• New Patreon Tier and Early Access Content available. If you would like to support AVForums, we now have a new Patreon Tier which gives you access to selected news, reviews and articles before they are available to the public. Read more.

BBC HD Update

scarty16

Prominent Member
From speech today by Mark Thompson

The BBC is also keen to invest in high definition television (HDTV), which offers clear, lifelike pictures and sound on large-screen televisions. Sky is planning to launch its own HDTV service next year.

Mr Thompson pledged to deliver free-to-air HDTV on all BBC digital platforms "as soon as practical", which is expected to be by about 2010.
 

Stephen Neal

Distinguished Member
I suspect this means that things like a swift move to HD, along with the proposed move of Sport and Kids to Manchester, rely on the BBC getting something near their proposed RPI+2.3% licence fee formula.

I think the current proposals include spending around £700m on digital infrastructure stuff - which includes upgrading to HD.

I agree with the previous poster that 2010 and "as soon as is practical" don't mean the same thing.

Given that the BBC iMP trial already includes HD content I suspect we'll see satellite and broadband HD (possibly cable) well before we see it via digital OTA.
 

nigelbb

Distinguished Member
Stephen Neal said:
Given that the BBC iMP trial already includes HD content I suspect we'll see satellite and broadband HD (possibly cable) well before we see it via digital OTA.
Unless they use MPEG4 & thus a whole new generation of Freeview boxes they will have to wait until analogue switch off in 2012 before there is enough bandwidth for HDTV in MPEG2 in Freeview.
 

Nick_UK

Banned
You are assuming that the bandwidth liberated by terrestrial TV would be made available to digital TV, and the government has never indicated that this would be the case. In previous TV band closures (Bands 1 & 3) the government has sold off the bandwidth to the highest bidder, and (given the government's haste to close down terrestrial) I suspect that this will be the case again. There's a lot of wealthy mobile phone companies waiting with cheque books at the ready.
 
T

tim k

Guest
am i right in thinking that with IMP you dont need a regular tv license?

im thinking a mighty loophole here.
 

Starburst

Distinguished Member
tim k said:
am i right in thinking that with IMP you dont need a regular tv license?

im thinking a mighty loophole here.




The BBC are experts at closing loopholes:)

No doubt the license will soon include PC and Internet systems to cover those who don't have a traditional tuning facilites just as it did when satellite became popular even though there were little or no BBC UK services on the platform:)
 

Stephen Neal

Distinguished Member
tim k said:
am i right in thinking that with IMP you dont need a regular tv license?

im thinking a mighty loophole here.

Not sure how this is being addressed during the trial - but I would be VERY surprised if a licence wasn't required for the full version when it is rolled out. I suspect the Beeb will lobby for the legislation to be altered to include watchign pre-recorded broadcast TV on a PC...
 
P

paolo999

Guest
Stephen Neal said:
Not sure how this is being addressed during the trial - but I would be VERY surprised if a licence wasn't required for the full version when it is rolled out. I suspect the Beeb will lobby for the legislation to be altered to include watchign pre-recorded broadcast TV on a PC...

Well, obviously for something like the iMP they can have a registration process which will gather the same kind of data that is gathered in the current scenario (i.e. new TV sales) to produce a cross-check DB for the enforcement people.

But for non iMP sources of UK broadcast TV - of which there are plenty - then you've got to got to visit homes without a TV license, get access to the PC and find the programmes - not simply point at a box and say "it's got a tuner, you're nicked."

It'll be interesting to see how this pans out.

I guess the mitigating factor here is that whilst you can get pretty much all recently broadcast drama as downloads, there is no realtime facility via the "uncontrolled" sources, and so very few households will fully dispense with a tuner even if they are watching alot of TV (as I do) using their PC.

So it's a loophole that might have little impact for the foreseeable.
 

mjn

Distinguished Member
Or maybe it'll be a case of, "If you can access the Internet on your PC, you'll need a licence to view the BBC website. It doesn't matter if you visit the website."
 

Rasczak

Distinguished Member
Or maybe it'll be a case of, "If you can access the Internet on your PC, you'll need a licence to view the BBC website. It doesn't matter if you visit the website."
Which seems perfectly reasonable IMHO. I would have no serious objection to TV licencing being extended to cover PC ownership. It seems the logical step.
 

wyrdness

Established Member
Rasczak said:
Which seems perfectly reasonable IMHO. I would have no serious objection to TV licencing being extended to cover PC ownership. It seems the logical step.

Does it? I don't own or watch TV. The BBC are talking about increasing the license fee to almost £200. Why the f*** should I be forced to pay £200 for a service that I don't want or use?
 

GreasyWeasel

Established Member
Rasczak said:
Which seems perfectly reasonable IMHO. I would have no serious objection to TV licencing being extended to cover PC ownership. It seems the logical step.

I think you'd find a lot of resistance to that. Especially from companies who have large numbers of pc's who wouldn't be too pleased about having to pay license fees.
 

neilmcl

Prominent Member
wyrdness said:
Does it? I don't own or watch TV. The BBC are talking about increasing the license fee to almost £200. Why the f*** should I be forced to pay £200 for a service that I don't want or use?
No offence but if you don't watch or own a TV then why are you on these forums.
 

rogeralpine

Standard Member
neilmcl said:
No offence but if you don't watch or own a TV then why are you on these forums.

...there's plenty to watch on a TV screen without relying on the beeb!

The news of the proposed increase in the licence fee certainly got a few at work talking and the general widespread opinion was that if we could do without the beeb, we all would as we hardly watch anything it produces anyway. I would be more than happy to buy on DVD programs it produces that interest me - I'm not happy about the "forced" licence fee, I would like the choice!

I'm not saying that other broadcasters don't splash the cash, but if the reports are true, then there appears to be a substantial amount of "wastage" at the Beeb on things like taxis and trips to the States to cover the election. If I had a choice about paying for that then fine, but I don't - that's the annoying factor. Give me Sky or NTL TV access without the Beeb to save me the licence fee any day!
 

richard plumb

Distinguished Member
£150 after 8 years is almost £200? :rotfl:



And I don't think anyone was suggesting simply charging you £150 a year to own a PC - just if you access the service. Most likely you'll just have to tie your license number with your PC somehow.
 

neilmcl

Prominent Member
As far as PC usage is concerned there were talks of the BBC developing theire own browser software and google type search engine, not sure of the full details but apparently some of the license fee would be used to develop this and possibly it's usage. Like Richard said I don't think anyone was seriously saying that you would have to pay the fee just for simply owning a PC.
 

Rasczak

Distinguished Member
I would be more than happy to buy on DVD programs it produces that interest me - I'm not happy about the "forced" licence fee, I would like the choice!
But without the licence fee these programmes would never get made in the first place. ITV is the classic example of this - look how far programming from that channel is toned down to ensure it appeals to a wide audience at home and abroad. By contrast the BBC judges the success of it's programming on ratings coupled with audience appreciation - a unique position because of the licence fee. It's all very well for you to say "you'll buy what you want" - but without the licence fee they simply wouldn't be made.

there appears to be a substantial amount of "wastage" at the Beeb on things like taxis and trips to the States to cover the election. If I had a choice about paying for that then fine, but I don't - that's the annoying factor.
There is "wastage" like that in any large organisation - it's a fact of life. Large organisations employ people from all over the country. These people need to travel and costs need to incurred. If you think the BBC is bad look at the military!

Give me Sky or NTL TV access without the Beeb to save me the licence fee any day!
Ok - but as Sky buys a substantial amount of programming with the BBC (on a Sky shows first, then the BBC) the licence fee partly pays for Sky TV viewers - some you would still need to pay that part of the licence. In addition UKTV satellite channels have direct access to the BBC archive - including programmes that have only just been aired on one of the main BBC channels - so you can also contribute to that part of the licence fee. And, if the licence fee was scrapped, there would soon be a call to create more UK programming and therefore you would find you would probably end up paying a substantial amount extra on your subscription to fund the quotas that would be assigned to Sky.

The news of the proposed increase in the licence fee certainly got a few at work talking and the general widespread opinion was that if we could do without the beeb, we all would as we hardly watch anything it produces anyway.
You must have a fairly non-standard workforce then! If you look at the ratings figures the BBC achieves it produces some of the most popular programming on TV: Eastenders, Casualty, Doctor Who plus countless short dramas such as Charles II, Cambridge Spies etc - these have all been massive ratings winners. Likewise look at the favourite channel polls on this forum - the BBC always comes out top (when you conbine BBC1/BBC2 polls together). If the BBC was failing in the ratings then there would need to be questions raised about how to make it more mainstream - however that is simply not the case!

When you look at what the BBC provides - extensive and varied UK programming, unrivaled news coverage, over 8 TV channels, dozens of radio channels and one of the best websites on the internet - I think most people agree it is worth the licence fee and more!
 

wyrdness

Established Member
neilmcl said:
No offence but if you don't watch or own a TV then why are you on these forums.

Good question. I own a DVD player and a projector. I'm currently thinking of upgrading the projector to one of the newly announced HD-ready models from Sanyo (Z4) or Panasonic (AE-900), which is why I subscribed to these forums.
I also work for a certain TV company.
 

neilmcl

Prominent Member
wyrdness said:
Good question. I own a DVD player and a projector. I'm currently thinking of upgrading the projector to one of the newly announced HD-ready models from Sanyo (Z4) or Panasonic (AE-900), which is why I subscribed to these forums.
I also work for a certain TV company.
Are you currently paying the License Fee then? I know this has been debated before but I'm pretty sure if you haven't got equipment in use actively recieving a TV signal then you have a case for not paying it anyway.
 

rogeralpine

Standard Member
neilmcl said:
Read the OP post, he said he doesn't own or even watch TV not that he doesn't watch the BBC.


...yes, but you weren't referring the the OP's post but wyrdness's post. There's plenty of reasons to be a member here and not watch TV - as in the Beeb.
 

rogeralpine

Standard Member
Rasczak said:
But without the licence fee these programmes would never get made in the first place. ITV is the classic example of this - look how far programming from that channel is toned down to ensure it appeals to a wide audience at home and abroad. By contrast the BBC judges the success of it's programming on ratings coupled with audience appreciation - a unique position because of the licence fee. It's all very well for you to say "you'll buy what you want" - but without the licence fee they simply wouldn't be made.


I certainly don't disagree - but I think in recent years the quality and standard of programs coming out of the Beeb has declined somewhat - all IMHO of course and if you enjoy their services that's fine by me - they just don't offer anything I'm interested in to warrant £200 or more of my money.


Rasczak said:
There is "wastage" like that in any large organisation - it's a fact of life. Large organisations employ people from all over the country. These people need to travel and costs need to incurred. If you think the BBC is bad look at the military!

I'm fully aware other companies are wasteful and I half-mentioned that in my orginal post.

Rasczak said:
Ok - but as Sky buys a substantial amount of programming with the BBC (on a Sky shows first, then the BBC) the licence fee partly pays for Sky TV viewers - some you would still need to pay that part of the licence. In addition UKTV satellite channels have direct access to the BBC archive - including programmes that have only just been aired on one of the main BBC channels - so you can also contribute to that part of the licence fee. And, if the licence fee was scrapped, there would soon be a call to create more UK programming and therefore you would find you would probably end up paying a substantial amount extra on your subscription to fund the quotas that would be assigned to Sky.

....fair point - which I was not aware of tbh. I'd certainly like to know which shows are jointly purchased by Sky and the Beeb - any links to the info?

Rasczak said:
You must have a fairly non-standard workforce then! If you look at the ratings figures the BBC achieves it produces some of the most popular programming on TV: Eastenders, Casualty, Doctor Who plus countless short dramas such as Charles II, Cambridge Spies etc - these have all been massive ratings winners. Likewise look at the favourite channel polls on this forum - the BBC always comes out top (when you conbine BBC1/BBC2 polls together). If the BBC was failing in the ratings then there would need to be questions raised about how to make it more mainstream - however that is simply not the case!

Eastenders - do me a favour - male 30's + certainly in our office hate that drivel. There has been plenty of comments about the material the Beeb produces and I've seen many articles about "failing" ratings as well. In any case, neither I nor my work colleagues are interested in ratings as everyone is entitled to rate the service for themselves - for the majority of the population they may be rated highly but I and my work colleagues (not all may I add) do not and surely we're entitled to our opinion on that?

Rasczak said:
When you look at what the BBC provides - extensive and varied UK programming, unrivaled news coverage, over 8 TV channels, dozens of radio channels and one of the best websites on the internet - I think most people agree it is worth the licence fee and more!

All down to personal taste - I'm not knocking those that love the service and are happy to pay for it but for me I do not think it's worth £200+ and therefore would prefer the option to opt out if I could.
 

rogeralpine

Standard Member
Rasczak said:
Which seems perfectly reasonable IMHO. I would have no serious objection to TV licencing being extended to cover PC ownership. It seems the logical step.


....IMHO that's complete nonsense - if the Beeb want to cover all their bases and not lose out on what they see as potential income streams, they should introduce an account login method to restrict people who want to gain access to their web services to those that already have a licence. There's no way PC ownership and consequential internet access should result in someone having to pay a licence fee - that's completely illogical.

If you were referring to those PC's with TV tuner cards fair enough - but again you're dealing with no choice as opposed to a chioce which isn't fair IMO. You may think it's excellent value - that's your decision, not everyone elses!
 

The latest video from AVForums

SVS Prime Wireless Pro Powered Speakers - Review Coming Soon
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom