Distribution Conventionality in the Movie Sector: An Econometric Analysis of Cinema Supply

Collins, Alan; Sco cu, An onello E.; Zanola, R. Wo king Pape Dis ibu ion Con en ionali y in he Mo ie Sec o : An Econome ic Analysis o Cinema Supply Quade ni - Wo king Pape DSE, No. 639 P o ided in Coope a ion wi h: Uni e si y o Bologna, Depa men o Economics Sugges ed Ci a ion: Collins, Alan; Sco cu, An onello E.; Zanola, R. (2008) : Dis ibu ion Con en ionali y in he Mo ie Sec o : An Econome ic Analysis o Cinema Supply, Quade ni - Wo king Pape DSE, No. 639, Alma Ma e S udio um - Uni e si à di Bologna, Dipa imen o di Scienze Economiche (DSE), Bologna, h ps://doi.o g/10.6092/unibo/amsac a/4608 This Ve sion is a ailable a : h ps://hdl.handle.ne /10419/159480 S anda d-Nu zungsbedingungen: Die Dokumen e au EconS o dü en zu eigenen wissenscha lichen Zwecken und zum P i a geb auch gespeiche und kopie we den. Sie dü en die Dokumen e nich ü ö en liche ode komme zielle Zwecke e iel äl igen, ö en lich auss ellen, ö en lich zugänglich machen, e eiben ode ande wei ig nu zen. So e n die Ve asse die Dokumen e un e Open-Con en -Lizenzen (insbesonde e CC-Lizenzen) zu Ve ügung ges ell haben soll en, gel en abweichend on diesen Nu zungsbedingungen die in de do genann en Lizenz gewäh en Nu zungs ech e. Te ms o use: Documen s in EconS o may be sa ed and copied o you pe sonal and schola ly pu poses. You a e no o copy documen s o public o comme cial pu poses, o exhibi he documen s publicly, o make hem publicly a ailable on he in e ne , o o dis ibu e o o he wise use he documen s in public. I he documen s ha e been made a ailable unde an Open Con en Licence (especially C ea i e Commons Licences), you may exe cise u he usage igh s as speci ied in he indica ed licence. h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ 1 Dis ibu ion Con en ionali y in he Mo ie Sec o : An Econome ic Analysis o Cinema Supply A.Collins♦ Uni e si y o Po smou h A.E. Sco cu♣ Uni e si y o Bologna and RCEA R.Zanola♠ Uni e si y o Eas e n Piedmon and RCEA ABSTRACT This pape empi ically analyzes he impac o se e al ac o s on a ‘con en ionali y index’ in he speci ic con ex o he cinema exhibi ion sec o . To ou knowledge, i is he i s ime ha a s anda d con en ionali y index has been cons uc ed o his pu pose. Econome ic analysis o he de e minan s o a ia ion in his index p o ides decision-make s wi h an empi ical ocus o analyzing dis ibu ional aspec s o he mo ie exhibi ion ma ke , wi h pa icula emphasis on p oduc di e en ia ion. Speci ically, (i) do cinemas based in a ci y a ea ha e a di e en o ‘specialized’ ocus in con as o cinemas in small owns? O , (ii) do mul iplexes ha e a di e en o mo e specialized ocus in compa ison wi h cinemas? To his end, c oss-sec ional econome ic models a e es ima ed o help analyze hese e ec s in h ee I alian egions o a sample o cinemas co e ing he 2006 season. JEL classi ica ion: C2; D2; Z1. Key wo ds: mo ies; con en ionali y index; supply; I aly.  ♦Depa men o Economics, Uni e si y o Po smou h Business School, Po land S ee , Po smou h P01 3DE, England, e-mail: [email p o ec ed] ♣Depa men o Economics, Uni e si y o Bologna, S ada Maggio e 45, I-40125 Bologna, I aly, e-mail: [email p o ec ed]; Rimini Cen e  ♠Depa men o Public Policy and Public Choice, Uni e si y o Eas e n Piedmon , Co so Bo salino 83, I- 15100 Alessand ia, I aly, e-mail: [email p o ec ed] 2 In oduc ion Many s udies ha e explo ed he ex en o p oduc di e en ia ion wi hin a s o ganiza ions. Such wo k has ended o ocus on high cul u al pu sui s such as ope a, d ama ic hea e o symphony o ches a conce s (Neligan, 2006; O’Hagan and Neligan, 2005; Pie ce, 2000; Dowd e al 2002). I is ypical o hese ac i i ies o equi e subs an ial public inancial suppo and/o subs an ial co po a e sponso ship a angemen s. Acco dingly, many in es iga ions ( ypically in ol ing he cons uc ion o a ‘con en ionali y index’ (CI)) ha e sough o ocus on he ex en o which subsidized/sponso ed pe o mances disp opo iona ely ea u e ‘sa e’ o ‘es ablished’ epe oi e and eschew ‘new’ o ‘expe imen al’ wo k. The hypo hesized a ionale is ha by such a s a egy i is hough mo e likely ha con inui y o public unding (and/o majo co po a e sponso ship a angemen s) can be secu ed o enewed. The al e na i e hypo hesis, howe e , can also be explo ed. This ela es o whe he a measu e o ‘insula ion’ om comme cial p essu es a o ded by signi ican public unding and/o co po a e sponso ship can ac ually os e g ea e a is ic expe imen a ion and adicalism o emb ace he ‘shock o he new’. In cinema exhibi ion, p i a e sec o inancing o e whelmingly domina es, hough he e a e many publicly suppo ed a s cinemas and in I aly a leas , he e is also a signi ican s a e ilm dis ibu o wo king among he p i a e sec o ilm dis ibu ion gian s. Ne e heless, despi e he ma ke o ien a ion, exp essions o consume dissa is ac ion ega ding he limi ed ex en o o e ed p oduc di e en ia ion in a ious owns’ and ci ies’ cinemas and mul iplexes ha e a isen (see, o example, Hubba d, 2000, 2002). I is hus o policy in e es o explo e he ex en o which such exp essions empi ically alid. Decision-making ega ding he disbu semen o public o sponso ship unding o ilm p oduc s and specialis o a house mo ie hea e s could also be in o med by such an e idence base. While he e may be much anecdo al cha e and pe cep ions ha mo ie hea e s a e showing oo many simila ilms, he deg ee o which his is uly he case in a gi en geog aphical a ea is an open empi ical ques ion. This is he i s pape , o ou knowledge, o cons uc an o hodox con en ionali y index (CI) in he speci ic con ex o cinema (mo ie hea e ) exhibi ion. Tha said, in he speci ic con ex o he Bos on me opoli an a ea, Chisholm, Macmillan and No man (2007) ha e de eloped a ela ed index - a ‘simila i y index’- in he con ex o ilm scheduling. This is used o 3 in es iga e he de e minan s o s a egic p oduc di e en ia ion in he indus y as condi ioned by con ac ual cons ain s. In gene al hey ind ha p oduc di e en ia ion is in e sely ela ed o ma ke size and ha mo e simila ilm p og amming is ound wi hin mo ie hea e s unde common owne ship. This s udy uses da a om h ee ep esen a i e I alian egions. C oss-sec ional econome ic models a e es ima ed o help analyze a ia ion in his CI. By so doing a pa icula mode o empi ical enqui y is enabled o help ame analysis o some dis ibu ional aspec s o he mo ie exhibi ion ma ke . Speci ically, (i) do cinemas based in a ci y a ea ha e a di e en o mo e ‘specialized’ ocus in con as o cinemas in small owns? O , (ii) do mul iplexes ha e a di e en o mo e specialized ocus in compa ison wi h cinemas? While di e ences in consume s’ mo ie-going beha io has been analyzed wi h espec o mul iplex and non- mul iplex mo ie hea e s (Collins e al., 2005), supply-side di e ences in e ms o mo ie dis ibu ion con en ionali y ha e no been simila ly explo ed. The pape is o ganized in he ollowing manne . The nex sec ion explo es some o he economics o p oduc di e en ia ion ha can in o m wo k on mo ie exhibi ion con en ionali y and p esen s a guiding heo e ical amewo k o his s udy. Backg ound on he mo ie exhibi ion sec o in I aly is hen p esen ed o con ex ualize he s udy applica ion. Sec ion 4 ou lines he modeling s a egy adop ed wi h espec o bo h he cons uc ion o he CI and he CI model s uc u es. The da a is desc ibed in he ollowing sec ion and he esul s o model es ima ion a e p esen ed and discussed in Sec ions 6 and 7. The inal sec ion o e s some concluding ema ks. 2. P oduc Di e en ia ion and Mo ie Con en ionali y: A B ie Re ospec In gene al e ms, a CI o a cul u al expe ience good may be de ined, [1] Whe e pi is he numbe o en i ies ( enues o pe o ming companies) in a sample unde sc u iny showing/pe o ming a gi en ype o cul u al good in a gi en ime pe iod and n is he o al numbe o ha ype o cul u al good shown (o pe o med) in he same gi en ime pe iod. Essen ially, i co esponds o he a e age numbe o en i ies in which each gi en cul u al good 4 shown o pe o med by a gi en en i y is shown/pe o med elsewhe e in ha gi en ime pe iod. I is a me ic ha has been widely used o o mally analyze he epe oi e di e si y o deg ee o p oduc di e en ia ion by hea e s and o ches as (Neligan, 2006; O’Hagan and Neligan, 2005; Pie ce, 2000; Dowd e al., 2002). The usual second s age in such analyses is o es ima e a single- equa ion CI unc ion using OLS eg ession. Fo example, he ypical a ay o igh hand side a iables o hea e s pe ain o, in e alia, he p opo ion o subsidy and subsc ip ion income o a gi en hea e enue o pe o ming company, a poli ical index o he go e nmen subsidy awa de s, some simple measu e o compe i ion (e.g. numbe o public/p i a e hea e s in he ele an municipali y), a ange o enue-speci ic cha ac e is ics, popula ion size and a ange o socio-economic a iables o he municipali y in which he enue lies. Hi he o his app oach has no been used o analyze p oduc di e en ia ion in comme cial hea e (e.g. New Yo k B oadway, London Wes End) o cinemas/mo ie hea e s o any kind. Wi h espec o mo ie hea e s, key di e ences wi h he d ama ic hea e s udies conce n (i) he deg ee o eliance on comme cial e enue s eams and (ii) ha while hea e (o symphony o ches a) senio managemen ac ually o e see he selec ion, p oduc ion and pe o mance o epe oi e, his may no be he case o a gi en mo ie hea e . This la e poin sugges s he need o some di e en a gumen s in a mo ie hea e CI unc ion and he need o be in o med by a co pus o economic heo y no la gely con ingen on he heme o expec ed and e ealed public sec o p e e ences. While many do exis , mos indi idual mo ie hea e s a e no independen i ms o en i ies. Ra he , hey a e ou le s in a mul iple chain o mo ie hea e s owned by an exhibi o i m. Local managemen a each ou le ypically has e y limi ed disc e ion o e he ‘sla e’ o newly eleased ilms ha a e shown. Decision-making by exhibi o i ms may also cons ained by means o high equi y c oss-owne ship o ull o wa d e ical in eg a ion be ween dis ibu o and exhibi o i ms. E en whe e his is no he case exhibi o i ms s ill ha e o buy bundles o ilms (block-booking) nego ia ed wi h e y complex con ac ual a angemen s om mo ie dis ibu o companies. In acco dance wi h p o i maximizing economic heo y, each bundle will ypically con ain some ilms expec ed o be high ea ne s and some low ea ne s (S igle 1968, Adams and Yellen, 1976, Dansby and Con ad, 1984, Salinge , 1995). The con ac s ea u e a ious box o ice and mo ie hea e concessions ( ood, d ink e c) e enue appo ionmen o mula and possibly ‘holdo e ’ clauses manda ing ex ensions 5 o ilm sc eening days in he e en o pa icula box o ice a ge s being achie ed. O s ein (1995) and O bach (2004) p o ide a de ailed analysis o he con ac ual amewo ks go e ning mo ie hea e ope a ions. The la e wo k also p o ides use ul insigh s o help accoun o he pe sis en lack o p ice compe i ion in his sec o , pa icula ly gi en ha his o y shows box o ice p icing was no always p edominan ly uni o m. He does no a ibu e his o he e icien ma ke hypo hesis, bu a he o ‘p essu e’ om dis ibu o s seeking o minimize a ange o demand and supply side isks. Shaked and Su on (1982) p o ide heo e ical suppo o his iew ha i ms will use e ical p oduc di e en ia ion o elax p ice compe i ion. Howe e i was achie ed, he powe o dis ibu o s and exhibi o s o ensu e non- p ice compe i ion now domina es ma ke conduc , ende s he deg ee o p oduc di e en ia ion and i s domains o le els (i.e. ilm-based, mo ie hea e en i onmen -based), o be a mo e signi ican p ac ical ocus o economic enqui y. Lancas e (1990) p o ides a pano amic su ey o he gene al li e a u e and om he indi idual i m’s pe spec i e iden i ies h ee app oaches o analyzing p oduc a ie y by mul ip oduc i ms. The i s ela es o he p oduc ion side and ocuses on cos ad an ages om join p oduc ion and economies o scope. The second ela es o demand side conce ns in balancing he inc eased e enue om g ea e p oduc a ie y agains he loss o scale economies in he p oduc ion o each a ian . The hi d ela es o he deploymen o p oduc a ie y as a o m o s a egic p eemp ion in he p oduc space o achie e en y de e ence objec i es. The de elopmen , di usion and a e o g ow h o he mul iplex phenomenon could po en ially be iewed in he ligh o all h ee o hese easons, bu so could he e ical o quasi- e ical in eg a ion o dis ibu o s and exhibi o s, inc easing ma ke concen a ion and possibly he hea y eliance on pa icula ‘p o en’ plo o mulas, ‘da e mo ie’ appeal and s a ac o s/ac esses. Ho elling (1929) i s se ou he idea o i ms compe ing on mo e han one le el – in his case p ice and loca ion. The upsho o he basic p oposi ion was ha he equilib ium compe i i e loca ion o wo i ms ope a ing in a linea ma ke wi h dis inc e minal bounda ies and uni o mly dis ibu ed cus ome s was o be as close as possible oge he wi hou ac ually colliding. As Lancas e (1990) no ed, “…beyond pu e geog aphical loca ion, he p oposi ion is conce ned wi h he deg ee o di e en ia ion a he han he numbe o goods, answe ing he ques ion: i he e a e wo i ms in he ma ke , will hei bes s a egy be o choose p oduc s which 6 a e e y simila o e y di e en ?” [p197]. So eme ged he so-called P inciple o Minimum Di e en ia ion. Ye in subsequen yea s his equilib ium esul s we e hea ily challenged and ound no o hold o cases o mo e han h ee i ms and when a ious o he assump ions we e elaxed o modi ied. The e ision by D’Asp emon e al (1979) sugges ing quad a ic a he han linea anspo cos s sugges ed a maximum a he han minimum di e en ia ion equilib ium ou come. Bes (1998) howe e , sugges ed ha impe ec in o ma ion abou he e ical (quali y) cha ac e is ics o goods ( ilms) educes dis ibu o s/exhibi o s incen i es o ho izon al p oduc di e en ia ion (o he ilms/gen es) and hus leading o minimum p oduc di e en ia ion. In spa ial e ms, he implica ion is ha i ms (mo ie hea e s) will end o choose head-on comple ion by agglome a ion a a gi en loca ion. This means ha consume s can inciden ally bene i om impe ec in o ma ion conce ning p oduc ( ilm) quali y. Typically hese s udies end o assume, as Ho elling did in his o iginal wo k, ha consume s a e uni o mly dis ibu ed. When his pa icula assump ion was d opped, De Palma e al (1985) iden i ied enewed heo e ical suppo o he Minimum Di e en ia ion P inciple. Hence, non-uni o mly dis ibu ed consume s in geog aphical and/o p oduc cha ac e is ics space (i.e. consume he e ogenei y in space and as es) p o ide some heo e ical basis o jus i y expec a ions o a high CI sco e in he con ex o mo ie hea e exhibi ion. Chisholm and No man (2004) in es iga ed he deg ee o which he Minimum Di e en ia ion P inciple ex ends o loca ion choices by mul i-p oduc i ms o di e en sizes supplying di e en ia ed goods o consume s wi h he e ogeneous as es. They ound ha mul i- p oduc i ms dispe se hei p oduc s i consume he e ogenei y is low o dis ance be ween ma ke s is high. 3. The Mo ie Exhibi ion Sec o in I aly An impo an and mo i a ing ocus o his s udy is he cu en supply s uc u e o cinemas and sc eens in I aly. Up o a ew yea s ago, he opening o a new cinema was subjec o s ingen public egula ions. In ac , he egula ion esul ed in a se e e a ioning o openings and in he p og essi e ageing o supply: he as majo i y o cinemas we e single sc een, o en wi h his o ical loca ions in down own a eas. In ecen yea s he sec o was libe alized. The changes esul ed in he opening o many mul i sc een cinemas ( om 5 o 7 sc eens) o 7 mul iplexes (8 o mo e sc eens) a he expenses o smalle single sc een s uc u es1. As shown in Table 1, he o al numbe o cinema emains mo e o less cons an (-2.7%) while he numbe o sc eens ose signi ican ly (+9%). The inc easing p opo ion o new-build cinemas can be shown o be connec ed wi h inc eased quali y in e ms o he iewing expe ience (pa icula ly in e m o com o o he sea s, sigh lines, e c) as well he in oduc ion o up- o-da e ma ke ing and o ganiza ional echniques. Fo example, he numbe o cinemas closed in July and Augus (a common p ac ice o small single amily-owned and un single sc een cinemas) has sha ply educed. Some suppo ing e idence is p o ided in Table 1 showing ha admissions o single sc een cinemas in 2004 was sligh ly abo e 20% bu ha wo yea s la e he igu e d opped o 15%. The edis ibu ion o cinema goe s seems o be in he a o o mul iplexes. Table 1 abou he e On he basis o such da a i is possible o asse ha he a e age size o an I alian cinema has sligh ly inc eased – om 2.2 o 2.5 sc eens pe cinema du ing he pe iod 2004-2006. The inc ease, howe e , comes in only in pa om he inc eased size o indi idual cinema complexes (whe e he a e age numbe o sc eens has isen by 6.7%, om 4.35 o 4.65). O p incipal impo ance has been he inc ease in he ma ke sha e o he la ge ypes o cinemas (an 8.6% inc ease, om 465 o 505). The o e all e ec has been a 15.6% inc ease in he numbe o sc eens in he la ge cinemas which o e shadows he 9.6% d op in he numbe o single sc een cinemas. As a consequence o a dec ease in he o al numbe o admissions and o he inc ease in he numbe o sc eens, he a e age a endance pe sc een d opped by jus unde 14% o e he h ee yea s conside ed. Fu he in e es ing ends can be disce ned i he da a is disagg ega ed by cinema size. The a e age admission o single sc een cinemas has collapsed d ama ically (-26%), whe eas he d op o mul i-sc een cinemas and megaplexes, albei signi ican , emains limi ed o -15% and -13%, espec i ely. These de elopmen s ha e e ol ed  1 This end is po ayed in he mo ie “Nuo o Cinema Pa adiso” by G. To na o e ha won he 1989 Academy Awa d (Osca ) o Bes Film in a Fo eign Language. 8 a a di e en pace wi hin he a ious egions o I aly. The da a shows ha in he mo e u banized No he n a ea, he ex en o he decline o single sc een cinemas has been so ho ough ha hey almos ende ed ex inc 2, while in he Sou h his p ocess o ans o ma ion is lagging behind ha o he No h. In he Cen al egions (wi h he no able excep ion o Rome) a mo e ‘in e media e’ posi ion3 can be disce ned. F om he pe spec i e o his s udy’s ocus o enqui y, he iden i ica ion o di e en business s a egies and ou comes associa ed wi h la ge and small cinema es ablishmen s is o cen al impo ance. This enables some assessmen o he ex en o which cinemas o di e en size exhibi di e en con en ionali y indices. This can be quan i ied by compu ing CIs pe sc een and pe cinema ( he eby agg ega ing he eigh o mo e sc eens o a mul iplex in o a single “a e age” sc een). Unsu p isingly, single sc een cinemas a e also losing impo ance in e ms o admissions. Table 2 shows ha he p opo ion o he smalle cinema es ablishmen s, e en i s ill sizeable, is dec easing s eadily, om 21% in 2004 o 15% in 2006. Fo his segmen , he d op in e ms o a endance pe sc een is e en mo e d ama ic: om 26,591 icke s sold in 2004, o 19,763 in 2006, wi h a 25.6% dec ease. As o he ype o gen e o mo ies, I alian p e e ences seem simila o hose o he es o he Eu ope. US mo ies domina e he box o ice and mos o he dis ibu o s a e subsidia ies o he Ame ican based majo s. The ma ke sha e o na ional ilms luc ua es a ound 22-25% o he o al numbe o admissions, wi h some e y empo a y inc eases in he case o a ew pa icula ly success ul I alian hi s (Table 2). Table 2 abou he e Rega dless o mo ie o igins, cinema consump ion in I aly has been and s ill emains high. I is, by and la ge, he mos popula ac i i y among he ange o pe o ming a s. Figu e 1 p esen s he pa e n o pa icipa ion o e ecen yea s. I is immedia ely appa en ha wi hin a b oadly s able pic u e o he o he pe o ming a s, he e is some e idence o inc easing cinema going.  2 Se e al single sc een cinemas we e ans o med in o mul iplexes. 3 Tables ha e no shown o he sake o b e i y bu a e a ailable upon eques om he au ho s. 15 Re e ences Adams WJ, Yellen JL. 1976. Commodi y Bundling and he Bu den o Monopoly. Qua e ly Jou nal o Economics 90: 475-98. Bes e H. 1998. Quali y Unce ain y Mi iga es P oduc Di e en ia ion. RAND Jou nal o Economics 29: 828-844. Chisholm DC, No man G. 2004. He e ogeneous P e e ences and Loca ion Choice wi h Mul i- P oduc Fi ms. Regional Science and U ban Economics 34: 321-339. Chisholm DC, McMillan MS, No man G. 2006. P oduc Di e en ia ion and Film P og amming Choice: Do Fi s Run Mo ie Thea e s Show he Same Films? NBER WP 12646. Collins A, Hand C, Ryde A. 2005. The Lu e o he Mul iplex? The In e play o Time, Dis ance and Cinema A endance. En i onmen & Planning A 37: 483-501. Dansby RE, Con ad C. 1984. Commodi y Bundling, Ame ican Economic Re iew (Pape and P oceedings) 74: 377-381. D’Asp emon C, Gabszewicz JJ, Thisse J-F. 1979. On Ho elling’s S abili y in Compe i ion. Econome ica 17:1145– 1151. De Palma A, Ginsbu gh V, Papageo giou, Y, Thisse J-F. 1985. The P inciple o Minimum Di e en ia ion Holds Unde Su icien He e ogenei y Econome ica 53: 767-781. Dowd TJ, Liddle K, Lupo K, Bo den A. 2002. O ganizing The Musical Canon: The Repe oi es o Majo U.S. Symphony O ches as, 1842 o 1969. Poe ics 30: 35-61. Hubba d P. 2000. Sa e ou Sc eens? Town and Coun y Planning 69: 299-301. 16 Hubba d P. 2002. Sc een-shi ing: Consump ion, ‘Riskless Risks’ and he Changing Geog aphies o Cinema. En i onmen and Planning A 34: 1239-1258. Neligan A. 2006. Public Funding and Repe oi e Con en ionali y in he Ge man Public Thea e Sec o : An Econome ic Analysis. Applied Economics 38: 1111-1121. O’Hagan J, Neligan A. 2005. S a e Subsidies and Repe oi e Con en ionali y in he Non-P o i English Thea e Sec o : An Econome ic Analysis. Jou nal o Cul u al Economics 29: 35-57. O bach BY. 2004. An i us and P icing in he Mo ion Pic u e Indus y. Ame ican Law and Economics Associa ion Annual Mee ings, Wo king Pape 40, 1-45. h p://law.bep ess.com/alea/14 h/a 40 O ns ein SI. 1994. Mo ion Pic u e Dis ibu ion, Film Spli ing and An i us Policy. Has ings Communica ions and En e ainmen Law Jou nal 17: 415-444. Pie ce JL. 2000. P og amma ic Risk-Taking by Ame ican Ope a Companies. Jou nal o Cul u al Economics 24: 45-63. Lancas e K. 1990. The Economics o P oduc Di e en ia ion: A Su ey. Ma ke ing Science 9: 189-206. Salinge MA. 1995. A G aphical Analysis o Bundling. Jou nal o Business 68: 85-98. Shaked A, Su on J. 1982. Relaxing P ice Compe i ion Th ough P oduc Di e en ia ion. Re iew o Economic S udies 49: 3-13. Sis o A, Zanola R. 2008. Cinema A endance in Eu ope, Applied Economics Le e s ( o hcoming) S igle GJ. 1998 A No e on Block Booking, In: The O ganiza ion o Indus y, GJ S igle (ed). 17 Homewood: R. D. I win. We ck K, S ul jes M, G inwis P, Heyndels B. 2007. Budge a y Cons ain s and P og amma ic Choices by Flemish Subsidized Thea es Applied Economics ( o hcoming) Wojan TR, Lambe DM, McG anahan DA. 2007. Emo ing wi h hei Fee : Bohemian A ac ion o C ea i e Milieu. Jou nal o Economic Geog aphy 7: 711-736. Wolinsky A. 1985. P oduc Di e en ia ion wi h Impe ec In o ma ion. Re iew o Economic S udies 51: 53-61. 18 Table 1. The s uc u e o he I alian mo ie dis ibu ion indus y Yea Single sc een Mul iplex To al N° o cinemas 2004 778 465 1,243 2005 779 496 1,275 2006 704 505 1,209 N° o sc eens 2004 778 2024 2,802 2005 779 2237 3,016 2006 704 2346 3,050 A e age sc een pe cinema 2004 1 4,352688 2,254,224 2005 1 4,510081 2,365,490 2006 1 4,645545 2,522,746 Sou ce: Cine el Table 2. Mo ie a endance in I aly, 2004-2006 Single sc een (%) Mul iplex (%) To al A endance 2004 21,13 78,87 97,927,192 2005 17,57 82,57 90,641,603 2006 15,1 84,9 92164739 A e age a endance pe sc een 2004 26591 38159,67 34,949 2005 20444 33456,76 30,053 2006 19763 33353,74 30,217 Sou ce: Cine el 19 Table 3. Summa y s a is ics (single CI sample) Va iable Obs Mean S d. De . Min Max single CI 870 10.40179 4.2733 1.583333 40.08333 pop2 870 1,296,396 1,268,905 11,447 3,113,130 p14 870 .1436967 .0201929 .1089435 .1828786 gdp 870 22,480.63 3,102.12 15,603 27,463 mul iplex 870 .8563218 .3509649 0 1 Table 4. Reg ession esul s (single CI sample) Single CI Coe . Robus S d. E . Be a pop2 .0794262 .0099685 7.97 .3426394 p14 -1.678658 .7046662 -2.38 -.0898779 gdp .3497385 .1117659 3.13 .129156 mul iplex .13438 .0445128 3.02 .129156 cons -2.149166 1.08023 -1.99 .1250516 Numbe obs. 870 F(7,861) 58.60 R-squa ed 0.2392 Link es -.6063868 Mean VIF 1.70 20 Table 5. Summa y s a is ics ( ull CI sample) Va iable Obs Mean S d. De . Min Max ull CI 282 9.89576 5.361723 1.583333 40.08333 pop2 282 1,036,370 1,214,768 11,447 3,113,130 p14 282 .1436448 .0220754 .1089435 .1828786 gdp 282 22,240.87 2,945.753 15,603 27,463 mul iplex 282 .5602837 .497235 0 1 Table 6. Reg ession esul s ( ull CI sample) Full CI Coe ien . Robus S d. E . Be a pop2 .0943814 .0275036 3.43 .3280474 p14 -2.472265 1.582562 -1.56 -.1157037 gdp .7168488 .2913231 2.46 .2016467 mul iplex .0606911 .0521557 1.16 .0639781 cons -5.877908 2.790462 -2.11 . Numbe obs. 282 F(6,275) 27.28 R-squa ed 0.2699 Link es .4368184 Mean VIF 1.89 21 Figu e 1. Pa icipa ion in pe o ming a s e en s in I aly (1993-2006) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2005 2006 hea e cinema museums and exhibi ions classical music conce s o he music conce s spo e en s  Sou ce: Is a . No e: da a o 2004 a e no a ailable