Met Office loses BBC contract

[Paul]

Whats melodramatic about it. If the BBC have so much faith in the new provider why don't they use their weather warnings. So its clear to me that this decision is not based on the best provider but the cheapest. The BBC hope that the public won't notice the dodgy new forecasts most of the time. They then can use the UKMO for weather warnings where the consequences are much greater. If they go wrong the UKMO takes the flak.

 

It's not that at all, it's because the Met Office is the official provider of weather warnings for the UK, so makes sense that the BBC would continue to use them. 

 

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/about-us/what/pws

[Nick L]

Whats melodramatic about it. If the BBC have so much faith in the new provider why don't they use their weather warnings. So its clear to me that this decision is not based on the best provider but the cheapest. The BBC hope that the public won't notice the dodgy new forecasts most of the time. They then can use the UKMO for weather warnings where the consequences are much greater. If they go wrong the UKMO takes the flak.

 

Because you're making the completely un-informed assumption that the new forecasting company will be inaccurate. You have nothing to suggest that this is the case.

[Dami]

it takes the mick, we don't want you BUT can we still use your warnings?

 

What is the BBC on, TBH.

 

If i was the met0 i'll tell them what alley to go up.

[Nick L]

it takes the mick, we don't want you BUT can we still use your warnings?

 

What is the BBC on, TBH.

 

If i was the met0 i'll tell them what alley to go up.

 

See Paul's post above. The Met Office are obliged to produce public weather warnings.

[Methuselah]

It's not that at all, it's because the Met Office is the official provider of weather warnings for the UK, so makes sense that the BBC would continue to use them. 

 

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/about-us/what/pws

I don't buy that, Paul, not for one minute; our own home-grown talent and expertise is, once again, being sold down the river. What's next - privatising the MetO?

[nick sussex]

It's not that at all, it's because the Met Office is the official provider of weather warnings for the UK, so makes sense that the BBC would continue to use them. 

 

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/about-us/what/pws

Thanks so basically the BBC have to use those warnings. It still seems unfair though because those warnings are the ones that get a lot of public attention and always likely to get most criticized if they're wrong so the new provider in a sense has an advantage. I'm not sure this is the end of the story re the UKMO and BBC.

[chrisbell-nottheweatherman]

As far as I'm aware, any changes would be minimal as most regional presenters are hired by the BBC (or in our case through a contract with other private weather companies such as Weatherquest). The only change would naturally be the graphics package (should they change of course...)

 

Thanks Dan.  I must say, I consider the evening team (yourself, my namesake, Jim, Alex (when she returns from maternity leave), Julie (is she returning?) and Sara Thornton (about whom I was utterly wrong when she was with ITV) to be superb.  I notice that Jim has made sure recently to do the evening forecasts in "normal" weather periods rather than is previous tendency to appear only when storms or other lively conditions were in the forecast!

[nick sussex]

Because you're making the completely un-informed assumption that the new forecasting company will be inaccurate. You have nothing to suggest that this is the case.

You generally get what you pay for. The song from the terraces will be are you NAVGEM in disguise.....! lol

[Relativistic]

I don't buy that, Paul, not for one minute; our own home-grown talent and expertise is, once again, being sold down the river. What's next - privatising the MetO?

 

It's not though entirely, is it? Do you reckon the MoD, for example, are all of a sudden going to give up on them?

[Methuselah]

It's not though entirely, is it? Do you reckon the MoD, for example, are all of a sudden going to give up on them?

Is there an eejit in charge of the MOD?

[Paul]

I don't buy that, Paul, not for one minute; our own home-grown talent and expertise is, once again, being sold down the river. What's next - privatising the MetO?

 

So there's no homegrown talent outside of the Met Office in the UK then Pete? There are many, many very talented, well qualified forecasters working in the private sector in the UK - including within the 2 companies who by the sounds of it are in prime position to battle it out to win the contract. 

 

Thanks so basically the BBC have to use those warnings. It still seems unfair though because those warnings are the ones that get a lot of public attention and always likely to get most criticized if they're wrong so the new provider in a sense has an advantage. I'm not sure this is the end of the story re the UKMO and BBC.

 

I don't think it'll be like that as they still have to run forecasts on the days where warnings are issued. I guess what will be interesting is if the data used by the new co disagrees with any warnings, I would imagine at that point it would most likely be moved into line with the warnings so as not to confuse the issue.

 

All conjecture at this stage though of course. 

[chrisbell-nottheweatherman]

I guess what will be interesting is if the data used by the new co disagrees with any warnings, I guess at that point it would most likely be moved into line with the warnings so as not to confuse the issue.

That would be my concern - if the two don't correlate there's the potential for serious confusion in the minds of viewers, which could lead to annoyance at the new arrangement.  Would any such modification of the new provider's forecasts (or at least rejection of the implications of the data) cause friction between the provider and the BBC?

[Methuselah]

So there's no homegrown talent outside of the Met Office in the UK then Pete? There are many, many very talented, well qualified forecasters working in the private sector in the UK - including within the 2 companies who by the sounds of it are in prime position to battle it out to win the contract. 

 

 

 

Of course there is; but how much UK-taxpayers' money has been invested in our own graduates/postgraduates/experts? Cut-off the MetO, and a sizeable portion of that investment goes down the Swanny?

[Paul]

Of course there is; but how much UK-taxpayers' money has been invested in our own graduates/postgraduates/experts? Cut-off the MetO, and a sizeable portion of that investment goes down the Swanny?

 

Who's cutting off the Meto? You're taking them losing a contract with the BBC and multiplying it by 1000 to come up with a conclusion that just isn't likely. 

[Methuselah]

Who's cutting off the Meto? You're taking them losing a contract with the BBC and multiplying it by 1000 to come up with a conclusion that just isn't likely. 

Okay Paul, this one will run and run, so I'll leave it here, with one question: Does anyone really want to see the BBC forecasts lowered to the inanity that's on Sky and ITV?

[nick sussex]

So there's no homegrown talent outside of the Met Office in the UK then Pete? There are many, many very talented, well qualified forecasters working in the private sector in the UK - including within the 2 companies who by the sounds of it are in prime position to battle it out to win the contract. 

 

 

I don't think it'll be like that as they still have to run forecasts on the days where warnings are issued. I guess what will be interesting is if the data used by the new co disagrees with any warnings, I would imagine at that point it would most likely be moved into line with the warnings so as not to confuse the issue.

 

All conjecture at this stage though of course. 

How would the BBC justify ditching its new provider on the days of those warnings and amend their forecasts to the UKMO without strengthening the argument that when push comes to shove they have more faith in the UKMO?

[Nick L]

Of course there is; but how much UK-taxpayers' money has been invested in our own graduates/postgraduates/experts? Cut-off the MetO, and a sizeable portion of that investment goes down the Swanny?

 

I'm paying it back through my taxes...

Okay Paul, this one will run and run, so I'll leave it here, with one question: Does anyone really want to see the BBC forecasts lowered to the inanity that's on Sky and ITV?

 

Own goal there, ITV forecasts are provided by the Met Office...

[knocker]

So there's no homegrown talent outside of the Met Office in the UK then Pete? There are many, many very talented, well qualified forecasters working in the private sector in the UK - including within the 2 companies who by the sounds of it are in prime position to battle it out to win the contract. 

 

 

 

Yes I agree with what you are saying. There is a great amount of expertise outside of the METO and various companies are quite capable of servicing a BBC contract. Frankly I don't think it that big a deal. But let's not muddy the waters by broadening the discussion. The UK needs a first class national met service to cover all angles, including research, and in the METO, it has one.

[Methuselah]

 

 

Own goal there...

Well I am a Spurs follower!   Point taken...

[Paul]

How would the BBC justify ditching its new provider on the days of those warnings and amend their forecasts to the UKMO without strengthening the argument that when push comes to shove they have more faith in the UKMO?

 

It would appear, based on what's been said so far that a decision has been made to keep the weather warnings from the agency responsible for handling them - ie the Met Office. So any contract negotiations with a new provider would, (you'd think, based on the little info we have at this point) take part with that requirement in there. It wouldn't be about trust, it would be about providing a unified, single voice for the national warnings. 

 

That's not quite so dramatic as 'ditching' the new provider is it...

Edited August 23, 2015 by Paul

[essexweather]

Some more information starting to come out now in the media, whether it's true or not:

 

Met Office 'lost BBC contract over dumbing down rows and weather app'

 

 

I've also spoken to a few people today and can confirm some good news about the chance of some presenters hanging on:

 

http://essexweather.weebly.com/blog/met-office-lose-bbc-contract

[Dancerwithwings]

Just a Q....Can the Met office appeal the decision ? It's just that today when watching the Met Office spokesman been interveiwed on BBC NEWS 24

he mentioned that the Met Office are still in talks with BBC and he still thinks there will be a positive outcome.

[bobbydog]

How would the BBC justify ditching its new provider on the days of those warnings and amend their forecasts to the UKMO without strengthening the argument that when push comes to shove they have more faith in the UKMO?

i totally agree with that point nick, if the new providers forecast is accurate then it should naturally include a weather warning when warranted. the new providers warnings should be as valid as the met office. smacks to me of; everyday weather forecasts can be supplied by the cheaper option but when it comes to impacts on life or property, they will use the (free) advice of the 'trusted professionals'

[Nick L]

i totally agree with that point nick, if the new providers forecast is accurate then it should naturally include a weather warning when warranted. the new providers warnings should be as valid as the met office. smacks to me of; everyday weather forecasts can be supplied by the cheaper option but when it comes to impacts on life or property, they will use the (free) advice of the 'trusted professionals'

 

I really don't know where to begin with this.

 

The Met Office are legally obliged to provide public weather warnings, and are paid for by the government, NOT the BBC...

 

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/about-us/what/pws

 

There is no evidence that the Met Office were outpriced.

[johnholmes]

A lot of speculation with much of it just that. I doubt with the exception of 2 maybe 3 on here have enough access into UK Met to really know what is going on or what the end result may be. 

(I don't include myself in those numbers-my knowledge is at least 8-10 years old as all my ex colleagues have mostly retired)

On what we have been told by BBC and UK Met, or what I have heard and read it is a sad day but the BBC like the Met O is under a great deal of pressure to cut costs as it is the government via our taxes that covers much of the costs.

Just one point the Met O was, probably still is, an Executive Agency. That roughly means parts of it are under MOD control and part is required to return a profit. The part under MOD control obviously covers for the service both actual and forecast in any war zone along with routine support for any British bases at home and abroad. It also includes the core computer areas including research or did the last time I got information from someone about 4-5 years ago. It may of course have changed by now. I am not sure where the Met O commitment to the WMO and its being one of only two major aviation centres fits in but would imagine that comes under core services.

Edited August 23, 2015 by johnholmes