Originally Posted by welshfoxy:
“I have no idea :P Who?”
“I have no idea :P Who?”
Sky own a big chunk of it
The Ratings Thread (Part 68)
174 of 881
Originally Posted by Dancc:
“It's not about what Viacom can afford - of course they could afford it, but they'd still want to see a nice return on their investment. And the simple fact of the matter is it would get more viewers on ITV, and therefore they would be able to bid more confidently.
The only realistic danger to ITV if they bid is Sky. But I would be utterly astonished even with the links if they went down that road. This is, after all, fundamentally a programme about an extraordinarily high viewership, and in turn, a product that has immense appeal from an advertising perspective. The idea that you wouldn't want to fully exploit that and instead allow Bake Off to become some sort of loss-leader to get a few more Sky dishes put up, I'm really not buying.”
“It's not about what Viacom can afford - of course they could afford it, but they'd still want to see a nice return on their investment. And the simple fact of the matter is it would get more viewers on ITV, and therefore they would be able to bid more confidently.
The only realistic danger to ITV if they bid is Sky. But I would be utterly astonished even with the links if they went down that road. This is, after all, fundamentally a programme about an extraordinarily high viewership, and in turn, a product that has immense appeal from an advertising perspective. The idea that you wouldn't want to fully exploit that and instead allow Bake Off to become some sort of loss-leader to get a few more Sky dishes put up, I'm really not buying.”
Don't write Channel 5 off just because ratings may fall. We've seen from the Big Brother and Neighbours acquisitions that Channel 5 can turn ratings around if they fall.
Originally Posted by DarylDay1991:
“Sky own a big chunk of it”
“Sky own a big chunk of it”
Thanks. I see this happened only today
Was not itv supposed to be angry with the Agatha Christie estate that they had switched to the BBC after decades of support from itv?
Pretty sure some on social media laughed at itv over it.
I would assume Love has already sorted a deal out with a new partner. They will know that the BBC will spin this against them. You wonder how other commercial houses will view that BBC statement. They might not be impressed.
Pretty sure some on social media laughed at itv over it.
I would assume Love has already sorted a deal out with a new partner. They will know that the BBC will spin this against them. You wonder how other commercial houses will view that BBC statement. They might not be impressed.
Originally Posted by Dancc:
“What an overreaction.
Money is the way of the world, unfortunately. It's certainly no reason to not watch a programme you enjoy.
Also, unless you were privy to exactly what went on, it's hard to say whether or not Love Productions were demanding too much or whether it was more the case that the BBC undervalued it and refused to budge out of stubbornness.
Given it's their most watched programme by a long long way and still growing, was it really unreasonable of Love Productions to expect them to pay more? Because I certainly don't think it was.”
“What an overreaction.
Money is the way of the world, unfortunately. It's certainly no reason to not watch a programme you enjoy.
Also, unless you were privy to exactly what went on, it's hard to say whether or not Love Productions were demanding too much or whether it was more the case that the BBC undervalued it and refused to budge out of stubbornness.
Given it's their most watched programme by a long long way and still growing, was it really unreasonable of Love Productions to expect them to pay more? Because I certainly don't think it was.”
It isn't an over-reaction at all. The BBC are responsible for making GBBO the hit it is now. Not Love Productions. The programme commissioned by the BBC has undoubtedly improved the reputation of Love and who wouldn't want "worked for the BBC" on their CV? Love are putting greed above anything else and as such, the BBC are unlikely to ever use them again. And if they do the same with other broadcasters, then Love's name will become tarnished. Love Productions know the BBC have limited funds, and as they're part of Sky, this will have been logistically planned. I suspect you are declaring an over reaction because you're rubbing your hands with glee hoping it'll turn up on your beloved Channel trash (five).
Originally Posted by Cory_Osborn2:
“I think Love Productions are going to think again tomorrow!.”
“I think Love Productions are going to think again tomorrow!.”
I don't think they will! More money for the agreement, then all of the advertising, product placement and sponsorship deals.
Watching it on ITV will be like spot the brand!
It's no surprise this has happened.
Originally Posted by sunbeam007:
“Was not itv supposed to be angry with the Agatha Christie estate that they had switched to the BBC after decades of support from itv?
Pretty sure some on social media laughed at itv over it.
I would assume Love has already sorted a deal out with a new partner. They will know that the BBC will spin this against them. You wonder how other commercial houses will view that BBC statement. They might not be impressed.”
“Was not itv supposed to be angry with the Agatha Christie estate that they had switched to the BBC after decades of support from itv?
Pretty sure some on social media laughed at itv over it.
I would assume Love has already sorted a deal out with a new partner. They will know that the BBC will spin this against them. You wonder how other commercial houses will view that BBC statement. They might not be impressed.”
But they will all still want to work with them of course.....
Generally disappointed for the BBC here, though it's good if it doesn't air in 2017 - with no major sporting ecent, it paves the way for BGT to take the #1 spot! 
Originally Posted by H of De Vil:
“They managed too pay £21million for TVUk over 3 series with less spin-offs and hours. Everything Bake-Off related rates well.
Foolish. Really foolish. The problem is, the BBC is the loser in this situation. Love Productions will be more happy that they have their asking price.”
“They managed too pay £21million for TVUk over 3 series with less spin-offs and hours. Everything Bake-Off related rates well.
Foolish. Really foolish. The problem is, the BBC is the loser in this situation. Love Productions will be more happy that they have their asking price.”
There is a very big difference here. The Voice had already done very well in Holland & more importantly in America on NBC. As The Voice had already established itself as a brand that could deliver, it was sought after by numerous broadcasters here. The three year £21million deal is actually good value. it equates to £7million per series and around £200k-£300k per hour. When compared to Strictly, that's actually very good!
I don't really think the BBC is the loser in this situation either. The success of the Bake Off is a bonus if anything. Their main entertainment focus is Strictly, and after 12 years, that is still doing very well. TV programmes are, after all, replaceable. The BBC is a 94 year old organisation that has gone through a lot. I think losing a baking show is not that big a deal.
Originally Posted by Dancc:
“What an overreaction.
Money is the way of the world, unfortunately. It's certainly no reason to not watch a programme you enjoy.
Also, unless you were privy to exactly what went on, it's hard to say whether or not Love Productions were demanding too much or whether it was more the case that the BBC undervalued it and refused to budge out of stubbornness.
Given it's their most watched programme by a long long way and still growing, was it really unreasonable of Love Productions to expect them to pay more? Because I certainly don't think it was.”
“What an overreaction.
Money is the way of the world, unfortunately. It's certainly no reason to not watch a programme you enjoy.
Also, unless you were privy to exactly what went on, it's hard to say whether or not Love Productions were demanding too much or whether it was more the case that the BBC undervalued it and refused to budge out of stubbornness.
Given it's their most watched programme by a long long way and still growing, was it really unreasonable of Love Productions to expect them to pay more? Because I certainly don't think it was.”
BIB - a bit of both
It has been reported a few times that Love were after an entertainment-sized budget. Bake Off was initially commissioned by Emma Willis (no, not that one) who was in the Documentary commissioning department at the time. The budgets between entertainment & documentary are worlds apart. It's not unreasonable to ask for a budget increase (especially with how well the show is performing), but if they were asking for more than double (I read somewhere that they were looking for £600k-£700k per hour), then they were certainly pushing their luck.
We all know that the BBC has to save money with the real-world decrease in the Licence Fee. Bearing in mind how good the programme is with their current budget, it's hard to see how major improvements can be made to the production that would justify the cost. From first glance it looks like Love were asking for a fairly hefty production fee.
From the internal email at Love Productions (printed on the Telegraph website);
Quote:
“Unfortunately we were unable to agree either a fair valuation, and nor were the BBC able to provide the necessary comfort for the future protection of such a distinctive and much-loved television series.”
“Unfortunately we were unable to agree either a fair valuation, and nor were the BBC able to provide the necessary comfort for the future protection of such a distinctive and much-loved television series.”
It sounds like their estimations were poles apart. As for "the necessary comfort". Really??? It's got a very cosy slot, it's well promoted and it's on Britain's most watched TV channel. If it really was about brand protection, it would've stayed on the BBC. Looks like they want their pay day.
EDIT: The BBC have themselves said that they are 'a considerable distance apart'. 99% sure that it's all about the money.
Originally Posted by sunbeam007:
“The Voice. Blankety Blank. Morecambe and Wise. This is your Life.”
“The Voice. Blankety Blank. Morecambe and Wise. This is your Life.”
M & W were a disaster on ITV in the Thames era (although successful with ATV in the 60s), so was Hancock when he left the BBC. To be fair Tommy Cooper and Benny Hill were successful on ITV, This Is Your life was successful on both channels and there is talk of the BBC reviving it.
Originally Posted by sunbeam007:
“The BBC couldn't afford to keep GBBO but could afford to bid so much for MOTD that itv didn't even try to compete with it.
It's about priorities. The BBC chose the Premier League over other sports and programming. MOTD gets 3m viewers.
Love is a business. This is no different to any other business wanting to sell its products for more money.
https://www.theguardian.com/football...gue-highlights”
“The BBC couldn't afford to keep GBBO but could afford to bid so much for MOTD that itv didn't even try to compete with it.
It's about priorities. The BBC chose the Premier League over other sports and programming. MOTD gets 3m viewers.
Love is a business. This is no different to any other business wanting to sell its products for more money.
https://www.theguardian.com/football...gue-highlights”
Excellent post.
Anyone who believes the BBC statement when it says they did everything they could and made a very fair offer - show your working please. The BBC are more than willing to spend when it suits them, perhaps this was more a case of complacency and not expecting to lose it?
The term "quintessentially BBC" rings a lot of alarm bells with me. We all get what they mean by that, of course. But it raises the possibility that they were disrespectful in their offer because they did not expect Love to have the balls to walk away and adapt the format for commercial TV.
Really shocked and quite sad about this. As there will be a year's gap, this gives the BBC the opportunity to make their own version with the same judges and presenters and a few changes to the format so it isn't too similar. It won't get 10m viewers but it could still get around 7-8m and grow over a few years. But will they have the guts to do it?
Originally Posted by Dan R:
“Generally disappointed for the BBC here, though it's good if it doesn't air in 2017 - with no major sporting ecent, it paves the way for BGT to take the #1 spot!”
“Generally disappointed for the BBC here, though it's good if it doesn't air in 2017 - with no major sporting ecent, it paves the way for BGT to take the #1 spot!
”
How sad
Originally Posted by lewiep93:
“Christmas special and third series confirmed of Still Open All Hours.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/lat...name=corporate”
“Christmas special and third series confirmed of Still Open All Hours.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/lat...name=corporate”
They started the location filming today.
Originally Posted by Jokanovic:
“But they will all still want to work with them of course.....”
“But they will all still want to work with them of course.....”
Of course. It is business. If Downton switches to the BBC in the future people would say... Well, it is a costume drama, it really does suit the BBC better than itv... Itv should stick to errr reality TV shows...
Jake Kanter, who used to work at Broadcast and is not at Business Insider, has provided some pretty interesting context to the GBBO subject.
https://twitter.com/Jake_Kanter/stat...89749938888704
Basically what I've just written above.
https://twitter.com/Jake_Kanter/stat...89749938888704
Basically what I've just written above.
Originally Posted by Dancc:
“Excellent post.
Anyone who believes the BBC statement when it says they did everything they could and made a very fair offer - show your working please. The BBC are more than willing to spend when it suits them, perhaps this was more a case of complacency and not expecting to lose it?
The term "quintessentially BBC" rings a lot of alarm bells with me. We all get what they mean by that, of course. But it raises the possibility that they were disrespectful in their offer because they did not expect Love to have the balls to walk away and adapt the format for commercial TV.”
“Excellent post.
Anyone who believes the BBC statement when it says they did everything they could and made a very fair offer - show your working please. The BBC are more than willing to spend when it suits them, perhaps this was more a case of complacency and not expecting to lose it?
The term "quintessentially BBC" rings a lot of alarm bells with me. We all get what they mean by that, of course. But it raises the possibility that they were disrespectful in their offer because they did not expect Love to have the balls to walk away and adapt the format for commercial TV.”
Of course it also raises the possibility the major shareholder did not want this show still to be on BBC.
Originally Posted by Dan R:
“Generally disappointed for the BBC here, though it's good if it doesn't air in 2017 - with no major sporting ecent, it paves the way for BGT to take the #1 spot!”
“Generally disappointed for the BBC here, though it's good if it doesn't air in 2017 - with no major sporting ecent, it paves the way for BGT to take the #1 spot!
”
You are far too happy about that. It's very weird.
Love Productions are quoted as saying there's no reversal on the decision so I don't know what that BBC press release is all about.
"We hope Love Productions change their minds" 
I don' think I've ever seen a statement from a broadcaster like this after losing a programme.
I don' think I've ever seen a statement from a broadcaster like this after losing a programme.
Originally Posted by marke09:
“Interesting timing from the Guardian
BSkyB confirms purchase of 70% slice of Great British Bake Off producer
https://www.theguardian.com/media/20...ve-productions”
“Interesting timing from the Guardian
BSkyB confirms purchase of 70% slice of Great British Bake Off producer
https://www.theguardian.com/media/20...ve-productions”
That's from 2014. Although I do agree with your insinuation that it's incredibly obvious that certain vested interests have played a big part in this.
Originally Posted by ftv:
“M & W were a disaster on ITV in the Thames era (although successful with ATV in the 60s), so was Hancock when he left the BBC. To be fair Tommy Cooper and Benny Hill were successful on ITV, This Is Your life was successful on both channels and there is talk of the BBC reviving it.”
“M & W were a disaster on ITV in the Thames era (although successful with ATV in the 60s), so was Hancock when he left the BBC. To be fair Tommy Cooper and Benny Hill were successful on ITV, This Is Your life was successful on both channels and there is talk of the BBC reviving it.”
Thank you. Didn't know that. I've got a feeling a Brucie quiz switched sides too. Of course his Big Night failed though it actually didn't fail that badly.
Originally Posted by Jay Lee:
“Love Productions are quoted as saying there's no reversal on the decision so I don't know what that BBC press release is all about.”
“Love Productions are quoted as saying there's no reversal on the decision so I don't know what that BBC press release is all about.”
Playing victim.
Originally Posted by all_night:
“"We hope Love Productions change their minds"
I don' think I've ever seen a statement from a broadcaster like this after losing a programme.”
“"We hope Love Productions change their minds"
I don' think I've ever seen a statement from a broadcaster like this after losing a programme.”
The desperation is clear. It's sad to see the BBC so desperate. They need to get over it and move on.
174 of 881
