|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
The number of minutes of advertising has progressive gone up and the quality of programming has gone down. This is because there is less advertising revenue to go around. In the old days a successful program had a 60% or more market share. Today a smash hit is anything above 5% if that. The television world has changed whereas the US revenue model has not. That is why I believe the revenue model in the UK is still okay. OTA choice may be limited but there is still better stuff to be found to watch on the BBC and ITV channels and no advertising on the BBC. |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
Tom C. Zenith: The quality stays in EVEN after the name falls off! What I want. --> http://www.videokarma.org/showpost.p...62&postcount=4 |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Without addressing subjective quality issues, the average reality TV show is a bear to produce. Instead of having a written, presumably efficient plan that cast and crew follows, reality TV relies on multi-camera coverage to the extreme. This over-shooting results in tons of footage that has to be screened and logged (by producers -- the non-financial, non-decisionmaking kind ) in order to be edited together to produce the desired story line. (The story line is not left to chance as much as would be expected.) Reality show low-level producers are subject to extremely long hours with very low average pay, as there is always someone standing by in the wings to take their place as a "producer on a national network TV show". I would guess that reality shows shoot and log at least four times as much footage as a scripted multi-camera show does.
Chip |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Yes with script shows.Everything is organized with the script and the storyboard.The cast should cruise through it with a couple of takes. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Speaking of UK TV shows.I enjoy these shows.Post other when I think of them.
Keeping Up Appearances (S15 E5) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFBuA4aCibU As Time Goes By Season 7 E03 The New Neighbors https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ee0zrEbYDzw These are will produced shows and very funny. |
Audiokarma |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
BBC Licence used to be 10/- ($1) a year!
CPB (usa) gets 100X the Fed money it got in the late-60s! Why are Bankrupt countries throwing money at Broadcasting? (Bankrupt: borrowing just to pay the interest on Debt) (which both countries are doing) |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
CPB more likely is getting less Fed dollars today then years ago.I have notice PBS is having more pledge drives in the resent years.
Running programs on TV is not cheap after everybody gets their cut with the royalties it makes.I have no idea how much does PBS have to pay for a classic movie or series like Sesame Street ,Nova and other popular shows.The inside shows are probably cheaper but the outside shows are more likely expensive. Maybe somebody here in the biz can shed some light on it.Thanks. |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
We need to put a Scotsman in charge - But not John Reith!
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
10/- was $2 in 1925. For many years it was $4 to the pound.
This website is invaluable for working with historic amounts of money in both the US and the UK. Their methods are well researched and use the best available data sets. Some comparisons are available back to the 13th century! https://www.measuringworth.com Putting in 10/- (ten shillings = 50 pence in current usage) and getting today's value gives a set of numbers from £25 to over £200 depending on which comparison method you use. If you look at the income comparison, a good measure of affordability, it's £143, close to the present day licence fee. You get rather more for your money from the BBC now than then. |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
The Pound was way more 'Sound' than I thought;
4:1 would have given England very strong purchasing power for imports. Shows you how decimated the US Dollar has been by a century of [Gov-engineered] inflation! The worst is yet to come after they discover their latest desperate maneuver - - GDP-expansion-by-immigration - fails to deliver growth & deceive creditors. |
Audiokarma |
|
|