[Stockland Hillman]

Don´t get me wrong, but Sky News doesnt´t have regional news and neither the production value of BBC One´s buleltins or Newsnight, or the international presence with correspondents that BBC News has. So costs are obviously less than the BBC.

Is Sky News more interesting on a presentation level? Yes, but i think that it always has been the case since the start. Can BBC News do better with the budget that they have now? Totally too. The offering since the merger has been mediocre at best.

You misunderstand. The Sky cost is for the entire news organisation and distribution. The BBC cost I mention is higher is JUST the news channel, not including network news, regional news, radio news, online, distribution etc.

You are correct to point out that the BBC has a vast operation, so the news channel itself should be a much deaper and more polished experience than Sky News