Because of the unique way the BBC is funded...

[tencrush]

So, Julie Gardener has CONFIRMED that Torchwood S3 will be a 5-episode one week mini-series type event. Of course, this is all about money, pure and simple, and that's really a shame, because unlike Who, I don't think TW has enough casual fans (hardcore, yes, casual, no) in the UK to survive that kind of cutback. Unless S4 follows VERY SWIFTLY on the heels of this event, I doubt it'll get made.

God, I bet BBC America are SO FUCKING PISSED OFF right about now.

Comments

[tencrush]

Um... you do understand that BBC America is actually owned by the BBC, don't you?
As far as I'm aware, daughter company or not, BBC America pay the BBC for the rights to broadcast BBC shows just like any other cable company. In fact, as far as I'm aware, again, the Sci-Fi channel actually has first broadcasting pick for both Who and TW, but passed on Torchwood because it didn't like the target demographic, and that is the only reason that BBCA now has TW as a premiere, unlike Doctor Who, which premieres on Sci-Fi. I'd be willing to bet that, financially, the BBC is probably more closely tied to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, the co-production partner for Who series one and two and TW series one, than it is to BBCA.

[maxine-mirkwood.livejournal.com]

As far as I'm aware, daughter company or not, BBC America pay the BBC for the rights to broadcast BBC shows just like any other cable company.

I'm sure they do but it's still all internal accounting, most large companies do it so that their various parts all seem to be "paying their" even if their actual "customer" is internal, not external. It still remains that getting BBCA to pay more for TW would still only be robbing Peter to pay Paul.

In fact, as far as I'm aware, again, the Sci-Fi channel actually has first broadcasting pick for both Who and TW, but passed on Torchwood because it didn't like the target demographic, and that is the only reason that BBCA now has TW as a premiere, unlike Doctor Who, which premieres on Sci-Fi.


Well, yeah. Because getting Sci Fi to pay for something is way better than getting one of your own subsidiaries to pay to for it, 'cos they're only paying you with money that sort of belongs to you anyway. That way, Sci Fi introduces new money into the equation instead.

I'd be willing to bet that, financially, the BBC is probably more closely tied to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, the co-production partner for Who series one and two and TW series one, than it is to BBCA.


I'm afraid you'd lose the bet. The CBC belongs to the Canadian people in the same way the BBC belongs to the British and the ABC (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) belongs to the Australian people. They are all publicly owned, government (under)funded, charter driven institutions which while they are free to become involved in productions with other broadcasters (the ABC was actually a production partner in series one of the new DW as well) all still belong to their respective nations. In fact, their sovereignty and independence is something that is taken very seriously by charters that position them very much as the voices of their respective peoples and require them to provide content that is not driven by ratings, political affiliations or commercial concerns. Whether or not these charters are always followed in the spirit of their intent is a whole other argument...

In any case, due to a couple of extremely grey areas in their charter, the BBC have managed to engage in some pretty commercial enterprises outside of the UK but at the end of the day, BBC Worldwide is 100% owned by the BBC... and a nice little earner it is too, for a supposedly non-profit organisation!

All of that of course still leaves us in our current predicament - the BBC giveth and the BBC taketh away and none of it has much to do with the ratings. Still, where there's government institutions, there's politics and I'm sincerely hoping that that's what Julie Gardner is playing at right now because while I'll gratefully accept how ever many episodes of Torchwood we're given, I'm greedy and 13 sounds like a whole lot better deal to me than 5, no matter how "big" they are.

[tencrush]

Which is why I think they're going for a co-production thing with BBCA. As far as I know, I realise it's a subsidiary, but it functions pretty much as a separate financial entity. Like someone was saying on the OG, because of the BBC's charters, they've got very little leeway to invest in something that they think will make them a nice commercial profit later. They have a budget and they need to stick to it, they're not the sort of business that's allowed to spend money to make money, so they're not allowed to take any potential future earning power of TW into consideration. If they want to spend more money, they just have to raise the allocated budget somehow, and the only way I can see them doing that is by pushing BBCA to throw some of their budget toward BBC Wales for Torchwood, as a co-production. And I think Gardner is trying to pressure them into doing that.