Pacts are agreements between production companies and studios for development and output of (in this case) film. These production agreements lead to continuous film production between studios and companies and have a positive correlation with box office success. The production pacts speed up the production process; take Wasko's example of Michael Crichton's story and Fox studios. The process was shortened because Fox was the only company the book was sold to instead of having it shopped around.
So why the big deal? Why does it matter if all production pacts do is speed the process up an lead to box office success. This is true but with production pacts many writers, ideas, and concepts cannot break into the market. These pacts effect the process because it provides a shortcut for producers and studios, they are cost-effective, and a successful pact has been shown to lead to box office success; the flip side is they are not inclusive they do not provide a lot of opportunity for new ideas and talent to enter on the production side of film.
There is no denying that production pacts regulate and effect the film industry. They secure success for major companies and are not really helpful to the "little guy." Regardless of the negatives in concerns to the "little guy" they are economically valuable ways for production companies to continue success. In any business money is the driving factor; the film industry is no different. Unfortunately the desire for economic success has a negative effect on the production of texts.
The pact process does not include many "little guy" companies. It does not provide great opportunities for inclusion and promotes consistency with major name companies. Who knows how many ideas, concepts, blockbusters, and potential this system has disregarded or left out. While the system creates convenience for big name production companies it has a negative effect on the production of texts and on "little guy" companies.