Just when we thought 2016 couldn’t get any worse, the BBC proves why nobody should make final decisions whilst Mercury is in retrograde.
Or at least that’s what two avid cake lovers told the world on Twitter.
So Great British Bake Off, currently drawing audiences of 12million over on Auntie’s flagship TV station, has been swiped by Channel 4, with a new deal worth £75million beginning when the current series ends. And everyone, it seems, has something to say about it.
Lord Alan Sugar isn’t happy- immediately declaring his loyalty to the Beeb should anyone try and poach his programme, The Apprentice. GBBO presenters, Mel and Sue, are refusing to jump ship when the move finally happens. Even Question Time presenter David Dimbleby got involved, if only to explain that one episode of his political open mic night costs 1/10 of each Bake Off slice.
The Metro paper ran a headline about ‘people LOSING IT’ once news broke, and pretty much every entertainment writer in the country has penned some opinion piece or other on why this is a good, bad, or irrelevant thing. But who has really lost out here, and who has gained?
There’s no easy answer to that question, especially as I forgot to bring the trusty crystal ball. The production company behind GBBO, Love Productions, has netted a great deal in return for skipping the proverbial town, but at what cost in the long run when you consider how important loyalties are to those looking on?

Reactions online have been divided, although as this story in The Sun shows many celebrities have blasted the decision. The powers that be may have walked out of the C4 meeting feeling like winners, but many disagree. One theory being that greed has led them to push for a deal so lucrative it involves allying with a broadcaster that’s as far from a homely flan as Manchester is from Macau. Greed has been common thread in the media and on the lips of Brits and football fans in particular this week but more on Big Sam to follow.
The public are very fickle though, and people have a habit of forgetting. Whether this is enough to forgive the apparent treachery is open to wild speculation, but it certainly feels like someone has perhaps misjudged the situation. When three of your prized stakeholders- Mel, Sue, and Mary- refuse to follow the pound signs it implies they are not as invested as we originally presumed. Others may feel similar. shouldn’t Love Productions also have completed greater due diligence and checked that the creative assets were handcuffed as part of the deal?
All this brings to mind a perpetual business problem- growth. It’s no secret there can be positive and negative expansion; understanding the difference between the two is where the real skill lies. Leaders, owners, and managers must assess how sustainable growth is, judge if things are going too fast, and understand what the real end game from any decision is, or risk finding themselves in a position of short term gain, long term pain.