Despite its early teething troubles, the National Film Finance Corporation made an important contribution to supporting the British film production industry. It almost certainly saved the British Lion Film Corporation from collapse, and in providing part-finance for around half of all British feature films in its early years it secured the immediate future of the industry. However, it soon became apparent that the provision of end money loans was not sufficient in itself to solve the underlying economic problems of the British production sector. There still remained the question of the inadequate returns to producers from the box-office receipts of their films. The initiative to establish a production fund for British films raised through a levy on ticket sales was influenced by both political and economic considerations. Unlike the setting up of the NFFC, however, which had been achieved quickly and with relatively little difficulty, the process of establishing the British Film Production Fund – popularly known as the Eady levy after Second Secretary to the Treasury Sir Wilfrid Eady – involved protracted negotiations with all sections of the trade. Like the NFFC, there are differing views of how effective the Eady levy actually was. Geoffrey Macnab suggests that it ‘stands as one of the few practical interventions to benefit British cinema made by any government’. However, Margaret Dickinson and Sarah Street offer a more qualified verdict in so far as ‘if anything, the levy reinforced the existing trade structure. Producers received payments in proportion to the box office earnings of their films, so those who benefited most were those already favoured by the system of distribution and exhibition.’