# BBC lose Bake Off!



## Hacker Khan (Sep 12, 2016)

Well done everyone, 2016 is the year that just keeps on giving.  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-37344292

Also extra marks for the hypocrisy of the person who said 'This has never been about who might write the biggest cheque 'No of course it's not, I mean there are many other reasons to move the most watched program on BBC1  to a commercial provider who will fill an hour of it with about 20 minutes of actual content, 10 minutes of explaining what will happen after the break, 10 minutes of explaining what happened before the break, and 20 minutes of adverts for baking products. Genius.


----------



## SocketRocket (Sep 12, 2016)

This really takes the biscuit!


----------



## PhilTheFragger (Sep 12, 2016)

Quit with the wisecracks Cupcake


----------



## ruff-driver (Sep 12, 2016)

[FONT=&quot]One day you're the best thing since sliced bread. The next, you're toast.[/FONT]


----------



## Blue in Munich (Sep 12, 2016)

Hacker Khan said:



			Well done everyone, 2016 is the year that just keeps on giving.  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-37344292

Also extra marks for the hypocrisy of the person who said 'This has never been about who might write the biggest cheque 'No of course it's not, I mean there are many other reasons to move the most watched program on BBC1  to a commercial provider who will fill an hour of it with* about 20 minutes of actual content, 10 minutes of explaining what will happen after the break, 10 minutes of explaining what happened before the break, and 20 minutes of adverts for baking products. *Genius.
		
Click to expand...

Don't often agree with your posts but this one is spot-on; the disease that is modern TV programmes.


----------



## bluewolf (Sep 12, 2016)

Don't watch it, or any other reality show or soap. In the immortal words of Why don't you? -

Why don't you just turn off your television set and go out and do something less boring instead?


----------



## Tongo (Sep 12, 2016)

If they sell it to Sky they will market it as if its the greatest thing since sliced bread. 


Closely followed by adverts of Ray Winstone screaming: 

BAKE IN PLAY! BAKE IN PLAY!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Fish (Sep 12, 2016)

No more sponging from the licence payers, hot crossed it over to the dark side where it'll flop and sag, the Beeb really are tossers (pancake joke not...) for not rolling it out longer. 

I'll get me coat....


----------



## Pin-seeker (Sep 12, 2016)

That's me not paying my TVs licence!


----------



## Norrin Radd (Sep 12, 2016)

whats bake off? serious question .

or is the question what was bake off?


----------



## Pin-seeker (Sep 12, 2016)

Norrin Radd said:



			whats bake off? serious question .

or is the question what was bake off?
		
Click to expand...

Baking programme.


----------



## chrisd (Sep 12, 2016)

Everything comes down to the dough in the end!


----------



## One Planer (Sep 12, 2016)

I suppose that's just how the cookie crumbles.


----------



## Jimaroid (Sep 12, 2016)

The production company that owns Bake Off is 70% owned by Sky. They're simply holding the BBC to ransom - good riddance.


----------



## bobmac (Sep 12, 2016)

Pie man said moving to ITV is a recipe for disaster but the proof of the pudding .........


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Sep 12, 2016)

Very disappointing and typical of the BBC expecting a productions company to curtail to it's demands. That's Bake Off going to to commercial land and the whole show will be far worse for it


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 12, 2016)

crumbs!


----------



## PhilTheFragger (Sep 13, 2016)

This is another example of what happens when the bbc stops actually making programs itself and buys them in off the shelf, clearly the production company are aware that their program is a huge hit, but they also realise that any program has a certain shelf life and Bake off is a fair way down that line,

Clearly the production company will be rubbing their hands with glee, they have maximised their financial gains, it's called market forces.

But, Mary Berry is 81, she isn't going to continue for much longer, and she is a central reason for its success, what happens if she leaves

Clearly channel 4 think they can maximise advertising revenue, but it's clearly another example of the erosion of the bbc as in the old days they would have bought the rights off the production company as soon as they realised the programs potential , and saved themselves a packet in the long run.

You can draw a parallel with the bbcs golf coverage

It's another soggy baked Alaska


----------



## FairwayDodger (Sep 13, 2016)

Good news! The bbc has shown a total lack of interest in baking for years. A commercial broadcaster will bring new innovations to the coverage and hopefully inspire a whole new generation of young bakers.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Sep 13, 2016)

FairwayDodger said:



			Good news! The bbc has shown a total lack of interest in baking for years. A commercial broadcaster will bring new innovations to the coverage and hopefully inspire a whole new generation of young bakers.
		
Click to expand...

:clap: :clap: :clap:


----------



## Tongo (Sep 13, 2016)

FairwayDodger said:



			Good news! The bbc has shown a total lack of interest in baking for years. A commercial broadcaster will bring new innovations to the coverage and hopefully inspire a whole new generation of young bakers.
		
Click to expand...

Well if it goes to Sky they will hype it up as the most important thing on the planet alongside Oxygen and slightly higher than water.


----------



## Imurg (Sep 13, 2016)

FairwayDodger said:



			Good news! The bbc has shown a total lack of interest in baking for years. A commercial broadcaster will bring new innovations to the coverage and hopefully inspire a whole new generation of young bakers.
		
Click to expand...

Will we get Pro-Tracer giving us the flight to and from the oven...?


----------



## bluewolf (Sep 13, 2016)

Imurg said:



			Will we get Pro-Tracer giving us the flight to and from the oven...?
		
Click to expand...

Or Colin Montgomerie in the studio telling us that not only are his cakes the best, but that he once taught Mary Berry how to decorate an award winning lemon drizzle cake.


----------



## PhilTheFragger (Sep 13, 2016)

bluewolf said:



			Or Colin Montgomerie in the studio telling us that not only are his cakes the best, but that he once taught Mary Berry how to decorate an award winning lemon drizzle cake.
		
Click to expand...

All credit to him


----------



## guest100718 (Sep 13, 2016)

Tongo said:



			Well if it goes to Sky they will hype it up as the most important thing on the planet alongside Oxygen and slightly higher than water.
		
Click to expand...


CH4


----------



## user2010 (Sep 13, 2016)

It`s the end of the world!


----------



## Piece (Sep 13, 2016)

Breadxit?


----------



## Alex1975 (Sep 13, 2016)

No Mel and Sue.... there is a god after all!

Apparently they stepped down... yeee course.


----------



## PhilTheFragger (Sep 13, 2016)

So channel 4 have splashed out 25 mil on a program format and without securing the services of any of the presenters or judges who made the show so popular.

sounds like a bargain to me, bet someone at The Beeb is wetting himself with laughter, whilst someone at C4 is just wetting themselves


----------



## Hacker Khan (Sep 13, 2016)

Tongo said:



			Well if it goes to Sky they will hype it up as the most important thing on the planet alongside Oxygen and slightly higher than water.
		
Click to expand...

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/sport...ghts-to-great-british-bake-off-20160913113703


----------



## SocketRocket (Sep 13, 2016)

Piece said:



			Breadxit?
		
Click to expand...

BreadStick!


----------



## bobmac (Sep 13, 2016)

Alex1975 said:



			No Mel and Sue.... there is a god after all!

Apparently they stepped down... yeee course.
		
Click to expand...

Another opportunity for Clarkson, Hammond and May?


----------



## Tashyboy (Sep 13, 2016)

PhilTheFragger said:



			So channel 4 have splashed out 25 mil on a program format and without securing the services of any of the presenters or judges who made the show so popular.

sounds like a bargain to me, bet someone at The Beeb is wetting himself with laughter, whilst someone at C4 is just wetting themselves
		
Click to expand...

Thank god for that, coz if sue Perkins is funny then so are Piles. Well they are on yer mate but that's not the point. If mr Hollywood and Mary go then oh dear. When the Beeb lost the open to Sky it was going to be the apocalypse. Well that soon Went tits up for all the doubters. Re bake off, I want to see people er bake, then I want to see people say you can or cannot bake Sue and wot sis name are not the Jeremy Clarkson and gerbil of the baking world.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Sep 13, 2016)

Alex1975 said:



			No Mel and Sue.... there is a god after all!

Apparently they stepped down... yeee course.
		
Click to expand...

Me thinks the production company that sold their soul to the highest bidder have kind of underestimated what makes the show work, i.e the chemistry between the presenters and the fact it kind of ambles along without any annoying advert breaks or manufactured jeopardy which commercial TV is so fond of _(after the 5th commercial break in 40 minutes, will Alice's bread rise, tune in to find out...._.)  

You'd have thought the Top gear fiasco would have given them a bit of a heads up, but seems not.


----------



## Imurg (Sep 13, 2016)

No worries....get that tart from Big Brother in, a couple of other Z list celebs - that berk Rylan springs to mind - add a few firecrackers and whizzbangs and Roberts yer Father's Brother.
The kids will love it.........


----------



## Hacker Khan (Sep 13, 2016)

Tashyboy said:



			Thank god for that, coz if sue Perkins is funny then so are Piles. Well they are on yer mate but that's not the point. If mr Hollywood and Mary go then oh dear. When the Beeb lost the open to Sky it was going to be the apocalypse. Well that soon Went tits up for all the doubters. Re bake off, I want to see people er bake, then I want to see people say you can or cannot bake Sue and wot sis name are not the Jeremy Clarkson and gerbil of the baking world.
		
Click to expand...

I'd argue the comparison is more with Top Gear than The Open.  The Open on the BBC was a tired and lazy production out of the 1980's, it was always obvious that Sky would do a much better job in terms of the technical side of it.  But if you look at the viewing figures they were much reduced on Sky that what ever you used to get on the BBC.

Bake Off mostly works because of the chemistry of the presenters, much like Top gear did.  Hardly anyone would tune in just to see amateurs baking on their own, the premise for it is faintly silly as a ratings winner really.  But it is the most watched program on BBC and a massive part of that is down to Mel and Sue and Mary and Paul.  Much like the reason Top Gear mostly worked was down to Clarkson, Hammond and May. They had chemistry which appealed to a lot of viewers. Yes some people may not like them or find them funny in which case fair enough, but sometimes the presenters are the main reason the program works and in Top Gear and Bake Off I'd argue that is the case. Which I expect is/will be backed up by the viewing figures.


----------



## BesCumber (Sep 13, 2016)

bobmac said:



			Another opportunity for Clarkson, Hammond and May?
		
Click to expand...

He could give his v8 food processor another airing.
I might actually watch that.


----------



## Sweep (Sep 14, 2016)

I am so glad I appear to be the only person in the country that couldn't care less about this. 
Never really got cooking / baking programs to be honest. The food looks good but when they taste it you kind of have to take their word on how delicious it is.


----------



## bluewolf (Sep 14, 2016)

Slightly ironic to see the Sun criticising CH4 for buying GBBO, especially when you notice that 70% of the company that makes GBBO is owned by none other than Rupert Murdoch :rofl:


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Sep 14, 2016)

I think someone at The Sun will be getting a less than friendly phone call from Murdoch towers and the tone of their coverage will suddenly change. In the next few days blame will go onto the BBC and CH4 will be seen as the saviour of the show.


----------



## bluewolf (Sep 14, 2016)

Lord Tyrion said:



			I think someone at The Sun will be getting a less than friendly phone call from Murdoch towers and the tone of their coverage will suddenly change. In the next few days blame will go onto the BBC and CH4 will be seen as the saviour of the show.
		
Click to expand...

I'm not sure. Rupert has found himself in the delightful position of being able to blame both of Britains Publicly owned TV stations for the same issue. He must be rubbing his hands at the prospect.


----------



## drdel (Sep 14, 2016)

PhilTheFragger said:



			This is another example of what happens when the bbc stops actually making programs itself and buys them in off the shelf, clearly the production company are aware that their program is a huge hit, but they also realise that any program has a certain shelf life and Bake off is a fair way down that line,

Clearly the production company will be rubbing their hands with glee, they have maximised their financial gains, it's called market forces.

But, Mary Berry is 81, she isn't going to continue for much longer, and she is a central reason for its success, what happens if she leaves

Clearly channel 4 think they can maximise advertising revenue, but it's clearly another example of the erosion of the bbc as in the old days they would have bought the rights off the production company as soon as they realised the programs potential , and saved themselves a packet in the long run.

You can draw a parallel with the bbcs golf coverage

It's another soggy baked Alaska
		
Click to expand...


I agree. TV is part of the entertainment business so the only real thing to matter is money. BBC should use tighter contracts if they want to maximise the Intellectual Property etc.  But since most of them have their nose in the trough nobody is  bothered


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Sep 14, 2016)

I heard Eamon Holmes talking this morning about programming and he was saying that the BBC are very poor payers and program makers often only make money on overseas sales, not on what the BBC pay. Effectively, they outsource programs to save money and without outside companies holding on to the rights it would not be worthwhile for them. That suits the BBC on most occasions but it leaves them exposed if they have a big success.


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Sep 14, 2016)

With Mel and Sue gone, Mary Berry already 81 and Paul Hollywood with fingers in many (shortcrust) pies, it's inevitable there will be a new line up, probably a different format and it will bear little or no resemblance to the current show


----------



## Bunkermagnet (Sep 14, 2016)

Don't see what else the BBC can do.
 They took on a program that no-one else wanted, developed it and turned it prime time main stream, offered then to double the existing contract value to Â£15m to then be told it was Â£25m the production company wanted. If they had paid up, you can just see and read the bile that would have gone their way because of their reckless spending of the publics money.
I dont watch the program but I hope it crashes and burns, not because I don't like C4, but because I applaud the BBC for standing up for themselves.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Sep 15, 2016)

Lord Tyrion said:



			I heard Eamon Holmes talking this morning about programming and he was saying that the BBC are very poor payers and program makers often only make money on overseas sales, not on what the BBC pay. Effectively, *they outsource programs to save money *and without outside companies holding on to the rights it would not be worthwhile for them. That suits the BBC on most occasions but it leaves them exposed if they have a big success.
		
Click to expand...

Actually they are forced to do this as part of the charter renewal imposed by the tories, who we all know mostly hate the BBC as they do not slavishly churn out right wing propaganda like a lot of the main stream print media. To quote the proposals


Programme making will be opened to greater competition. The possibility of production by independent companies will exist for all BBC programmes except news and some parts of current affairs.

So I imagine there will be more of this in the future where production companies will be happy to let the BBC grow the show but then take it elsewhere for more money. Price of everything and value of nothing etc etc


----------



## sawtooth (Sep 15, 2016)

It will go the same way as top gear, people watched bake off mostly for the presenters. Now they have all gone the show will flop I reckon. It might even go back to BBC ala match of the day.in a year or two .


----------



## Smiffy (Sep 15, 2016)

Bunkermagnet said:



			Don't see what else the BBC can do.
 If they had paid up, you can just see and read the bile that would have gone their way because of their reckless spending of the publics money.
		
Click to expand...

You'll get the moaners, whatever they do/did.
My wife loves the programme, watches it every week.
I'm not in to cooking/baking but I also watch it. It's entertaining.
At least the BBC would have been spending money on something the public want, as the viewing figures will testify.


----------



## freddielong (Sep 15, 2016)

HomerJSimpson said:



			With Mel and Sue gone, Mary Berry already 81 and Paul Hollywood with fingers in many (shortcrust) pies, it's inevitable there will be a new line up, probably a different format and it will bear little or no resemblance to the current show
		
Click to expand...

I thought the quote I heard was very apt " channel 4 have effectively paid 30 million for a marquee and some Magi mixers"
With everyone gone it will die you cannot change all the presenters and have a similar show, one maybe two at a push but not all


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Sep 15, 2016)

Bunkermagnet said:



			Don't see what else the BBC can do.
 They took on a program that no-one else wanted, developed it and turned it prime time main stream, offered then to double the existing contract value to Â£15m to then be told it was Â£25m the production company wanted. If they had paid up, you can just see and read the bile that would have gone their way because of their reckless spending of the publics money.
I dont watch the program but I hope it crashes and burns, not because I don't like C4, but because I applaud the BBC for standing up for themselves.
		
Click to expand...

Spot on - the BBC can never win because they will never keep everyone happy , if they spend Â£25mil to keep a very popular program then people would complain about spending that much

I enjoy the program - it's really good entertainment, the wife tries the recipes out sometimes and it's full of just normal people enjoying themselves


----------



## IanM (Sep 15, 2016)

sawtooth said:



			It will go the same way as top gear, people watched bake off mostly for the presenters. Now they have all gone the show will flop I reckon. It might even go back to BBC ala match of the day.in a year or two .
		
Click to expand...


That's it!  Get Clarkson and the chaps to present it!  Just imagine... "that cake is rubbish you silly cow!"  etc etc etc


----------



## ger147 (Sep 15, 2016)

IanM said:



			That's it!  Get Clarkson and the chaps to present it!  Just imagine... "that cake is rubbish you silly cow!"  etc etc etc
		
Click to expand...

I wonder what the most powerful cake in the world would be?

Or if you raced across Japan, would a Chocolate Fudge Cake or a Victoria Sandwich win?


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Sep 15, 2016)

A Victoria Sandwich is lighter but a Chocolate Fudge cake is more satisfying. Pure pace or grunt?


----------



## bobmac (Sep 15, 2016)

Star in a reasonably priced burger van


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 15, 2016)

Well  what do we expect when we have John Whittingdale egged on by his anti-BBC Tory colleagues effectively cutting BBC funding and making BBC fund the over75yrs licence fee.  Â£650m less budget - can't afford to compete for the programmes.  Loss of TGBBO is not the fault of the BBC - it's the fault of the government and George Osborne's austerity programme - currently being abandoned by Teresa May.  

Though there are those here who will say that I would say that - it is surely an incontrovertible truth. Not that I am that bothered about TGBBO as it's not something I have ever really watched.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-33400935


----------



## Hacker Khan (Sep 15, 2016)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Well  what do we expect when we have John Whittingdale egged on by his *anti-BBC Tory colleagues effectively cutting BBC funding *and making BBC fund the over75yrs licence fee.  Â£650m less budget - can't afford to compete for the programmes.  Loss of TGBBO is not the fault of the BBC - it's the fault of the government and George Osborne's austerity programme - currently being abandoned by Teresa May.  

Though there are those here who will say that I would say that - it is surely an incontrovertible truth. Not that I am that bothered about TGBBO as it's not something I have ever really watched.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-33400935

Click to expand...

Like this? But then again I would post that...




http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-37365718

You keep chipping away Tory party, uncle Rupert and The Daily Mail will be very pleased with you.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 15, 2016)

Hacker Khan said:



			Like this? But then again I would post that...

View attachment 20780


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-37365718

You keep chipping away Tory party, uncle Rupert and The Daily Mail will be very pleased with you.

Click to expand...

That's it...why should I pay my BBC licence fee when BBC can't keep my favourite programme (TGBBO) and it goes to Ch4 - which I get that for free...


----------



## Sweep (Sep 15, 2016)

I just knew it wouldn't be long before the left would blame it all on the government.
You could argue that if its a good enough model for a commercial station - even a non profit station - to do well with, then it's mismanagement by the BBC to be outbid. But that wouldn't suit the looney left agenda.
The fact is the BBC is funded by an outdated model. They have been left for dead by the commercial stations. The TV arm at least should be funded commercially. Good grief, they are even writing to companies now telling them they will be checked to see if any employees are watching iplayer on company PCs, because if they are the company has to buy a TV licence. Like we have time to watch TV.
Its nothing more than a publicly funded mouthpiece for the left these days and I for one object being forced to fund it.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Sep 15, 2016)

Sweep said:



			I just knew it wouldn't be long before the left would blame it all on the government.
You could argue that if its a good enough model for a commercial station - even a non profit station - to do well with, then it's mismanagement by the BBC to be outbid. But that wouldn't suit the looney left agenda.
The fact is the BBC is funded by an outdated model. *They have been left for dead by the commercial stations*. The TV arm at least should be funded commercially. Good grief, they are even writing to companies now telling them they will be checked to see if any employees are watching iplayer on company PCs, because if they are the company has to buy a TV licence. Like we have time to watch TV.
Its nothing more than a publicly funded mouthpiece for the left these days and I for one object being forced to fund it.
		
Click to expand...

Well if having the largest viewing figures mean they are being left for dead then you make a very sensible and balanced point.

http://www.barb.co.uk/viewing-data/weekly-viewing-summary/

Yours sincerely

A looney lefty.


----------



## SocketRocket (Sep 15, 2016)

Hacker Khan said:



			Well if having the largest viewing figures mean they are being left for dead then you make a very sensible and balanced point.

http://www.barb.co.uk/viewing-data/weekly-viewing-summary/

Yours sincerely

A looney lefty.
		
Click to expand...


Du bist ein Berliner.


----------



## ColchesterFC (Sep 15, 2016)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			That's it...why should I pay my BBC licence fee when BBC can't keep my favourite programme (TGBBO) and it goes to Ch4 - which I get that for free...
		
Click to expand...

Do you ever look at the BBC Sport website or have a look at the BBC News website? Or watch the news on BBC? Or listen to any of the BBC radio stations? All of which are funded from the license fee. If not, then you might have a justifiable complaint about the license fee but if you ever use one of these services then maybe you should wind your neck in and stop sulking over the fact that the BBC no longer shows your favourite programme.


----------



## bluewolf (Sep 15, 2016)

ColchesterFC said:



			Do you ever look at the BBC Sport website or have a look at the BBC News website? Or watch the news on BBC? Or listen to any of the BBC radio stations? All of which are funded from the license fee. If not, then you might have a justifiable complaint about the license fee but if you ever use one of these services then maybe you should wind your neck in and stop sulking over the fact that the BBC no longer shows your favourite programme.
		
Click to expand...

I think he was being sarcastic.


----------



## Sweep (Sep 16, 2016)

Hacker Khan said:



			Well if having the largest viewing figures mean they are being left for dead then you make a very sensible and balanced point.

http://www.barb.co.uk/viewing-data/weekly-viewing-summary/

Yours sincerely

A looney lefty.
		
Click to expand...

They have been left for dead when you compare the offerings of the commercial companies with dedicated sports, movies, arts and entertainment channels. The BBC is now a jack of all trades and sadly master of none. The world has moved on. It was OK when we had 2 or 3 or even 4 channels to charge a TV licence and offer a couple of channels without ads and fulfil public service broadcasting. The BBC made great programs then, probably because they had to. no-one else made them except ITV and they showed what they made in competition to the Beeb. Now the BBC buy in rather than make and this is the result. They make a program successful because of their platform and then the makers take it to the highest bidder.
There are several good reasons why the BBC gets the audience it does. Firstly because of its special place in British hearts it's the first place viewers look. Where else in the world do they call their state broadcaster "Auntie"? Secondly it is very conveniently at the top of every listing and number 1 on the remote, because historically it was always channel 1 and 2. Thirdly people watch it because quite frankly they have paid for it and many still can't or won't pay for subscription TV.

No-one will argue that the BBC do certain things well. Bake Off is a good example. It's quintessentially British and a bit querky. Strictly is the same. Their nature stuff is amazingly produced. But if you really think about the programs you watch on the BBC nowadays, would you pay for it if you weren't forced to? Maybe, but if they lose Strictly and Eastenders how much is left?

For me, the TV arm of the business should go free to air commercial, like ITV, Channel 4 etc. It wouldn't be so bad if they didn't fill the space between programs with adverts for their own shows, but the result is just the same as commercial with slightly less interesting adverts.
The radio side is a different matter. the World Service is vital and should be publically funded and I am lead to believe it's the main reason why so many people speak English around the world.

Joking aside, it does concern me that a state broadcaster has become so biased in their news programming. A lot of concern is being voiced and the BBC seems to take no notice. When a state broadcaster has its own political agenda, you are suddenly on very dangerous ground, whichever side of the political divide they favour. The news should be the news and not a magazine program.

As for Bake Off, is it such a problem to press 4 rather than 1 on the remote? Maybe they didn't want to pay as much as Channel 4 because the BBC gets its money whether they show good programs or not. The same cannot be said for Channel 4 and maybe that's why they pushed the boat out. That's competition and it's time to level the playing field. If the BBC is as good as you say it is, as a commercial entity it could only flourish.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Sep 16, 2016)

I was agreeing with the above post until you threw in the world service to be publicly funded. No thanks. It is not our role to spread the English language around the world, nor keep British diplomats in touch with life back home. The internet can do all of that now. Log on, read a website. 

Same with BBC news world channel which you often get as the only English channel in European hotels. It gives you news from all the remote corners of the world but nothing about Britain. A ridiculous waste of licence money.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 16, 2016)

bluewolf said:



			I think he was being sarcastic.
		
Click to expand...

He was.  

And he's also not sure what's lefty about observing that it is inevitable that budgets for programmes will be cut if the government cuts BBC funding (or doesn't increase the licence fee) and is asked to find Â£650m for the over 75s licencing.  Because that's what Osborne did.


----------



## SocketRocket (Sep 16, 2016)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			He was.  

And he's also not sure what's lefty about observing that it is inevitable that budgets for programmes will be cut if the government cuts BBC funding (or doesn't increase the licence fee) and is asked to find Â£650m for the over 75s licencing.  Because that's what Osborne 
did.
		
Click to expand...

Makes your heart bleed for poor old Auntie.   Every new household brings in a new License fee and we all know that's a whole lot of licenses.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Sep 16, 2016)

SocketRocket said:



			Makes your heart bleed for poor old Auntie.   Every new household brings in a new License fee and we all know that's a whole lot of licenses.
		
Click to expand...

No bleeding heart for TGBBO here - but if you are not happy that BBC have failed to keep that programme by not being willing to pay more due to budget limitations - don't blame the BBC for living within their means - blame those who have constrained the budget.


----------



## Sweep (Sep 16, 2016)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			No bleeding heart for TGBBO here - but if you are not happy that BBC have failed to keep that programme by not being willing to pay more due to budget limitations - don't blame the BBC for living within their means - blame those who have constrained the budget.
		
Click to expand...

Yes, let's give the BBC an unlimited budget of public funds so they can give us what the commercial free to air stations give us for nothing.


----------



## Papas1982 (Sep 16, 2016)

ColchesterFC said:



			Do you ever look at the BBC Sport website or have a look at the BBC News website? Or watch the news on BBC? Or listen to any of the BBC radio stations? All of which are funded from the license fee. If not, then you might have a justifiable complaint about the license fee but if you ever use one of these services then maybe you should wind your neck in and stop sulking over the fact that the BBC no longer shows your favourite programme.
		
Click to expand...

Whilst I generally have very little use for the BBC, be that tv, radio or online. The fee is hardly extoriniate. 

That said, if someone views a few pages of online content. I'd hardly say they should be taxed, which is exactly what it is. The same amount as a regularly viewer because the tv content costs a darn sight more to produce.


----------



## ColchesterFC (Sep 16, 2016)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			No bleeding heart for TGBBO here - but if you are not happy that BBC have failed to keep that programme by not being willing to pay more due to budget limitations - don't blame the BBC for living within their means - blame those who have constrained the budget.
		
Click to expand...




Sweep said:



			Yes, let's give the BBC an unlimited budget of public funds so they can give us what the commercial free to air stations give us for nothing.
		
Click to expand...

An interesting point was raised regarding this. The BBC was happy to pay approx Â£200 million to keep the rights to show Match of the Day which averages around 4 million (mainly male) viewers but refused to pay Â£25 million to keep GBBO which averages around 9-10 million (mainly female) viewers.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Sep 17, 2016)

ColchesterFC said:



			An interesting point was raised regarding this. The BBC was happy to pay approx Â£200 million to keep the rights to show Match of the Day which averages around 4 million (mainly male) viewers but refused to pay Â£25 million to keep GBBO which averages around 9-10 million (mainly female) viewers.
		
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be so sure it's mostly female viewers

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/...hed-Great-British-Bake-Off-than-football.html


----------



## Bunkermagnet (Sep 17, 2016)

ColchesterFC said:



			An interesting point was raised regarding this. The BBC was happy to pay approx Â£200 million to keep the rights to show Match of the Day which averages around 4 million (mainly male) viewers but refused to pay Â£25 million to keep GBBO which averages around 9-10 million (mainly female) viewers.
		
Click to expand...


To compare the financial costs you also need to compare the actual numbers of shows per year. On thats basis MOTD works out cheaper


----------

