Tv licence has "10 years left"

[I1L2T3]

The BBC needs to go on its own. It's disgraceful that in a supposedly democratic country, public money is used to pay for a hugely biased news service. And yet we laugh at the media output of countries like North Korea.

 

Most countries in western Europe have TV licence or media fees and/or central grants from the state to public service broadcasters.

 

Nothing disgraceful about it at all. It's pretty normal.

 

The licence fees here are actually cheaper than in some of the other countries, and out service is way superior.

[Vague_Boy]

So because you can't find anything worthwhile on BBC radio and television the payment system has to change.

 

Given that it's a compulsory system policed by doorstepping goons from CAPITA, I think the current funding system is certainly worthy of scrutiny.

 

It's a system that might have worked in 1928 but in the Space Year 2015, it looks a tad antediluvian.

 

SKY don't automatically assume that I'm using their services and send a jumped up bailiff to my door demanding payment. Or threatening letters through the post.

 

 

People complain about the BBC, yet happily throw 50 a month at Sky to watch crap, full of adverts and lining the pockets of scum like Murdoch.

 

Any you know what? That's their choice. It's their money after all. They can choose to get a SKY subscription or they can choose not to.

 

Choice. A lovely thing.

 

Now I can choose (and indeed have done so) not to have a TV, not to watch or record live TV as it is broadcast and according to the BBC's own web site [LINK] that means I don't need a TV licence.

 

The trouble is, the BBC and their sub-contracted goons at CAPITA don't believe me. "Guilty until proven temporarily not guilty" is their approach.

 

Letters ever month (threats more like) and visits from jumped up bailiffs are what's in store if you dare to exercise your choice not to use BBC services.

 

You can tell them that you don't need a license. That might work for a while but after a year or so, they'll stop believing you (again).

 

So I think we should put licence evaders in jail. We'll have to empty the jails of murderers, rapists, kiddie fiddlers etc., but this "heinous" crime of watching TV without a state imposed tax must take priority over such piffling indiscretions.

[I1L2T3]

Its time for the BBC to pay for itself like the other channels do. The thing I dislike is you are forced to pay for BBC regardless if you want it or ever watch it in short no choice. We should have a choice its only fair . If you do want it and quite happy to pay for it , fair enough. If you don't want any BBC channels their should be no charge.

 

YOU pay for the other channels or don't you realise that the costs of the adverts comes out of the marketing budgets of the companies that advertise. The cost of the marketing budget is passed to consumers.

 

I read somewhere that when the cost of the marketing revenue for ITV is divided by the number of households it comes to £8 per household per month.

 

Channel 4 is something like £3 a month per household. Channel 5 is £2 per month.

 

The cheeky devils at Sky, not content with your £50 a month, pull in a load of advertising revenue too, just to top up how much people effectively pay them. Suckers.

[bigsexydoug]

YOU pay for the other channels or don't you realise that the costs of the adverts comes out of the marketing budgets of the companies that advertise. The cost of the marketing budget is passed to consumers.

 

I read somewhere that when the cost of the marketing revenue for ITV is divided by the number of households it comes to £8 per household per month.

 

Channel 4 is something like £3 a month per household. Channel 5 is £2 per month.

 

The cheeky devils at Sky, not content with your £50 a month, pull in a load of advertising revenue too, just to top up how much people effectively pay them. Suckers.

 

You do realise the BBC is allowed product placement, so you have just called yourself a sucker lol

[Happ Hazzard]

If you don't buy the advertised products, you don't pay a pennY!

[mimic]

The choices were a bit limited for me.

 

I emailed the BBC and canceled my renewal. Main reason is that I only watched about 5-10 minutes of news per day. The rest of my viewing is on my timetable via my own collection, Netflix or things like iplayer. To be charged nearly £150 for this is way out of line for me. What really annoys me is the line "any live broadcast" I know it's just another tax but to have you pay twice for paid services like sky is a bit OTT.

 

Each to their own, if you like watching live TV... go and pay the fee. If not, don't buy one.

[I1L2T3]

If you don't buy the advertised products, you don't pay a pennY!

 

Challenge yourself to do it. To not buy a single product from a any company that advertises on ITV.

 

Be an interesting experiment. Don't know what you'll do for thrush cream though.

 

---------- Post added 22-06-2015 at 20:17 ----------

 

The choices were a bit limited for me.

 

I emailed the BBC and canceled my renewal. Main reason is that I only watched about 5-10 minutes of news per day. The rest of my viewing is on my timetable via my own collection, Netflix or things like iplayer. To be charged nearly £150 for this is way out of line for me. What really annoys me is the line "any live broadcast" I know it's just another tax but to have you pay twice for paid services like sky is a bit OTT.

 

Each to their own, if you like watching live TV... go and pay the fee. If not, don't buy one.

 

Sky is crazily expensive for what it is.

[mimic]

 

Sky is crazily expensive for what it is.

 

I agree. I wouldn't pay for that either.

[bigsexydoug]

Challenge yourself to do it. To not buy a single product from a any company that advertises on ITV.

 

Be an interesting experiment. Don't know what you'll do for thrush cream though.

 

---------- Post added 22-06-2015 at 20:17 ----------

 

 

Sky is crazily expensive for what it is.

 

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 ?

[ECCOnoob]

The choices were a bit limited for me.

 

I emailed the BBC and canceled my renewal. Main reason is that I only watched about 5-10 minutes of news per day. The rest of my viewing is on my timetable via my own collection, Netflix or things like iplayer. To be charged nearly £150 for this is way out of line for me. What really annoys me is the line "any live broadcast" I know it's just another tax but to have you pay twice for paid services like sky is a bit OTT.

 

Each to their own, if you like watching live TV... go and pay the fee. If not, don't buy one.

 

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" commenters 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.

 

The American style of adverts every 10 minutes is bad enough, but do we really want a service where every single programme title is a blatant as this...

The commercial channels are bad enough as it is.

 

Do we really want every single TV programme to be filled with stuff like this....

 

As for those gloating online users, no long before youtube/Netflix/prime will all be filled with non skip adverts too. Its happening more and more as it is. Itv and 4player already have long lead in adverts. As for youtube, even some of the shortest videos can be stuck with a 2.00min ad at the start.

 

Sometimes its nice to actually be able to watch something all the way through and dare I say it, commercial free.

Edited June 22, 2015 by ECCOnoob