1 / 89

Introduction

“The application of measures concerning the promotion of distribution and production of European works in audiovisual media services, including television programmes and non-linear services”

KeelyKia
Download Presentation

Introduction

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. “The application of measures concerning the promotion of distribution and production of European works in audiovisual media services, including television programmes and non-linear services” Public Presentation File for the Final Study Report for The European Commission (DG Information Society and Media) Study completed by: Attentional Limited, Oliver & Ohlbaum Associates, Rambøll Management and Headway International 20th March 2009

  2. Introduction • Overall goal • Provide the European Commission with the elements required to continue monitoring Articles 4 and 5, and with the elements required to commence monitoring of Article 3i • Key objectives • Description and analysis of the implementing measures taken by Member States pursuant to Articles 3i, 4 and 5 of the Directive as of the end 2007 • Description and analysis of the production industry and market for audiovisual works • Independent evaluation of the application of Articles 4 and 5 to specific linear broadcast channels • Review of non-linear audiovisual services in Europe in 2007 • Suggestions for operational procedures and performance indicators for monitoring the application of Article 3i to non-linear services

  3. “Part 1: Modes of Implementation” 1.2

  4. Objectives and Approach Analysis of Member State rules at the beginning of 2008 regarding: Broadcasting (linear services) How Articles 4 and 5 are implemented Stricter measures Implementation modes On-demand (non-linear services) Pre-existing national legislation Implementation of Article 3i Data collected via questionnaires to Member State regulatory authorities in early 2008 1.3

  5. Broadcasting (Linear Services) How Articles 4 and 5 Are Implemented Significant variations in how Member States apply Articles 4 and 5 to broadcasters: Some Member States set fixed targets that must always be met, while others set targets to be met ”where practicable”, (exceptionally) lower targets for new broadcasters, etc. Some Member States rely solely on broadcasters’ transmission returns, while others take steps to verify data Some Member States authorities cannot really sanction non-compliance, while others may use warnings and fines, or even revoke the broadcasting licence 1.4

  6. Broadcasting (Linear Services) How Articles 4 and 5 Are Implemented Particularly large differences between Member States regarding independent productions: Definition of ”independent producer” In some Member States, the term is not defined in the legislation at all In other Member States, specific legal definitions have been adopted: Criteria used in definitions: ownership, programme supply, secondary rights and autonomy Target for independent productions In most Member States, set as a proportion of transmission time In a few Member States, set as a proportion of programming budget, or even of total turnover 1.5

  7. Broadcasting (Linear Services) Stricter Measures Nearly all Member States apply stricter measures to broadcasters, but the requirements differ greatly: A few Member States require higher proportions of European works/independent productions than the Directive(particularly from public service broadcasters) Most Member States have some specific requirements on content type, language and/or regional issues About half the Member States require a proportion of programming to be originally produced in a specific language Some Member States require contributions to indigenous film production, either directly or as contributions/taxes to central film funds. 1.6

  8. Broadcasting (Linear Services) Scoring - Implementation Modes Each Member State have been assigned scores for How Articles 4 and 5 are implemented Stricter measures The higher the score, the stricter the regulatory regime Member States have then been grouped in four “implementation modes”: Flexible: low score for how Articles 4 and 5 are implemented Prescriptive: high score for how Articles 4 and 5 are implemented High: high score for stricter measures Low: low score for stricter measures 1.7

  9. Broadcasting (Linear Services) Member State Implementation Modes How Articles 4 and 5 are implemented Flexible Prescriptive Stricter requirements High Spain Sweden Bulgaria Romania Italy Poland Finland Portugal France United Kingdom Netherlands Low Austria Iceland Cyprus Ireland Czech Rep. Lithuania Denmark Luxembourg Germany Malta Belgium Estonia Greece Norway Hungary Slovakia Latvia Slovenia 1.8

  10. On-demand (Non-Linear Services) Pre-Existing National Legislation Prior to implementing Article 3i, only very few Member States have adopted legislation that is in line with Article 3i : Belgium (French Community) Technology-neutral legislation Non-linear services are subject to the same requirements as linear services France Taxes on on-demand service providers, with the proceeds going to (cinema) film production A voluntary cinema-on-demand agreement with investment quotas existed for 2006, but it expired without being renewed 1.9

  11. On-demand (Non-Linear Services) Implementation of Article 3i Deadline for implementation of the new Directive: 19 December 2009 The majority of Member States expect implementation to take place in 2009 Some Member States have held public consultations and working groups in 2008 1.10

  12. “Part 2: The European TV Supply Chain and Audiovisual Content Creation” 2.1

  13. Objectives of Our Research To develop an informed analysis of the market for audiovisual works in the EU and EEA Explore the structure of the broadcasting industry on a country by country basis Quantify sources of turnover: advertising, consumer payments (pay TV), licence fees and ancillary revenues Understand in detail the role of on-demand services and their operators Explore developments in independent production in each Member State 2.2

  14. Methodology MICRO DATA MEMBER STATE MACRO DATA • Programming spend • Pay TV ARPUs • Programming funds • Regulation • Compliance • Pay TV Penetration Flow of Funds Model • Advertising • Pay TV • Licence Fee • Ancillary revenues Top down Bottom Up x30 Member States TOTAL EUROPEAN BROADCASTING VALUE CHAIN 2.3

  15. Total Industry Income by Segment € BN 90 • Pay TV continues to be the main driver of growth in the overall market • Advertising has grown at just over 3% for E17, faster for new Member States • Decline in revenue generated from cable relay as customers migrate to digital 78.1 80 5.3 72.4 OTHER BROADCAST REVENUE 0.4 4.9 6.5 70 VOD 0.4 5.4 19.8 CABLE RELAY 61.2 18.7 60 4.3 6.3 PAY TV 50 12.7 28.3 25.8 40 22.6 30 ADVERTISING 20 17.8 17.2 15.2 10 LICENCE FEES 2002 E17 2006 E17 2006 E30 2.4 SOURCE: OLIVER & OHLBAUM ANALYSIS

  16. TV Revenue by Member State The five largest states represent over 71% of total TV revenue REVENUE IS THE AGGREGATION OF LICENCE FEE PAYMENTS, CONSUMER PAYMENTS, ADVERTISING REVENUE AND OTHER ANCILLARY REVENUES 2.5 SOURCE: OLIVER & OHLBAUM ANALYSIS

  17. Differences in TV Revenue Structure by Member State • Market structure differs significantly by Member State • Over 40% revenue from pay TV in France and Ireland • Almost 60% of revenue from advertising in Lithuania and Greece • Licence fee in Germany accounts for 41% while in Poland accounts for just 5% OTHER BROADCAST REVENUE VOD CABLE RELAY PAY TV ADVERTISING LICENCE FEES 2.6 SOURCE: OLIVER & OHLBAUM ANALYSIS

  18. TV Household by Reception Method in EU TV HHS (M) 250 • Significant fall in the number of analogue terrestrial homes • Free DTT now reaching over 28m homes • Number of premium subscription TV (pay cable, satellite and IPTV) homes has increased • IPTV starting to gain traction in certain markets (France and Spain) 200 200 1 CHANNEL 2 5 20 TO 60 CHANNELS 174 60 TO 200 CHANNELS 25 PAY TERRESTRIAL PAY TV = 62M 2 IPTV 5 156 PAY CABLE 25 5 29 100 TO 700 CHANNELS 150 16 PAY SATELLITE 29 19 29 50 TO 200 CHANNELS 17 100 23 FREE SATELLITE 39 10 TO 40 CHANNELS 31 FREE TV = 138M 31 CABLE RELAY 28 20 TO 40 CHANNELS 50 28 FREE DTT 67 42 3 TO 7 CHANNELS ANALOGUE 31 TERRESTRIAL E17 '02 E17 '07 E30 '07 2.7 SOURCE: OLIVER & OHLBAUM ANALYSIS

  19. Differences in TV Reception Method by Member State 2.8 SOURCE: OLIVER & OHLBAUM ANALYSIS

  20. Digital Switchover (DSO) dates by member state 1 DECEMBER 2012 UK ITALY ROMANIA PORTUGAL 11 DECEMBER 2006 HUNGARY NETHERLANDS 3 APRIL 2010 1 SEPTEMBER 2007 BULGARIA FINLAND SPAIN SLOVAKIA 1 DECEMBER 2008 1 SEPTEMBER 2010 LITHUANIA GERMANY CZECH REPUBLIC 1 SEPTEMBER 2006 IRELAND LUXEMBOURG LATVIA 1 DECEMBER 2011 1 SEPTEMBER 2009 1 DECEMBER 2014 ESTONIA DENMARK FRANCE POLAND CYPRUS 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 GREECE AUSTRIA BELGIUM 31 DECEMBER 2008 5 MARCH 2007 MALTA SWEDEN NORWAY SLOVENIA 15 OCTOBER 2007 1 DECEMBER 2009 1 DECEMBER 2010 - LIECHTENSTEIN ICELAND NO DIGITAL SERVICES 2.9 SOURCE: OLIVER & OHLBAUM ANALYSIS

  21. The Comparable Size of the Estimated Video-on-Demand Market € BN 90 • Still a nascent market • By end of 2006, generating little revenue • Majority of offerings are catch-up services with no access charge • Commercial services still struggling to monetise services other than pay-per-view 78.1 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0.4 TOTAL E30 TV MARKET TOTAL EST. VOD MARKET 2.10 SOURCE: OLIVER & OHLBAUM ANALYSIS

  22. TV Content Creation and the Independent Sector • 47% on rights acquisitions • 17% on sports • 30% on film and TV imports • 53% on commissions • 25% in house • ~7% on news • €6.9bn external production market* 16.6 FILM AND TV IMPORTS SPORTS RIGHTS 18.4 IN HOUSE NEWS EXTERNAL 2.11 SOURCE: OLIVER & OHLBAUM ANALYSIS *Refers to independent production and broadcaster affiliate production

  23. The Overall European TV Value Chain PAY TV REVENUES OTHER REVENUES ADVERTISING FILM AND TV IMPORTS SPORTS RIGHTS IN HOUSE LICENCE FEE NEWS EXTERNAL 2.13 SOURCE: OLIVER & OHLBAUM ANALYSIS

  24. The Overall European TV Value Chain – the key figures explained • Of the €78.1 billion in total TV revenue: • Delivery platforms retain €13.6 billion • The remainder of €64.5 billion flowed to broadcasters of which: • €5.0 billion is spent on transmission • €35.0 billion is invested in programming • And the remaining €24.5 billion covers all profits, administration and management costs • Of the €35.0 billion programme spend • €16.6 billion was spent on acquiring rights of various kinds • €6.2 billion on sports rights • €10.4 billion on film and TV acquisitions • The remaining €18.4 billion was invested in original programming • €8.9 billion on in house production • €2.6 billion on the production of news programming • And €6.9 billion invested in the external production market 2.12 SOURCE: OLIVER & OHLBAUM ANALYSIS

  25. “Part 3: Views from the Industry: Broadcasters and Producers” 3.1

  26. Objectives of the Questionnaires • Overall goal • Understand the key implications of Articles 4 and 5 from the TVWF Directive • Key objectives • Identify the determinants of programme spending decisions • Understand the dynamics of co-productions and trade in programming • Develop a more detailed understanding of the economic performance of the audiovisual sector and content producers (inc. terms of trade) 3.2

  27. Methodology INTERVIEWS CONDUCTED / ORGANISATION QUESTIONNAIRES RETURNED PUBLICLY FUNDED BROADCASTER 12 COMMERCIAL BROADCASTER 23 INDEPENDENT PRODUCER 6 REGULATOR 13 TRADE BODY 2 PURE VoD PLAYER 15 TOTAL 71 Questionnaire Design 71 Completed Responses 230 Questionnaires distributed 3.3

  28. Interview Sample – State Representation in the Survey STATE REPRESENTATION IN SURVEY PERCENTAGE € 78.1m 29 100% 12% 17% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 88% PROPORTION 83% 40% REPRESENTED 30% 20% 10% NUMBER OF STATES* TOTAL REVENUE *LIECHTENSTEIN EXCLUDED • 83% (24 states) of all states included in the study have been represented in the findings • These 24 states represent over 88% of total European TV revenue 3.4 SOURCE: OLIVER & OHLBAUM ANALYSIS

  29. Spend on Genre and Channel Programme Spend Allocation PERCENTAGE OF PROGRAMMING SPEND (EXC. NEWS, SPORT & GAMES) 2007 SPEND ON PROGRAMMES BY GENRE 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 PUBLIC BROADCASTERS 58 25 16 IN - HOUSE EXTERNAL COMMISSION ACQUIRED COMMERCIAL BROADCASTERS 18 31 51 ALL CHANNELS 32 29 39 3.5 SOURCE: OLIVER & OHLBAUM ANALYSIS

  30. Commissioning New Programmes • Majority of news programming produced in house • Cinema film and documentaries tend to be produced externally • In news, sport and games over 15% of programming is made by other broadcasters 3.6 SOURCE: OLIVER & OHLBAUM ANALYSIS

  31. Programme Acquisition Decisions – Costs, Recency and Sourcing • Fiction, film and documentaries found to be the only genres where proportion of acquisition spend > 5% • Relative to commissioning costs, the acquisition of sport and fiction was reported be high • 56% of all acquisitions are from the US 3.7 SOURCE: OLIVER & OHLBAUM ANALYSIS

  32. Financing New Programmes PRIMARY BROADCASTER NEWS 99 0 1 FACTUAL 97 2 0 1 0 MAGAZINE ADVANCES AGAINST MERCHANDISING SPORT 97 0 2 1 NEW MEDIA RIGHTS AND ADVANCES FOR REVENUES GAMES 94 5 0 0 1 0 ENTERTAINMENT 93 3 2 0 0 1 0 SECONDARY PUBLIC FUNDING BODY BROADCASTER* R DOCUMENTARY 89 2 2 0 7 DISTRIBUTOR PRIVATE FUNDING FORNON-DOMESTIC CO - PRODUCTION LINKED TO TAX BREAKS RIGHTS FICTION 87 6 1 0 3 3 80% 82% 84% 86% 88% 90% 92% 94% 96% 98% 100% PROPORTION OF TOTAL PROGRAMME FUNDING • Majority of funding (>85%) still comes from the primary broadcaster • Fiction/ Documentaries can have the most complex funding structures • In sport some funding flows from merchandising 3.8 SOURCE: OLIVER & OHLBAUM ANALYSIS *Secondary broadcaster in this instance refers to any funding from a broadcaster other than the primary broadcaster e.g. Other broadcaster invests in production in exchange for first look in a particular territory

  33. Co-Productions ENTERTAINMENT 56 FICTION 50 CINEMA FILM 44 DOCUMENTARIES 44 GAMES 22 FACTUAL 17 MAGAZINE NEWS 0 SPORT 0 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% PERCENTAGE OF RESPONDENTS GENRES MOST COMMONLY CO-PRODUCED BY EUROPEAN BROADCASTERS • Approximately 86% of broadcasters co-produce programming • Entertainment is most commonly co-produced • News and sport are rarely co-produced • Domestic and intra-European co-productions are most popular 3.9 SOURCE: OLIVER & OHLBAUM ANALYSIS

  34. Terms of trade and the balance of trade in programming • Terms of trade between broadcasters and producers (slide 3.11) • The large majority of broadcasters across Europe expect to retain all domestic rights for programming they commission • In some of the larger markets, producers have some leverage around ancillary rights • Exploitation in the overseas market tends to be the responsibility of producers - under 22% of broadcasters stated they expect to retain overseas rights for programming. • With the introduction of a number of on-demand services across Europe, all broadcasters surveyed expect to retain internet and new media rights • Trade in programming – Fully produced programming* (slide 3.12) • European fiction and feature films were assessed by broadcasters as being the most successful in the international export market while non-European fiction and film was deemed the most attractive in terms of successful non-European imports • News and factual magazines were seen as inherently local and therefore unlikely to sell well abroad or be imported • Trade in programming – Formats/Ideas (slide 3.13) • Only entertainment and factual entertainment/reality formats were rated above 50% as potentially exportable formats • Relatively high level of European intra-trade of formats evidenced by high rating of European reality, entertainment and games formats * ‘Fully produced’: a programme that is traded with the same cast/crew/script/set e.g. a direct acquisition such as a drama from the US that is aired in a European country without any changes to the original programme. 3.10 SOURCE: OLIVER & OHLBAUM ANALYSIS

  35. Terms of Trade Between Broadcastersand Producers 3.11 SOURCE: OLIVER & OHLBAUM ANALYSIS

  36. Trade in Programming - Fully Produced Programming NEWS 17 FACTUAL MAGAZINES 43 GAMES 54 SUCCESSFUL SPORT 57 NON - EURO ENTERTAINMENT 87 IMPORTS DOCUMENTARIES 87 FEATURE FILMS 100 FICTION 100 NEWS 25 FACTUAL MAGAZINES 46 GAMES 45 SUCCESSFUL SPORT 87 EURO ENTERTAINMENT 60 IMPORTS DOCUMENTARIES 73 FEATURE FILMS 71 FICTION 80 NEWS 20 FACTUAL MAGAZINES 17 GAMES 55 SPORT SUCCESSFUL 40 EXPORTS ENTERTAINMENT 42 DOCUMENTARIES 62 FEATURE FILMS 89 FICTION 83 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% PERCENTAGE OF RESPONDENTS 3.12 SOURCE: OLIVER & OHLBAUM ANALYSIS

  37. Trade in Programming - Formats/Ideas OTHER 43 FICTION 73 SUCESSFUL FACTUAL MAGAZINES 73 NON - EURO GAMES 80 IMPORTS FACTUAL ENTERNAINMENT/REALITY 87 ENTERTAINMENT 93 63 OTHER FICTION 63 SUCCESSFUL 67 FACTUAL MAGAZINES EURO GAMES 86 IMPORTS FACTUAL ENTERNAINMENT/REALITY 81 ENTERTAINMENT 93 20 OTHER FICTION 42 FACTUAL MAGAZINES 42 SUCCESSFUL GAMES EXPORTS 45 67 FACTUAL ENTERNAINMENT/REALITY ENTERTAINMENT 62 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% PERCENTAGE OF RESPONDENTS 3.13 SOURCE: OLIVER & OHLBAUM ANALYSIS

  38. “Part 4: EU-wide Analysis of Linear Services” 4.1

  39. Produce a consistent measure of Articles 4 and 5 across Member States, and apply this to linear broadcast channels in Europe. A representative sample of 11 European Member States covering the main types of European markets was selected. A sample of 54 channels* representative of the diversity of European broadcasters in terms of audience size, ownership and revenue model was selected. A set of data based on two non-consecutive sample weeks selected in the Spring and Fall periods in 2007 was acquired. This data was coded for the following criteria: Qualifying works/European works/Independent works/Recent works. Methodology * In some markets, we have included broadcasters that are regulated by authorities from another Member State than the Member State in which it finds its audience. This is due to our methodological choice to favour channel choice in terms of viewing. 4.2

  40. Qualifying programmes’ cover approximately two thirds of all hours either transmitted over television channels or watched by television viewers. Qualifying programmes are less prominent on the television schedules of leading channels compared with non-leaders. Qualifying programmes are more prominent on the television schedules of subscription channels compared with both publicly funded and privately funded channels. Proportion of Qualifying Works 4.3

  41. Proportion of European Works All Day Peak Time Ratio of Ratio of Ratio of Ratio of Qualifying Qualifying Grouping of Sample Grouping of Sample Qualifying Qualifying European to European to European to European to Total Qualifying Total Qualifying by: by: Total Qualifying Total Qualifying Viewer Hours Viewer Hours Hours (%) Hours (%) (%) (%) 52,5% 59,7% 49,7% 59,5% No No Leader? Leader? 72,6% 79,6% 76,6% 81,9% Yes Yes 54,1% 66,4% 55,0% 69,0% Private Private Channel Channel Ownership Ownership 78,0% 84,5% 78,6% 84,9% Public Public Type Type 57,5% 66,7% 59,6% 69,4% Ad Ad Revenue Revenue 78,0% 84,5% 78,6% 84,9% Gvt Gvt Model Model 32,7% 53,5% 27,2% 50,9% Subs Subs 60,9% 77,8% 63,1% 78,1% North North Geography Geography 64,6% 70,2% 62,5% 72,5% South South Country Country 56,2% 66,1% 55,4% 63,7% New New Recency Recency Type Type 64,4% 75,5% 64,9% 77,6% Old Old 66,9% 74,6% 63,7% 75,8% Large Large Size Size 53,0% 67,4% 61,1% 72,6% Small Small 62,4% 74,0% 62,8% 75,5% Result for Member States Sample Result for Member States Sample 4.4

  42. European works make up an average of 62.4% of the total qualifying transmission hours (62.8% in peak-time). Most European broadcasters are significantly above the 50% requirement for European works. They also make up an average of 74% of the total viewer hours (75.5 % in peak-time), which indicated the strong appeal of European works to European audiences and the broadcasters’ reliance on European content to build their ratings. Channels with the highest proportions of European works are leading, public channels from Southern, old and large European countries*. Subscription channels typically feature less European works in their schedule than privately funded or by publicly funded channels. As we will see in the next section, European works in practice mean a vast majority of domestic works… Proportion of European Works *For this Study, we have classified Member States as followed:7 Member States are located in the Northern part of Europe (Belgium, Estonia, Germany, Ireland, Poland, Sweden and the United Kingdom); 4 Member States are located in the Southern part of Europe (France, Italy, Romania and Spain). • Moreover, as regards the recency criterion: 8 Member States joined the EU before 2004 (Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Ireland, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom) and thus are counted as ‘old’ Member States; 3 Member States have joined the EU after 2004 (Estonia, Poland and Romania) and thus are counted as ‘new’ Member States. 4.5

  43. Proportion of Non-domesticEuropean Works All Day Peak Time Ratio of Non- Ratio of Non- Ratio of Non- Ratio of Non- Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Grouping of Sample Grouping of Sample Qualifying Qualifying Qualifying Qualifying European to European to European to European to by: by: Total Qualifying Total Qualifying Total Qualifying Total Qualifying Viewer Hours Viewer Hours Hours (%) Hours (%) (%) (%) 7,1% 4,4% 6,8% 3,0% No No Leader? Leader? 9,3% 4,3% 7,1% 2,9% Yes Yes 6,9% 3,6% 6,5% 2,7% Private Private Channel Channel Ownership Ownership 10,7% 5,3% 7,8% 3,3% Public Public Type Type 6,8% 3,6% 6,2% 2,6% Ad Ad Revenue Revenue 10,7% 5,3% 7,8% 3,3% Gvt Gvt Model Model 7,0% 5,7% 8,6% 6,2% Subs Subs 9,4% 4,1% 9,3% 3,9% North North Geography Geography 6,5% 4,5% 3,3% 1,7% South South Country Country 11,1% 6,9% 9,4% 5,6% New New Recency Recency Type Type 7,3% 3,8% 6,3% 2,4% Old Old 5,1% 4,0% 3,7% 2,4% Large Large Size Size 14,7% 9,1% 13,5% 8,3% Small Small 8,2% 4,3% 7,0% 2,9% Result for Member States Sample Result for Member States Sample 4.6

  44. Non-domestic European works make up 8.2% of the total qualifying transmission hours in 2007, compared to 4.3% of total qualifying viewer hours. Public channels offer, on average, higher proportions of non-domestic European qualifying hours than private channels, a gap that is reduced in peak-time Subscription channels show, on average, the highest proportion of non-domestic European qualifying hours in peak-time. Interestingly, that strategy is paying off when we look at proportions in viewer hours Channels from southern, old and large European countries show average proportions between 5.1% and 7.3% of non-domestic European works, whereas channels from Northern, new and small European countries show proportions between 9.4% and 14.7%. Proportion of Non-domesticEuropean Works 4.7

  45. Proportion of IndependentEuropean Works All Day Peak Time Ratio of Ratio of Ratio of Ratio of Qualifying Qualifying Qualifying Qualifying Independent Independent Independent Independent Grouping of Sample by: Grouping of Sample by: European to European to European to European to Total Qualifying Total Qualifying Total Qualifying Total Qualifying Viewer Hours Viewer Hours Hours (%) Hours (%) (%) (%) 31,2% 33,7% 31,4% 36,4% No No Leader? Leader? 30,8% 33,3% 37,8% 37,1% Yes Yes 31,9% 34,2% 34,9% 36,9% Private Private Channel Channel Ownership Ownership 29,3% 32,2% 33,8% 36,9% Public Public Type Type 33,5% 34,7% 38,2% 37,7% Ad Ad Revenue Revenue 29,3% 32,2% 33,8% 36,9% Gvt Gvt Model Model 21,2% 11,6% 15,4% 7,9% Subs Subs 32,1% 33,2% 34,6% 33,4% North North Geography Geography 29,4% 33,6% 34,5% 41,1% South South Country Country 26,7% 23,0% 29,0% 25,1% New New Recency Recency Type Type 32,3% 35,4% 36,2% 38,9% Old Old 32,4% 33,5% 34,2% 36,5% Large Large Size Size 28,0% 32,6% 35,3% 40,8% Small Small 31,0% 33,4% 34,6% 36,9% Result for Member States Sample Result for Member States Sample 4.8

  46. Independent European works make up 31% of the total qualifying transmission hours in 2007, compared to 33.4% of total qualifying viewer hours. Proportions are higher when looking specifically at peak-time. Most European broadcasters are significantly above the 10% requirement for independent works. Differences between channel types are rather smallacross all-day, both when looking at transmission and viewer hours. Subscription channels show a somewhat different situation than other channels in our sample: their qualifying schedules are made of 21.2% of independent productions vs. 31% for the entire sample. There are important differences when we look specifically at the peak-time situation. Leading, public channels from small and old Member States offer significantly more independent productions than during all-day. Proportion of IndependentEuropean Works 4.9

  47. Proportion of Recent IndependentEuropean Works All Day Peak Time Ratio of Recent Ratio of Recent Ratio of Recent Ratio of Recent Qualifying Qualifying Qualifying Qualifying Independent Independent Independent Independent European to European to European to European to Grouping of Sample by: Grouping of Sample by: Total Qualifying Total Qualifying Total Qualifying Total Qualifying Independent Independent Independent Independent European European Viewer European European Viewer Hours(%) Hours(%) Hours(%) Hours(%) 85,4% 92,3% 90,7% 96,6% No No Leader? Leader? 83,4% 91,4% 94,0% 95,0% Yes Yes 86,7% 93,1% 91,7% 95,5% Private Private Channel Channel Ownership Ownership 79,6% 89,5% 94,1% 95,5% Public Public Type Type 86,9% 93,1% 91,7% 95,5% Ad Ad Revenue Revenue 79,6% 89,5% 94,1% 95,5% Gvt Gvt Model Model 84,8% 96,1% 91,4% 99,3% Subs Subs 87,0% 92,9% 93,3% 95,5% North North Geography Geography 80,2% 90,4% 91,1% 95,5% South South Country Country 78,5% 83,4% 86,5% 88,1% New New Recency Recency Type Type 86,0% 92,7% 93,8% 96,3% Old Old 85,5% 91,9% 93,3% 95,8% Large Large Size Size 82,0% 88,8% 90,7% 92,7% Small Small Result for Member States Sample Result for Member States Sample 84,4% 91,7% 92,4% 95,5% 4.10

  48. Across our sample, recent independent European works make up an average of 84.4% of the total independent European hours in 2007, compared to 91.7% of total independent European viewer hours. Proportions are higher in peak-time. Non-leading channels show more recent independent productions than leading channels during all-day but fewer of them in peak-time. Private channels show more recent independent productions than public channels during all-day but fewer of them in peak-time. Proportions of recent independent productions are higher on channels from Northern, old and large Member States. Proportion of Recent IndependentEuropean Works 4.11

  49. Comparison with Past Data 4.12

  50. Comparison with Past Data 4.13

More Related