• 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
<<
<
47 of 89
>>
>
Ash_M1
22-09-2016
Originally Posted by calico_pie:
“You're moving the goalposts though.

If you want to argue that Bake Off won't be as successful on C4 because 3 out of 4 of the main presenters / judges have left, I'd agree completely.

But up until now you have been arguing that it won't be as successful because Paul's show in the US didn't do very well.

The point myself and others have been making is that that is a lousy comparison, for the reasons given.

Put it this way - if the US show had been a massive success, I'd still argue that Bake Off won't be as successful on C4 because 3 out of 4 of the main presenters / judges have left.

Whereas maybe you would argue that Bake Off on C4 is likely to be just as successful on C4 without Mel, Sue and Mary?”

Bake Off will not be a success on 4. Why? It will no longer be Bake Off given the change of presenters, ads/sponsorship etc plus the fact that Channel 4 gets a much smaller audience than the Beeb because 4 is much less popular.
Ash_M1
22-09-2016
Originally Posted by calico_pie:
“The principle is almost identical though, no matter how many pedantic you want to be about it.

I know money isn't everything, but the point is that the whole thing was out of Paul's control. And as I've said I admire the others for taking the stance they have.

I just don't think Paul necessarily deserves such harsh criticism - none of them should be obligated to walk away on a point of principle held by much of the show's audience.”

Paul is/was doing very well on the Beeb...exceptionally well. Something doesn't quite sit right when 'doing exceptionally well' is still not good enough. Know what I mean? Greed is never a good look is it.
planets
22-09-2016
Originally Posted by calico_pie:
“You're moving the goalposts though.

If you want to argue that Bake Off won't be as successful on C4 because 3 out of 4 of the main presenters / judges have left, I'd agree completely.

But up until now you have been arguing that it won't be as successful because Paul's show in the US didn't do very well.

The point myself and others have been making is that that is a lousy comparison, for the reasons given.

Put it this way - if the US show had been a massive success, I'd still argue that Bake Off won't be as successful on C4 because 3 out of 4 of the main presenters / judges have left.

Whereas maybe you would argue that Bake Off on C4 is likely to be just as successful on C4 without Mel, Sue and Mary?”

I'm not moving any goal posts. The subtext of my point to Mark was that Bake Off had a very special chemistry between the four of them that made it successful, i have posted that very point previously. The four of them together were successful, Hollywood alone (doing the only version of Bake Off where he was the only one of the quartet there until Mary took over) was a flop.

I'm not moving any goal posts since my original comment i'm just answering completely random questions people are attaching to my posts. My original post was in response to Mark's thoughts about Hollywood's success. I responded, then, because my point was never answered, more and more deflections were brought into the mix which i responded to.

Underlined bit: You seem to be under the mistaken delusion i think that the channel 4 version will be a success, when i have never stated that in any post. What led you to make that massive and incorrect assumption?
DVDfever
22-09-2016
Originally Posted by human nature:
“Are you having a laugh? Are you genuinely still of the opinion that all four of the presenters are going to move across to Channel 4 and that this whole thing about them staying with the BBC has been a carefully planned publicity stunt?

What will it take for you to realise what's really going on?”

You know it'll happen. That's how the media works.

Anyhoo, Happy Birthday to Sue Perkins! She does it for me, but it will never be
Dennis_May
22-09-2016
Hot off the press..

Digital Spy forum members have been hacking phones for years. That's why they know so much about EVERYTHING
calico_pie
22-09-2016
Originally Posted by Ash_M1:
“Bake Off will not be a success on 4. Why? It will no longer be Bake Off given the change of presenters, ads/sponsorship etc plus the fact that Channel 4 gets a much smaller audience than the Beeb because 4 is much less popular.”

I'm sure it will be a success insomuch as it will be one of C4's bigger shows.
Ash_M1
22-09-2016
Originally Posted by calico_pie:
“I'm sure it will be a success insomuch as it will be one of C4's bigger shows.”

There maybe an initial interest (out of intrigue) but when viewers realise it is no longer Bake Off...

In fact, we don't even need to wait to find out do we. Three of the four 'talent' have quit. Bake Off will officially end during December 2016 on BBC One.
Object Z
22-09-2016
Originally Posted by Ash_M1:
“There maybe an initial interest (out of intrigue) but when viewers realise it is no longer Bake Off...

In fact, we don't even need to wait to find out do we. Three of the four 'talent' have quit. Bake Off will officially end during December 2016 on BBC One.”

Using that logic Top Gear ended when Clarkson and co left. Hmm you could be right.
Richardcoulter
22-09-2016
Originally Posted by Ash_M1:
“Paul is/was doing very well on the Beeb...exceptionally well. Something doesn't quite sit right when 'doing exceptionally well' is still not good enough. Know what I mean? Greed is never a good look is it.”

I agree and think that this will be the result:

Originally Posted by Object Z:
“Using that logic Top Gear ended when Clarkson and co left. Hmm you could be right.”

carl.waring
22-09-2016
Originally Posted by Antbox:
“No, like for like, please. There has to be something on BBC1 which the BBC can look at and say "this is the least popular, least public-service, least good use of our money, and we can instead spend the money on something more valuable, like GBBO."”

Well in any list of the BBC Top 30 shows for any given week, the show at the bottom still gets 3-4m viewers. So no, probably not.

Quote:
“There's no reason why TV channels can't live within their means.”

And the BBC does.

Quote:
“If you're never allowed to cancel or stop making anything "because it could very-well be the favourite of someone" then you will end up spending an infinite amount of money which you do not have. So making choices is not something that anyone should consider surprising or unexpected.”

They have, in the recent past, cancelled quite a few shows that have been popular but just not popular enough. BBC 2's "Cuffs" for one. Its cancellation upset a lot of people including me.
carl.waring
22-09-2016
Originally Posted by ohglobbits:
“Just because it was built up from zero by a the Beeb doesn't make it non-commercial.”

So, as I asked before, at what point does it become commercial and why?

Quote:
“Channel 4 has innovated and launched original formats like Googlebox and Come Dine With Me.”

And GBBO... no ... wait

Quote:
“And to answer your second question, when it became worth 25 million.”

Which it would not have done without the BBC as no other broadcaster wanted it.

Quote:
“The point is that the BBC are very good at developing lucrative formats which is all well and good until the talent or the indie gets greedy. Then the BBC gets shows stolen.”

Exactly. So what's to stop it happening again in the future? Nothing. So why the heck should the BBC invest any money in a format that no-one else wants knowing that if it becomes too popular they will lose it?!

Quote:
“This is natural.”

No. It's nonsense is what it is.
skp20040
22-09-2016
Originally Posted by DVDfever:
“Mary Berry set to sign multi-million pound deal with Channel 4!!!

Watch this space!”

So far the only one you have been right about signing with C4 is Paul , and even a broken clock is right twice a day
daziechain
22-09-2016
Originally Posted by planets:
“Thanks Straker I had never seen anything else of his even as a trailer so didn't know he'd done anything.”

He did a programme about cars ... Aston Martin cars ... called 'Licence to Thrill'. It was on BBC2 last year I think.
ohglobbits
23-09-2016
Originally Posted by carl.waring:
“So, as I asked before, at what point does it become commercial and why?”

Day One if it's a talent show with judges IMO.
bingbong
23-09-2016
Hats off to Holywood!! He and Clare Balding will be the dream team of baking. Ant and Decs reign over commercial TV's light entertainment could be over.
Tassium
23-09-2016
Paul Hollywood is completely charmless, there is no way this show will work for CH4 with him as the star name.
---------
What has occurred to TV that so many senior TV execs have become obsessed with formats? It used to be people who were obsessed over, they would change channels for big money...

I suppose there are so few personalities in TV these days that formats is the only thing left to obsess over. All the interesting people are on Youtube.
mikw
23-09-2016
Originally Posted by Tassium:
“Paul Hollywood is completely charmless, there is no way this show will work for CH4 with him as the star name.
---------
What has occurred to TV that so many senior TV execs have become obsessed with formats? It used to be people who were obsessed over, they would change channels for big money...

I suppose there are so few personalities in TV these days that formats is the only thing left to obsess over. All the interesting people are on Youtube.”

Many women fancy Paul Hollywood. Apart from that element of the audience they might lose the rest.
mossy2103
23-09-2016
Originally Posted by mikw:
“Many women fancy Paul Hollywood. Apart from that element of the audience they might lose the rest.”

And apparently a number of those women turned against him when he chose to have an affair with his US co-presenter. So he has lost some of the shine (even though the BBC chose to stick by him, after Mary B had intervened on his behalf as I recall).
Straker
23-09-2016
Kevin 'O Sullivan on The Wright Stuff inflating Hollywood's salary to £1.5m per year.
ftv
23-09-2016
Originally Posted by Straker:
“Kevin 'O Sullivan on The Wright Stuff inflating Hollywood's salary to £1.5m per year.”

Well Hollywood won't be getting any work from the BBC
mossy2103
23-09-2016
Originally Posted by Straker:
“Kevin 'O Sullivan on The Wright Stuff inflating Hollywood's salary to £1.5m per year.”

The truth is I don't think anyone really knows what he is getting.
planets
23-09-2016
Originally Posted by daziechain:
“He did a programme about cars ... Aston Martin cars ... called 'Licence to Thrill'. It was on BBC2 last year I think.”

Thanks Daziechain.
Licence to Thrill with its massive 0.97 million viewers....

ETA for some reason DS keeps editing the url address to the link for the ratings. However if you are unconvinced by the number i provided....google "ratings for Paul Hollywood's Licence to Thrill" and the 9th link down takes you to www.tvratingsuk.com
mossy2103
23-09-2016
He also did Paul Hollywood's Bread, again on BBC Two:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01rhdgt


And Paul Hollywood's Pies and Puds, this time on BBC one (20 episodes):

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03hcv64

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_H..._Pies_and_Puds
Straker
23-09-2016
He's all about the Bread, man......
planets
23-09-2016
Originally Posted by mossy2103:
“He also did Paul Hollywood's Bread, again on BBC Two:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01rhdgt


And Paul Hollywood's Pies and Puds, this time on BBC one (20 episodes):

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03hcv64

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_H..._Pies_and_Puds”

Thanks: Paul Hollywood's Bread
"Don't forget to mop up those juices...."
<<
<
47 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