GS
Gavin Scott
Founding member
Its probably worth suggesting that only those old enough to *actually* pay a licence should have a vote.
Then we might actually get some people who know what value for money is.
Then we might actually get some people who know what value for money is.
SK
But its not right haveing to pay for the TV TAX. Not everybody like the BBC you know.
I know someone that would get SKY if they stoped the TV TAX. As they would have more £10.00pcm. So why should some miss out on SKY.Just too pay for the TV TAX.
I know someone that would get SKY if they stoped the TV TAX. As they would have more £10.00pcm. So why should some miss out on SKY.Just too pay for the TV TAX.
TT
People keep saying how its value for money. And maybe it is. But I really don't see why people should be forced to pay for the BBC if all they watch is ITV or Sky.
And I'm not so sure its value for money, the unique way the BBC is funded usually means departments are under funded. The local radio stations that for years were stuck in the 1980s technology. The archive which is apparently falling to bits in parts because there isn't the money to deal with it.
I suppose the middle ground would be to have a greatly reduced fee. Which would only pay for the public service productions - news and such. So adverts pay for the rating-grabbing programmes the rest of the time. No adverts around or during the licence funded programmes.
And I'm not so sure its value for money, the unique way the BBC is funded usually means departments are under funded. The local radio stations that for years were stuck in the 1980s technology. The archive which is apparently falling to bits in parts because there isn't the money to deal with it.
I suppose the middle ground would be to have a greatly reduced fee. Which would only pay for the public service productions - news and such. So adverts pay for the rating-grabbing programmes the rest of the time. No adverts around or during the licence funded programmes.
NE
Before this thread even gets busy, it may be a good idea to read this DS thread and read in particular the posts of "THE BORG" who no doubt will fill this same name thread with similar comments albeit under a different name.
MI
Skyonefan - not all of us appreciate your immature Murdochite ramblings.
£120 per year pays for 8 free-to-air TV channels and their original planning, 10+ radio stations and programming, one of the world's best journalistic and newsgathering organisations, a major UK employer, a film production set up, probably the most comprehensive online presence by any broadcaster in the world, plus a broadcasting presentation design outfit which even ITV uses.
I think thats better value than £26 a month for a decent sky package. Those who choose to can get sky. One shouldn't make those who don't have Sky access it through a conditional subscription.
Would you make ITV/4/five/S4C subscription too?
Edited due to crap English.
£120 per year pays for 8 free-to-air TV channels and their original planning, 10+ radio stations and programming, one of the world's best journalistic and newsgathering organisations, a major UK employer, a film production set up, probably the most comprehensive online presence by any broadcaster in the world, plus a broadcasting presentation design outfit which even ITV uses.
I think thats better value than £26 a month for a decent sky package. Those who choose to can get sky. One shouldn't make those who don't have Sky access it through a conditional subscription.
Would you make ITV/4/five/S4C subscription too?
Edited due to crap English.
TT
Lovely. I watch none. I listen to none. I still have to pay dear BBC for them though because I like to watch Channel 4 and sometimes, although rarely, ITV. The number of times they say "because of the unique way we're funded we can bring you this.." They don't say all the things they can't do because of the unique way they're funded which ITV and such can do.
Is the BBC archive fully converted over to digital? The ITV one practially is now - why? Yes the great way ITV is funded.
The licence fee to me seems to be a bit like say having to pay a fee to Marks and Spencers just to enter a shopping mall whether you're going to shop in their store or not.
So ok the BBC is value for money. But its not fair.
Alexia posted:
£120 per year pays for 8 free-to-air TV channels and their original planning, 10+ radio stations and programming, one of the world's best journalistic and newsgathering organisations, a major UK employer, a film production set up, probably the most comprehensive online presence by any broadcaster in the world, plus a broadcasting presentation design outfit which even ITV uses
Edited due to crap English.
Lovely. I watch none. I listen to none. I still have to pay dear BBC for them though because I like to watch Channel 4 and sometimes, although rarely, ITV. The number of times they say "because of the unique way we're funded we can bring you this.." They don't say all the things they can't do because of the unique way they're funded which ITV and such can do.
Is the BBC archive fully converted over to digital? The ITV one practially is now - why? Yes the great way ITV is funded.
The licence fee to me seems to be a bit like say having to pay a fee to Marks and Spencers just to enter a shopping mall whether you're going to shop in their store or not.
So ok the BBC is value for money. But its not fair.
BB
But what about people who don't watch the BBC, go to BBC online or use any of their other facilities? People should have a choice. If the BBC was to go to Pay TV, I don't think we'd lose much...have you seen the state of BBC One recently?
BBC Broadcast was sold to Creative Broadcast Services, and therefore is nothing to do with the BBC. ITV use this service as they would any other presentation company, it has no direct link with the BBC.
In this multi channel environment, the licence fee going to the BBC is unjustified and unfair.
On a slightly seperate note, have you noticed how much self promotion they do? During breaks between programmes they have more trailers for their own programmes than any commercial channels, like Sky and ITV do.
Alexia posted:
Skyonefan - not all of us appreciate your immature Murdochite ramblings.
£120 per year pays for 8 free-to-air TV channels and their original planning, 10+ radio stations and programming, one of the world's best journalistic and newsgathering organisations, a major UK employer, a film production set up, probably the most comprehensive online presence by any broadcaster in the world, plus a broadcasting presentation design outfit which even ITV uses.
I think thats better value than £26 a month for a decent sky package. Those who choose to can get sky. One shouldn't make those who don't have Sky access it through a conditional subscription.
Would you make ITV/4/five/S4C subscription too?
Edited due to crap English.
£120 per year pays for 8 free-to-air TV channels and their original planning, 10+ radio stations and programming, one of the world's best journalistic and newsgathering organisations, a major UK employer, a film production set up, probably the most comprehensive online presence by any broadcaster in the world, plus a broadcasting presentation design outfit which even ITV uses.
I think thats better value than £26 a month for a decent sky package. Those who choose to can get sky. One shouldn't make those who don't have Sky access it through a conditional subscription.
Would you make ITV/4/five/S4C subscription too?
Edited due to crap English.
But what about people who don't watch the BBC, go to BBC online or use any of their other facilities? People should have a choice. If the BBC was to go to Pay TV, I don't think we'd lose much...have you seen the state of BBC One recently?
BBC Broadcast was sold to Creative Broadcast Services, and therefore is nothing to do with the BBC. ITV use this service as they would any other presentation company, it has no direct link with the BBC.
In this multi channel environment, the licence fee going to the BBC is unjustified and unfair.
On a slightly seperate note, have you noticed how much self promotion they do? During breaks between programmes they have more trailers for their own programmes than any commercial channels, like Sky and ITV do.
GS
Gavin Scott
Founding member
I want to see a scan of Skyonefan's TV Licence.
I'll bet a million quid he is 14 and has no conception of what Sky subs actually cost, nor does he pay for the shopping bill which pays for ITV.
But of course, if I were 14 and a fan of shows like Buffy and Minja Ninja Hero Tortoises, then perhaps I would only want Sky One too.
I'll bet a million quid he is 14 and has no conception of what Sky subs actually cost, nor does he pay for the shopping bill which pays for ITV.
But of course, if I were 14 and a fan of shows like Buffy and Minja Ninja Hero Tortoises, then perhaps I would only want Sky One too.