Great British Bake Off 2016

[Mastodon2]

I have a feeling that C4 have bought themselves a bit of a turkey here, they seem to have misunderstood the show in the same way that some posters in this thread have. It's not the concept or necessarily even the presenters that viewers enjoy, it's the familiarity of it that keeps people coming back. C4 have failed to see that and showing it on their channel, cutting the length down to put adverts in and the inevitable "modernising the program for a younger audience" were always going to turn the core viewer off.

I do expect that it will get some half-decent viewing figures in the next series, but it will tail off quickly and soon C4 will wish they didn't have 3 years to mull over this blunder. Likewise, someone at Love Productions will probably be getting the sack, scoring the big money deal by creating a 3 year deal on a program no one watches and damaging the credibility of the people that make it as a result.

Much like Top Gear, it's a case of the big wigs thinking they know better than the consumer. They think they know all the ingredients but their recipe came out half-baked and look what happened to that.

[vxr8mate]

RemyMartin said:

MiniMan64 said:

vxr8mate said:

Hollywood is the most important of all the presenters and I think C4 have offered him a pay rise of significant proportions, so why wouldn't he stay on.

Mel and Sue are mere garnish and will be easily replaced, hopefully with people that are funny.

Let's be honest, Mary is getting on a bit and probably fancies putting her feet up.

I think people seriously underestimate the importance of all four of them as a team, if they put someone like Oliver in there it's going to crash and burn, guaranteed.

This. Anyone who thinks they can be 'easily' replaced does not understand the viewing demographic of this show.

Top gear all over again. Will fade away into obscurity.

Top Gear didn't 'fade away,' it's still there and I think doing well.

As for 'underestimating,' speak for yourself. I will be gald to see the back of Mel and Sue and others I know are saying the same.

[Europa1]

nicanary said:

Now there's a shock. He's the only one of the 4 presenters who has no principles. Smell the money.......

What principles should he have?

[Halmyre]

I'll never understand PH. One minute the place is full of people who think the BBC is a cesspool of godless communists, and the next they're banging on about respecting the organisation's honour and principles.

[Janluke]

Why didnt Channel 4 speak to the presenters before making their bid, bearing in mind the presenters are a core part of the show its pretty ballsy to make a bid and just assume they'd all follow. All they've bought is the format in the same way the overseas broadcasters have ecect for a lot more money.

I understand the why Mary, Mel and Sue havent gone but also can't see why Paul Hollywood is getting such a hard time on social media etc

[KTF]

Europa1 said:

nicanary said:

Now there's a shock. He's the only one of the 4 presenters who has no principles. Smell the money.......

What principles should he have?

The presenters are all freelancers. The contract with the BBC finished and C4 came along with a new contract offering him the same job and more money.

What was he meant to do, say no? If so, why?

[Moonhawk]

nicanary said:

Now there's a shock. He's the only one of the 4 presenters who has no principles. Smell the money.......

What principles do you think he should have.

He is a contractor who is out of contract. As with any other contractor - he has a perfectly legitimate right to seek alternative contractual arrangements when existing contracts come to an end. Happens every day in many sectors of business up and down the country.

Do all of these people lack principles?

[Europa1]

KTF said:

Europa1 said:

nicanary said:

Now there's a shock. He's the only one of the 4 presenters who has no principles. Smell the money.......

What principles should he have?

The presenters are all freelancers. The contract with the BBC finished and C4 came along with a new contract offering him the same job and more money.

What was he meant to do, say no? If so, why?

I am struggling to understand the outrage this is generating. A TV show has moved from one free to air channel to another free to air channel.

[SystemParanoia]

Doesnt the BBC own most of Ch4 ?

[smithyithy]

SystemParanoia said:

Doesnt the BBC own most of Ch4 ?

It's owned by the Channel 4 Television Corporation whose parent is the Department for Culture, Media & Sport (UK Gov)

[SystemParanoia]

smithyithy said:

SystemParanoia said:

Doesnt the BBC own most of Ch4 ?

It's owned by the Channel 4 Television Corporation whose parent is the Department for Culture, Media & Sport (UK Gov)

Ahh Gov, not Auntie... i see

[MarshPhantom]

vxr8mate said:

RemyMartin said:

MiniMan64 said:

vxr8mate said:

Hollywood is the most important of all the presenters and I think C4 have offered him a pay rise of significant proportions, so why wouldn't he stay on.

Mel and Sue are mere garnish and will be easily replaced, hopefully with people that are funny.

Let's be honest, Mary is getting on a bit and probably fancies putting her feet up.

I think people seriously underestimate the importance of all four of them as a team, if they put someone like Oliver in there it's going to crash and burn, guaranteed.

This. Anyone who thinks they can be 'easily' replaced does not understand the viewing demographic of this show.

Top gear all over again. Will fade away into obscurity.

Top Gear didn't 'fade away,' it's still there and I think doing well.

As for 'underestimating,' speak for yourself. I will be gald to see the back of Mel and Sue and others I know are saying the same.

Who would be better than M and S?

Top Gear doing well?

[MarshPhantom]

RemyMartin said:

MiniMan64 said:

vxr8mate said:

Hollywood is the most important of all the presenters and I think C4 have offered him a pay rise of significant proportions, so why wouldn't he stay on.

Mel and Sue are mere garnish and will be easily replaced, hopefully with people that are funny.

Let's be honest, Mary is getting on a bit and probably fancies putting her feet up.

I think people seriously underestimate the importance of all four of them as a team, if they put someone like Oliver in there it's going to crash and burn, guaranteed.

This. Anyone who thinks they can be 'easily' replaced does not understand the viewing demographic of this show.

Absolutely. The "Comic" Relief ones without Mel and Sue are generally awful.
C4's plan is Celebrity Bake Off, so it will be Comic Relief Bake Off without Mary.

Great work Channel 4.

[Cobnapint]

Janluke said:

Why didnt Channel 4 speak to the presenters before making their bid, bearing in mind the presenters are a core part of the show its pretty ballsy to make a bid and just assume they'd all follow. All they've bought is the format in the same way the overseas broadcasters have ecect for a lot more money.

Agree. They've bought one of the finest pieces of bone china availabe at auction, and dropped it on the way back to the car.

The show was so good because all it's constituent parts matched so perfectly. Now it's broken.

I didn't watch it myself but the missus did, and I appreciate it for what it was.

[vxr8mate]

MarshPhantom said:

RemyMartin said:

MiniMan64 said:

vxr8mate said:

Hollywood is the most important of all the presenters and I think C4 have offered him a pay rise of significant proportions, so why wouldn't he stay on.

Mel and Sue are mere garnish and will be easily replaced, hopefully with people that are funny.

Let's be honest, Mary is getting on a bit and probably fancies putting her feet up.

I think people seriously underestimate the importance of all four of them as a team, if they put someone like Oliver in there it's going to crash and burn, guaranteed.

This. Anyone who thinks they can be 'easily' replaced does not understand the viewing demographic of this show.

Absolutely. The "Comic" Relief ones without Mel and Sue are generally awful.
C4's plan is Celebrity Bake Off, so it will be Comic Relief Bake Off without Mary.

Great work Channel 4.

You don't like the new TG and you obviously think Mel and Sue are great. Maybe the new GBBO will be aiming for a demographic that doesn't include you. Well at least I hope so.

[Jonesy23]

smithyithy said:

It's owned by the Channel 4 Television Corporation whose parent is the Department for Culture, Media & Sport (UK Gov)

Which is where they made the biggest mistake. £25m per year to buy in GBBO from another UK channel isn't compatible with the Channel 4 remit and model, and this has been noticed.

As said the fallout could be interesting.

[gl20]

Anyone on here know how media contracts of this nature work? Are there normally clauses that say the transfer fee is contingent on presenters being retained? surely they are such a part of the asset's value that, as the buyer, C4 would have some protection/rebate in this scenario?

[Cobnapint]

Sounds to me like a rush job, I get the feeling C4 just bought it without looking too deeply.

[FourWheelDrift]

Cobnapint said:

Sounds to me like a rush job, I get the feeling C4 just bought it without looking too deeply.

Not only that but they were so unbelievably amateurish they did not specify the whole team as part of the deal. No team no deal.

It's like Apple buying out McLaren but only getting the empty factory at Woking because they didn't specify the cars, people and IP.

[KTF]

gl20 said:

Anyone on here know how media contracts of this nature work? Are there normally clauses that say the transfer fee is contingent on presenters being retained? surely they are such a part of the asset's value that, as the buyer, C4 would have some protection/rebate in this scenario?

Clearly not as three of the four jumped ship.