[DTV]

I think it's right that what has traditionally been Three and Four content moves back to BBC Two, a channel which has really lost its identity over the past 20 years.

Isn't that the case - really hit by the twin bullets of losing a sizeable chunk of its remit to digital services in the early-2000s, then by taking the brunt of the cuts in the last 15 years - it really is shocking that nearly 40% of the reduction in BBC broadcast content spend (including radio) in the last decade has come solely from BBC Two. Outside of (most of) weekday evenings, a husk of a channel and a fraction of what it was.

Even in areas where it hasn't particularly lost remit, it's been cut to shreds - News and Current Affairs output 25 years ago consisted of three daily political/parliamentary programmes, two daily news summaries, a daily consumer/business affairs programme, Newsnight, weekly regional current affairs programmes, a Saturday evening news and sport bulletin, a weekly international affairs documentary, Sunday regional political programmes and The Money Programme. Now, you basically have Politics Live and Newsnight, plus some News channel simulcasts.

I mean, even consolidating one of the channels into it would breathe a bit more life into it.

[Happy2001]

The main attraction for the reboot BBC Three has been RuPaul's Drag Race UK and all the other 156 different variations of it

That show has kind of highlighted how there is no room to hide on linear TV.    It could pretty much be declared a hit by the BBC as an iPlayer first show (though it got a BBC1 repeat) and had enough buzz around it to seem like it was, but then on BBC3 on TV it's not actually done that great numbers.   

Wikipedia says that the first series broadcast on BBC Three as a channel (UK vs The World) got 0.69 - 0.93 Million with Catch Up though it doesn't say if it was 7 or 30 days:
en.m.wikipedia.org 

RuPaul's Drag Race: UK vs the World - Wikipedia
Open main menu Home Random Nearby Log in Settings Donate About Wikipedia Disclai…
  Source: en.m.wikipedia.org

Overnight for episode 1 was 348k.

Can't find rating reports for Series 4.

[tellyblues]

Drag Race gets the hype because of its concept, much like The Traitors or The Circle, but it isn't accessible enough nor of interest to those who watch linear TV. You have to wonder why so many reality shows get commissioned for the main channels when the audience they will appeal to isn't there.

Drag Race UK has particular appeal in the LGBTQ+ scene, so it doesn’t need to do massive numbers to justify its existence if it does well for its target audience.

Of course, but I wasn't questioning Drag Race's commissioning, hence why I said main channels.

[tellyblues]

The Apprentice Australia listed as series 2 on the BBC3 schedule is actually series 6, so another example of an attempt to catch people out. What's more is that the show has been axed now but maybe because there's four previous seasons that haven't been aired over here that the BBC will air them and list them as S3 etc?

[Happy2001]

The Apprentice Australia listed as series 2 on the BBC3 schedule is actually series 6, so another example of an attempt to catch people out. What's more is that the show has been axed now but maybe because there's four previous seasons that haven't been aired over here that the BBC will air them and list them as S3 etc?

It's the second series of the revival of Celebrity Apprentice Australia which is probably why they listed it like that.

Neither the 1 public series (2009) or the original 4 Celeb series (2011-15) were shown on the BBC and i don't think they will be now.

[agentsquash]

The Apprentice Australia listed as series 2 on the BBC3 schedule is actually series 6, so another example of an attempt to catch people out. What's more is that the show has been axed now but maybe because there's four previous seasons that haven't been aired over here that the BBC will air them and list them as S3 etc?

It's the second series of the revival of Celebrity Apprentice Australia which is probably why they listed it like that.

Neither the 1 public series (2009) or the original 4 Celeb series (2011-15) were shown on the BBC and i don't think they will be now.

Indeed the main appeal to the UK audience will be the common factor of Lord Sugar - which wasn’t there in the original series.

[Jon]

The Apprentice Australia listed as series 2 on the BBC3 schedule is actually series 6, so another example of an attempt to catch people out. What's more is that the show has been axed now but maybe because there's four previous seasons that haven't been aired over here that the BBC will air them and list them as S3 etc?

What a ridiculous post. Even if they had shown all previous series, I’m not sure listing this one as series 2 would be an attempt to catch people out, because generally people look for newer content. 

It’s the second series shown in the UK and it’s probably just to indicate to people it’s different from the series they’ve already shown. It’s a far more logical way for a streaming service to categorise them than only having series 5. 

As said unlikely they’d show the previous series as they don’t include Lord Sugar, unless this had done particularly well with UK audiences and they wanted to see if it still had appeal without him being attached.

[Brekkie]

And the two series with Lord Sugar are a reboot rather than a continuation of the original four series, so likely considered series 2 anyway, just as the reboots of Survivor UK and Gladiators in the autumn will likely be labelled Series 1.

[JAS84]

Yeah, and like how the 2005 Doctor Who series is called Series 1, not Season 27.

[tellyblues]

The Apprentice Australia listed as series 2 on the BBC3 schedule is actually series 6, so another example of an attempt to catch people out. What's more is that the show has been axed now but maybe because there's four previous seasons that haven't been aired over here that the BBC will air them and list them as S3 etc?

What a ridiculous post. Even if they had shown all previous series, I’m not sure listing this one as series 2 would be an attempt to catch people out, because generally people look for newer content. 

It’s the second series shown in the UK and it’s probably just to indicate to people it’s different from the series they’ve already shown. It’s a far more logical way for a streaming service to categorise them than only having series 5. 

As said unlikely they’d show the previous series as they don’t include Lord Sugar, unless this had done particularly well with UK audiences and they wanted to see if it still had appeal without him being attached.

Not sure it is such a ridiculous post but then broadcasters can do no wrong apparently.

The first series shown here was/is listed as series 1 and it was never in question that the series following on chronologically from that was going to be listed as anything other than series 2. It certainly wasn't going to be listed as series 1 because people know fine well that the format of The Apprentice doesn't consist of a grand final then a total reset of contestants midway through a series.

The comparisons to Doctor Who and Gladiators are flawed as viewers here know what is meant by "series 1" for these particular shows - that it denotes the first series since being rebooted. I doubt many people in the UK even know The Apprentice Australia has been rebooted (if that indeed is the case) since it isn't a British show. That those in Oz don't class the first Sugar series as season 1, it appears they don't see it as a reboot, so it's a quandary why the BBC seem so eager to.