2007 European Film Market (EFM) Outcomes Report Conducted by: For: Telefilm Canada June 2007

1. 2007 EuropeanFilm Market (EFM)Outcomes Report Conducted by: For:Telefilm Canada June 2007

2. Methodology

3. Methodology • A total of 28 e-mailed invitations were sent to Canadian companies that attended the 2007 European Film Market. • 13 of the 28 companies clicked on the link in the e-mail invitations to go to the survey site. • Of these 13, 12 completed all of the survey - a 43% response rate. • The survey was open from March 9 until June 9, 2007. • During the course of the survey, POLLARA made multiple attempts to follow up with non-responding companies through e-mail and telephone calls to encourage them to participate. In addition, POLLARA asked members of the IIAC to follow up with non-responding companies in their respective provinces.

4. Methodology E-mail invitations sent to 28 companies • The low response rate raises concerns about possible non-response bias (for example, are the companies that answered the survey smaller or larger than those that did not? Are some provinces over/underrepresented?). • Consequently, Telefilm should exercise caution and judgment when reviewing these results. 13 clicked on link in e-mail to visit the survey site 12 companies reached the end of the survey

5. Sample and Respondents by Province • Broken down by province, the sample consisted of the following companies.

6. Respondent Profile

7. Primary Business Focus of Company Q1. What is the primary business focus of your company? Select all that apply.N=13

8. Main Format(s) of Interest Q2. What is the main format(s) of interest to your company? Select all that apply.N=13

9. Location of Head Office Ontario31% Newfoundland & Labrador23% Quebec15% British Columbia23% Manitoba8% Q3. In which province/territory is your head office located?N=13

10. Company Revenues Q4. What were your company’s total gross revenues for its most recent fiscal year?N=13

11. Number of Employees Q5. How many full-time employees are there currently in your company? N=13

12. The Film Market

13. Genres and Formats Companies Interested in Selling and/or Pre-Selling at 2007 EFM Q6. In deciding to attend the 2007 European Film Market, which of the following programming genres was your company interested in selling and/or pre-selling? Q7. For each of the programming genre(s) of interest to your company, what was the type of media? N=13

14. Sales/Pre-Sales • Ten companies indicated that they either completed sales while at the European Film Market or began discussions that are likely to lead to sales while at EFM. • Six companies indicated that they either completed pre-sales while at the European Film Market or began discussions that are likely to lead to pre-sales. • Of these, 4 companies provided information on 16 deals involving 9 titles. • Companies reported that 2 distribution agreements were signed. • Respondents reported that $280,000 of sales were completed while at the 2007 EFM and that $2,164,500 worth of sales are likely to occur as a result of discussions initiated at the market. • Companies did not report any completed presales at the 2007 European Film Market, but they expect $800,000 of pre-sales to occur as a result of discussions initiated at EFM.

15. Breakdown of Sales and Pre-Sales Deals Sales Pre-Sales 4 Companies 2 Companies 8 Titles 3 Titles 11 Deals 5 Deals $2,164,500 Sales likely to occur as a result of discussions completed while at 2007 European Film Market $800,000 Pre-Sales likely to occur as a result of discussions completed while at 2007 European Film Market $280,000 Sales completed while at 2007 European Film Market $0 Pre-Sales completed while at 2007 European Film Market

16. Sales Q8a. Did you complete any sales of your titles, or begin discussions that will likely lead to future sales while at the 2007 EFM? N=13

17. Sales Likely Sales Breakdown of Sales and Likely Sales by Genre $’000s

18. Sales Likely Sales Breakdown of Sales & Likely Sales by Country $’000s

19. Sales Likely Sales Breakdown of Sales and Likely Sales by Company Region $’000s

20. Pre-Sales Q8e. Did you complete any pre-sales or begin discussions that will likely lead to pre-sales while at the 2007 EFM? N=13

21. Pre-Sales Likely Pre-Sales Breakdown of Pre-Sales and Likely Pre-Sales by Genre $’000s

22. Pre-Sales Likely Pre-Sales Breakdown of Pre-Sales by Country $’000s

23. Pre-Sales Likely Pre-Sales Breakdown of Pre-Sales and Likely Pre-Sales by Company Region $’000s

24. Co-Production and Co-Venture Deals • 7 companies (54% of those who answered the question) indicated that they either signed, or began negotiating co-production or co-venture deals while at the 2007 EFM. • However, only 5 of these companies answered all subsequent questions concerning the number of deals, the value of deals, and the countries with which these deals were made. • 6 companies provided information about the number of co-production or co-venture deals - and reported a total of 11 deals. • 5 companies provided information about the value of co-production or co-venture deals - and reported that the deals were worth $32,120,000. • 6 companies provided information about the countries with which deals were made. • Respondents reported that they participated in an average of 17 business meetings each while at the 2007 EFM.

25. Co-Production and Co-Venture Deals

26. Co-Production and Co-Venture Deals by Company Region Q9b. How many co-production or co-venture deals were either signed or will likely be signed in the future as a result of discussions initiated at the 2007 EFM? Q9c. What is the estimated value to your company of these co-productions or co-venture deals (in Canadian Dollars)

27. Title Screening • 5 respondents (42%) indicated that they had a title screened at the 2007 European Film Market. • These respondents gave an average satisfaction score of 5.8 for the visibility their titles received from the screenings Mean satisfaction=5.8 Not at all satisfied VerySatisfied Q11. Were any of your titles screened at the 2007 EFM? (n=12) Q12. (IF YES TO Q11) Using a 10-point scale where 1 means you were Not at all satisfied, and 10 means you were Very satisfied, how would you rate your satisfaction with the visibility your titles received from the screenings? (n=5)

28. Title Screening - “Perspective Canada” Screening Program • Of the 5 respondents who indicated that they had a title screened at the 2007 European Film Market, 2 said it was part of the “Perspective Canada” screening program. • Of these 2 respondents, 1 indicated that the Perspective Canada program directly contributed to sales, and 1 said it partially contributed to sales.

29. Overall Satisfaction With, and Value of, 2007 European Film Market Not at Veryall satisfied satisfied Q13a. How satisfied would you say you were overall with the 2007 EFM in terms of facilities provided, meeting potential contacts, support, etc...? Using a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 means not at all satisfied, and 10 means very satisfied. Q13b. And thinking about what it costs your company to attend, and the quality of the services and support provided at the 2007 EFM, how would you rate the VALUE you received on the same 1-10 scale...?N=12

30. Satisfaction with 2007 European Film Market Not Applicable 0% 8% 8% 0% 8% 8% 25% 25% 83% 92% 0% 42% 8% Reconnect with existing business contacts For your own professional development Learn about international markets and trends Make new business contacts Meet potential co-production partners Seek out new project ideas and creative inspiration Identify potential new geographic markets Seek financing or investment Acquire titles for distribution Participate as a speaker on panels Pre-sell your titles and projects Sell/distribute your existing titles Attract visibility or press coverage for your company Not at Veryall satisfied satisfied Q13c. How satisfied were you with the 2007 EFM in terms of meeting the following objectives for attending, using a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 means not at all satisfied, and 10 means very satisfied? If a particular item does not apply, select, “not applicable”. N=12

31. International Markets & Festivals Attended Q14. Which, if any of the following international markets and festivals held in other countries have you attended during the past two years? Select all that applyN=12

32. Rating of International Festivals & Markets Cannes Film Market European Film Market American Film Market Sundance Film Festival Venice Film Festival MIPCOM MIPTV Sunny Side of the Docs RealScreen Summit World Congress of History Producers Hong Kong Filmart Other Q15 Thinking of the European Film Market together with the other major international events held outside of Canada, which one best meets your needs, is second best at meeting your needs, is third best at meeting your needs? N=10

33. Used Services of Canada Pavilion? Used Canada Pavilion? Why Not? • “Not sure what services were to be provided” • “I found each part of the festival was very disconnected to the other parts and I could have used more information as it was my first time attending.” Q17 Did you use the services provided by the Canada Pavilion at the 2007 EFM? N=12 Q18 (IF “NO” TO Q17) Why didn’t you use the services provided at the Canada Pavilion? N=3

34. Satisfaction with Canada Pavilion Location of the stand Helpfulness of booth staff Design and appearance of the stand Overall utility of the Canada Pavilion to your company Usefulness of pavilion in holding meetings Size of meeting spaces Availability of meeting spaces Not at Veryall satisfied satisfied Q19 (THOSE WHO DID USE THE CANADA PAVILION) Please rate your level of satisfaction with each of the following aspects of the Canada Pavilion at the 2007 EFM using a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 means not at all satisfied, and 10 means very satisfied. If a particular item does not apply, select “not applicable.” N=9

35. Suggestions for Future Improvements to the Canada Pavilion • Respondents provided the following suggestions for future improvements to the Canada Pavilion: • “I believe the space was somewhat too small, especially for private meetings, but given the size of the overall venue (M. Gropius Building) it was understandable. Otherwise it was fine.” • “Get a bigger space with better location easier to be found.” • “More needs to be made of Canada's position as a producer of independent product. There is so much that could be done to make a booth or pavilion that shows this profile, at all international events, so that Canada becomes known as the "indie" place, with stylish film clips playing etc.” • “I think the Canada Pavilion could get more involved in helping to promote all Canadian films screened at the BFF. There also needs to be a social at the Pavilion as a meet and greet.” • “By matching enquiries for sales or co-production with producers from Canada in attendance in a more proactive way.” Q20 (THOSE WHO DID USE THE CANADA PAVILION) Please provide any suggestions you may have on how the Canada Pavilion could be improved in the future. N=12

36. Past Attendance at EFM Q21. Which previous European Film Markets, if any, has your company attended? Select all that applyN=12

37. Definitely Probably Not Sure Not Likely Definitely Not Likelihood of, and Reasons for, Recommending EFM to Others • “Attending the Berlinale was a tremendous opportunity to grasp current trends in the marketplace.” • “It is a very useful and user friendly market for Canadian content films.” • “Very important to have this visibility on the international film stage.” • “Good opportunity to meet producers & distributors from European territories, a lot of good buzz and a wonderful city as host.” • “Has to do with overall initiatives regarding raising the profile of Canadian production and Canadian product abroad.” • “We had a co-production with Germany, so we had good reason to be there to screen the work and build on our relationship with the co-producers.” Q22a. Would you recommend the European Film Market to other companies in the Canadian audio-visual industry? N=12 Q22b. Please explain your answer. N=12

38. Cost of Attending EFM 2007 • Companies incurred an average cost of $5,730 in attending the 2007 European Film Market. • 83% of respondents (10 companies) indicated that they received funding support from Telefilm, other federal government organizations or the provincial funding agencies to attend the event. • Five companies reported receiving federal funding ranging in amount from $1,000 to $20,000. The median amount was $2,400. • Seven companies indicated that they had received provincial funding ranging in amount from $1,800 to $3,600. The median amount was $2,000.

39. Other Comments • “Thank you once again to Telefilm & its representatives for all of the help and support provided. Attending the EFM was an invaluable experience & I have BCFilm and Telefilm to thank for helping me make the best of such a great opportunity.” • “It was my first time, after receiving Telefilm eligibility as a producer, in attending the EFM and I found it, overall, to be very useful. I'm sure that business will result.” • “Canadian presence at international festivals and markets is a must. A more concerted, stylish, up-to-date, "produced" approach to raising the profile of Canadian production and products is a must.” Q26. Finally, please provide any other comments you have on the 2007 European Film Market or suggestions for improving the support provided by Telefilm and its partners. N=12

40. Other Comments • “The Canadian screenings were very helpful to get our film seen by a large majority of buyers at EFM. Having our film as an official selection in the Berlinale was a big part of our success at the EFM. The ongoing outreach and follow up with the Telefilm Canada Festivals Bureau staff is INDISPENSIBLE in attending the foreign markets. This team, especially Brigitte Hubmann's relationships with all the international festival programmers, goes a long way to getting our films selected into these festivals and sold at the accompanying markets.” • “The EFM itself is not very helpful for screenings. You cannot put up your poster until one hour before a screening. Very rigid rules and there seems to be no interest on behalf of the organizers in getting film buyers to the screenings.” Q26. Finally, please provide any other comments you have on the 2007 European Film Market or suggestions for improving the support provided by Telefilm and its partners. N=12

41. Other Comments • “Maybe this year was not the best one for the Berlin Film Festival/European Film Market, as it was a seasonal thing. Hopefully, next year, it will be a better one (along with a better weather!)” • “Je crois que le European Film Market (et le Festival de Berlin) cherche encore la manière idéale de s'organiser et de se centraliser; c'est un peu éparpillé et désorganisé; cela va venir...” Q26. Finally, please provide any other comments you have on the 2007 European Film Market or suggestions for improving the support provided by Telefilm and its partners. N=12

42. Conclusions

43. Conclusions • As a result of the low response rate to the survey, and possible concerns about non-response bias, the sales data within this report should be treated with some caution. • Nevertheless, it appears that participants at EFM did enjoy a successful market: • More than three-quarters (77%) either completed sales, or began discussions that are likely to lead to sales while at the event. • Forty-six percent either completed pre-sales, or began discussions that are likely to lead to pre-sales. • Over half of respondents (54%) either signed or began negotiating co-production or co-venture deals. • $280,000 of actual sales, $2,964,500 of likely sales and pre-sales, and $32,120,000 of co-production or co-venture deals were reported by survey participants.

44. Conclusions • Despite this sales success, respondents were only moderately satisfied with the market, giving an overall satisfaction rating of 6.8 out of 10, and rating value for money as 6.4 out of 10. • These scores are lower than they were in 2007, when they both scored 7.7 out of 10. • Participants were most satisfied with the 2007 EFM in terms of reconnecting with existing business contacts (7.9 out of 10), and least satisfied with it in terms of attracting visibility or press coverage for their companies (4.9 out of 10). • Respondents indicated that the Cannes Film Market was the best international event held outside of Canada at meeting their needs.

45. Conclusions • Three-quarters (75%) of respondents used the services provided by the Canada Pavilion at the 2007 EFM. • They were moderately satisfied with the overall utility of the Canada Pavilion (rating their satisfaction as 6.8 out of 10). • More specifically, they were most satisfied with it in terms of: • The location of the stand (7.4) • The helpfulness of booth staff (7.3) • The design and appearance of the stand (7.2) • They were less satisfied with the stand in terms of being able to conduct meetings there. Specifically: • The usefulness of Pavilion in holding meetings (6.0) • Size and availability of meeting spaces (5.6)

46. Conclusions • Currently, the Canada Pavilion seems to be more informational than interactive. • Companies are able to use the Pavilion to display and promote their products, but they find that the Pavilion is lacking in facilities for conducting meetings. • The Canada Pavilion could me made more useful to clients if it were more of a facilitation point, i.e. a better location for holding meetings and for introducing buyers to sellers, possibly by devoting more space to meeting rooms.

47. 101 Yorkville AvenueToronto, Ontario M5R 1C1 Tel: 416.921.0090 / Toll Free: 1.888.POLLARA www.pollara.com