If the show was given to the UK, I feel as though Manchester would be a lock-in to host. I doubt that the BBC would move its ESC production up to Salford only to move back to London to host only a year later. I could see Glasgow as a good alternative in the case that the AO Arena were fully-booked, but to me, Manchester is the perfect host. They have the airport and transport links, they're large enough to host all the fans and delegates but still small enough to fully embrace an event like Eurovision, and the AO is an ideal venue. It's big enough to hold a large number of fans, but not a massive football stadium like the 2001 and 2011 venues were. Also, unlike the O2, there'd be none of the complications associated with hosting around a massive indoor dining and entertainment district. It also helps that I adored the place when I visited last year and would love an excuse to return!
As for hosts, Mel Giedroyc's already got 'eurovish' credentials, the comedy chops and the hosting experience. Surely a Mel and Sue hosting is at least on the cards? Maybe with Rylan to make it a trio? If they want to bring in some Radio 1 talent, Clara Amfo would be a fantastic choice and cement her as one of the corporation's biggest stars.
Also, hi! Long-time lurker (like, at least 10 years on TVForum), first-time poster!
Mel and Sue another example of decent presenters but with limited hits - they've not really had a hit together outside of Bake Off and both are somewhat acquired tastes.
One other advantage of bringing in a musician as the host is they can also double as one of the interval performers.
(17-05-2022, 10:38 PM)Rxtx Wrote: [ -> ]I think there’s going to be far more Ukrainian involvement than some here are imagining.
Yes logistically and physically they can’t host it at home but they could still put together a presentation and creative team to do the editorial side of the show.
I beliece it will be based on the Australian Victory approach. It'll be in another country mostly in geography only but I do stress if it's a co-pro both sides should be allowed involvement. And as I keep saying, Suspline will be bringing in a very international team anyway.
Can Suspline afford to co produce financially. Quite possible they would only be able to afford on screen talent and not be responsible for funding any non Ukrainian talent on or off screen. And even if they can afford it should the EBU be letting them when that money could be better spent in Ukraine.
(17-05-2022, 11:04 PM)Newshound47 Wrote: [ -> ]Can Suspline afford to co produce financially. Quite possible they would only be able to afford on screen talent and not be responsible for funding any non Ukrainian talent on or off screen. And even if they can afford it should the EBU be letting them when that money could be better spent in Ukraine.
Good point. Maybe the EBU will fund in a move of solidarity.
I assume the EBU covers most the financial cost now - after all the Big 5 is a thing after all. It's the practicalities which makes it a non-starter and it's amazing they can keep a single national news feed going without expecting them to put on one of the biggest European shows of the year too.
Decisions need to be practical rather than emotional.
(17-05-2022, 11:04 PM)Newshound47 Wrote: [ -> ]Can Suspline afford to co produce financially. Quite possible they would only be able to afford on screen talent and not be responsible for funding any non Ukrainian talent on or off screen. And even if they can afford it should the EBU be letting them when that money could be better spent in Ukraine.
I think maybe we need to look at the bigger picture here. In a year's time Ukraine will either be a country still at war but news coverage will probably be waining due to viewer fatigue (in the same way Syria and so many others have), or it will be a peaceful country desperate for investment. I think it's highly likely the Ukrainian government will want to capitalise on a huge platform and keep Ukraine in people's minds. Ultimately a few million is a drop in the ocean, even for a war-torn country, and especially if it's being co-hosted elsewhere with someone else footing much of the bill. The soft-power benefits could be seismic for them.
It was only a few weeks ago a Ukrainian government-funded propaganda campaign was running in London train stations and various other cities around the world. A country's brand is important, same reason why they didn't withdraw this year.
(18-05-2022, 09:16 AM)Brekkie Wrote: [ -> ]I assume the EBU covers most the financial cost now - after all the Big 5 is a thing after all.
No, most of the cost comes locally. The City of Rotterdam funded quite a fair chunk of 2021, Israel's broadcaster only just managed to fund it alone after the government refused to provide funding in 2019.
(17-05-2022, 10:50 PM)telebox2001 Wrote: [ -> ] (17-05-2022, 10:38 PM)Rxtx Wrote: [ -> ]I think there’s going to be far more Ukrainian involvement than some here are imagining.
Yes logistically and physically they can’t host it at home but they could still put together a presentation and creative team to do the editorial side of the show.
I beliece it will be based on the Australian Victory approach. It'll be in another country mostly in geography only but I do stress if it's a co-pro both sides should be allowed involvement. And as I keep saying, Suspline will be bringing in a very international team anyway.
The Australian approach is mutually agreed by both parties that Australia won't host it due to time differences and geography.
The Ukrainian situation is entirely different. Ukraine have first refusal as to whether they can and want to host it. It's a similar situation to Israel in 1980. Due to security/safety issues at the time, Israel could not host it so the runner up country, Netherlands, stepped in and hosted it instead.
The EBU do have actual rules and guidelines around this kind of thing. At present, it is assumed Ukraine will host. The moment they say they can't, the EBU will exercise their rulebook and will act in accordance to what those rules are.
Surely someone needs to pull the common sense card out rather than stick firmly to the rules, Theres no way the EBU can just continue on until Ukraine say they can't do it. It just cannot happen there.
As Steve said the EBU rulebook will be followed, so certain guarantees will have to be made by certain dates and it'll be if and when those are not met plan B will be publicly activated. At the moment though we're only 4 days on - it's right Ukraine have their moment and any official talk of moving it kicked down the road a bit. I've no doubt unofficially though the back up plan is beginning to be considered too by all parties.
(18-05-2022, 10:44 AM)gottago Wrote: [ -> ].
(18-05-2022, 09:16 AM)Brekkie Wrote: [ -> ]I assume the EBU covers most the financial cost now - after all the Big 5 is a thing after all.
No, most of the cost comes locally. The City of Rotterdam funded quite a fair chunk of 2021, Israel's broadcaster only just managed to fund it alone after the government refused to provide funding in 2019.
It's worth remembering that the 'Big 5' are the biggest financial contributors to the EBU not specifically the song contest.
(18-05-2022, 01:01 PM)aaron_scotland Wrote: [ -> ]Surely someone needs to pull the common sense card out rather than stick firmly to the rules, Theres no way the EBU can just continue on until Ukraine say they can't do it. It just cannot happen there.
You do have a point there, with the way Ukraine is looking right now, it's just too dangerous and unsafe for a country torn apart by illegal invasion and war to welcome 40+ delegations to their country.
Just hoping it'll be somewhere safer until Ukraine is safe, rebuilt and ready to welcome Eurovision back to its country.
(18-05-2022, 01:30 PM)Inspector Sands Wrote: [ -> ] (18-05-2022, 10:44 AM)gottago Wrote: [ -> ].
(18-05-2022, 09:16 AM)Brekkie Wrote: [ -> ]I assume the EBU covers most the financial cost now - after all the Big 5 is a thing after all.
No, most of the cost comes locally. The City of Rotterdam funded quite a fair chunk of 2021, Israel's broadcaster only just managed to fund it alone after the government refused to provide funding in 2019.
It's worth remembering that the 'Big 5' are the biggest financial contributors to the EBU not specifically the song contest.
According to the FAQs funding from EBU members comes via a participation fee rather than direct from the EBU, but either way they are the biggest contributors other than the host country. The EBU stump up €6.2m and the host broadcaster is expected to find €10-€20m, with further funding from the host city.
Quote:How is the Eurovision Song Contest financed?
The Eurovision Song Contest is a non-profit event, mostly financed by:- contributions from the Participating Broadcasters (the so-called participation fee), adding up to €6.2 million combined. This fee is different for each country based on the solidarity principle that the strongest shoulders carry the most weight. It is at the sole discretion of each Participating Broadcaster to decide if they wish to make public the financial details of their participation;
- a contribution from the Host Broadcaster, which is generally between €10 and €20 million, depending on local circumstances and available resources.
- a contribution from the Host City, either financially or 'in kind' (e.g. covering expenses of city branding, side events, security, etc.);
- commercial revenue from sponsorship agreements, ticket sales, televoting and merchandise, which varies from year to year.
On average, over 90% of all available funds are being earmarked for the TV production and event organisation. Approximately 5% of available funds represent the budget for the EBU's Eurovision Song Contest team and its partners. Any remaining funds are being reimbursed to the Participating Broadcasters, for as long local legislation allows such reimbursement. The budget is overlooked and approved by the Reference Group, on behalf of all Participating Broadcasters, on an annual basis.
https://eurovision.tv/about/faq
Financially you have to wonder if the Ukrainian broadcaster can afford it (heck, we're all wondering if the BBC can too!) and I would imagine the EBU are probably helping to fund the current sustain service as it is anyway. Not sure how the Ukrainian PSBs are usually funded but you'd imagine any kind of licence fee or advertising funding has significantly reduced, though governments of course fund their broadcasters during times of war as they are crucial.
@aaron_scotland Common sense has been alluded to already. That's why the rules were created to begin with.
Ukraine are entitled to at least ascertain as to whether they can logistically go ahead. They haven't said they don't want to host, so the rules of the EBU are already being carried out.