• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • TV
  • Broadcasting
BBC Loses Great British Bakeoff
<<
<
20 of 89
>>
>
Super_Furry
14-09-2016
Today's headlines:

- TV show moves from terrestrial TV channel to another terrestrial TV channel
- Everyone who watched it before will still be able to watch it
- World continues turning
eggchen
14-09-2016
Originally Posted by Ash_M1:
“Wrong. My argument is perfectly valid. I should be able to buy what I wish WITHOUT a penny going to ITV. This is the point you fail to/choose to not understand.

BIB...and this is wrong, wholly wrong.

BIB2...and this is right and proper. All should contribute to all public services regardless.

...any way, I'm not going to allow you to distract me from the outrageous behaviour of Not-So Love Productions.”

It isn't valid, whether you choose to respond or not. What you have is a choice not to buy certain products if you don't wish any of the proceeds going towards the advertisement of them on commercial TV, because you can buy alternatives without penalty. That is not the case with non-terrestrial TV vs the licence fee.

Trying to assert that this is some equivalent tax that you are subject to is the most risible argument I've ever heard.
Xuri
14-09-2016
Originally Posted by Ash_M1:
“Wrong. My argument is perfectly valid. I should be able to buy what I wish WITHOUT a penny going to ITV. This is the point you fail to/choose to not understand.”

What business is it of yours what they spend their money on. It's not your money anymore. You seem to be ignoring this basic principle of commerce. The money doesn't remain yours. If you don't want to contribute to a practice of a particular company then you have the option to not purchase their products.

Your argument is ridiculously invalid. It's not even remotely analogous to the licence fee.
Object Z
14-09-2016
Originally Posted by Super_Furry:
“Today's headlines:

- TV show moves from terrestrial TV channel to another terrestrial TV channel
- Everyone who watched it before will still be able to watch it
- World continues turning”

Precisely, and BBC can spend money saved on something else. Those folk who only consume BBC product will be happy with whatever is used to replace a cooking programme (I guess, another cooking programme)
hendero
14-09-2016
Originally Posted by Ash_M1:
“Wrong. My argument is perfectly valid. I should be able to buy what I wish WITHOUT a penny going to ITV. This is the point you fail to/choose to not understand.”

Do you have any idea how the outside world works? You are essentially saying you don't want ITV, or any other commercial television channel, to exist. Which I suppose is fine from the perspective from Ash's Mum's basement, but that is as far as it goes.
jazzydrury3
14-09-2016
Just read on a DS Article channel 4 are looking to air 40 hours of Bake Off a year from 2017.

Could we. Be getting a hour version of Extra Slice, could Creme de la Creme, and Junior Bake Off become full series, maybe it could try to become there master chief.

As Channel 4 have no kids TV Strand, Junior Bake Off will have to become Primetime viewing, or maybe in the afternoons during school holidays.

And the celebrity version in 2017, is set to tie in with there Stand up for cancer charity, which I thought.

Just thought I would try to make it more positive
Straker
14-09-2016
C4 plan to milk (& egg) it to death then? Not sure how that can be seen as positive.
mossy2103
14-09-2016
Originally Posted by jazzydrury3:
“Just read on a DS Article channel 4 are looking to air 40 hours of Bake Off a year from 2017.

Could we. Be getting a hour version of Extra Slice, could Creme de la Creme, and Junior Bake Off become full series, maybe it could try to become there master chief.

As Channel 4 have no kids TV Strand, Junior Bake Off will have to become Primetime viewing, or maybe in the afternoons during school holidays.

And the celebrity version in 2017, is set to tie in with there Stand up for cancer charity, which I thought.

Just thought I would try to make it more positive”

Or perhaps they plan on milking the brand for all that it's worth, either with multiple main series per year, or with countless spinoffs (along the lines of 8 out of Ten Cats do ...., Great Big Fat Gypsy Bakeoff etc) until even the most committed viewer is heartily sick of a strained format.

A format even more strained if none of the current four are presenting or judging.
David_Flett1
14-09-2016
Originally Posted by waz101:
“Yes it has and cost a certain Mr Cowell quite a lot of money http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/4482216.stm”

Settled out of court. Not tested in court. No Judgement by the court.

Masterchef is hugely popular and there is no reason that the format could be copied for baking and use the same presenters. It would not be GBBO but the recipe for GBBO success is the contestants and the chemistry between the presenters and the contestants. I really would like to see how that could be challenged. Would it get 10 million viewers? Maybe not but it wouldn't cost £25 million a year either and would almost certainly harm the CH4 version of GBBO. As for my main point the public are being continually held to ransom for our entertainment and sport. Yes you can decide to not subscribe to SKY or BT for your football fix and go without but maybe glance at your broadband and phone bill which help support revenue to drive subscriptions.
FusionFury
14-09-2016
I think people are massively overreacting.
Straker
14-09-2016
By talking about it? How very dare they!
mossy2103
14-09-2016
Originally Posted by Straker:
“By talking about it? How very dare they!”

By talking about it on a discussion forum and social media too.

The cheek of it.
spectra
14-09-2016
Originally Posted by DVDfever:
“I've already said they haven't quit. Yes, it's a publicity stunt. Oh, but hang on, it's in the news, so it must be true. Jeez....



Because most of the public aren't so daft as to believe it.



NO-ONE HAS QUIT! FFS!



Why would they quit? Sue Perkins won't have been happy that they cancelled her sitcom after one series, so why would she care what the BBC think?



WAKE UP!



BREAKING NEWS: Mel and Sue have confirmed the word 'gullible' has been removed from the dictionary.”

Originally Posted by DVDfever:
“Yeah, because C4 would happily spend £25m without ensuring they had anyone on board...

How many of those magic beans would you like? I'm doing them for a pound each or six for £6.”

Wow so sure are you that you are confident enough to slag off those that disagree with you.

I am sure (not) you will come back and apologise as fervently if/when you are wrong.

You do realise that if you posted a conspiracy theory like that in any other section on DS you would be shot down in flames.

I feel like almost everyone else that the announcement by Mel and Sue is irreversible for people like them ( ie they don't appear to come across as money grabbers) and is therefore genuine .

If this proves to be wrong I will acknowledge your foresight fully if DS is still around by then.
Xuri
14-09-2016
Originally Posted by spectra:
“I feel like almost everyone else that the announcement by Mel and Sue is irreversible for people like them ( ie they don't appear to come across as money grabbers) and is therefore genuine . ”

Also, isn't it better for "talent" to be on the BBC gravy train than any other?

The BBC doesn't seem to drop people unless they do something really bad. That's why you have dinosaurs on the BBC that have been around since the dawn of time.

Even without bake off they're better off in the long run staying with the BBC. Perkins in particular. Doesn't she do a lot of radio work for them?
noise747
14-09-2016
Originally Posted by skp20040:
“As you say Love ( 70% owned by Sky ) being greedy , I mean going from £5m turning down £15m and wanting £25m is bloody greedy , yes people want more but that's excessive. Bearing in mind Love became a popular investment for Sky due to its growth thanks to the BBC you would think there might be some loyalty and bearing in mind most of its output has been aired on the BBC but sadly not. You see me if I was the BBC I would now say to Love well take the rest of your stuff elsewhere as well and see how far you get.”

Not disagreeing with any of that, apart from the fact there is not such thing as loyalty these days, it don't get get you anywhere.
Quote:
“By sorting itself out do you mean pay over the top for things and what anyone demands to keep a show ? one can only imagine how many threads we would have on that if they did.”

No, i don't mean pay over the top for anything, but they need to get some decent content and keep it, there was a time when the BBc use to produce some great content, now they normally use production companies. they should go back to using in house production.
the problem is that there is very little difference between the BBC and the commercial channels now apart from the lack of adverts.
mossy2103
14-09-2016
In Bake Off, the BBC had decent content, but would have had to pay silly money (i.e. over the top) to keep it.
noise747
14-09-2016
Originally Posted by Ash_M1:
“Nothing to do with the fact that the BBC is a hugely popular broadcaster no?

You are right about one thing, I don't give Channel 5 the time of day. Utter tripe. I am very much a BBC type.”

So you want nothing on any of the other channels? While i am not a BBC lover, I can find something to watch if I really put my mind to it. Staying with the BBc must give you a very boring outlook on life, just like being in the forums that is about broadcasting, I never see you in any of the other forums on this site.

Variety is the spice of life so they say.

Saying all of that I just had a look at what is on Channel 5 and you could be right,, not much better on BBc 1 to be honest, just had a quick look and two stood out that is not better than channel 5, Caught Red Handed and fake Britain.

The few times i watch the great British bake off, I thought it was ok, but not much difference to a lot of shows like that.

This is why I like Netflix and now Tv, it offers me choice to watch what I like when i like, sure they both got some trash on it, but also some good stuff, put a bit of You Tube in that, it is more than enough for me.
A.D.P
14-09-2016
Evening standard, Paul and Mary expected to quit.

http://www.standard.co.uk/stayingin/...-a3344321.html
skp20040
14-09-2016
Originally Posted by noise747:
“Not disagreeing with any of that, apart from the fact there is not such thing as loyalty these days, it don't get get you anywhere.


No, i don't mean pay over the top for anything, but they need to get some decent content and keep it, there was a time when the BBc use to produce some great content, now they normally use production companies. they should go back to using in house production.
the problem is that there is very little difference between the BBC and the commercial channels now apart from the lack of adverts.”

They had no choice but to use external production companies they were told to, 50% has to be independent 25% from small indies and 25% from others with 50% guaranteed in-house, that 50% in-house guarantee is about to be dropped so 100% of production will be up for grabs with BBC in-house bidding alongside others other than kids, sport , news and religion.

It is not surprising to see a price rise but I do find it interesting but not surprising that now 70% owned by SKY the price is increased by 400% , we all know how Murdoch and SKY hate the BBC so a cynic might say with their anti BBC agenda they were on a win win , the BBC pay the money and a string of headlines in their papers about the BBC wasting our cash when they could have let it go to the non public funded PSB C4, they don't pay and they half say the BBC were right and half moan whilst being able to have a dig at the other PSB C4 who they want to see privatised.
Gray77
14-09-2016
Originally Posted by noise747:
“Staying with the BBc must give you a very boring outlook on life, just like being in the forums that is about broadcasting, I never see you in any of the other forums on this site.”

Strange POV. Maybe Digital Spy gives us insight into media news that nowhere else really gives us, but for everything else it's just generic filler which we can be beaten elsewhere. If I want to talk about history, politics, culture, football, music, hell, even WWE, I sure as hell can find better ways to do it than come on here. Why would you assume that people who only post on the main broadcasting forum are only into one thing?

BTW, serious question. Do you find 6 Music 'boring'? Do you find political shows like 'This Week' boring? Do you find some of the documentaries that appear on BBC4 and BBC2 'boring'? Do you find Sherlock, Peaky Blinders, Luther etc boring? Just asking, because I honestly don't see how all of the things I listed would lead me to having a one-dimensional 'BBC' type of attitude to life.
Saxon Bury
14-09-2016
Originally Posted by mossy2103:
“In Bake Off, the BBC had decent content, but would have had to pay silly money (i.e. over the top) to keep it.”

Exactly. No TV show is bigger than the BBC. When X-Factor dies ITV will carry on too.

And it increasingly looks like they will keep all the "talent" while Channel 4 gets a nice tent.
Aftershow
14-09-2016
Originally Posted by David_Flett1:
“It has never been contested in court”

It has.

Which essentially found that the idea of the rights to a format is meaningless. There'd be an issue around trademarks if they tried to use the GBBO name (or something very similar), but there's nothing stopping them from doing an amateur baking competition.
A.D.P
14-09-2016
Originally Posted by Aftershow:
“It has.

Which essentially found that the idea of the rights to a format is meaningless. There'd be an issue around trademarks if they tried to use the GBBO name (or something very similar), but there's nothing stopping them from doing an amateur baking competition.”

And...

Simon Cowell ripped off Pop Idol, and created the very very similar X Factor, subject to a court action and settlement.
lundavra
14-09-2016
Originally Posted by Ash_M1:
“...and this is wholly wrong. Of course I am. You acknowledge this yourself within your very post above.

The fact of the matter is this...I should be able to buy any product I like without being forced to subsidise some low-grade commercial broadcaster. All the time the advertising tax exists, anti-licence fee types have not a leg to stand on.

You are right. The BBC is the best that we have. The way it is funded makes it a cut above the rest, the fact it is ad-free, total bliss.”

You only have to look at the people involved in advertising and their plush offices to see where most of the money goes.
Aftershow
14-09-2016
Originally Posted by A.D.P:
“And...

Simon Cowell ripped off Pop Idol, and created the very very similar X Factor, subject to a court action and settlement.”

An out of court settlement does not create a legal precedent.
<<
<
20 of 89
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map