The Big 5 in the Semi finals

[Andreea]

The UK spent £310,000 on Eurovision 2012, not sure what that is in euros!

1 EUR = 0.815 GBP
£310,000 = ~ 380,000 EUR (currency converter, I don't remember the change in 2012)

Yes,last year i read that each spanish entry cost around 300.000 euros and yesterday my boyfriend told me that France pays 500000 euros each year, how many pay San Marino?

I also read that this year Romania had to pay 130,000 euros.
If Spain paid 300,000 euros it means a "big 5" country pays 2.3 times more than others

 

[Bibberluis]

1 EUR = 0.815 GBP
£310,000 = ~ 380,000 EUR (currency converter, I don't remember the change in 2012)


I also read that this year Romania had to pay 130,000 euros.
If Spain paid 300,000 euros it means a "big 5" country pays 2.3 times more than others

But Spain has 45 mil. people and Romania only 20 mil. The UK also has a far bigger population. So per capita they dont pay more

 

[MyHeartIsYours]

Big 5 is to do with EBU funding not Eurovision, as has been said already...

 

[dogmeat]

Questions about fairness aside, I think scrapping the big 5 would actually pay off to those countries.

Some of you are afraid of losing viewing figures in the final in case a big country fails to qualify. But what about the viewing figures in the semifinals?! Let's say 1 to 3 of them would lose final viewers every year... In the current system, all 5 of them are losing potential semifinal viewers each and every year!

 

[FilipFromSweden]

really? than why "big 5" ?
why those 5 countries are being treated differently and the others like a "second class citizen" ?
(you have to prove first you are worthy for an Eurovision final, while "big5" just buy their place in the final, or I though that until now, I though they give more money)

To be in the big 5 might seem like a great thing, but it's not. Participating in semi-finals gives your song more publicity and makes the song grow on the audience/viewers.

 

[doctormalisimo]

Let's remember that the Big 5 (or Big 4 as it was back then) rule came about because Germany PMSed when they were kicked out by the juries in 1996. The rule was made to bend over backwards to the bg 4, rather than reward them for financial contribution.

 

[LalehForWD]

Let's remember that the Big 5 (or Big 4 as it was back then) rule came about because Germany PMSed when they were kicked out by the juries in 1996. The rule was made to bend over backwards to the bg 4, rather than reward them for financial contribution.

It may have made sense at the time, but it's almost 20 years ago and the contest has changed. I find it strange the matter isn't more controversial than it is. Swedish head of delegation Christer Björkman is frequently stating his support for the big 5 rule, maybe it's some personal give and take policy from his side. The rule doesn't hurt Sweden in any way. The last time the thing was up, he reasoned about BBC lost influence in EBU due to long time mismanagement and that Germany is perhaps the EBU top dog nowadays.