DS Forums

 
 

Cost...


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 16-11-2014, 19:59
redboy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4

Just as a matter of interest, how do do fellow people think it costs the BBC to use/hire the Blackpool tower ballroom? The lights/sets were brilliant!
redboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 16-11-2014, 20:24
scoobiesnacks
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 2,849
I might be wrong on this but I think they cut back on the Blackpool set compared to previous years. I'm sure they used to put up the strictly arcs at the back?
scoobiesnacks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-11-2014, 20:26
DiamondDoll
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 14,001
The only thing I know is that it took 350 BBC employees to put on that superb show.
DiamondDoll is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-11-2014, 20:30
redboy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 4

The only thing I know is that it took 350 BBC employees to put on that superb show.
Wow!! That many! IMy daughter and I are inquisitive to know the hire cost of the ballroom though 😄
redboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-11-2014, 20:32
DiamondDoll
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 14,001
Wow!! That many! IMy daughter and I are inquisitive to know the hire cost of the ballroom though 😄
Sorry don't know but perhaps (since it was a massive advert for them) it was a freebie.
DiamondDoll is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-11-2014, 20:35
A.D.P
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 7,319
SCD series budget is six million, that for everything all series, there will be a deal as it's fantastic advertising for the ballroom, Blackpool and resort and the fee would be far far less than you would expect.
A.D.P is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-11-2014, 20:44
scoobiesnacks
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 2,849
SCD series budget is six million, that for everything all series, there will be a deal as it's fantastic advertising for the ballroom, Blackpool and resort and the fee would be far far less than you would expect.
That's an average of 17.5k per person excluding all other costs. That doesn't sound right. Some must work all year
scoobiesnacks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-11-2014, 21:18
Shine_On
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: England
Posts: 1,188
They probably pay the BBC.
Shine_On is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-11-2014, 21:19
TerryM22
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 17,987
The only thing I know is that it took 350 BBC employees to put on that superb show.

Wow that is a lot but it was a great show.
TerryM22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-11-2014, 21:22
A.D.P
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 7,319
That's an average of 17.5k per person excluding all other costs. That doesn't sound right. Some must work all year
That's the full series budget, and no they do not work year round, some like the judges most there not told anything until May each year.

If you search online there was a newspaper article on the budgets and comparing it to X a Factor, it was either daily Mail, independent or guardian.

Judges £100k Presenters £250k, Pros £31k, Celebs in stages from £25k if last four odd weeks, then £40k if last longer, to £60k longer and £200k for the winner,


Compare to the million pound deals on XF.
A.D.P is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-11-2014, 07:08
TerryM22
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 17,987
That's the full series budget, and no they do not work year round, some like the judges most there not told anything until May each year.

If you search online there was a newspaper article on the budgets and comparing it to X a Factor, it was either daily Mail, independent or guardian.

Judges £100k Presenters £250k, Pros £31k, Celebs in stages from £25k if last four odd weeks, then £40k if last longer, to £60k longer and £200k for the winner,


Compare to the million pound deals on XF.
Its all a very large amount of money.
TerryM22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-11-2014, 07:09
scoobiesnacks
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 2,849
Sounds quite low to me.
scoobiesnacks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-11-2014, 07:16
Mr Cellophane
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,203
They presumably economise very vigorously on guest singer costs?

Tony Bennet, Boy George, Annie Lennox, McCrap, Dame Shirl - all of them were so bad they should have paid the Beeb for the privilege of appearing!
Mr Cellophane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-11-2014, 07:51
martyboy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 803
... Tony Bennet, Boy George, Annie Lennox, McCrap, Dame Shirl - all of them were so bad they should have paid the Beeb for the privilege of appearing!
Perhaps they do!

I thought that Tony Bennet, Boy George and Annie Lennox were all there just to plug their latest albums. A 2-minute slot on prime time Saturday night BBC can't come cheap.
martyboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-11-2014, 08:00
humpty dumpty
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,494
That's the full series budget, and no they do not work year round, some like the judges most there not told anything until May each year.

If you search online there was a newspaper article on the budgets and comparing it to X a Factor, it was either daily Mail, independent or guardian.

Judges £100k Presenters £250k, Pros £31k, Celebs in stages from £25k if last four odd weeks, then £40k if last longer, to £60k longer and £200k for the winner,


Compare to the million pound deals on XF.
Such a huge gap in salary between the presenters and the Pros, especially when you consider the talent and effort they put into the show. Between the pro dances, their choreography and the dances with their partners, they really are the show. And over time, they have become mini-celebs in their own right...quite often the public tune in to see them, rather than the judges or the pros. Such an unfair disparity between what they do and what the presenters do (introductions along with a few unfunny, predictable gags read from an autocue). The pros should be getting paid more imo.
humpty dumpty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-11-2014, 08:20
mossy2103
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 68,698
Such a huge gap in salary between the presenters and the Pros, especially when you consider the talent and effort they put into the show. Between the pro dances, their choreography and the dances with their partners, they really are the show. And over time, they have become mini-celebs in their own right...quite often the public tune in to see them, rather than the judges or the pros. Such an unfair disparity between what they do and what the presenters do (introductions along with a few unfunny, predictable gags read from an autocue). The pros should be getting paid more imo.
That's show business (quite literally)!
mossy2103 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-11-2014, 09:38
Mr Cellophane
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,203
Such a huge gap in salary between the presenters and the Pros, especially when you consider the talent and effort they put into the show. Between the pro dances, their choreography and the dances with their partners, they really are the show. And over time, they have become mini-celebs in their own right...quite often the public tune in to see them, rather than the judges or the pros. Such an unfair disparity between what they do and what the presenters do (introductions along with a few unfunny, predictable gags read from an autocue). The pros should be getting paid more imo.

I do agree that the pros are worth much more, but there are numerous instances of pay anomalies these days - professional footballers and city bankers come immediately to mind. Pay (paticularly in the entertainment business) is determined by market forces rather than skill and effort involved.
Mr Cellophane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-11-2014, 09:43
TerryM22
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 17,987
That's show business (quite literally)!
It certainly is mossy.
TerryM22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-11-2014, 10:21
lundavra
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 25,462
The only thing I know is that it took 350 BBC employees to put on that superb show.
I doubt very much that there were 350 BBC employees involved. There might have been 350 people but most would be on contract.
lundavra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-11-2014, 10:27
lundavra
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 25,462
Such a huge gap in salary between the presenters and the Pros, especially when you consider the talent and effort they put into the show. Between the pro dances, their choreography and the dances with their partners, they really are the show. And over time, they have become mini-celebs in their own right...quite often the public tune in to see them, rather than the judges or the pros. Such an unfair disparity between what they do and what the presenters do (introductions along with a few unfunny, predictable gags read from an autocue). The pros should be getting paid more imo.
I doubt very much that the BBC publish the amounts paid especially to the presenters. The tabloids are fond of saying that someone earned a figure when it can be an estimate of their total income.
lundavra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-11-2014, 10:29
lundavra
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 25,462
I do agree that the pros are worth much more, but there are numerous instances of pay anomalies these days - professional footballers and city bankers come immediately to mind. Pay (paticularly in the entertainment business) is determined by market forces rather than skill and effort involved.
But would the professionals be able to earn as much from their personal appearances and dance tours if they had not been on Strictly Come Dancing? Most would be unknown to the general public if it was not for Strictly Come Dancing.
lundavra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-11-2014, 10:40
Mr Cellophane
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,203
But would the professionals be able to earn as much from their personal appearances and dance tours if they had not been on Strictly Come Dancing? Most would be unknown to the general public if it was not for Strictly Come Dancing.

That's certainly true - their earning potential has obviously shot up, with tour participation, their own shows, fitness videos, dance tuition etc. But I don't begrudge them any of it - the have certainly earned their success!
Mr Cellophane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-11-2014, 14:08
Hamlet77
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Liverpool. Champions of Europe
Posts: 15,515
I thought the rule of thumb was OBs cost three times what a nonOB would.

At least it gives it more of a national than Londoncentric feel to the whole SCD event
Hamlet77 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:03.