BBC license change to cover catchup - Page 3

TheDaddy · 03-03-2016, 14:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris

It's absurd to equate the cost of a TV licence with the price of a theatre ticket, which is what you seemed to be doing earlier. The TVL works out at around £3 a week. I took the kids to the panto last Christmas and the cheapest seats in the house were £20 *each*.

Yes, you can of course have a free-to-air national TV broadcasting service without imposing a charge on those who use it. The quality of those networks is however not so good. Even in the USA, where the advertisers potential audience is more than five times the size of the UK, free-to-air TV is swamped with cheap, low quality dross. What we see of US TV in the UK is highly distilled, has often been made to show on networks that require a subscription, and these days is normally shown in the UK on a network requiring subscription, given the producers' need to recoup the high costs of making it.

For a *tiny* contribution from all TV users in the UK, the BBC produces quality output and caters for a wide range of interests. Even for those who do not watch it, its output sets a benchmark that forces its competitors to keep their own standards up.

No I didn't equate the cost of the TV tax to a theatre ticket at all, what I said was you ignored the financial burden the tax placed upon the poor when you were on your high horse

Mr K · 03-03-2016, 15:17

The BBC is fantastic value for money when compared to Cable or Satellite. Most of their output is original, and most cable channels just repeat it. Not just tv, radio and websites -all ad free.

Lots of people agree with me:-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4lzS8yW8INA

denphone · 03-03-2016, 16:38

Yes l could not have said it better myself.

TheDaddy · 03-03-2016, 16:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr K

The BBC is fantastic value for money when compared to Cable or Satellite. Most of their output is original, and most cable channels just repeat it. Not just tv, radio and websites -all ad free.

Lots of people agree with me:-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4lzS8yW8INA

Oh yes fantastic value, 145 quid a year for something I never use is cheap at twice the price and it's not anyway compared to itv or channel 4 which cost nothing directly.

heero_yuy · 03-03-2016, 17:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Oh yes fantastic value, 145 quid a year for something I never use is cheap at twice the price and it's not anyway compared to itv or channel 4 which cost nothing directly.

Exactly.

Mr K · 03-03-2016, 18:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Oh yes fantastic value, 145 quid a year for something I never use is cheap at twice the price and it's not anyway compared to itv or channel 4 which cost nothing directly.

How much do you spend on cable, satellite subscription in a year for mostly repeated programming of low quality dross? Are you sure you never use the BBC - local radio, weather, traffic, website? I think many take these things for granted. If we relied on commercial TV, some of the best TV drama would never get made - we'd be left with tabloid TV.

heero_yuy · 03-03-2016, 18:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr K

How much do you spend on cable, satellite subscription in a year for mostly repeated programming of low quality dross? Are you sure you never use the BBC - local radio, weather, traffic, website? I think many take these things for granted. If we relied on commercial TV, some of the best TV drama would never get made - we'd be left with tabloid TV.

Meh.

You want to read Horizon's linked document: Source

From the thread in VM TV Link

But you won't being a fully paid up BBC fanboi.

But to return to the thread: How on earth will this be enforced when phones and tablets are likely to be connecting via public WiFi? Can you see a TVL Bozo trying to make a load of bolshie teens pay the TV tax? Ain't going to happen. They're more likely to get knifed.

A law that cannot be enforced is a bad law IMHO.

**Chris** · 03-03-2016, 19:28

A prediction I have made elsewhere:

The TVL will be replaced with a precept on council tax to be paid to a national broadcasting authority (probably Ofcom), which will then pass most of it to the BBC and invite bids from the other public service broadcasters to fund some of their PSB obligations.

Stuart · 03-03-2016, 21:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by General Maximus

I wasn't talking about normal tax, I was referring to Stuart's assertion that tv is essential for schools. Do they only watch the BBC?

And I was referring to TheDaddy's assertion that

Quote:

The council tax pays for essential services, the idiot box isn't essential, perhaps they're bringing this in to cover the legal fees for the paedophile cover up.

I did not mention the licence. The School would likely to have to pay for any channel that has any reasonable amount of educational programming even if the licence fee did not exist as, in my experience, the channels on Freeview (which is largely funded by the licence fee, BTW) don't tend to carry educational TV.

TheDaddy · 03-03-2016, 23:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr K

How much do you spend on cable, satellite subscription in a year for mostly repeated programming of low quality dross? Are you sure you never use the BBC - local radio, weather, traffic, website? I think many take these things for granted. If we relied on commercial TV, some of the best TV drama would never get made - we'd be left with tabloid TV.

Zero pounds and pretty sure

TheDaddy · 23-03-2016, 06:40

5% of households don't have a tv anymore, many use catch up services but a significant number don't bother with it at all.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...thout-one.html

General Maximus · 27-03-2016, 10:24

great, if they were going to do it properly and not rip people off then they need to manage as a pay per view service. Sky boxes use cards so Sky know who you are what package/channels you have access to and the BBC should be managed the same way. Like wise, just as you have to register/sign in for Sky Go, if BBC want to start charging people to use iplayer then they should get them to register with name, address, tv license number etc and sign in when they want to use it. Failure to implement such a system just makes a mockery of the whole system and means some people license payers are paying for other people to use the service. If you think I am being stupid then look at it this way. What would you think if 4 millions people paid for Sky in their home to watch on tv/boxes but Sky let non-paying people access Sky Go/other services online and have it all for free?

TV is multi platform now and whether it is online or on the "tv" everyone who wants to watch it should pay for it. I think the sticking point is that they need to change the name from "tv license" and call it "media license" or "BBC license".

tweedle · 27-03-2016, 14:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr K

The BBC is fantastic value for money when compared to Cable or Satellite. Most of their output is original, and most cable channels just repeat it. Not just tv, radio and websites -all ad free.

Lots of people agree with me:-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4lzS8yW8INA

I my house the BBC channels never watched, we enjoy ITV and C4, and many other channels. So too me the BBC is a rip off and many many agree with me.

---------- Post added at 14:01 ---------- Previous post was at 13:58 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr K

How much do you spend on cable, satellite subscription in a year for mostly repeated programming of low quality dross? Are you sure you never use the BBC - local radio, weather, traffic, website? I think many take these things for granted. If we relied on commercial TV, some of the best TV drama would never get made - we'd be left with tabloid TV.

It's only TV, close the BBC let me save £145 a year or let those that want it subscribe to it. It's only TV. Just like those that don't want Virginmedia TV choose not to subscribe to it.

If the BBC is so amazing I'm sure everyone currently paying the TV licence or face prison will keep willingly paying.

I can't think of a single programme any of my kids have ever watched on the BBC,

TheDaddy · 27-03-2016, 20:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by General Maximus

great, if they were going to do it properly and not rip people off then they need to manage as a pay per view service. Sky boxes use cards so Sky know who you are what package/channels you have access to and the BBC should be managed the same way. Like wise, just as you have to register/sign in for Sky Go, if BBC want to start charging people to use iplayer then they should get them to register with name, address, tv license number etc and sign in when they want to use it. Failure to implement such a system just makes a mockery of the whole system and means some people license payers are paying for other people to use the service. If you think I am being stupid then look at it this way. What would you think if 4 millions people paid for Sky in their home to watch on tv/boxes but Sky let non-paying people access Sky Go/other services online and have it all for free?

TV is multi platform now and whether it is online or on the "tv" everyone who wants to watch it should pay for it. I think the sticking point is that they need to change the name from "tv license" and call it "media license" or "BBC license".

Isn't that what tv licensing is all about anyway, everyone has to pay whether you use it or not and if some peoples predictions come true even a little thing like not having a tv won't protect you from subsidising other peoples dubious 'viewing pleasure'

Taf · 27-03-2016, 20:41

Quote:

In addition to funding BBC programmes and services, a proportion of the licence fee contributes to the costs of rolling out broadband to the UK population and funding Welsh Language TV channel S4C and local TV channels.

Quote:

The licence fee allows the BBC's UK services to remain free of advertisements and independent of shareholder and political interest

http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-i...-pay-for-top13