TV Live Forum

Jez_CymruWales post_id=67538 time= user_id=1544 Wrote:But the point is it doesnt make enough money which is why Channel 5 are not renewing the contract.

I don't know why you think that that is a point I'm making?

RDJ post_id=67553 time= user_id=831 Wrote:It might be possible for one of the streaming services to pick it up maybe. They operate in all the markets that the show is broadcast and the costs involved is a drop in the ocean for them nowadays. Plus, a regular soap opera broadcast 5 days a week is something no streaming service currently offers, so could be a big attractor to their platforms, with them striking deals with TV broadcasters to broadcast it, probably a couple of days behind. Who knows!

I did think C5 might drop behind a bit on Neighbours and Home and Away and then use exclusive same day screenings as a selling point for Paramount+ but that clearly was never the plan.

I just can't see any other streamer picking it up - it's not really the business model.

RDJ post_id=67553 time= user_id=831 Wrote:The problem with most British PSB broadcasters now is the amount of home grown productions they need to spawn off, which makes a commission in Australia less attractive.

That immediately puts Channel 4 out and even the BBC to some extent who have quotas to hit.

My memory (which can be faulty) is that it counted against the home grown quota as Five funded the programme (in the same way as Death in Paradise counts to the BBC's). It just happens to be filmed on location.

James2001 post_id=67526 time=1644244448 user_id=956 Wrote:I can't see how RTE could possibly be able to pay for the show's production if Channel 5 can't afford it... or how they could even justify using Irish taxpayer's money to fund TV a production in Australia anyway.

Didn't they remove their radio stations from DAB including 2fm and Lyric FM to save money?

If so, wouldn't someone like say Lorcan Murray at Lyric FM be a bit peeved as well over this Neighbours news, given RTE removed some of his audience in cries of poverty?

Jez_CymruWales post_id=67549 time= user_id=1544 Wrote:

Brekkie post_id=67547 time= user_id=976 Wrote:C5 reportedly pay 7 times less but I'd be surprised if Home and Away costs less to make with their more frequent stunts and on location filming - it's just 7 picks up the bill.

Exactly and so they should as its their own production. Any overseas sales are just a bonus and add to any profit made.

But that’s because it’s made primarily for the Aussie market. Neighbours is basically made (or was) for the UK market. It’s like saying a Chinese company should fit the bill of production of Sky Glass, because it’s made there, when they’re made mainly for the UK market.

Home and Away's advantage is that it's made in house by Seven so they benefit from both ad revenue in its home country and the overseas money from Channel 5, RTE and other countries that air it.

IIRC Channel 5 actually offered less money to acquire Home and Away but were willing to commit to a life of series deal unlike ITV.

XIII post_id=67570 time= user_id=894 Wrote:Home and Away's advantage is that it's made in house by Seven so they benefit from both ad revenue in its home country and the overseas money from Channel 5, RTE and other countries that air it.

IIRC Channel 5 actually offered less money to acquire Home and Away but were willing to commit to a life of series deal unlike ITV.

And Channel 5 knew the risk they were taking by agreeing to a lifetime deal. Getting the show for a lot less than they would have if they had committed to just a few years.

ITV did have a clause in their contract saying another broadcaster wasn't allowed to broadcast the series for 12 months after the end of their contract. I think this did a lot of damage to Home and Away in the UK and a lot of viewers stopped watching and lost interest during the 12 month gap.

Torpido1 post_id=67419 time=1644179519 user_id=857 Wrote:Have just emailed channel 5 urging a rethink and Fremantle as well thanking 10 peach for their continued enthusiasm and a plethora of uk broadcasters asking them to consider talking to Fremantle about taking it on - if others did likewise who knows if not at least we ve tried and we’ve nothing to lose

The thing is, something which has been quoted a few times is that Channel 5 think the soap is “stale”… it’s not just stale, it’s got rigor mortis. It’s dreadful. It’s banal, infantile one dimensional drivel, watching it for 10 minutes just for giggles, is painful, it’s biff and chip storytelling. the scope of the show is so limited, I think it can’t be saved because it’s genuinely run out of road.

It was the introduction of the filmic look that put me off Neighbours, which made it look so dreary and a slog to watch. It also ruined The Bill when they started using it. Shows have to attract new viewers and you could maybe get away with it on smaller, unheard of shows but in the case of two very well-known brands, people already know what to expect and any drastic change from that just seems like desperation to get them to watch but it has the adverse effect of them not watching.

Jez_CymruWales post_id=67571 time= user_id=1544 Wrote:ITV did have a clause in their contract saying another broadcaster wasn't allowed to broadcast the series for 12 months after the end of their contract. I think this did a lot of damage to Home and Away in the UK and a lot of viewers stopped watching and lost interest during the 12 month gap.

I think it worked out alright for Home and Away despite that twelve month gap. The most obvious factor was that ITV took so long to replace it, if they'd ended Home and Away on the Friday and had the new soap ready to go on the Monday then there was a good chance people would have got into it and forgotten about Home and Away by the time it came back. You can argue the Beeb did that with Neighbours, in that they had Doctors building an audience while Neighbours was still on, so when it ended they could just shuffle Doctors into its old slot and audiences stayed pretty robust, and quite a lot of people stuck with Doctors rather than follow Neighbours over to Five.

But with Home and Away, it ended in June and Crossroads didn't start until the following March, so people had just got out of the habit of watching ITV at that time. And Night and Day didn't start until the following November, by which point Home and Away was long back. Presumably the whole idea of the year's gap was so they could establish a replacement, but they messed it up and were too slow.

Also as well Home and Away really had a loyal audience. In the last eighteen months on ITV they started trying to curb their reliance on it a bit so it was now networked at 5pm everywhere, when many of the larger regions aired it at six*, and most regions dropped it at lunchtimes. And I remember in 1999 they dropped the lunchtime showing for a week because of snooker, only showing it at teatime, and William Phillips in Broadcast referred to "an example of true audience loyalty" as the audience for the teatime showing absolutely shot up, and if you removed the people who had ITV on all day and watched it twice, pretty much everyone who usually watched it at lunchtime watched it at teatime instead that week. So they weren't watching it just because it was on, they genuinely wanted to watch it and would follow it around the schedule.

*Always a good way to work out where people grew up, asking them what time Home and Away used to be on, because of course some regions showed it at 5.10 and some at six**. In the mid-nineties, Carlton, Central and Granada were showing it at six, so most of the country saw it then, and the biggest region who always showed it at 5.10 was Yorkshire. But towards the end of the decade most regions moved it to 5.10 and the only regions still showing it at six when it was networked at five in 1999 were Central and HTV.

** And obviously, if they said it was at 3.27, they grew up watching TSW.

I still think it should get to its 40th anniversary in March 2025. The axe falling now at just over 37years does not feel right.

Get it on BBC ONE or TWO daytime, for 3 years of 'end of life care', with a 7pm or post midnight THREE repeat, then at the 40th in 2025, as Peggy Mitchell would say, "Let it BURN!!! Let it BURN!!!"

tellyblues post_id=67585 time= user_id=1333 Wrote:It was the introduction of the filmic look that put me off Neighbours, which made it look so dreary and a slog to watch. It also ruined The Bill when they started using it. Shows have to attract new viewers and you could maybe get away with it on smaller, unheard of shows but in the case of two very well-known brands, people already know what to expect and any drastic change from that just seems like desperation to get them to watch but it has the adverse effect of them not watching.

The filmic look actually looks much better now compared to 2008 although I think it works better on H&A,

tellyblues post_id=67585 time= user_id=1333 Wrote:It also ruined The Bill when they started using it.

Brookside, Casualty and Holby City as well.

To be honest, I could be here all day listing shows, of all genres, not just dramas or soaps, where having a film look is completely unecessary, and if anything actually detracts from the show, but it's shoved on virtually everything these days, even things like property, cooking and DIY shows.

I've never thought Neighbours has suited the particularly dour filmic look they've had in the past few years, as it only invites comparisons to more prestigious drama series and in doing so is left wanting.

Funnily enough, we didn't actually get the film look on the show in the UK until the move to channel 5, even though it had been on the show in Australia from the 2007 revamp, but the BBC showings of those post-revamp episodes were without it.