Frequent moviegoers often note that movies are rarely based on original ideas. Most of them are based on a television series, a video game, or$,$ most commonly, a book

In general, does a movie or a book have a higher fixed cost of production?

$\{$

$[$ Select $]$

$["$A movie has a higher fixed cost.", "A book has a higher fixed cost.", "Both have about the same fixed cost."$]$

$\}$

Hollywood releases about $100$ new movies every year while just one publisher, Penguin Random House, releases about $15,000$ book titles a year. How does your answer in part a explain such a wide difference? Which is riskier: publishing a book or producing a movie?

$\{$

$[$ Select $]$

$["$a movie is riskier due to its lower fixed costs.", "a book is riskier due to its lower fixed costs.", "a movie is riskier due to its higher fixed costs.", "a book is riskier due to its higher fixed costs."$]$

$\}$

Using a proven success $($at least in book format$)$ mitigates some of the risk of movie production so investors are much more likely to be willing to gamble that a successful book can be made into a movie than they are to gamble on a movie with no fan base. As a result, we can expect to see $\{$

$[$ Select $]$

$["$more$",$ "less"$]$

$\}$ innovation in novels, the low$-$fixed$-$cost industry. Low fixed costs mean $\{$

$[$ Select $]$

$["$lots of$",$ "little"$]$

$\}$ entry.