BBC License fee

Burnsy2023 · 10 Jun 2009 at 12:24

arfur said:
What would happen if you told them you didnt have a TV (which may be true) but a PC with either internet access or USB TV receiver?

That all depends what you use it for. If you use the USB TV tuner to watch DVDs etc, it's fine.

Hatter The Mad · 10 Jun 2009 at 12:25

Burnsy2023 said:
That all depends what you use it for. If you use the USB TV tuner to watch DVDs etc, it's fine.

I thought you had to have a license for any equipment that receives a TV signal, unless clearly and obviously out of action?

arfur · 10 Jun 2009 at 12:26

Burnsy2023 said:
That all depends what you use it for. If you use the USB TV tuner to watch DVDs etc, it's fine.

you wouldnt need a USB tuner to watch DVD's, these are for TV reception. Just wandered how they would track you down.

Skidder · 10 Jun 2009 at 12:44

BBC worldwide is the commercial arm of the BBC and sells programmes, products etc., including internationally and should not be confused with you subsidising anything - in fact BBC worldwide subsidises the BBC with it's profits. personally I think the BBC represents great value for money.

platypus · 10 Jun 2009 at 12:48

arfur said:
Its like everycar in the UK being forced to have road tax, even if its off the road or in a museum.

Which it isn't.

arfur · 10 Jun 2009 at 12:50

platypus said:
Which it isn't.

no your not forced to road tax every car whether or not you use it, the license fee is...

Slime101 · 10 Jun 2009 at 13:38

Scrap the license fee, im sick of paying for them to spank money on knobs like Johnathan Ross and make crap TV and radio programs.

It should be run like any other commercial enterprise and privately funded, if that means adverts in breaks then so what, i dont care or object to that, i do object to the obscene fee we are forced to pay.

[TW]Fox · 10 Jun 2009 at 13:41

arfur said:
no your not forced to road tax every car whether or not you use it, the license fee is...

If you do not receive TV signals you do not nede to pay for a license.

Skidder · 10 Jun 2009 at 13:44

Slime101 said:
Scrap the license fee, im sick of paying for them to spank money on knobs like Johnathan Ross and make crap TV and radio programs.

It should be run like any other commercial enterprise and privately funded, if that means adverts in breaks then so what, i dont care or object to that, i do object to the obscene fee we are forced to pay.

it's not any other commercial enterprise, since it's not commercial

God forbid all news in this country was like Sky's - that would be commercial and it would suck balls. The BBC does a great job and jumping on the Jonathan Ross is paid too much thing is not to look at the big picture - he is paid the going rate comensurate with the number of viewers and listnerers he generates.

Jeff Lynne · 10 Jun 2009 at 13:47

Slime101 said:
Scrap the license fee, im sick of paying for them to spank money on knobs like Johnathan Ross and make crap TV and radio programs.

It should be run like any other commercial enterprise and privately funded, if that means adverts in breaks then so what, i dont care or object to that, i do object to the obscene fee we are forced to pay.

I detest adverts. It's great that we can sit down and watch the BBC without having to sit through bloody adverts.

Slime101 · 10 Jun 2009 at 13:49

Skidder said:
it's not any other commercial enterprise, since it's not commercial

God forbid all news in this country was like Sky's - that would be commercial and it would suck balls. The BBC does a great job and jumping on the Jonathan Ross is paid too much thing is not to look at the big picture - he is paid the going rate comensurate with the number of viewers and listnerers he generates.

I never said they were commercial, i said they SHOULD be, and hence no license fee to pay and them being operated like a proper company not from my pocket.

JR isnt a band wagon, he's a pompus fool who is grossly overpaid (along with footballers but thankfully i dont contribute to their wages), there is nothing comensurate about his salery, the "standard" by which he is paid is dictated by the industry he is in, which is a self governing pit of corruption who take money from tax payers and dont actually have to justify it hence the vast quantity of grossly overinflated saleries (and egos) at the BBC.

platypus · 10 Jun 2009 at 13:50

Jeff Lynne said:
I detest adverts. It's great that we can sit down and watch the BBC without having to sit through bloody adverts.

And yet you're forced to pay an annual tax so they can ***** £5m a year on idiots like Ross? Interesting.

I suppose ITV and the like just have cheaper idiots.

Hatter The Mad · 10 Jun 2009 at 13:53

Just like you pay for the NHS whether or not you use it, you pay for the BBC. It is a public service - programs for the minority. If you let the majority dictate TV (if the BBC was ad-funded), we'd get crap. Fewer documentaries, less news, less debate and fewer educational programs.

Stop whining, and go watch Britain's Got Talent.

Cosimo · 10 Jun 2009 at 13:53

Jeff Lynne said:
I detest adverts. It's great that we can sit down and watch the BBC without having to sit through bloody adverts.

... and what do you call all the rubbish the Beeb show between programs.

Burnsy2023 · 10 Jun 2009 at 13:54

simulatorman said:
... and what do you call all the rubbish the Beeb show between programs.

I call them better then ITV/Channel4 etc's prime time offerings.

FrostedNipple · 10 Jun 2009 at 13:58

simulatorman said:
... and what do you call all the rubbish the Beeb show between programs.

It's not mid programme though! I can watch the f1 without adverts now...brilliant! Jonathan Ross, why do people hate him? I think his Friday night show is well good. Have i got news for you is also very good, lets not forgot the mighty QI as well. Good shows like Reggie Perrin. BBC is ace!

arfur · 10 Jun 2009 at 14:36

Jeff Lynne said:
I detest adverts. It's great that we can sit down and watch the BBC without having to sit through bloody adverts.

I detest paying for license but I have to, with SKY+ or other PVR's I dont need to, I very rarely watch anything live now.

Glaucus · 10 Jun 2009 at 14:39

arfur said:
I detest paying for license but I have to, with SKY+ or other PVR's I dont need to, I very rarely watch anything live now.

yes you do. using sky+ or pvr technology instantl;y means you have to pay for a license.

Iplayer is not available abroad and they sale tv rights to foreign countries. Radio and website IIRC are not paid for by the license fee.

[DOD]Asprilla · 10 Jun 2009 at 14:41

iPlayer isn't available outside the UK

BBC.com carries advertising and is the version that is availble overseas.

Overseas BBC channels are run by BBC Worldwide which is a wholely owned and profitable subsidiary.

The World Service is funded by a grant from the FCO.

platypus said:
I suppose ITV and the like just have cheaper idiots.

You think that Ant & Dec and the judges from BGT are cheap? Half an episode of BGT costs more than an entire series of The South Bank Show (which has just been canned)

arfur · 10 Jun 2009 at 14:54

AcidHell2 said:
yes you do. using sky+ or pvr technology instantl;y means you have to pay for a license.

Iplayer is not available abroad and they sale tv rights to foreign countries. Radio and website IIRC are not paid for by the license fee.

I was referring to not having to watch adverts

It was always a case that the BBC's Radio programs were funded by the license fee. I always remember Chris overpaid Moyles ranting on about the license fee paying for more than just TV.