Well, you do have a choice, you can cancel the licence and not watch live TV or iplayer.
TV Licence Super Thread
- Thread starter Ken
- Start date
Well, you do have a choice, you can cancel the licence and not watch live TV or iplayer.
Well, you do have a choice, you can cancel the licence and not watch live TV or iplayer.
I don't call that a fair choice.
I wan't to watch live content on non-bbc sources, why should we have to pay for that?
You shouldnt so perhaps the Govt should get rid of the licence fee altogether and just raise taxes and fund it all?
Keep it how it is.
You can pay or not pay.
I just don't want my tax bill going up 150 a year for entertainment.
I can't see the government saying 'you can now watch all other channels for 40 per year and we will bundle that into income tax, and you pay 100 for BBC services which you can chose to pay or not' .
BBC would crumble. They have too many costs and over heads. A lot of waste and a very few good quality shows.
Too many people would bail on it. 100 for BBC or 100 for Netflix? I'll have Netflix thanks!
Id bet on it going to general tax or no change when the charter gets renewed.
You can pay or not pay.
I just don't want my tax bill going up 150 a year for entertainment.
I can't see the government saying 'you can now watch all other channels for 40 per year and we will bundle that into income tax, and you pay 100 for BBC services which you can chose to pay or not' .
BBC would crumble. They have too many costs and over heads. A lot of waste and a very few good quality shows.
Too many people would bail on it. 100 for BBC or 100 for Netflix? I'll have Netflix thanks!
Id bet on it going to general tax or no change when the charter gets renewed.
No, just change it from taxes to a choice to subscribe to the BBC content or not.
We don't have to tax the hell out of everything, that's a very old way of looking at it.
The BBC need to stop trying to compete with commercial organisations and drop the high paid fees.
https://www.uktv.co.uk <-- BBC owns all those channels, and is actively making money from adverts on them.
https://www.uktv.co.uk <-- BBC owns all those channels, and is actively making money from adverts on them.
I think so too.
You don't have to answer but I'm guessing you are of a generation that has not grown up with 3-4 tv channels.
We have so much more choice now.
Ah but the Govt thinks we need a BBC World Service and Ceebeebies and Welsh language proprams and BBC Parliament and local radio stations etc.
So if you scrap the licence fee then taxes have to go up to pay for all the other stuff.
Netflix are starting to get annoying by shoehorning woke stuff in to their originals as well to be honest.
As much as I enjoy OITNB, Queer Eye and Kimmy Schmidt as "guilty pleasures", it's jarring in some of their other series and documentaries. Like in the new retro computer gaming series they are ticking boxes like there's no tomorrow just 2 episodes in.
I suppose Afterlife is a nice antidote
As much as I enjoy OITNB, Queer Eye and Kimmy Schmidt as "guilty pleasures", it's jarring in some of their other series and documentaries. Like in the new retro computer gaming series they are ticking boxes like there's no tomorrow just 2 episodes in.
I suppose Afterlife is a nice antidote
I did have 4 TV channels when I was a kid (34 years old now) and I vaguely remember channel 5 (garbage) TV launching.
I found with TV if I had it I'd watch it. Soaps, general junk. It's just easy to do. And it's a waste of time.
Not having TV channel spam means I seek out what I want to watch. Granted. I probably miss a few things.
Generally now we have so much multi media content spammed in our faces don't need broadcast TV. Why should I have to be on my sofa at a certain time? It's out of date.
Besides. It also makes me do my hobbies outdoors more not having a stream of trash in my house.
I love my hobbies. But it's easier to stay in and watch TV.
Facebook etc is bad enough now for that
BBC guaranteed would see a massive income decline if people could drop BBC, save 100 a year and watch all other content
But if that's the case, it should die
Unfortunately, because it's the law. I don't agree with it but that's the way it is.
Plenty of laws I don't agree with that aren't fair but follow as we have no choice.
This can of worms never ceases to give up...
So we are paying for this content twice? Through TV Licence and sky subscription.
Many UKTV channels are available on free view too.
This is the problem. For a public service broadcaster there is far too much trash TV being produced.
Stuff that should be the exclusive domain of ITV
They've spread themselves far too thin, and now have far too many prima donna presenters who think they're superstars as well.
For every piece of quality content there is 50 trash-tier shows.
And what about the "BBC not having adverts". They do! They spent almost as much time advertising their own shows as the commercial channels spend advertising tat.
Let's face it.. the BBC has become a whale. It's not a lean, mean public service broadcaster. It's got fat on junk food.
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Apr 2009
- Posts
- 5,760
- Location
- Location, Location!
They shouldn't contain adverts.
The BBC is acting like a commercial company. That is the wrong mind set in my opinion.
This is the problem. For a public service broadcaster there is far too much trash TV being produced.
Stuff that should be the exclusive domain of ITV
They've spread themselves far too thin, and now have far too many prima donna presenters who think they're superstars as well.
For every piece of quality content there is 50 trash-tier shows.
And what about the "BBC not having adverts". They do! They spent almost as much time advertising their own shows as the commercial channels spend advertising tat.
Let's face it.. the BBC has become a whale. It's not a lean, mean public service broadcaster. It's got fat on junk food.
Yep.
For a long time BBC has basically had free money. The TV licence fee is nearly a tax. And when you have that resource you just use it. With little Ramification.
People who have sky etc still need to pay it no matter what trash BBC puts out.
And Those presenters will be unlikely to get the salaries they command elsewhere so just cut it.
Obviously they are headline costs but it's a start.
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2011
- Posts
- 22,382
- Location
- ST4
Permabanned
- Joined
- 23 Apr 2014
- Posts
- 23,552
- Location
- Hertfordshire
IIRC that is paid for via the world service, because it is a language that is used widely in some areas - and most languages are "made up", the difference is that IIRC pidgin is the written version of what people learned to speak as a common tongue when there were several languages being used (a quick google suggests it's the main common language across something like 250 groups in Nigeria), especially in ex "colonial" counties where modified versions of the conqouring counties language became common (half of "english" is from French, German and Latin for similar reasons).
It'll also be very cheap to maintain as I suspect the translation from English is done largely automatically.