As somebody who works in the private sector and who works with public and private sector organisations I completely agree with you.
Yep, send commentators, interviewers, reporters etc but no need for everyone to be over there. Wonder how much the studio on the beach cost! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Or the documentaries, travel programmes etc which were part of their coverage (and remit as a public broadcaster)
So how much of your chargeable day rate goes to you? (Don't answer by the way mate!). Worked out recently how many architects we could have employed direct for framework rates
Do they actually need to send commentators? Could they not commentate from a studio? Itsmtge same with F1. They send commentators who can't actually see the track (other than one straight) and instead sit in a commentary booth watching a tv showing the exact same thing that I'm sat at home watching. The BBC could have saved a fortune if they had just had Coulthard and co in a UK studio
They give up on F1 three years ago when they gave the rights to Sky - any serious F1 fan then had to fork out for Sky Sports and was never going to watch the then BBC's live races after that.
All I will say is that I am charged out at £1090 per day and I only see a fraction of it so I get the point.
They need to get rid of the overpaid geriatric Dimbleby brothers and their Ilk and cut down on sending news reporters to overseas events in which they address camera and nothing else is viewed. As for the subject matter, it can hardly be called a fair sport. It is totally dependent mainly on the skills of the designers and engineers, not the drivers. It would be more sporting for the drivers to draw their car to drive, out of a lottery drum.
Personally I think they do. You know as well as me that watching a game on tv is totally different to live. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Osborne had meetings with Murdoch before making the cuts. Murdoch wants a world in which you have to pay him to watch TV and suffer adverts as well. The last thing Murdoch wants is a quality free to air channel that he doesn't own. The Tory government is in Murdoch's pocket and you buy the propaganda put out by the Murdoch press and Tory central office. The BBC belongs to us and we should fight any attempts to dismantle it!
Makes the £850 a day you'd pay my employers for my services look like damn good value! I think the public vs private efficiency comparison is largely true in my experience, but it does depend on the organisation type. Universitities for example have seemingly been awash with cash for a few years but are being pegged back a bit now. FE colleges however, haven't had a pot to piss in for as long as I can remember. Not a penny goes to waste in them places.
Can you give my boss a call please. Seriously though the company I work for is a FTSE100 company so pay rises are not always the easiest thing to get as the days of negotiating your own pay increase are long gone. I have been offered more, a lot more in one case, to go an work elsewhere but I decided to stick due to me having a degree of job security, long service and my age. Money is only a small part of what motivates me.
Unfortunately I think there is a lot of truth in this The Murdoch press and tv have been running a campaign against the BBC for years, after all they are major competition and also much less in line with Murdoch policies which are much better represented by Fox news and the Sun. For all those who are moaning about BBC inefficiency - annual cost for BBC1 ..BBC4, Childrens channels News channels Radio iplayer etc etc = £175 per household or £3.30 per week When I looked at Sky pricing so I could continue to watch F1 the cost was £10.30 per week or over three times as much so the BBC isnt quite so bad as some would have you believe I wonder why Sky arent also forced to give free viewing to over 75's and pay for it themselves by the way
Amongst our customer base we also have Universities and some Colleges and my experience, albeit fairly limited, of these organisations is exactly as you have said.