I wouldn't expect a great deal of quality programming from the BBC in 2012. The amount they'll spend on presenting the Games will be ridiculous.
I really don't see why the BBC and ITV couldn't share rights much like they do for the World Cup. It would certainly save some of the License Fee payers money.
I wouldn't expect a great deal of quality programming from the BBC in 2012. The amount they'll spend on presenting the Games will be ridiculous.
I really don't see why the BBC and ITV couldn't share rights much like they do for the World Cup. It would certainly save some of the License Fee payers money.
I think the BBC have the rights as they bid for them as part of the EBU. That a huge purchasing power which ITV cannot compete with. Besides, ITV would probably cut to an advertising break in the middle of the 100m final:rolleyes:
Anyway, if the rights were shared there would be even more complaints that there was "nothing else on TV" for 2 weeks.
What would be an acceptable number for the BBC to take?
If they took a limited number some would complain they weren't taking the Olympics seriously enough...
Ofcourse I know we pay their wages etc but can think of worse events/things they've wasted money on and ofcourse the millions they pay certain presenters for not very much quality.
I, for one, will be taking the opportunity to watch less television-this Olympics fiasco bores me to tears!
It`s no longer about human competition anyway-just big business-someone should have shipped Seb Coe and Co to a desert island a long time ago-the only saving grace is that I don`t live in London!!
I can't understand - who was in charge of training her to reveal them with suspense?
How could there be suspense? They're medals; circular, gold, silver and bronze, with Nike on one side (as always) and - oh, what a surprise! - that dreadful 2012 logo on the other.
The muted applause was because 95% of the crowd were BBC staffers who were waiting to get down the pub.
How many of the few sent by other broadcasters were on a "training exercise?"
If anything the BBC are "over-trained" as well as overstaffed.
When you've got too many people, send two to do the one job, or in the case of the BBC, send half a dozen?
They still don't get it, too many employees, too many levels of management and too many on silly money, yet the programme schedules get steadily poorer and they show now embarrassment to tell us we'll be getting even more repeats..
Those in charge of the Olympics coverage need to face up to reality.
I'd imagine the planned activity and coverage was all decided before the BBC faced up to the long term cash shortage they will be experiencing for the forseeable future.
But it's like a "runaway train" no one seems able to apply the brakes.
I like sport as much as anyone, but there are a lot events where the interest of the BBC's core viewers will be minimal.
They should be approaching this not as "a once in a lifetime event" so a "no expense spared attitude" but apply some business sense and only cover events where they can expect reasonable viewer numbers.
There'll be more people uninterested in the Olympics than want to watch it.
An exception of course, should be made for ...... the "Women's Beach Volleyball" (which only became an Olympic sport because allegedly, Juan Antonio Samaranch liked to watch it. One of the few decisions he made with which I'm in accord) and "blanket coverage is necessary."
"I'm reliably informed" that DFS have received an order for many extremely long "pundit sofas."
I had to laugh at the news last night when it was bought up that there would be transport problems in the city, and the answer the guy gave, was take time off work and don't go out unless it was essential
Comments
I wouldn't expect a great deal of quality programming from the BBC in 2012. The amount they'll spend on presenting the Games will be ridiculous.
I really don't see why the BBC and ITV couldn't share rights much like they do for the World Cup. It would certainly save some of the License Fee payers money.
I think the BBC have the rights as they bid for them as part of the EBU. That a huge purchasing power which ITV cannot compete with. Besides, ITV would probably cut to an advertising break in the middle of the 100m final:rolleyes:
Anyway, if the rights were shared there would be even more complaints that there was "nothing else on TV" for 2 weeks.
Good thing too.
Makes a change from crap soaps and the like.
Yesterday's programme had a point but was never going to be any good.
Jake Humphrey's did fine in a bad situation - you're not going to get a British crowd enthused just by telling them to be so.
And Boris the Buffoon remains an embarassment - I'd say sack his speechwriter but he'd sound like a idiot reciting The Bard.
Boris was being Boris......very funny.
Tom's Dive was Great.:cool:
BIB: It was on in our region too
If they took a limited number some would complain they weren't taking the Olympics seriously enough...
Ofcourse I know we pay their wages etc but can think of worse events/things they've wasted money on and ofcourse the millions they pay certain presenters for not very much quality.
It`s no longer about human competition anyway-just big business-someone should have shipped Seb Coe and Co to a desert island a long time ago-the only saving grace is that I don`t live in London!!
How could there be suspense? They're medals; circular, gold, silver and bronze, with Nike on one side (as always) and - oh, what a surprise! - that dreadful 2012 logo on the other.
The muted applause was because 95% of the crowd were BBC staffers who were waiting to get down the pub.
"Training exercise?"
How many of the few sent by other broadcasters were on a "training exercise?"
If anything the BBC are "over-trained" as well as overstaffed.
When you've got too many people, send two to do the one job, or in the case of the BBC, send half a dozen?
They still don't get it, too many employees, too many levels of management and too many on silly money, yet the programme schedules get steadily poorer and they show now embarrassment to tell us we'll be getting even more repeats..
There were 302 medal events in Beijing. That seems like an awful lot of sport to me.
I'd imagine the planned activity and coverage was all decided before the BBC faced up to the long term cash shortage they will be experiencing for the forseeable future.
But it's like a "runaway train" no one seems able to apply the brakes.
I like sport as much as anyone, but there are a lot events where the interest of the BBC's core viewers will be minimal.
They should be approaching this not as "a once in a lifetime event" so a "no expense spared attitude" but apply some business sense and only cover events where they can expect reasonable viewer numbers.
There'll be more people uninterested in the Olympics than want to watch it.
An exception of course, should be made for ...... the "Women's Beach Volleyball" (which only became an Olympic sport because allegedly, Juan Antonio Samaranch liked to watch it. One of the few decisions he made with which I'm in accord) and "blanket coverage is necessary."
"I'm reliably informed" that DFS have received an order for many extremely long "pundit sofas."
Yes, it makes mockery of the original aims-but, then again, it`s like so many other things today-quality is secondary to monetary gain!!:yawn: