Originally Posted by AlexiR:
“Big Brother is a brand and it has been for sometime. When you cross into the realm not only of spin-off shows but actively pimping out your contestants to magazines and papers (most of which you also own) you enter into the territory of brands not television shows. And lets not forget that Five don't just limit themselves to direct spin-off shows like Bit on the Side you also get things like All About Amy, When Paddy Met Sally and an in development Jedward series that look to trade off of the Big Brother branding as well. Five are already on the point of overextending Big Brother (this is the third series in less than 12 months if nothing else) to add in a consistent live feed just keeps stretching an already aged and tired format that isn't as popular as it once was to breaking point.
The live feed isn't essential and the vast majority of the time it isn't even very popular. Inevitably it also ends up dominating at the expense of everything else and alienating viewers that don't care about Big Brother (which is an ever increasing number). I'm also not sure it has much in the way of an upside for Five. Are live feed viewers really more likely to stick around for the rest of 5*'s content? I don't have memories of things working out that way for E4. Out of interest does anyone have the numbers for whatever followed the live feed on 5* last night?”
They cease to be BB related when they leave the house. After that, they are free to do what they want. Channel 5 just know how to cash in on a profitable show.
If they were spin off shows it would be Big Brother's Celebrity Wedding Planner or Big Brother's Celebrity Life Swap or even Big Brother Follows Amy Childs.
Originally Posted by grahamzxy:
“CBB is popular - regular Big Brother is a shadow of its former self. I watched almost all of BB 2011, but ratings were not electric. The spin off shows (Amy et al) are cheap and cheerful, maybe the ad revenue they bring in justifies their broadcast - even if quality wise they are pretty poor.
Regarding Live Feed, maybe a showing each Wednesday would work - it must be quite cheap to make and scores with the demographics.”
What exactly do they need to do? Pay writers for scripts, pay cameramen for multiple takes?
All they need to do is swap between cameras and mute anything libel. That's not hard nor is it expensive to do. The paid live feed on Channel 4's website failed because people didn't want to subscribe to something online that should be on TV for free.
Originally Posted by AlexiR:
“As I said in my previous it seems to me as if the schedules
What, exactly, are you basing the idea that a live feed would do very well for 5* on? Or indeed that a target audience would 'lap it up'?
But assuming you're right why, I wonder, would Five want to air a live feed of Big Brother when it would just undermine their attempts to sell ads on Five and indeed attract audiences to programmes on Five? Surely their priority should be establishing a consistently growing audience for their main channel and not divert what little audience they have to 5*?
Firstly there have been Big Brother style shows under a different name. In fact Channel 4 aired one over the Christmas period. And again where is the notion of guaranteed viewers coming from?
Setting records on 5* is something of a meaningless stat in and of itself – a bit like ITV boasting about having their best Tuesday night performance in 12 months. Undoubtedly though the performance on 5* last night was very impressive however that was for a special one-off event that followed on directly from a live eviction show on Five. Presumably a live feed wouldn't have that kind of leg up every time it aired. And I would suggest that when a live eviction is struggling to pull in 2 million viewers its fair to say the show is running out of steam.”
It's not really struggling to pull in 2 million. IT IS pulling in 2 million, and plus 1 viewers, and on demand viewers, and those that record and watch the next day, and those that watch the repeat the next day on Channel 5, Channel 5 +1, 5* and 5* +1. Then there's also the fact that Big Brother is available to watch for more than 7 days online.....
And to say a show is running out of steam just hours after it pulls in record ratings to an under the radar channel which puts it on the map is really ludacris! And no I'm not on about the artist!
Originally Posted by grahamzxy:
“Channel 5 television is a bunch of channels, similarly to C4 which has E4 (and successfully chases the 16-34 ad ££ revenue) - there is no reason 5* cannot be a golden egg for C5, it would take some doing to be successful, I think they need to look at the schedule they put out and ensure the channel leans more towards younger viewers with regard to movies/drama/reality. Regarding the live feed, the success depends on the channel opposition, also the fact that it followed a live eviction show at 10:00pm - people did not turn to 5* through apparent boredom - they wanted to watch more of the show. The other channels last night at 10:00pm were showing News, The Crusades, News, a cyber-stalking drama and the KT documentary - hardly something that typical BB viewers would want to watch.”
5* is becoming a golden egg for C5B. When has the channel ever had higher than a 1% audience share before?