Ok, they do show *some* mass appeal shows (Eastenders, Dr Who, Top Gear etc...) but the goal is to provide a full, wide range of shows which some may call 'tripe'. For example, the pompous and ridiculous shows often on some of the BBC radio stations (eg. much of the content of Radio 4 for example) make no sense to me - they would be a 'waste of money', but no-one else will cater to that minority market. What about BBC Radio 6 Music? That was slated to be closed due to poor listener numbers, but has been saved because it fulfils a goal.
ie. it is a public service broadcaster, not a commercial broadcaster.
Last edited by localzuk; 29th July 2011 at 12:28 PM.
Why couldn't the bbc and itv split them 50-50. all races fta but splits the cost. Or even go to channel 4/5 if it must.
I'm not paying £600 a year to watch f1.
Agreed. I like Radio 6, and dislike Radio 1, but wouldn't want to see either of them go for any reason.
Eastenders wouldn't be missed, though.
Last edited by jinnantonnixx; 29th July 2011 at 12:28 PM.
Blinking Joke this is, F1 lives on teh Beeb, Sky will fill it wtih adverts and you'll never get to see the excitment it will be like ITV was, you'll come back from 3 minutes of junk to a oh well Schumacher just crashed and the race red flagged but we were learning about some insurance or car selling thing so you missed it and FOM TV has shown the replays whilst you were being bored by adverts thus you missed it sorry etc...
They should shut BBC4 that was the option they had it was F1 or BBC4, close BBC4, shift a load of the junk off BBC3 and make the two into one.
How is Sky so good at making people part with money?
I haven't got Sky (Freesat does me fine) but this is how I understand it:
You subscribe to Sky.
You buy extra packages to see the stuff you really want to see.
You pay more indirectly (advertising)
You buy pay-per-view events on top of everything.
Is this right?
This is just like cricket going to sky, england won the ashes in the Aussies backyard not done since god know when and as very few people could watch it the nation didn't care, compare it to when we won the ashes in 2005 when the nation was really in to tit.
SKY = MURDOCH = THE MAN = BAD
@localzuk if that's the case, then where do they stop with axing the 'mass appeal shows' (as you termed it)?
If these shows are watched by a minority market and therefore most likely losing money then why not axe them to save money rather than axing things that make money? You're probably gonna say that it's because the BBC's goal is to broadcast shows that otherwise wouldn't get broadcast (unless you were referring this point to my argument over axing BBC4, maybe?). I would think that although F1 costs a lot of money to produce, it would think it cancels that out by the revenue it brings in.Originally Posted by localzuk
Yes, you're right, I am saying what you said there - because the BBC is a public service broadcaster, not a mass appeal broadcaster. Not to make money.
Last edited by localzuk; 29th July 2011 at 12:38 PM. Reason: fix sentence - the BBC does make income from global sale of shows, but not UK broadcast
I'm with localzuk on this. BBC is a service. Look what happens when the lowest common denominator is catered for. ITV1. Yes, it has its place. I can't think where, but I'm being kind.
Very disappointed to hear the news that $ky have F1 from next year.
I've really enjoyed this F1 Season so far in glorious HD (Freesat not $ky, not forgetting the extra viewers benefiting from Freeview HD).
I'll have to see what Foreign Satellite Channels are showing it FTA and adjust my portable satellite dish in the garden
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)