I have seen them. You have, too, most likely. They lurk in hallways at LF industry conferences.

Some know they have been stricken and openly discuss the effect on their work. Others who have it may not have been diagnosed yet. Some have it but are in denial. Some of those who recognize the symptoms are not sure what to do and may simply accept the status quo.

In the past it was not talked about publicly. Some felt ashamed, believing they were the only ones afflicted, thinking perhaps that to mention it might brand them with a scarlet letter. But in today’s world of easily shared information, those who speak up win a red badge of courage.

Whether it is discussed or not, a virus is running amok, perhaps at epidemic proportions. No one is quite sure. It is Attendance Deficit Disorder or ADD.

The attendance drop referred to in the January 2002 issue of LF Examiner is startling, but perhaps not so surprising. It closely mirrors the data I reported in the GSTA Economic Impact Study, in which 55% of responding institutional theaters reported decreased attendance over the previous three years.

Adding in LF Examiner’s data, the downward trend is now four years in duration. If more information was available, would we see a five- or six-year trend? Clearly the drop in attendance must be turned around before it is too late.

The events of September 2001 have obviously had a negative impact. Theme parks and the travel industry as a whole have experienced a slowdown, but both will pull out of the slump in due time. Both had reasonable growth trends early in 2001 and before. This is a hiccup on their radar, not a trend.

In 2000 and 2001 the mainstream film business was in serious financial trouble due to dramatic overbuilding, even while box office and attendance were growing. But this growth was not enough to offset the significant capital expenditures.

Hollywood actually experienced record box office and attendance in 2001 in North America. While there is some way to go before they completely recover, most of the multiplexes’ reorganizations are complete, and 2002 is expected to be a profitable year for several of them.

Fortunately, a cure is available for the LF industry, although like a bad-tasting medicine, it may be good for us even though it’s no fun going down. It is time to accept the cure before it is too late and to put stringent measures in place.

Here are a few suggestions:

Expand the audience. Easier said than done. Revisit all marketing budgets, at the distributor and exhibitor levels. Marketing beyond the usual target audiences is a must. I still chuckle when I recall the sensational efforts of the Brooklyn Museum of Art to attract more people (reminder: elephant dung). While I don’t suggest the LF industry go to that extreme, it is time for new ideas. Let’s think out of the box. Maybe there could be a GSTA MAC award for the most outrageous marketing concept.

Film selection. It’s time to expand the types and numbers of films. Repeat business is a must. Film buyers are often seen as gatekeepers who buy films they think the audience wants to see instead of those the people really want to see. Where topic testing is used, how about doing it out on Main Street, not as part of an exit poll of visitors already in the museum?

Value. Some of those with ADD say that the LF film’s higher ticket price is worth it. Apparently audiences disagree. They vote with their pocketbooks. New pricing structures can have a positive impact, especially when publicized.

Economics. My favorite topic. Regular readers know where I stand on the many components of the economic model, whether you agree or not. Fact is, fixing some of the economics can be an effective remedy for ADD. Keep the statistics and other facts that have been reported in mind.

For instance, the Economic Impact Study survey asked for the ideal number of films on a theater’s schedule. Forty-four percent of institutions reported that one or two at a time was ideal. None of the commercial theaters gave that answer. The institutions’ decline in attendance and rise in ticket prices suggests to me that there is a correlation here.

The January issue of LF Examiner detailed the releases coming in 2002. Many are refreshingly innovative in approach. The good news is several of them come out in the spring.

The release of Santa Vs. The Snowman, Treasure Planet, and The Lion King within two or three months may be seen as competitive in some circles, but if parlayed correctly, they could increase attendance.

Did you see more than one Hollywood film this past holiday season? With the wide selection that was available, many people saw several films. Box office data support this fact. Why not makes it traditional for families to come to your LF Theater several times during the holidays, as well as at other times of the year? Once is not enough.

The Number One economic priority in exhibition is attendance. Without the ticket-buying customer, nothing else matters. Attracting and retaining the customer is the goal. It is expensive to run a theater and unlike the commercial exhibition chains, institutions don’t have the option of a major financial reorganization. Large fixed costs can only be offset by growth in attendance.

Can ADD victims be cured? New film product alone may not be sufficient, but in combination with other remedies we can get started. But first one must acknowledge the disorder and want to be cured.

Copyright 2002 by Cinergetics, LLC. All rights reserved. Used by permission.