Industry leaders have warned the sector is at a breaking point with an urgent need for structural reform.
What’s Been Reported?
Speakers at the most recent 2025 British Screen Forum have delivered an unusually blunt assessment of the UK film and television sector, calling for its fundamental restructuring to address deepening financial, political and global challenges. The candid tone underscores a growing fragility in the UK’s screen ecosystem and an urgent need for policy, capital and structural reform.
A key feature of concern at the event, held on November 19, 2025, focused on finance. Anne Sheehan, of AS Media Consulting, described the current environment as “the most difficult landscape I have ever seen for independent film finance.” She linked this to a weakened distribution market, disruption caused by streaming platforms and rising costs that have not been matched by revenue. “Costs have gone up,” she said, “but the rewards have gone down.”
Stephen Welton, non-executive chair of the British Business Bank, reminded delegates that the bank already accounts for about 20 percent of the UK venture capital market. Even so, he said public capital cannot carry the sector on its own. He highlighted UK pension funds as a large pool of money that could support domestic creative growth and asked directly how the UK might persuade those funds “to invest more in the UK.”
From the private investment side, Danny Cohen explained that Access Entertainment has largely stepped back from television investment and redirected its resources. The company is now largely looking at gaming and theatre in the UK. “Almost everything else is US,” he said, referring to where their capital flows. Cohen spoke about Access’ present focus on the creator economy, immersive entertainment, micro dramas and film slates with larger production houses. Access backs A24’s slate and has a development deal with the UK’s House Productions.
Cohen made a broader point about scale. He argued that “radical consolidation” in the UK creative sector will be necessary. He even pointed to a possible Sky and ITV merger as an example of the kind of bold steps the UK may soon need to consider.
Policy concerns surfaced repeatedly. Isabel Davis spoke about a longstanding misunderstanding inside government. Her point was that a production can qualify as British and still return little or no IP value to the UK. When major studio or streamer backed projects film in the UK, they often keep the rights elsewhere. She also criticised the government’s handling of the Data Use and Access Bill. “She described the government’s position as “hair raising” in the way it appeared to “throw its lot” in with technology companies. “It was a hair-raising moment to see the British government fundamentally misunderstand the value of copyright and throw its lot so fundamentally with the tech bros in that debate,” she said.
International visibility has also shifted. Grace Carley, chief executive of Film Export UK, said that the UK’s soft power in Europe is “ebbing away.” She contrasted the modest budgets at the London Screenings, where buyers might receive little more than “a glass of warm white wine,” with Unifrance’s Paris showcase in which buyers are hosted at scale. She added that access to Asian markets has tightened. China, India and South Korea have become more restricted for a mix of reasons including censorship and the strength of local content.
Tom Adeyoola of Innovate UK reflected on his experience on the Creative Industries Sector Plan task force. He said he found the process “frustrating” and pointed out that the plan failed to tell a clear story about what the UK excels at and why. Compared with other sector strategies, he felt the creative industries plan read more like an internal policy document than an inspiring strategic vision.
There may be some hope, however. Screen Scotland’s Davis pointed out that government officials may be seeing the negative effects of the UK screen sector’s present-state. She added, “the penny is dropping.”
Why It Matters
Any sector that feels exhausted from the inside can look very different from the outside. The British Screen Forum has highlighted an industry where capital is tight, business models are dated and policy has not kept up. That is exactly the kind of environment in which professional investors find opportunity for capital growth.
If the creative entrepreneurs are present and supportable.
What industry leaders have lamented at this year’s British Screen Forum are the conditions and circumstances that professional investors would call opportunity. It simply has to be seized.
According to Fortune, global VC funding into media, entertainment and gaming rose by 58% in 2024. The international entertainment and media market is expanding, projected by PwC to reach US$3.5 trillion (~£2.65 trillion) in global revenue by 2029. Capital has not left entertainment. It’s become more attuned to global market forces, moving toward formats and structures that can demonstrate clearer paths to growth and capital performance.
Set against that backdrop, the UK’s current discomfort looks less like a dead end and more like a foundation for growth. A system built on thinly capitalised producers, weak rights retention and opaque back-end flows is difficult for traditional financiers, but it can be attractive for investors if they can find new structures, data tools and cross-format thinking that links IP to growth in capital performance.
For example, the creator economy is now a multi-hundred-billion-dollar market, with estimates of more than US$200 billion (~£150 billion) in 2024 and compound growth rates above 20% through the next decade. Ad-spend on creators alone is forecast to hit US$37 billion (~£28 billion) this year and is growing several times faster than the wider media industry. New tools are also appearing in independent film and scripted content, from slate funding platforms to tokenised revenue shares and blockchain based participation structures that promise more transparent accounting and global, retail-style capital formation.
The prize for the UK is the ability to acquire or originate undervalued rights, deploy capital into an ecosystem that still commands global attention and help rebuild parts of the value chain that incumbents have neglected.
The Forum’s bleak tone could therefore be read in two ways: as a warning for policymakers and legacy players who hope incremental change will be enough. Or, as a call for more agile entrepreneurs to attract today’s investors.
What will be telling is which direction the UK’s creative sector moves. What’s clear is the signal that the UK screen sector is well positioned to enter a new phase where those willing to innovate in how projects are financed, owned and exploited can secure outsized influence over what the next version of the UK’s creative sector looks like.
Curation Details
Primary article: “Speakers call for radical overhaul of UK film and TV sector at British Screen Forum” — ScreenDaily. Published 24 November 2024. .
The Story
Coverage from leading outlets support and expand on the concerns raised at the Forum.
Variety reported on the launch of the UK Independent Film Tax Credit in September 2024 and welcomed the relief for independent films. Their analysis also noted that years of cost inflation and squeezed margins will not be solved by incentives alone. (Variety)
The Hollywood Reporter published an assessment in February 2025 showing that UK production spend had bounced back to more than £5.5 billion after the US strikes. The report highlighted that most of this money came from inward investment productions rather than projects owned by UK companies. The analysis described this as a structural weakness for long term value creation. (The Hollywood Reporter)
UK Screen Alliance released guidance on the introduction of the Audio Visual Expenditure Credit. Their briefing explained the benefits of the new structure but also pointed out that reforms do not address core questions around IP ownership or the viability of domestic post production companies. (UK Screen Alliance)
The Financial Times has tracked these issues closely. A 2024 feature examined whether the UK is at risk of becoming a service hub for global productions rather than a country that grows and protects its own IP. The article argued that without a stronger rights and export strategy, Britain will struggle to keep the value created on its own soil. (Financial Times)
Together these perspectives reinforce the message heard at the British Screen Forum. Britain has a strong base of talent, crews and infrastructure but it needs clearer policy, deeper financing and a refreshed international strategy if it is to compete on equal terms with regions that invest more deliberately in their cultural industries.
Explore Media & Entertainment further:
For related articles, visit our Creative Value pillar page.
For the full picture, visit Our Industry page.
Representing the entire team, posts from “The Publisher” offer deeper insights into the collective mind of the Media C-Suite. Our acting Publisher is Thomas Kingston, and you may recognise his voice and style in much of the work posted under the by-line of The Publisher.
Great article, althought the phenomenon of American financiers buying British IP is not new – this has been going on for many years. For example – Warners owns the Harry Potter IP rights, although it makes all the films (and now series) in Britain using British talent and crews, Yes, they spent a lot of money on these productions, massively helped by the UK tax credit conrtribution, and generate a lot of production activity that leaves a net tax gain for HMRC. But as you point out, all the real economic benefit from all the Harry Potter goes to Warners, an American company. Why don’t the British have comanies like thsi? France does, Germany does, and even Finland now does with IPR. Why won’t the British invest in content? This is NOT a tax break issue and has nothing do do with government incentives- it’s a mindset issue that needs to be fixed.
Interesting, Gavin. One reason why the UK isn’t a leader in this field is the accounting treatment of Copyright over literary works. This is the same in the US, but your “mindset” differential allows US investors to see the value of IP more clearly than those in the UK.
If the UK were to treat the expenditure on Copyright (acquisition and development) as investment (an asset) rather than operational expenditure (a liability), then the UK would revolutionise IP holding, management and development. IP would instantly become the most valuable balance sheet asset class in existence. This is what private capital already values (look to the IP/Royalty income funds proliferating today).
If the US does this first, then say goodbye to the ownership of the creative industries in the UK. UK production companies will forever after be mere services companies for American IP owners.