BBC set to announce budget cuts - Page 2

Chrysalis · 06-10-2011, 11:40

In my view.

bbc3,4 cbbc should go.
the bbc should not spend money on trying to gain viewers of commercial channels, eg. competing with itv sat nights.
I disagree with the decision to spend extras on comedy.

The bbc could setup an online archive of all historical shows and sell access to it to raise funds, old classics like grange hill etc. There is clearly demand as shown by the illegal sharing of old shows.

It was also very wrong to do that deal with sky on F1 just to stop channel4 getting F1. They acting like a commercial channel when they shouldnt be.

Also I dont agree with them paying middle aged newsreaders 100k a year, get someone form uni doing it for 15k a year instead. Channel4 did it with countdown, presenters demanding obscene wages so they had the balls to sack them and replace them and in my view jeff and that new girl are doing a great job on countdown on much lower wages.

Jimmy-J · 06-10-2011, 12:21

Will we see a rise in the licence fee after all these cuts?... I thought so.

Russ · 06-10-2011, 12:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimmy-J

Will we see a rise in the licence fee after all these cuts?... I thought so.

Really? Really?

Why do you think they're having these cuts?!

**Chris** · 06-10-2011, 13:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimmy-J

Will we see a rise in the licence fee after all these cuts?... I thought so.

The licence fee will not be allowed to rise until after 2017. If you tried reading about something before deciding what you think about it you'd be less confused.

Welshchris · 06-10-2011, 19:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris

Would be good to find a link for that as it would have major implications for their future plans. The fact is, a lot of the move has already happened. Children's completed the move last month.

i cant remember where i read it but the reasons that were given that they may not move them is because some people will need to travel between thames studios and the BBC ones within a short ammount of time and if the studios are so far apart big costs could be incured for getting the people between studios ontime.

---------- Post added at 20:47 ---------- Previous post was at 20:45 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by denphone

l also think another thing the BBC could do is utilise its huges archives to fill in weaknesses in programming as it has some wonderful stuff in these archives which quite a few viewers would love to see.

i have been saying this for a long time.

There is so much they could release on DVD or show on TV.

Why not on their website put it to the people what they would like to be shown or released from their achives and release them at an affordable price and not a massive price like Â£80 a box set which most people will wait for it to fall in price to atleast below Â£40.

**Chris** · 06-10-2011, 20:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Welshchris

i cant remember where i read it but the reasons that were given that they may not move them is because some people will need to travel between thames studios and the BBC ones within a short ammount of time and if the studios are so far apart big costs could be incured for getting the people between studios ontime.

You may have been reading the complaints from some of the staff that didn't want to move out of London.

Not only is the Salford move going ahead, they are now planning to move an additional 1,000 staff there compared to the original plan. BBC Three will be in Salford from 2016.

Chrysalis · 06-10-2011, 21:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by heero_yuy

BBC3 and BBC4 are a waste of bandwidth, any unique shows should be pulled back to BBC1/2. Having two kiddies channels is also a waste.

Unfortuntly due to a very shortsighted attitude in the late 70's and 80's the BBC erased many quality shows and documentaries just to save on tape costs so apart from private archives, I have several 100's of hours of "World about us" and Horizon from then on LP1700 tapes, (Pre VHS system) they are just not available.

Another area of bloat are the legions of sports commentators sent out to major events like the olympics, with separate teams for each channel.

The BBC has IMO run amok and has far exceeded the PSB remit in the pursuit of ratings or in an attempt to crush its commercial competitors on radio, TV and internet using a revenue stream that it knows will never (until now) be curtailed.

agreed with everything said there, it seems they have a problem they cant/refuse to shake off. The bbc will probably have about 4x the staff at the olympics than itv does.

Waldo Pepper · 07-10-2011, 03:28

I can add a few changes that would save a fortune.

1. Get rid of Woss and Norton.
2. Let's return to the days of Kenneth Kendal i.e one presenter to give us news instead of the tennis style tittilating conversations between two.
3. Stop giving us weather details from location. You don't need to be in Scotland to tell us it's raining there.
4. Scrap 'Stenders.
5. Leave local news to the radio. We don't need an onsite crew reporting on the likes of a "Rabbit owner in Peterborough....."

However I won't deny they make some cracking drama series.

Russ · 07-10-2011, 06:47

It's incredible to see what some of the BBC radio presenters are saying on facebook and twitter about how their jobs will go when so many shows and stations will be networked. Up in arms about it, the lot of them. Although I did wonder why these people were not so vocal 3 years ago when commercial radio went the same way.

Jimmy-J · 08-10-2011, 02:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris

The licence fee will not be allowed to rise until after 2017. If you tried reading about something before deciding what you think about it you'd be less confused.

Who's confused? What I said in my post was right.

**Chris** · 08-10-2011, 08:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimmy-J

Who's confused? What I said in my post was right.

No, it wasn't. You suggested they'd increase the fee after making the cuts, while neglecting to include the significant fact that there will be no fee increase for at least 6 years.

Still, if the facts don't fit your views, why not, eh.

Jimmy-J · 08-10-2011, 13:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris

No, it wasn't. You suggested they'd increase the fee after making the cuts, while neglecting to include the significant fact that there will be no fee increase for at least 6 years.

Still, if the facts don't fit your views, why not, eh.

will the licence fee increase after the cuts, yes or no?

Welshchris · 08-10-2011, 14:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Waldo Pepper

I can add a few changes that would save a fortune.

1. Get rid of Woss and Norton.
2. Let's return to the days of Kenneth Kendal i.e one presenter to give us news instead of the tennis style tittilating conversations between two.
3. Stop giving us weather details from location. You don't need to be in Scotland to tell us it's raining there.
4. Scrap 'Stenders.
5. Leave local news to the radio. We don't need an onsite crew reporting on the likes of a "Rabbit owner in Peterborough....."

However I won't deny they make some cracking drama series.

Ross is no longer with BBC he is back with Channel 4

I do agree they waste money with this on location weather reports

and yes some of the onsite reporting can be a waste of money to.

i also think a lot of their shows are boring and tedious, instead of aiming at particular audiences they should start to do more family orientated shows and get back to writing some of the best sitcoms in the world.

**Chris** · 08-10-2011, 14:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimmy-J

will the licence fee increase after the cuts, yes or no?

I'm not interested in hare-brained attempts to frame questions so that the answer appears to back up your view. All you're doing is trying - and failing - to dodge the inconvenient fact that Parliament has banned the BBC from increasing the licence fee until 2017 at the earliest.

Insisting that your cynicism is justified simply because the licence fee will at some point in the future go upwards is about as clever as pretending you're some sort of soothsayer for claiming that the sun will come up tomorrow morning.

If there was any spark of intelligence about your argument you might at least try to factor in by how much the licence fee would have to go up in 2017 - assuming it does go up - in order to counteract the effects of six years of inflation.

The value of the licence fee, by staying static in cash terms, will fall significantly in the next 6 years. The next time it increases, it is entirely possible that it won't be allowed to go up far enough for its value to be even the same as it is today, never mind greater.

Please, stop me if this is confusing you.

Osem · 08-10-2011, 17:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Welshchris

Ross is no longer with BBC he is back with Channel 4

I do agree they waste money with this on location weather reports

and yes some of the onsite reporting can be a waste of money to.

i also think a lot of their shows are boring and tedious, instead of aiming at particular audiences they should start to do more family orientated shows and get back to writing some of the best sitcoms in the world.

Ross is on ITV isn't he? Minus that stupid 'Guy Fawkes' visage his mid-life crisis brought on.