The BBC relocation to Salford.
Discussion
This is turning out to be rather messy.
To start off with, despite previous claims that this move will save money for the license fee payer, it now appears that this is not true.
Top bosses do not want to move as shifting their families 'oop norf' does not really appeal to them. And shows like 'BBC Breakfast' claim that their show will be severely handicapped because less political and celebrity guests will want to come onto their show.
However to be fair to the BBC they are providing counselling to help staff with the trauma of moving from London to Salford.
So here we have a move which won't save money, and the majority within the BBC think it's unwise because it gives London centric broadcasters an edge over them. So what is the whole point of this move?
To start off with, despite previous claims that this move will save money for the license fee payer, it now appears that this is not true.
Top bosses do not want to move as shifting their families 'oop norf' does not really appeal to them. And shows like 'BBC Breakfast' claim that their show will be severely handicapped because less political and celebrity guests will want to come onto their show.
However to be fair to the BBC they are providing counselling to help staff with the trauma of moving from London to Salford.
So here we have a move which won't save money, and the majority within the BBC think it's unwise because it gives London centric broadcasters an edge over them. So what is the whole point of this move?
Nick_F said:
The point is to make the BBC less London-centric. So it's perhaps not surprising that there are effects which London-centric staff find objectionable.
It's not, and I don't think it ever has been, about saving money,
It was supposed to save money after 5 years. Time will tell.It's not, and I don't think it ever has been, about saving money,
5unny said:
So here we have a move which won't save money, and the majority within the BBC think it's unwise because it gives London centric broadcasters an edge over them. So what is the whole point of this move?
It isn't meant to save money. Its meant to make the BBC a better regional broadcaster. And frankly, who gives a f
k what southerners think.
Morningside said:
Why Salford? Why not, BBC Norwich or somewhere closer?
I also thought that some northern centers were closed to SAVE money?
Because Manchester is the home of Granada, who before the recession were to sell their Manchester HQ and also move into Media City.I also thought that some northern centers were closed to SAVE money?
And because f
k all happens in Norfolk.Parrot of Doom said:
Morningside said:
Why Salford? Why not, BBC Norwich or somewhere closer?
I also thought that some northern centers were closed to SAVE money?
Because Manchester is the home of Granada, who before the recession were to sell their Manchester HQ and also move into Media City.I also thought that some northern centers were closed to SAVE money?
And because f
k all happens in Norfolk.
Anglia TV (ITV) were quite big in the 70s/80s until this reshuffle. Not sure about the BBC side but going by the so-called local news that looks cut back as well.I notice of late that a lot of programming comes from Bristol. Is this to save money or is it case that they are just damn good at it?
Morningside said:
I notice of late that a lot of programming comes from Bristol. Is this to save money or is it case that they are just damn good at it?
They are good at it in Bristol, and they make a good TV programme too.... boom boom.The natural history unit has been based in Bristol for a number of years and the output has been expanded too. So they now actually produce a lot of programmes and its worked very well. That and the close collaboration with BBC Cardiff (for Dr Who and others) means that its actually very efficient.
off_again said:
Morningside said:
I notice of late that a lot of programming comes from Bristol. Is this to save money or is it case that they are just damn good at it?
They are good at it in Bristol, and they make a good TV programme too.... boom boom.The natural history unit has been based in Bristol for a number of years and the output has been expanded too. So they now actually produce a lot of programmes and its worked very well. That and the close collaboration with BBC Cardiff (for Dr Who and others) means that its actually very efficient.
Quite often you relocate simply to shake things up.
A lot of staff will simply leave - as they do not wish to move from London. Their other halves will probably work in London, their families will go to school in London and so forth. These people won't move and, hence, will leave the BBC.
The BBC arriving in Salford will be smaller. In the long term this will save money.
They are also moving to an economically less expensive part of the UK. Whilst this will not save money initially in the long term it probably will.
And then there's the fact that since government can't get rid of the BBC maybe they can, at least, piss them off a bit. I expect to a fair few at Westminster that's worth every penny!
A lot of staff will simply leave - as they do not wish to move from London. Their other halves will probably work in London, their families will go to school in London and so forth. These people won't move and, hence, will leave the BBC.
The BBC arriving in Salford will be smaller. In the long term this will save money.
They are also moving to an economically less expensive part of the UK. Whilst this will not save money initially in the long term it probably will.
And then there's the fact that since government can't get rid of the BBC maybe they can, at least, piss them off a bit. I expect to a fair few at Westminster that's worth every penny!
I think it was done to encourage a broader outlook on broadcasting than was going on at the time of the decision. The economising side was always an excuse.
The thing is I think it won't work in the long term. As people leave the BBC to go back to work in London for independant companies I think the idea wll be seen as futile and gradually production will be shifted back to London.
The thing is I think it won't work in the long term. As people leave the BBC to go back to work in London for independant companies I think the idea wll be seen as futile and gradually production will be shifted back to London.
Don said:
Quite often you relocate simply to shake things up.
This. I worked there for 5 years and never once in that time knew of anyone getting sacked despite there being plenty of deserving candidates.There are BBC lifers who have their feet well under the table and need a rocket firing up their arse to wake them up from their cosy slumber in W12.
The BBC loves to spunk money on projects like Salford but these take so much time and end up so big that people lose sight of why they bothered in the first place.
Benny Saltstein said:
Don said:
Quite often you relocate simply to shake things up.
This. I worked there for 5 years and never once in that time knew of anyone getting sacked despite there being plenty of deserving candidates.There are BBC lifers who have their feet well under the table and need a rocket firing up their arse to wake them up from their cosy slumber in W12.
The BBC loves to spunk money on projects like Salford but these take so much time and end up so big that people lose sight of why they bothered in the first place.
I think Cameron should have ordered a full audit of the BBC. It would probably cost a fair bit, but only a fraction of the £1bn costs for relocation that have been mentioned.
MX7 said:
Apparently the staff are getting a relocation allowance and they get to keep their London weightings.
I don't pay my TV licence to the BBC for any other reason but to make good programmes. This seems wholly unnecessary.
That is not the case. Some high up management may well do. But the ordinary Joe is not and is far from happy about the move. I don't pay my TV licence to the BBC for any other reason but to make good programmes. This seems wholly unnecessary.
Also, not everyone who works at the BBC lives in London, a huge amount of people travel in.
5678 said:
MX7 said:
Apparently the staff are getting a relocation allowance and they get to keep their London weightings.
I don't pay my TV licence to the BBC for any other reason but to make good programmes. This seems wholly unnecessary.
That is not the case. Some high up management may well do. But the ordinary Joe is not and is far from happy about the move. I don't pay my TV licence to the BBC for any other reason but to make good programmes. This seems wholly unnecessary.
Also, not everyone who works at the BBC lives in London, a huge amount of people travel in.
MX7 said:
5678 said:
MX7 said:
Apparently the staff are getting a relocation allowance and they get to keep their London weightings.
I don't pay my TV licence to the BBC for any other reason but to make good programmes. This seems wholly unnecessary.
That is not the case. Some high up management may well do. But the ordinary Joe is not and is far from happy about the move. I don't pay my TV licence to the BBC for any other reason but to make good programmes. This seems wholly unnecessary.
Also, not everyone who works at the BBC lives in London, a huge amount of people travel in.
Personally, I don't see a problem with people still being paid the same salary if they move up north.
The good programmes you expect for your money would take a real set back if they had to replace all of the staff that make them.
FWIW, I think the move is pointless too.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff