CBeebies forced out of Television Centre

Simon, you seem to have this idea in your head that they do things without any sort of reasoning behind them. The studio currently used for CBeebies - I would imagine it would be a hell of a lot more profitable to rent it out than to use it themselves. You describe the move to Manchester as "nonsensical" - they wouldn't be doing it if that were the case. How about looking at things from all angles before jumping to conclusions?

Salford actually, not Manchester.

I can't imagine Resources doing much to market the studio currently used by Cbeebies once it's vacated. If they're still where they used to be, it's a small four waller on what used to be the performance floor of a music recording studio. They use a couple of timecode locked camera-recorders and cut it later.

I think it's fair to say that TVC did lose sight of the way things were going when it left itself with only medium and large sized studios. When Pres A and B closed in the late 90s, it left TVC with only TC2 as a regularly available smallish studio. TC5 is a similar size, but has been block booked to Sport for years. With the launch of the CBBC Channel TC2 became block booked too, leaving TVC with only the then newly Resources-absorbed former news studios TC10 and 11 as smaller studios. I dont recall seeing The Sky at Night in TC1, but I've certainly seen it in TC3 which looked ridiculous!

Apart from big entertainment things and the occasional sitcom, most studio based programmes these days are shot in small studios - and the key market players in this area are the indies. No wonder TVC has found itself considered by the accountants to be not worth holding on to.

I wonder if Cbeebies are going to use the spare studio space at Teddington that was vacated after that fradulent auction channel was closed down by Ofcom last year?

I'm afraid I can't get sentimental when it comes to studio space... even though I'm concerned for the future of TVC as part of our national heritage.

The introduction of Producer Choice was a painful time for many of the people affected by it. But the worst initial excesses of the internal market (such as researchers being sent to HMV to buy a CD as it was cheaper than hiring one from the library) have long gone.

The alternative is to go back to the old Soviet-style command economy which was fine in the days when the only people who owned facilities were the BBC and the ITV companies. Then programmes, especially those lower down the pecking order, were told which facilities they were getting and when. Now, of course, it's for each producer to shop around and do what they believe is best.

At a creative level, I'm sorry to see BP coming from a small studio. The character and feel of the programme is different because of that. But that's quite distinct from an argument about whether all BBC programmes should be compelled to use BBC facilities. The world is a different place now and the benefits of buying in facilities are obvious to just about anyone who works in a production role.

I seem to recall Blue Peter being referred to as 'the wandering nomad of TV programmes' as it used to have no fixed studio as home and came from whichever studio was available.

Ah - that's a change. It used to be two JVC multicore cameras switched on a matrix cut panel from the studio floor. It certainly looked like it was still being shot on JVCs until recently (that horrid fleshtone was a giveaway)

Yep - but this is true of quite a number of shows that didn't require specific technical or audience facilities. (Sport are in their permanent studio because they require two galleries, uprated incoming lines and comms and graphics etc. TOTP used to be in their studio because it had enhanced sound facilities. Sit coms mainly come from the studio they do because it has audience seating etc.)

Blue Peter didn't have specific requirements on a series level (no specific comms, no major sound desk requirements, no audience seating) , but may have had different requirements on a programme-by-programme basis - so moving studios was advantageous at times.

I agree with your main point - though sadly the two examples are probably weaker than you would hope.

1. The CBeebies studio probably won't be used for very much when CBeebies leave - it isn't a studio after all... However it may still save money by not accepting the work at the level Teddington have pitched.

2. The move to Manchester is not about economics or business, it is about politics and representation of the UK. It is far from clear whether it is a good move financially. Certainly the money spent relocating will be many times that of refurbishing the production office spaces at TV Centre... (Ignoring resources areas like studio and VT) Rumour has it that the costs of refurbishing White City are not insignificant. (It is in a dreadful state after less than 20 years...)

What about Dr Who?

From what I've read, it tended to move studios regulary, even between Lime Grove & TVC & one famous occasion to Pebble Mill!

They have several small studios which were created for smaller digital channels, as well as their main 3 big studios.

AuctionWorld I think used studio 3 (this is the smallest of their 3 main studios) and this was then used by the iBuy shopping channel who took advantage of the unused facilities to make launch quickly. I'd have thought that Studio 3, if it's free at the moment, would be too big. It also comes with production facilities for live programmes (offices/phone room etc) although it does have some form, IIRC it was used for Rainbow, Magpie and the like.

I worked there in 1996 and I'm pretty sure they were promoting having a digital widescreen studio back as long ago as then.