|
||||||||
BBC Loses Great British Bakeoff |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1926 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: The dark side of the moon
Posts: 51,362
|
Quote:
With the BBC Bake Off, nobody watching gets up to make a cup of tea or pop to the loo in the middle of the baking for the showstopper.
A 3 minute break in the middle of the mad scramble to finish making the final products will make it a different show, like it or not Nobody knows where the ad breaks will be. |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#1927 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 6,089
|
Quote:
You quoted a post where I was specifically discussing the format. Whether or not you explicitly mentioned the format is irrelevant - it's not unreasonable to expect your post to also be referring to the format.
It really is as simple as that. You're wrong. Let it go and move on instead of continuing to drag the thread off-topic. If you are unable to seperate both issues perhaps you shouldn't attempt to discuss this as it is seemingly very confusing for you. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1928 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 6,548
|
Quote:
Again, this is all guesswork.
Nobody knows where the ad breaks will be. Bake off will not get "special dispensation" just because C4 paid a stupid amount of money for it, or that they stole it from the BBC. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1929 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Sussex
Posts: 25,516
|
BBC wanted to bring back bake off for comic relief why would the company do that when the corporation didn't want anything to do with it. Can't have there cake and eat
it. https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.mir...?client=safari |
|
|
|
|
|
#1930 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 2,631
|
Quote:
In order to fit OFCOM guidelines the ad breaks will have to be inserted into the middle of some of the baking action.
Bake off will not get "special dispensation" just because C4 paid a stupid amount of money for it, or that they stole it from the BBC. The show will be edited accordingly in order to make the break have as little jarring affect as possible. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1931 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 20,371
|
Quote:
In order to fit OFCOM guidelines the ad breaks will have to be inserted into the middle of some of the baking action.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1932 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Central London
Posts: 43,693
|
Quote:
BBC wanted to bring back bake off for comic relief why would the company do that when the corporation didn't want anything to do with it. Can't have there cake and eat
it. https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.mir...?client=safari |
|
|
|
|
#1933 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,099
|
Quote:
With the BBC Bake Off, nobody watching gets up to make a cup of tea or pop to the loo in the middle of the baking for the showstopper.
A 3 minute break in the middle of the mad scramble to finish making the final products will make it a different show, like it or not I doubt C4 want to annoy viewers by putting the ads in an awkward place! And C4 HAVE cared about viewers in the past - they air the live Formula One races advert free! They don't have to, but they do it... (Not that I'm suggesting they'll air BO without ads, only that IMO they'll put them between rounds.) |
|
|
|
|
|
#1934 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 7,322
|
Quote:
I think you will find that was before C4 won the new contract and one would have thought Love would have done it as it is a charity event. And it certainly wasn't too late for Love to make it as they claim. As for the BBC not wanting anything to do with it, where did you get that from ? the BBC offered them a 200% per series increase in fee Love wanted 400% and went elsewhere, short term greed rather than long term financial strategy if you ask me. If anyone comes out of this looking it is Love who if we remember did not even have the cash to start filming GBBO the BBC gave them a grant to do it for the first series in addition to their fee .
Love clearly have been shocked by the backlash and trying hard to win back public opinion. But they are not charitable, they cite working with 4 for charity specials, but the bottom line was they bargained hard. The said they wanted £25 million nothing less, something everyone knows the BBC just couldn't do. Quote:
However, the BBC's version is as follows: "We would have loved a Bake Off Comic Relief special but Love Productions refused to make it. They have now moved to Channel 4 and are making a charity programme with them - with which we wish them well."
And a source at the Beeb said that it "is preposterous nonsense and nothing more than a half baked accusation to suggest Love were willing to make a Comic Relief special when in fact they refused. "It's since become very clear they never had any interest in continuing to make it for the BBC and they are moving to Channel 4. Love should be prepared to stand by their own decisions rather than seeking to blame others. We absolutely wanted to do another series of Comic Relief Bake Off and made that very clear to Love." |
|
|
|
|
|
#1935 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 31,434
|
We all know perfectly well that a 200% increase was pure extortion to benefit the greed of the owners of LP and it couldn't possibly be justified, more fool C4 for paying it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1936 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 7,322
|
Quote:
We all know perfectly well that a 200% increase was pure extortion to benefit the greed of the owners of LP and it couldn't possibly be justified, more fool C4 for paying it.
To be honest the BBC should sue, they invested in that show. Like say a traditional husband and wife, in a divorce, and the lady was at home as a homemaker, ( this is just an example and roles could be swapped). In my example the lady still contributed, maybe not cash, but a valued contribution. In a divorce she should get 50%. The BBC commissioned it, nurtured it, gave ideas to it, and made it the success it is. They by default have equal rights and an vested interest. In addition the BBC marketed it around the world to the benefit of Love. Love then like a greedy husband has just gone off with a younger model and a lot of money! |
|
|
|
|
|
#1937 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Love The Beeb! PROUD Remoaner!
Posts: 11,190
|
Quote:
What difference does it make which house the tent is in the grounds of?
So far the only known differences are 3 out of the 4 presenters/judges. But that doesn't mean the actual format will be any different. The only claims that it will are coming from people who are throwing their toys out the pram. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1938 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 7,322
|
Quote:
It will be different editorially too. Product placement? Sponsorship? and... er... everyone's' favourite - apart from Ash's - the fifteen minutes of ads an hour.
Sainsbury's flour, M&S aprons. Mixer from Argos. Lipstick from Avon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1939 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Central London
Posts: 43,693
|
Quote:
We all know perfectly well that a 200% increase was pure extortion to benefit the greed of the owners of LP and it couldn't possibly be justified, more fool C4 for paying it.
|
|
|
|
|
#1940 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 7,322
|
Quote:
C4 have paid more, the BBC offered them 200% increase which Love refused, Channel 4 have actually paid them a 400% increase on what they were getting from the BBC which is what love demanded from the BBC to stay.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1941 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,137
|
Mark, what you don't seem to be able to grasp is that -
if Channel 4 allow a one hour slot for the programme, the actual content will be shorter because adverts will have to be included in that one hour if Channel 4 keep the one hour content, then the programme will have to have a slot of about one and a half hours to accommodate it and the adverts Therefore, although we don't know which one it will be, whichever it is we do know it will be DIFFERENT to the one hour of continuous content that it had on the BBC. Apart from different presenters and one different judge, we do also know that if the format is kept to signature. technical and show stopper challenges, the technical challenge will not be a Mary Berry recipe as about half of those on the BBC are. That is another DIFFERENCE. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1942 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: nr Peterborough, England
Posts: 48,127
|
Quote:
Too true,
Sainsbury's flour, M&S aprons. Mixer from Argos. Lipstick from Avon. ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#1943 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 7,322
|
Quote:
given the recent marriage for Sainsburys and Argos, I could totally see that working.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1944 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 7,322
|
Quote:
Mark, what you don't seem to be able to grasp is that -
if Channel 4 allow a one hour slot for the programme, the actual content will be shorter because adverts will have to be included in that one hour if Channel 4 keep the one hour content, then the programme will have to have a slot of about one and a half hours to accommodate it and the adverts Therefore, although we don't know which one it will be, whichever it is we do know it will be DIFFERENT to the one hour of continuous content that it had on the BBC. Apart from different presenters and one different judge, we do also know that if the format is kept to signature. technical and show stopper challenges, the technical challenge will not be a Mary Berry recipe as about half of those on the BBC are. That is another DIFFERENCE. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1945 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 20,371
|
Quote:
if Channel 4 keep the one hour content, then the programme will have to have a slot of about one and a half hours to accommodate it and the adverts Two most likely possibilities. A shortened version (48m) with three 3m 50s breaks (the maximum Ofcom allow). That's what Sky did with Don't Tell The Bride. A 75m slot with four 3m 50s breaks to keep the current length. This is what commercial broadcasters do with 60m imported shows that are ad free in their original broadcast. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1946 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 20,371
|
Quote:
Too true,
Sainsbury's flour, M&S aprons. Mixer from Argos. Lipstick from Avon. ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#1947 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 25,466
|
Quote:
Agree on both counts.
To be honest the BBC should sue, they invested in that show. Like say a traditional husband and wife, in a divorce, and the lady was at home as a homemaker, ( this is just an example and roles could be swapped). In my example the lady still contributed, maybe not cash, but a valued contribution. In a divorce she should get 50%. The BBC commissioned it, nurtured it, gave ideas to it, and made it the success it is. They by default have equal rights and an vested interest. In addition the BBC marketed it around the world to the benefit of Love. Love then like a greedy husband has just gone off with a younger model and a lot of money! |
|
|
|
|
|
#1948 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 7,322
|
Quote:
.....fridges from Smeg. Oh hang on, they've already done that one!!
First seen on Red Dwarf. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1949 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 7,322
|
Quote:
It would be nice if they did but with the amount of money that Love have got from Channel 4 they could even afford to hire Clononey's wife and drag it through the courts for ages.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1950 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 2,631
|
I'm not entirely convinced taking legal action against Love Productions is a good use of public money...
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 17:20.





.