Haha I'm actually not fussed by the news

The BBC obvs isn't as almighty and powerful as it thinks it is

I'm glad Channel 4 got it, will be a nice change. It was getting a bit bit boring

Paul and Mary are posh, middle-class luvvies so I doubt they care much.

When you point out all those things, the massive price rise makes no sense. Unless you take into account Love Productions being owned by Sky. I don't think they really care as much about the long term future of Bakeoff as much as they care about the damage it will do to the BBC if they keep losing their most popular programmes. They must have known that their demands were unlikely to be met by anyone other than commercial TV.

Why when we know what programmes to expect on some channels. Anything moved to ITV becomes trashier as well as lots of interruptions for adverts. Similar applies to Channel 4, I can't think of any programme that has improved when it moved from BBC to ITV or Channel 4.

Isn't Digital Spy effectively a 'channel'? Would people prefer coming to Digital Spy and looking on the forum or spending hours looking around the web for different aspects in different locations?

Why should the BBC be held to ransom by a production company?

There will also be some resentment when we read that the presenters and judges are being several million pounds each after the move especially as the Mail and other never stop moaning about them being paid much less now.

You cannot think of a programme, well let me help you out, the Paralympics have improved massively since Channel 4 got the rights to show them (BBC used to have the rigors, but did naff all to highlight them).

So it does show that programmes can be improved by leaving the BBC structure.

But they cannot be promoted on the show. If the sponsoring brand makes a food mixer then the programme will have to use it, rather than choose the best for the job.

Especially one owned by Sky, no wonder The Sun was crowing about it.

So the programme will be ten minutes or so shorter because of the adverts.

I recall Ronnie Barker saying he and Ronnie C had had offers from ITV but always turned then down, as if you switched channels the only way to succeed was to be much better than you were previously - "the same is not good enough"

One point nobody has mentioned is running time.

The BBC show is one hour - less credits.
There is not much "repeating things" in Bake-off, as the edit is quite fast paced.
This means to get the same style of show the Channel 4 show will have to run for 1 hour 15 minutes, or lose the "comprehensive" coverage.
With adverts you will get 45 minutes of actual "action"
This is clearly not enough.
They will have to change the style or pace to fit the reduced time

Only other option is to have less contestants to fit the reduced running time of 45 minutes if the show remains at one hour - with advert breaks

Though we still have to pay the Advertising Tax unless we buy unbranded items that do not do any TV advertising. We will be paying far more that way than through the TV Licence.

More, how many programmes on Channel 4 get five million viewers? But even a couple of million viewers will be a lot by Channel 4 standards so bring in advertising.

What is happening to the rest of the 'Great British' brand? I can't imagine Channel 4 putting a sewing or pottery programme on at peak times.

If they had matched the high price paid by Channel 4 then it could well have gone higher, you can never outbid someone with a bottomless purse.

That's not particularly a case of improving it, simply showing more of it. I can't say I'm overly impressed with C4's coverage (which is not to say the BBC's Olympic coverage is perfect) of it.

When Bakeoff is made in other countries with commercials, it has two contests instead of 3, to allow for 15 minutes of ads in the hour. It will lose 1/3 of the content, most likely, as well as it's presenters.

When the BBC had the rights to the Paralympics it was a much smaller event and also when international satellite links were more expensive. Channel 4's coverage of the Paralympics is amateurish compared with the BBC's coverage of the Olympics though I have only watched a small amount because every time I switched over there were adverts on and I have seen quite a few comments around about Channel 4 missing crucial happenings in Rio.

Two of the most successful shows on TV are Bake Off and Strictly, formats that the commercial sector weren't interested in showing. Love Productions tried for 4 years selling the format but were rebuffed by the commercial sector. The BBC took it on and in it's first season only had 2 million viewers. The BBC promoted and developed it and that is why it became so huge. If a commercial broadcaster had taken it on and achieved only 2 million viewers, they would most likely have dropped it after season one. Come Dancing ended nearly a decade before the BBC developed another dancing show, ample time for the commercial sector to come up with the idea that dancing would be prime time television hit, they didn't because commerciaal television is ratings driven.

Love Productions may sit quite happily checking their bank account but they were a very small production company before the BBC took Bake Off on and helped Love Productions grow and attract investment from SKY. The format was good, the BBC building it was the real success.

Perhaps the government taking £503 million out of the licence fee may be one of the reasons. Come back in 2021 when that doubles to over £1 billion each year, not one single penny spent on what every licence payer believes what they are paying for. "Content"

Love Productions can set the level very high but may have even disappeared if the BBC hadn't stepped in and taken up the Bake Off as no one was interested. If we want the BBC to compete and produce content that everyone wants then it can only do so if it can retain what the licence fee raises. The government take £500 million each year rising to £1.1 billion by 2021 and a staggering £1.5 billion by the end of the next charter. How many people know this? How many people understand this? The licence fee has always provided a balance to the commercial sector allowing them to share a very large income from advertising which delivered a significant amount of affordable content. PAY TV has stepped in and not only use dedicated TV subscriptions but eat into that advertising budget but unfairly use our broadband and phone to build even more revenue. Not may complain because the media never really publish the facts and it is never ever debated but the licence payer should really wake up and challenge why so much of the money they pay is being used for things other than content they wish to consume. Bake Off may just be the beginning.

More like 15-20 minutes shorter when you take out the time used up by ad breaks, sponsor idents and trailers for other shows.

You are not comparing like for like, we are not talking about the Olympics, (as they to my knowledge have never been on Channel 4), we are talking about the Paralympics.

The coverage has dramatically improved since they went to Channel 4, you have events shown live for starters, and then you have a great associated programme like The Last Leg, neither of which the BBC did when they had the rights to the Paralympics.

So the Paralympics have most definitely improved since they went to Channel 4, so the point stands, about finding a programme that has made the switch and improved.

So you would have been happy for the BBC to have matched C4's £75 MILLION for three years?

That's an awful lot of money, especially when budgets are being squeezed and when the BBC is under considerable scrutiny.

And it also seems to be the case that the agreed price does not cover presenters or judges - these will have to be negotiated (and paid for) separately. They have paid for the format & production.

This could come back and bite C4 on the bum. Really hard.

Personally i have never forgiven channel 4 with what they did to their show "Time Team"

Don't forget the obligatory "this is what happened before the break" recaps after each ad-break.