BBC3 and BBC4 don't deserve to have their hours extended, not while the final hours of the transmission day are spent repeating what was shown at the start of it. The problem are the silly hours both have to work to at present.
If it was possible to end the "shared frequency" arrangement with the children's channels and enough material could be found to sustain a full "day", 4pm-2am would seem much more sensible.
One very cheap solution might be close BBC3 and replace it with the BBC Entertainment channel coming to Europe in the coming months. Would save a fair few pennies.
BBC Entertainment will not be allowed to be shown in the UK for a simple reasons that......
It is a BBC Worldwide channel and not a licence fee channel - in other words it will have commercials. BBC worldiwde is currently a partner with Virgin media - i.e the UKTV channels and OFCOM will probably not allow BBC show a BBC Worldwide channel!!!
I was under the impression that the costs to broadcast overnight are fairly negligible?
Certainly an overnight repeat is a damned sight cheaper than having a +1 channel.
The technology of course would be exactly the same -- just timeshift by 6 hours instead of 1, and push the output out the same channel.
Indeed, the same trick could be pulled the following day in daytime, saving even more money.
Well as more and more people have Freeview they will have to find something to fill overnight BBC1, as showing News 24 will become increasingly pointless
Of course. The closing down of the entire marketing department for one, or at least scaling them back and limiting their activities only to off-air promotion of BBC services and programmes. And the sack for Clare Wildey.
Failing that, less lavish trails/promotions and those that remain voiced by the usual CAs instead of actors with trendy voices. More input from the CAs such as programme menus and slides.
That should at least mean a few less wage packets having to be paid...while earlier "bedtimes" for BBC2, and startup put back to 7am, would cut both repeats and transmission expenses.
Although you wouldn't be entirely happy unless they return to bad old times of 1984 with BBC2 closing down several times a day and filling the rest of the time with Ceefax and testcards!
I don't understand how the Beeb can moan about budget cuts when you consider the salaries of the likes of Jonathan Ross, Terry Wogan, Chris Moyles or, even worse, the spineless board members.
Admittedly that would be the easiest solution to cost cutting by simply reducing their salaries to something more realistic (similar to what should be done with footballers etc.)
Then it would be 'Goodbye BBC.... Hello Virgin Radio/ITV'
If they want the best presenters (and Ross/Moyles are the best in their respective fields) then they have to pay the going rate. The BBC aren't immune from whatever the commercial sectro will pay
Although you wouldn't be entirely happy unless they return to bad old times of 1984 with BBC2 closing down several times a day and filling the rest of the time with Ceefax and testcards!
Bad old times? In your view maybe. I don't have a problem with channels being on air only when they've got something worth showing.
I definitely don't think the BBC should waste money on new idents, in fact they think they should stop wasting as much as they do on them. I can only comment for myself but when I tune into the BBC I'm tuning in for a programme not some 30 Second ident that cost £100,000 or something stupid like that. If they must insist on commissioning new ones why not have a competition informing art colleges, film schools and such like that the winning entries will be used. The winners themselves win say five grand and further opportunities at the BBC.
Bad old times? In your view maybe. I don't have a problem with channels being on air only when they've got something worth showing.
But you'd prefer a channel with stuff worth showing 24 hours a day? Also remember that what you consider 'worth watching' isn't what other people think is 'worth watching'
The way to cut costs is by not making any reduction to what's on screen. They are there to provide a service of programming, they should be cutting back on the back end and not what appears on screen.
:-(
A former member
what does the BBC give us
4 channels
4 time share channels
5 national radio stations
many local ones
much better Question, are there using their resource to there best use, answer is no.
But you'd prefer a channel with stuff worth showing 24 hours a day? Also remember that what you consider 'worth watching' isn't what other people think is 'worth watching'
A channel with stuff worth showing round-the-clock is an oxymoron, unless it's a rolling news channel. Any others that broadcast 24 hours have to rely on repeats or trashy phone-ins to fill the overnight hours.
There's nothing to be gained from broadcasting round the clock "just because you can".
:-(
A former member
five used to fill the nightime with US sport
C4; used it to show films and repeat of Daytime show like countdown at 5am.