• 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
<<
<
27 of 89
>>
>
David_Flett1
16-09-2016
Originally Posted by Antbox:
“Wait, World Service is a BBC service. That's not "money taken away from the BBC Licence Fee" any more than the £1.3 billion that the BBC spend on BBC One.

The World Service is the responsibility of the Foreign Office and was funded out of the Foreign Office Budget. In 2010 the coalition government made the licence payer responsible for the funding.

The funding of broadband has been dropped, as you mentioned.

The funding is being phased out and will be £150 million until 2017/2018, £80 million 2018/2019 £20 million 2019/2020.


"SC4" is actually S4C, a valued Public Service Broadcasting service for Wales, which has always had the involvement of the BBC and fulfils BBC objectives in that it allows the BBC to discharge their obligation to make and/or broadcast Welsh-language programming, without having to actually broadcast it on the BBC's English-language channels.


S4C (sorry for getting C and 4 the wrong way round) is Channel Four Wales and should be funded in the same way Channel Four is funded through advertising.

News Monitoring is a discretionary activity. If the BBC wishes to monitor the news, that's the BBC using its own money as it sees fit, not "money taken away from the BBC licence fee". These days the BBC seems to monitor Twitter more closely than foreign broadcasts anyway.


News monitoring was set up as part of the Foreign Office and independent of the BBC to monitor foreign news broadcasts and was extensively used in the second world war, the cold war and since has been used to translate over 100 language broadcasts and currently pays special attention to monitoring the middle east crisis. The funding was transferred to the licence payer in 2013.

Local TV? OK, possibly I will give you that one. I think the BBC could contribute to local TV in better ways, certainly. But in any case that figure is insignificantly small compared to the £4 billion licence fee income, and the intent is certainly 'public service', so hard to get too excited about it.

The figure of £4 billion is always banded about mostly mistakenly that the BBC receives £4 billion from the licence fee. So here is the current and projected figures and what the BBC will receive under the new charter proposals. Local TV may be insignificant but my main point is that the licence fee is funding a great deal more than the BBC. £500 million currently, £1.1 billion by 2021 and the end of the next charter £1.5 billion. In total £13.4 billion will be taken out of the licence fee and I think if you carried out a poll and asked either how much the BBC receives from the licence fee or what the licence fee raises I would bet very highly that £13 billion taken from the licence fee would shock most.

2016 Licence Fee £3.72 billion BBC £3.25 billion

2021 Licence Fee £4.18 billion BBC £3.07 billion

2028 Licence Fee £4.92 billion BBC £3.43 billion

The "cost" of over-75s TV licences is not a cost at all - it's not a cost if you were never entitled to collect the money in the first place. The BBC themselves have publicly confirmed that the impact of the changes is cost neutral, so that's not "money taken away from the licence fee" either.

The BBC received a rebate from the DWP to compensate for the over 75 free licences. This was a social policy introduced by Gordon Brown to allieviate the furore surrounding the pension grab. It should never have been used for this purpose and still shouldn't be.

This cost will be borne by the licence payer in full by 2020. Cost neutral is dependent on the licence fee rising in line with inflation, closing the iplayer loophole (good luck with that one) So the licence payer must face a rise in the licence fee determined by the rate of inflation just to keep the licence fee cost neutral. Currently the licence Fee is £`145.50. By 2028 if it rises in line with the BOE Inflation target will be £185. Currently the BBC receives £127 from the licence payer in 2028 that will rise only by £2 to £129. Are you happy to pay an extra £40 a year in 2028 to give away free licences? To cover Foreign Office responsibilities? The BBC only gets £2 of it. How far will that go?

As I have posted many times, I believed the licence fee provided a balance because the advertising pot funded the commercial sector and offered a broad range of content to be affordable for the majority especially for those priced out of PAY TV. My view today is that under current proposals I cannot support the licence fee in it's present form as £500 million, rising to £1.5 billion by 2028 will be taken out of the licence fee and not be spent on supporting a broad range of content and services to balance the commercial sector.

What would be the view if we removed the same percentage from public places and services, our museums, parks, arts centres etc. Oh sorry the government are already cutting the grants for these services.
”

.....
scoobiesnacks
16-09-2016
Originally Posted by Artygill:
“I have a question for all you clever people who seem to know a lot about broadcasting. Just how much input would the BBC have had in the formulation of Bake Off? Did LP just hand over a finished product or was it a collaboration with the BBC offering creative direction. Who chose the presenters, who did the styling, who came up with the location, etc.
I'd really like to know how it works.”

It might anywhere between 0-70% of the format is coming from decisions made by the BBC. Only Love Productions and the BBC actually know. The BBC is notoriously hands on with some external productions.
Artygill
16-09-2016
Originally Posted by scoobiesnacks:
“It might anywhere between 0-70% of the format is coming from decisions made by the BBC. Only Love Productions and the BBC actually know. The BBC is notoriously hands on with some external productions.”

Thank you. Food for thought there.
mseven1
17-09-2016
Originally Posted by rammie96:
“Would never work on Netflix. Sky would be the best chance of it remaining totally unchanged (i.e. Ad free) but they probably couldn't deliver the audience for the "brand".

It sounds like Love want to really milk the "brand" so I expect it to burn out brightly but quickly over on C4.”

Why would they do it ad free? Programmes aren't free to make, they cost millions of pounds to make, it's on of the reasons why the BBC lost Bake Off.
ftv
17-09-2016
Originally Posted by mseven1:
“Why would they do it ad free? Programmes aren't free to make, they cost millions of pounds to make, it's on of the reasons why the BBC lost Bake Off.”

Talking of costs each episode of Bakeoff will cost C4 about £800,000. How on earth can this be so - a bunch of people in a tent baking cakes, sounds like a rip-off.
mossy2103
17-09-2016
Originally Posted by scoobiesnacks:
“It might anywhere between 0-70% of the format is coming from decisions made by the BBC. Only Love Productions and the BBC actually know. The BBC is notoriously hands on with some external productions.”

Whilst it does not answer the question, S1 was rather different from S2 in that it was not from a static marquee - each week it was from a different place in the UK, tied in with that week's theme. with just 10 bakers over 6 rounds. S2 was also expanded to 12 bakers over 8 rounds, and the award of Star Baker was added.

So obviously a fair bit of fine-tuning to the original format.
mikw
17-09-2016
Originally Posted by Jellied Eel:
“Yup. But my comments were addressed at some of the pro-Beebies who assumed TG would be just fine without Clarkson & Co. And now suggesting BO will fail miserably on C4 if the 'stars' don't go with it.. But there's hardly a shortage of celeb chefs to judge, or people to present. Hell, they may be able to get Greg Wallace, if he can squeeze his buns into the schedule..”

Who ever said it would be "just fine"??!!

Don't remember that.
A.D.P
17-09-2016
Originally Posted by ftv:
“Talking of costs each episode of Bakeoff will cost C4 about £800,000. How on earth can this be so - a bunch of people in a tent baking cakes, sounds like a rip-off.”

Jay Hunts days in her role, are now numbered.
ftv
17-09-2016
https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbi...tish-bake-off/
Straker
17-09-2016
Originally Posted by A.D.P:
“Jay Hunts days in her role, are now numbered.”

She needs Paul and Mary otherwise she's under serious threat. Nadiya's thrown her headscarf into the ring so maybe there's a pairing there to be made with Paul but I daresay his ego would bristle at the thought of being paired with a home-baker who was "made" by the show only last year.

C4's mooted replacements for M&S are dire but I daresay they will look past the inability to clone Mel and Sue if Hunt can put in place two judges who have the heft and audience appeal of Paul and Mary.

It's a hell of a price they've paid for, essentially, a bag of broken biscuits.
lundavra
17-09-2016
Originally Posted by Straker:
“She needs Paul and Mary otherwise she's under serious threat. Nadiya's thrown her headscarf into the ring so maybe there's a pairing there to be made with Paul but I daresay his ego would bristle at the thought of being paired with a home-baker who was "made" by the show only last year.

C4's mooted replacements for M&S are dire but I daresay they will look past the inability to clone Mel and Sue if Hunt can put in place two judges who have the heft and audience appeal of Paul and Mary.

It's a hell of a price they've paid for, essentially, a bag of broken biscuits.”

I would thought that it would be a mistake for Nadiya to get involved with the Channel 4 programme. She has become a well respected TV performer since winning Bake Off but her reputation would be damaged by being associated with it, especially if it is a failure. The PR people will spin it to claim that she stepped in to help rescue the programme but she will be seen by most as just after the big pay packet.
Straker
17-09-2016
I agree. Was surprised to see her put her name forward.
Steve9214
17-09-2016
Originally Posted by Straker:
“I agree. Was surprised to see her put her name forward.”

That is because Nadiya is inexperienced in the Media and probably gave an honest answer to what she thought was an "honest" question.

When asked : "Would you like to be like Mary Berry one day"
any answer she gives becomes: "I want replace Mary as judge in the next series of Bake Off"
DVDfever
17-09-2016
Originally Posted by ftv:
“https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbi...tish-bake-off/”

The other day, Mel & Sue said they'd leave. Then later, Paul says he'll stay, while Mary says she'll leave (but then she's 503 years old).

And more hype today.

The presenters will all stay the same, as I said earlier re: Mel & Sue. The only way they'd not come to C4, is if they weren't asked.

Anyone who believes the "We're not going onto C4 hype" really should get into the kitchen cupboard because you're all a bunch of mugs!
A.D.P
17-09-2016
Another independent company has wade into the discussion and said Love Productions has behaved due gracefully....

Poldark's producer is not happy about "disgraceful" Great British Bake Off move
​"The BBC can have Poldark as long as they want.

http://www.digitalspy.com/tv/great-b...ove-channel-4/

Everyone and their mother in TV land is throwing their two cents into the Great British Bake Off drama, and now the producer of Poldark and Victoria has weighed in, too.

Damien Timmer of Mammoth Screen has hit out at Love Productions for not renewing with the BBC and signing on with Channel 4 to the tune of £25 million a series.

Speaking to The Daily Telegraph, Timmer said: "I think Love Productions' behaviour has been disgraceful. Treating the BBC with such little respect, I think it's shameful. I'm aghast that a production company would behave like that."
Mark.
17-09-2016
Originally Posted by DVDfever:
“The other day, Mel & Sue said they'd leave. Then later, Paul says he'll stay, while Mary says she'll leave (but then she's 503 years old).

And more hype today.

The presenters will all stay the same, as I said earlier re: Mel & Sue. The only way they'd not come to C4, is if they weren't asked.

Anyone who believes the "We're not going onto C4 hype" really should get into the kitchen cupboard because you're all a bunch of mugs!”

You really need to tone down the attitude. Since your first post in this thread you've been nothing but insulting.

You have your opinion. That's fine. But everyone else is entitled to theirs, especially when it's based on what Mel & Sue themselves have said.
rammie96
17-09-2016
Originally Posted by mseven1:
“Why would they do it ad free? Programmes aren't free to make, they cost millions of pounds to make, it's on of the reasons why the BBC lost Bake Off.”

Because the vast bulk of Sky's income comes from subs rather than advertising so they could have used it as a vehicle to drive that.

You only need to look at how Sky are aggressively pushing on demand viewing (which has barely any adverts at all) to see how little they really need to rely on adverts from traditional linear broadcasting.
human nature
17-09-2016
Originally Posted by DVDfever:
“The other day, Mel & Sue said they'd leave. Then later, Paul says he'll stay, while Mary says she'll leave (but then she's 503 years old).

And more hype today.

The presenters will all stay the same, as I said earlier re: Mel & Sue. The only way they'd not come to C4, is if they weren't asked.

Anyone who believes the "We're not going onto C4 hype" really should get into the kitchen cupboard because you're all a bunch of mugs!”

Give it up, DVDfever. You don't know what's going to happen any more than anyone else does. At best you have a theory - which most people disagree with.

It does seem rather unlikely that Mel & Sue will return to the programme after their heavily publicised resignation. If they did, they'd end up looking really greedy (which is not an attractive look). They're not that stupid.
Antbox
17-09-2016
Originally Posted by A.D.P:
“Jay Hunts days in her role, are now numbered.”

Why, for scooping a show with the full knowledge, permission, and sign-off from the C4 board? Not a chance.

They will have known full well that they didn't have the talent (and will already have taken soundings from existing and past presenters and judges - it's already known that informal approaches had been made "on the grapevine") and they will have signed the deal in full knowledge that they face the opportunity of having to make it work with a new cast. No problem.
snafu65
17-09-2016
Originally Posted by rammie96:
“Because the vast bulk of Sky's income comes from subs rather than advertising so they could have used it as a vehicle to drive that.

You only need to look at how Sky are aggressively pushing on demand viewing (which has barely any adverts at all) to see how little they really need to rely on adverts from traditional linear broadcasting.”

How come some of the big shows on Sky 1 or Sky Atlantic aren't ad free then? If it was on Sky 1 there's zero chance it would've been ad free. You mentioned Netflix in an earlier post, I agree Bake Off wouldn't really suit Netflix but it would definitely have been ad free on there.
sat-ire
17-09-2016
Originally Posted by snafu65:
“How come some of the big shows on Sky 1 or Sky Atlantic aren't ad free then? If it was on Sky 1 there's zero chance it would've been ad free. You mentioned Netflix in an earlier post, I agree Bake Off wouldn't really suit Netflix but it would definitely have been ad free on there.”

Precisely.

It's pure fantasy to think Sky might run a show ad-free just because we are paying for the privilege of watching..

As the best example: most shows on Sky Atlantic are HBO productions, they have a cinematic feel and are designed to run without commercial interruption.

Other European providers respect this, including - interestingly - Sky Atlantic Deutschland and Sky Atlantic Italia!
ftv
17-09-2016
Originally Posted by A.D.P:
“Another independent company has wade into the discussion and said Love Productions has behaved due gracefully....

Poldark's producer is not happy about "disgraceful" Great British Bake Off move
​"The BBC can have Poldark as long as they want.

http://www.digitalspy.com/tv/great-b...ove-channel-4/

Everyone and their mother in TV land is throwing their two cents into the Great British Bake Off drama, and now the producer of Poldark and Victoria has weighed in, too.

Damien Timmer of Mammoth Screen has hit out at Love Productions for not renewing with the BBC and signing on with Channel 4 to the tune of £25 million a series.

Speaking to The Daily Telegraph, Timmer said: "I think Love Productions' behaviour has been disgraceful. Treating the BBC with such little respect, I think it's shameful. I'm aghast that a production company would behave like that."”

As the BBC bought the rights for the original Poldark series in 1975 I suspect they still hold the rights and not the production company so it would stay with the BBC.But as I have noted before, independents have every right to be worried by Love Productions behaviour.
A.D.P
17-09-2016
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/tv/2016/0...-wont-be-pret/


"Hunt cut her teeth at BBC News, but when the news broke about Mel and Sue leaving Bake Off, a BBC journalist texted me: “Nothing short of unbridled joy among BBC News staff, that their former colleague Jay Hunt has f***ed something up quite so drastically.”

Hunt, of course, was very publicly dragged through an ageism and sexism tribunal after the dismissal of Countryfile presenter Miriam O’Reilly on her watch as BBC One controller.

However, this deal could now easily come back to damage Hunt – as well as her Channel 4 boss David Abraham, the broadcaster’s board, and even its prospects of staying in public hands.

“I’d like to understand from Channel 4 how they can justify spending £25 million (a year) on a show that’s already very successful somewhere else, when their statutory remit is to be different and innovative,” says Lord Michael Grade, himself a former chief executive of Channel 4."
sat-ire
17-09-2016
Originally Posted by A.D.P:
“http://www.telegraph.co.uk/tv/2016/0...-wont-be-pret/


"Hunt cut her teeth at BBC News, but when the news broke about Mel and Sue leaving Bake Off, a BBC journalist texted me: “Nothing short of unbridled joy among BBC News staff, that their former colleague Jay Hunt has f***ed something up quite so drastically.”

Hunt, of course, was very publicly dragged through an ageism and sexism tribunal after the dismissal of Countryfile presenter Miriam O’Reilly on her watch as BBC One controller.

However, this deal could now easily come back to damage Hunt – as well as her Channel 4 boss David Abraham, the broadcaster’s board, and even its prospects of staying in public hands.

“I’d like to understand from Channel 4 how they can justify spending £25 million (a year) on a show that’s already very successful somewhere else, when their statutory remit is to be different and innovative,” says Lord Michael Grade, himself a former chief executive of Channel 4."”

Change your username to Dave for this thread and Dave Ja Vu for the other one; the amount of repeats you produce are incredible.
ukcarter
17-09-2016
Originally Posted by sat-ire:
“Change your username to Dave for this thread and Dave Ja Vu for the other one; the amount of repeats you produce are incredible.”

Perhaps the solution would be for the moderators to merge all of the "Bake Off to C4" threads into one?
<<
<
27 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