A Sky, cable and digital tv forum. Digital TV Banter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » Digital TV Banter forum » Digital TV Newsgroups » uk.tech.digital-tv (Digital TV - General)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

uk.tech.digital-tv (Digital TV - General) (uk.tech.digital-tv) Discussion of all matters technical in origin related to the reception of digital television transmissions, be they via satellite, terrestrial or cable. Advertising is forbidden, with no exceptions.

How does closing BBC Three save any money?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old September 28th 15, 09:29 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
John Hall[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 265
Default How does closing BBC Three save any money?

In message , Scott
writes
On Sun, 27 Sep 2015 23:36:44 +0200, Martin wrote:

On Sun, 27 Sep 2015 12:37:56 +0100, Scott
wrote:

I see the 'closure' of BBC Three has not been postponed until after
Christmas. I still don't see how this move will save any money at
all. If BBC Three continues on-line then the production costs are
still there. The multiplex is still there, apparently with BBC One+1
so so savings in transmission costs. Is it maybe that rights cost
less if the audience is smaller?

On a related theme, is BBC One+1 still going ahead? I thought Ofcom
thought it was unfair competition?


BBC1+1 is not going ahead. How on earth can it be unfair competition?


Found it:
http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2015-...posal-rejected


'However the Trust said that the proposals would have an “adverse”
effect on the rest of the industry “capturing viewing share for the
BBC at the expense of commercial channels and reducing the
profitability, in particular, of ITV and Channel 5".'

Boggle! Since when was the BBC supposed to be run with the interests of
the commercial channels at heart? Following that logic, perhaps BBC1
should be closed down.
--
John Hall
"Honest criticism is hard to take,
particularly from a relative, a friend,
an acquaintance, or a stranger." Franklin P Jones
Ads
  #12  
Old September 28th 15, 04:22 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
PeterC
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 812
Default How does closing BBC Three save any money?

On Mon, 28 Sep 2015 10:17:15 +0100, Brian-Gaff wrote:

I think a plus 24 might be better. One assumes though that it will only be
available when the kiddies channel is off.
To me with two third party kiddie channels now on for all day and night
should not the bbc up its kiddy channel game a bit?
Brian


Not really - the advantage of '+' channels is avoiding crowded slots and 9
pm is about the worst.
I sometimes record repeats at 0sillyhours, if I can do so without the
hand-wagglers. I have some binocular instability and can start to feel a bit
peculiar with flapping going on.
--
Peter.
The gods will stay away
whilst religions hold sway
  #13  
Old September 28th 15, 06:28 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 234
Default How does closing BBC Three save any money?

On Sunday, 27 September 2015 18:00:31 UTC+1, Peter Duncanson wrote:
.. It would be BBC Three
"Lite" providing the equivalent of 1, 2 or maybe 3 hours a day.


BBC is already 'Lite'.

I don't know about Family Guy and American Dad on tonight, but Top Gear, Don't Tell The Bride, EastEnders, and Russell Howard's Good News, are all repeats.

KKK The Fight for White Supremacy is shown three times between 9 pm and 3.50 am, but is marked NEW in my TV Guide, and Orphan Black is apparently NEW EPS.

That's a maximum of 3.5 hours new programming assuming FG and AD are new.

I don't want to see it go online-only but I wonder if they are running down new programming so fewer people object.

Owain

  #15  
Old September 28th 15, 10:20 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Johnny B Good[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 513
Default How does closing BBC Three save any money?

On Mon, 28 Sep 2015 10:29:48 +0100, John Hall wrote:

In message , Scott
writes
On Sun, 27 Sep 2015 23:36:44 +0200, Martin wrote:

On Sun, 27 Sep 2015 12:37:56 +0100, Scott
wrote:

I see the 'closure' of BBC Three has not been postponed until after
Christmas. I still don't see how this move will save any money at
all. If BBC Three continues on-line then the production costs are
still there. The multiplex is still there, apparently with BBC One+1
so so savings in transmission costs. Is it maybe that rights cost
less if the audience is smaller?

On a related theme, is BBC One+1 still going ahead? I thought Ofcom
thought it was unfair competition?

BBC1+1 is not going ahead. How on earth can it be unfair competition?


Found it:
http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2015-...posal-rejected


'However the Trust said that the proposals would have an “adverse”
effect on the rest of the industry “capturing viewing share for the BBC
at the expense of commercial channels and reducing the profitability, in
particular, of ITV and Channel 5".'

Boggle! Since when was the BBC supposed to be run with the interests of
the commercial channels at heart? Following that logic, perhaps BBC1
should be closed down.


That's exactly what the commercial broadcasters and their customers are
after. The BBC are effectively providing a refuge from advert infested
lowest common denominator programming for the viewer in the form of BBC1's
version of LCD programming which mimics the trash programming of those
two commercial broadcasters, only at a higher intellectual level thus
fulfilling the *educate* and entertain part of their charter. As such,
it's depriving the advertising industry and their enablers from gaining
the full 100% access to the UK consumer they so dearly crave.

“capturing viewing share for the BBC at the expense of commercial
channels and reducing the profitability, in particular, of ITV and
channel 5" *is* the whole point of BBC ONE afaics (and long may it be so).

ITV and Channel 5 are an affront to civilised society imho and should be
outlawed forthwith! Their demise, one way or another, couldn't come soon
enough afaiac.

--
Johnny B Good
  #16  
Old September 29th 15, 12:06 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Mark Carver
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,633
Default How does closing BBC Three save any money?

On 28/09/2015 23:20, Johnny B Good wrote:


That's exactly what the commercial broadcasters and their customers
after. The BBC are effectively providing a refuge from advert infested
lowest common denominator programming for the viewer in the form of
BBC1's
version of LCD programming which mimics the trash programming of those
two commercial broadcasters, only at a higher intellectual level thus
fulfilling the *educate* and entertain part of their charter. As such,
it's depriving the advertising industry and their enablers from
gaining
the full 100% access to the UK consumer they so dearly crave.


I write to you from the USA. If you think anything provided by the BBC,
or the UK commercial TV stations is 'LCD crap' then get yourself on the
next plane over here.

(Although the Yanks have a far better idea about local TV)



--
Mark
Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.
  #17  
Old September 29th 15, 02:51 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Johnny B Good[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 513
Default How does closing BBC Three save any money?

On Tue, 29 Sep 2015 01:06:55 +0100, Mark Carver wrote:

On 28/09/2015 23:20, Johnny B Good wrote:


That's exactly what the commercial broadcasters and their customers
after. The BBC are effectively providing a refuge from advert
infested lowest common denominator programming for the viewer in the
form of BBC1's version of LCD programming which mimics the trash
programming of those two commercial broadcasters, only at a higher
intellectual level thus fulfilling the *educate* and entertain part
of their charter. As such,
it's depriving the advertising industry and their enablers from
gaining the full 100% access to the UK consumer they so dearly crave.


I write to you from the USA. If you think anything provided by the BBC,
or the UK commercial TV stations is 'LCD crap' then get yourself on the
next plane over here.


No thanks, Mark. I caught enough of the 'flavour' of Yank TV on a
holiday to Toronto including a couple of days stay at the Brock Hotel,
Niagra Falls, way back in 2005.

I rarely watch live commercial TV at all these days and it's been that
way for over 2 decades now. I can't even be bothered to record commercial
TV or use 'Live Pause' since I know that the 'programme content' is
merely advert bait to suck the punters in and there's nothing they show
that I can't live without or else torrent download or wait for the BBC to
air. In any case, what the BBC put out is way more TV than I should be
watching so I'm certainly not at all interested in "The extra Choice"
being offered by the commercial broadcasters.

The only times I land up seeing commercial TV programmes are when I'm in
the kitchen/dining room to brew up a spot of lunch or a cup of tea whilst
the XYL has the TV set on for company in the day. I've learnt to 'bite my
tongue' in regard of making any deserved observations of the adverts or
the 'Bait Programming' since it upsets the XYL out of all proportion to
my restrained comments.


(Although the Yanks have a far better idea about local TV)


I don't know about local TV but that wouldn't surprise me since they've
been doing 'local TV' for way longer than the recent advent of local TV
stations here in the UK.

--
Johnny B Good
  #18  
Old September 30th 15, 01:56 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Johnny B Good[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 513
Default How does closing BBC Three save any money?

On Tue, 29 Sep 2015 09:58:24 +0200, Martin wrote:

On Mon, 28 Sep 2015 22:20:23 GMT, Johnny B Good
wrote:

On Mon, 28 Sep 2015 10:29:48 +0100, John Hall wrote:

In message , Scott
writes
On Sun, 27 Sep 2015 23:36:44 +0200, Martin wrote:

On Sun, 27 Sep 2015 12:37:56 +0100, Scott
wrote:

I see the 'closure' of BBC Three has not been postponed until after
Christmas. I still don't see how this move will save any money at
all. If BBC Three continues on-line then the production costs are
still there. The multiplex is still there, apparently with BBC
One+1 so so savings in transmission costs. Is it maybe that rights
cost less if the audience is smaller?

On a related theme, is BBC One+1 still going ahead? I thought Ofcom
thought it was unfair competition?

BBC1+1 is not going ahead. How on earth can it be unfair competition?

Found it:
http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2015-...posal-rejected

'However the Trust said that the proposals would have an “adverse”
effect on the rest of the industry “capturing viewing share for the
BBC at the expense of commercial channels and reducing the
profitability, in particular, of ITV and Channel 5".'

Boggle! Since when was the BBC supposed to be run with the interests
of the commercial channels at heart? Following that logic, perhaps
BBC1 should be closed down.


That's exactly what the commercial broadcasters and their customers are
after. The BBC are effectively providing a refuge from advert infested
lowest common denominator programming for the viewer in the form of
BBC1's version of LCD programming which mimics the trash programming of
those two commercial broadcasters, only at a higher intellectual level
thus fulfilling the *educate* and entertain part of their charter. As
such, it's depriving the advertising industry and their enablers from
gaining the full 100% access to the UK consumer they so dearly crave.


BBC1 & BBC2 programmes are at the same intellectual level as ITV's and
Channel 4's


I disagree. Even if we discount the disruptive effect of advert breaks,
BBC One, which I regard as 'Crap TV', is discernably more high brow than
ITV. Admittedly, not by a huge margin. The same applies when comparing
the higher quality of Channel Four's programming against BBC Two's
programming quality. BBC Two has a definite edge over Channel Four.
Sadly, this doesn't say very much for BBC Two's programme quality.


The "Educate" requirement is mainly fulfilled by BBC4.


In this, I agree. It's a great pity about the (admittedly rather muted)
DOG near the top left corner and the end credit crushing (which applies
to all four BBC channels) though.



“capturing viewing share for the BBC at the expense of commercial
channels and reducing the profitability, in particular, of ITV and
channel 5" *is* the whole point of BBC ONE afaics (and long may it be
so).

ITV and Channel 5 are an affront to civilised society imho and should
be
outlawed forthwith! Their demise, one way or another, couldn't come soon
enough afaiac.


Do you actually watch either channel?


Apart from mercifully brief glimpses, no.


--
Johnny B Good
  #19  
Old September 30th 15, 12:03 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Mark Carver
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,633
Default How does closing BBC Three save any money?

On 30/09/2015 09:27, Martin wrote:


Channel 4 has the best news.


Yes, I agree, and it's about the only regular ongoing programme on C4,
that has maintained C4's original remit.


--
Mark
Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:45 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.SEO by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright 2004-2018 Digital TV Banter.
The comments are property of their posters.