Ekona

You and your damn love taps My own fault for outbraking myself constantly

Because I'm selfish. I don't give a hoot about ratings or revenue, I care about them making a show that I want to watch. I'm hoping they can make that specifically caters to my needs. Which is pretty much the same reason as you and everyone else who loved the old TG watched it. You're selfish, and you didn't want it to change because you thought it was perfect. At the end of the day, we're all selfish when it comes to stuff like this: We only care if it works for us.

You just missed a decent session on PCars What's your GT? Although I suspect I can guess it...

I don't run silly size wheels

Ripped straight from the first page of the BBC Royal Charter: The BBC exists to serve the public interest and its main object is the promotion of its public purposes; • Its public purposes are: sustaining citizenship and civil society; promoting education and learning; stimulating creativity and cultural excellence; representing the UK, its nations, regions and communities; bringing the UK to the world and the world to the UK; and, in pursuing its other purposes, helping to deliver to the public the benefit of emerging communications technologies and services, and taking a leading role in the switchover to digital television; • The Trust is the guardian of the licence fee revenue and the public interest; • The Trust and the Executive Board are to act separately and the Trust must maintain its independence of the Executive Board; • The Trust has, inter alia, the function of assessing the performance of the Executive Board in delivering the BBC’s services and activities and holding the Executive Board to account for its performance; • The Trust must represent the interests of licence fee payers and exercise rigorous stewardship of public money; • The Trust must ensure that arrangements for the collection of the licence fee are efficient, appropriate and proportionate; • The Trust must have regard to the competitive impact of the BBC’s activities on the wider market and adopt a statement of policy on fair trading policy and hold the Executive Board to account for compliance with it; • The Executive Board must conduct the BBC’s operational financial affairs in a manner best designed to ensure value for money None of which mentions making a profit, which is what business is about. BBC Worldwide is a commercial arm which is 100% there for profit, perversely. Everything that Steve posted relates to the Worldwide arm. I'm not saying the BBC doesn't make money, I'm saying that's not what it's there for, not its primary purpose.

Correct. It's not.

Cat insurance I've never bothered with. I'm sure it'll catch me out at some point, but I figure that as mine are house cats then they're a bit less likely to get run over. In general, female cats are supposed to be more friendly than male ones. Every cat I've ever encountered is the opposite of this rule, so make of that what you will. Personally, I think it's more down to how they're brought up than their sex. I would never get a solo cat, only ever two or more. Company is everything, despite cats actually being loners out in the wild. Feral cats may be okay with that, I'd suggest that domestic cats aren't. There's a theory that domestic cats never actually leave the kitten stage of mentality, and my experience would back that up. Whatever you think cats cost these days, double it. They're frightfully expensive buggers, especially when they get older and only eat posh food. My eldest two only eat cat food that's £6 for 8 tins, and at two tins a day each... Yup, over £1K a year just on food. Add in litter at £5 a bag which lasts a fortnight, £75 in injections & treatments, god knows how much on kitty treats and toys, and they're a little bit pricey. Absolutely worth every penny, and I know you said that money isn't an issue for this right now but you could hopefully have 20 years of those costs.

Oh absolutely, I don't expect it to be markedly different. What I'm hoping for is that it will be sufficiently different that it offers me a reason to watch again. If it's not, then as much as I like CE, I won't be watching it.

Wallpaper it. Choose to be different.

This is very true. It also means they're all idiots. What I'm getting it is that just because something is popular, does not mean that it is good.

No, you're right. I don't want a documentary, I want TG exactly like it was 10 years ago. It was perfect then.

*They're wrong :p I know you're doing it on purpose, but I still can't help myself!

CH was awful on the early videos. He was stiff, dull, useless. Couldn't agree with you more. However... He is so much better now. Watch his conversation with Andreas Preuninger chatting about the GT4, or with Chris Goodwin over the P1: The passion and intelligence there is eminently likeable. Watch the 458 vid round Combe, or the P1 vid round Bahrain. I really don't see how that looks forced, certainly not when compared with the forced scripted humour in the TG bits. No, he's not perfect and sometimes the insistence of the slomo cornering shots bores me to tears, but no more so than the TG reliance on acute cuts with juddering pans.

I saw the hypercar bits on YT, they weren't a patch on what had come before and certainly had nothing on what CH did with just him, one camera and a lot of enthusiasm. I did see the first episode of the last series as wasn't Webber on it? Or whatever series that was, I saw that whole episode and was massively disappointed still. You're right though, everyone should watch it with an open mind and prepare to have really strong feelings about it one way or another

Quite right. I don't want the star either, as I usually skip that bit. I remember watching stuff like when they got their Mum's in to review three hatchbacks, that was brilliant. Or when they first started doing the Which Is Fastest bits, they were new and different. I also remember when TG jumped the shark, which was when the review of the 997TT, the latest iteration of one of the most important sports car brands ever, was relegated to 5mins of night driving. That did it for me. The reviews of things like the CGT/Enzo/SLR were masterpieces in how to review properly, and I can remember them as if they were yesterday. I'm not in TV producing or writing, so I have no idea what new things should replace the chaff, but I'm damn sure we've not run out of stuff yet. What about motorsport? Get the presenters to race in stuff like the Drift championships, or a rally stage like Catchpole did, or any of the hundreds of other disciplines. That'd be ace, and would certainly fill a gap.

I dunno, maybe more on the actual cars themselves? Just a thought.

So where do you sit with it now? New 2ZZ, rebuild what you have, scrap it and start again?

Sat on the phone?! What is this, 1993 all over again?! I know what you mean though, it superheats my urine these days that you have to be there for bang-on 9am on the internet else you don't have a hope in hell of getting a ticket for the big names. These days I either make sure I am there at 9, or I just don't go.

Oh bugger, that's a right pain, sorry to hear that matey

I can't stand the thought of some random person being picked for one of the most prestigious TV shows in the world. They should be hiring the cream of the crop, not picking some knobhead just because every man and his dog feels they know a lot about cars and can do a better job. Here's a hint: You can't. Lots of people know a lot about cars, that's just fact remembering, but being entertaining & funny & likeable & able to present a TV show takes a HELL of a lot of work and experience. I don't want TG does BB, thanks.

Preview programme. Only limited games so far, but it's incredibly smooth.

Just do whatever your engine builder said. They have the warranty, and if you break that then you're stuffed. There may be better ways than what they say, but is it worth the risk? I'd say no. Tbh though as long as you don't go screaming the tits off it then I can't see too much going wrong. Maybe the engine might last 100K miles instead of 200k miles, but so what?

I've never bought from a ticket site, I have a very healthy sense of cynicism with stuff like that

I'd be amazed if they refunded you what you paid vs face. From their Ts&Cs: "In the event that an event is cancelled or re-scheduled, viagogo reserves the right to cancel a seller’s transaction." Now, that is INCREDIBLY vague. Given that they also state that they never obtain title to the tickets and merely act as a go-between, then I would suggest that whatever is on the original ticket stands. If it says that it's non-transferable (and I bet it does), then the only person who can claim that refund from the venue is the seller. In the perfect world, I would hope that Viagogo step in and refund you, then the seller gets his refund. Would they? I don't think so. It's not the seller's fault the date got changed, so why should he lose out? Realistically, it would be up to you to sell them on yourself, hopefully at least covering your cost. Interestingly the entire site is governed by the Swiss courts, who's legal framework I have zero idea of! Not great news, I know, but that's how I read it.

I believe most of the writing staff have left, so it should be significantly different. Who knows at this point though, they may well prioritise commercial interests over a refresh?