BBC wants licence fee of RPI + 2.3%

From Digital Spy: http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/article/ds25112.html



OK, most people here know my opinion on the licence fee. In principle I think it's fundamentally wrong that to watch any TV channel you must subscribe to the BBC, but in reality to ensure a safe switch to digital transmissions, the licence fee has to remain for the next decade or so!

I disagree though with an inflation busting increase - and ideally would like the fee frozen so over the next seven years, the actual cost of it falls - but unfortunately that won't happen!

It's crucial the switch to digital is funded for all TV viewers, but what I object to is the BBC wanting increases to fund mobile and broadband plans. These should be commercial operations, and are not essential to the typhical licence fee player.


I also question the BBC's cost-cutting, as none of the savings are ever returned to the licence payer - instead they are just wasted somewhere else!

Is the costly move of BBC Sport, CBBC and some radio services to Manchester really a benefit to the licence payer?

As for what's on screen - I personally think the BBC is in a far worse state than it was the last time the charter was renewed, and as other channels cope on smaller budgets, I don't swallow the excuse of extra money being required for better programmes and less repeats!

And also, I think it's time BBC Radio was turned into a non-profit making organisation (like C4). I always find it ironic that the time I used the BBC services most was when I was without a TV - and with the number of trailers on Radio 1 especially, it might as well have ads!

Anyway - rant over!

What's your thoughts!

Lets all pretend we're 75...

Radio 1 has 2 trailers an hour...they have introduced brief sweepers-come-ads at the top of the hour, but these are only a few of seconds long and are hardly trails.

The re-location to Manchester will indeed benefit all license payers as it will cost less to keep the plac up and running, meaning the money can be pushed elsewhere.

I'm all for it, it's hardly alot of money to pay over a year now is it?

why is it going up if there cuting cost?

did you not read the last post? oh sorry i forgot you are an idiot.

things in london are expensive because london is an overpriced city. therefore if they move two self contained depts to another city it'll cost less in the long run

WELL if you bother TO READ YOURSELF you would of notice A very important FACT I post my at 4.41pm while the one before me was posted at 4.40!! So be simple logical! I never READ that post when view the posts original?

But still that doesn’t answer my question why are there putting up the fee if there cutting cost? And do there need this “inflation busting increase” is it pay for the cost cutting in the first place?

oh why are they putting up the licence fee if they are cutting costs.

not why are they going up north if they are cutting costs.

i see now.

however you're still an idiot

The license is vital for public service broadcasting, but the rises being sought are a damn cheek.

A radical review is needed; firstly, make the license income-related. Then downgrade non-payment from a criminal to a civil offence. How can we justify sending old ladies to prison in 2005?

Yes my parents look at the licence fee as a tax, and it is in a way a tax on entertainment, however having had a very good look at their commercial offerings off my Hotbird/Astra dish, I think the BBC services are better off funded by the taxpayer, although increasing it to £150 is a bit too much.

There needs to be a fairer system in place somehow.

You're forgetting that this is a financial game that happens in every industry.

It's like when unions ask management for a pay rise. If they want a 2% rise they will initially ask for at least 4%, knowing that they will negotiate towards a level they'll settle on. If they started on 2% they'd end up with 1%.

You will find the final figure is not the one that the Daily Mail will publish in the morning (though ironically the Daily Mail readership is a group that would miss the BBC more than most).

Media Guardian has a break down of the price - basically the rise in price will bring around £1.6b (annually?) into the BBC, with cost cutting bringing in £3.9b. IMO, they can cope without the extra £1.6b - and save a few more pounds too! It's just the BBC is held to ransom by the unions.


I think it's time some of the channel budgets became alot more realistic - especially for the digital channels which have significantly larger budgets than their main commercial rivals!