• 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
<<
<
60 of 89
>>
>
lundavra
01-10-2016
Originally Posted by carl.waring:
“
Answer me this then. Why were C4 not interested in GBBO the first time they were offered it? After all, they also have a remit to be "innovative" etc., in their programming don't they? I think you'll find that the answer is probably because, being commercial, they have to make programmes that attract advertisers. Which GBBO now will. So much for "innovative" then, eh?”

I suspect that Channel 4 thought originally that it would not appeal to the type of audience that watches Channel 4 which still applies but they were hoping that it is so popular that even if they only retain 10% of the audience then that is still a big audience for Channel 4.
lundavra
01-10-2016
Originally Posted by Antbox:
“I didn't say that - it's Ash who thinks that's the way it should rightly be. What I said was that if the BBC were going to throw their toys out of their pram and refuse to award any more commissions to LP, they may find that LP would not be minded to accept any more commissions in the first place.”

I would think there are many more independent production companies that the BBC can choose from (as well as choose to make a programme themselves) than channels that Love can get commissions from.
jonbwfc
01-10-2016
Originally Posted by lundavra:
“I would think there are many more independent production companies that the BBC can choose from (as well as choose to make a programme themselves) than channels that Love can get commissions from.”

Indeed - fundamentally the BBC is one of the relatively few UK networks that has serious money to throw around (I'd argue Sky and ITV are the only other two). Given who now effectively owns Love I'd assume Sky will have first refusal on any future property they might be pitching but if Sky don't want it, they're suddenly in a much weaker position. If the BBC deal with them at all, you'd assume the Beeb will be much stricter in terms of the bargain driven and about the terms of contracts with Love than they previously have been.

Basically by selling out to Sky and burning their bridges with the BBC (regardless of who started it, it's pretty clear that Love made the decision that took the relationship from 'strained' to 'broken' and their public actions post the split won't have calmed the waters at all) they've put themselves in a weaker position in the future with new properties. That may be fine to the owners of the production company - who between the Sky buyout and the GBBO deal have made an absolute pot load of money -but I suspect there are quite a few people lower down the food chain at Love whose situation is nowhere near as comfortable as it was say a year ago.
ftv
01-10-2016
Originally Posted by lundavra:
“I suspect that Channel 4 thought originally that it would not appeal to the type of audience that watches Channel 4 which still applies but they were hoping that it is so popular that even if they only retain 10% of the audience then that is still a big audience for Channel 4.”

I think it's pretty obvious that C4 assumed the principals would move with the show. Don't forget ITV didn't bid because LP couldn't guarantee it.
Straker
01-10-2016
Originally Posted by lundavra:
“I suspect that Channel 4 thought originally that it would not appeal to the type of audience that watches Channel 4 which still applies but they were hoping that it is so popular that even if they only retain 10% of the audience then that is still a big audience for Channel 4.”

No, C4 would most assuredly not regard an audience of 1m - 1.5m a "big audience" for GBBO no matter what they paid let alone £25m a year.
lundavra
01-10-2016
Originally Posted by Straker:
“No, C4 would most assuredly not regard an audience of 1m - 1.5m a "big audience" for GBBO no matter what they paid let alone £25m a year.”

It's a higher audience than most of their programmes and quite likely they will be lucky to get more than that.
Straker
01-10-2016
They get semi-decent figures for their bigger shows in primetime. Anything less than 4m overnight would be seen as unacceptable for what they paid. Factor in C4's horrible catch-up service and consolidation is likely to be nowhere near what iPlayer generates so that's another shortcoming it faces on C4. It's hard to imagine they'll get the chemistry right from the start or at all so that'll also impact viewing figures past the rubbernecking that the first edition will get.

It's all a disaster waiting to happen which explains why that horrible Hunt is looking to jump ship to Amazon if the rumours are true. If she had confidence in it being a roaring success she'd be there until at least 2018 to take credit for all of it.
Ash_M1
01-10-2016
Originally Posted by lundavra:
“I would think there are many more independent production companies that the BBC can choose from (as well as choose to make a programme themselves) than channels that Love can get commissions from.”

Absolutely right. There are currently 300 indies roughly, so plenty of choice for the Beeb. Top of their agenda will be loyalty and an indie which possesses the right moral and ethical code. Love sadly fails on all of the above.
Ash_M1
01-10-2016
Originally Posted by jonbwfc:
“Indeed - fundamentally the BBC is one of the relatively few UK networks that has serious money to throw around (I'd argue Sky and ITV are the only other two). Given who now effectively owns Love I'd assume Sky will have first refusal on any future property they might be pitching but if Sky don't want it, they're suddenly in a much weaker position. If the BBC deal with them at all, you'd assume the Beeb will be much stricter in terms of the bargain driven and about the terms of contracts with Love than they previously have been.

Basically by selling out to Sky and burning their bridges with the BBC (regardless of who started it, it's pretty clear that Love made the decision that took the relationship from 'strained' to 'broken' and their public actions post the split won't have calmed the waters at all) they've put themselves in a weaker position in the future with new properties. That may be fine to the owners of the production company - who between the Sky buyout and the GBBO deal have made an absolute pot load of money -but I suspect there are quite a few people lower down the food chain at Love whose situation is nowhere near as comfortable as it was say a year ago.”

Yes absolutely mate. The golden rule: never bite the hand which feeds you. Love have broken all the rules in the rule book. If I were the Beeb, I'd have nothing more to do with them (other than honouring their remaining contracts). They need to be made an example of. The BBC is in charge, no-one else.
jonbwfc
01-10-2016
Originally Posted by Ash_M1:
“They need to be made an example of. The BBC is in charge, no-one else.”

I don't agree with that, nor do I think that's what the Beeb will do. It's a collaborative as well as competitive industry after all. There's no need for the beeb to appear to be vindictive, they currently have (in most people's opinion) the moral high ground. They need to carry on as normal, but in future treat Love in.. cordial terms. If the other indies think the Beeb might act like a rejected teenager at some point that will not help the BBC's general business of operation.

They need to continue to act in a professional manner. But they now have to take into account that Love are in a category of partner where they must assume at any point they may do something against the BBC's interests and therefore protect themselves. That means they're going to get less leeway and 'nastier' contracts than any other indie, assuming the BBC think they're worth the hassle at all.

If, as in all likelihood, Love have made the market harder for themselves to operate in in future, that of itself would be enough to put other indies off doing the kind of thing they've done. There's no reason for the BBC to kick them when they can trip themselves up quite effectively.

(Aside ; If Love think Sky and ITV won't use the breakdown of the relationship between Love and the BBC (and therefore Love having less possible customers for their programmes) to drive harder bargains with Love on future productions, they may well be in for a nasty surprise.)
Janet43
01-10-2016
I have a dilemma - I want Love to get their just deserts and do no more programmes for the BBC, but I do definitely want more Sewing Bee. I'm sure those who do clay work also want the Pottery Throwdown, which is/has been already recorded.

I'm sure Love would impose really punitive penalties on the BBC if they tried anything remotely like them. I don't think they're as easy as cooking to come up with something different.
Ash_M1
01-10-2016
Originally Posted by jonbwfc:
“I don't agree with that, nor do I think that's what the Beeb will do. It's a collaborative as well as competitive industry after all. There's no need for the beeb to appear to be vindictive, they currently have (in most people's opinion) the moral high ground. They need to carry on as normal, but in future treat Love in.. cordial terms. If the other indies think the Beeb might act like a rejected teenager at some point that will not help the BBC's general business of operation.

They need to continue to act in a professional manner. But they now have to take into account that Love are in a category of partner where they must assume at any point they may do something against the BBC's interests and therefore protect themselves. That means they're going to get less leeway and 'nastier' contracts than any other indie, assuming the BBC think they're worth the hassle at all.

If, as in all likelihood, Love have made the market harder for themselves to operate in in future, that of itself would be enough to put other indies off doing the kind of thing they've done. There's no reason for the BBC to kick them when they can trip themselves up quite effectively.

(Aside ; If Love think Sky and ITV won't use the breakdown of the relationship between Love and the BBC (and therefore Love having less possible customers for their programmes) to drive harder bargains with Love on future productions, they may well be in for a nasty surprise.)”

Yes, on reflection, you are absolutely right. I am just so angry with Love regarding the way they have treated the BBC and us licence fee payers.
Ash_M1
01-10-2016
Originally Posted by Janet43:
“I have a dilemma - I want Love to get their just deserts and do no more programmes for the BBC, but I do definitely want more Sewing Bee. I'm sure those who do clay work also want the Pottery Throwdown, which is/has been already recorded.

I'm sure Love would impose really punitive penalties on the BBC if they tried anything remotely like them. I don't think they're as easy as cooking to come up with something different.”

You raise an interesting dilemma. What you also throw light on is the problem of not owning the IP. It is going to become an increasing problem for the Beeb as more and more content is outsourced. Maybe just maybe, this awful business with Love has come at the 'right time'...to focus minds at the Beeb.
mossy2103
02-10-2016
Originally Posted by Ash_M1:
“You raise an interesting dilemma. What you also throw light on is the problem of not owning the IP. It is going to become an increasing problem for the Beeb as more and more content is outsourced. Maybe just maybe, this awful business with Love has come at the 'right time'...to focus minds at the Beeb.”

You can outsource programme production and retain the IP on your own content. The problem arises when the format/content is owned by a third party (i.e. it is their idea) and you simply commission it. So the BBC would be fine as long as they outsource their own content.
Janet43
02-10-2016
Originally Posted by mossy2103:
“You can outsource programme production and retain the IP on your own content. The problem arises when the format/content is owned by a third party (i.e. it is their idea) and you simply commission it. So the BBC would be fine as long as they outsource their own content.”

Doesn't solve my dilemma with Sewing Bee because, presumably Love Productions owns the format. I suspect they do because they wanted to sue the BBC over 'Hair' and the 'Great Painting Challenge' which they thought were similar to the Bake Off format.
ftv
02-10-2016
I can understand how programmes like Pointless, Countdown and The Chase have a format but a bunch of people baking cakes and being judged doesn't really seem to be much of a format as there are numerous other shows doing much the same thing.
Straker
02-10-2016
PM gives her tacit approval for the Beeb's new version:

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/716...prime-minister

Hope that's ruined Hunt's breakfast!
eggchen
02-10-2016
Originally Posted by Janet43:
“I have a dilemma - I want Love to get their just deserts and do no more programmes for the BBC, but I do definitely want more Sewing Bee. I'm sure those who do clay work also want the Pottery Throwdown, which is/has been already recorded.

I'm sure Love would impose really punitive penalties on the BBC if they tried anything remotely like them. I don't think they're as easy as cooking to come up with something different.”

Exactly why the BBC will continue to work with them, despite this idea that they must be ostracised forever. As long as they are giving the viewers what they want to watch, the BBC will want to collaborate with them. They will be disappointed to lose Bake Off, but I can't see them cutting off their nose to spite their face.
Janet43
02-10-2016
Instead of making a point of watching Bake Off every week it's on, I'll only watch it on Channel 4 if there's nothing else I want to watch elsewhere. If the BBC make their own version, I'll definitely watch that.

The nail in the coffin for me is the audacity of Channel 4 trying to persuade the BBC to show it next year “for public rather than self”. You can't get more hypocritical than that.
Janet43
02-10-2016
Originally Posted by eggchen:
“Exactly why the BBC will continue to work with them, despite this idea that they must be ostracised forever. As long as they are giving the viewers what they want to watch, the BBC will want to collaborate with them. They will be disappointed to lose Bake Off, but I can't see them cutting off their nose to spite their face.”

We'll see. A next series of 'Sewing Bee' hasn't been confirmed yet.
snafu65
02-10-2016
Originally Posted by eggchen:
“Exactly why the BBC will continue to work with them, despite this idea that they must be ostracised forever. As long as they are giving the viewers what they want to watch, the BBC will want to collaborate with them. They will be disappointed to lose Bake Off, but I can't see them cutting off their nose to spite their face.”


I hope the BBC do work with LP again, if only to see a certain forum members reaction.
ukcarter
02-10-2016
Originally Posted by eggchen:
“Exactly why the BBC will continue to work with them, despite this idea that they must be ostracised forever. As long as they are giving the viewers what they want to watch, the BBC will want to collaborate with them. They will be disappointed to lose Bake Off, but I can't see them cutting off their nose to spite their face.”

I think you're right. However, it would be wise for the BBC to ensure that in future they will be able to move the format freely between production companies (including the BBC themselves) to enable them to invite tenders for each series and opt for the bid which delivers best value for the viewers while retaining production values, encouraging competition, increasing effiency and driving down costs.
lundavra
02-10-2016
Originally Posted by Janet43:
“Doesn't solve my dilemma with Sewing Bee because, presumably Love Productions owns the format. I suspect they do because they wanted to sue the BBC over 'Hair' and the 'Great Painting Challenge' which they thought were similar to the Bake Off format.”

I suppose if all depends on whether:

1. The BBC went to Love and asked if they could do a programme with sewing in a similar format to Bake Off

or

2. Love went to the BBC with an idea to do a programme around sewing in the Bake Off format.
lundavra
02-10-2016
Originally Posted by ftv:
“I can understand how programmes like Pointless, Countdown and The Chase have a format but a bunch of people baking cakes and being judged doesn't really seem to be much of a format as there are numerous other shows doing much the same thing.”

That is the sort of conundrum that can make lawyers very wealthy!
lundavra
02-10-2016
Originally Posted by eggchen:
“Exactly why the BBC will continue to work with them, despite this idea that they must be ostracised forever. As long as they are giving the viewers what they want to watch, the BBC will want to collaborate with them. They will be disappointed to lose Bake Off, but I can't see them cutting off their nose to spite their face.”

With luck the BBC will be careful in any contract with Love to ensure that full credit is given to the BBC for any contribution it makes to the development, promotion etc of a programme. Also they should be very suspicious of Love and not trust them at all. If there is ever a choice between Love and another company then hopefully that will ensure that the other company gets the contract.
<<
<
60 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