Give Liam Rosenior the MOTD slot and then let him interview the wanky celebs and then let him do the radio 2....2 o’clock slot.
3 mill saved....... and better shows than them counts do.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[TV] What could the BBC do to cut costs or bring in more money
- Thread starter Raleigh Chopper
- Start date
Give Liam Rosenior the MOTD slot and then let him interview the wanky celebs and then let him do the radio 2....2 o’clock slot.
3 mill saved....... and better shows than them counts do.
- Jul 7, 2003
- 47,221
Promise never to show another episode of Mrs Brown's Boys., in return for a £20 per household increase in the licence fee.
Sorry I am always doing that I tend to write as I speak which is in very long diatribes.
The BBC is an outdated concept now we have so many other better alternatives. Paying more than you do for netflix when you hardly ever watch it is nuts.The licence should be scrapped and the BBC made to compete on a level paying field. Just why do they need so many websites & channels now too? But mainly why should we be forced to subscribe to their political agenda? I don't buy the Guardian as I hate the politics so why should I be forced to pay for the BBC?
Cheshire Cat
The most curious thing..
Increase the licence fee.
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,306
My personal opinion. There is more to be made abroad if the BBC can find a way to compete with the big boys infrastructure.
They are proven great programme makers but are competing against state of the art supply chains.
Look at Amazon. They have redefined what a supply chain looks like and THEN started making programmes. They also don't care (much) about viewing figures if Clarkson's Grand Tour brings millions to sign up to their Prime (pay up front for delivery) service.
Netflix are pumping millions into new drama and (for instance) have completely disrupted how translation is done for foreign markets.
The BBC simply can't go out and borrow the millions (or billions) that the other companies are.
I suspect we will a world player iplayer at some point, but probably partnering with the other traditional broadcasters like ITV and Channel Four.
Sent from my BLA-L09 using Tapatalk
They are proven great programme makers but are competing against state of the art supply chains.
Look at Amazon. They have redefined what a supply chain looks like and THEN started making programmes. They also don't care (much) about viewing figures if Clarkson's Grand Tour brings millions to sign up to their Prime (pay up front for delivery) service.
Netflix are pumping millions into new drama and (for instance) have completely disrupted how translation is done for foreign markets.
The BBC simply can't go out and borrow the millions (or billions) that the other companies are.
I suspect we will a world player iplayer at some point, but probably partnering with the other traditional broadcasters like ITV and Channel Four.
Sent from my BLA-L09 using Tapatalk
I’ve seen Ali Jananbakshs interviews with some of the best of Hollywood’s greats and I’ve bloody loved them. I remember him helping Gwyneth Paltrow on to the stage once and that still stands as his only assist over here.
Interesting discussion regarding the perceived excessive earnings of Conservative party leadership candidates on this mornings Victoria Derbyshire show . Somehow though VD failed to mention that her basic BBC salary is considerably higher than that of the PM .
oneillco
Well-known member
- Feb 13, 2013
- 1,259
Yeah brilliant...let's just brainwash the population with endless McDonalds adverts
Stato
Well-known member
- Dec 21, 2011
- 6,581
For eight quid a month Netflix will give you access to a load of films and TV, a lot of the latter, made by the BBC.
For thirteen quid a month the BBC provides 9 broadcast channels and 1 internet one. 10 national and 40 regional radio stations, the World Service and one of the most popular and respected news websites in the world.
The argument 'I don't use it very much, so I shouldn't pay' is the equivalent of 'I'm not ill, why should I pay for the NHS', 'I haven't got kids, why should I pay for schools', or 'I haven't been robbed, so why am I paying for the police.' Make all of these arguments if you like, but be aware that without a shared social contract, we are all likely to end up in one of two camps: poor, disenfranchised and desperate, or well off but scared of the revolutionary threat posed by those who are poor, disenfranchised and desperate.
We all pay into the BBC and it provides something of value to the nation as a whole and to millions of separate individuals. It's contribution to British culture has been incalculable. As an idea it has decades of proven success in offering entertainment, education, social cohesion and news information that is more independent of market pressures and political influence than any other media outlet in the world.
Last edited:
Uncle C
Well-known member
Remove all 'double manning' in studios and radio for things like news and music shows.
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,306
To clarify to point (and a few others), the BBC already runs advertising and sponsorship on a number of services outside and inside the UK.
BBC websites outside the UK carry advertising.
It runs many channels abroad which carry advertising and sponsorship.
https://www.bbcchannels.com/
http://www.bbcamerica.com/ (50% owned by the BBC)
https://www.bbccanada.com/ (20% owned by the BBC - I think)
It is now the 100% owner of UKTV (e.g. Alibi, Dave, Drama, Eden, Gold, W and Yesterday etc..) which obviously carry adverts.
Lastly the production arm (which excludes certain area such as Sport) has been merged with the existing commercial operations and is now effectively an independent production company that can make programmes for other broadcasters.
https://www.bbcstudios.com
It will be making programmes for ITV which I'm sure will be carrying adverts.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/bbcstudios/2019/itv-commission-inside-the-duchy
The television industry is now incredibly complicated with all sorts of alliances where broadcasters are making programmes for other broadcasters.
A few examples:
- The Royale Family was made by Granada for the BBC.
- The Graham Norton Show is made by ITV for the BBC.
- The BBC (as above) is now making programmes for ITV.
- Bake Off was made by a subsidiary of Sky, who took it to Channel Four.
- The BBC plays ITV and Channel Four programmes on it's foreign channels.
- Loose Women, Sunday Brunch are broadcast from BBC Studios in London.
- ITV and BBC have partnered to create a streaming service in the US https://www.britbox.com/home
I can give you hundreds more. My opinion is that broadcasters need to be a bit better with their communication to viewers regarding how the industry operates in the modern world. The only newspapers that really bothers to cover it is the Guardian.
Most of what I read on here regarding the traditional TV industry is an assumption it is operating in the same way as the 1980s. That's the broadcasters fault not yours.
Last edited:
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,306
I'm also sure that many people don't know that Channel Four is publicly owned but financed through advertising, has a public service remit and is effectively an independent subsidiary of the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport.
Hands up who thought Channel Four had shareholders ?
Who knew that Channel 5 was owned by the owners of MTV ? ( after previously being owned by the owners of the Daily Express )
Hands up who thought Channel Four had shareholders ?
Who knew that Channel 5 was owned by the owners of MTV ? ( after previously being owned by the owners of the Daily Express )
Last edited:
nicko31
Well-known member
Put a levy on all Murdoch products in the UK to subsidise the Beeb....
Raleigh Chopper
New member
- Thread starter
- #95
I would like to know how many sports presenters/correspondents the BBC has, it seems a different one turns up each time on programmes like breakfast TV and then on a Saturday morning it's Mike Bushnell who plays some odd sport and reports on it, is that all he has done that week?
Also when there is a major football tournament there really is no need for Lineker and his overpaid pundits to actually be there on a long free holiday.
Why so many pundits too, for an organisation that basically no longer has much sport they really spend a lot of money showing it.
Also when there is a major football tournament there really is no need for Lineker and his overpaid pundits to actually be there on a long free holiday.
Why so many pundits too, for an organisation that basically no longer has much sport they really spend a lot of money showing it.