How does the BBC make any money?

[maxh]

Take into account what they spend on producing programmes for over 4 channels.

Websites like http://www.bbc.co.uk and bbc iplayer. Which must cost an arse load to maintain and fill with content.

What they spend on radio. What they spend on sending journalists all over the world!

But they don't sell advertising.

Oh I think I may have answered my own question. A TV license costs 142.50 so that * by roughly 50 million is a biiiig number.

But still, why don't they monetise their websites?!?!

 

[RedEvo]

They sell program formats, they have commercial arms, they sell films they fund etc etc

d

 

[Zeal]

selling / licensing? programs like 'doctor who' - which is shown on various other TV channels over 30 /40 countries worldwide.

This shows how just the TV licence fee was spent

• BBC online / BBC iPlayer / BBC Mobile = £199 Million. Only 6% of the licence fee costs.

 

[Faevilangel]

- Selling dvd's / magazines / other stuff related to the programs
- Selling the license to other tv channels like Dave, Bravo, and foreign channels
- License fee (you pay them to have a tv)

 

[Astaroth]

They don't sell advertising on their websites because it would go against their charter.

Within the UK they are required to provide services in return for the license fee and this cannot be a commercial operation. Over the years they have started taking a slightly more sensible approach in that they no longer mask all brand names (blue peter always used to use "sticky back plastic" rather than sellotape as not to promote a brand).

There is however a commercial arm in addition to the fee payer funded aspects which includes those elements already listed but also the World Service.

I know that they try and block iPlayer from being viewed outside of the UK by using IP Geo location but not sure if they try anything along those lines (or introducing ads etc) for their other online sites/ services. Certainly the iPhone Apps they were developing for iPlayer etc they said would be available to UK only

 

[Faevilangel]

I know that they try and block iPlayer from being viewed outside of the UK by using IP Geo location but not sure if they try anything along those lines (or introducing ads etc) for their other online sites/ services. Certainly the iPhone Apps they were developing for iPlayer etc they said would be available to UK only

Yeah Iplayer is blocked for those out of the UK. The other sites like sports, news etc are available to in other countries.

 

[Astaroth]

Yeah Iplayer is blocked for those out of the UK. The other sites like sports, news etc are available to in other countries.

I know they are available but did't know if they tried injecting anything more commercial (eg ads) into them

 

[Faevilangel]

I know they are available but did't know if they tried injecting anything more commercial (eg ads) into them

I wouldn't think so, not tried it though.

 

[grantex]

Top Gear is one of BBC Worldwide's largest selling products. BBC Worldwide produces £142m for BBC. Although in the UK it is a public service broadcaster, on a worldwide basis it is a commercial entity that sells the programmes that the BBC produces.

 

[Alicatt]

If you go onto the BBC websites from abroad, you do see adverts.

But their main source of income apart from the licence is selling programs abroad.

 

[Jon236]

BBC Worldwide only earns the corporation around 20% of its annual income. The majority is made up through the license fee, which believe you me is well spent. EVERYTHING the BBC does as a company considers value for the license fee payer, even down to the water dispensers they have in their buildings.

And before any Daily Mail readers pipe up about fees for Jonathan Ross etc, I suggest they get all their facts before they say ANYTHING.

 

[Deleted member 59730]

Apart from a very few celebs who get paid headline figures the BBC exists by rights grabbing contracts from creators. One of their so called creatives' contracts looks forward to the time they are broadcasting on Mars, Saturn, Neptune etc. (and wanted me to agree to ship digital files to those planets and undertake not to put bombs in the files! Which leads me to think they employ too many lawyers;-) )

 

BBC Worldwide only earns the corporation around 20% of its annual income. The majority is made up through the license fee, which believe you me is well spent. EVERYTHING the BBC does as a company considers value for the license fee payer, even down to the water dispensers they have in their buildings.

And before any Daily Mail readers pipe up about fees for Jonathan Ross etc, I suggest they get all their facts before they say ANYTHING.

You can not be serious.The rubbish the BBC produces these days is a totall waste of the licence fee .

Never mind the continuous repeats.

As for Jonathan Froth ,words fail me.

Last decent program that was regularly screened was only fools in th 90's since then they have been scraping the barrel with the occasional good program as opposed to a period when nearly everything was good.

Its a totall unfunny joke these days.IMHO.

Earl

 

[MASSEY]

what i dont get is why they are always trying to drive traffic to their site, all you ever hear on radio one is visit the website and look at bla bla,

 

[Zeal]

Last decent program that was regularly screened was only fools in th 90's since then they have been scraping the barrel...

Not a Top Gear Fan then!


Come to think of it, Only time I watch BBC is:
Family Guy, Top Gear, Dragons Den, F1 and the football when it's showed.

 

Not a Top Gear Fan then!


Come to think of it, Only time I watch BBC is:
Family Guy, Top Gear, Dragons Den, F1 and the football when it's showed.

My point exactly.

one has to ask would you miss It.?

Looks like the inevitable is not so far away.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/5972728/BBCs-share-of-TV-viewers-falls-to-new-low.html

Earl

 

[Jon236]

Not a Top Gear Fan then!


Come to think of it, Only time I watch BBC is:
Family Guy, Top Gear, Dragons Den, F1 and the football when it's showed.

Fairplay, this is obviously what you like to watch and I enjoy those programmes too, but the BBC is not aimed just at you. As a public service broadcaster they have to cover and show a bit of everything for everyone, some people may be keen on documentaries about trains, or Wildlife programmes, others on music, or sports, whereas someone else may benefit from the children's programming etc. The BBC as a public service broadcaster has to cover all these bases, they might not be to everyone's taste, but that's the flaw when comparing public service broadcasting to potentially more crowd pleasing commercial television.

 

[bdw]

You can not be serious.The rubbish the BBC produces these days is a totall waste of the licence fee.

Actually like the government, we are getting the television we deserve.

IMO the reason the BBC standards are slipping is that they are trying to compete with the commercial channels and their diet of "classy" programs like the "Naked Office", "50 best genital warts", endless same format "talent" shows and let's eat some slugs and cockroaches.

Like the Sun and the Star newspapers, I am afraid that's what the public wants nowadays. The BBC is losing market share to these other channels but is it because they offer better fare?

.

 

[Lorro2]

The BBC doesn't make any profit and are having to lay off staff in large numbers. The BBC makes superb programmes. This week we had a whole evening about cycling, there was Synth Britannia last night, new series of Coast, The European Athletics Championships, The Antiques Road Show, Eggheads, The Weakest Link. then there is all the consumer programmes, Radio4, Radio 2 and I could go on. It is the BBC that brings our leaders to book on theings like Newsnight, Question Time, The Politics Show, Any Questions etc. We should be grateful for the BBC. Just go to continental Europe of the USA and see how dumb ass and crass the television is there. LC

 

[bdw]

I totally agree.

 

Actually like the government, we are getting the television we deserve.

IMO the reason the BBC standards are slipping is that they are trying to compete with the commercial channels and their diet of "classy" programs like the "Naked Office", "50 best genital warts", endless same format "talent" shows and let's eat some slugs and cockroaches.

Like the Sun and the Star newspapers, I am afraid that's what the public wants nowadays. The BBC is losing market share to these other channels but is it because they offer better fare?

.

Although I agree with you that this is a probably a major factor .I do wonder if the BBC is leading the public down this avenue .?

As it is much cheaper to produce celebrity chef type programs and that whole genre or programs than to produce quality .

Even the few quality programs they produce like coast are low cost productions compared to producing the costume drama's one used to see in yesteryear.

One has to ask as they are getting vast sums of money from the liecense fee.

What are they doing with it.?

I suspect one would not have to look far.

Earl

 

[Zeal]

Fairplay, this is obviously what you like to watch and I enjoy those programmes too, but the BBC is not aimed just at you. As a public service broadcaster they have to cover and show a bit of everything for everyone, some people may be keen on documentaries about trains, or Wildlife programmes, others on music, or sports, whereas someone else may benefit from the children's programming etc. The BBC as a public service broadcaster has to cover all these bases, they might not be to everyone's taste, but that's the flaw when comparing public service broadcasting to potentially more crowd pleasing commercial television.

Jon - I think you read into my reply too much... It was a simple case of stating what I use the BBC for - not saying they should air more interesting stuff (aimed at me )

 

[Barnie]

i dont think the bbc does to bad, its never going to please everybody and whilst i dont like most of programs the quality is there (bar 101 ways to leave a game show, that is poor.) and they have a good variety, but i think they have lost the ability to be innovators in programming, there is to much copying of other channels, ie itv run a singing contest, bbc do the same, bbc do a dancing contest itv also pilot a dancing program

i like channel 4 though, i think they do a pretty good job, especialy when compared to ITV that channel is so bad its untrue

 

[Dawg]

"The BBC is the best broadcasting company in the world"

We keep hearing this sort of statement, but we used to hear the same about the British bobby, the NHS, the Civil Service, the Mother of Parliaments and the rest.

And guess what? Bollox.

The BBC is a comfortable place to work for British middle class Oxbridge graduates who sneer at 'trade', (that's us BTW), who inhabit a comfy Islingtonia type headset, (estimates put the Guardian as paper of choice for 90% of the BBC newsrooms, that's balance huh?), and who live nice comfy lives away from the fray of competition, (which would be so demeaning, darling, and just not what creatives dooo).

Claims are made about the quality of the output. Technically OK but expensive compared to other suppliers it falls at a major hurdle: mass appeal. They chase after mass appeal, but just can't get it right.

For instance; the new Sherlock Holmes. Brilliant, funny, exciting, clever: great. Then we discover that there are only three, film length episodes. This is TV people, we want a series, like 13 weeks, an hour a hit. Sort of like the rest of the world does. But no: because the BBC can do as it pleases, without commercial considerations it makes bleedin' fillums instead.

On the commercial front the BBC breaks the copyright acts as a matter of course. That is: they ignore the law whilst taking our money. And now, in today's news, they are refusing to allow the National Audit Office to look at the books. If a private company acted like this they would be out of business very quickly, can you imagine: "The law doesn't apply to Megacorp PLC, and we decided we don't like audits either."

So to sum up: I don't believe the quality argument. But even were it true the BBC acts in a cavalier, law breaking fashion whilst extorting a licence fee (under threat of imprisonment), and is demonstrably partisan.

In answer to the OP: we pay for the BBC. It's a sort of welfare system for rich, clever people who can't be arsed to do a real job.

(Today's rant was not brought to you by Rupert the Murdoch)

 

[Jon236]

Jon - I think you read into my reply too much... It was a simple case of stating what I use the BBC for - not saying they should air more interesting stuff (aimed at me )

Haha, sorry Zeal, I clearly got carried away. It's a subject I am passionate about though.

 

In answer to the OP: we pay for the BBC. It's a sort of welfare system for rich, clever people who can't be arsed to do a real job.

(Today's rant was not brought to you by Rupert the Murdoch)

Dawg thats the third time we have agreed in 2 years.

Glad to hear the counseling is working for you.

Earl

 

[inthethickofit]

personally, i get really annoyed with the amount of 'adverts' the bbc runs for its own programmes- it is no different to showing commercial ads that could subsidise the tv license or scrap it altogether!
In this day and age, i think its unfair that we are forced to pay the license fee- when we get no say in what the money is spent on. It should all be pay-per-view, that way, you only pay for what YOU want to see!

 

[mit74]

As Alicatt mentioned the BBC do sell advertising and lots of it. If you visit their websites from an international address they have tons of advertising, not to mention revenue from secondary sales to other TV channels and the MASSIVE revenue from text messaging from viewers. Radio 1 is just 24 hours of DJs telling people to text in your 'thoughts' and we'll read 1 in 100,000 we recieve out to keep you happy. The TV licence is the biggest tax scam on the planet.

 

[roydmoorian]

The TV licence is the biggest tax scam on the planet.

So would you really be happy to have no BBC, not even Radio but still keep paying your £** per month for subscription TV ?

Nobody actually ENJOYS putting their hand in their pocket but the licence fee remains excellent value IMHO

 

[An Oasis]

So would you really be happy to have no BBC, not even Radio but still keep paying your £** per month for subscription TV ?

1. Yes
2. Why would I need to pay a fee if 1. were the case? Or are you saying it's just another form of taxation?

About 12 months ago I decided to see what would happen if I completely avoided MSM. The good news is that I am better informed than I was 12 months ago.

Give it a try you might be surprised.

 

[Dawg]

So would you really be happy to have no BBC, not even Radio but still keep paying your £** per month for subscription TV ?

Nobody actually ENJOYS putting their hand in their pocket but the licence fee remains excellent value IMHO

Yes.
I resent having to pay for any TV/radio under threat of imprisonment, let alone Guardian TV.

 

[bdw]

I had a think about this and I considered what channel I would keep if I could only have one and I had to chose. There was no contest against the BBC.

I used to work a lot with people from the USA and when over here most of them loved the BBC because they had uninterrupted viewing. Don't knock it!

In the USA they have the PBS. They love it, watch it and asre happy to pay for it.

A national survey undertaken by the bipartisan polling firms of Hart Research and American Viewpoint indicates overwhelming public opposition (69% to 27%) to proposals to eliminate government funding of public broadcasting, with voters across the political spectrum opposed to such a cut, including 83% of Democrats, 69% of Independents, and 56% of Republicans. More than two-thirds (68%) of voters say that Congressional budget cutters should “find other places in the budget to save money.”

.

 

[Mustaka]

My big bug bear about the BBC is being forced to pay a license fee. I do not have a choice to opt out of their service like I do with any other company. I in fact am paying the license fee twice as it is included in my Sky package.

Normally if a broadcaster like Sky wants to show a channel it pays a broadcast fee to the channel owner. They cover the cost of the broadcast fee by charging the user, Me, a subscription fee.

Samething with online content. I read New Scientist magazine a couple of times a week. Some of their articles you have to be subscribed to view. Fair enough if I want to use the content I pay for it. The BBC however make it all available to everyone in the UK and use that as justification to force a fee payment.

I think the correct and democratic thing to do is an opt in opt out type setup. Or they restrict online content unless you actually subscribe (IE have paid the license fee) to the BBC.

It is an antiquated system. Plain and simple.

 

[I Love Spreadsheets]

There are a huge number of ways the BBC makes money including

IP Rights going back to the 1930's
Selling programs abroad (The UK version of Top Gear 350M viewers world wide alone)
Funding film production
Advertising abroad, and in their countless magazines, dvds and other goods sold here in the UK
Phone in competitions
It owns half of the UK TV channels (Gold, Dave, Watch, Alibi, Yesterday, Blighty, Eden, Good Food and Reality)

£145 Is roughly £2.80 a week for 9 TV channels, 11 radio stations (not including local radio) and their contribution to Channel 4/S4C. This works out far cheaper per channel than the so called free channels such as ITV which we pay for by buying the products thats advertised on them.

 

This works out far cheaper per channel than the so called free channels such as ITV which we pay for by buying the products thats advertised on them.

You might buy I certainly don't.

so to me its free and quite good quality compared with the BBC which seems to employ all its presenters after they finish being on Blue Peter.

Earl

 

[I Love Spreadsheets]

Earl, I'm not saying that you go out and buy the products because they are advertised on the TV. What I'm saying is if you buy anything at all that has been advertised on the TV a certain amount of your spend goes on the products marketing (including TV advertising).

Especially if you shop at any of the big supermarkets because some of your spend goes to pay for Tesco, Asda etc to advertise on TV.

 

[Esk247]

Mixed views on the BBC. I don't like being forced to pay for anything BUT it does provide a decent enough service for me, i listen to Radio One a lot with all the driving around I do and slap the BBC News site up a few times a day to have a gander so for me, it works rather well in comparison to Paid For channels like Sky or whatever. They can work out quite expensive for the return (personally) as i don't watch much american TV or dreaded american sitcoms.

The quality of the BBC has dipped a little the last few years with some awful script writing and so called comedies but im quite picky about all that anyway.

I used to enjoy Only Fools and Horses etc. but i also acknowledge that they are very dated now, the format doesn't work for a modern audience that wants better quality, more suspense and a more unique script without the canned laughter. Channel 4 has been smashing the BBC over the head with some quality film work recently, especially for the teenage demographic with Skins, Misfits, Shameless and the InBetweeners.

I'm surprised My Family did so well, the acting was dreadful from the supporting actors and the story line was trash, cringe worthy.

 

I used to enjoy Only Fools and Horses etc. but i also acknowledge that they are very dated now, the format doesn't work for a modern audience that wants better quality,

You can not be serious.

The programs they show are the dross a modern audience wants.

Simple stuff that even Americans can understand.

Watch with mother for grown ups.

Earl

 

[Esk247]

You can not be serious.

The programs they show are the dross a modern audience wants.

Simple stuff that even Americans can understand.

Watch with mother for grown ups.

Earl

No i actually agree with you, i perhaps didn't word it correctly. The mass public enjoy drivel like My Family etc. Thats why it won awards, they enjoy Eastenders and lots of other nonsense that i can't be bothered with.

I don't actually watch anything on TV any more..apart from the football tonight..which was a waste of time in the end

The computer is swiftly becoming better for me, i can watch what i want, when i want. Sure i get a few annoying adverts but i can watch programmes from dozens of channels at a time that suits me.

 

[Esk247]

I have the complete collection on dvd and I watch it regularly even now. The only thing that is dated about it is the fact that it was made a while ago.
If they were to show reruns on the BBC then im sure that they would still do very well in the ratings even though many people would have already seen them. Im only 32 but I find the comedies on now to be complete rubbish.

Yeah they are rubbish, Only Fools and Horses was pure comedy genius..but i still feel it is dated. The format is a bit out of it now and although the timing is still perfect and the facial expressions are brilliant, some of the storylines just don't fit anymore.

They just don't seem to have the formula for good comedy these days. I'm only 24 so i will have a different view to many people on here, but I can't wait for the day they phase out canned laughter forever. It makes me feel a bit ill.