MovieChat Forums > Imitation of Life (1934) Discussion > 20% of profits for a black woman in 1939...

20% of profits for a black woman in 1939....

posted 18 years ago by unlikely_protagonist
18 replies | jump to latest

I've seen a post or two about how excited she was to receive 20% of profits and how wrong that was. But if you think about it, it was a pretty good deal for Delilah. Bea could have just taken it all. Deliah, as an uneducated black woman in 19-frickin'-39 wouldn't have had much of a legal recourse. Back in the day, white people could and did take/manipulate just about anything from a black person (including life,sex,money,property) because so many African Americans weren't in a position to defend themselves ( because of lack of education, money or other resources) not to mention the fact that law routinely would take the side of white person over the word of a black person. So Delilah was really lucky and Bea was somewhat generous not to take the whole lot when she very easily could have.

"Ah ha! Now the tables have turned, Darkness!" (Chappelle's Show)

[–] XweAponX 18 years ago

Yah, I kind of thought that was the shaft the first time I saw the... 1939 you say? Thought it was 34. Ah, I suppose the history inside of the film itself encompases 1934.

But, think about it, that Bea and Delialah had the relationship they had... It was wonderful. The only thing I thought dishonest with the film is that I do not think Fredi would have forsaken her ma like that, regardless of if she was passin for white or not.

You know, I don;t know what yeasr it is sposed to be at the end of the film cos both girls are about 18 or so. And if the depression was in full swing when Bea and Delilah met... Well, I think some things got stretched a bit. like time.

[–] unlikely_protagonist 18 years ago

1934-or '39 my bad. I guess I was thinking of the beginning of WWII.
"Ah ha! Now the tables have turned, Darkness!" (Chappelle's Show)

[–] Lilibetp 18 years ago

Don't forget - the money actually had to be split 4 ways, not 2:

Bea
Elmer
Delilah
The Company

20% doesn't sound so bad to me, under the circumstances.

[–] rrticulate1 17 years ago

Elmer's share had nothing to do with the 20%. At any rate, it would have been unconcionable for Bea to have given Delilah any more, given this was still when blacks were still being strung up for just being black. I doubt if Delilah would have even accepted it.

You remember that Delilah hesistated even accepting the 20%--not understanding the concept that the company started with her idea.

I think Elmer's share was something like 40%, but Bea still had majority ownership. It was his idea that the pancake flour be mass produced.

[–] fabio.silva 17 years ago

20% to be a silent partner is a great deal. Remember that Delilah did not work at the company, while Bea was running it. If you had a recipe and sold it to Betty Crocker, a 20% royalty rate would be amazing -- particuarly if you don't have to do anything other than cash royalty checks. (This stuff doesn't get made on its own, package itself, and sell itself.)

[–] HarlowMGM 17 years ago

Thank you fabio.silva! I've seen this complaint many times on boards and reviews of IOL but people are just not sitting down and realizing it is a very GENEROUS offer. If you write a book, you take it to the publisher what amount of royalties do they pay you - TWELVE PERCENT!! If you record an album of music, what percentage of the record sales do you get - TEN PERCENT! Sometimes it's higher than those rates, but usually not by much. And I suspect most people who invent recipes for food products probably get nothing more than a flat fee and zero on the actual sales.

If you invent something and you want a bigger slice of the sales, you'll need to own it and market it yourself because not many places will give an "idea" person a 20 percent share of the sales, especially some with no track record.

Delilah supplied the recipe but Bea did all the hard work marketing it, investing in it (Delilah didn't put up any money), etc. It's only natural she would own the majority of the corporation. Plenty a businessman would have paid Delilah (or someone in her shoes, black or white) a modest flat fee and had them sign away all future rights.

[–] lyndadavis_07 16 years ago

Once again let me state that Bea also did not put up any money. I have stated this before here. She used her charm to get that help and paid everyone back after she and Delilah made the money. This is discussed MANY times in the movie. AND Delilah did not only give the pancake recipe she spent many years making the pancakes herself.

Because of this many times many of the examples given here do not work. AND Bea is not the equivalent of a publishing company or any other large company. That is a stupid argument. It was more like two friends starting a company together and they should have gotten the same amount. Elmer should have gotten a larger piece than they did not Bea.

The only argument that is right here is that another white person back in those days would have taken MORE advantage of Delilah considering her lack of education. Delilah would not have known the difference.

[–] HarlowMGM 15 years ago

Bea did everything to run that business!! All Delilah did was supply the recipe and when they had the restaurant, cook. Are you suggesting people who cook in restaurants are entitled to 50 percent of the profits? When the corporation was formed to market the pancakes, there is no suggestion in the story Delilah did a bit of work for the company. Delilah's contributions were (A) supplying the recipe and (B) working as a cook in the small restaurant, which is often a minimum wage job.

Even if Bea used her "charm", it's her charm, isn't it, not Delilah's, that got the business rolling. It's debatable whether or not Bea put up money - I believe she did, I can't see someone starting a business for you without you putting up something. She likely had to mortgage her house but the movie does not go into all the details. And even if she didn't, she is shown getting credit. This is not free money - Bea has to pay if back and if the business had failed it would have been all on her.

It is not a case "two friends starting a company together and they should have gotten the same amount", Delilah did absolutely nothing to run the company, it was all Bea's push and drive and hands-on work. The comparsion to royalty rates are absolutely accurate because that is all Delilah did - supplied the idea, not the marketing, not the financial investment. As has been mentioned over and over, in the business world to get 20 percent of the profits for something you do nothing more than come up with the idea for is extraordinary.

Take race out of play - if Bea and Delilah were both black (or both white) Bea would still deserve the lion's share of the profits for everything she did to make the business a success.

Finally, what do you think Bea's share was - it certainly was not the other full 80 percent. Ned was also in on the deal and they had stockholders, etc. so Bea's share was likely only 30-40 percent in itself even with all her work.

[–] Kumquat66 17 years ago

I am watching the movie right now and I thought 20% was unfair but after reading the other posts, I realize it she was not getting the shaft.
However....if the movie had been made today; Delilah would have gotten her own lawyer and her own house. Also, if she did stay with her friend, she would not live downstairs unless she had her own indoor pool, bowling alley or something.
Someone said they could not believe that Peona would leave her mother but I could see where someone who wanted to pass for white so badly back then would do that. Even today, some white people who "make it big" try to hide their humble beginnings and parents...especially when they are young.

[–] macfilm 16 years ago

Yes, 20% was a great deal, for anybody at any time.

When Henry Ford started the Ford Motor Company in 1903, he got 25% of the stock....and had to build the prototype car, set up the company, the factory, the dealer organization, and run the whole thing.

So getting 20% of the company, plus resulting profits and capital gains, for just supplying ONE recipe is terrific. And she would get 20% of any profit from future products that the company produces as well, even if she had nothing to do with developing them.

[–] reikun86 16 years ago

That sounds a lot like the 2005/2006 remake someone was suggesting lol.

[–] andrewwjohnson 16 years ago

.....Even if Delilah only got twenty percent of the profits from the sale of her pancake mix she would would still have made millions; more then enough to buy a townhouse in Sugar hill or some other upscale black area. She certainly wouldn't have to work as a maid. Her daughter would of felt better about being black if she saw her mother achiving success. Of course that would take out most of the plot. You can't have drama without conflict after all.....Also I made another post about this movie's time frame. According to Wikipedia and my memory the story begins in 1919 when Peola is four years old. The movie was released in 1935 when the charter, played by Fedi Washington is nineteen. According to the full list of actors IMdB for "Imitation of Life" Peola is played by Dorothy Black (a British, film stage and early TV actor); at age thirty five. The last scene Peola appears in is at her mother's funeral which means Delilah passed away in 1950 in a 1935 movie (!). There is a scene after that, at a New York restaurant, but while the characters are talking about Peola getting her life together she's not present and I doubt the scene was set fifteen years in the future. I put down my own theories, ultimate movie blooper to a reaction to the Hays Office, but I'm sure some of you have your own.
People are just getting dumber, but more opinionated-Ernestine (Silks) in "The Human Stain"

[–] HarlowMGM 16 years ago

Absolutely. 20 percent of that corporation would have made Delilah very very rich. She obviously chose to live modestly which is not all that uncommon among people who come from nothing and make fortunes. Of course, still living as something of a maid is an extreme but then it appears she has her own wing if you will of Bea's townhouse. We don't see it but Delilah was obviously quite involved in the black community of the era for her to get such a funeral so well attended by black people of promenience, they wouldn't have shown up just for anybody.

[–] Haifis 14 years ago

"We don't see it but Delilah was obviously quite involved in the black community of the era for her to get such a funeral so well attended by black people of promenience, they wouldn't have shown up just for anybody"

Notice that in the funeral crowd, there was a lot of white people too.
Delilah was well liked by everyone.
Notice that throughout the entire film, she was concerned about taking care of her daughter, Bea, and Bea's daughter.
Money didn't mean anything to her because she was an altruist.
Didn't spend much time worrying about herself but definetly cared about others.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] mjr1114 15 years ago

I can understand the year error .. the year of 1939 is noted for being the 'best' year in cinematic history. This is a great film, so that was probably your subconcious trying to let it be known your true feelings on this movie. It is so good it should have been among the 1939 movies.

[–] noname1479 13 years ago

1934. The average white person's thinking, "Delilah is black & uneducated. She won't know what to do with this money. I'll throw her 20% of $5,000,000 and she'll be happy." Even wealthy black celebs had to live in black areas, bordering slums.

[–] macfilm 7 years ago

As I originally posted back in 2008 (see above) 20% was, and still would be today, a very generous deal, considering my reference to Henry Ford getting 25% of the original Ford Motor Company...and he had to develop the car, set up a sales network and run the whole company for years.

Ford eventually bought out all the investors but didn't put a single cent into the original set up of the company in 1903.

So 20% of a company and all its future profits for ONE recipe, no cash investment, and no responsibility for running the company in any way is a really terrific.