Tv licence has "10 years left"

[mimic]

What do you think funds iplayer and most of the content on it. - magic beans?

 

The BBC has to make programmes. Its needs studios, offices, props, sets and of course talent to create what is broadcasts.

 

The way you choose to watch something is irrelevant. There is far more to the BBC than just the end product and far more paid out of licence fee monies which would simply not exist if funded by other means.

 

Nobody if they had a choice would CHOOSE to fund say, religious programming or educational programming or disability access services or foreign language services. They certainly would not choose to pay subscription for news services either. However, it does not stop them being watched and used by the population. Many of those no doubt will be ones complaining about the licence fee.

 

Lets also never forget (which so many people do) that a chunk of licence fee monies also went to pay for the "subscription free" Freeview service which so many people embraced. Again, I suspect many of those freeview customers will be complaining about the licence fee too.

 

People should look into exactly what the piffle of £12.00 a month actually provides for the nation. All those smug "I don't have a TV comments" might change if all those freely available BBC radio stations went subscription only or disappeared altogether.

 

The BBC is still to this day under a Royal Charter to provide Public Service not always aiming for a profit. Its something the commercial broadcasters such as Sky don't have on their back. To lose a national service might be one of the biggest mistakes we ever make.

 

Take a look around the world at what tv broadcasting is like in other countries. It sometimes make you grateful for what we have.

 

I have been funding and watching repeats for a lot of years so please don't preach to me about the ethics of the BBC. They make DVD and Blue ray out of your licence fee, do they offer you a discount for being a British licence payer or charge you the same or more than people in other countries that are not required to help pay for the production? Things will no doubt change with the view to on demand free players, until then, why not use them for free?

[I1L2T3]

So don't get sky ! You have a choice, something you don't want others to have !

Why don't you want others to have the same choice with the BBC ?

 

I don't get Sky.

 

Just counting up the costs it's extortionate.

 

Your make the BBC a subscription service idea is a bit stupid though. If anything it would change to a mix of advertising and government grants.

[ECCOnoob]

I have been funding and watching repeats for a lot of years so please don't preach to me about the ethics of the BBC. They make DVD and Blue ray out of your licence fee, do they offer you a discount for being a British licence payer or charge you the same or more than people in other countries that are not required to help pay for the production? Things will no doubt change with the view to on demand free players, until then, why not use them for free?

 

Why should they. If you choose to OWN a piece of Intellectual property after it has been broadcast and streamed on the BBC's services then that's your choice.

 

The BBC commercial arm and international sales also put monies back into the Licence fee pot. Its not all one way.

 

Here is another interesting thought about the licence fee too..... http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/tony-ballard/bbc-licence-fee-supports-_b_6790818.html

[bigsexydoug]

I don't get Sky.

 

Just counting up the costs it's extortionate.

 

Your make the BBC a subscription service idea is a bit stupid though. If anything it would change to a mix of advertising and government grants.

 

Why ?

Would people not subscribe to the BBC ? Why is that ?

Surely they would see the great programmes and still subscribe !

[ECCOnoob]

I don't get Sky.

 

Just counting up the costs it's extortionate.

 

Your make the BBC a subscription service idea is a bit stupid though. If anything it would change to a mix of advertising and government grants.[/QUOTE]

 

That's pretty much the system in Ireland and France. (im sure some others too)

 

In Ireland licence fee to be paid of around £138 but still adverts all over the telly. France is about the same and does not even offer any national radio services.

 

Wonder how many of the LF complainers would be happy with this system instead.

[bigsexydoug]

I don't get Sky.

 

Just counting up the costs it's extortionate.

 

Your make the BBC a subscription service idea is a bit stupid though. If anything it would change to a mix of advertising and government grants.[/QUOTE]

 

That's pretty much the system in Ireland and France. (im sure some others too)

 

In Ireland licence fee to be paid of around £138 but still adverts all over the telly. France is about the same and does not even offer any national radio services.

 

Wonder how many of the LF complainers would be happy with this system instead.

 

so why dont they start jailing people and introduce a licence fee if it provides the best tv in the world ? they could even produce elysees-enders !

[Mister M]

BBC Radio is excellent (though local radio is rubbish) Radio 4, 4 extra and Radio 5 are definitely worth listening to.

The licence fee is regressive in the sense that rich or poor, everyone pays the same. Perhaps funding it through general taxation may be better.

[I1L2T3]

Why ?

Would people not subscribe to the BBC ? Why is that ?

Surely they would see the great programmes and still subscribe !

 

Because it's a public service broadcaster.

 

You don't subscribe to them. Doesn't work like that, anywhere.

 

I know it ruins your argument but tough.

 

---------- Post added 22-06-2015 at 21:21 ----------

 

BBC Radio is excellent (though local radio is rubbish) Radio 4, 4 extra and Radio 5 are definitely worth listening to.

The licence fee is regressive in the sense that rich or poor, everyone pays the same. Perhaps funding it through general taxation may be better.

 

I think general taxation is the best way too. Maybe cap the amount spent to 0.2% of GDP or similar which would probably give about 75% of current funding.

 

The BBC needs to take a look at how it operates and scale back in some areas for sure.

[ECCOnoob]

Because it's a public service broadcaster.

 

You don't subscribe to them. Doesn't work like that, anywhere.

 

I know it ruins your argument but tough.

 

---------- Post added 22-06-2015 at 21:21 ----------

 

 

I think general taxation is the best way too. Maybe cap the amount spent to 0.2% of GDP or similar which would probably give about 75% of current funding.

 

The BBC needs to take a look at how it operates and scale back in some areas for sure.

 

Totally agree. I don't doubt that there are lots of things and people on the gravy train within the BBC that need to be cut. But I don't think it should be lost altogether.

 

Its a public service and needs to remain that way. Limiting is output to simply what's the most profitable or appealing to the masses is not a good thing. Its about an overall picture.

[bigsexydoug]

Because it's a public service broadcaster.

 

You don't subscribe to them. Doesn't work like that, anywhere.

 

I know it ruins your argument but tough.

 

---------- Post added 22-06-2015 at 21:21 ----------

 

 

I think general taxation is the best way too. Maybe cap the amount spent to 0.2% of GDP or similar which would probably give about 75% of current funding.

 

The BBC needs to take a look at how it operates and scale back in some areas for sure.

 

ruins my argument ? you havent even answered the question !

 

the only thing from your post i can deduce is something along the lines of it provides a service that a lot of people dont want to watch so we need to keep it that way for some reason ? feel free to dispute this !

 

surely if it provides such amazing value for money if it was made a subscription service nothing would change, people would rush to subscribe to the bbc ! so nothing changes !

 

its totally fair ! why are you so against a totally fair system ?

 

and your plan to replace basically a tax and swap it for a tax is oustanding work !