[vidalia]

Originally Posted by Paul_DNAP

Therin lies the point of the game, the players have to seek out (or "hunt") items that have been significantly undervalued by the retailers (or a "bargain").

Like this one

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqM_7...eature=related

[LIZALYNN]

Originally Posted by RickWhite

I love bargain hunt, it's one of my fave day time tv programmes

Me too. I saw it being filmed once as we walked round an antiques fayre. it all seemed a bit rushed so I wonder why they only have one hour.
More and more as the series have gone on the couple are persauded to only choose what the expert wants to buy.
I would like to see the contestants be given more of a chance to do the choosing. Also let the contestants choose the bonus buy and suprise their expert.
They do need to revamp the show and cut out the boring long interviews at the start and the slot with Tim's visit to a nearby place.
Another thing I would cut out is the deliberate most embarrassing freeze frame shot at the end of each team's auction.
I like all the experts but my favourite experts on Bargain Hunt are Paul Laidlaw, Charles Hanson, Mark Stacey and Jonathan Pratt.

[Aidan11]

I like BH.

Find it strange though that they mainly make losses on that programme but on Antiques Road Show they usually make a profit. Been some big profits too.

[Cestrian18]

Originally Posted by floppydog

I too love watching to learn about different items.
Have James Lewis and Paul Laidlaw as the experts and Anita Mnning as the auctioneer and there is always a few quid to be made.
Some of the other auctioneers start with ridiculous prices for things eg £20 for something costing over £100.
Anita always asks well over the odds and never comes down to very low prices, her enthusiasm and explanations helps the bidders. I love it when she stands up on the podium, you know there is a bidder war starting.

Some of the so called experts dont really seem to grasp what is going on, Thomas Plant and the Jonathon Pratt are two that immediately spring to mind. Phillip Serrell is past his sell by date and losing his touch now. Charles Hanson drives me insane but I think he is infectious.

Completely agree with all of this, some of the other auctioneers aren't too bad either but the 'experts' are useless. Me and My brother always joke that if we were on we'd follow Tim around as he always seems to find something that would make a profit and I think he's quite a natural presenter but I appreciate not to everyones taste Its just harmless daytime tv really and VASTLY better than watching that bunch of old biddies having a a good old b*tch on ITV

[don roberto]

Is there any point to Bargain Hunt?

It's light entertainment! If you don't find it entertaining don't watch! Quite simple really!

[Ed Sizzers]

Originally Posted by RickWhite

I love bargain hunt, it's one of my fave day time tv programmes

Likewise. I have no interested in any other daytime telly, including any other antique shows. And the appeal of property shows has always left me completely baffled.

But Bargain Hunt is the one watchable daytime telly show on the BBC.

[Doghouse Riley]

Originally Posted by Ed Sizzers

Likewise. I have no interested in any other daytime telly, including any other antique shows. And the appeal of property shows has always left me completely baffled.

But Bargain Hunt is the one watchable daytime telly show on the BBC.

Property shows.

Is this where they find dysfunctional people who want somewhere with lots of space and when one is found for them they complain it is too isolated and they never buy anything?

They're just a cheap schedule filler.

[BellaRosa]

Originally Posted by scorpionatthepc

I know the show is just a bit of fun but the teams very rarely make a profit. Todays show one team made a loss of over 150 quid.

That's our blooming licence fee money they are throwing away

[floppydog]

Is Thomas Plant's mother choosing the programmes? he seems to be on every day lately and he is rather hopeless. Yesterday he paid over £200 for a brooch that sold for £75!!

Today his team made an overall loss of £90 !!

We can't afford him !!!!!

[vidalia]

Originally Posted by BellaRosa

That's our blooming licence fee money they are throwing away

They all start off with the same amount of £200 and if they lose then they have lost that money but if they win more they give the profits to the contestants so it doesn't cost the programme makers any more whether they win or lose surely?

I should imagine it is not a particularly costly programme to make.

[BellaRosa]

Originally Posted by vidalia

They all start off with the same amount of £200 and if they lose then they have lost that money but if they win more they give the profits to the contestants so it doesn't cost the programme makers any more whether they win or lose surely?

I should imagine it is not a particularly costly programme to make.

But where does the £400 come from ? .. the programme!! .. who pays for the programme ? ... our licence fee!!

So that is our money

[vidalia]

Originally Posted by BellaRosa

But where does the £400 come from ? .. the programme!! .. who pays for the programme ? ... our licence fee!!

So that is our money

Given the cost of making TV programmes £400 is petty cash really.

[JumpTheShark]

Originally Posted by LIZALYNN

Me too. I saw it being filmed once as we walked round an antiques fayre. it all seemed a bit rushed so I wonder why they only have one hour.
More and more as the series have gone on the couple are persauded to only choose what the expert wants to buy.
I would like to see the contestants be given more of a chance to do the choosing. Also let the contestants choose the bonus buy and suprise their expert.
They do need to revamp the show and cut out the boring long interviews at the start and the slot with Tim's visit to a nearby place.
Another thing I would cut out is the deliberate most embarrassing freeze frame shot at the end of each team's auction.
I like all the experts but my favourite experts on Bargain Hunt are Paul Laidlaw, Charles Hanson, Mark Stacey and Jonathan Pratt.

God, yes. They rush through the buying of the items so they can fit in those deadly dull sections. I can see why some people would enjoy seeing the stately homes (though I don't) but does anybody care about the life history of the contestants?

[BellaRosa]

Originally Posted by vidalia

Given the cost of making TV programmes £400 is petty cash really.

I think you maybe forgetting a few things ...

Director/Camera men/sound men/lighting/o/s broadcasting .. etc etc .. the list is endless and all need paying ... bit more than £400

[vidalia]

Originally Posted by BellaRosa

I think you maybe forgetting a few things ...

Director/Camera men/sound men/lighting/o/s broadcasting .. etc etc .. the list is endless and all need paying ... bit more than £400

I know, I have worked on many television programmes but we were talking about the money they used to buy the antiques with rather than the overall cost of the programme. Even so, it is still a relatively cheap programme to make. However I don't know how much longer it will last due to the BBC Trust report criticising the overuse of 'collectable hunting and property' for daytime TV.

[PrinceGaz]

It's worth noting that at an auction, commission is taken off the "hammer price" which is normally 15%, so if an item sold in the auction for £100, the seller actually only receives about £85.

That means that except for those few items which make a large profit, pretty much everything would make a loss if you were to attempt to do this yourself.

Then again, the amount of money the BBC spend on the actual items bought and sold, and subsidising the sale price, must be negligible compared with the main production costs for the show (camera crews, editing, etc). It's cheap TV. Dickinson's Real Deal is much better in my opinion, especially if you want to learn anything about the real value of stuff.

[allafix]

Originally Posted by PrinceGaz

It's worth noting that at an auction, commission is taken off the "hammer price" which is normally 15%, so if an item sold in the auction for £100, the seller actually only receives about £85.

That means that except for those few items which make a large profit, pretty much everything would make a loss if you were to attempt to do this yourself.

Then again, the amount of money the BBC spend on the actual items bought and sold, and subsidising the sale price, must be negligible compared with the main production costs for the show (camera crews, editing, etc). It's cheap TV. Dickinson's Real Deal is much better in my opinion, especially if you want to learn anything about the real value of stuff.

Yes, but Bargain Hunt doesn't try and hide this. Commission is often referred to. It's a game, everybody understands the rules. They could include commission but it wouldn't make any real difference, just make the arithmetic harder. Note, in the similar Antiques Road Trip they do count commission because the dealers there can win or lose money. In Bargain Hunt they win a cash prize if they make a notional profit.

Dickensons's Real Deal has to account for commission because these are peoples' own possessions being offered for real money to dealers or at auction. It's not a game.

Personally I find Dickenson rather creepy and some of his experts are shameless in their low initial offers. It's quite formulaic these days as the "orange one" appears uncalled for during negotiations. The dealer offers a silly low price, Dickenson turns up with a proper valuation and they negotiate a deal around that or go to auction. I find the dealing out cash ritual particularly distasteful. Bargain Hunt has class and wit. Real Deal is basically about greed.

The auction price is the real value of stuff if that's how you sell it. The dealer has his "commission" too, in the sense he has to make a profit so will offer less than the item is worth. To the dealer the item has another value, the price it will be sold for in the shop.

[RegTumbler]

I have always enjoyed Bargain Hunt but two recently (relatively) introduced themes spoil it for me.

The first is the constant reminders that the teams have only one hour to shop and that they are in peril of going over the hour. Yet no one has ever been timed out.

The second is the repeated admonitions to the team that they must not let the other team know the results of their auction. This is so we, the viewing public, can watch the contestants' reactions to learning the results of their opponents' auction.

In its original form BH was a bit of light hearted fun. It it's present form it is supposed to be a serious competition, but it fails on this level.

[roverboy1965]

Originally Posted by Doghouse Riley

Property shows.

Is this where they find dysfunctional people who want somewhere with lots of space and when one is found for them they complain it is too isolated and they never buy anything?

They're just a cheap schedule filler.

Property shows used to really annoy me, the format was great, but it always seemed to be very rich people with 500K/1million plus to spend (so irrelevant to most of the population), or the couple who had been searching for years, and viewed hundreds of properties, and it was obvious (and so it was to Kirsty and Phill) they wouldn't buy anything now either, and just appeared to be the dreaded serial viewers.

[allafix]

Originally Posted by RegTumbler

I have always enjoyed Bargain Hunt but two recently (relatively) introduced themes spoil it for me.

The first is the constant reminders that the teams have only one hour to shop and that they are in peril of going over the hour. Yet no one has ever been timed out.

The second is the repeated admonitions to the team that they must not let the other team know the results of their auction. This is so we, the viewing public, can watch the contestants' reactions to learning the results of their opponents' auction.

In its original form BH was a bit of light hearted fun. It it's present form it is supposed to be a serious competition, but it fails on this level.

No, it's never been a serious competition and it isn't one now, it's a bit of fun. You're right about the boilerplate script though, same every show. And they've been using it for as long as I can remember. But BH isn't alone in this. The very much more serious Dragon's Den uses the same formulaic voiceover week after week.

[Pob-Bundy]

I miss the old Dickinson days with the dodgy intro of him pulling pervy faces at the camera, looking through an antique telescope with an expression implying that he'd seen a woman with massive tits.

[conceptas]

I find the 'oh, it's only £400' type attitude of some of the posters here irritating, how many of these shows have been produced over the years ? How many losses has been made ? It all adds up and we, the licence fee payers directly or indirectly are footing the bill.
Forgive me for thinking that the 'Big Boys Club' were trying to save money; maybe they should start here.

[RegTumbler]

Originally Posted by conceptas

I find the 'oh, it's only £400' type attitude of some of the posters here irritating, how many of these shows have been produced over the years ? How many losses has been made ?

Irritating and out of date as the 'spend' per team is now £300, so it should be, "It's only £600"

[allafix]

Originally Posted by conceptas

I find the 'oh, it's only £400' type attitude of some of the posters here irritating, how many of these shows have been produced over the years ? How many losses has been made ? It all adds up and we, the licence fee payers directly or indirectly are footing the bill.
Forgive me for thinking that the 'Big Boys Club' were trying to save money; maybe they should start here.

In terms of the show's overall budget, the spending money is probably a small fraction. Without it the show would be meaningless, so it's essential spending. Anyway the BBC get some of that back as the items bought are then sold. Other daily game shows have a £1,000+ daily prize budget. Eggheads and Pointless for example.

[daveycrocket222]

Originally Posted by scorpionatthepc

I know the show is just a bit of fun but the teams very rarely make a profit. Todays show one team made a loss of over 150 quid.

They need to change the rules.

If a team makes a loss of 150 quid then that team should have to pay the BBC 150 quid.