TV licence thread

[HeHasRisen]

8 minutes ago, ukdobby said:

No it’s based on a cameramen I know who’s there.

0 reporters listed on the closing credits. 

 

As I said, if they did the final from a broom cupboard in Salford they wouldn't win, they are losing either way with the likes of you and the Daily Mail. Look at the stick Prince William has got for not going. Had he gone they would have moaned about the carbon impact etc. Moan moan moan. 

Edited August 20, 2023 by HeHasRisen

[Guest]

1 hour ago, HeHasRisen said:

They have, license fee rises have been less than inflation. 

 

Oh and the number of "reporters" shown in the credits at the end of the coverage a bit ago? Zero. 

 

If people think 2m on Lineker and Shearer is a lot for the BBC to be stumping up, you better not go and look at how much they stump up to get the PL highlights rights, they would have a hernia 😂😂

Now that's a bit better response instead of either wisecracking or wildly exaggerating everything that anyone says.

That may not be a lot out of the BBC's budget but,  as you know,  people are changing their energy suppliers all the time to keep their costs down.

Those savings are not massive savings but small ones which,  added together with other small savings,  become enough to stave off the impending doom of living beyond their means.

Thee BBC needs to learn,  as ordinary households do,  that there are always savings to be made and, as I've said,  they could start by not doing outside broadcasts,  every single news report.

Why do the BBC need 2 presenters for every single program when a company like Sky can happily use a single presenter ?

The point is,   they don't want to change the way they work,   but neither do other people,  who very often have to.

Thank you for a more sensible answer    but   the broom cupboard in Salford,  remark in your answer to ukdobby is a slide back to your silly schoolboy ways.

 

Edited August 20, 2023 by Organgrinder

[HeHasRisen]

8 minutes ago, Organgrinder said:

Why do the BBC need 2 presenters for every single program when a company like Sky can happily use a single presenter ?

You are comparing apples with eggs tbf, look at live football coverage, Sky have one host and 2/3 pundits, absolutely no different to what the BBC or ITV do, as its what the consumer expects.  This isn't the 1970s anymore with no host and a commentary done down the phone. 

 

The BBC don't have 2 hosts for "every single programme" btw. I am sure you know this and you are exaggerating a little. 

8 minutes ago, Organgrinder said:

but   the broom cupboard in Salford,  remark in your answer to ukdobby is a slide back to your silly schoolboy ways.

Not really. BBC Sport is based in Salford and people like Dobby would happily want every single sporting event to be done on the cheap. No people on location, no fancy graphics, the smallest studio possible (i.e. a broom cupboard, akin to the old CBBC studio).  Heck, maybe just one camera operated by remote control, why waste money on a cameraman? 

Edited August 20, 2023 by HeHasRisen

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, HeHasRisen said:

 

Not really. BBC Sport is based in Salford and people like Dobby would happily want every single sporting event to be done on the cheap. No people on location, no fancy graphics, the smallest studio possible (i.e. a broom cupboard, akin to the old CBBC studio). 

I never saw Dobby say that he wants every single sporting event done on the cheap so that is even more exaggeration from you.

Do you not think that people like Dobby,  or people like me are allowed to have views at all.  You seem to think it's your job  ( don't know why ) to shoot all their ideas down and tell them they are wrong.

Maybe many people would like to see  LESS STAFF   not NO staff,  for SOME  not ALL,  presentations  with LESS  not none,  fancy graphics and  only SOME not every,   on location..

Do you not see that every time you apply a hard and fast exaggerated,  ALL OR NOTHING RULE,  to everything people say.

You obviously have no idea of what budgets mean and that you undertake them by making small cuts here and there.  If you cut back on food,  you don't starve yourself to death.

 

[HeHasRisen]

Blimey he's pulled the coloured font out now. Chekhov-esque. 

 

Well maybe he can clarify then. Personally I have absolutely no issue with the BBC sending over a HANDFUL of staff for the final four games of the biggest womens football event in the world that is only held every four years.  Adds something to the event them being there than in a broom cupboard... Oops better not say that again. 

 

The license fee is fantastic value for money for the amount of BBC content I consume.  You have a choice not to pay it and not watch live TV broadcasts of course. 

 

 

Edited August 20, 2023 by HeHasRisen

[Guest]

18 minutes ago, HeHasRisen said:

You are comparing apples with eggs tbf, look at live football coverage, Sky have one host and 2/3 pundits, absolutely no different to what the BBC or ITV do, as its what the consumer expects.  This isn't the 1970s anymore with no host and a commentary done down the phone. 

 

The BBC don't have 2 hosts for "every single programme" btw. I am sure you know this and you are exaggerating a little. 

 

If you watch SY News ch 233 from 8am to 9 am,  it's presented by one woman presenter,  as are many programs on Sky.

turn over to BBC news and you will see presenters galore.

You may also bear in mind,  during your comparisons with other channels,  that the presenters they use are paid for by themselves,  and not the British licence payers.

 

I'm sure I could compile a list of programs that have 2 or more presenters when they could manage with one quite easily.

[HeHasRisen]

6 minutes ago, Organgrinder said:

If you watch SY News ch 233 from 8am to 9 am,  it's presented by one woman presenter,  as are many programs on Sky.

turn over to BBC news and you will see presenters galore.

You may also bear in mind,  during your comparisons with other channels,  that the presenters they use are paid for by themselves,  and not the British licence payers.

 

I'm sure I could compile a list of programs that have 2 or more presenters when they could manage with one quite easily.

BBC News simulcasts with BBC One for that hour, and it's a breakfast magazine programme for the masses. Dont see the harm in them having two hosts. They don't for the rest of the time. 

 

Now let's do one the other way then... Portrait Artist Of The Year, on Sky Arts (you never said which Sky channels you were talking about btw) has two hosts. Do they need two hosts?  

 

All channels have programme with two hosts when in your opinion one would probably suffice, it's hardly a BBC thing.  It's what people expect in modern day television 

 

Sky News isn't 233 in my house btw, because I am not a Freeview peasant. 

Edited August 20, 2023 by HeHasRisen

[ukdobby]

3 hours ago, HeHasRisen said:

 

You know this how? You don't know me. 

 

Ditto.

so Bbc don’t have 2 or 3 pundits? As well as a reporter every news program.

 

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, HeHasRisen said:

Blimey he's pulled the coloured font out now. Chekhov-esque. 

 

Well maybe he can clarify then. Personally I have absolutely no issue with the BBC sending over a HANDFUL of staff for the final four games of the biggest womens football event in the world that is only held every four years.  Adds something to the event them being there than in a broom cupboard... Oops better not say that again. 

 

The license fee is fantastic value for money for the amount of BBC content I consume.  You have a choice not to pay it and not watch live TV broadcasts of course. 

 

 

You may not have an issue with anything but that doesn't mean that other people are not allowed to.  The gibberish in the rest of that paragraph is unintelligible.

The licence fee's value for money is not decided by you alone but by everyone who has to pay it.

Again,  you decide for yourself what choices the viewers should have.    They could decide that their choice would be to bin the BBC altogether and pay no licence fee.

 

[The_DADDY]

16 minutes ago, HeHasRisen said:

Blimey he's pulled the coloured font out now. Chekhov-esque. 

 

 

I think that means he loves you ❤️