Across these markets, they've seen that while overall sales have stayed more or less constant, "blockbusters" (Harry Potter books, the Twilight movies, etc.) continue to set records and sell jillions, even as more and more independent/alternatives crowd the market and sell their self-produced works. They posit that the "middle ground" shrinks even as the blockbusters and the niche products sell more, with the classic example being network television, or newspapers other than the NYT and WSJ. The middle-market companies are squeezed out.
The basic conclusion is that the "blockbusters" appeal to/sell to people who might normally not partake of whatever they are buying (kids read Harry Potter that don't normally read anything and don't branch out to anything else; housewives in line to see Twilight). They explain the opposite phenomenon too:
Quote:
By contrast, the audience for an obscure novel is largely composed of people who read a lot. That means the least popular books are judged by people who have the highest standards, while the most popular are judged by people who literally do not know any better. An American who read just one book this year was disproportionately likely to have read The Lost Symbol, by Dan Brown. He almost certainly liked it.
If anyone happens to be interested, here's a link to the whole thing.
http://www.economist.com/displaystory.c ... d=14959982
_________________
Fantasy Roleplaying Supplements for Basic, Expert, and Advanced games, free for download or print-on-demand and available now! http://www.barrataria.com/
