And has elaborate staging, lighting & projection, along with live band and guest singers

By the above rationale then, the BBC spending £15m a year on Bake Off would have been poor value for the licence fee payer and it is best for it to have left the broadcaster.

Aye I can understand how/why Strictly can cost a lot more than Bake off, I was trying to point out that there is no way that the BBC could really justify paying so much more for Bake Off than Strictly given the relative audiences, costs and air time.

Bake Off is at it's heart a far simpler and smaller production so assuming similar audience levels and air time should cost a lot less.

...and that attitude is precisely why Love have been lambasted since this whole sorry saga started. While the going was good, they were happy to take licence fee money and the support the BBC gave them. Then when they thought they could, they sold out. They put 'self' and 'profit' ahead of their duty and loyalty to the public. This is unforgivable. This makes Love unsuitable to receive any public money going forward.

They weren't interested in securing a deal with the Beeb. This is the truth of the matter. They were engaged in a money grab. They are dreadful people who have no values whatsoever.

It won't for all the many reasons highlighted within this thread. Love's greed has killed the most popular show on the box. Incompetence doesn't even come close.

Nice spin. Now some to balance:

But the BBC did go as high as it felt was justifiable, perhaps the Strictly costs reflect the idea that Strictly is done rather efficiently (it being a BBC Studios production of course)

Ha ha - nice spin by retort.

Thank you.

Agree.

Changed your tune then,

Agree.

Agree.

Agree, thry should be called, Chuggers or Dick Turpin, or even Donald Trump.

Agree.

Agree, they were in a difficult position GBBO is very popular £15 million would hurt, but would be just about justified, and if they didn't try the public would not have been on the BBC side. But the Love execs were stringing them along, we know they were in contact with ITV who said no, ( wisely), and Love were speaking to C4 who were inept, incompetent, and didn't perform any due diligence and didn't consider the Reputational damage to C4s future.

It's the same with the Mail, you typically get the Left posting that you cannot believe anything in the Mail even though their own House Journal, Daily Mirror, has a far worse reputation. I sometimes look up the stories and quite often the Mail has just picked them up from local newspaper as well as the stories being in lots of other national ones.

Not at all. How have you derived that?

Yes, very true, I " in the past " was a former DM reader but it became too biased, I couldn't trust it anymore, I purchased it for its news, moneymail, was good, but the current management killed it and it , doesn't gave news, just the owners opinions, I will not buy opinions.

Do you remember the Queen song.

Bohemian rhapsody


You keep posting the BBC overpaid, underpaid, should keep it, shouldn't keep it.

And say why are people posting on this thread and why is it so important to posters, but post the alternative to anything?

Say what now?

I don't understand a word of the above

What do you mean it wasn't likely to have continued, do you mean in general ? because that's wrong as the BBC wanted to keep it on air and had no plans to drop it at all. if you mean due to the money then of course not as the BBC would not pay a 400% increase.

I meant what I typed. The show was not likely to have continued with the BBC.

If you read the posts in context, mine was in response to this consternation that Channel 4 have somehow "stolen" the programme. They haven't, because you can only steal (or poach) that what belongs to somebody else. Love had been in talks with the BBC for a year, and they were not fruitful with a satisfactory renewal deal, so the programme was going to move anyway most likely.

Yes, it was Love Productions that destroyed their own programme - and their reputation too - in their greedy desire for a ridiculous 400% pay increase! And for buying a dud Channel 4 now has a lot of damage limitation to sort out as well.

The only reason it would have been unlikely to carry on is because of Lives ourageous overpricing of their product. A product is only worth what someone is willing to pay. If Channel 4 had looked into the deal for more than 5 minutes, they would have realised it was way overpriced, and Love would have had to come back with a more sensible offer. As it was, they chances it and Ch4 paid it, without the presenters and apparently without the international licencing rights. It's not worth £75 m.

Yes, BBC Worldwide have the international rights until 2028.


http://m.broadcastnow.co.uk/5109408.article

£25 Million LOL......Kind of funny when you consider last weeks show about Batter and basic looking pancakes had the Budget Busting ingredients - Flour, Milk and Egg !!!!

£15m is probably way, way above what it is worth and yet everybody, to a man, seems to think that the BBC should have paid this with our licence fee. In fact, everybody would have been pleased if they had.

According to the Sunday Times the BBC is planning a new baking show with Mary, Sue and Mel which will get on the air long before C4 can air their version of GBBO in 2018.They also say ITV did not bid because Love Productions could not deliver the four principals, a fact C4 seems to have overlooked.

So you'd be happy if you owned a business and those who you appointed to run that business for you suddenly went against what you'd appointed them to do and spent far more on a project they shouldn't have been concerned with in the first place, than it was worth? Stupid if you would.

So why is it stupid for the government, who own Channel 4, to want answers on what Channel 4 has done? I'd say sensible.

Nobody is able to say definitively what the show is worth. The BBC thought £6m, then £15m. Love Productions and Channel 4 think £25m. Whose valuation is the right one? Only time will tell.

Do you think the BBC should have paid £15m a year for a baking show in a tent? If so what are you basing your value on?