TR
And yet 6 months ago the BBC was 'committed' to production at TVC.
The Pebble Mill asbestos excuse used again.
The Mailbox is too small and not at all versatile.
Sacking staff was to pay for money for programmes, not for a northern TVCentre.
The BBC is independant of the Government yet this government is to ringfence the money for Manchester - not that they are interfering in how the BBC operates. It just happens to appease the present government to make programmes from Manchester.
TV Centre is one of the best purpose built television centres in the world - its not a shopping centre or an industrial unit conversion.
It is far cheaper to re-fit TVC than move everything.
Its LIES LIES LIES.
The BBC is far more at risk from its own management than the government.
The Pebble Mill asbestos excuse used again.
The Mailbox is too small and not at all versatile.
Sacking staff was to pay for money for programmes, not for a northern TVCentre.
The BBC is independant of the Government yet this government is to ringfence the money for Manchester - not that they are interfering in how the BBC operates. It just happens to appease the present government to make programmes from Manchester.
TV Centre is one of the best purpose built television centres in the world - its not a shopping centre or an industrial unit conversion.
It is far cheaper to re-fit TVC than move everything.
Its LIES LIES LIES.
The BBC is far more at risk from its own management than the government.
MO
It's far cheaper to sell it and get someone else refit it, and take the risk of renting out the resultant studio space.
Few programmes are made by the BBC now, and with the departure of CBBC and News it makes it uneconomic for the BBC to own its own studios.
The BBC should be a broadcaster of excellent programmes, not a studio rental company!
TROGGLES posted:
It is far cheaper to re-fit TVC than move everything.
Its LIES LIES LIES.
Its LIES LIES LIES.
It's far cheaper to sell it and get someone else refit it, and take the risk of renting out the resultant studio space.
Few programmes are made by the BBC now, and with the departure of CBBC and News it makes it uneconomic for the BBC to own its own studios.
The BBC should be a broadcaster of excellent programmes, not a studio rental company!
TR
It's far cheaper to sell it and get someone else refit it, and take the risk of renting out the resultant studio space.
Few programmes are made by the BBC now, and with the departure of CBBC and News it makes it uneconomic for the BBC to own its own studios.
The BBC should be a broadcaster of excellent programmes, not a studio rental company!
I quite agree however the BBC has stated that they would do the work before selling it - using tax - sorry licience fee payers money. There is little evidence that moving to Manchester and building another one by means of PFI - which saddles us with debt for 40 years - is cheaper.
If studios are vacant why arn't the BBC using them to make programmes? Its all political cobblers that independant companies can make better programmes. The might be the same but it is cheaper for the BBC to make them in house with the proper resources. The independant quota was forced on the BBC by Ofcom which is another way of the government influencing the BBC.
Moz posted:
TROGGLES posted:
It is far cheaper to re-fit TVC than move everything.
Its LIES LIES LIES.
Its LIES LIES LIES.
It's far cheaper to sell it and get someone else refit it, and take the risk of renting out the resultant studio space.
Few programmes are made by the BBC now, and with the departure of CBBC and News it makes it uneconomic for the BBC to own its own studios.
The BBC should be a broadcaster of excellent programmes, not a studio rental company!
I quite agree however the BBC has stated that they would do the work before selling it - using tax - sorry licience fee payers money. There is little evidence that moving to Manchester and building another one by means of PFI - which saddles us with debt for 40 years - is cheaper.
If studios are vacant why arn't the BBC using them to make programmes? Its all political cobblers that independant companies can make better programmes. The might be the same but it is cheaper for the BBC to make them in house with the proper resources. The independant quota was forced on the BBC by Ofcom which is another way of the government influencing the BBC.
BB
ASTON you hit the nail on the head... the main building is listed and cannot be knocked down. I agree with you... they may sell some bits of land but NOT the whole lot.
If it happened it truly would be the end of the BBC... they can just about get away with selling Technology, Broadcast and tendering out lots of other bits... but to sell BBC Television Centre in West London... that is one sale too far.
CORRECTION: I have called English Heritage and they have confirmed it is NOT A LISTED BUILDING. However, if anybody is interested they only need one application for it to be considered. They also suggested that the 20TH CENTURY SOCIETY may currently be putting together an application to save it.
So if anybody is interested in saving it then you may wish to consider speaking with both organisations.
BBC Scotland posted:
Aston posted:
A couple of things:
> I might be wrong, but I'm sure that Television Centre is currently listed?
> I don't think it'll happen, there's too much history there, those walls have seen too much. I'd rather see the building get an overhaul to be mostly offices, leaving just a few studios than it be sold and knocked down. In this instance they should sell the new "Media Centre" buildings which could easily be used for offices for ANYTHING corporate or even a call-centre. However, to lose such a specialised building/facility as Television Centre would be a disgrace...
> I might be wrong, but I'm sure that Television Centre is currently listed?
> I don't think it'll happen, there's too much history there, those walls have seen too much. I'd rather see the building get an overhaul to be mostly offices, leaving just a few studios than it be sold and knocked down. In this instance they should sell the new "Media Centre" buildings which could easily be used for offices for ANYTHING corporate or even a call-centre. However, to lose such a specialised building/facility as Television Centre would be a disgrace...
ASTON you hit the nail on the head... the main building is listed and cannot be knocked down. I agree with you... they may sell some bits of land but NOT the whole lot.
If it happened it truly would be the end of the BBC... they can just about get away with selling Technology, Broadcast and tendering out lots of other bits... but to sell BBC Television Centre in West London... that is one sale too far.
CORRECTION: I have called English Heritage and they have confirmed it is NOT A LISTED BUILDING. However, if anybody is interested they only need one application for it to be considered. They also suggested that the 20TH CENTURY SOCIETY may currently be putting together an application to save it.
So if anybody is interested in saving it then you may wish to consider speaking with both organisations.
ST
I am shocked that the BBC may close TVC.
It is such an iconic building with it's doughnut and the sheer size of TC1.
When you walk into the building you certainly feel like you are in more than a TV studio and office complex. TVC is the home of British television, and I hope that it continues to be for the future.
I - amongst most others on this forum, I'm sure - wouldn't mind our licence fee being spent on doing up the building into a more modern style - kind of like Channel 4's building or even - dare I say it? - the Mailbox in Birmingham.
Over the years the BBC building has been used as a backdrop on many programmes - BBC Children in Need, Top of the Pops, Live & Kicking, BBC News, and home to other shows, not broadcast on the BBC such as the New Paul O'Grady Show.
As they already rent space out in their studios, surely they must realise that there is a hell of a lot of interest in using the studios because of it's iconic style.
The buildings insides are like a rabbit-warren. If you don't know where you got to go exactly - give it an hour or so to find it...!
So c'mon, BBC, use your head, and keep TVC alive and home of British TV.
It is such an iconic building with it's doughnut and the sheer size of TC1.
When you walk into the building you certainly feel like you are in more than a TV studio and office complex. TVC is the home of British television, and I hope that it continues to be for the future.
I - amongst most others on this forum, I'm sure - wouldn't mind our licence fee being spent on doing up the building into a more modern style - kind of like Channel 4's building or even - dare I say it? - the Mailbox in Birmingham.
Over the years the BBC building has been used as a backdrop on many programmes - BBC Children in Need, Top of the Pops, Live & Kicking, BBC News, and home to other shows, not broadcast on the BBC such as the New Paul O'Grady Show.
As they already rent space out in their studios, surely they must realise that there is a hell of a lot of interest in using the studios because of it's iconic style.
The buildings insides are like a rabbit-warren. If you don't know where you got to go exactly - give it an hour or so to find it...!
So c'mon, BBC, use your head, and keep TVC alive and home of British TV.
AS
Murder? Rape? Atomic bombs?
I'm surprised that you'd say that.
Television Centre is an historically important building, and these are just a couple of reasons off the top of my head:
> It was the first purpose built television studio facility in the world. Even today there are only a handful of others in existance in the UK, I can think of: Granada (Manc), YTV (Leeds), LWT (London). Nottingham has already closed to Television Production.
> The building has unique archutecture, there is no other like it. Anywhere.
> It is historically important in that it has hosted many events from music performances and drama recordings to record-breaking tap-dances.
> Television Centre is the BBC, the BBC is Television Centre. There's no denying there's a feeling as soon as you walk into the place, whether you're a visitor or have worked there for years.
Yes - it would seem that it's possible many of the users of the facility are potentially moving to Manchester. However, there is still a market out there for television studios. The last year demonstrates there has been a return to more studio based production (more gameshows back on the screen and more magazine shows).
There are many more reasons, but hopefully these would form the basis of any application to list the building.
Brekkie Boy posted:
Nothing worse than a building being saved for the sake of saving it!
Murder? Rape? Atomic bombs?
I'm surprised that you'd say that.
Television Centre is an historically important building, and these are just a couple of reasons off the top of my head:
> It was the first purpose built television studio facility in the world. Even today there are only a handful of others in existance in the UK, I can think of: Granada (Manc), YTV (Leeds), LWT (London). Nottingham has already closed to Television Production.
> The building has unique archutecture, there is no other like it. Anywhere.
> It is historically important in that it has hosted many events from music performances and drama recordings to record-breaking tap-dances.
> Television Centre is the BBC, the BBC is Television Centre. There's no denying there's a feeling as soon as you walk into the place, whether you're a visitor or have worked there for years.
Yes - it would seem that it's possible many of the users of the facility are potentially moving to Manchester. However, there is still a market out there for television studios. The last year demonstrates there has been a return to more studio based production (more gameshows back on the screen and more magazine shows).
There are many more reasons, but hopefully these would form the basis of any application to list the building.
PO
What a very unimaginative view, which is unfortunately very typical of people who don't understand building conservation.
If the whole complex was to close, the key iconic parts of the building (the "doughnut" and the wall of Studio 1 with "BBC Television Centre" on the outside perhaps) could be retained and reused for apartments, offices, hotel...
The peripheral buildings on the site and more recent additions, which aren’t integral to the architecture of the building, could then be cleared and new, sympatheticlly-designed buildings could be erected for other uses. The rest of the site would release a land value that would pay for retaining and refurbishing the Listed elements; indeed developers would factor these costs in before buying the site anyway. I’m sure the site, even with some buildings retained, would be particularly valuable in the London property market.
Listed Buildings are reused (recycled if you like) all the time with a bit of imagination - look at the Bankside Power Station (Tate Modern) and many more on varying scales across the country. It is often cheaper to reuse a building than demolish it and start again too. I would imagine that the opportunity to own an apartment in such a well-known, iconic building would be a unique selling point and attractive to more than just TV Forumers!
Brekkie Boy posted:
Nothing worse than a building being saved for the sake of saving it!
What a very unimaginative view, which is unfortunately very typical of people who don't understand building conservation.
If the whole complex was to close, the key iconic parts of the building (the "doughnut" and the wall of Studio 1 with "BBC Television Centre" on the outside perhaps) could be retained and reused for apartments, offices, hotel...
The peripheral buildings on the site and more recent additions, which aren’t integral to the architecture of the building, could then be cleared and new, sympatheticlly-designed buildings could be erected for other uses. The rest of the site would release a land value that would pay for retaining and refurbishing the Listed elements; indeed developers would factor these costs in before buying the site anyway. I’m sure the site, even with some buildings retained, would be particularly valuable in the London property market.
Listed Buildings are reused (recycled if you like) all the time with a bit of imagination - look at the Bankside Power Station (Tate Modern) and many more on varying scales across the country. It is often cheaper to reuse a building than demolish it and start again too. I would imagine that the opportunity to own an apartment in such a well-known, iconic building would be a unique selling point and attractive to more than just TV Forumers!
NW
Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought Granada had the first purpose built Television studio, they were at Quay Street for when the station came on air in May 1956, where as the BBC didn't move into Television Centre until a few years later. But from watching Imagine on BBC One just before Christmas, TVC was in the pipeline for sometime before and took a long time to build.
From a Broadcasting POV, yes it would be a sad loss, but from a general POV it makes rather good sense, quite a bit of the BBC will be moving to Manchester or the refurbished Broadcasting House, both probably before the decade is out. TVC will be vastly underused by then, in theory I would welcome this decision, the BBC could always hire out space from someone else or find another suitable location, ie Elstree Studios.
And considering the increasing amount of programmes they have to comission from Independents this is just making TVC being used less and less surely?
Aston posted:
> It was the first purpose built television studio facility in the world. Even today there are only a handful of others in existance in the UK, I can think of: Granada (Manc), YTV (Leeds), LWT (London). Nottingham has already closed to Television Production.
Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought Granada had the first purpose built Television studio, they were at Quay Street for when the station came on air in May 1956, where as the BBC didn't move into Television Centre until a few years later. But from watching Imagine on BBC One just before Christmas, TVC was in the pipeline for sometime before and took a long time to build.
From a Broadcasting POV, yes it would be a sad loss, but from a general POV it makes rather good sense, quite a bit of the BBC will be moving to Manchester or the refurbished Broadcasting House, both probably before the decade is out. TVC will be vastly underused by then, in theory I would welcome this decision, the BBC could always hire out space from someone else or find another suitable location, ie Elstree Studios.
And considering the increasing amount of programmes they have to comission from Independents this is just making TVC being used less and less surely?