Independent Exhibitors Film Bulletin (1963)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

PAY TV SURVEY Majority Willing To Pay S I SO I*,., Month The 47% who expressed disappointment about too many old movies, or, if you will, not enough new ones, griped most vehemently about what one vexed Subscriber termed, "Too damn many repeats!" This complaint was heard repeatedly. Subscriber unrest was not confined to failure alone. A very impressive 29% of the nay-sayers voted "price", per se, as a primary ground. A further breakdown reveals that far fewer groused about the rates for attractions than about the annual $15.00 service charge imposed last Summer. About three-quarters of the unsatisfied elements said that they do not believe they are getting as much use from the medium currently as when they first subscribed. An overwhelming majority of "dissatisfied" Subscribers declared they use the medium hardly at all in the summer. The "undecided" element closely approximated this view. A negligible number saw fit to cite the insufficiency of special shows, spectaculars, or serious programming as ground for complaint. Some (11%) complained that sports attractions were not as numerous as desired. So far, the study has established (1) the original expectations of Subscribers, and (2) how they "feel" now in light of actual "home boxoffice" experience. At this juncture, Audienscope deemed it of interest to ascertain what type of programming all Subscribers (satisfied or otherwise) would prefer, if they remain Telemeter customers. In view of their experience with the medium, a hypothetical inquiry seemed in order. What Kind of Attraction Are You Most Willing to Pay For? New Movie 56% Sports 47% Other 7% The disclosures that new movies and sports, together, make up a staggering 93% of the attractions Etobicoke's Pay TV patrons are most willing to pay for brings us to a revelation of the fundamental nature of the medium, as reflected by this expression of its audience's tastes. Movies and sports, sports and movies — in the words of Keats, all ye know and all ye need to know, so far as this study can discern. The Canadians who submitted to the research appear to be counterparts of Americans in the modest income ($5000-$8000) bracket and of average educational background. They are typical of people in the States outside of the highly sophisticated, higher income elements in large metropolitan centers. This look at the Etobicoke population would seem to explain, to some extent at least, why so-called "longhair" entertainment, such as opera, ballet and programs of an educational nature, received little notice in the responses on entertainment tastes. Very few acknowledged with any enthusiasm the special attractions which were staged and taped for Telemeter presentation. On the other hand, theatre drama registered about two-thirds of the preference for "other" attractions. Having been told what they would prefer to pay for, it was, of course, logical next to inquire how much the subscribers would pay. How Much Are You Willing To Spend on Pay TV? $4 to $6 per month 58% $6 to $10 per month 11% Above $10 per month 3% Depends upon Attractions 17% Under $4 per month 8% Undecided 3% The question as put was predicated entirely on the kind of programming Subscribers have known. More than two-thirds volunteered the information that their responses were conditioned upon worthwhile attractions being offered. No doubt was left in the interviewers' minds that price was inextricably intertwined with programming. Once the above query was put, Subscribers were asked if the hypothetical figures coincided with actual expenditures. A total of 61% said they believed their actual spending was lower, but blamed the offerings rather than their budgets for this. Those fixing $4 to $6 per month as their "willing to pay" figure the next highest tally by about three-and-a-half to one. This might have to be interpreted as evidence that average Subscribers have set that as a limit on their Pay TV expenditures. It was found that those willing to spend above $6 per month were sports fans in the main. The group saying "would Depend upon Attractions" was comprised of a high percentage of movie fans. Subscriber spending is largely confined to Fall and Winter. Almost 80% said they watch not at all or infrequently in Summer. More than 55% said they believed they paid to see all or most of the new films presented. A much smaller number reported paying for older films. In this phase of the interviews there again recurred the complaints against "too many repeats" and "too many old films". About one-fifth said Children continuing basis. Shows has exacted money on a fairly Within the framework of the expenditure ideal of $4 to $6 per month, Subscribers appear willing to pay required rates for worthwhile attractions. When, within this cost context, shows are not satisfying, the medium is viewed as expensive, as not worth the money. This is behind many cost gripes dealing with program rates. The greater cost irritant is the $15 annual service fee. Its impact reverberated throughout the interviews. Compounding the sore were complaints of the failure of general programming. Many declaimed against the carrying charge as not justified because of infrequent use. Spread over few shows, the $15 fee sends the unit cost per show spiraling, they said. A point appears to be reached in the fixing of Subscriber charges where an added increment produces drastic reaction. If it was the intention of Telemeter to winnow out infrequent users by the $15 charge, it apparently succeeded — and then some. It appears to have chased more than a few with moderate tuning habits. At the time of the survey, it was cited by many more as a decisive factor in their announced intentions to cancel. Earlier data clearly demonstrates that infrequency of meter use is still prevalent. A still significant portion of remaining Subscribers are holding on to the medium in the hope that programming will improve. * * * Wither Subscribers? What course of aciton can meter holders be expected ( Continued on Page 16) Film BULLETIN August 19, 1963 Page 15