Interesting correlation on how the move business and Pharma share similar business plans when it comes to producing a blockbuster drug. R and D, yup, got high costs with both, unpredictable, yup, nobody knows until the release, budgets and flops, well it could be a toss up over which industry can claim more of those; however, the entertainment business has a bit more experience in the block buster business. They do have an advantage in the fact that they only want the audience and do not have to go to step 2 to create the need for the use of a medication.
That portion I remember back to my sales 101 days, there are different types of markets and sales techniques. The movie business doesn't require the process of creating a need, thus it moves along a little faster and posts no threats or harm to our bodies. All of this is going under change though as personalized medicine and the answers research is bringing to light will be giving us some new alternatives for the treatment plans of the future, so the entertainment business will continue with blockbusters, but healthcare will be facing a new blockbuster structure of it's own. BD
The importance of blockbusters has been challenged recently by Chris Anderson's long tail theory that you can make money in many creative industries by selling specialized products to niche markets identified via the Internet. For example, the new CEO of GlaxoSmithKline, the pharmaceuticals giant, likens the search for blockbusters to "finding a needle in a haystack when you need it." He also worries that a company is at risk if sales depend too much on one or two megabrands that could run into lawsuits from generic competitors or regulatory challenges.