This via Guido:
We know that the BBC lost £100 million on its failed digital media project.
But it’s worse than that.
William Foxton in the Telegraph says:
‘I heard that, over the five years of its life, factoring in staff costs, consulting fees and the money paid to Siemens, the contractors fired for failing to deliver the project by 2009, £150 million had been dumped into DMI. It’s always been the tradition at the BBC to calculate the value of a project in terms of how many licence fees it costs; to put this into context, £150 million is more than a million licence fees wasted.’
He also reveals that an ‘off the shelf” system would have cost around £1 million…plus a bit more to adapt it.
But here’s the funny BBC logic:
The BBC claims it didn’t lose more than £10 million on the Siemens deal – in its accounts, it says it paid the extra costs of the Siemen’s failure by extra “savings” (cuts) across other departments.
It didn’t lose money because it made cuts elsewhere. Well done.
Ahh…but…if you, the BBC, hadn’t lost that money you could have then spent it on programmes and not made those cuts…and sacked all those people.
No digital media system and no extra production…lose/lose all round.
Bit like saying I’ve lost a shoe..but it’s OK…because I’ve cut off one of my legs so I now only need one shoe.
Still, lots of archive material to keep the constant repeats going on the Beeb…if only you can find them now and get them delivered…hope there’s no Tube strikes.
~Claps hands~
Alan posts something interesting about the Beeb without a single mention or allusion to Islam. A momentous occasion folks. One to tell the grankids in days to come. “I remember where I was the day Alan” etc etc
Stay classy, Pob.
Sorry David. It was irresistible P.S You have been the voice of reason around here this week so hats off. pah, As I See It and Sir Arthur have also earned my respect.
Not back handed, honest.
I do pay attention to this site 🙂
‘Honest’ LOL
Sorry…Alan, are you saying I was being sarcastic? or dishonest in general?
Definitely a slot for Pob on HIGNFY.
He’s not at all funny, but he has the right opinions.
I like a bit of a change..as do you…new day and a new name…why is it our ‘critics’ always feel the need to use so many different names?…..keep playing the games Pob or whatever you decide to call yourself…’I do pay attention to this site’.
Nice bit of kiss arsing by the way. I’m sure David’s impressed. Flattery will get you everywhere.
Not arselicking at all just giving my opinion as a reader. As a reader of the site I made a point (yes in a satirical manner) Don’t know what you mean by the rest but don’t want an answer especially
Sulky little Pob
Are you suggesting all the BBC bias that involves Muslims/Islam/similar should be ignored? Filtered? rationed?
just shows how much disrespect the bbc has for us licence fee payers
It’s contempt….Socialist television where only Guardian readers are satisfied with what Joe Public is forced to pay for.
Very weird accounting tricks here. If it lost 100million plus then that is the figure. Making savings elsewhere is irrelevant and does not affect the loss. No wonder the average Beeboid has a poor grasp of reality.
“A poor grasp of reality” and a desperately poor grasp of Finance. Hippo Steph is living proof of that.
It shows they KNOWINGLY deceived when telling the public how much this fiasco cost.
Something for those who think BBC output is an unconscious bias to reconsider.
How about the past al-beeb’s “project” of opening an office in Tehran? Always wondered how much that “initiative” cost.
“£150 million is more than a million licence fees wasted.” And more than a million people are on license fee strike. So that’s all right then.
Hey whats a £100million here and there when they get £3billion/year. Chicken feed. And you paying the bill are the chickens.
Given that the Beeb generates £2 of economic value to Britain for every £1 taken in licence fees*, surely this should be reported as a £300M investment in the IT sector?
*I know because they were kind enough to tell us:
Click to access bbc_economic_impact_2013.pdf
BBC making cuts, oh the irony.
“Bit like saying I’ve lost a shoe..but it’s OK…because I’ve cut off one of my legs so I now only need one shoe.”
They did that quite some time ago when they cut off the right leg and kicked out any pretense to balance with the left.
Ephraim Hardcastle, re-role of ex-BBC D.G, Mr THOMPSON.
‘Daily Mail’:-
“Mark Thompson’s exit as the BBC’s director-general helped him avoid entanglement in the sordid Jimmy Savile scandal and the row over the loss of nearly £100million on a ‘Digital Media Initiative’. Now Tory MP Rob Wilson wants Thompson to shed light on these matters, saying in a letter: ‘As someone who remains on the public payroll via your BBC pension, you will appreciate the need for you to attend to both of these matters urgently.’ As £4million CEO of The New York Times, I wonder if this request is high on Thompson’s list of priorities.”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2333024/EPHRAIM-HARDCASTLE-Harrods-gains-kosher-certification-Qatari-royal-family-ownership.html
it says it paid the extra costs of the Siemen’s failure by extra “savings” (cuts) across other departments.
**********************************************************
So why didn’t they do the ‘cuts’ anyway?
Oh yeah, public sector, they don’t need to.
Idiots.
Can anyone point to any public sector IT development which hasn’t gone tits up? Seems a bit like Ministry of Defence procurement. Costs go one way and satisfactory outcomes go the other.
Was it also noticeable (or not) that this news slipped out on Friday when everyone was still digesting the Woolwich atrocity?
Meanwhile, the usual Beeboid junkets:
“300 BBC staff to provide in-depth coverage of Glastonbury music festival”
http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/uk/300-bbc-staff-to-provide-in-depth-coverage-of-glastonbury-music-festival-1.98118?
Why? Perhaps because Glastonbury is the music festival for the Guardian reading classes. Bit like Hay on Wye with sound effects.
They are really boringly predictable.
Oh dear. Here’s a list of the acts appearing:
http://www.glastonburyfestivals.co.uk/line-up/
Surely not suggesting only Guardian readers listen to music and there is nothing here you like!
However I can’t see how 300 people are needed to cover it. Maybe they are expecting it to be a bit like Passchendaele and expect to lose a large number to the mud and portable loos.
I’d love to go, but I don’t fancy a diet of nut cutlet burgers and the runs.
There you go again, Alan! Hyping BBC failures.
Please correct yourself by revising your figures. The BBC did not lose £100m as you stated but £98.4m. This will give execs a full £1.6m to spend on Graham Norton or office refurbishment – whichever proves to be the more colourful..
http://thenextweb.com/uk/2013/05/24/bbc-scraps-digital-media-initiative-after-spending-98-4m-on-a-revamped-archive-and-production-tools/
Please let me know if you’re looking for a author for your site. You have some really great posts and I think I would be a good asset. If you ever want to take some of the load off, I’d really like to write some content for your blog in exchange for a link back to mine. Please send me an e-mail if interested. Many thanks!