Boxoffice-December.02.1950

LETTERS
THAT COMPO-TOA CONTROVERSY
A Texas TOA Leader and An Allied Regional Chief Take a Look at the Problem
To BEN SHLYEN:
The affairs of COMPO and TOA seem to
be embracing an unduly important amount
of space in discussions
and in the tradepress.
particularly in regard
to the question of
"representation" in the
structure of this latest
organization.
It seems more truly
not so much a question
of representation, or
laclc of it, as to states or
territories as the minority
position of exhibition
as a whole in Henry Reeve
the basic forming of an organization which
was primarily created to be a sort of United
Nations board for our motion picture industry.
Pew, if any, have fault to find with what
was started in Chicago, and there definitely
is a place for sucli work in our business, sadly
ignored and neglected these many years.
SAYS POLICIES SIDETRACKED
Listening to "The Voice of Main Street"
in Houston it was very apparent that COMPO
had taken a route far off the road map originally
charted. On tlie recoi-d of recent
months and weeks it is hard to see the why
or wherefore of Allied, TOA and COMPO as
it has been operating. Why all three? Exhibition
as a whole is the party needing unified
organization, so lacking to date from
any and all sources. Three exhibitor organizations
of national scope, each with its high
salaried executives, all endeavoring to warrant
those salaries can hardly result in accomplishment
or benefit for tne exhibitor.
As to the much discussed representation
controversy, our question is on the peculiar
situation of organizations such as the AFL
council, MPAA, SIMPP, the Screen Actors
Guild, the tradepress. Variety International,
and two purely localized New York exhibitor
associations having, each of them, an equal
voice with Allied and TOA which represent
thousands of theatres and exhibitors all over
our nation. Exhibition, the theatres and theatre
men and women, are the summation of
all these others, and the direct contact with
the public—we put out what all the others are
m business for. Define and use COMPO's
proper function for which it was originally
created, that can make sense and do a job.
Otherwise the question will endure.
RECORD 'HARDLY GLOWING'
With all the organizing that has been going
on, and all the claims and leg-work that
has been done on many exhibitor organization
projects and problems, the record of accomplishment
is hardly a glowing one. No
need to pick them out, but there has been
much to do about controlling fair selling.
Current selling policies speak for themselves
on the futility of organized control of this
phase of our business. National transportation
and advertising matters have repeatedly
been talked about, but that is all there is to
it.
"Main Street" is not happy over the result
of the tax fight, and the Korean incident was
The current controversy between
the Council of Motion Picture Organizations
and Theatre Owners oj
America over the question of increased
ToA representation in the
CoMPo executive committee has
brought a number of letters to Boxoffice.
Two of the letters came from,
exhibitors who are prominent in regional
exhibitor association affairs—
Henry Reeve, Menard, Tex., president
of Texas Theatre Owners, Inc., and
O. F. Sulliva7i, Wichita, Kas., president
of Allied Independent Theatres
of Kansas arid Missouri. While the
men head their regional exhibitor organizations,
their views are expressed
as individuals only.
but an easy excuse to pass an issue that is an
economic necessity for the smaller situations.
Isn't it about time to stop the flag-waving
over what our industry does for our country?
Sure, we've done a job, and we'll always do
it, but Washington has a very high-angled
view of our show business and the representatives
of it who appear at its high functions
we who really and vitally need consideration
haven't a chance.
Exhibitor conventions are mo.st enjoyable
affairs. What comes out of them to benefit
theatre operations and show business? At
Houston, a very fine meeting, one top businessman,
from outside our industry, and one
general sales manager of a producing company
gave out with truly constructive and
usable thinking that could be taken home.
An odd situation that is repeated in conventions
time and time again.
There are so many exhibitors in many
states—north, east, south and west, knowing
the same facts, feeling the same needs,
hoping for the same unanswered results. All
of them realizing that their voices and their
knowledge are not considered, and probably
never will be.
Perhaps there is but one solution. If we
want to stay in this business, just admit its
failings and Impossibilities, forget the wishful
thinking that some organization can take
care of us. Dig into our individual business
and give it the best we've got. We know
"There's No Business Like Show Business,"
and if we don't feel that, we're best out of it.
Most of us are believers in organization
and what It can and should be able to accomplish
for us and our industry—it does
seem that we of the motion picture industry
are least able of all American business institutions
to organize for our own best interest.
That's too bad, for we do such a grand job
in every other way.
Really didnt mean to make this a "Gone
With the Wind" in length. It's not just a one
man angle I can assure you. I think you know
how much I have appreciated your personal
friendship and what you and BOXOFFICE
mean to our industry—you have meant much
to our segment of a great industry.
HENRY REEVE
President, Texas Theatre Owners, Inc.
Menard, Texas.
—
To BEN SHLYEN:
The attitude TOA is taking towards
COMPO may be likened to the attitude that
Russia is taking toward
the United Nations
organizations. I would
not make the accusation
that there is the
same ulterior motive
but the results may be
just as disastrous.
The cooperation of
nations could accomplish
results which
have never been in evidence
in this so-called
civilized world and
the cooperation of the O. F. Sullivan
branches of the motion picture industry
could result in the elimination of adverse
public relations which have ever
been a millstone around the neck of
our industry.
CASE OF 'SPLITTING HAIRS'
With such important accomplishments
through COMPO so evident, it seems
to me that TOA is splitting hairs with
ti>eir objections regarding what they
claim to be inadequate representation. It is
lamentable that dissension in the ranks of
one of COMPO's members will possibly
weaken the effectiveness of the organization
even before an opportunity is given to prove
its merit and this dissension comes at a iiuie
when all efforts should be put forth to seil
COMPO to the exhibitors of this country.
Every regional organization which is a
member of a parent-exhibitors national organization
has complete autonomy and it is
regrettable that TOA would allow dissension
to prevent the national organization's
approval of COMPO. National AUied approved
COMPO and as we have complete local
autonomy, one regional office of Allied did
not see fit to concur in the decision of the
national organization.
SEE OTHER INVOLVEMENTS
I personally believe that some circuits that
are very close to the distributors direct the
policy of some district exhibitor units that
are associated with TOA, so in reality, the
distributors who have their own vote in
COMPO can also influence TOA's vote in
COMPO and on that basis the accusation
could be claimed that the distributors have
unfair representation.
Hundreds of exhibitors who are not members
of any organization have no representation
in COMPO. The ultimate aims of
COMPO are, however, too important to run
the risk of wrecking tlie organization, with
inconsequential criticism, even before it begins
to function. I hope that TOA and their
unimportant criticisms will not justify by
their action, the actions of Russia in that
nation's effort to sabotage the council of
nations.
O. F. SULLIVAN
President,
Allied Independent Theatre Owners
Of Kansas and Missouri
Wichita, Kansas.
26 BOXOFFICE December 2, 1950