• 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
<<
<
34 of 89
>>
>
skp20040
19-09-2016
Originally Posted by Antbox:
“Indeed. Just as the BBC's contract with Love for GBBO had expired, and the BBC would not agree reasonable terms for a renewal. The BBC were failing to provide the investment in the show that is necessary for such a massively popular show to have the production resources it needs. Despite a full year of negotiations, the BBC would not budge from their massively misguided position that GBBO was a "factual" show and that - being factual - it would never be given as high a budget as the BBC gives to entertainment shows. Something which is in itself quite disgraceful and highlights how the supposed Public Service ethos of the BBC has been all but abandoned in favour of unchallenging, easy ratings-grabbing nonsense.

This is the real reason why those with vested interests are trying so hard to spin this discussion as being about 'loyalty' and 'greed' - to cover up the BBC's entirely broken system of management and its callous disregard of the value of, and failure to invest in, factual programming - the most important genre of programming and one which should be absolutely core to the BBC's values.

Remember, very little of that production budget is profit. If the BBC internally lobbied for a £10m a year increase in the money allocated to EastEnders, that money doesn't go in the producers' pockets - it gets spent on the shows and seen on the screen. The same applies to GBBO. To pretend that it's about "greed" is wilfully dishonest, and no less than would be expected of the posters on here who think the BBC can do no wrong. (It does a lot of good, true, but it has some serious problems as well.)


It's a long-held view that the quality of the show "on the screen" is directly proportional to how much money is spent on it. Love Productions may well have thought that the BBC was limiting their show's success by refusing to invest adequately in it. To say nothing of the staff and talent who worked on the show. I would expect that Love probably had a real job on their hands having to explain to everyone who gave their all to the show that they'd continue to be paid a "tiny 2 million BBC2 show" fee for their work on the biggest show on BBC1 and British Television as a whole. There comes a point when you realise you're being taken for a ride.

Why was Mel (or was it Sue) actually already thinking about leaving the series anyway, before this all blew up? Because of long hours and a punishing production schedule - exactly what happens when production budgets are tight and the channel fails to invest in a show, and its staff.

So Kudos to Love for taking the risk and doing the right thing - no matter how much it may upset Ash personally. ”

Can you explain what exactly has happened that Love needed to go from £5 mill (which is what the BBC were paying) to £25 mill per season in order to keep staff and promote the show ? Were they intending to film all year round so the staff had less hours to work, were Mel and Sue going to be carried around by A list celebs decked out in diamonds ?

The BBC offered them a 200% increase to £15mill so please explain how that was paltry and not enough to do the show properly ? and have we heard how all the staff are getting lots more money due to the £25 mill C4 will pay per year ? seeing who owns the majority of Love I doubt it somehow.

As for punishing schedule, two 12 hour filming shifts is one episode and 10 weeks is a series. How many normal people do 12 hour shifts as the norm and are they demanding 400% pay increases? Where does it state either one of them were considering quitting ? I mean if that were the case surely they would have used that to demand more money and less hours with C4 rather than both stating they wanted it to remain on the BBC
mossy2103
19-09-2016
Originally Posted by eggchen:
“It doesn't imply that at all, so I'm not sure where you have derived that thought from. I was simply pointing out that the BBC have done very well out of 2014, 2015 and 2016's run of Bake Off, because they paid relatively little for what then became the UK's most watched programme. They should have perhaps factored that thought in and paid Love's requested fee for the rights to screen in 2017, 2018 and 2019.”

My mistake then. But the BBC did factor it in by more than doubling their offer, taking it to a value that they felt was reasonable and affordable

Quote:
“£25m a year for the UK's most watched TV show is a steal.”

I wouldn't class it as a steal, especially when actual programming costs are factored in (60 mins of top-quality drama costs around £1 million for example).

As stated previously by others (I do begin to wonder why things have to be repeated time & time again) Bake Off will cost comparatively little to make, production costs will not have doubled over the life of the previous contract (making the BBC's offer reasonable and even generous), there is no justification for a three or four-fold increase in costs other than to line the pockets of the LP directors.

And to cap it all, yes it might be the nation's most watched programme, but the BBC cannot fully cash in on that popularity, as LP own the rights. LP cash in on the programme sales, the merchandise etc too. They have even cashed in on the success of last year's winner (by producing & selling a programme based around her). their stock had risen, tehy were the production company that owned the goose that laid the golden egg (even though the BBC had tended that goose and had nurtured it in the early days).
sat-ire
19-09-2016
Originally Posted by eggchen:
“You haven't "betrayed" a company you do business with simply by taking your product elsewhere if they can't meet your asking price, don't talk nonsense.

How old are you, because you have a very, very blinkered view of the world.”

It's a parody account

We are all being trolled and it's really tiresome reading the same rubbish day after day.
mossy2103
19-09-2016
Originally Posted by eggchen:
“They don't have to justify where the millions are going. £25m is what they believed the rights were worth, and Channel 4 has paid it..”

And therein lies the issue - the BBC does have to justify where the millions are going, especially in these times when it is under greater scrutiny than ever, and when it is faced with a Government that is less than forthcoming in its support.
mossy2103
19-09-2016
Originally Posted by eggchen:
“They would change their tune if the money was on the table.”

Presumably it was on the table, otherwise commercial broadcasters would not have been offering.
eggchen
19-09-2016
Originally Posted by mossy2103:
“My mistake then. But the BBC did factor it in by more than doubling their offer, taking it to a value that they felt was reasonable and affordable

I wouldn't class it as a steal, especially when actual programming costs are factored in (60 mins of top-quality drama costs around £1 million for example).

As stated previously by others (I do begin to wonder why things have to be repeated time & time again) Bake Off will cost comparatively little to make, production costs will not have doubled over the life of the previous contract (making the BBC's offer reasonable and even generous), there is no justification for a three or four-fold increase in costs other than to line the pockets of the LP directors.

And to cap it all, yes it might be the nation's most watched programme, but the BBC cannot cash in on that popularity, as LP own the rights. LP cash in on the programme sales, the merchandise etc. They have even cashed in on the success of last year's winner (by producing & selling a programme based around her). their stock had risen, tehy were the production company that owned the goose that laid the golden egg (even though the BBC had tended that goose and had nurtured it in the early days).”

The value to the BBC of Bake Off being the most watched programme on TV is that it adds to the ongoing justification of the licence fee.

"Why should we pay you our licence fee, it's a rip off!"
"Well we had the UK's most watched show on our BBC1 channel last year you know"

Again, manufacturers and suppliers of products don't justify their individual production costs to the consumer or the trade when they set their selling price. The price is what it is, and the market will dictate whether that value is reasonable based on what the projected returns will be.

Bake Off could have been the top show for the next three years, so at £25m a year, that would have been pretty reasonable, and I think that the BBC are now starting to look at why they didn't work harder to find the money to pay it.
skp20040
19-09-2016
Originally Posted by eggchen:
“Why should they "respect" the BBC? They are a commercial production company whose remit is to make products that make money. You have to wake up and realise that the world doesn't revolve around the BBC, and commercial interests won't always align with your bizarre subservience to our public service broadcaster.

They don't have to justify where the millions are going. £25m is what they believed the rights were worth, and Channel 4 has paid it. Whether that proves to be a mistake remains to be seen .”

Love do not of course have to justify why they asked for £25mill, though they may do if it goes pearshaped and greed screws what was a popular format and money maker for them

The BBC does have to justify such expense and you can guarantee these forums would have been awash with accusations of waste if they had paid £25m along with the press and MP's ( though Murdoch and some MP's were probably hoping they would pay so the media and MP's could then lambast the BBC for wasting money)

And unless C4 make a killing from this programme they as a PSB and a public corporation of the Department for Culture, Media & Sport will have to justify why they paid that amount.
mossy2103
19-09-2016
Originally Posted by eggchen:
“The value to the BBC of Bake Off being the most watched programme on TV is that it adds to the ongoing justification of the licence fee.”

Not so going by comments previously made by the erstwhile Culture Secretary (Whittingdale) and various Tory MPs. Not so going by comments made around the time of the Charter Review White Paper this Summer. Not so going by comments elsewhere in the media.



Quote:
“Bake Off could have been the top show for the next three years, so at £25m a year, that would have been pretty reasonable, and I think that the BBC are now starting to look at why they didn't work harder to find the money to pay it.”

Obviously the BBC felt that they could not justify such a figure. And I fully support that view (even though I am an avid viewer of Bake Off and will be losing out with what I see as an inferior offering on C4).
And just in case anyone throws the time-honoured "but you're a die-hard BBC supporter" argument at me, I felt that the BBC should have kept hold of Clarkson and suspended & fined him so that the viewers were not deprived of a successful programme in CHM Top Gear. But that is not a topic for this thread.
Mark.
19-09-2016
Originally Posted by Ash_M1:
“...because they are the broadcaster which gave them the break. Without the BBC, there would have been no Bake Off and no £25 million for Love now. Love have forgotten their roots, have ignored the viewers, betrayed the BBC and sold out.”

I suppose you could argue that the BBC should have done more to protect themselves in those early days, e.g. by taking a share in the format. I'm pretty sure that the already desperate Love Productions would have bitten their hand off.
mossy2103
19-09-2016
Originally Posted by Mark.:
“I suppose you could argue that the BBC should have done more to protect themselves in those early days, e.g. by taking a share in the format. I'm pretty sure that the already desperate Love Productions would have bitten their hand off.”

I suspect that these are the sort of things that the BBC enquiry will be looking at, rather than whether they should (could?) have stumped up the extra £10 million from some budget or other (and thereby causing another programme genre to have to be cut back by £10 million).

And yes, perhaps the BBC need to ensure that future contracts are better-worded and leave less room for such things to happen.
A.D.P
19-09-2016
This extracts from an article from the Daily Mirror covers the points still being discussed.

Why on earth would Love Productions be willing to FRITTER away such a large audience and all hope of any further commissions from the BBC?

Just watch those ratings go flat as a PANCAKE when the show moves to C4.

As for C4 , it appears to have gone from Born Risky to Born Suicidal.

Well, fancy blowing £75million with**out knowing whether you were getting all the talent for your money – or any of the talent for that matter.

It’s madness. Like buying a used car unseen on the internet then wondering why it has just turned up with no wheels – and a nasty surprise in the boot.

Ultimately, it’s the viewers who will lose out. I know this sounds daft but lots of people only watch the BBC to avoid adverts. So I won’t be surprised if they stubbornly refuse to make the switch to C4.

Also, you only have to look at Top Gear to see how badly the public reacts to enforced change.

And what will they get if they do switch? No Mel and Sue, for starters. Say what you like about their work away from Bake Off, on this show they are irreplaceable.

If Mary Berry and her beardy gimp Paul Hollywood also decide to do the decent thing, no amount of desperate public statements from C4 boss Jay Hunt will be able to delay the inevitable: Bake Off will be pulled off before the second Bread Week.

Still, at least that would earn Ms Hunt a pretty appropriate nickname to pop on her CV. The Show Stopper.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-review...illion-8865641

And Emmy award winner Steven Moffat blasts Love Productions.

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-en...-a7316161.html

The Sherlock and Doctor Who showrunner told Press Association he had offers for the Benedict Cumberbatch-starring show from other broadcasters but did not accept them.

"We have had offers, that's not what it's about. It should never be about that,” he said. “I think the BBC was quite right not to reward greed. It's wrong.”

Speaking at the Emmys, Steven Moffat praised the BBC for not paying the substantial sums of money the production company demanded for the show.
While accepting his award for Sherlock special The Abominable Bride, Moffat referred to the controversy surround The Great British Bake Off, saying: "Thank you to the BBC who we love above all bakery. British people will get that.”
lundavra
19-09-2016
Originally Posted by eggchen:
“£25m a year for the UK's most watched TV show is a steal.”

Only £25 million because the BBC dropped out of the bidding, if the BBC had matched it or increased then it would have gone higher.
dodrade
19-09-2016
Are there any previous examples of a production company taking a show to another channel when the previous host still wished to keep it? (Not counting US imports obviously).
lundavra
19-09-2016
Originally Posted by eggchen:
“Why should they "respect" the BBC? They are a commercial production company whose remit is to make products that make money. You have to wake up and realise that the world doesn't revolve around the BBC, and commercial interests won't always align with your bizarre subservience to our public service broadcaster.

They don't have to justify where the millions are going. £25m is what they believed the rights were worth, and Channel 4 has paid it. Whether that proves to be a mistake remains to be seen.”

Because if they come up with another idea then the BBC and other broadcasters without a bottomles purse like Channel 4, will be very wary of getting involved with them because they could invest a lot of effort in getting a series popular then Love would want to sell to someone else for a lot more.
lundavra
19-09-2016
Originally Posted by Ash_M1:
“They betrayed the BBC, they betrayed the presenting team and they betrayed the loyal viewers. Love have shown the ugly side of the private sector this week. Not pretty. It leaves a bad taste in the mouth.”

Is it true that Sir Philip Green wants to invest in Love Productions because he thinks they have similar morals to himself?
Night Crawler
19-09-2016
Originally Posted by mossy2103:
“My mistake then. But the BBC did factor it in by more than doubling their offer, taking it to a value that they felt was reasonable and affordable

I wouldn't class it as a steal, especially when actual programming costs are factored in (60 mins of top-quality drama costs around £1 million for example).

As stated previously by others (I do begin to wonder why things have to be repeated time & time again) Bake Off will cost comparatively little to make, production costs will not have doubled over the life of the previous contract (making the BBC's offer reasonable and even generous), there is no justification for a three or four-fold increase in costs other than to line the pockets of the LP directors.

And to cap it all, yes it might be the nation's most watched programme, but the BBC cannot fully cash in on that popularity, as LP own the rights. LP cash in on the programme sales, the merchandise etc too. They have even cashed in on the success of last year's winner (by producing & selling a programme based around her). their stock had risen, tehy were the production company that owned the goose that laid the golden egg (even though the BBC had tended that goose and had nurtured it in the early days).”

Isn't the £25m for 40hrs of programming a year, 1 series consisting of 12 episodes and a bunch of specials, that's £625,000 an hour, what's the going rate for this type of programming?

How many hours of GBBO do the BBC currently air?
Ash_M1
19-09-2016
Originally Posted by Mark.:
“I suppose you could argue that the BBC should have done more to protect themselves in those early days, e.g. by taking a share in the format. I'm pretty sure that the already desperate Love Productions would have bitten their hand off.”

Absolutely...or held a controlling share (the BBC) in the format. Then if Love wanted to pull out of their 49% stake, another co-producer could have been found. This debacle will not only be a steep learning curve for the broadcasters but the indies too.
Mark.
19-09-2016
Originally Posted by dodrade:
“Are there any previous examples of a production company taking a show to another channel when the previous host still wished to keep it? (Not counting US imports obviously).”

The Voice is another recent example.

Remember, though, there's two types of 3rd party production:

1) Where the broadcaster commissions a production company to produce the broadcaster's own show

2) Where the broadcaster pays the production company for the rights to broadcast a show that company owns the rights to

GBBO and The Voice fall into the latter category;
mossy2103
19-09-2016
Originally Posted by Night Crawler:
“Isn't the £25m for 40hrs of programming a year, 1 series consisting of 12 episodes and a bunch of specials, that's £625,000 an hour, what's the going rate for this type of programming? ”

Mid-cost Entertainment tariffs: 130 - 400k (assuming NOT Saturday evening, and NOT high studio or location fees). "Most Factual Entertainment, Comedy Entertainment, chat shows and clip based programmes fall into this category. Key price drivers are talent costs and archive clearances."

Premium Entertainment tariffs are 400k - 700k - "Premium entertainment e.g. Saturday night entertainment shows on BBC One or one-off specials. Key price drivers will be high studio or location costs and format fees. "

Note also:

"The tariff will set out the range within which the BBC expects individual prices for specific programmes within that genre or category to fall. The price the BBC is prepared to pay for a programme will be determined by reference to a number of factors including the estimated production budget, the expected level of upfront third party investment or other sources of funding, and will be inclusive of any development funding paid by the BBC. "


https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rc...Vpm5tA&cad=rja

I doubt that Bake Off would be seen to qualify in the Premium Entertainment category.

Quote:
“How many hours of GBBO do the BBC currently air?”

Maybe 12-14 hrs for the main programme (assuming a few Masterclasses), 5 hrs for Extra Slice, and maybe an hour for a Christmas Masterclass. then add in any Sport/Comic Relief (4 hours?) and Junior Bake Off (4 hrs max?). So 28 - 30 hrs maybe (at a rough guess).
eggchen
19-09-2016
Originally Posted by mossy2103:
“Mid-cost Entertainment tariffs: 130 - 400k (assuming NOT Saturday evening, and NOT high studio or location fees). "Most Factual Entertainment, Comedy Entertainment, chat shows and clip based programmes fall into this category. Key price drivers are talent costs and archive clearances."

Premium Entertainment tariffs are 400k - 700k - "Premium entertainment e.g. Saturday night entertainment shows on BBC One or one-off specials. Key price drivers will be high studio or location costs and format fees. "

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rc...Vpm5tA&cad=rja

I doubt that Bake Off would be seen to qualify in the Premium Entertainment category.

Maybe 12-14 hrs for the main programme (assuming a few Masterclasses), 5 hrs for Extra Slice, and maybe an hour for a Christmas Masterclass. then add in any Sport/Comic Relief (4 hours?) and Junior Bake Off (4 hrs max?). So 28 - 30 hrs maybe (at a rough guess).”

It is certainly premium entertainment if it is the most watched show in the UK I would argue. No wonder Love wanted the premium rate then.
ianradioian
19-09-2016
Does it really matter to its fans? They'll watch it whatever channel it's on; it's no hardship whether you press button 1 or button 4 on the tvs remote is it? It'll still get millions of viewers, and I'll wager the presenters will be on it, or most of them.
You can't blame the production company for wanting a good sale. The Bbc bought it in; now channel 4 has.
Tuvok
19-09-2016
What a lot of fuss.

"It won't work with ou Mel and Sue" - well the Junior Bake Off and Sport Relief versions don't have them.

Paul an Mary are not on the Junior version.
Straker
19-09-2016
Industry bod in the ratings thread reporting that Paul looks set for C4 and Mary's staying with the Beeb. We shall see....
Straker
19-09-2016
Originally Posted by Tuvok:
“What a lot of fuss.

"It won't work with ou Mel and Sue" - well the Junior Bake Off and Sport Relief versions don't have them.

Paul an Mary are not on the Junior version.”

I've never watched the Junior one for that reason and I find the Sport Relief ones are substandard as the celebs don't really care or take it seriously for the most part so it's all a bit pointless. Like most people I suspect, I watch the main one because the mix of all the ingredients are pitch-perfect.
Tassium
19-09-2016
Originally Posted by ianradioian:
“Does it really matter to its fans? They'll watch it whatever channel it's on; it's no hardship whether you press button 1 or button 4 on the tvs remote is it? It'll still get millions of viewers, and I'll wager the presenters will be on it, or most of them.
You can't blame the production company for wanting a good sale. The Bbc bought it in; now channel 4 has.”

That would only apply if it were a bought in completed programme rather than the format it is.

So if the drama Game of Thrones were to shift from one channel to another it would still be Game of Thrones.

But '...Bake Off' had a huge amount of input from the BBC who basically kept it quaint and uncommercial, partly because it had to.

When formats move channel they change, often drastically.
<<
<
34 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