Jeremy Clarkson suspended by BBC...

[Oilchange]

Or smack the fool back?

[xjsdriver]

[redacted]

[mph1977]

longblackcoat said:

That proves only that you can download a list, not that you understand the industry.

You fail to point out that the BBC is required to ensure that at least 25% of the content comes from indie producers. So by definition there's going to be a lot.

You also fail to point out that at least 50% comes from in-house.

Here's the relevant bit from the Charter.




"Independent production quota

This relates to levels of programming made by qualifying independent producers only.

The BBC must ensure that at least 25% of qualifying programmes broadcast across its television services are allocated to independent productions. The BBC is committed to treating the 25% as a floor and not a ceiling.

The BBC is also required to ensure at least 25% of BBC One qualifying programmes and at least 25% of BBC Two qualifying programmes are allocated to independent productions.

The definition of a qualifying independent producer are provided in the statutory broadcasting (independent productions) order (see Statement of operation from more information) but in brief, an ‘independent producer’ is a producer:
1.Who is not employed by a broadcaster.
2.Who does not own more than 25% of a broadcaster (unless the producer is based in the EEA and the broadcaster it has a shareholding in is outside the EEA).
3.In which no single UK broadcaster owns a stake of more than 25% or no two or more UK broadcasters together own more than 50%.

A UK Broadcaster is any broadcaster who provides a television service intended for reception in any area of the UK (even if it is also intended for reception elsewhere).



In-house production guarantee

This relates to levels of BBC in-house production only.

From 2007 each genre has had a guaranteed level of in-house output. The guarantees vary across genres ensuring that the BBC sustains a production base to deliver its public service commitments.

Overall the in-house guarantee makes up 50% of output."

so 50% in house

at least 25 % from independents who meet the definition above

the balance can be either of the above or none BBC sources that don't meet the 'independent' crtieria above

[Countdown]

[redacted]

[Countdown]

[redacted]

[Countdown]

[redacted]

[nyxster]

Countdown said:

FFS he offered him a cold platter! Anybody offers me a cold platter they're going down. No two ways about it!!

Explains Hitler, they serve a lot of cold platters in Bavaria,

[jmorgan]

Countdown said:

FFS he offered him a cold platter! Anybody offers me a cold platter they're going down. No two ways about it!!

Do you get invited to many wedding buffets?

[Chim]

robemcdonald said:

Chim said:

Emm, the BBC, 50Million in profit. Then lets start with the production staff on the Top Gear team, if the format now fails or the show is dropped the contracts will be canned for these people, lets then look at the place that they film from, I don't suppose that there will be many rushing into Dunsfold to take up the slack. Thats before we even start on the loss of revenue, some 50 million. Are you seriously suggesting that this drop in revenue ail have no impact on anyone, if so you are smoking a rather strange mixture of drugs.

On the "how I would deal with it" comments, I have already stated how I would have dealt with the specific issue that the BBC had, why should I have to go into world of stupid speculation as to "how far would you let it go", it serves no purpose, we have a clear situation, I have stated how I would deal with it. 50 million is one hell of a lot of profit to potentially let go off.

Edited by Chim on Thursday 26th March 18:12

Lovely stuff. I can't comment everything you've made up here but a few points.
If top gear fails the bbc staff will be moved to other programmes no doubt. Top gear isn't just great because of the presenters is it? The production crew play a massive part.
There are a lot of companies on the airfield at dunsfold. Finding a someone to fill topgears unit won't be a problem. One thing that should be noted is top gear is a bit of a nuisance to people that work on the site as going about normal business is more or less impossible on filming days due to the influx of up to 600 cars, as was the case recently on the will smith episode.
Finally the shortfall in earnings. £50m is a drop in the ocean to the BBC and if push really came to shove they would stick a couple of quid on the licence fee.

Christ on a bike, what type of fairly tale world do you live in, now just a point of note, that 50 million is profit, from a revenue perspective it is some 250 million, just on what planet can any company shrug off that kind of loss and just march on, it will inevitable lead to cuts and job loses, either that or a licence fee hike. So who pays here exactly, certainly not Clarkson, he just strolls off to pick up another check somewhere else.

Oh, to live the life of righteous, fk the consequences, I followed the rule book, I am therefore exonerated from all and any after effects.

Yip, genius.

[MGJohn]

Jeremy didn't waste time finding a job with Commercial TV following leaving the BBC programme he presented. He's interviewing both the Prime Minister and Leader of the Opposition on SKYNews this evening.

Worth a watch I think.











.... Stand by .......

[Blue Cat]

Chim said:

robemcdonald said:

Chim said:

Emm, the BBC, 50Million in profit. Then lets start with the production staff on the Top Gear team, if the format now fails or the show is dropped the contracts will be canned for these people, lets then look at the place that they film from, I don't suppose that there will be many rushing into Dunsfold to take up the slack. Thats before we even start on the loss of revenue, some 50 million. Are you seriously suggesting that this drop in revenue ail have no impact on anyone, if so you are smoking a rather strange mixture of drugs.

On the "how I would deal with it" comments, I have already stated how I would have dealt with the specific issue that the BBC had, why should I have to go into world of stupid speculation as to "how far would you let it go", it serves no purpose, we have a clear situation, I have stated how I would deal with it. 50 million is one hell of a lot of profit to potentially let go off.

Edited by Chim on Thursday 26th March 18:12

Lovely stuff. I can't comment everything you've made up here but a few points.
If top gear fails the bbc staff will be moved to other programmes no doubt. Top gear isn't just great because of the presenters is it? The production crew play a massive part.
There are a lot of companies on the airfield at dunsfold. Finding a someone to fill topgears unit won't be a problem. One thing that should be noted is top gear is a bit of a nuisance to people that work on the site as going about normal business is more or less impossible on filming days due to the influx of up to 600 cars, as was the case recently on the will smith episode.
Finally the shortfall in earnings. £50m is a drop in the ocean to the BBC and if push really came to shove they would stick a couple of quid on the licence fee.

Christ on a bike, what type of fairly tale world do you live in, now just a point of note, that 50 million is profit, from a revenue perspective it is some 250 million, just on what planet can any company shrug off that kind of loss and just march on, it will inevitable lead to cuts and job loses, either that or a licence fee hike. So who pays here exactly, certainly not Clarkson, he just strolls off to pick up another check somewhere else.

Oh, to live the life of righteous, fk the consequences, I followed the rule book, I am therefore exonerated from all and any after effects.

Yip, genius.

You are aware I am sure that the BBC's turnover in 2014 was £5066M, so your figure of £250M which I don't agree with (published figures say £150M), is only 5% of their total turnover, it really isn't going to damage them as much as you might wish it will

Edited by Blue Cat on Thursday 26th March 19:48

[driver67]

From b3ta.com (where else) :-

[SPS]

OK it's now all over but the shouting continues!
Lets be honest the last few seasons have mostly been about three mates having a ball at our expense.
The cars are supposed to be the stars not the presenters. I mean when I saw the segment on the Peugeot cars I just thought that they had all been smoking whacky tobacky tbh - bloody boring and pointless waste of time. So all in all probably best to change the whole format presenters and all.
After all the three of them have all made a load of money, Jezza more than the others, but don't get too depressed the other channels will, are, throwing money at Jezza as they don't mind if they employ bullies do they.

[otolith]

SPS said:

Lets be honest the last few seasons have mostly been about three mates having a ball at our expense profit.

Edited for accuracy.

[irocfan]

MGJohn said:

Jeremy didn't waste time finding a job with Commercial TV following leaving the BBC programme he presented. He's interviewing both the Prime Minister and Leader of the Opposition on SKYNews this evening.

Worth a watch I think.











.... Stand by .......

Que??

[robemcdonald]

Chim said:

Christ on a bike, what type of fairly tale world do you live in, now just a point of note, that 50 million is profit, from a revenue perspective it is some 250 million, just on what planet can any company shrug off that kind of loss and just march on, it will inevitable lead to cuts and job loses, either that or a licence fee hike. So who pays here exactly, certainly not Clarkson, he just strolls off to pick up another check somewhere else.

Oh, to live the life of righteous, fk the consequences, I followed the rule book, I am therefore exonerated from all and any after effects.

Yip, genius.

Look I don't really want to get into an argument, but just making stuff up like you did in your original post just leaves you open for cross examination. Take for example your assertion that £50m profit equates to £250m of revenue. What information do you have to support the statement. I could be wrong (I frequenatly am) but I suspect that like your comments about dunsfold it's just made up on the spot.

[PRTVR]

Chim said:

Christ on a bike, what type of fairly tale world do you live in, now just a point of note, that 50 million is profit, from a revenue perspective it is some 250 million, just on what planet can any company shrug off that kind of loss and just march on, it will inevitable lead to cuts and job loses, either that or a licence fee hike. So who pays here exactly, certainly not Clarkson, he just strolls off to pick up another check somewhere else.

Oh, to live the life of righteous, fk the consequences, I followed the rule book, I am therefore exonerated from all and any after effects.

Yip, genius.

also at what point was Clarkson considered not to be at work? Where I work I have over the years heard the call of "I will see you outside the gate" there has to be a time when you are not at work in that type of job and your actions should be considered of less importance to the employer.

[macp]

Gandahar said:

macp said:

Gandahar said:

So who will be the replacement ?

Someone earlier on in this thread suggested Chris Evans.

I think it would be a good choice.

Chris Evans nooooooooooo !!

I enjoy TG because of JC and the lack of sitting on the fence in his opinions.I cant think of one preseter who could replace him. James May is also a favourite but without his JC foil imo even he will struggle to head up the programme. It sounds like Hammond & May are considering walking out too so I cant see how they will find anybody else to replace them who seem to work well together.

Alan Partridge, the vertically challenged one out of the Crankies and Chris Morris ?

I'd even turn up to watch it if Armando Iannucci did the script.

There is just something about Chris Evans that irritates me but I cant put my finger on it. Armando Iannucci writing the script,even the cast of country file could make it work

[mybrainhurts]

otolith said:

SPS said:

Lets be honest the last few seasons have mostly been about three mates having a ball at our expense profit.

Edited for accuracy.

To be a valid point, the same goes for every performer on TV who enjoys performing on TV. Therefore, not valid.

Have you ever thought how much effort must go into making TG? I'm buggered if I would want to put up with that.

Edited by mybrainhurts on Thursday 26th March 20:13

[SPS]

otolith said:

SPS said:

Lets be honest the last few seasons have mostly been about three mates having a ball at our expense!

Edited for accuracy.