They seem to be sending him quite a lot of letters.
TV Licence Super Thread
- Thread starter Ken
- Start date
but again, that is the past, as we move forward antenna style broadcast is fading away.
if elements of infrastructure are indeed still needed the bbc could easily decouple its content generation from its infrastructure and sell its infrastructure.
if needed, this part of the business could go private and be profitable. same as any needed business
there is no need for the tv license anymore.
Last edited:
Soldato
Sure but, the BBC is still involved in the development of IPTV and has been since the mid-2000s. Not to sound like a stuck record but their R&D blog is well worth a read as you will see exactly how the organisation is advancing broadcasting in this country.
Although we're still a fair way from ditching antennas yet.
How would you easily decouple that? And similarly, how do you know it would be profitable?
Roll it into the national tax, problem solved. Again, we already subsidise services we don't use and the majority here don't appear to have an issue with that, and funding the licence this way would likely to be unnoticeable on most of our tax bills.
If what the bbc does is so important, and its still relevant today, then surely what it does would be worth paying for by other broadcasters? basically same as any other private corporation. And if it isnt profitable, then obviously it isnt needed.
If what you say is done by the BBC and the BBC is best at it, someone would pay for it.
Of courseit could be decoupled. You could take the entire content creation out of the infrastructure and make content subscription, we all know it would fail, as people dont value it enough.
Rolling into national tax would increase tax bills a lot, i suspect those of us with #out a tv licence would end up paying 200-300 a year more, it would be unaccountable, and that cost could just rise unchecked.
We are at a time when the BBC isnt needed, it can be left to fend for itself like any other non essential service.
As many of us have said before, if bbc was valued enough by the public it would flourish, but we all know it isnt.
i see no reason to support a non essential service through general tax. It isnt education, health, defence etc.
Last edited:
Associate
As far as the terrestrial broadcasting infrastructure is concerned, there's no need to speculate - it was done quite some time ago:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arqiva#BBC
Ah, so it is done, the critical part of the BBC, is already separate
Soldato
Other broadcasters are involved especially with bodies like the DTG but, the BBC is and always has been integrale in the research and development of broadcasting within this country.
Have you got any data to show how you got to the £200-300 figure?
And why do you believe it would be unaccountable? Surely the same checks that currently exist and are in place would be carried forward with the only difference being the funding comes from a new/existing national tax?
Last edited:
Soldato
lol, bbc is done, you can't save it
If the fee is 170 ish for every household, think how many households are on benefits. if all those households now get it for free (ie general tax) that cost has to go up a lot.
so im guessing the average working household would end up paying a chunk more.
If its bundled in council tax, same applies.
Look at water companies, they get away with anything because the regulator is poor. I cant see any reason to think bbc would be any different.
At least now if the bbc puts out garbage, they can lose revenue with people opting out They already have an advantage in that you need one for any live content.
i have no issue paying for things i dont use that are critical, but BBC is not one of those things.
Bottom line, times change, the world changes. the bbc just isnt critical anymore. 20 years ago, yeah yeah it was important, but not now, and thats ok.
It is ok if things end. it happens all the time obviously.
Last edited:
Soldato
So how have you reached the £200-300 figure?
If you decided to take it from each taxpayer then cig packet maths puts it around £100 annual or £8pm to keep it at the current funding, so i'm trying to work out how you've got double and triple that or, are you just pulling figures?
So because Ofwat is ran terribly you assume the BBC would be too even though they've got nothing to do with water and would still be under the same authority and held to the same standards as they currently are? Any actual evidence that backs up that opinion?
Sorry to break the news to you but there's plenty of our tax money going towards non-critical services and funding
Genuine question, would you be open to the splitting of the BBC with say TV/Radio being funded from subscription and others, like R&D, being funded from a national tax?
Last edited: