NG
£200,000 per programme is a pretty considerable budget for a show... It wouldn't be a "peripheral" show with that budget.
noggin
Founding member
Paul02 posted:
On the cuts, if 1 new, peripheral programme was cut from BBC1 and BBC2 per day, which would have cost as little as a total of £200000 to make, then, over 6 years, £438 million is saved.
That's nearly a quarter of the (supposed) deficit in funding.
That's nearly a quarter of the (supposed) deficit in funding.
£200,000 per programme is a pretty considerable budget for a show... It wouldn't be a "peripheral" show with that budget.
:-(
A former member
BBC 85 years old today?
PA
£200,000 per programme is a pretty considerable budget for a show... It wouldn't be a "peripheral" show with that budget.
Excuse me, I meant from BBC1 and BBC2- 2 programmes in total.
My intention was merely to point out how the cuts might be effected practically.
Programmes are also often shown well into the early hours of the morning. (For instance, BBC1 and BBC2 continue until after 3am on Saturday mornings.) These programmes could be saved for another time, so there's another saving. It's quite easy once you get going.
noggin posted:
Paul02 posted:
On the cuts, if 1 new, peripheral programme was cut from BBC1 and BBC2 per day, which would have cost as little as a total of £200000 to make, then, over 6 years, £438 million is saved.
That's nearly a quarter of the (supposed) deficit in funding.
That's nearly a quarter of the (supposed) deficit in funding.
£200,000 per programme is a pretty considerable budget for a show... It wouldn't be a "peripheral" show with that budget.
Excuse me, I meant from BBC1 and BBC2- 2 programmes in total.
My intention was merely to point out how the cuts might be effected practically.
Programmes are also often shown well into the early hours of the morning. (For instance, BBC1 and BBC2 continue until after 3am on Saturday mornings.) These programmes could be saved for another time, so there's another saving. It's quite easy once you get going.
NG
But how would C4 square that with their public service charter? They aren't a commercial company - they are, like the BBC, a public service corporation.
Also - I think you are confusing the sale of BBC Resources (the people who operate the studios) with TV Centre, the building the studios are in.
They aren't the same thing.
Buying TV Centre doesn't mean you can run the BBC studios - any more than being the landlord to a bank means you can start lending money.
noggin
Founding member
C4Fan posted:
If Channel 4 had any sense, they would get in there and buy it. They are suffering decreasing ratings and only have enough money to last until 2012 where they will begin to struggle. By purchasing the studios, they will gain a lot more money through companies like ITV and even the BBC themselves wanting to hire the studios.
But how would C4 square that with their public service charter? They aren't a commercial company - they are, like the BBC, a public service corporation.
Also - I think you are confusing the sale of BBC Resources (the people who operate the studios) with TV Centre, the building the studios are in.
They aren't the same thing.
Buying TV Centre doesn't mean you can run the BBC studios - any more than being the landlord to a bank means you can start lending money.
TV
Yeah, the BBC should really be proud of being the largest PSB provider by default! Just like they have ended up the biggest home producer of Children's programmes by default even though the range and diversity of the latter has been decimated in recent years. The PSB has to be as good as it is now, not just lip service.
I'm furious there will be more repeats even though this is one of the biggest complaints viewers have about the BBC. Part of the problem already in this direction is the BBC has so many different channels that don't really warrant a stand-alone existence - BBC3 for example. Look in any TV listing magazine and you'll find that on an average night there are only about three non-repeats at the most. So what is the point of BBC3 then - why not just move their original output to BBC1 or BBC2? BBC4 has the same problem to a lesser extent - the quality of its programming is not in question but again can you justify a channel when the amount of new material shown each day would be better invested into an existing service?
And then there's BBC2, which I recently described on Teletext TV Talking Point as "a sea of repeats". The answer here is simple - Heroes only gets one broadcast a week, startup is put back to 7am weekdays and bedtime brought forward on days when there is no Learning Zone.
Very sad that BBC should want to outsource more when they'd produce better programmes themselves. That, and the sale of BBC Resources, they really are "selling the family silver". Perhaps I should just sell my TV now?
nwtv2003 posted:
I think after Digital switchover is complete I think people will appreciate the BBC more than what they do now, simply as the amount of PSB on other channels I think will slowly disappear as it won't be commercially viable after 2012.
Yeah, the BBC should really be proud of being the largest PSB provider by default! Just like they have ended up the biggest home producer of Children's programmes by default even though the range and diversity of the latter has been decimated in recent years. The PSB has to be as good as it is now, not just lip service.
I'm furious there will be more repeats even though this is one of the biggest complaints viewers have about the BBC. Part of the problem already in this direction is the BBC has so many different channels that don't really warrant a stand-alone existence - BBC3 for example. Look in any TV listing magazine and you'll find that on an average night there are only about three non-repeats at the most. So what is the point of BBC3 then - why not just move their original output to BBC1 or BBC2? BBC4 has the same problem to a lesser extent - the quality of its programming is not in question but again can you justify a channel when the amount of new material shown each day would be better invested into an existing service?
And then there's BBC2, which I recently described on Teletext TV Talking Point as "a sea of repeats". The answer here is simple - Heroes only gets one broadcast a week, startup is put back to 7am weekdays and bedtime brought forward on days when there is no Learning Zone.
Very sad that BBC should want to outsource more when they'd produce better programmes themselves. That, and the sale of BBC Resources, they really are "selling the family silver". Perhaps I should just sell my TV now?
TV
And guess what - local TV is also a heavy casualty with planned local TV services ditched in favour of broadband services. Why can't the BBC resist commercial pressures?
NG
I think the major difference between the two is that the Local TV service was a staff-heavy content creation operation, the Broadband services are likely to be staff-light, repurposing of existing content services?
The current internal debate within the BBC is the balance of content creation (i.e. making stuff) and content distribution (i.e. getting it to the viewer - TV, online, mobile phone, internet, broadband, download etc.) - and how these are squared.
I suspect MyNewsNow will have less content than the proposed local TV services - as it won't need to hit a certain duration each day in the way the semi-linear local TV service did. Also it won't require expensive satellite transponder capacity.
Another interesting nugget is the suggestion that BBC Three will start earlier AND CBBC continue later. Not sure how they will do this on Freeview - as they share a single video and audio stream currently. (Satellite is less of an issue)
noggin
Founding member
tvarksouthwest posted:
And guess what - local TV is also a heavy casualty with planned local TV services ditched in favour of broadband services. Why can't the BBC resist commercial pressures?
I think the major difference between the two is that the Local TV service was a staff-heavy content creation operation, the Broadband services are likely to be staff-light, repurposing of existing content services?
The current internal debate within the BBC is the balance of content creation (i.e. making stuff) and content distribution (i.e. getting it to the viewer - TV, online, mobile phone, internet, broadband, download etc.) - and how these are squared.
I suspect MyNewsNow will have less content than the proposed local TV services - as it won't need to hit a certain duration each day in the way the semi-linear local TV service did. Also it won't require expensive satellite transponder capacity.
Another interesting nugget is the suggestion that BBC Three will start earlier AND CBBC continue later. Not sure how they will do this on Freeview - as they share a single video and audio stream currently. (Satellite is less of an issue)
PC
BBC2 would be quite deserving of some the output that is currently made for BBC4 (and a bit of BBC3) for that matter - that is, if those digital channels were to be closed at this point; but they apparently won't be.
If the BBC wanted their second channel to have a richer and less repetitive schedule, the programming is there to be carried across from the digital channels, which as they are remain far from fleshed out - even for their limited on-air time of under 10 hours per day.
If the BBC wanted their second channel to have a richer and less repetitive schedule, the programming is there to be carried across from the digital channels, which as they are remain far from fleshed out - even for their limited on-air time of under 10 hours per day.
NG
I suspect the relationships between BBC Two and BBC Four will change - especially given the increase in repeats (outside BBC One peak) that are likely, and also between BBC One and BBC Three to a lesser extent.
Shows which originate currently on Four and are repeated on Two, particularly drama and high-end documentary, may now originate on Two I'd imagine? (Filling more "expensive" slots on the network?)
noggin
Founding member
Paul Clark posted:
BBC2 would be quite deserving of some the output that is currently made for BBC4 (and a bit of BBC3) for that matter - that is, if those digital channels were to be closed at this point; but they apparently won't be.
If the BBC wanted their second channel to have a richer and less repetitive schedule, the programming is there to be carried across from the digital channels, which as they are remain far from fleshed out - even for their limited on-air time of under 10 hours per day.
If the BBC wanted their second channel to have a richer and less repetitive schedule, the programming is there to be carried across from the digital channels, which as they are remain far from fleshed out - even for their limited on-air time of under 10 hours per day.
I suspect the relationships between BBC Two and BBC Four will change - especially given the increase in repeats (outside BBC One peak) that are likely, and also between BBC One and BBC Three to a lesser extent.
Shows which originate currently on Four and are repeated on Two, particularly drama and high-end documentary, may now originate on Two I'd imagine? (Filling more "expensive" slots on the network?)