BBC admits to having pissed away £100m (must be a good day to bury bad news)

Discussion in 'The Intelligence Cell' started by Blogg, May 24, 2013.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. BBC News - BBC abandons £100m digital project

    What they have not yet said is that this fiasco, which was "central" to the idiotic move to Salford although known to be a crock of shit for many years, means reinstalling ye old tape editing machines, which are going to have to be put into specially constructed chilled environments because they generate so much heat.
  2. So, Who is getting fired, and who is going to jail?
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Dont worry another quid on the license fee will get it all back
  4. Well the top tech man has been suspended, no doubt on his full £280k salary.
  5. These things happen.
    All, or most companies, that try and develop these sort of things usually get stung for a large amount of money for systems, they are all well meaning, but sometimes dont do what it says on the tin. For example, the company I work for, has over the years spent several hundred million on a couple of systems but they have been quietly dropped, as they weren't up to do what they were supposed to do. The same applies to friends of mine who work for another company.
  6. Interesting to see in the BBC news story the figure of 98 million. This is designed to fool the public into thinking its not that bad, 98 looks waaaay better than 100 million. Had this been a Tory Party screw up the story would have been "Hundreds of Millions of Tax Payer Money Wasted. Also, the spin put into the story reads like, "hey look, we saved you money by dumping this boondoggle, a big thanks is in order if you don't mind".
  7. the idea of the salford move was to save money and create jobs,big no on both accounts.
  8. Don't worry, it won't be long before they repeat the mistake.
  9. or alternatively it was £98m
    • Like Like x 1
  10. So the left wing luvvies have screwed up again, well done the BBC
  11. They're going to be better off without it; these 'bespoke' technology projects, if they work, leave their owners locked into a unique system that soon becomes antiquated whilst everyone else goes out and buys the latest thing off the shelf. The university I used to work for has a similar system with its own custom-built email servers, they weren't inter-operable with anything else so 'bandwidth' became a treasured commodity, emails might take a few hours to arrive and attachments were forbidden.
    • Like Like x 1
  12. 12 posts and we finally get one from someone that knows what they are talking about.

    The BBC thing strikes me as a typical vanity project. The type that are rife across Govt and the Public sector.

    Given the choice of 80% out of the box functionality and low integration risk from off the shelf COTS products or 100% bespoke software with high risk on requirements they've taken the vanity route. The warnings were there when they binned Siemens and decided to deliver in house. Problem is the issues are generally in house issues of internal politics and inability to baseline a workable requirement.

    Even if they'd delivered it they'd have done so with no idea of total lifetime costs, upgrade roadmaps or hardware refresh plan. As Pigshyt_Freeman says maintenance would either be impossible or too expensive and it would have ended up binned anyway.
  13. j
    Was Graham Norton the Requirements Manager then? Were there no IT staff?
    • Like Like x 1
  14. 'Bleeding Edge' technology is hugely expensive (even when it is fit for its intended purpose) and is generally superseded or rendered non-standard by developments by the time it is installed. Subsequent generations are always much cheaper and technologically better.