Really interesting Twitter thread. An Aussie producers perspective on this situation:
Neighbours
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Neighbours Threads
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
That really is interesting. I was hoping that it would take a break, but from what I've gathered reading that it sounds like freemantle don't want to produce neighbours and channel 5ay have not completely screwed them over? Or I have got that worng?
Channel 5 have zero blame from me for the show going under. It's not up to them to keep a foreign show on the other side of the world going. Being from Yorkshire I can understand why the channel makes a crazy amount of TV shows her because the ratings are massive and the shows are all cheap to make like 5 On The Farm, Yorkshire Vet, Our Yorkshire Family etc.
With nobody else interested not even Amazon, Disney, Netflix etc the cost must be too high. I think they have to be paying the cast too much and it's a bloated cast as well that could cope with less faces.
I blame channel 5, they produce a lot of rubbish, it's either shows about Yorkshire, Benidorm or the awful Royals. They have wanted rid of neighbours for years, they have messed up the scheduling, especially during covid. They shouldn't have bod for it, if they didn't want to pay towards the costs of producing it.
As much as I’m really sad about it, to be fair to channel 5, they did keep it going for 14 solid years. That’s a long time considering how much viewing habits have changed and the fact it’s not a UK soap.
Saying that, I don’t watch anything else on that channel apart from home and away. And their own shows are rubbish. I’ll be interested to see how many viewers they lose in terms of the shows and daytime films that people might have watched because they had ch 5 on for neighbours
This is where they've totally missed the point- Neighbours gets their highest viewing figures. And you're spot on, people put it on, and leave it on and end up with whatever crap comes afterwards. They can say they're focussing on home grown tv shows as much as they like, but they aren't known for their quality content, so people are unlikely to give a brand new show a shot, and they certainly won't be tuning in for the diabolical 2.15 American movies of their own free will, so they'll just see overall viewing figures plummet unless they can really pull something great out of the bag.
It's understandable they want to switch it up and change with the changing tv viewing habits, but let's be honest, for the majority of people who watch Neighbours have watched it for years and don't want to change that habit. There are much much better ways to get around this situation-
- Hyped up a new show and showed it after Neighbours. Use neighbours as the pull and show their own things rather than the crap they do now.
- Requested they cull the cast. They got rid of Sonia a few years ago to save some money, so if cutting ONE person can make that kind of saving, imagine what they could do if they slimmed down the cast. Now, I love Paul, but can you imagine what he costs them?! I'd sacrifice Paul to keep the show going. Heck, I'd sacrifice both the Kennedys. They used to fill the cast with unknown teenagers who went on to become huge stars, and they don't seem to have many anymore. We've got Hendrix (who probably has the best shot at big time fame), and Mackenzie and Harlow, Zara. But where's the house full of 15 year olds they can pay peanuts?
- Stop buying those crap documentary series. I'm sure Police Interceptors cost them next to nothing, but if they got rid of Filthy House SOS they could actually build a better reputation, it's those shows that people look down on the channel as a whole for having. They could do another screening on Home and Away as well like they used to and pick up another Aussie soap for cheap, something old with lots of cheap back episodes, or even stuff from other countries that just want a new audience and make a reputation as the channel for international stuff.
Two things have struck me. Firstly if channel 5 have been in talks for 12 months then they’ve had a year to cut costs! They could have re budgeted and come back with a much better offer for channel 5.
So either they were trying to bluff them or channel 5 wanted rid whatever rather costs.
secondly it must be really expensive if itv weren’t interested, the comment about it being a good draw for the lunchtime slot was spot on. Pop it on after loose women. They could have doubled what channel 5 were getting.
All major news channels and papers have run the story about it ending and the reputational damage is bad, plus tourism. How many brits go to aus because they watched neighbours and especially Melbourne.
So either they were trying to bluff them or channel 5 wanted rid whatever rather costs.
secondly it must be really expensive if itv weren’t interested, the comment about it being a good draw for the lunchtime slot was spot on. Pop it on after loose women. They could have doubled what channel 5 were getting.
All major news channels and papers have run the story about it ending and the reputational damage is bad, plus tourism. How many brits go to aus because they watched neighbours and especially Melbourne.
They did?! I thought it was her choice to leave?
I have to disagree on Susan and Karl, they’re the heart of the show for me
I wouldn’t mind if they got rid of Toad though, he’s not done anything for agesI don’t think they have been trying to cut costs at all, if anything they are going the other way with more location shooting. The other week Chloe, Leo, Roxy & Kyle went to a random restaurant for lunch for no storyline purpose, and the picnic at the different park when Leo decided to give up Abi. All these bits of location shooting bump up costs. Never mind a week away where they’ve been this week and Paul tracking down Nicolette in Canberra or wherever that was shot (I’ve forgotten already so well worth the trip!)
There has definitely been a noticeable increase I recently. I remember a time when it was a huge novelty for them to be shooting off set. The likes of eastenders, Corrie, hollyoaks rarely shoot outside the set unless it’s a special.
the Twitter article mentioned the set it so expensive as it’s the only thing left there they film, so why wasn’t it relocated to a cheaper location ages ago. Seems to be so many missed opportunities or unwillingness to save it.
the Twitter article mentioned the set it so expensive as it’s the only thing left there they film, so why wasn’t it relocated to a cheaper location ages ago. Seems to be so many missed opportunities or unwillingness to save it.
The sets also seem bigger like they’ve had a refurb noticed the canning house looked a lot bigger and Therese has a 4th wall. Also Chloes sunroom which has appeared out of nowhere.
The actors who played Steph and Mark were also axed to save money.
Every time I turn on Neighbours I’m slightly taken aback by the sets.
Back in the early 2000s, all of the houses genuinely looked like suburban homes that you might happen across in real life if you popped in to your work colleague’s house to drop something off for whatever.
Nowadays, they all look like weird fake rooms you could see in IKEA. Just far too modern and pristine.
It was especially noticeable in Karl and Susan‘s house because, every time I would flick Neighbours on, the entire living room/kitchen would have been redecorated except for the very noticeable front door (which obviously was never changed because it needed to match the outdoor set).
I just don’t believe that a couple like that would be completely revamping their home every 18 months.
Back in the early 2000s, all of the houses genuinely looked like suburban homes that you might happen across in real life if you popped in to your work colleague’s house to drop something off for whatever.
Nowadays, they all look like weird fake rooms you could see in IKEA. Just far too modern and pristine.
It was especially noticeable in Karl and Susan‘s house because, every time I would flick Neighbours on, the entire living room/kitchen would have been redecorated except for the very noticeable front door (which obviously was never changed because it needed to match the outdoor set).
I just don’t believe that a couple like that would be completely revamping their home every 18 months.
They did their house up, because Karl’s sisiter (Sharon from Kath and Kim) decided the living room wasn’t feng Sui, it was a funny storyline and she ended up paying for it to be decorated and she bought Karl the tram.
The interioer are very modern now and they’ve spent a bit adding walls and outd spaces since the storm. Chloe has got a new outside area and they haven’t shown her pool for a while.
I read they started adding new locations to modernise, but noone cares! We like it because it's cosy and familiar. We're happy just chilling in Harold's thank you, they really didn't need all those locations, there'd be location fees and transport fees, and it's an unncessary expense. Looks like Aaron and David just got a new kitchen, Harold's got a whole revamp, as did Lassiters terrace. And Toadie got a new sunroom? Wtf even is a sunroom? It's so strange they'd suddenly start splashing cash knowing that they were too expensive? I can't even being to think what the idea was behind that.
At the very least, stop flying to the UK every year and forking out for Z-list celebrities. They clearly think it helps UK audiences will feel closer to the soap with that connection, and appreciate seeing familiar faces, but I do not need to see even more Amanda Holden.
At the very least, stop flying to the UK every year and forking out for Z-list celebrities. They clearly think it helps UK audiences will feel closer to the soap with that connection, and appreciate seeing familiar faces, but I do not need to see even more Amanda Holden.
I can't believe ch5 
are axing the show. Great memories of coming back from high school watching the show (was on BBC1 back then).
They're going on on like they're even a main watched channel as it is ala BBC/ITV...so go ahead get rid of one of your very few higher rating shows...makes sense.
are axing the show. Great memories of coming back from high school watching the show (was on BBC1 back then).They're going on on like they're even a main watched channel as it is ala BBC/ITV...so go ahead get rid of one of your very few higher rating shows...makes sense.
I'm sad enough to know The Kennedy's house has only been revamped three times. Once shortly after they moved in (big picture of the kids on fireplace wall), then again when they moved it all around and had the sofas that were green (or had green cushions). I'm fairly sure a wall moved then too or a new window was added (maybe the front door area change). Then lastly with the refurb from Karl's sister.
As I said previously the money that factual/reality spend is not the same pot that drama/soap spend. Each department gets a budget and spends on what it wants. What one department spends it’s money on has little baring on what another does.
The show is reported to be making a loss and cannot attract good advertisers. Lunchtime adverts are all funeral plans and over 50’s life insurance.
It is also freemantle and channel 10 who don’t want to cough up the pennies to fund it.
The show is reported to be making a loss and cannot attract good advertisers. Lunchtime adverts are all funeral plans and over 50’s life insurance.
It is also freemantle and channel 10 who don’t want to cough up the pennies to fund it.
- Status