My issue with this article lies here - he talks about 'the industry' like it's a single contained thing. That works for the major studios, because there's a relatively small number and it's not too difficult to define the boundaries of what constitutes a major studio.
With indies that's not really the case - I mean, it's clearly difficult enough to define what constitutes an independent film vs. an 'indie' film. It gets even harder when you try to treat it like a single industry - does it include every single filmmaker who makes a feature film outside of a major studio? Every festival? Every distribution site? Or do you have to draw a line somewhere between 'real' filmmakers and... I don't know, people who you don't count as part of an industry? That seems pretty arbitrary, and whatever line you draw means your discussion doesn't really represent the full scope of independent film.
So if we don't pick that arbitrary line, how can we discuss 'the industry's response'? 'The Industry' didn't decide to make more films - people did. People who wanted to make films before but didn't have the resources. People who tried to make it in the mainstream industry but couldn't. People who got tired of working within the constraints of the mainstream industry. People who want to make art, not commerce. People who want to make a bunch of money. People who want to be famous. People who are trying to figure out what they want to do with their lives. People who've always wanted to make films, and people who just picked up a camera yesterday.
All of his proposed solutions assume an industry that could choose to work together in it's own interest to improve the economic situation - but that doesn't exist. In fact I'd say the very impulse that drives so many people to try to make an independent film essentially prevents that from existing. Any attempt by industry members to limit the number of independent films, to try to focus them into fewer but better films, is bound to be thwarted by the fact that those outside of whatever structure forms will continue to just make their films, independently, because that's what they do - so there's still going to be too many films.
Here came everybody, and ain't nobody going home soon. Any 'solution' that involves somehow turning back the clock is nothing but wishful thinking. I honestly don't know what the solution is - I'm not even sure there really is one, at least not in the sense everyone seems to be looking for - but I do expect something will emerge gradually over the next decade or two as the old industry continues to wither away and new industries emerge which aren't dependent upon scarcity to exist.