DS Forums

 
 

BBC Loses Great British Bakeoff


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 26-09-2016, 07:29
mossy2103
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 68,698
According to the Express, a spokesman for Mary Berry has said that she has not said that she only intended to do one more year.
Sadly, iIt looks like your post has got lost amongst the circular arguments that have been posted over the last two pages.

Here is a report:

Mary Berry has "absolutely no plans to retire", despite reports she only intends to work for another year, her agent has said.

The Great British Bake Off judge announced this week she will leave the show when it moves to Channel 4 from the BBC.

Fiona Lindsay, Berry's agent, said: "It has been reported that Mary only intends to work another year - that's simply wrong, she has lots of exciting projects coming up - including on TV with the BBC - and has absolutely no plans to retire."
http://www.itv.com/news/2016-09-25/m...tish-bake-off/

I do wonder where that original report that she was only going to do one more year came from. The cynic in me suggests that it would have had absolutely nothing to do with the PR teams from either Love Productions or Channel 4 (who have both been trying to claw back some positive PR lately).
mossy2103 is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 26-09-2016, 07:42
niceguy1966
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 12,479
Sadly, iIt looks like your post has got lost amongst the circular arguments that have been posted over the last two pages.

Here is a report:


http://www.itv.com/news/2016-09-25/m...tish-bake-off/

I do wonder where that original report that she was only going to do one more year came from. The cynic in me suggests that it would have had absolutely nothing to do with the PR teams from either Love Productions or Channel 4 (who have both been trying to claw back some positive PR lately).
Their PR teams might as well try to turn back the tide. That this would be a PR disaster was entirety predictable (and avoidable).
niceguy1966 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-09-2016, 08:01
mossy2103
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 68,698
Their PR teams might as well try to turn back the tide. That this would be a PR disaster was entirety predictable (and avoidable).
But would they try to turn the tide by seeding false stories? Surely not.
mossy2103 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-09-2016, 08:29
Janet43
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,129
I'm still waiting for eggchen to say which of the items listed in Channel 4's remit which I posted in post #1290 covers outbidding the BBC who is currently broadcasting a very successful show. But I won't hold my breath.
Janet43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-09-2016, 08:53
lundavra
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 25,460
Sadly, iIt looks like your post has got lost amongst the circular arguments that have been posted over the last two pages.

Here is a report:

http://www.itv.com/news/2016-09-25/m...tish-bake-off/

I do wonder where that original report that she was only going to do one more year came from. The cynic in me suggests that it would have had absolutely nothing to do with the PR teams from either Love Productions or Channel 4 (who have both been trying to claw back some positive PR lately).
I do wonder how active their PR teams have been on here?
lundavra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-09-2016, 08:57
eggchen
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,550
I'm still waiting for eggchen to say which of the items listed in Channel 4's remit which I posted in post #1290 covers outbidding the BBC who is currently broadcasting a very successful show. But I won't hold my breath.
Please, feel free.

A remit is an official assigned activity, a list of tasks that are a statutory requirement, but nothing in that remit precludes Channel 4 from bidding to acquire a commercial product to supplement their other output.
eggchen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-09-2016, 09:24
Glawster2002
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Nailsworth, Gloucestershire
Posts: 10,402
I'm sure she didn't, because the notion of her having to answer to MP's for acquiring a baking show that couldn't agree terms with its original broadcaster so moved to Channel 4 instead is ridiculous in the extreme.
Why is it "ridiculous in the extreme"?

The only reason Love Productions "couldn't agree terms with its original broadcaster" is because the original broadcaster thought the asking price was too much.

Love Productions weren't interested in doing a deal with the BBC because C4 were prepared to meet the asking price, however as C4 is government owned surely it is within their remit, as government money is our money, to ask why C4 paid so much to take a programme from another publicly-owned broadcaster.
Glawster2002 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-09-2016, 09:31
Glawster2002
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Nailsworth, Gloucestershire
Posts: 10,402
Love shouldn't do anything they don't feel is in their interests, that is just silly.
However long term is this really in their interest?

Yes, they have potentially £75m for three series of Bake Off but how damaged is their reputation now and how wary of them will broadcaster be going forward?
Glawster2002 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-09-2016, 09:39
eggchen
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,550
However long term is this really in their interest?

Yes, they have potentially £75m for three series of Bake Off but how damaged is their reputation now and how wary of them will broadcaster be going forward?
If you read the context of that post, it was in response to Ash_M1 who makes the repeat insistence that Love Productions should have taken the BBC offer. Not from a better business point of view as I can gather, but simply because they should have, based on some kind of ethical premise. I responded the way I did because of that. Whether it turns out to be commercially correct for them to move to Channel 4 is anybody's guess. I personally don't see anything wrong with them wanting to take a higher monetary offer for their product, but many do I suppose. I think that is strange but there you go.
eggchen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-09-2016, 10:07
Glawster2002
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Nailsworth, Gloucestershire
Posts: 10,402
If you read the context of that post, it was in response to Ash_M1 who makes the repeat insistence that Love Productions should have taken the BBC offer. Not from a better business point of view as I can gather, but simply because they should have, based on some kind of ethical premise. I responded the way I did because of that. Whether it turns out to be commercially correct for them to move to Channel 4 is anybody's guess. I personally don't see anything wrong with them wanting to take a higher monetary offer for their product, but many do I suppose. I think that is strange but there you go.
Because going for the highest price may not be in the best long-term interests of your business, as I said above.

Is a short term gain of £75m over three years better value than the long-term damage to their reputation? Whichever way you look at it, this has been a PR disaster for both Love Productions and C4.

C4 will recover from it. It may well mean Jay Hunt losing her job and the privatisation of the channel, but they will recover. Love Productions, on the other hand, will see their stock within the industry plummet, and healing a damaged reputation in any industry is almost impossible.
Glawster2002 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-09-2016, 10:09
Janet43
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,129
If you read the context of that post, it was in response to Ash_M1 who makes the repeat insistence that Love Productions should have taken the BBC offer. Not from a better business point of view as I can gather, but simply because they should have, based on some kind of ethical premise. I responded the way I did because of that. Whether it turns out to be commercially correct for them to move to Channel 4 is anybody's guess. I personally don't see anything wrong with them wanting to take a higher monetary offer for their product, but many do I suppose. I think that is strange but there you go.
You insist on ignoring the fact that, without the BBC, they would have no show to sell because NO-ONE ELSE WOULD TAKE A CHANCE ON IT!
Janet43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-09-2016, 10:12
Janet43
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,129
Please, feel free.

A remit is an official assigned activity, a list of tasks that are a statutory requirement, but nothing in that remit precludes Channel 4 from bidding to acquire a commercial product to supplement their other output.
According to you. We'll see what the Select Committee, who know more about what their remit is than you or I, say.
Janet43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-09-2016, 10:24
eggchen
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,550
According to you. We'll see what the Select Committee, who know more about what their remit is than you or I, say.
You posted up the remit in a bid to support your own argument, did you see anything in there that would preclude them from bidding for the rights to air The Great British Bake Off?
eggchen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-09-2016, 10:25
eggchen
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,550
You insist on ignoring the fact that, without the BBC, they would have no show to sell because NO-ONE ELSE WOULD TAKE A CHANCE ON IT!
And now they do, and the BBC have lucked out. Big deal.
eggchen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-09-2016, 10:27
Janet43
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,129
You posted up the remit in a bid to support your own argument, did you see anything in there that would preclude them from bidding for the rights to air The Great British Bake Off?
Did you see anything that stated they could? I didn't.
Janet43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-09-2016, 10:28
eggchen
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,550
Because going for the highest price may not be in the best long-term interests of your business, as I said above.

Is a short term gain of £75m over three years better value than the long-term damage to their reputation? Whichever way you look at it, this has been a PR disaster for both Love Productions and C4.

C4 will recover from it. It may well mean Jay Hunt losing her job and the privatisation of the channel, but they will recover. Love Productions, on the other hand, will see their stock within the industry plummet, and healing a damaged reputation in any industry is almost impossible.
I don't think there is any kind of moral, ethical, commercial or otherwise issue surrounding the principle of selling your product to the party who will pay the most for it. We all do it, from selling our lots on ebay to the winning bidder, to selling our cars and houses to the buyers who offer the most for them.

That Love Productions now face this barrage of criticism and vitriol for doing exactly that seems strange to me.
eggchen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-09-2016, 10:30
Janet43
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,129
And now they do, and the BBC have lucked out. Big deal.
There's no point in arguing or even discussing with someone who has no ethical standards. So I won't any more.
Janet43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-09-2016, 10:33
eggchen
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,550
Did you see anything that stated they could? I didn't.
Why do they need instruction to do so as an extraneous activity to their remit of statutory obligations as long as they are meeting them?
eggchen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-09-2016, 10:38
eggchen
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,550
There's no point in arguing or even discussing with someone who has no ethical standards. So I won't any more.
Fair enough. Your ethical standards are far detached from the real world however, so it's no wonder there's no mutual understanding.
eggchen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-09-2016, 10:49
Glawster2002
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Nailsworth, Gloucestershire
Posts: 10,402
I don't think there is any kind of moral, ethical, commercial or otherwise issue surrounding the principle of selling your product to the party who will pay the most for it. We all do it, from selling our lots on ebay to the winning bidder, to selling our cars and houses to the buyers who offer the most for them.

That Love Productions now face this barrage of criticism and vitriol for doing exactly that seems strange to me.
Which to me shows you understand little about business and reputation.

Trust and reputation is everything in business. So if a potential new business partner doesn't feel they can trust you because of your damaged reputation they are less likely to work with you. Love Productions, through their actions, have created that mistrust about themselves.

The BBC, for example, will be very reluctant to ever work with them again, ITV and the other commercial channels will have seen what they have done and wonder if they would do the same to them if they work with them.

Even when it comes to selling a house you're not bound to sell to the person who makes the highest offer. I know of plenty of people who have accepted a lower offer because they thought the people who offered the lower price were more suitable purchasers.
Glawster2002 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-09-2016, 10:52
Glawster2002
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Nailsworth, Gloucestershire
Posts: 10,402
Fair enough. Your ethical standards are far detached from the real world however, so it's no wonder there's no mutual understanding.
I think you will find that in the real world long-term, successful, businesses don't operate the way Love Productions have done.
Glawster2002 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-09-2016, 10:54
eggchen
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,550
Which to me shows you understand little about business and reputation.

Trust and reputation is everything in business. So if a potential new business partner doesn't feel they can trust you because of your damaged reputation they are less likely to work with you in the future. Love Productions, through their actions, have created that mistrust about themselves.

The BBC, for example, will be very reluctant to ever work with them again, ITV and the other commercial channels will have seen what they have done and wonder if they would do the same to them if they work with them.

Even when it comes to selling a house you're not bound to sell to the person who makes the highest offer. I know of plenty of people who have accepted a lower offer because they thought the people who offered the lower price were more suitable purchasers.
You're missing the point. I understand perfectly well about business and reputation, but what I am saying is that I don't think this criticism of Love Productions for taking their program to C4 is wholly warranted.

The BBC's relationship with Love wasn't great to begin with if reports are to be believed, and this would have probably formed part of their decision to move. So where you have some previous bad blood and a better offer, I see it as understandable that they parted ways.
eggchen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-09-2016, 10:55
eggchen
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,550
I think you will find that in the real world long-term, successful, businesses don't operate the way Love Productions have done.
Remains to be seen whether it was a bad decision for them. Too early to tell.
eggchen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-09-2016, 11:14
Glawster2002
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Nailsworth, Gloucestershire
Posts: 10,402
You're missing the point. I understand perfectly well about business and reputation, but what I am saying is that I don't think this criticism of Love Productions for taking their program to C4 is wholly warranted.

The BBC's relationship with Love wasn't great to begin with if reports are to be believed, and this would have probably formed part of their decision to move. So where you have some previous bad blood and a better offer, I see it as understandable that they parted ways.
Those reports though seem to be coming from Love Productions, probably to 'justify' their decision.

Business is all about compromise and if, as it seems, Love Productions weren't prepared to budge on £25m a year why would the BBC continue to negotiate? £25m was far more then they were prepared to offer. From their perspective Love Productions intransigence would render any future discussions a waste of time and so they walked away.

If neither side are prepared to compromise there are no grounds for negotiations.
Glawster2002 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-09-2016, 11:17
Glawster2002
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Nailsworth, Gloucestershire
Posts: 10,402
Remains to be seen whether it was a bad decision for them. Too early to tell.
If Sky see the damage to Love Productions reputation as compromising the return on their investment those who made the decision to take C4's money won't be around for long, so we might only to wait until the phone stops ringing at Love Productions to tell.
Glawster2002 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 19:34.