• 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
<<
<
57 of 89
>>
>
skp20040
28-09-2016
Originally Posted by mfr:
“The Bake Off will still be on TV, it'll still be FTA. We're now getting Bake Off and, presumably, £15m of new programming from the BBC. Result!

There's no reason for the BBC to provide content that can be provided by another broadcaster. There's no reason for it to deny C4 the right to broadcast the Bake Off early - no gain to either it or the public.”

The only thing C4 cannot do is show a series next year as that was the original contract and as Love being at the end of a contract was able to say they wanted a 400% increase for no other reason than greed then why should they not have to abide by the contract they signed with the BBC should Love be able to ignore legal contracts ? and C4 new what they were buying, well so they say.

As for the BBC having no reason to provide content another channel could then what you really mean is the BBC should be closed down because any channel could do what they do however that does not mean they will . We heard the same about websites, the BBC was forced to close down websites including some that accompanied its own programmes after complaints from the commercial sector that the BBC was taking work from them and they could be running such sites. The BBC closed them down including educational ones and what happened ? not one of those sites was then reopened by a commercial company and the educational ones which I would think is PSB remit area are gone so now parents rather than being able to get free learning aids for the kids have to pay private sites for membership.

The BBC were quite right Love cannot have its cake and eat it, I would add if it does lets hope it chokes on it.
skp20040
28-09-2016
Originally Posted by eggchen:
“Jay Hunt was right though in that the BBC lost Bake Off. The relationship between Love Productions and the BBC had broken down and the show became available. To that end, nothing was stolen or poached.

The other point is that I think it is a sign of desperation to try and use Davina McCall's musings on a lighthearted chatshow as some kind of ammo. Do you take her that seriously? ”

Originally Posted by eggchen:
“ The fee demand was likely the same as one of those sky high estimates you get from your local plumber when he doesn't actually want the job.

>>”

So which was it the relationship broke down due to Love wanting a 400% increase or Love just didn't want its programme on the BBC ( if we take your plumber analogy).

Either way if that is the case one must then assume Love will not be asking the BBC to re-commission any of its existing or new programmes.
Paul_DNAP
29-09-2016
Originally Posted by skp20040:
“So which was it the relationship broke down due to Love wanting a 400% increase or Love just didn't want its programme on the BBC ( if we take your plumber analogy).”

I think they are both interlinked, the commercial greed of Love played against the restraints they had in supplying the BBC which irked them. Then there was their pompous suing of the BBC for doing some shows slightly similar without paying them to do it.

Originally Posted by skp20040:
“Either way if that is the case one must then assume Love will not be asking the BBC to re-commission any of its existing or new programmes.”

I don't know, Love are such commercial vampires I am sure they would not see why they shouldn't allow the BBC to push (e.g.) The Sewing Bee some more, as it is unlikely to be commercially attractive to anyone else until the BBC build an audience for it that they can cash in on at a later date.
skp20040
29-09-2016
Originally Posted by Paul_DNAP:
“I think they are both interlinked, the commercial greed of Love played against the restraints they had in supplying the BBC which irked them. Then there was their pompous suing of the BBC for doing some shows slightly similar without paying them to do it.



I don't know, Love are such commercial vampires I am sure they would not see why they shouldn't allow the BBC to push (e.g.) The Sewing Bee some more, as it is unlikely to be commercially attractive to anyone else until the BBC build an audience for it that they can cash in on at a later date.”

You see if I were the BBC I would tell them "sorry but perhaps it would make you more money elsewhere and we will not be re-commissioning"
eggchen
29-09-2016
Originally Posted by Paul_DNAP:
“I think they are both interlinked, the commercial greed of Love played against the restraints they had in supplying the BBC which irked them.”

I am sure that the producers felt that the BBC constraints prevented them from fully exploiting the show's success.

Originally Posted by Paul_DNAP:
“Then there was their pompous suing of the BBC for doing some shows slightly similar without paying them to do it..”

It's rather funny how these thing come across depending on which side of the fence you come down on. Where you see "pompous suing" I see a successful challenge to infringement of their intellectual property, as the BBC settled with them.
eggchen
29-09-2016
Originally Posted by skp20040:
“You see if I were the BBC I would tell them "sorry but perhaps it would make you more money elsewhere and we will not be re-commissioning"”

If I were the BBC, I might be inclined to take a look first. No point just cutting off your nose to spite your face etc
mikw
29-09-2016
Originally Posted by eggchen:
“I am sure that the producers felt that the BBC constraints prevented them from fully exploiting the show's success.



It's rather funny how these thing come across depending on which side of the fence you come down on. Where you see "pompous suing" I see a successful challenge to infringement of their intellectual property, as the BBC settled with them.”

It would be hard to prove infringement, talent shows have been around for donkey's years.

I expect the out of court settlement was just to quieten things down a bit.
eggchen
29-09-2016
Originally Posted by mikw:
“It would be hard to prove infringement, talent shows have been around for donkey's years.

I expect the out of court settlement was just to quieten things down a bit.”

Maybe. I expect the BBC's lawyers saw some merit in their claim however. I still don't understand why it is "pompous" to sue if you feel that your idea is being nicked though.
Paul_DNAP
29-09-2016
Originally Posted by eggchen:
“It's rather funny how these thing come across depending on which side of the fence you come down on. Where you see "pompous suing" I see a successful challenge to infringement of their intellectual property, as the BBC settled with them.”

The matter was settled, so there was no "success" either way - it was just "settled" and not "won" by anyone.

I was a tad flippant, but the pomposity comment came from me not really liking their stance that their creation was so brilliant and ground breaking that not only do they deserve to be paid for that creation but they should be earning money out of everything else in the world that is even a tiny bit similar, and how dare you make a talent show without first consulting us if we think it is okay for you to do that.
Charnham
29-09-2016
Originally Posted by skp20040:
“You see if I were the BBC I would tell them "sorry but perhaps it would make you more money elsewhere and we will not be re-commissioning"”

yes I would not be surprised if the BBC didnt renew, or dropped the amount they were willing to pay, telling Love to go elsewhere if they think they can find someone who can match the original price.
skp20040
29-09-2016
Originally Posted by eggchen:
“If I were the BBC, I might be inclined to take a look first. No point just cutting off your nose to spite your face etc”

In some cases but bearing in mind Love have shown how they behave and the extortionate increase they asked for (without the BBC grant they received they would never have got the show that all other channels turned down off the ground in the first place) they have blotted their own copy book and I personally wouldn't want to do business with someone like that and would look to give someone else a chance.

To me whilst profit is of course needed it is better business sense to think long term stability and guaranteed income rather than very short term large gain and another thing is that to me you do not bite the hand that feeds you

Originally Posted by eggchen:
“I am sure that the producers felt that the BBC constraints prevented them from fully exploiting the show's success.



It's rather funny how these thing come across depending on which side of the fence you come down on. Where you see "pompous suing" I see a successful challenge to infringement of their intellectual property, as the BBC settled with them.”

Sometimes you have to fight whatever the cost but sometimes people settle as it is cheaper than a long drawn out court case where the winners are lawyers
eggchen
29-09-2016
Originally Posted by Paul_DNAP:
“The matter was settled, so there was no "success" either way - it was just "settled" and not "won" by anyone.

I was a tad flippant, but the pomposity comment came from me not really liking their stance that their creation was so brilliant and ground breaking that not only do they deserve to be paid for that creation but they should be earning money out of everything else in the world that is even a tiny bit similar, and how dare you make a talent show without first consulting us if we think it is okay for you to do that.”

There was success on the part of Love's claim because they reached a settlement. I had a claim with a local authority some years ago which was settled out of court, but it counts as a victory as far as I was concerned as the damages paid to me was a de facto admission that I had suffered loss at their hands and they were liable.
Ash_M1
29-09-2016
Originally Posted by Straker:
“If the relationship had irretrievably "broken down" as you say then surely no amount of money would've repaired it and yet they made it clear it could've stayed at the Beeb had they coughed up £25m a year for it. The one contradicts the other here, you see that.....right?





http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016...corporation-c/



You affect/state an attitude of ambivalence about the programme itself that's under discussion and yet swamp the thread to the extent that 10% of ALL posts in it are yours. Is that a "sign of desperation" that you seemingly feel compelled to be so relentlessly snide, sarcastic and dismissive of others throughout?”

I agree with The Telegraph and James Purnell. New regs are needed to control Ch4 and to stop it from poaching BBC shows.
skp20040
29-09-2016
Originally Posted by Ash_M1:
“I agree with The Telegraph and James Purnell. New regs are needed to control Ch4 and to stop it from poaching BBC shows.”

I would agree they should not as a PSB get into bidding wars ( as such) or be played off with another PSB for the benefit of a commercial company in the way Love just has . Channel 4 has shot itself in the foot and left itself wide open to those who want to see it sold off.
Ash_M1
29-09-2016
Originally Posted by skp20040:
“I would agree they should not as a PSB get into bidding wars ( as such) or be played off with another PSB for the benefit of a commercial company in the way Love just has . Channel 4 has shot itself in the foot and left itself wide open to those who want to see it sold off.”

I totally agree. 'The Public' has been played by Love for it's own benefit and it sucks. It really leaves a bad taste in the mouth. The BBC should not give anymore contracts to Love. They (Love) bit the hand that feeds them. They (Love) need to suffer the consequences.
eggchen
29-09-2016
Originally Posted by Ash_M1:
“I totally agree. 'The Public' has been played by Love for it's own benefit and it sucks. It really leaves a bad taste in the mouth. The BBC should not give anymore contracts to Love. They (Love) bit the hand that feeds them. They (Love) need to suffer the consequences.”

Presumably £15m a year of Licence Fee money for Love's own benefit would have been perfectly acceptable to you?
skp20040
29-09-2016
Originally Posted by eggchen:
“Presumably £15m a year of Licence Fee money for Love's own benefit would have been perfectly acceptable to you?”

That is what those working in the profession who already aired it valued it at so yes to my mind we can respect that figure, Love wanting to go for a 400% increase was greed and not justifiable.
eggchen
29-09-2016
Originally Posted by skp20040:
“That is what those working in the profession who already aired it valued it at so yes to my mind we can respect that figure, Love wanting to go for a 400% increase was greed and not justifiable.”

I think that kind of money from the licence fee spent on a baking show is outrageous, so why are you right and I'm not? Why do we have to respect it just because the BBC were prepared to pay it?

Truth is, the only people who are able to say that they feel the show is worth what was asked for are those who paid for it.

I'm glad it's moved, we still get to watch it and the BBC have saved themselves a fortune. Win / win.
ohglobbits
29-09-2016
Originally Posted by snafu65:
“Nadiya Hussain on Breakfast a few moments ago when asked about GGBO moving to Channel 4. "I can't believe people are still talking about, it's old news isn't it." Hear, hear.

She also said she hopes it succeeds wherever it goes.”

She's rumoured to be Mary Berry's replacement. I'd keep schtum too if I was her.
Originally Posted by aurichie:
“It's amazing the special feelings people reserve for the BBC when you consider all the much publicised shenanigans that have been going on over there for decades. The BBC is a national embarrassment as far as I'm concerned.”

Amusing that all the media who previously were all for BBC losing The Voice have treated GBBO differently. Obviously competitive baking embodies Lord Reith's vision and can sit alongside such shows as Civilisation and The Forsyte Saga.
mossy2103
29-09-2016
Originally Posted by ohglobbits:
“Amusing that all the media who previously were all for BBC losing The Voice have treated GBBO differently. Obviously competitive baking embodies Lord Reith's vision and can sit alongside such shows as Civilisation and The Forsyte Saga.”

presumably because of two things:

1) The Voice was a wholly bought-in format and was no different from other commercial shows, and would have sat happily on a commercial channel. Its renewal was very expensive - £22 million for two series.

2) Bake Off was a format nurtured and built by the BBC and felt "very BBC". S1 was very different from what came after it, and it is safe to assume that S1 was mainly or wholly Love Productions, whilst S2 and later had input and steering from the BBC (due to teh mods to the format)
Janet43
29-09-2016
Originally Posted by eggchen:
“I think that kind of money from the licence fee spent on a baking show is outrageous, so why are you right and I'm not? Why do we have to respect it just because the BBC were prepared to pay it?

Truth is, the only people who are able to say that they feel the show is worth what was asked for are those who paid for it.

I'm glad it's moved, we still get to watch it and the BBC have saved themselves a fortune. Win / win.”

Why are you right and those involved in the industry, as well as fans of the show, wrong?

What experience of commissioning TV shows have you had?
skp20040
29-09-2016
Originally Posted by eggchen:
“I think that kind of money from the licence fee spent on a baking show is outrageous, so why are you right and I'm not? Why do we have to respect it just because the BBC were prepared to pay it?

Truth is, the only people who are able to say that they feel the show is worth what was asked for are those who paid for it.

I'm glad it's moved, we still get to watch it and the BBC have saved themselves a fortune. Win / win.”


But you do think then obviously C4 a public owned PSB was right to spend far more and 5% of its commissioning budget on it ?
ftv
29-09-2016
Interesting piece in the legal section of The Times today saying there is no reason why the BBC can't launch a similar programme to GBBO as LP cannot possibly hold the rights to all cooking programmes. The BBC would just have to avoid the same title (pretty obvious), catchphrases etc and would have to change the format a bit. either reducing or increasing the number of competitors.They could use the same judges/presenters.But the BBC do need to change the rules so an independent producer can't do this again to them in the future.
Ash_M1
29-09-2016
Originally Posted by ftv:
“Interesting piece in the legal section of The Times today saying there is no reason why the BBC can't launch a similar programme to GBBO as LP cannot possibly hold the rights to all cooking programmes. The BBC would just have to avoid the same title (pretty obvious), catchphrases etc and would have to change the format a bit. either reducing or increasing the number of competitors.They could use the same judges/presenters.But the BBC do need to change the rules so an independent producer can't do this again to them in the future.”

...or the Beeb introduces very tough deals, for example, 'whole life' deals/two year break clause deals. The indies need to be discouraged from the behaviour displayed by Love.
eggchen
29-09-2016
Originally Posted by Janet43:
“Why are you right and those involved in the industry, as well as fans of the show, wrong?

What experience of commissioning TV shows have you had?”

After all your criticism of Channel 4, I can only assume that your inversion of my question had the same rhetorical intent.
<<
<
57 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