BBC Cuts..

[DOD]Asprilla;19631938 said:
I read 'No' and the rest doesn't really matter does it?

Similarly I could say that the BBC has policies that must be complied to when it comes to contract signing and whilst BBC commercial managers may want to sign a deal whatever the contract says their corporate lawyers will simply not allow it. One of these is that the contract must have an exit clause or the capacity to be terminated early.

Actually the rest does matter, there are things lawyers can't do. You either accept the terms or you don't own the rights, simple as.
 
Actually the rest does matter, there are things lawyers can't do. You either accept the terms or you don't own the rights, simple as.

This could go on for some time. The Corporate Counsel have the last say. If it doesn't meet their requirements then it doesn't get signed.

You've already said you've not seen the contract and yet you are so staggeringly sure of what in it. Strange.
 
[DOD]Asprilla;19632058 said:
You've already said you've not seen the contract and yet you are so staggeringly sure of what in it. Strange.

surprisingly you don't always need to see the contract. You can go read up on bernie and tv rights and see what he has said for a start.
 
Let's wait and see. I guarantee that if they don't sell the rights they will continue broadcasting, as otherwise bernie will win all their license fee and then some in compensation(maybe slightly exaggerated) but the point is that the punishment is so harsh they would continue broadcasting. They could cut the introduction and features and still broadcast the race to save money.
 
Let's wait and see. I guarantee that if they don't sell the rights they will continue broadcasting, as otherwise bernie will win all their license fee and then some in compensation(maybe slightly exaggerated) but the point is that the punishment is so harsh they would continue broadcasting. They could cut the introduction and features and still broadcast the race to save money.

Agreed, however I really enjoy the coverage of practice, qualifying, and the introduction / features etc. (not that I watch them all the time, but it's nice to have the choice)
 
Keep Angry Boys and Family Guy though. Rest can go.

I’m sure Channel 4 would happily take Family Guy off their hands, which would save them some cash.

BBC3 and BBC4 should merge or simply drop them. Radio channels such as Radio 1 Xtra should go, Radio 1 plays most of their stuff anyway.
 
BBC do a lot of really good stuff but they also show utter trash, it's the sociality dooming junk they need to cut not this.
russell-brand_1241627c.jpg
 
I’m sure Channel 4 would happily take Family Guy off their hands, which would save them some cash.

BBC3 and BBC4 should merge or simply drop them. Radio channels such as Radio 1 Xtra should go, Radio 1 plays most of their stuff anyway.
Was going to say the same thing, there are plenty of channels that will pick up non BBC material no trouble.

However merging BBC3 and BBC4 isn't a good idea, 3 is designed for people with single digit IQ's, 4 requires a lot of brain cells and an attention span longer than a goldfish, it just wouldn't work.

When will the BBC realise that they need to shape society rather than letting the lowest common denominator shape them?

They also need to keep on shaking the tree internally, there's far too many freeloaders still in there.
Example: does anyone know how many people agreed to strike that Friday compared to how many actually spent the day at the picket line? I'm damned sure there'd be a huge discrepancy, if you weren't at the picket line you're outta here...
A strike isn't a chance to grab a day at the park in great weather and a free long weekend, muppets.
 
[DOD]Asprilla;19631208 said:
I wish I lived in your world where everything was so simple and so black and white.

I am glad i don't live in your naive world where you think any organization that's revenue comes from misappropriation will ever be able to adequately spend the money. The BBC is a thieving, propagandist based organization that should be put to death. There is nothing good that comes out of the £4 billion in misappropriated funds. if they are so good then what is the problem with making it voluntary? If there are so many English license players that love the BBC propaganda then they will continue to pay for it.

You can't even own a TV without paying money to the BBC. That should be a crime to any principled person.
 
I am glad i don't live in your naive world where you think any organization that's revenue comes from misappropriation will ever be able to adequately spend the money. The BBC is a thieving, propagandist based organization that should be put to death. There is nothing good that comes out of the £4 billion in misappropriated funds. if they are so good then what is the problem with making it voluntary? If there are so many English license players that love the BBC propaganda then they will continue to pay for it.

You can't even own a TV without paying money to the BBC. That should be a crime to any principled person.

Wow. Much hate?

Work much with the BBC? I do. And with Sky and Ch4, and ITV as of next month.

I have no particular allegiance to any of then but I do feel you are fairly far off the mark.
 
I am glad i don't live in your naive world where you think any organization that's revenue comes from misappropriation will ever be able to adequately spend the money. The BBC is a thieving, propagandist based organization that should be put to death. There is nothing good that comes out of the £4 billion in misappropriated funds. if they are so good then what is the problem with making it voluntary? If there are so many English license players that love the BBC propaganda then they will continue to pay for it.

You can't even own a TV without paying money to the BBC. That should be a crime to any principled person.

I think this may be the first time I'd said this.

LOLGroen.

You've even got the bit about owning a TV wrong, you can own a TV without a licence, the licence is for Receiving Live Broadcasts.

The rest of the statement is even funnier :)
 
You can't even own a TV without paying money to the BBC. That should be a crime to any principled person.

Don't be silly, you know that isn't the case, otherwise you wouldn't even be able to buy at TV without first presenting a TV licence.

Albeit, if you really don't know this, you've clearly never bought a TV and so no doubt have never bought a TV licence either.

As far as taxes imposed by governments go, a £12 a month fee to watch some great television is hardly going to cause me to want to up sticks and move to another country. You could be living in some communist state or corrupt third world government where they take all your money.
 
Well Andy Parfitt is leaving so that is a saving of £211,000 per year



Feel free to browse the salary's of the senior staff on the BBC here -
http://www.bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/running/bbcstructure/az.shtml

It's just a pity we don't see the equivalent wages as ITV, C4, C5, and Sky as easily, especially when an ex BBC guy moves from the BBC and usually gets a massive pay hike at the other broadcasters :)

IIRC it works out at something like the top 10 BBC senior management between them get less than a couple of their equivalents at ITV and Sky (even the DM editor is much better paid than the DG of the BBC).
 
My heart bleeds for them... Perhaps if they hadn't been designed to be reliant on taxpayer's money and continue to be funded irrespective of whether they were producing the goods or not (which isn't to say that everything the Beeb produces is bad) then they wouldn't be in quite the same position.
Perhaps the license fee could be reduced so that it covers only BBC news coverage (not necessarily rolling news). They would receive funding regardless of whether they were competing well against commercial news outlets. The focus would be on unbiased coverage of a broad spectrum of events.

Then have optional funding for everything else. Produce a year's worth of toss and you lose your funding.
 
Back
Top Bottom