Quantcast

NEWS: BBC licence fee to be scrapped?

Goooner

Distinguished Member
What does it matter where they are? Good programmes are good programmes.

If you aren’t paying a license fee you could afford a year of Netflix and Prime for instance.

Years ago, the BBC would be producing stuff of the quality of The Crown, now it’s on Netflix.
 

BrightonChris

Distinguished Member
All these 'quality programmes' the BBC supposedly make would still be made, or would still have been made regardless of the BBC's existence. Mostly they just licensed the rights from production companies anyway. The only argument that makes any sense, although one I strongly disagree with, is their 'neutral' news coverage that would be impaired by commercial oversight.
 

invisiblekid

Distinguished Member
Like Goooner said, you can opt out in principle but the reality is you can't. Let's say I want to watch rugby on Sky Sports and never view a BBC channel - I could get a criminal record for that. That's is grossly unjust and unfair.

Why not make the licence fee a subscription like Netflix or make it optional - if the BBC is so wonderful and all then I'm sure they'll have no shortage of subscribers. But I don't believe that would be the case and I think you know that too which is why you don't want things to change.

You're telling me Gary Lineker is worth almost £2m a year? Are you honestly telling me that? You could find a bloke in just about any pub who could do his job for 1/10th the cost. This is the sort of nonsense people are fed up of. It's no longer justifiable.

You need to accept the fact the licence fee's day's are numbered.
NOt being able to watch LIVE TV without a licence is dumb yes.

Regards to ITV, Lineker is paid a fair wage. By that I mean he'd very likely be paid more on ITV. Are we paying for him if that were the case, not directly, but at some point, skipping commercials, ad free streaming is going to cause some big disturbances down the line.
 

Goooner

Distinguished Member
Well duh, of course you can but they are still made by the BBC!
Well duh, of course you can, but you’d still be able to do so if they were made elsewhere.

Line of Duty is made by World Productions, for the BBC, they could as easily make it for any other broadcaster.
 
One of our last remaining crown jewels being sold off by the tories. We will simply get 24/7 reality crap and US imports. Where are the quality British shows going to come from??

Surely even the tories can see this would be a massive downgrade for the country on a whole as millions of people depend on the BBC to some extent?? Unless they want to make us the 51st State.
Netflix, Amazon, HBO etc. What great British shows is the BBC producing? Seriously, I'm 28 and haven't watched the BBC in years, there's nothing worth watching except the six nations.
 

Goooner

Distinguished Member
NOt being able to watch LIVE TV without a licence is dumb yes.

Regards to ITV, Lineker is paid a fair wage. By that I mean he'd very likely be paid more on ITV. Are we paying for him if that were the case, not directly, but at some point, skipping commercials, ad free streaming is going to cause some big disturbances down the line.
People have been able to skip commercials for 20 years, it doesn’t seem to have had any effect as yet.

What ITV would pay Lineker is entirely a matter for them and their shareholders.
 

invisiblekid

Distinguished Member
Netflix, Amazon, HBO etc. What great British shows is the BBC producing? Seriously, I'm 28 and haven't watched the BBC in years, there's nothing worth watching except the six nations.
House of Games. It's the only quiz show I can answer the questions.
 

invisiblekid

Distinguished Member
People have been able to skip commercials for 20 years, it doesn’t seem to have had any effect as yet.

What ITV would pay Lineker is entirely a matter for them and their shareholders.
And the BBC's "shareholder" is Government.
 

BrightonChris

Distinguished Member
Probably worth remembering that part of the reason these celebs are paid so much is that the BBC got involved in bidding wars, inflating the market, about 15 years ago when they were obsessed with chasing viewing figures against their remit.
 

Goooner

Distinguished Member
And the shareholders of the BBC are no longer happy, hence announcing they’re thinking of scrapping the license fee.
 
And NHS consultants get paid a lot, also public funded. How disgusting.
Councillors and politicians get paid loads, also public funded.
What a shocking country we live in.
Let's just get random people from the public to present shows and see how good they are.
Might as well use the same idea for doctors.
To be fair politicians are poor no matter what they're paid.
Complete straw man argument. NHS consultants are well paid because they are highly trained professional medical personal that go through years and years of expensive training and have huge amounts of responsibility on their shoulders.
Gary Lineker is none of those things. He has played football, that's it. He doesn't have decades of experience saving lives, he doesn't take the responsibility of someones life in their hands on a daily basis, he doesn't provide anything of value whatsoever. This is such a lazy and poorly drawn straw man a child could poke holes in it.

The top paid consultants in the NHS are perhaps on £200-£400k a year, an actual reasonable amount with all things considered. You have people like Gary Lineker who comes on a TV show, does a bit of talking and gets almost £2m a year. No one is saying doctors are over paid, but BBC 'stars' absolutely are. Let them quit and go to the private sector, no one will miss them.
 
Way overdue. In my experience what annoys people the most is that the BBC seem to have a bizarre assumption that the masses can't exist without television. They have stood still for so long that they really are going backwards.

It's always been very simple to me. If you watch television then pay for a licence. If you don't watch television then don't pay for a licence. Nobody can force you to.

If you go fishing and get caught without a rod licence, you are breaking the law and should face the consequences. If you drive a motor vehicle with no licence and get caught then you should expect to face consequences. If you watch television without a licence, ditto.

If you don't drive a car, go fishing or watch television then your conscience is clear, sit back , relax, grab a decent book, put on a blue ray or dvd or the radio and enjoy.
The issue is what if I want to watch live TV such as Sky Sports? Why should I pay for my TV license if I do not watch the BBC in anyway shape or form?
 

nylonsyorks

Active Member
Well, because its the law Scolanator and assuming you wish to be deemed a law abiding citizen then its only responsible to abide by it.
 
NOt being able to watch LIVE TV without a licence is dumb yes.

Regards to ITV, Lineker is paid a fair wage. By that I mean he'd very likely be paid more on ITV. Are we paying for him if that were the case, not directly, but at some point, skipping commercials, ad free streaming is going to cause some big disturbances down the line.
Let him go to ITV and give everyone a cheaper licence fee then. I guarantee you no one in the country watches MoTD because of Gary Lineker, he's just the talking head that presents it. You could replace him with any knowledgable football fan. I don't even watch football myself I just cannot stand this argument that the BBC needs to pay him that much because ITV would? Completely ignoring the point that no one cares about Gary Lineker, he's overpaid and the BBC cannot justify this sort of thing any longer. Hence why they are going to have to say goodbye to the licence fee.
 

nylonsyorks

Active Member
Good luck with your hopes Scolanator.
 

paulst10

Distinguished Member
If you go fishing and get caught without a rod licence, you are breaking the law and should face the consequences. If you drive a motor vehicle with no licence and get caught then you should expect to face consequences. If you watch television without a licence, ditto.
I don't see that argument being remotely relevant as you pay a licence fee for the BBC channels alone amongst the hundreds of other non fee channels.

That's like saying you all need a fishing licence to fish in a few lakes in the entire UK regardless of whether you use those lakes, or a driving licence to drive on a few select roads in the UK whether you use them or not.. :rolleyes:
 

nylonsyorks

Active Member
Well, no, you are wrong there Paulst10, in fact you couldn't be more wrong. The TV Licencing rules and regs changed a while since. The licence stipulates if 'watch any live TV Channels', or iplayer or by any method of live viewing of any channels.

Have a look at the TV Licencing site, it's worth a look to actually see how they are doing their little best to hang on to what they haven't had for years.
 

nylonsyorks

Active Member
The fishing rod comparison was one of simply pointing out the obvious. If you don't use something that requires a licence, then you don't need a licence.

I actually think that regardless of where a person fishes they require a rod licence, a rod licence doesn't entitle an angler fishing rights to fish anywhere, that's a very separate thing, I think, but that's going off subject matter
 

paulst10

Distinguished Member
Well, no, you are wrong there Paulst10, in fact you couldn't be more wrong. The TV Licencing rules and regs changed a while since. The licence stipulates if 'watch any live TV Channels', or iplayer or by any method of live viewing of any channels.

Have a look at the TV Licencing site, it's worth a look to actually see how they are doing their little best to hang on to what they haven't had for years.
Yeh, interesting. Either way it's a rip off, can't wait till they scrap it :)
 

nylonsyorks

Active Member
Yeh, interesting. Either way it's a rip off, can't wait till they scrap it :)
Total rip off. It should be on a subscription basis like everything else, sky, prime, virgin, BT, Netflix etc etc. If people want it, then they pay for it, if they don't pay for it, don't provide the service, its that simple
 
Well, no, you are wrong there Paulst10, in fact you couldn't be more wrong. The TV Licencing rules and regs changed a while since. The licence stipulates if 'watch any live TV Channels', or iplayer or by any method of live viewing of any channels.

Have a look at the TV Licencing site, it's worth a look to actually see how they are doing their little best to hang on to what they haven't had for years.
This is my whole issue. Why am I forced to pay for the licence fee under threat of criminal prosecution if I want to watch privately paid for and broadcasted channels that are not the BBC?

Scrap this requirement and I'm absolutely fine. But then I imagine you will have people cancelling their licence fee in even bigger numbers than they already are resulting in pretty much the end of the BBC as we know it.

EDIT:
I see this the same as if I was forced to pay for a Netflix subscription under threat of criminal prosecution if all I wanted to do is watch the BBC. It sounds bizarre right? Well this is the current state of the BBC licence fee and it's completely unfair.
 

nylonsyorks

Active Member
This is my whole issue. Why am I forced to pay for the licence fee under threat of criminal prosecution if I want to watch privately paid for and broadcasted channels that are not the BBC?

Scrap this requirement and I'm absolutely fine. But then I imagine you will have people cancelling their licence fee in even bigger numbers than they already are resulting in pretty much the end of the BBC as we know it.
Because like I said Scolanator, whether its right or wrong, its the law presently.

Correct in what you say. The BBC are frightened to offer their services as a subscription option as they are all too aware they would sink overnight.

I hate to say it and no offence intended, but if you think a conservative government has some sort of integrity then you are going to be heavily disappointed regarding the BBC, they all pee in the same pot.
 

LexDiamond

Active Member
Not surprised at all. Right now BBC have the monopoly - pay us or you can only watch tv in a restricted way. However, BBC don’t really provide much decent entertainment. That coupled with the fact that the news and current affairs coverage is also embarrassing. The Brexit coverage was so unimaginative and they never really covered anything of substance and instead decided to try and be popular by promoting a left wing project fear agenda. Then it was almost radio silence once the election results were out.

The days of saying ‘us or adverts’ are long over. Advert free tv is available for less than the price of a tv licence and I suspect people will no longer stand for being forced to pay for a bundle of channels they feel don’t offer much value.
 

Similar threads

Trending threads

Latest News

Philips 800 Series OLED TVs come to UK in July
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
AVForums Podcast: 31st May 2020
  • By Phil Hinton
  • Published
MQA expands global partnerships for high end experience
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Samsung 2020 TV app lineup upgraded
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Film festivals move online: We Are One starts 29th May
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Top Bottom