Pfft, that post was written by some random member more than 10 years ago, it's not official BBBA content. I can also say you sound like a bit of a dick. OMG there, it's official now.check the forum FAQ, your name is mentioned there!
-
Welcome to the discussion forums. To get posting, register an account.
Big Brother back in 2025 on 10! AND LIVE!
- Thread starter TravisM
- Start date
- Featured
Kingston
Canadian Royalty
Well said.
beardymac
john might've been the walrus, but paul was a cat
I ain't reading all that. Your example is off because you're making a false equivalence by implying it's two different groups that could run the show. It's the one production company and two different funding groups.
beardymac
john might've been the walrus, but paul was a cat
lmao can I have this job? I'll turn it around in two weeks.
Today is the first time I have seen that FAQ thread because of this being pointed out! Kingston was and still is way less abrasive than some of the personalities here when that FAQ was written. If this place gets back to the numbers it used to have with a proper BB season you will find people here with personalities that will differ. There will probably be some heated discussions at times - that is the nature of forums and healthy and robust conversation with differing opinions are a part of life. The mods are here to tell us when we step over the line and I have never seen Kington not respect what the mods say.
do it two weeks get paid for 12 months - dream job!!!
Gayspie
Well-Known Member
one production company = one council owned venue.
two competing channels = two competing community groups.
holdback imposed on competing channel by production company = exclusive booking renewal rights for incumbent group by council owned venue.
Your analogy is probably the wrong way round. It's the community group wants to change venue.
Kingston
Canadian Royalty
Thank you for your kind words, however I’m not really sure you know the extent of my reputation… Looking back my behaviour was embarrassing, shocking, and downright disgusting at times.
beardymac
john might've been the walrus, but paul was a cat
yes, this.
beardymac
john might've been the walrus, but paul was a cat
Honestly, who hasn't said or done shit they regret? The late 2000s / early 2010s were a wild time on internet forums.
I think we all look back and think I should have handled that differently/better. But honestly what I remember of you from that time was that you could be snarky but not the nasty levels of gaslighting I saw from WB.
How do we know Channel Ten and Channel 7 and endemol have not come to some agreement that channel seven will not renew the contract?
Channel seven does not seem to want it, Channel ten does. Being spiteful really may not play well for them for future things they may want. Maybe we are just all overthinking something because it seems too good to be true in a decade where nothing is going well?
Channel seven does not seem to want it, Channel ten does. Being spiteful really may not play well for them for future things they may want. Maybe we are just all overthinking something because it seems too good to be true in a decade where nothing is going well?
BBAU25
Active Member
7 has no interest in renewing BB, they added the holdback clause in the contract to stop other networks from picking the show up for a reasonable turn around.. it’s just a greedy thing 7 did.
And if they did come to an agreement, we would’ve seen a pre cast announcement for interest. And then auditions would start around Feb/March
Rison
Wahoo!
Bit hyperbolic there.
At the end of the day, its just a short and temporary "do not compete" clause, which is also quite a standard thing in contracts. I'd be surprised if there isn't a handful of people on this forum that aren't under an employment contract themselves with such a clause.
Also, Endemol accepted a contract with the clause in it and more than likely added to the total cost Seven paid for the contract. No way it was just given to them as a freebie clause. The only greedy ones in this scenario are Endemol Shine - who have been caught trying to have their cake and eat it too.
BBAU25
Active Member
I wouldn’t say that… there could be multiple scenarios as to what could’ve happened.
° could’ve forgotten about the clause, as the contract would’ve been signed years ago.
° new management/team could’ve taken over and may not have known about the contract or clause.
There are things that aren’t public knowledge at the moment.
Zcsund1234
Well-Known Member
And this is where I completely stop taking any of your posts seriously.
As if a large well known production company doesn’t have a legal team going over all of this with them…
BBAU25
Active Member
That’s fine…
But big brother on channel 7, was co produced by seven studios! It wasn’t just ESA…
God, I know the production team on Seven screwed up Big Brother but they're not that thick. This is basic stuff.
The only confusion may be the dates of the holdback considering you have the original production date, the likely intended mid-year air date, the actual air date six months later and the point where Seven said no to another series. Simply reading the contract should make it clear though unless it's more vague than it should be. I do wonder though if the producers went off the production date and the (former) broadcaster off the broadcast date.
Quite surprised though these holdback clauses are still included in Aussie contracts but the Aussie networks still operate as if it's the 1980s and they're each others biggest competition when really they're not. However as this outdated model means "talent" is still largely assigbed to one channel lets just be grateful that means Kruger is not an option.
That's a worthwhile theory at least.