Goodbye BBC Broadcast...

I bet any viewers who didn't know anything about the world of TV would have been baffled at that announcement, thinking what on earth she was on about an end of an era.

I'm not sure if all MTV's channels are in-house or not... my confusion is not helped by a press release sent out a couple of weeks ago by the company they've just appointed to supply their new playout systems. It suggested that not all playout was in-house before, but it could just have been clumsily written. Anyhoo, I think we can safely assume that they think in-house playout is A Good Thing given the amount of new investment in their own TX area.

Here it is...
http://uk.sys-con.com/read/111890.htm

(Quote removed)
I believe the figures being floated around at the time of the deal were that BBC Broadcast Ltd was sold for £150m, and the BBC have £500m of contracts with them over the next 10 years. I still can't quite work out how this makes commercial sense for the BBC.

For BBC Broadcast (who are apparently working behind the scenes on their new brand - ie they don't know what to call it yet), they say it means they don't get tied to the perception that they're just for BBC channels, so can get more business from elsewhere. At the moment, as well as BBC and UKTV channels, they handle playout for ESPN Classic Sport and disaster recovery for Five, and presumably they're after more contracts. I still can't quite see why they couldn't have managed that while being part of the BBC, though..

But remember it's not just the case of getting £150 million but having to spend £500 million for nothing. If it remained in-house the BBC would have had to have paid to broadcast its channels.

If, after 10 years all the overheads (wages, power, equipment, property cost etc) would have cost the BBC more than £350 million if they'd stayed in-house.... then it is a saving

It was Nicola Phoenix - definately Irish!

I'm pretty sure I read today that BBC Broadcast are renting their space in the Broadcast Centre from the BBC, and presumably other property services, power, and the like. But then they'll have to set up their own payroll, wages, and recruitment, etc.
I'm still not quite convinced that this is actually going to save anyone much money in the long run, but just result in a greater movement of small green pieces of paper. Still, it must have made sense to some men in suits at some point.

Did anybody capture a video of the handover to BBC News 24 on BBC ONE Wales? As previously mentioned in another post, there was a very good announcement and the ident played in full.

That's not very politically correct Simon. Nicola's Northern Irish.

Would you like a bigger spoon, marksi?

At the risk of veering off topic, a Northern Irish accent is very different from a Southern Irish accent. If you can't tell the difference then you're just not trying. It's also lazy to use the term "Irish" to describe anyone from the island of Ireland. While not technically incorrect, it's like describing a Canadian as "North American".

There's a certain presenter of Up All Night on Five Live who could do with reading her Producer's Guidelines on this subject. Either that or a kick in the arse for sloppiness.

Now, back to the matter in hand...

Fair point, but I guess that it could be a matter of opinion as to whether "Irish" can cover the whole island. Probably a conversation best kept for elsewhere.

On topic.. right, er.. I hear ESPN Classic Sport Europe went live today.

I totally agree with you marksi -- it pains me as a person of Northern Irish descent that people can't tell the difference between Northern and Southern accents. They're very distinct -- Northern Irish can sound almost as close to Scottish sometimes as it does to Southern Irish -- possibly due to the history of the province.