Post by Christopher Perry on Sept 4, 2012 19:31:18 GMT
This thread is very interesting, and seems to paint TV companies as demons who charge a fortune, but want something for free.
So let's put their side of it.
Because anyone reading this thread will never return anything ever again.
Ok, BBC Archives store this stuff, and it costs a lot of money to store an archive. And only a tiny bit sells, so the prices reflect the overall cost of storing material for 50 years.
Then take into account that the record company wanting to buy this footage is going to make money out of it - it's not being given out for a free event or as a charity event. So it's only fair they pay, because they want to make big profits out of it. And believe me record companies charge far more than the BBC if you want their rare footage on your documentary to air on BBC4 :-)
Then we have the figure of 10,000 - not all of that is profit for the BBC, they have to pay all the key artists involved in the clip, including the band and a share to the record company.
Typically, most companies license footage for 500 per minute, and they take about 175 of that as profit, the rest goes to artistes and paying expenses.
If you want the BBC to be a purely commercial organisation - let me play devil's advocate and ask the question.
Should they destroy the 100,000 items that never sell to save costs?
Then keep the 5000 items that do sell, and charge lower fees?
And then not pay the artistes and performers - eg no royalties or repeat fees?
In real terms the cost of footage has declined in the last 15 years, and more is available than ever before. I think that's a good situation to be in.
So let's put their side of it.
Because anyone reading this thread will never return anything ever again.
Ok, BBC Archives store this stuff, and it costs a lot of money to store an archive. And only a tiny bit sells, so the prices reflect the overall cost of storing material for 50 years.
Then take into account that the record company wanting to buy this footage is going to make money out of it - it's not being given out for a free event or as a charity event. So it's only fair they pay, because they want to make big profits out of it. And believe me record companies charge far more than the BBC if you want their rare footage on your documentary to air on BBC4 :-)
Then we have the figure of 10,000 - not all of that is profit for the BBC, they have to pay all the key artists involved in the clip, including the band and a share to the record company.
Typically, most companies license footage for 500 per minute, and they take about 175 of that as profit, the rest goes to artistes and paying expenses.
If you want the BBC to be a purely commercial organisation - let me play devil's advocate and ask the question.
Should they destroy the 100,000 items that never sell to save costs?
Then keep the 5000 items that do sell, and charge lower fees?
And then not pay the artistes and performers - eg no royalties or repeat fees?
In real terms the cost of footage has declined in the last 15 years, and more is available than ever before. I think that's a good situation to be in.