Sunday Brunch on Channel 4 was originally on BBC and the format now is very similar.

Considering the huge popularity of the show then I would expect the BBC to do anything and everything to keep it. Be that matching or beating any bid from channel 4 or anyone else then so be it. Or even ensuring in previous negotiations that barring plague and pestilence they can keep their top shows

For myself I am not a huge fan, I watch it because my sister enjoys it, and I don't exactly cringe every time it's on. But when a show is so popular on the publicly funded broadcaster then it angers me somewhat that those in charge do not keep it.

It's another example that such a well funded organisation cannot get the job done that it was set up for. From sports right being abandoned, to a more experimental and youthful channel being axed. We can now add the single most popular to show on television in Britain being tossed away, for what? I don't see any great raft of new interesting shows or formats getting anywhere near the figures GBBO did.

Still amazed at its popularity but it still should not have been allowed to go.

Is this show more popular than Strictly??

Wasn't it the same when BBC lost Mad Men? Even though John Whittingdale claims Strictly and the Great British Bake Off are absolutely original, distinctive and BBC and all that, they are simply talent shows without ads. I imagine people will find The Voice on ITV won't be destroyed by the odd toilet break nor will this show.

As for the footie, it's like that everywhere. The pay tv market has domestic football cornered as it's such a lucrative market.

Mel and Sue failed in their new version of Late Lunch on ITV. They're not sme hot commodity but lucky to have been chosen as presenters of a show watched by millions. Personally I can't stand Sue Perkins smug act that makes her sound like the school swot. Glad to see her out of the BBC.

But that's just not practical, nor possible, is it. The BBC can't compete in terms of money with the likes of Sky and Amazon and I don't think we, as license payers, would expect or want them to. How would it work? The BBC spends way above its income to secure a show like BO, then a year or two down the line the license is increased for everyone to cover the cost of that one show? The outcry would be tremendous, with near universal statements that they should only pay within their means, not pay silly money then demand more from the tax-payer to bail them out.

Additionally, it's never a good idea to show your hand and make it clear that once a show's a hit, you're willing to be held to ransom and pay whatever the demand is to retain it. On the contrary, I think it's far shrewder to make it clear that you're willing to spend big, but only up to a point.

£75 million is way overpriced, it's extortion.

At least the directors of Love get huge bonuses for destroying a popular show built up by the BBC.

Hope they enjoy their massive pay packages.......

I hope it tanks spectacularly on C4. I really like Bake Off (not entirely sure why...), but LP are just being greedy here. The BBC were going to double the current deal to £12.5m a year which ought to have been enough.

But I'm glad the BBC haven't paid whatever it took to keep it. The show isn't worth doing that for. But I hope they blacklist Love Productions over this now.

It'll be great karma if it ends up only scraping 2m viewers on C4. But, then again, Love probably won't care as they'll have £75m in the bank.

Depends on Paul, Mary and co, with them it may get 5 million on 4 loosing half its audience, without them, yes 2 million, but the directors of Love, get millions of pounds of fat bonuses for their lack of loyalty and an improved bid of £15 million from the BBC.

Lover clearly were in talks with 4 for some time, you do not sign a £25 million contract in two hours. There was communicating, and their must have been board meetings at Love, on their hard ball tactics knowing the BBC wouldn't match £25 million.

Love set up the BBC, gave an ultimatum that they knew they couldn't accept and lined their pockets on licence fee payers hard cash and BBC work.

Hope they enjoy the profits of their dishonesty.

they would be likely to chop out some sentences, or bits that they believe are superfluous.


Unless I am wrong, it was actually stated earlier that a few of the overseas versions DO reduce the programme down to 2 challenges rather than 3. It was not a suggestion.

In the context of the UK series, and how Channel 4 might accommodate commercial breaks, it was a suggestion.

I've seen other posters complain that she's been acting a bit too butch too.

I'm not a great fan of hers to be honest.

So the BBC should have paid full value to keep Bake Off? Give over, if they coughed up the cash posters like yourself would bash them and likewise the present scenario has seen the BBC attacked for not 'keeping hold of its prized possessions'. They can't win.

The Bake Off, as other programmes have shown, will ultimately go one way: down. Especially when Mary Berry decides to hand the wooden spoon over to someone else. At the end of the day the move was instigated by the production company, and they got what they wanted. More money. The BBC wouldn't have offered that, and in hindsight it may prove to be a smart decision.

Much like many employees then who have another job lined up in case they don't get the pay rise or promotion that they have worked hard for? It isn't "dishonesty" it is simply business, real life, and people need to get this into their heads.

Do you work? Why don't you accept half your salary instead of what you're paid? It's probably enough, don't be greedy.

I really don't get this absolutely childishly sulky attitude of "Huh, hope it fails"

It really is the oddest attitude.

I certainly would not have moaned about the BBC paying to keep a programme that over 10 million viewers, I might have questioned the sanity of the 10 million in some cases.

But, no the BBC can't win, however for far too long now the reason for moaning is that the BBC is not committing to their top shows. I cannot think of an example of the BBC deserving criticism for over committing to a well established show. It's all been one way for too long from the BBC I, afraid.

BBC breaking news, yeah it is rather sad.

Mel and Sue will step down as presenters of GBBO says channel 4. Well that's interesting. I leave other to speculate and counter speculate, and counter counter speculate what that means or was caused by.

Wouldnt be surprised if Tim Lovejoy and Simon Rimmer take over as hosts, they work well on Sunday Brunch together and work as a team

I can see Mary stepping down. Her working career has been with the BBC. I don't think she is the type to follow the money. She will stay out of loyalty.

Do you mean deserving, or simply getting criticism? The BBC has been heavily criticised in the past for paying what some considered to be way over the top salaries or contracts or whatever the arrangement was for, for e.g. Top Gear, Jonathan Ross and Graham Norton, among others I forget. Whether the criticism was 'deserved' is subjective, I suppose.

It is all a crying shame really, Im not normally one for reality shows, but I love GBBO, its going to be weird watching the show from Tommorrow Night, as it is like an end of an era

Channel 4 are just passing on second-hand info by the look of things:


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-37355065

They have decency, honesty and integrity, unlike the money grabbing directors at Love and thier big million pound dividend bonuses. Well done Mel and Sue!

You could be right, but to do what? Surely the last thing British TV needs is yet another cooking or food oriented show, and I'm not sure what other genre she could move into. Paul Hollywood will be fine, should he also step-down. His surname is very apt for his personality and he could probably turn his hand to most presenting gigs.

Yes, kudos to Mel & Sue.

Now we wait to hear from Paul & Mary.

They wanted £25 million a year, up from the £5 million they got last time. That is extortion, and massively overpriced. It costs £1m an episode to make Doctor Who, which has a massive special effects budget, location fees, scriptwriter fees etc etc, and they wanted £2 million an episode for a reality show with unpaid participants and a tent. The whole thing stinks.