IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wpa/wuwpio/0505006.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Determinants of Profit in the Broadcasting Industry - Evidence from Japanese Micro Data -

Author

Listed:
  • Norihiro KASUGA

    (Faculty of Economics, Nagasaki University)

  • Manabu Shishikura

    (Institute for Information & Communications Policy)

Abstract

The operating areas of each terrestrial broadcasting station in Japan are geographically divided by a licensing system and form oligopolies in each of their respective markets. These institutional constraints define the market structure, and as a result, affect the business performance of the broadcasting industry. The primary purpose for regulation is based on the "Media Ownership Rule", a rule designed for preserving "plurality", "diversity" and "localism" of stations. Similar rules exist in many countries, but benchmarks differ. To this end, if the regulative authority introduced a new regulation framework, it might be useful to improve the financial foundation of the licensed stations, thus preserving the original purpose of the rule. With the rapid progress of digital technology and the increasingly diversified selection of media types, the government needs to urgently review Japan's old regulations with the aim of giving more freedom in the operation of terrestrial stations and so promote voluntary restructuring. Based on the above viewpoints, we implemented an econometric analysis with respect to factors that affect on the business performance (especially on profit) of each station. We focus on the terrestrial broadcasting industry because it plays a central role in the Japanese broadcasting system. As a result, we ascertained the following points. (1) Structural parameters: market share of each station has a positive correlation with profit, although market concentration appears to have no correlation. (2) Geographical parameters: the number of households per station and the income per household have positive correlations. (3) Business parameters: the aired ratio of self-produced TV programs has a positive correlation with revenue, although it has a negative correlation with profit. It is said that geographical environment is quite important for business performance in the broadcasting industry. This hypothesis is strongly supported by our results. Therefore deregulation and subsequent voluntary rearrangement may reinforce the operating basis of each station.

Suggested Citation

  • Norihiro KASUGA & Manabu Shishikura, 2005. "Determinants of Profit in the Broadcasting Industry - Evidence from Japanese Micro Data -," Industrial Organization 0505006, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpio:0505006
    Note: Type of Document - pdf; pages: 22
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de/econ-wp/io/papers/0505/0505006.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert Ekelund & George Ford & John Jackson, 1999. "Is Radio Advertising a Distinct Local Market? An Empirical Analysis," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 14(3), pages 239-256, May.
    2. Ekelund, Robert B, Jr & Ford, George S & Koutsky, Thomas, 2000. "Market Power in Radio Markets: An Empirical Analysis of Local and National Concentration," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 43(1), pages 157-184, April.
    3. Robert Ekelund & George Ford & John Jackson, 2000. "Are Local TV Markets Separate Markets?," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(1), pages 79-97.
    4. Webbink, Douglas W, 1973. "Regulation, Profits and Entry in the Television Broadcasting Industry," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(2), pages 167-176, April.
    5. Robert W. Crandall, 1972. "FCC Regulation, Monopsony, and Network Television Program Costs," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 3(2), pages 483-508, Autumn.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rennhoff, Adam D. & Wilbur, Kenneth C., 2012. "Local media ownership and media quality," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 231-242.
    2. Almas Heshmati & Rachid El-Rhinaoui, 2009. "Effects of Ownership and Market Share on Performance of Mobile Operators in MENA Region," TEMEP Discussion Papers 200921, Seoul National University; Technology Management, Economics, and Policy Program (TEMEP), revised Nov 2009.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alvin Silk & Lisa Klein & Ernst Berndt, 2002. "Intermedia Substitutability and Market Demand by National Advertisers," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 20(4), pages 323-348, June.
    2. Dennis Halcoussis & Anton Lowenberg, 2003. "The quantity and quality of radio broadcasting: are small markets underprovided?," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(3), pages 347-357.
    3. Marc Ivaldi & Jiekai Zhang, 2017. "Advertising Competition in the Free-to-Air TV Broadcasting Industry," CESifo Working Paper Series 6461, CESifo.
    4. Amnon Levy & Benoit Freyens, 2011. "Optimal Control of Broadcasting Spectrum with a Variety-Reception Tradeoff and Consumers’ Income Sensitivity," Economics Working Papers wp11-14, School of Economics, University of Wollongong, NSW, Australia.
    5. Benoît Pierre Freyens & Chris Jones, 2014. "Efficient Allocation of Radio Spectrum," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 16(1), pages 1-23, February.
    6. Simon P. Anderson & Stephen Coate, 2005. "Market Provision of Broadcasting: A Welfare Analysis," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 72(4), pages 947-972.
    7. Anderson, Simon P. & Gabszewicz, Jean J., 2006. "The Media and Advertising: A Tale of Two-Sided Markets," Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture, in: V.A. Ginsburgh & D. Throsby (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 18, pages 567-614, Elsevier.
    8. Ivaldi, Marc & Zhang, Jiekai, 2015. "Advertising Competition in the French Free-To-Air Television Broadcasting Industry," CEPR Discussion Papers 10762, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    9. Georges Siotis & Carmine Ornaghi & Micael Castanheira, 2023. "Evolving market boundaries and competition policy enforcement in the pharmaceutical industry," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 55(2), pages 313-348, April.
    10. Smith, Howard & O'Gorman, Catherine, 2008. "Efficiency Gain from Ownership Deregulation: Estimates for the Radio Industry," CEPR Discussion Papers 6699, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    11. Bourreau, Marc, 2003. "Mimicking vs. counter-programming strategies for television programs," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 35-54, March.
    12. Simon P. Anderson & Stephen Coate, 2000. "Market Provision of Public Goods: The Case of Broadcasting," NBER Working Papers 7513, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Amnon Levy & Michael R. Caputo & Benoît Pierre Freyens, 2013. "Royalties, Entry and Spectrum Allocation to Broadcasting," Economics Working Papers wp13-02, School of Economics, University of Wollongong, NSW, Australia.
    14. Evan Kwerel & Johathan Levy & Robert Pepper & David Sappington & Donald Stockdale & John Williams, 2002. "Economic Issues at the Federal Communications Commission," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 21(4), pages 337-356, December.
    15. Javier Elizalde, 2013. "Market definition with differentiated products: a spatial competition application," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 36(3), pages 471-521, December.
    16. Willem H. Boshoff, 2011. "Antitrust market definition using statistical learning techniques and consumer characteristics," Working Papers 224, Economic Research Southern Africa.
    17. Czygan, Marco, 1999. "Wohin kann Wettbewerb im Hörfunk führen? Industrieökonomische Analyse des Hörfunksystems der USA und Vergleich mit Deutschenland," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 18, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
    18. Ekelund, Robert B, Jr & Ford, George S & Koutsky, Thomas, 2000. "Market Power in Radio Markets: An Empirical Analysis of Local and National Concentration," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 43(1), pages 157-184, April.
    19. Kenneth C. Wilbur, 2008. "A Two-Sided, Empirical Model of Television Advertising and Viewing Markets," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(3), pages 356-378, 05-06.
    20. Robert Seamans & Feng Zhu, 2014. "Responses to Entry in Multi-Sided Markets: The Impact of Craigslist on Local Newspapers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(2), pages 476-493, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Terrestrial Broadcasting Station; Determinants of profit; Principle of Media Ownership Rule; Audience Share; Oligopoly;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D43 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Oligopoly and Other Forms of Market Imperfection
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
    • L82 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Entertainment; Media

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpio:0505006. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: EconWPA (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.