• 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.

Should the Government increase the TV licence?

la gran siete

Distinguished Member
Cant remember how much the BBc will be asking for but it seems to me we have been getting BBC tv on the cheap for too long and if we want the return of quality programming we should be prepared tp cough up- £150 to £170 seeems reasonable enough. I would also suggest a voluntary top up for sporting progs for I feel the crown Jewel events should be on the Beeb together with edited highlights of club footy and rugby.Mainsteam programming should concentrate on high quality drama, comedy, documentaries, current affairs and "minority" progs.
 

Razor

Distinguished Member
I only watch eastenders. I think the £120 is a ripp off as it is. :thumbsdow
 

Nick_UK

Banned
The BBC are awash with money. They recently sold their engineering arm off to Siemens for about £2bn, so they're not short of cash at all. However, I would happily pay another £10 a year if they promised to take Eastenders off the screen, and never bring it back :smashin:
 

Razor

Distinguished Member
Nick_UK said:
I would happily pay another £10 a year if they promised to take Eastenders off the screen, and never bring it back :smashin:



'Leave it out Pat' :D
 

mrtbag

Well-known Member
The BBC webiste says:

If the government accepts the BBC's proposal, the licence fee would rise by £3.14 per year from £126.50 to £150.50 by 2013, not allowing for inflation
 
D

Dr Diversity

Guest
I think the government sholud raise the fee - providing they raise standards too. No more repeats during peak viewing. By all means run repeats at night when the recorder can catch it for you. Lets have new programs during the peak times
 

Ian J

Banned
I did once think about paying for my TV Licence with a photocopy of an old cheque to give them "another chance to see it"
 

HMHB

Distinguished Member
Ian J said:
I did once think about paying for my TV Licence with a photocopy of an old cheque to give them "another chance to see it"
:rotfl: Excellent !
 

oxygenuk

Banned
la gran siete said:
Cant remember how much the BBc will be asking for but it seems to me we have been getting BBC tv on the cheap for too long and if we want the return of quality programming we should be prepared tp cough up- £150 to £170 seeems reasonable enough. I would also suggest a voluntary top up for sporting progs for I feel the crown Jewel events should be on the Beeb together with edited highlights of club footy and rugby.Mainsteam programming should concentrate on high quality drama, comedy, documentaries, current affairs and "minority" progs.

:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :nono: :nono: :nono: *curses and swears at u*
 
F

FoxyMulder

Guest
The Border tv region where i live is apparently going to be all digital within 3 years, therefore i propose they encrypt their signal and let those that want it pay for it and those ( like myself ) who don't want it won't pay.

Unfortunately goverment ministers recently proposed that they may at some stage replace the TV tax ( which they cannot justify in the age of digital tv and choice of what you pay for ) with a computer tax as apparently by 2020 we will all have computers and they have to find a way to make us all pay even more tax.

Dunno if the above will ever happen but i do know we all pay far too much tax on everything and its a pity we don't have a powerful lobby group that can defend us all as god knows politicians never listen to us, pay packets go up by a small amount yet electricity and gas go up by over 12% ( again )

In answer to the question - No increase please and indeed lets ditch this unwanted tax.
 

GalacticaActual

Distinguished Member
Why should we be forced to pay the TV licenec if we dont watch the BBC channels. In fact , why should we be forced to pay for it at all. I pay for sky because I want to watch it. If I dont pay, they take it away, I wont get arested or fined. If I refuse to pay for the blooming BBC then I get in trouble with the law. Its a bloody outrage to be forced to pay for something that you may not even watch. I think we are the only country in the world that has a TV tax like this and it should stop right now!
If you want to watch the channel, then fine, pay for it like a subscription channel and pay a preimum every month. If you dont want to watch it then once every thing goes digital you should have the option to not watch it and have it turned off. :(
 

Razor

Distinguished Member
Dave-S said:
Why should we be forced to pay the TV licenec if we dont watch the BBC channels. In fact , why should we be forced to pay for it at all. I pay for sky because I want to watch it. If I dont pay, they take it away, I wont get arested or fined. If I refuse to pay for the blooming BBC then I get in trouble with the law. Its a bloody outrage to be forced to pay for something that you may not even watch. I think we are the only country in the world that has a TV tax like this and it should stop right now!
If you want to watch the channel, then fine, pay for it like a subscription channel and pay a preimum every month. If you dont want to watch it then once every thing goes digital you should have the option to not watch it and have it turned off. :(



I totally agree. Well said Dave :smashin:
 

Nobber22

Well-known Member
Dave-S said:
Why should we be forced to pay the TV licenec if we dont watch the BBC channels. In fact , why should we be forced to pay for it at all. I pay for sky because I want to watch it. If I dont pay, they take it away, I wont get arested or fined. If I refuse to pay for the blooming BBC then I get in trouble with the law. Its a bloody outrage to be forced to pay for something that you may not even watch. I think we are the only country in the world that has a TV tax like this and it should stop right now!
If you want to watch the channel, then fine, pay for it like a subscription channel and pay a preimum every month. If you dont want to watch it then once every thing goes digital you should have the option to not watch it and have it turned off. :(

Make sure you don't listen to any BBC radio channels either Dave. ;)
 
F

FoxyMulder

Guest
If i want radio i have hundreds of channels on AOL and NO dj's talking over the songs and choice is superb, who needs the BBC ? not i thats for sure.
 

Razor

Distinguished Member
I never listen to BBC radio either and as Foxy Mulder says there are hundreds of other stations to choose from.

Anyway I thought the TV license was for the TV and not for the radio. Surely BBC Radio as adverts to support it.
 

oxygenuk

Banned
all bbc has is eastenders.

£120 a year for eastenders and a few comedys from time to time.

theyre as bad as rapists (but for your wallet)
 

mh123

Active Member
Make them self-funding by selling advertising space. Due to a busy lifestyle I rarely watch TV in 'real-time' anymore; instead I Sky+ the *few* interesting progs and zip through them when I get the chance. Including ads :devil:

Personally I've calculated that I watch around 10 hours of BBC programming per month; thats costing me > £1 per hour :mad:

When is someone going to come up with consumption-based pricing for all TV programming? I really resent paying > £1 per hour when (for example) my pikey state-scrounging (sorry, "unemployed") brother probably consumes an average of about 15 hours PER DAY for the same cost. Now if only petrol was priced that way...
 

Tom Tom

Well-known Member
I think that the BBC struggles to make the quality now because of choice. With so many programmes and channels and people give the choice to buy the sport and movies, the cost to buy the rights to them are now stupid. Its a self perpetuating system, By charging people £X to watch the sport then people who arent making £3bn a year in revenue for sport cant afford to buy it.

The BBC has Governmental rights to the FA Cup. No one can buy that.

I think the idea of subscription TV is OK if you can subscribe to channels not packages.

I am with NTL but there are 2 packages. The family (cheap) that I have and the Full one, however there are a few channels that I dont use now but some I would like to have. I cant mix and match.

Also the cost. It does seem a touch expensive when 80% digital channels are running repeats and old shows.

At least the BBC has some new stuff (but yes a lot of repeats)
The channel I watch the most is Sky1 BBC1 ITV and Ch5
Each has a range of programmes I watch.

Maybe you could be charged for actual usage.

Set up a pay as you go. It would mean people wouldn't waste energy leaving the TV on and going out the room.

You have access to all the channels but if you dont watch the sports you are not charged, but if you wanted to watch a match you are only charged for that one match.
 

Gary D

Distinguished Member
if you stabnd here long enough - enough members with 1000's of pounds worth of dvd and HC equipment will start moaning about the TV licence fee.

less than 40p per day!!! christ you cant buy a paper for that!! If you cant afford less than 40p per day - they we'll organise a whip round.

there is NO one here that lives in the uk that has NOTHING to do with the BBC. the website the radio the TV etc etc etc.

they still provide the only TV channels that mean your kids WONT be bombarded with ads for cheap unhealthy food or expensive toys every 5 minutes. and thet still provide news coverage that is better than ANYTHING i've seen in other countries.

and what the BBC's HD channels - they will be free to air as well unlike any other HD service anywhere in the world.

RANT OFF/ (until the next "i cant afford 40p a day thread down with the BBC" thread.)


Gary
 

mjn

Distinguished Member
Trolling again?....the licence fee is from the time of the dinosaurs...It's like somebody shoving magazines through my letterbox, then expecting me to pay, even if i don't want them.

But if i don't want the magazines, thats fine, but i can't have a letterbox either!
 

Gary D

Distinguished Member
Taken from another time this old turkey came up

Try buying this for less than 40p per day:

alfablue said:
The BBC

* has 8 TV channels

* has BBC interactive channels (so you can choose which Wimbledon tennis match you watch, or which snooker game you watch, for example).

* has BBC online - the largest and most successful website in the UK (and I think, maybe the World - will check on that),

* has 11 radio channels

* has a comprehensive network of local radio stations covering the entire UK

* has the largest network of news journalists, on-site, throughout the world

* has a 24 hour news service

* broadcasts live and recorded debates from Parliament, on BBC Parliament

* has an internationally acclaimed BBC World TV service

* is a major provider of English and foreign language radio broadcasting throughout the world

* has educational broadcasting for schools and universities free, throughout the night;

* is a major producer of TV worldwide....(one could cite many examples, but in Australia, for example, where public service TV is funded through advertising, their best shows are BBC imports - ask your average Australian!)

You can't do all (or much at all) of the above based on advertising revenue. If there were more places to advertise the total revenue may possibly increase slightly, but would be spread even more thinly, hurting all broadcasters.

Plus advertising is entirely dependent on ratings. Dependency on ratings means all but the most popular (and consequently lightweight, dumbed down) programmes won't go to air. Hence the BBC could offer little more than is currently on BBC1.

Now,

you may not have a minority music or cultural interest
you may not be from an ethnic minority
you may not need schools programmes or be studying at the OU
you may not care if your news provider has a reporter in the field
you may not listen to radio, or be interested in local issues
you may not be a resident in a country with an oppressive regime that controls all media and news output, and where the BBC World Service represents the only window to the world you are likely to have

you may not give a :censored: about anyone but yourself....

BUT.... that does not mean these things are not valuable to others.

Nor does it mean that society as a whole cannot benefit by having these needs met, even if a given individual doesn't benefit personally.

If we choose to fund the service through advertising or subscription, we will do away with everything other than what the majority want. In a fair society we should want to respond to significant minority interests as well as the needs of the majority.

Channel 4:

It IS good, for what it does, I like it very much BUT it is (and it's costs are) hardly comparable. It is a mere fraction of the size of the BBC's operation. It does not have ANY obligation to provide loss-making / non-revenue generating output at all. Neither does it have any obligation to provide output for minority interests.

Evidence of C4's struggle with the business model came with the sad demise of Channel 4 films, which did produce some excellent British films, but the economics do not allow C4 to be any bigger or better than it is. In my opinion it puts out about 3 hours per day of potentially quality programming. A lot of the remainder is cheap, cheerful (and sometimes entertaining - we can all enjoy a bit of titillation) dross. Thats fine, for what it is.

The free market philosophy of the eighties (if it doesn't make profit for shareholders, it dies) is now largely discredited, we lost a great deal through the excesses and greed that went with this. Fortunately we are now (generally) more mature about such dogma, and realise that public service, along side free enterprise, is valid and needed in a well balanced society.
 

Jenn

Distinguished Member
The BBC yearly budget (from the licence) is currently £3 billion and they want to increase it.

NASA's 2005 budget was about £9 billion.

So unless the BBC is planning on presenting some TV shows live from the moon I fail to see how they can ask for more than a third of NASA's budget !
 

richjthorpe

Active Member
Hopefully, if the rise goes in to place, they will look at getting in good equipment for the FTA Hi Def service. Personally, I'd be fine with paying the fee. I watch a fair few BBC programmes including Top Gear and Spooks, the wife watches Casualty and the like. I listen to Radio 1 most of the time if I'm listening to the radio. I use the BBC website for general music, news and weather reports. I use interactive when Wimbledon is on and play the Spooks Interactive game too. I'm happy with the variety of the service they provide, I just ask if they can up the signal quality on freeview !

The idea that they charge for sports is an interesting one. I am a firm believer that the sport should be on the terestrial channels and absolutely dispise $ky for monopolising the sports, it's disgraceful. But the only way that sports can get back on the BBC, ITV or C4 is to get more money in. I would pay an extra 20-30 quid if it meant more sport on the Beeb.

Richie.
 

GalacticaActual

Distinguished Member
Nobber22 said:
Make sure you don't listen to any BBC radio channels either Dave. ;)


Strangly enough mate I dont listen to any BBC radio. Essex FM for me at work :D

Cds only in the car at at home. In fact I dont even get a reception on the radio in my house, probably becasue I have not rigged up the ariel in the back of the reciver :D
 

The latest video from AVForums

Guardians of the Galaxy Xmas Special, Strange World, Bones and All, and Cabinet of Dr Caligari in 4K
Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Full fat HDMI teeshirts

Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom