TV Licence Super Thread

[spoffle]

It's comical listening to people justifying their non payment of the licence fee and general hatred of the BBC, based mainly on the fact they don't watch live TV but watch Netflix, Amazon & Catch Up TV instead. The BBC iPlayer service has pushed the boundary for "On Demand" services for well over a decade. The likes of Sky would have been quite happy to continue their pay-as-you-view model via the Sky Store if the BBC hadn't established that a streaming service should be a staple of any network content. It was 5 years after iPlayer that Netflix launched in a proven market. Amazon Video was quite some time later.

The BBC has driven the On-Demand evolution right from the start, and they have been able to do so because the investment for them did not rely on commercial approval. That's the point of the BBC. It's a national broadcaster and it exists to provide a service to the nation free from commercial or political influence. Quite simply, if Sky wanted to charge an extra £10 per month for a Box Set service back in 2007 where the content was limited and the resolution/bandwidth structure in it's infancy, then people would not have bought it and it would be deemed not to be commercially viable.

The BBC website & news service is from the same mould. World class, impartial and it is the yard stick for it's rivals. Sky despise the BBC as they have to constantly evolve to keep up.

How many TV shows on Sky expose shady companies who shamelessly exploit the public? Sky couldn't have a consumer affairs series like "Watchdog" because one phone call from an advertising associate would be all it would take to bury the story.

Have you watched any Sport on Sky recently? The half time talk amongst the pundits, discussing the odds on the outcome of the match? It's product placement on the next level and the BBC are rightly immune to it.

The BBC is a British cultural essential just like a University or a Museum, a library, a local swimming pool. It is entirely irrelevant whether you use it or agree with it's existence. These things should be cherished.

Go to the USA if you want a taste of what capitalism and market forces will do to your TV.

I suspect that you are being overly generous to people who avoid paying the TV Licence fee.

I don't need to justify why I don't pay for a TV license. I only watch Netflix/Now TV/Amazon Prime/YouTube on my TVs at home. I don't hate the BBC, I just have no interest in watching TV on a schedule. On demand is how I like it and how I've been doing it the last 10 years+.

I'm not gonna pay for a TV license that I don't need just because you think the BBC has done all these wonderful things. No, you didn't say that but I think it's clear that is what you're suggesting.

 

[labcoattech]

The sooner the BBC moves to a subscription based service the better it will be for everyone.

 

[Burnsy2023]

The sooner the BBC moves to a subscription based service the better it will be for everyone.

I think it's more likely to move to general taxation than a purely subscription service.

 

[labcoattech]

so people who don't even own a TV will be forced to pay, don't think that will go down well

 

[Burnsy2023]

so people who don't even own a TV will be forced to pay, don't think that will go down well

Probably not, but that's never stopped policy changes like this.

 

[visibleman]

....but now they are a minor player...BBC used to set high standards and lead the industry but now they are a minor player.

BBC are actually a fairly big player in creating and developing new technologies and new standards, hence why you usually see the BBC at various TV/broadcasting industry shows hosting topics on the latest tech/specs etc. As mentioned previously, their R&D blog highlights a lot of it and i'd recommend reading.

Just look at Prime and Netflix which all have superior technology and broadcast out at much higher quality then what BBC do.

Being pedantic, your examples are not broadcasters and do not broadcast. Rather their streaming services which is a massive difference.

However, for apples-to-apples, i suspect the BBC will introduce UHD on their streaming/catch-up when they begin to broadcast UHD.

Edit - Just to add, this isn't me arguing for or against the License Fee; rather just to highlight that the BBC play a fairly big part in the development of TV (and other media areas).

 

[Psycho Sonny]

In the distance past but now they are a minor player. Just look at Prime and Netflix which all have superior technology and broadcast out at much higher quality then what BBC do. BBC used to set high standards and lead the industry but now they are a minor player. We could remove BBC and development wouldn’t be hurt.

I don’t see how the real value of BBC is the technical development when BBC own broadcasting is so low quality. Not only is broadcast quality low but in terms of content BBC has plummeted as well. When you look at what you can get on Prime or Netflix then BBC just pales in comparison.

u wot m8?

u do realise BBC are the only ones showing UHD HLG for free?

they are at the forefront and always have been

 

[malachi]

Question, are shows on the BBC broadcasted in 1080 now or still 720 upscaled?

 

[LuckyBenski]

Question, are shows on the BBC broadcasted in 1080 now or still 720 upscaled?

It's 1080i which has a comparable datarate to 720p.

 

[benjii]

This thread is more interesting when the freeman stuff pops up.

I appreciate what BBC do and their productions, but I have no interest in live TV. All the good BBC stuff ends up on Netflix anyway. We have a number of streaming services and haven't watched live tv/payed for a license in years now, I can't see us going back to it.

 

[SixTwoSix]

...cba

 

[visibleman]

Question, are shows on the BBC broadcasted in 1080 now or still 720 upscaled?

Was always dependent on programming and source material on whether or not it was up/down-scaled prior to broadcast (on HD channels). But the beeb has always (iirc, i don't think they've gone to 720 for their HD channels) broadcasted 1080i.

I suspect most programming (i'm sure there are exceptions to this; local news perhaps?) is sourced from (at least) 1080 footage now.

...free...

I'd be careful of using that term around these parts; someone will no doubt jump on that

 

[dowie]

I think it's more likely to move to general taxation than a purely subscription service.

They won’t like that though, currently they’re ring fenced via their own “tax”: licence fee, if they’re funded via general taxation then they are subject to cuts and frankly why not... I mean if it’s a toss up between more money for the NHS and more money for EastEnders etc... then the BBC can go swivel.

 

[Pottsey]

“u wot m8?
u do realise BBC are the only ones showing UHD HLG for free?
they are at the forefront and always have been”

It’s not free because you have to pay more than the broadcasters like Netflix or Amazon. When I sit down to watch TV shows I have been watching them for years with the options of 4k, HDR and Atoms sound which is amazing. BBC doesn’t have anything near that quality even though the other two big TV show producers have for years.

With BBC you are paying more money for less content and less quality of content. They are one of the worst ways to watch TV as they are inferior. There is no way BBC are at the forefront for watching TV shows, they are years behind.

“Being pedantic, your examples are not broadcasters and do not broadcast. Rather their streaming services which is a massive difference.”

How the content is delivered does not matter and they are broadcasters as they even broadcast live sports and live TV. It is not invalid just because it comes over the internet instead of satellite dish or other methods. This is about watching TV not if or if not they are broadcasters.

What matters is the quality of the content on screen and BBC is miles behind both in the quality delivered to the screen and in the quality of what is produced.

The fact is if we want to watch TV shows via steamers we get better quality then watching TV shows via BBC.

 

[h4rm0ny]

This might have been covered but the threads up to 138 pages so I'm going to ask anyway...

I'm buying a Smart TV (I'd rather not but my hand is forced). My current TV isn't even connected up to an aerial and I only use it for streaming things from my Xbox which I use as my media console. There's no way to get a Smart TV that doesn't have iPlayer included which requires a licence. Anyone had any hassle from TV licencing based on this or advice on how to handle it if I do? I don't intend to actually use iPlayer ever, but I can't stop it being installed and sitting there. Or does the app require some kind of licence log in before it runs? (That'd be nice).

 

[LuckyBenski]

This might have been covered but the threads up to 138 pages so I'm going to ask anyway...

I'm buying a Smart TV (I'd rather not but my hand is forced). My current TV isn't even connected up to an aerial and I only use it for streaming things from my Xbox which I use as my media console. There's no way to get a Smart TV that doesn't have iPlayer included which requires a licence. Anyone had any hassle from TV licencing based on this or advice on how to handle it if I do? I don't intend to actually use iPlayer ever, but I can't stop it being installed and sitting there. Or does the app require some kind of licence log in before it runs? (That'd be nice).

Are you planning to connect the TV to the internet? If not, you should be fine. I'll leave it to others as to smart TV hassle, as we have a license.

 

[Kenai]

This might have been covered but the threads up to 138 pages so I'm going to ask anyway...

I'm buying a Smart TV (I'd rather not but my hand is forced). My current TV isn't even connected up to an aerial and I only use it for streaming things from my Xbox which I use as my media console. There's no way to get a Smart TV that doesn't have iPlayer included which requires a licence. Anyone had any hassle from TV licencing based on this or advice on how to handle it if I do? I don't intend to actually use iPlayer ever, but I can't stop it being installed and sitting there. Or does the app require some kind of licence log in before it runs? (That'd be nice).

It's a licence to watch or record live TV, or use iPlayer.

It's not a licence to have equipment that can do this but is not used for that purpose.

It's a non-issue, don't worry about it. If they ever came knocking, you don't have to let them in anyway, just tell them you don't need a licence and shut the door if it comes to that.

 

[Nasher]

Or just don't answer the door at all

 

[Rannoch]

It's a licence to watch or record live TV, or use iPlayer.

It's not a licence to have equipment that can do this but is not used for that purpose.

It's a non-issue, don't worry about it. If they ever came knocking, you don't have to let them in anyway, just tell them you don't need a licence and shut the door if it comes to that.

This is spot on.

Also, the sad tv goons that illegally harass you on your own property may tell you you need a licence if you own a tv.

 

[Pottsey]

This might have been covered but the threads up to 138 pages so I'm going to ask anyway...

I'm buying a Smart TV (I'd rather not but my hand is forced). My current TV isn't even connected up to an aerial and I only use it for streaming things from my Xbox which I use as my media console. There's no way to get a Smart TV that doesn't have iPlayer included which requires a licence. Anyone had any hassle from TV licencing based on this or advice on how to handle it if I do? I don't intend to actually use iPlayer ever, but I can't stop it being installed and sitting there. Or does the app require some kind of licence log in before it runs? (That'd be nice).

You do not need a licence just because you have Iplayer installed. You only need a licence if you use Iplayer. Just make sure you do not log into Iplayer and your all good to go without a licence.