(18-05-2022, 02:58 PM)Brekkie Wrote:

(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.

(18-05-2022, 12:51 PM)SteveRW Wrote:

(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.

(19-05-2022, 05:26 PM)Brekkie Wrote: So Eurovision.tv has published an article on the plan for 2023 without even a hint that things might not be as straight forward as usual.

https://eurovision.tv/story/eurovision-whats-the-plan-for-2023

Quote:"Traditionally, the winning country hosts the following Contest, but this isn’t always possible (as it was the case for the winning broadcasters in 1956, 1959, 1962, 1971, 1973 and 1979), and there are no hard and fast rules dictating who should host in these circumstances."

(09-06-2022, 08:35 PM)p2004 Wrote: I'm not saying this means anything, but someone in the UK delegation for Eurovision posted that he was attending the first Eurovision 2023 related meeting... and it was a photo of New Broadcasting House. Considering that BBC Eurovision's moved up to Salford, is this maybe a sign of something going on with the EBU right now?

(09-06-2022, 09:46 PM)p2004 Wrote: Fair point, but surely they'd do such a meeting in Salford, where the team's actually based? It feels slightly odd to be holding it in London after the BBC made a massive point of moving all of the Eurovision Song Contest related team to Salford.

(13-06-2022, 03:49 PM)Roger Darthwell Wrote: Kyrylo Tymoshenko who is the deputy head of the Office of the Ukrainian President has announced that Ukraine has started the preparations for Eurovision 2023

(13-06-2022, 03:53 PM)Newshound47 Wrote:

(13-06-2022, 03:49 PM)Roger Darthwell Wrote: Kyrylo Tymoshenko who is the deputy head of the Office of the Ukrainian President has announced that Ukraine has started the preparations for Eurovision 2023

The EBU still has to agree. I can’t see them agreeing if by September the official travel advice given by the governments of Europe is still do not travel to Ukraine.