Behind The Scenes... Anything and everything you want to know

ShoppingTelly

Help Support ShoppingTelly:

IdealWorldWorker

Registered Shopper
Joined
Dec 13, 2015
Messages
50
Hi everyone. I tried this once before and ended up with skeptics thinking it's an Ideal World PR exercise, so in the end I gave up. But maybe we can try again.

I used to work for Ideal World and Create and Craft, around a year ago. I am still in the television circle so to speak and have connections with Hochanda too, so ask away on that too.

You all seem to have a lot of questions and skepticism around Ideal World and what the presenters say, how the demos are put together and more. When/if they are lying about stock. Repeat shows and reasons for it. Well, I'm here and happy to answer your questions. Anything you want to know about behind the scenes, demo set ups, whether they are fake, how they work, what they use. Questions on camera, lighting, sound, behind the scenes.

To clarify, as this got missed last time.
I will not "dish the dirt" on presenters, who I enjoyed working with, what they are like off-air, who is a diva etc.

Apart from that, I am quite happy to talk about how Ideal is made as it is neither negative or positive PR. Just stating truth to clarify things for you telly shopping fanatics.
 
This sounds a very interesting topic.

As I don't often watch IW I can't think of any questions at the moment, but I probably will when I think about it.

Their camera work is better than QVC, where yesterday the guest was pointing out all sorts of interesting things to look at on the item, while for the whole time, which seemed like minutes, they just had a still picture on screen showing a photo of the item.
 
This thread won't get very far as someone who claimed to be an insider on one of the other shopping telly forums on here got shut down very quickly because he/she would not reveal their identity. I guess it's to protect the forum from libel
 
No chance of any Libel here. As i said, I'm not here to negatively show IW and C&C. I work in the television industry and would not risk losing that. I just wanted to address the behind the scenes questions you all have on such issues as repeats etc. I've read lots of skeptic comments. But it's all just that.

Example:

Repeat shows. Unless it is clearly stated that it is a repeat, I assure you it is not a repeat. Not only is it against the law to not label it as a repeat, as you guys have mentioned, stock updates would be said wrong and could be misleading.
But you can all guess that. I want to fill in the blanks....

I worked here for 4 years and there are two shifts on a 7 day fortnight. An early, mid and late shift with a backstage crew of around 10 floor managers per day, setting up the shows, looking after guests and presenters and managing the studio throughout the day. Starting at 5am, and the late shift leaving at 1am.
The backstage crew would be begging for a repeat show to give them a break, as it's really hard graft setting up the shows all day, over two studios. If you do see a repeat show during the usual live hours, it will be because of an extremely rare issue. Known in the industry as "going to tape". I had a few. One time, the presenter was taken ill before going on air with no presenter able to step in. Another, stock of a main product in a show had very unexpectedly sold out, and there was no time to set up another show. Other repeat shows occured when guests were stuck in traffic, fire drills, and most bizarre, overnight painting in the studio had not been ventilated and the studio was a health and safety risk to staff.

Lastly, believe it or not, Shopping Channel bosses HATE HATE HATE going to tape. As for some reason, live shows sell more product than repeats.

The reason the shows look similar and you mention "the same intro" etc. Is because it is exactly that. These presenters have sold these products for years. There's no "script", but once you've found something that works, you're likely to stick to it. There is a formula and format to each show, but that's for another post if anyone wants to know.

No libel. No gossip. Just simply answering your queries of stuff to give you a better understanding of the crazy world of telly shopping.
 
Last edited:
This sounds a very interesting topic.

As I don't often watch IW I can't think of any questions at the moment, but I probably will when I think about it.

Their camera work is better than QVC, where yesterday the guest was pointing out all sorts of interesting things to look at on the item, while for the whole time, which seemed like minutes, they just had a still picture on screen showing a photo of the item.

If you have any generic questions on shopping tv channels or television production in general I can probably answer these too, as they all work on a similar format.
 
Go on then. Explain "limited stock" and "we're at the busiest part of the show." I'm guessing both these phrases are used with a certain amount of license?
 
I do like IW, it's a lot more professional than QVC, with a whole hour spent on showing a product, great products, delivery and cheaper prices, "busiest part of the show" doesn't bother me because there's always going to be one, as with limited stock, my gripe/question is why take on ex Bid presenters when there are presenters out there that are trying to catch a break and why do IW allow Peter Simon to do his sexual innuendo routines even before nine o'clock and Mike Mason to be so intimidating and with an obvious aggressive presenting style. If you have any pull with IW you should tell them how people are turning off, especially because of the exBidders, especially Peter Simon, the old suck in cheeks looking the camera up down in faux shock is so 1980s, it didn't work on BidTv so why would it in IW? They've turned a once respected and professional shopping channel in to a joke, so my question is.........why are IW allowing themselves to be turned into a laughing stock? Because we've no idea.
 
Go on then. Explain "limited stock" and "we're at the busiest part of the show." I'm guessing both these phrases are used with a certain amount of license?

It's completely legitimate, because it has to be. The presenters are fed live stock updates from the producers, into their ear. As you stated, it is illegal to lie, and in shopping telly, they are closely watched by OFCOM. With stock updates, the key is PERCENTAGES. Never do they mention numbers. It's just clever marketing. "WOW, we have just sold out 50% of our stock on this item!!". Sound impressive!? But it's the fact that they only have 10 of them in the warehouse. So this massive 50% stock sell out that looks so impressive and must surely be a lie.... Is actually just that the quantities, at times, are much lower than you'd imagine.

The "Busiest part of the show" is again, fact. However it is based on something called "allocations". Again, fed to the presenter by the producer. The producer has a live view of the items on the show, how many people are ordering on the phone etc. But the main thing is the "allocations". This is where it is in someones basket online, but not yet checked out. So there may have been 2-3 people online with it sitting in a basket. Then the "busiest part of the show!" can quite simple be where 6-7 people have the item in their basket.

You may have also noticed presenters saying "if it's in your basket, make sure you check out now, else someone can come along and take it off you". That's because they can. As just mentioned, allocations is purely people with it in their basket. It is not secured as theirs until they buy it. So if there's 20 items in stock, yet there are 30 of them "in allocation", only 20 will be able to buy them. They will also use the stock updates talk to drive people to checkout, if they see loads of people have the item in allocation.
 
More or less as I thought. Thanks. On another note, roughly how much are presenters paid?
 
I do like IW, it's a lot more professional than QVC, with a whole hour spent on showing a product, great products, delivery and cheaper prices, "busiest part of the show" doesn't bother me because there's always going to be one, as with limited stock, my gripe/question is why take on ex Bid presenters when there are presenters out there that are trying to catch a break and why do IW allow Peter Simon to do his sexual innuendo routines even before nine o'clock and Mike Mason to be so intimidating and with an obvious aggressive presenting style. If you have any pull with IW you should tell them how people are turning off, especially because of the exBidders, especially Peter Simon, the old suck in cheeks looking the camera up down in faux shock is so 1980s, it didn't work on BidTv so why would it in IW? They've turned a once respected and professional shopping channel in to a joke, so my question is.........why are IW allowing themselves to be turned into a laughing stock? Because we've no idea.

Unfortunately this isn't a question I can answer. I am purely an ex crew member. It's like asking a shelf stacker in tesco why Heinz baked beans aren't on offer this week, when you really like them. Simply not my domain. It's a question for people responsible for hiring, firing and the branding/presentation style set out to the presenters.
 
More or less as I thought. Thanks. On another note, roughly how much are presenters paid?

I would have no real idea, no more than you would know what the CEO of your company earns. Rough figures are thrown around but again, not really something I'd divulge as it's the workings of television that I'm happy to explain, not personal salaries. For what it's worth, as a crew member, seeing what they actually do, in person, with the full picture around me, they earn their money. As a viewer, you see one side of it. Where-as they actually have so much going on.

Imagine talking to a guest, listening to a guest, talking to the audience, selling a product, whilst also listening to 3 camera operators, 2 floor managers, a director, producer and assistant producer all telling you things at the same time. Whilst also finding the right camera to look at, remembering all the facts about a product, not tripping over cables behind, in front and to the side of them, not hitting their head on a camera floating above them. Then also talking for 57 minutes, sometimes about really boring products. Do viewers hate certain presenting styles? Yes. and i can see why. But the fact they can do that job is actually very impressive to watch when you're inside.
 
This sounds a very interesting topic.

As I don't often watch IW I can't think of any questions at the moment, but I probably will when I think about it.

Their camera work is better than QVC, where yesterday the guest was pointing out all sorts of interesting things to look at on the item, while for the whole time, which seemed like minutes, they just had a still picture on screen showing a photo of the item.

If it was up there for a long period of time, it will have been there as something on the set had happened, and it is the quickest and easiest way to hide it from the viewer. A camera could have gone down, the set could have came apart, someone could have spilt a drink. Any of these scenarios will be masked in this way. It allows the crew to quickly go in, without being seen to solve the problem, without having to necessarily go off air.
 
Last edited:
Unfortunately this isn't a question I can answer. I am purely an ex crew member. It's like asking a shelf stacker in tesco why Heinz baked beans aren't on offer this week, when you really like them. Simply not my domain. It's a question for people responsible for hiring, firing and the branding/presentation style set out to the presenters.

Sorry you just say you're an "ex Ideal World worker" didn't know what department you were in, as for "Tescos and Baked Beans" comment, some companies like Tescos do actually keep their staff, yes, even the lowly shelf stackers, in the loop and informed about the company they work for.
 
Sorry you just say you're an "ex Ideal World worker" didn't know what department you were in, as for "Tescos and Baked Beans" comment, some companies like Tescos do actually keep their staff, yes, even the lowly shelf stackers, in the loop and informed about the company they work for.

Wasn't meant to cause offence. Was just demonstrating that the decisions are made much higher up than myself :)
 
OK, a more general question: what were the presenters like to work with? Are some of them as highly medicated as they seem to appear?
 
OK, a more general question: what were the presenters like to work with? Are some of them as highly medicated as they seem to appear?

This kind of question can become a bit iffy, as I said before I'm not here to be negative, or indeed make IW look positive. Just like in all jobs, there are good and bad people to work with. Some were quiet and some were loud. None of the guests I worked with were ever an issue. In general, what I liked was that most were incredibly nice. It was like a big family.

Presenters have to be seen as actors. They are acting a part on set. You'll find that as soon as they are off-air or on a VT, they are their normal selves. They are there to do a job. So you might here them going "WOW, THIS IS SUCH A CRAZY DEAL GUYS!! WOOO, GET. IT NOW! TAKE A LOOK AT THIS AMAZING CLIP FROM IT SELLING OUT LAST NIGHT!!". You may see them laughing and joking and seeming un-serious. As soon as the clip is being played out, its like a switch, and it will be "Right, where would you like me next guys? How's the stock doing? Do we have many allocations? Am i doing ok? Can I get a drink of water please? Thanks for all your help everyone. Good show.".

Some presenters require more attention than others, with higher demands or expectation levels. However, the producer is always in charge of the output, and the floor manager is in charge on the studio floor. It sounds silly, but the floor manager rules all on the studio. If the floor manager says you've got to leave the studio, you leave. If the floor manager says the presenter can't eat the food, they can't eat it. It's a level of respect that the presenters have to give to the crew.
 
I imagine the presenters don't all live near the studio so do they travel in every day for their stints or do they work blocks of shifts and have to stay in nearby hotels?
 
I imagine the presenters don't all live near the studio so do they travel in every day for their stints or do they work blocks of shifts and have to stay in nearby hotels?

Some live relatively local and will travel in every day. Some presenters work on the same 7 day fortnight as the crew, so never work more than 3 days in a row, so the commute isn't too bad. You also get some presenters that work on 7 days on, 7 days off. Typically for those who live a lot further away. Some of them stay with other presenters, house share or stop in hotels.
 
Some presenters are guilty of "stretching the truth". Recently I posted here on another thread that a certain presenter states we have only 7 watches, and are the last 7 in the world, 20% of the stock has gone. Now, my point is, does the presenter say what he is told, and the answer to 20% of the stock remaining is in my book less than a full number? This observation shows 2 things, firstly, are the presenters playing us as fools, or second are there people in the gallery, who can't do simple mental arithmetic?
The whole credibility and content of what comes out of the presenters mouth's is listened to, and picked up when aired. They shouldn't be upset, or disappointed when discussed on an open forum. There are many many more claims, and untruth's that were picked up and discussed, all are available for you to read, enjoy!
Previously, I have said on another thread a while ago, doing a full hour unscripted must be extremely stressful and difficult. They have my complete admiration for doing that. Outrageous claims and let's say "FIBS", are picked up and discussed on here.
If you have been reading our post's for any length of time, you will have a feeling that some posters are passionate, and feel they may be being taken for fools. Please go back and read some of the threads, and you will see comments made about what is said in the "content" of a presentation creates a lot of discussion on here.
Lastly, does any one from your TV experience, read these post's, and if they are read, what is their take on posters comments about the "fibs" we hear?
Thank's for taking the time.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top