I will be gutted if this gets axed because of these Tories. It is one of the stronger soaps on the TV, so I hope it does not go anywhere.
Is there a chance of Eastenders getting axed?
1 of 2
I think the OP is referring to the cuts in budget and suggestions that it should no longer make 'popular' shows to chase ratings.
There is no way the BBC could go over to making only the type of programmes that currently air on BBC4 and BBC2. They will still have to make drama which appeal to the masses.
Within that, from a budget point of view, EE is about as value for money as you can get. The annual budget is, i believe, approx 30 million - that's for approximately 110 hours of programming. No way could they make 110 hours of something like Death in Paradise for that kind of money, let alone a costume drama or something with extensive stunts or effects like Casualty or Doctor Who.
Given the ratings it still gets for the money it costs, EE is about the safest show on the BBC.
There is no way the BBC could go over to making only the type of programmes that currently air on BBC4 and BBC2. They will still have to make drama which appeal to the masses.
Within that, from a budget point of view, EE is about as value for money as you can get. The annual budget is, i believe, approx 30 million - that's for approximately 110 hours of programming. No way could they make 110 hours of something like Death in Paradise for that kind of money, let alone a costume drama or something with extensive stunts or effects like Casualty or Doctor Who.
Given the ratings it still gets for the money it costs, EE is about the safest show on the BBC.
Even if the BBC didn't want EE I am sure another channel would snap their hands off to buy the rights for it.
I think one day it will be and eventually replaced by a new flagship show, much like Hollyoaks succeeded Brookside on Channel 4.
But this won't happen for a very long time.
The BBC are committed to EastEnders, with a new set being constructed at the moment.
But this won't happen for a very long time.
The BBC are committed to EastEnders, with a new set being constructed at the moment.
Originally Posted by Soapfan678:
“I will be gutted if this gets axed because of these Tories. It is one of the stronger soaps on the TV, so I hope it does not go anywhere.”
“I will be gutted if this gets axed because of these Tories. It is one of the stronger soaps on the TV, so I hope it does not go anywhere.
”
Course not. Ian Duncan Smith loves Cora! Mind you Theresa May was livid at Cora's crappy exit...
they are targeting show's that they pay a lot of money for the right to show such as the voice?
why would they axe eastenders when it is relatively cheap to make (esp ifyou compare it to the voice). but they also make money by sellng the rights to show it on channels abroad
why would they axe eastenders when it is relatively cheap to make (esp ifyou compare it to the voice). but they also make money by sellng the rights to show it on channels abroad
Originally Posted by CherryRose:
“Even if the BBC didn't want EE I am sure another channel would snap their hands off to buy the rights for it.”
“Even if the BBC didn't want EE I am sure another channel would snap their hands off to buy the rights for it.”
There is no rights for EastEnders. Its a BBC In House production. So when it ends it ends. If it was made by a separate production company outside of the BBC only then would the rights be up for grabs.
Originally Posted by FruityLoopy:
“There is no rights for EastEnders. Its a BBC In House production. So when it ends it ends. If it was made by a separate production company outside of the BBC only then would the rights be up for grabs.”
“There is no rights for EastEnders. Its a BBC In House production. So when it ends it ends. If it was made by a separate production company outside of the BBC only then would the rights be up for grabs.”
another production company could just as easily take over production in that scenario
Originally Posted by kitkat1971:
“I think the OP is referring to the cuts in budget and suggestions that it should no longer make 'popular' shows to chase ratings.
There is no way the BBC could go over to making only the type of programmes that currently air on BBC4 and BBC2. They will still have to make drama which appeal to the masses.
Within that, from a budget point of view, EE is about as value for money as you can get. The annual budget is, i believe, approx 30 million - that's for approximately 110 hours of programming. No way could they make 110 hours of something like Death in Paradise for that kind of money, let alone a costume drama or something with extensive stunts or effects like Casualty or Doctor Who.
Given the ratings it still gets for the money it costs, EE is about the safest show on the BBC.”
“I think the OP is referring to the cuts in budget and suggestions that it should no longer make 'popular' shows to chase ratings.
There is no way the BBC could go over to making only the type of programmes that currently air on BBC4 and BBC2. They will still have to make drama which appeal to the masses.
Within that, from a budget point of view, EE is about as value for money as you can get. The annual budget is, i believe, approx 30 million - that's for approximately 110 hours of programming. No way could they make 110 hours of something like Death in Paradise for that kind of money, let alone a costume drama or something with extensive stunts or effects like Casualty or Doctor Who.
Given the ratings it still gets for the money it costs, EE is about the safest show on the BBC.”
Out of interest, how is it so 'cheap'? Is it just that they use the same sets, don't shoot on location much and obviously special effects are pretty limited? Because I imagine in terms of the actors, it's probably one of the best-paid shows aside from stuff like Doctor Who and Sherlock. £30 million doesn't seem like much when you probably have a few people on six-figure salaries and a lot on mid-to-high five figures. Unless I'm wildly overestimating how much the average actor on EE gets paid.
Originally Posted by soap-lea:
“another production company could just as easily take over production in that scenario”
“another production company could just as easily take over production in that scenario”
They can't.
If it was made outside of the BBC via an outside production company then yes but its not. Its a BBC In House production. Its produced on BBC grounds all under BBC equipment. Everything is licence fee funded. For example, if it was a show the BBC bought in they would pay rights to the production company just to air it, they wouldn't fund anything else. EastEnders however isn't like that, everything about the show is funded by the BBC down to the very last penny.
Are you suggesting an outside production company buy out all of Elstree as well? or rebuild the entire set for millions in a new location? Because thats the only way it could happen.
Originally Posted by momentarything:
“Out of interest, how is it so 'cheap'? Is it just that they use the same sets, don't shoot on location much and obviously special effects are pretty limited? Because I imagine in terms of the actors, it's probably one of the best-paid shows aside from stuff like Doctor Who and Sherlock. £30 million doesn't seem like much when you probably have a few people on six-figure salaries and a lot on mid-to-high five figures. Unless I'm wildly overestimating how much the average actor on EE gets paid.”
“Out of interest, how is it so 'cheap'? Is it just that they use the same sets, don't shoot on location much and obviously special effects are pretty limited? Because I imagine in terms of the actors, it's probably one of the best-paid shows aside from stuff like Doctor Who and Sherlock. £30 million doesn't seem like much when you probably have a few people on six-figure salaries and a lot on mid-to-high five figures. Unless I'm wildly overestimating how much the average actor on EE gets paid.”
I don't think they get paid as much as what you'd expect, the likes of Steve and Adam seem to supplement their income by doing pants these days.
Originally Posted by momentarything:
“Out of interest, how is it so 'cheap'? Is it just that they use the same sets, don't shoot on location much and obviously special effects are pretty limited? Because I imagine in terms of the actors, it's probably one of the best-paid shows aside from stuff like Doctor Who and Sherlock. £30 million doesn't seem like much when you probably have a few people on six-figure salaries and a lot on mid-to-high five figures. Unless I'm wildly overestimating how much the average actor on EE gets paid.”
“Out of interest, how is it so 'cheap'? Is it just that they use the same sets, don't shoot on location much and obviously special effects are pretty limited? Because I imagine in terms of the actors, it's probably one of the best-paid shows aside from stuff like Doctor Who and Sherlock. £30 million doesn't seem like much when you probably have a few people on six-figure salaries and a lot on mid-to-high five figures. Unless I'm wildly overestimating how much the average actor on EE gets paid.”
The fixed costs of setting up / tearing down a production are spread over years rather than over 6 weeks of filming for a shorter series, so if Eastenders was a 6 part series, but still needed the same set, the set would cost £x amount / 6 episodes, whereas when it runs for years it costs £x / 5000 odd episodes. Same with the pre-production costs. Absorbed over the years.
Originally Posted by TeganRhan:
“Where's this idea come from? Lol don't be daft, of course they won't.”
“Where's this idea come from? Lol don't be daft, of course they won't.”
Oh dear, I wonder where the OP has this idea from.....
Originally Posted by FruityLoopy:
“There is no rights for EastEnders. Its a BBC In House production. So when it ends it ends. If it was made by a separate production company outside of the BBC only then would the rights be up for grabs.”
“There is no rights for EastEnders. Its a BBC In House production. So when it ends it ends. If it was made by a separate production company outside of the BBC only then would the rights be up for grabs.”
Exactly. The BBC own all rights, the sets, the character and location names, the concept - everything. They'd be very unlikely to sell the rights on because of the complications that would cause the selling the past 30 (+) years on for repeats or dvd releases, uploads or merchandising. So people would have to make a show set in another Square but not Albert Square, which didn't have the Queen vic and where even if they got the actors, Woodyatt wouldn't be playing Ian Beale, McFadden Phil Mitchell etc.
Brookside could have been bought by another channel because it was actually made and owned by Lime. Likewise Hollyoaks if it were cancelled. BBC productions are very different.
Why do people think Doctor Who was off air for so many years after the BBC cancelled it in 89 despite loads of people wanting to take it on, including American production companies
Originally Posted by momentarything:
“Out of interest, how is it so 'cheap'? Is it just that they use the same sets, don't shoot on location much and obviously special effects are pretty limited? Because I imagine in terms of the actors, it's probably one of the best-paid shows aside from stuff like Doctor Who and Sherlock. £30 million doesn't seem like much when you probably have a few people on six-figure salaries and a lot on mid-to-high five figures. Unless I'm wildly overestimating how much the average actor on EE gets paid.”
“Out of interest, how is it so 'cheap'? Is it just that they use the same sets, don't shoot on location much and obviously special effects are pretty limited? Because I imagine in terms of the actors, it's probably one of the best-paid shows aside from stuff like Doctor Who and Sherlock. £30 million doesn't seem like much when you probably have a few people on six-figure salaries and a lot on mid-to-high five figures. Unless I'm wildly overestimating how much the average actor on EE gets paid.”
It is cheap compared to other productions for exactly the reasons you state. Fixed sets, small costume and make up budget (everybody wears High street or market cloehtes and the same outfits for months or years), little location or stunt filming, virtually no expensive guest stars.
The cost of setting it up in the first place - ie building the standing set was huge and took a couple of years to recoup, same with the transfer to HD but once that initial outlay is done it is much cheaper than a show which needs new sets building for each episode.
I think you are over estimating the actors salaries. Yes, there will be a few big hitters who are in the six figures (probably lox six figures - say 200k per annum) like Steve McFadden, Barbara Windsor before she left but most will be on considerably less, especially the younger ones. I'd be very surprised it the actors salary bill is more than 2 or 3 million per annum combined so about 10 per cent?
Originally Posted by FruityLoopy:
“They can't.
If it was made outside of the BBC via an outside production company then yes but its not. Its a BBC In House production. Its produced on BBC grounds all under BBC equipment. Everything is licence fee funded. For example, if it was a show the BBC bought in they would pay rights to the production company just to air it, they wouldn't fund anything else. EastEnders however isn't like that, everything about the show is funded by the BBC down to the very last penny.
Are you suggesting an outside production company buy out all of Elstree as well? or rebuild the entire set for millions in a new location? Because thats the only way it could happen.”
“They can't.
If it was made outside of the BBC via an outside production company then yes but its not. Its a BBC In House production. Its produced on BBC grounds all under BBC equipment. Everything is licence fee funded. For example, if it was a show the BBC bought in they would pay rights to the production company just to air it, they wouldn't fund anything else. EastEnders however isn't like that, everything about the show is funded by the BBC down to the very last penny.
Are you suggesting an outside production company buy out all of Elstree as well? or rebuild the entire set for millions in a new location? Because thats the only way it could happen.”
if they stopped producing it and sold the rights to it elsewhere then yes that could include it being made by another production company if that was part of the deal or whoever wanted to show it could pay the bbc to produce it... money spinner for the bbc either way
as for the set that could also be sold or leased... if they no longer wanted to make EE and someone else wanted to they would ensure they made as much money from it as possible
1 of 2
