BBC's annual accounts to March 2012 are not out yet (due soon).
But with the LF frozen, total income must be broadly flat (in fact probably very marginally up due to household growth plus BBCWW profits up a bit). But call income flat for argument's sake.
So if spending on content is down by £157m, what has the balance been spent on?
I suspect a lot of the answer is the Olympics / Jubilee / Euros - ie spending last year was held back to cover very large non-annual items this year.
But is that the full explanation? Or is there something else - eg re property moves, pensions, infrastructure etc? (YouView?)
BBC's annual accounts to March 2012 are not out yet (due soon).
But with the LF frozen, total income must be broadly flat (in fact probably very marginally up due to household growth plus BBCWW profits up a bit). But call income flat for argument's sake.
So if spending on content is down by £157m, what has the balance been spent on?
I suspect a lot of the answer is the Olympics / Jubilee / Euros - ie spending last year was held back to cover very large non-annual items this year.
But is that the full explanation? Or is there something else - eg re property moves, pensions, infrastructure etc? (YouView?)
Is the comparison like for like? Would adding spend on nations and regions change the picture, or was that also omitted from the baseline?
These things should be made clear and a regulator should be careful about the message that leaps out of the first couple of paragraphs. Putting a bit of context in a footnote on page 9 is what tabloids do.
I have less sympathy for the arguement that funding was flat. It would not be accepted as jusification from a commercial broadcaster with falling advertising revenue.
Pizzatheaction
Posts: 20,157
Comments
BBC's annual accounts to March 2012 are not out yet (due soon).
But with the LF frozen, total income must be broadly flat (in fact probably very marginally up due to household growth plus BBCWW profits up a bit). But call income flat for argument's sake.
So if spending on content is down by £157m, what has the balance been spent on?
I suspect a lot of the answer is the Olympics / Jubilee / Euros - ie spending last year was held back to cover very large non-annual items this year.
But is that the full explanation? Or is there something else - eg re property moves, pensions, infrastructure etc? (YouView?)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/aboutthebbc/2012/06/ofcom-published-its-2011-psb.shtml
OK, thanks - didn't realise OFCOM was working in real terms. So content spending isn't actually down £157m in "pound note" terms.
At least the rest of my post was right.;)
These things should be made clear and a regulator should be careful about the message that leaps out of the first couple of paragraphs. Putting a bit of context in a footnote on page 9 is what tabloids do.
I have less sympathy for the arguement that funding was flat. It would not be accepted as jusification from a commercial broadcaster with falling advertising revenue.