Whats The Most Vested Property Program.?

[right_freds_dead]

i am about sick of all the property progs on tv at the moment. so much so i cancelled my tv licence in protest. -which i have not renewed. anyway, i think there must be at least 5 current property BUY BUY BUY programs on mainstream tv at the moment. is this a huge financial conspiracy or mad market trends ?

whatever it is its sucking the life out of the UK both financially, and taking any culture with it. cheap nasty and dangerous tv. and too much of it. some are more guilty than others. some are subtle, some are completey infuriating.

which ones the most vested ? my choice is 'To Buy or Not to Buy', which to me is simple propaganda. with quotes such as "this end terrace is a BARGAIN at £179k". ect. they are simply brainwashing people. also they give the guests a really hard sell. stop being picky ect. very pushy presenters. i vote this the most VESTED property program available. i am sure they contribute to this speculative bubble which has just popped. i wonder if they will accept that responsibility ?

i wonder who's behind it all ?

[Smell the Fear]

i am about sick of all the property progs on tv at the moment. so much so i cancelled my tv licence in protest. -which i have not renewed. anyway, i think there must be at least 5 current property BUY BUY BUY programs on mainstream tv at the moment. is this a huge financial conspiracy or mad market trends ?

whatever it is its sucking the life out of the UK both financially, and taking any culture with it. cheap nasty and dangerous tv. and too much of it. some are more guilty than others. some are subtle, some are completey infuriating.

which ones the most vested ? my choice is 'To Buy or Not to Buy', which to me is simple propaganda. with quotes such as "this end terrace is a BARGAIN at £179k". ect. they are simply brainwashing people. also they give the guests a really hard sell. stop being picky ect. very pushy presenters. i vote this the most VESTED property program available. i am sure they contribute to this speculative bubble which has just popped. i wonder if they will accept that responsibility ?

i wonder who's behind it all ?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ask Eric Pebble!

[eric pebble]

Ask Eric Pebble!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hi there!! YES - I sypathise entirely - It is really SHOCKING that particulalry the BBC - which we pay for - is allowed to peddle this endless cr*p and pure propoganda - why should they be allowed to give an entirely one-sided view on what is actualy people's largest financial transaction? It is truly DISGRACEFUL.

I simply cannot wait to when - when the dust settles sometime in the next 2 years or so - as it did with the dotcom bubble - and people start to look back on the whole thing - and they will look at those countless tv programmes - and see them for what they are - VESTED INTERESTS, - nakedly so.

It is so depressing.

[Guest Time 2 raise Interest Rates]

I think you will find nearly all independent T.V. property programs are sponsered

by the Halifax or DirectLine. Big VIs.

[Loanshark]

Well as someone who works in TV i can tell you there realy is no VI influencing prog makers.

The problem is the viewers !

Lets say you get a top job at CH4 as head of the channel, your job is to deliver an audience to that channel, experience tells you that as soon as you put on a 'property prog' viewing figures shoot up you also know that if you put on a prog about debt viewing figures would slump your job is on the line you need to deliver an audience to the channel which prog would you choose ?

IF viewers stopped watching property progs then the channel would stop showing them (after a lag of TXing the ones that are being made at present)

So it is the people who are to blame the TV exec's just feed them until they vomit

[George]

its the only thing proping this hole up, if it wasnt for massive borrowings and credit cards store cards etc. england would be a big pile of shit, its shit anyway, but even worse without hp boom. Once this bubble pops and all those camp fuckers stop getting in my face on property programs telling me "its boho" and "its art deco" then maybe england can build an economy based on realistic wealth. And not "hey laminate it paint walls white add £40k - wo hooo".

[erranta]

all those camp fuckers stop getting in my face

I saw that Butlins program once - did my head in!

[Guest muttley]

which ones the most vested ?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

BBC 6 o'clock news.

[BuyingBear]

The problem is the viewers !

Lets say you get a top job at CH4 as head of the channel, your job is to deliver an audience to that channel, experience tells you that as soon as you put on a 'property prog' viewing figures shoot up

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Indeed, the market will correctly, especially so when the main advertisers for these sort of programmes like B&Q and alike are now struggling.

I noticed C4 aren't comissioning many new property series, most are repeats or rehashed "Revisited" programmes. This seems to be in anticipation of a advertising drop off, they're milking old programmes for what they're worth while they can... repeatng them next year may seem quite distatesful if people have got themselves into neg equity because of Beenie.

Filming a property series this summer would probably be quite sober.

[No6]

i am about sick of all the property progs on tv at the moment. so much so i cancelled my tv licence in protest. -which i have not renewed.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Have they paid you a visit yet? I got rid of my TV 10 months ago and despite writing to TVLicensing they continue to send me letters, the latest saying they will send one of their Gestapo round to check.

They make it sound like you are a criminal for NOT having a TV.

I've decided not to let them in unless they have a warrant.

So, I have no idea which is the the most VI property prog on TV, but I would guess that they all trying hard to outdo each other for the title.

[Loanshark]

They make it sound like you are a criminal for NOT having a TV.

I've decided not to let them in unless they have a warrant.

They dont need a warrant they can enter by law once you open the door.

[No6]

They make it sound like you are a criminal for NOT having a TV.

I've decided not to let them in unless they have a warrant.

They dont need a warrant they can enter by law once you open the door.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, they can try.

Has the law been changed since 2002?

Select Committee on Public Accounts Minutes of Evidence

Examination of Witnesses (Questions 20 - 39)

MONDAY 1 JULY 2002

MS SUE STREET, MR GREG DYKE, MR JOHN SMITH AND MS ZARIN PATEL

Mr Gibb

20. Can I ask you about visits. I start by addressing this question to Ms Street. When a TV licensing officer visits a premises, do they ask for access to those premises?

(Ms Street) I do hate to pass the buck but, with the Chairman's agreement, it is probably not a matter for me.

(Ms Patel) Enquiry officers do not have automatic right of entry unless they have a search warrant.

21. Do they ask for access to premises?

(Ms Patel) Yes, they do but they make it clear, and most of their visiting is done on the doorstep because they need to ask questions about whether there is a television in the house. Where they need to inspect whether there is a television, for example when someone does not have a television, on a confirmatory visit, they will ask. They will not insist on entry unless they have a search warrant.

22. They do ask people if they can enter their premises?

(Ms Patel) Only if they have to inspect whether there is a televison in the house.

23. What is the procedure if the recipient says he or she does not have a television and is refusing entry to their home?

(Ms Patel) The enquiry officer will then leave.

24. Then what do you do—give up?

(Ms Patel) No, we write again to the particular person explaining to them why we need to make a confirmatory visit to check that they do not have a television as they are claiming. Once we have made that confirmatory visit, we then do not go to talk to that person for another two years.

25. What if he or she still refuses to give you access to that private home?

(Ms Patel) We would then think hard about whether we have reasonable evidence that there is the use of television on that premises, and we would then look at whether detection would be a sensible use of our resources.

26. What do you do to find out whether somebody is using a television in a particular home?

(Ms Patel) We use external evidence; an aerial on the house would be a give-away.

27. And if there is no aerial, then what do you do?

(Ms Patel) If there is no aerial, we would then look at whether we have enough of a suspicion that there is use of television and whether it is acceptable to use detection. That is a judgment I have to make, if there is not enough evidence. For example, if a person has written to us a few times before saying they have not got a television, you would probably say there is no need for detection.

28. What does detection mean?

(Ms Patel) Detection means we use a detector van that tries to detect whether there is a television in use at that moment.

29. Do detector vans actually work, and they are not just some bogus thing? They are genuine?

(Ms Patel) Yes, they do.

30. Do you think it is right that in pursuit of your commercial interests you should be requesting entry to somebody's home for somebody who does not receive your service?

(Ms Patel) This is about our duty to enforce. We have an obligation to make sure that we fairly and consistently enforce the regulations. Our experience shows that one in five people of those who claim they do not have a television set in fact does have a television set. I think in those circumstances we would not want to disadvantage those that pay by not checking up.

31. You know that we have corresponded on constituency cases. I have a 92 year old resident who does not have a television and felt intimidated by being asked for entry into her home. Do you think it is right that your commercial interest could result in one of my constituents being intimidated, or feeling she is being intimidated, on the doorstep? Are you aware of any other private sector organisation or commercial organisation that does provide a service where it can ask for entry into a person's home?

(Ms Patel) We do not ask for entry. We ask for co-operation of the honest majority to be able to check whether people have a television set when they claim they do not. It is not about our commercial interest. We do have a duty to enforce the licence fee enforcement system. We have no way of knowing—

32. Are you saying that you do not ask for entry into people's homes?

(Ms Patel) We do not force entry into people's homes.

33. I never implied that. Did you say that you do not ask for entry into people's homes?

(Ms Patel) Let me try and get this correct. When we do an unconfirmed no set visit, which is to visit someone who claims they have not got a television, we do ask to be let in to check that fact. If people refuse, we do not insist on it because we have no automatic right of entry.

34. Do you think it right that you as a commercial organisation should be asking for entry into people's homes when they do not receive your service? Eastern Electricity do not have any right to ask me for entry into my home. I live in the south of England. What right have you got to enter my constituents' homes if they do not receive your service?

(Ms Patel) I am saying we have a duty to enforce the law and not to disadvantage the honest majority that pays.

[privatefraser]

Well as someone who works in TV i can tell you there realy is no VI influencing prog makers.

The problem is the viewers !

Lets say you get a top job at CH4 as head of the channel, your job is to deliver an audience to that channel, experience tells you that as soon as you put on a 'property prog' viewing figures shoot up you also know that if you put on a prog about debt viewing figures would slump your job is on the line you need to deliver an audience to the channel which prog would you choose ?

IF viewers stopped watching property progs then the channel would stop showing them (after a lag of TXing the ones that are being made at present)

So it is the people who are to blame the TV exec's just feed them until they vomit

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You do have a point. People - in the UK and US especially - want to be fed lies.

The more garbage the Sun prints the more people buy it.

ditto The Guardian

They enjoy being brainwashed.

COMFORTABLY NUMB

[privatefraser]

Well, they can try.

Has the law been changed since 2002?

Select Committee on Public Accounts Minutes of Evidence

Examination of Witnesses (Questions 20 - 39)

MONDAY 1 JULY 2002

MS SUE STREET, MR GREG DYKE, MR JOHN SMITH AND MS ZARIN PATEL

Mr Gibb

  20. Can I ask you about visits. I start by addressing this question to Ms Street. When a TV licensing officer visits a premises, do they ask for access to those premises?

  (Ms Street) I do hate to pass the buck but, with the Chairman's agreement, it is probably not a matter for me.

  (Ms Patel) Enquiry officers do not have automatic right of entry unless they have a search warrant.

  21. Do they ask for access to premises?

  (Ms Patel) Yes, they do but they make it clear, and most of their visiting is done on the doorstep because they need to ask questions about whether there is a television in the house. Where they need to inspect whether there is a television, for example when someone does not have a television, on a confirmatory visit, they will ask. They will not insist on entry unless they have a search warrant.

  22. They do ask people if they can enter their premises?

  (Ms Patel) Only if they have to inspect whether there is a televison in the house.

  23. What is the procedure if the recipient says he or she does not have a television and is refusing entry to their home?

  (Ms Patel) The enquiry officer will then leave.

  24. Then what do you do—give up?

  (Ms Patel) No, we write again to the particular person explaining to them why we need to make a confirmatory visit to check that they do not have a television as they are claiming. Once we have made that confirmatory visit, we then do not go to talk to that person for another two years.

  25. What if he or she still refuses to give you access to that private home?

  (Ms Patel) We would then think hard about whether we have reasonable evidence that there is the use of television on that premises, and we would then look at whether detection would be a sensible use of our resources.

  26. What do you do to find out whether somebody is using a television in a particular home?

  (Ms Patel) We use external evidence; an aerial on the house would be a give-away.

  27. And if there is no aerial, then what do you do?

  (Ms Patel) If there is no aerial, we would then look at whether we have enough of a suspicion that there is use of television and whether it is acceptable to use detection. That is a judgment I have to make, if there is not enough evidence. For example, if a person has written to us a few times before saying they have not got a television, you would probably say there is no need for detection.

  28. What does detection mean?

  (Ms Patel) Detection means we use a detector van that tries to detect whether there is a television in use at that moment.

  29. Do detector vans actually work, and they are not just some bogus thing? They are genuine?

  (Ms Patel) Yes, they do.

  30. Do you think it is right that in pursuit of your commercial interests you should be requesting entry to somebody's home for somebody who does not receive your service?

  (Ms Patel) This is about our duty to enforce. We have an obligation to make sure that we fairly and consistently enforce the regulations. Our experience shows that one in five people of those who claim they do not have a television set in fact does have a television set. I think in those circumstances we would not want to disadvantage those that pay by not checking up.

  31. You know that we have corresponded on constituency cases. I have a 92 year old resident who does not have a television and felt intimidated by being asked for entry into her home. Do you think it is right that your commercial interest could result in one of my constituents being intimidated, or feeling she is being intimidated, on the doorstep? Are you aware of any other private sector organisation or commercial organisation that does provide a service where it can ask for entry into a person's home?

  (Ms Patel) We do not ask for entry. We ask for co-operation of the honest majority to be able to check whether people have a television set when they claim they do not. It is not about our commercial interest. We do have a duty to enforce the licence fee enforcement system. We have no way of knowing—

  32. Are you saying that you do not ask for entry into people's homes?

  (Ms Patel) We do not force entry into people's homes.

  33. I never implied that. Did you say that you do not ask for entry into people's homes?

  (Ms Patel) Let me try and get this correct. When we do an unconfirmed no set visit, which is to visit someone who claims they have not got a television, we do ask to be let in to check that fact. If people refuse, we do not insist on it because we have no automatic right of entry.

  34. Do you think it right that you as a commercial organisation should be asking for entry into people's homes when they do not receive your service? Eastern Electricity do not have any right to ask me for entry into my home. I live in the south of England. What right have you got to enter my constituents' homes if they do not receive your service?

  (Ms Patel) I am saying we have a duty to enforce the law and not to disadvantage the honest majority that pays.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Great stuff. The replies from the BBC stooge tells you all you need to know about the UK.

If that is not Totalitarian what is .

Hardly surprising Orwell's time at the BBC partly inspired 1984.

[Guest]

Well as someone who works in TV i can tell you there realy is no VI influencing prog makers.

The problem is the viewers !

Lets say you get a top job at CH4 as head of the channel, your job is to deliver an audience to that channel, experience tells you that as soon as you put on a 'property prog' viewing figures shoot up you also know that if you put on a prog about debt viewing figures would slump your job is on the line you need to deliver an audience to the channel which prog would you choose ?

IF viewers stopped watching property progs then the channel would stop showing them (after a lag of TXing the ones that are being made at present)

So it is the people who are to blame the TV exec's just feed them until they vomit

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, it's no longer property -- that went OUT in the same way that HOME COMPUTERS went OUT in 1986 in favour of SKATEBOARDING.

Now it's NAUGHTY KIDS, oh, and documentaries catching up with OASIS, plus a little FEMALE SEXUALITY. All in the name of good research, science, and education of the general public, you understand.

[Mushroom]

Bread, aka easy debt.

And

Circuses, aka "reality" TV.

Provide that and you stay on top.

[VacantPossession]

Well as someone who works in TV i can tell you there realy is no VI influencing prog makers.

The problem is the viewers !

Lets say you get a top job at CH4 as head of the channel, your job is to deliver an audience to that channel, experience tells you that as soon as you put on a 'property prog' viewing figures shoot up you also know that if you put on a prog about debt viewing figures would slump your job is on the line you need to deliver an audience to the channel which prog would you choose ?

IF viewers stopped watching property progs then the channel would stop showing them (after a lag of TXing the ones that are being made at present)

So it is the people who are to blame the TV exec's just feed them until they vomit

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yeah right...so all TV program makers are entirely "victims" of audience demand are they? So what happened to "vision" and "ideas" and program planning?

Audience figures in the way you describe don't quite work like that. How do quality drama programs happen to gain huge audiences? If your logic was carried through then you might as well say put on female naked mud wrestling and nothing else and the program will get record audiences. People tend to switch on to watch whatever is offered.

Please don't peddle the idea that TV channels are shoving out mediocre rubbish just because the audience "wants it". In a sea of mediocrity it APPEARS that every shite program is in demand. When you have a choice of fifteen "makeovers" accross the entire terrestial networks it is hardly surprising that they are "popular", because that's all there is!

VP

Edited September 1, 2005 by VacantPossession

[pod]

Well as someone who works in TV i can tell you there realy is no VI influencing prog makers.

The problem is the viewers !

Lets say you get a top job at CH4 as head of the channel, your job is to deliver an audience to that channel, experience tells you that as soon as you put on a 'property prog' viewing figures shoot up you also know that if you put on a prog about debt viewing figures would slump your job is on the line you need to deliver an audience to the channel which prog would you choose ?

IF viewers stopped watching property progs then the channel would stop showing them (after a lag of TXing the ones that are being made at present)

So it is the people who are to blame the TV exec's just feed them until they vomit

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I stopped watching TV property programmes about one year ago. I just got totally and utterly sick sick sick to death with them. I just reached the stage where I found them mind numbingly tedious....!

So, I simply do not watch any of them anymore.

FTBs of BRITAIN - do your bit for the crash and boycott TV property programmes!!!

Get this garbage off our screens...!

(Didn't know I could get that angry)

[teddyboy]

I love the way these threads go off on different tangents. From property programmes to what legal right ot the TV licensing people have. Shows what an interesting bunch we are.

I agree with one of the posters that its not the programme makers its Joe Public who are to blame. We all start out as sheep and unless we SEE THE LIGHT we are pre-programmed to follow the crowd.

The housing thing actually started off with the likes of Tommy Walsh - the DIY'er that went along with Alan Tithead and Big Nipples. He made DIY Fun and fashionable.

Anyone remmber Ken Hom (that sparked of WOK sales). The galloping gourmet? Made food fashionable. People seen DIY - made their first mortace-and-tenon joint. Seen Tommy making decking area, odd-jobs on the house and then said. Bugger me thats really easy - lets buy a wreck do some poor DIY and sell it at huge gain because property never goes down.

Then the flock followed.

You only have to looks at the celebrities that ARE 3 rate celebrities because of this; LL-Bowen -did a few nice design but majority were hiddeous!!! Yet he's looked upon as some guru. The two camp scottish guyz - Colin and someone? Famous for what - never seen then do anything> Million pound house experiment. They got a project Manager in to do coz they aint got a clue, but they are famous for being "property Experts". Kirsty & Phil (fill in insults here....).

BUT the flock LOVE EM!!

Unfortunately, there is an area where the bulls were right. 3 years ago or something. I remember a house selling in our street (3 bed semi with garden) with £100,000. This was a landmark figure which I found amazing. They were saying BUY NOW but my tight **** instincts told me "no way! Thats silly money". I stuck to my guns and never bought. If I could buy it today for £100,000 I would bite their hand off.

So at some point these people were right. The problem I have is they cant see the trees for the woods. And still maintain to talk up the market.

I would like to see some programmes changed CH4 schedule.

Location, Location, Location renamed to

'Going, Going, Gone (opps sorry they've just pulled out)'

A Place in the Sun to

'A place with me mum'

Property Ladder to

'The Market gets sadder'

How to be a property expert to

'How to get a BTL mortgage'

the list goes on as someone said in here - BUILD AND THE SHEEP WILL COME.

This also applied to the programme makers.

If theres anymore typo's I dont care - Im tired.

[right_freds_dead]

They make it sound like you are a criminal for NOT having a TV.

I've decided not to let them in unless they have a warrant.

They dont need a warrant they can enter by law once you open the door.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

i dont even open my door to anyone i dont regonise or am not expecting.

and why should i ? i let them rap away until they get bored. as i continue to watch tv.

uninvited door knockers are either wanting me to change gas/electric/phone or wanting poll tax or tv licence. i can see the door from my front room without being seen. "i hears the bells, but if i's donts regonsises thems i donts open." no one is going to knock and hand me £500 cash. there is nothing to gain from opening up the door to a stranger.

[Loanshark]

Yeah right...so all TV program makers are entirely "victims" of audience demand are they? So what happened to "vision" and "ideas" and program planning?

A lot of program makers are victims of the system, it is highly commercial (the BBC are the worst) and it is the accountants who put pressure on the commisioning editors to deliver cheaply made progs with ratings and the sad fact is uk viewers WILL watch cheap trash tv they will not watch expensive quality tv (and there is quality around outside of mainstream viewing if you look)

Drama does get good viewing figures but it is very expensive to make at £500,000 -£1M per hour but Location Location Location i would estimate has a budget of only £40k-£60k i suspect and can deliver a big audience which delivers advertisers and big profits for the accountants.

The good news is that reality tv type progs are coming to the end of their life i am glad to say there has been a shift in thinking towards bigger budget progs the industry is simply worn out making reality crap tv most of the people making the crap tv hate it never mind the viewers !

[Mushroom]

The good news is that reality tv type progs are coming to the end of their life i am glad to say there has been a shift in thinking towards bigger budget progs the industry is simply worn out making reality crap tv most of the people making the crap tv hate it never mind the viewers !

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Oh fiddlesticks! I haven't had my 15 minutes of fame yet.

[right_freds_dead]

well, that and they wheel them out on uk prime time 7-9pm.

these cheap and LMF productions.

its the blind leading the blind.

the makers are supposed to inspire and entertain the nation. now all they aspire to do is drip funds from advertising for doing as little as possible.

perhaps all of society should adopt this work ethic.

perhaps police thinking if its good business to monitor a speed camera all day long, rather than attend an unprofitable rta. maybe parameds can only attend those cheaper heart attacks rather than messy cuts and breaks. a doctor that only saw people with common colds.

oh, we could all do this kind of thing, though i d rather not be FORCED to pay for it.

[pod]

Location Location Location i would estimate has a budget of only £40k-£60k

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Jeez...

What on earth do they spend £40k-60k on, making one of those programmes...?

I'd have thought it would cost about tuppence...