[Garrett]

Breaking news: The BBC have won the ex-ITV Digital licence. The service they provide will be free to air.

[Ian J]

Originally posted by Garrett
The service they provide will be free to air.

No such thing. The customers will be paying one way or another.

[Garrett]

Oh it will, but you will pay for it elsewhere.
You get nothing for free, if not monetary, it will be the quality of programs.

Why do I get the feeling that the UK TV license fee is in for a major price hike in the not too distant future.

[Lex]

I don't get it? What does this mean? How can it be a free to air replacement for ITV Dig? ITV digital offered people Sky One, Sky Sports, Film Four, Uk Gold etc. The BBC will not be offering these for free will they. So what will they be offering? Surely nothing different to what it is now?

[Garrett]

Will the new transmissions work with the old ITV boxes?(should do), as I see they are now pushing new ones for the service. Maybe they have given the licence to the BBC so they can switch analogue off as planed.
The channels I have seen that are going on it are CBBC, News 24, Sky News and ITV1. Need I say more.

If you head on over to the "Digital TV, Satellite & Cable" bit of the forum, you'll see a few more threads about this that provide more info.

Taken from another board I frequent, the channel line up for the new service (or should I say lack of it)

BBC ONE
BBC TWO
BBC Choice/Cbeebies
BBC News 24
BBCi text
ITV 1
ITV 2
Channel 4
spare for C4
Teletext
Channel 5
QVC / S4C
TV Travelshop
S4C2
ITN News
BBC Parliament
BBC FOUR / CBBC
BBCi (interactive)
6 BBC Radio Services
Sky News
Sky Sports News
Sky Travel
UK History
Commercial Radio
CNN/Boomerang/TCM
An entertainment channel
A music service
An interactive service
Commercial Radio

[Richard46]

Originally posted by Lex
I don't get it? What does this mean? How can it be a free to air replacement for ITV Dig? ITV digital offered people Sky One, Sky Sports, Film Four, Uk Gold etc. The BBC will not be offering these for free will they. So what will they be offering? Surely nothing different to what it is now?

Well its clearly not intended to replace ITVDigital because that idea did not work. This in intended to replace terrestial TV.

[Garrett]

Originally posted by Squirrel God
If you head on over to the "Digital TV, Satellite & Cable" bit of the forum, you'll see a few more threads about this that provide more info.

Yes.
Squirrel, I did not know which forum to start this off in when I heard the news, I did check both forums to see if a thread had been started in anybody, I though this would be of interest to those who did not have digital, and would not go to that forum, as well as those who had it, and as you see this was started a good hour before the other.
But can’t get it right all the time.

Originally posted by Garrett
Yes.
Squirrel, I did not know which forum to start this off in when I heard the news, I did check both forums to see if a thread had been started in anybody, I though this would be of interest to those who did not have digital, and would not go to that forum, as well as those who had it, and as you see this was started a good hour before the other.
But can’t get it right all the time.

Garrett,
It wasn't a criticism of anyone, just an informational point for those who were interested. No offence intended.

[Garrett]

Non taken mate, cheers anyway.

The BBC should have adverts then get rid of the TV licence.

If they copied the American idea of adverts every 8mins they will soon reap the benefits, then hopefully programmes would get better.

Originally posted by freebird
The BBC should have adverts then get rid of the TV licence.

If they copied the American idea of adverts every 8mins they will soon reap the benefits, then hopefully programmes would get better.

I couldn't disagree more! The BBC already make some of the best programmes in the world IMO and to ruin them with advertising would be awful! We only have to look at how awful the programming is on ITV to see this. Yes, Ch 4 has some good programming, but not much good ORIGINAL programming (certainly a lot less than the BBC anyway) - the majority of its good shows are imported. And how annoying are the ad breaks during Six Feet Under!! And don't forget that the programmes are a good 5-10 minutes shorter with advert breaks (e.g. Men Behaving Badly, Series 1 and 2, which were shown on ITV are around 22-23 mins an episode; but Series 3 and onwards, which were shown on BBC1, are about 27-28 mins an episode).

The BBC make a good programme then repeat it for the next 3yrs.

Sky on the other hand do have adverts, granted they do import most of them from the states, but then where do they end up 12/18mts down the line, the BBC.

All I can see we get for our money is cooking, gardening and chat shows, if the licence was scrapped tomorrow it would be a day to late.

[Garrett]

Originally posted by Squirrel God

I couldn't disagree more! The BBC already make some of the best programmes in the world IMO and to ruin them with advertising would be awful! We only have to look at how awful the programming is on ITV to see this. Yes, Ch 4 has some good programming, but not much good ORIGINAL programming (certainly a lot less than the BBC anyway) - the majority of its good shows are imported. And how annoying are the ad breaks during Six Feet Under!! And don't forget that the programmes are a good 5-10 minutes shorter with advert breaks (e.g. Men Behaving Badly, Series 1 and 2, which were shown on ITV are around 22-23 mins an episode; but Series 3 and onwards, which were shown on BBC1, are about 27-28 mins an episode).

I agree with you Squirrel, adverts are a waste of time, and ones life. I wonder how many people the prefer adverts to the present system would prefer cheaper DVD’s if there were adverts in the middle that had to be watched?
The licence does give the BBC some freedom to make programs that commercial stations would steer away from. Trouble is the last few year they seem to have forgot this.

And don't forget the statstic from sky - They manage to stretch a 45 minute show into a 1 hour slot

The main "gimmick" of the BBC is that there aren't any adverts.....
apart from the balloons......the wheelchairs.....the bloke doing the handstand.....the dancers.....the radio times.....eastenders

:D

[Confucius]

None during the shows though.

Quite happily lose the dancing queens mind.

I don't mind the ads, lets face it some have more entertainment value than most programmes shown these days, also gives me a chance to see the new products that available as I don't have that much time window shopping and browsing the supermarkets.

Now that the BBC will be showing 24 digital channels free to air I am just waiting for the letter to say that the licence fee will be going up. Garrett said "they use to put out some good programmes but have forgotten how to do that that for some years", I don't see this changing, we will be paying money for old rope for years to come. If the licence was scrapped competition would be so much better and the programme content would have to rise to keep viewers. Scrap the licence, you know it makes sence.

[Confucius]

Given the choice between the BBC as we know it and a comercialy funded or PPV system I'd vote to keep the licence.

Originally posted by freebird
Scrap the licence, you know it makes sence.

Freebird by name.
Freebird by nature.

Hey Stuart Wright!

You are either weird or working for the BBC.

Good afternoon Mr Wright,

A 10:07 pm post I see, was that because there was nothing to watch on the BBC?

I remember 90/91, when there was a revision to the licensing laws, because of a loophole that was found, if you couldn't receive the terrestrial channels no licence was needed, some were removing their aerials while others were disabling their sets so they were unable to receive BBC and other free channels, why, because satellite had hit our skys. The BBC and the Government had some quick thinking to do so they didn't loose all this income, before you knew it the law had changed, they knew satellite was going to be big. So now you have to have a licence if you have any equipment that has a receiver, yes even a VCR. The licence fee is just another TAX!!

On the other issue of adverts if the licence was scrapped.

How many members here have Sky and watch Buffy, Angel, X Files, ER, The Simpsons and all the variations of Star trek? Quite a few, all highly rated stuff, on video and DVD and has a massive following, but hang a minute, Sky One has adverts, I don't hear the complaints about the ads, only hear and read how great the shows are. The BBC would love these programmes but can't afford them, so here's a little tip, adverts = better income, better programmes and better competition.

So the BBC funded by ads wouldn't be a bad thing if they got first-rate shows like Sky. They will have to think of something very soon as viewers are deserting the beeb and switching to ITV, Chann4 and even Chann5, I can't blame them, how can the BBC compete with Big Brother anyway.

No licence fee, we want it free.

[Garrett]

Adverts are a hidden tax, the cost of them are put on the price of the products. So you have a program interrupted and pay a hidden tax. I prefer the BBC way all up front, when was the last time Buffy, Roswell High, X-Files etc, transmitted in W/S on Sky.

Originally posted by Garrett
when was the last time Buffy, Roswell High, X-Files etc, transmitted in W/S on Sky.

Good point Garrett, so how many wait and watch it on the BBC 12/18 months down the line so they can watch it with no ads and in W/S.

I would compromise a few ads and maybe miss out on the programme being W/S if it meant viewing the programme when it was a few months old rather than it being 1/2yrs old.

[Ian J]

Originally posted by Stuart Wright
I find it quite disgusting that I am paying for the horrendous banging noises I hear coming out of young people's bedrooms.

That's a very ageist comment. Under no stretch of the imagination could I ever call myself a "young person" yet there are plenty of quality banging noises to be heard coming from my bedroom.

I don’t think that I am far wrong when I say that most of you here are movie fans, have read the posts on Indiana Jones when that was shown on ITV, most comments were about picture quality and the format it was going to be shown in, as with most movies we want a good picture, sound and the right ratio. Now we have DVD and some high tech equipment in our homes we can have just that, so TV programmes for me are further down the list in what I want from them, I have an interest in things apart from movies but care not if they are in widescreen or Dolby digital or have ad breaks, so paying the licence for me is just throwing away money I could spend on other things.

Freebird raised a good point, how many do make a compromise when wanting to view the new series of Buffy on Sky, shown in 4x3 with ad breaks. So if we did away with the licence and the BBC got the first episodes of Buffy and all the top shows that Sky seem to show, and was to show them in widescreen but with ad breaks would that be more acceptable?

The TV licence will always be a topic of debate, I for one would love to see it go, my reason, I hardly ever watch the BBC, it’s a bit like having a car parked up for the week and only using it for the weekend, I’m paying the same amount of road tax as someone who does 1000+ miles a week.

To the bloke who posted before me, I care not what goes on in you house, especially your bedroom. For the past 3yrs I have been celibate, any reference to "banging" or "a bit of the other" just make my task harder. Thank you.

[Confucius]

Originally posted by freebird
Good point Garrett, so how many wait and watch it on the BBC 12/18 months down the line so they can watch it with no ads and in W/S.

I do.

Originally posted by freebird
....If they copied the American idea of adverts every 8mins....

Yeah, right, 'brilliant' idea

[Ian J]

Originally posted by J Stevens
To the bloke who posted before me, I care not what goes on in you house, especially your bedroom. For the past 3yrs I have been celibate, any reference to "banging" or "a bit of the other" just make my task harder. Thank you.

I care not, whether you care or not but if a light hearted jest makes your task of celibacy that much harder I would suggest that you invest in a new hair shirt.

Originally posted by Ian J


I care not, whether you care or not but if a light hearted jest makes your task of celibacy that much harder I would suggest that you invest in a new hair shirt.

Great idea, then I would be scratching myself all day because of the goat hair, getting exited and making my task even harder.