[T*]

Originally Posted by 08marsh

It's not the amount, it's the ratings.

The BBC can make a lot of shows/content because they have a fixed amount of money. Their funding is at the mercy of demographics and viewing figures for popular shows with advertisers.

BBC 4 holds a lot of great programming/documentaries that wouldn't be made without the license fee. We'd end up with something more akin to itv 2's schedule.

That's actually a really good point.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

The Saville thing screwed them I think tbh. A few people I know (mostly older people aswell who have paid it for years) are now refusing to pay because 'the BBC uses their money to cover up pedophilia' and such Probably worried about loads and loads of people ending up with criminal records now.

Also, IMO the BBC are ****ing rubbish anyway. I actually cant think of one thing I watch on there yet am still expected to pay for it to have no ads Just put ****ing adverts on..god, from what I remember they have loads of ads on anyway, just advertising other shows on their channel rather than stuff to buy.

That's not really the point though. It's not to avoid actual advert time between shows, but the programming being reliant on advertisers.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by 08marsh

That's not really the point though. It's not to avoid actual advert time between shows, but the programming being reliant on advertisers.

Well as someone who doesnt even watch the BBC, I would much rather they put ads on than me having to pay for a channel I never bloody watch

If that makes me selfish and petty, so be it, I dont care. Its like asking teetotallers to pay alcohol tax on their cokes on a night out

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Well as someone who doesnt even watch the BBC, I would much rather they put ads on than me having to pay for a channel I never bloody watch

******* the rest of us.

I'll take the BBC anyway over itv. That's what I wouldn't like to see them turn into.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by 08marsh

******* the rest of us.

Indeed. Isn't that how the general thinking of the UK population goes...look out for yourself?

[Vicky.]

I *think* the only thing I watch on itv is saturday night takeaway every now and again. And thats only because I am seriously bored

[Vicky.]

If people are so concerned about bbc4 and the likes, why not make paying it an opt in service, and increase it. That way the people who want it are happy and keep their channel, and the people who have never watched anything on it arent pissed off

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

If people are so concerned about bbc4 and the likes, why not make paying it an opt in service, and increase it. That way the people who want it are happy and keep their channel, and the people who have never watched anything on it arent pissed off

Well, it's an option but I don't know about its chances of working.

That's probably the sort of "compromise" they'll move into in the future.

[Kate!]

[King Gizzard]

It's a necessary annoyance I think, nearly everyone will pull out if they hear about it lets face it, then BBC won't get their funding then we'll have gigantic ads everywhere

[joeysteele]

The BBC used to be great leaders in most news and entertainment areas, the licence likely made sense when it held at least 50% of the viewing channels available.
Now with so many commercial channels available it is ridiculous that people have to pay a licence for the BBC, to watch TV generally in their own homes on a TV they have had to buy too.

The really great and 'exclusive' days of the BBC are well gone.
It is time, and in fact massively overdue, that this daft licence fee is done away with completely and the other great things is that would get rid of totally the rotten sarcastic staff at TV Licensing too.

[Kizzy]

Then they can privatise it....

[Livia]

If you disabled all the BBC channels on your TV and radio, you'd still be required to pay the licence fee. And when you work out the licence fee week by week, it's not very much at all. Compared, say, to the money people pay for Sky every month. I do feel a bit aggrieved that some people seem quite proud of breaking the law and not paying it, so that those who don't pay end up getting a free ride of the backs of those of us who do. You're welcome. I hope they take your telly away.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Livia

If you disabled all the BBC channels on your TV and radio, you'd still be required to pay the licence fee. And when you work out the licence fee week by week, it's not very much at all. Compared, say, to the money people pay for Sky every month. I do feel a bit aggrieved that some people seem quite proud of breaking the law and not paying it, so that those who don't pay end up getting a free ride of the backs of those of us who do. You're welcome. I hope they take your telly away.

true.

Just read an article on this, what the people lobbying for this want the Beeb to do is collect payment via subscription so if you don't pay then it would be turned off, fair enough I think.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Cherie

true.

Just read an article on this, what the people lobbying for this want the Beeb to do is collect payment via subscription so if you don't pay then it would be turned off, fair enough I think.

Sounds perfect to me tbh

[Vicky.]

Its quite a lot to those who dont have much. If you dont pay it in one go, it works out something like £7 per week(as they make you pay 2 years or something I think, its definitely around 7 per week as my sis used to have problems with it)..which doesnt sound like much but when you figure to some people thats like..1/10 of their income or more

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Its quite a lot to those who dont have much. If you dont pay it in one go, it works out something like £7 per week(as they make you pay 2 years or something I think, its definitely around 7 per week as my sis used to have problems with it)..which doesnt sound like much but when you figure to some people thats like..1/10 of their income or more

I pay by DD its 12.00 a month! with one payment being a bit more! and no they don't make you pay for two years.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Cherie

I pay by DD its 12.00 a month! with one payment being a bit more! and no they don't make you pay for two years.

When my sister did it weekly, she got a payment card and was told it was £7 ish per week because you pay this years and the next years too

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Its quite a lot to those who dont have much. If you dont pay it in one go, it works out something like £7 per week(as they make you pay 2 years or something I think, its definitely around 7 per week as my sis used to have problems with it)..which doesnt sound like much but when you figure to some people thats like..1/10 of their income or more

When you work out that it's the main entertainment of many people, especially those with not much money, it's cheap. And if you can afford a telly you can afford a licence. It's like driving a car and saying, I've bought a car, but I don't have much money so I won't bother taxing it.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Livia

When you work out that it's the main entertainment of many people, especially those with not much money, it's cheap. And if you can afford a telly you can afford a licence. It's like driving a car and saying, I've bought a car, but I don't have much money so I won't bother taxing it.

Except that the two aren't really comparable; road tax is more like "road rent" as it pays for the upkeep of the roads and highways which, if you run a car, you will almost certainly be using. In fact if you're not - if you're only using your car on private land - then you DON'T need a tax disk.

The TV license is more akin to being forced to pay a £1 "milk tax" every time you go to the supermarket, whether you drink milk or not, so that everyone else can take their 2L milk bottle for free, because "most people drink milk".

I'm also unsire about your suggestion that "if you can afford a telly you can afford a license" - I could go on my local freecycling group right now and pick up 10 CRT televisions tomorrow for precisely £0.

The only people who should be paying for the BBC are the people who use the BBC and / or its broadcasting equipment. Period. If people don't want to pay a subscription charge for it - which should REALLY be less than £12 a month anyway - then there's no demand for the service and it simply shouldn't exist. And before people start bawling about Doctor Who - the intellectual rights to a show that successful would be snapped up by another network faster than you can say "fire-sale". The same goes for all successful BBC properties.

It's an outdated model. Broadcast television in general is on the way out in favour of on-demand services, and quite rightly. They're better. If the BBC was to switch to being an entirely on-demand, internet based service like Netflix tomorrow and charge a subscription fee, they would still make an absolute fortune.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Except that the two aren't really comparable; road tax is more like "road rent" as it pays for the upkeep of the roads and highways which, if you run a car, you will almost certainly be using. In fact if you're not - if you're only using your car on private land - then you DON'T need a tax disk.

The TV license is more akin to being forced to pay a £1 "milk tax" every time you go to the supermarket, whether you drink milk or not, so that everyone else can take their 2L milk bottle for free, because "most people drink milk".

I'm also unsire about your suggestion that "if you can afford a telly you can afford a license" - I could go on my local freecycling group right now and pick up 10 CRT televisions tomorrow for precisely £0.

Yup..said it better than I could have tbh.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Except that the two aren't really comparable; road tax is more like "road rent" as it pays for the upkeep of the roads and highways which, if you run a car, you will almost certainly be using. In fact if you're not - if you're only using your car on private land - then you DON'T need a tax disk.

The TV license is more akin to being forced to pay a £1 "milk tax" every time you go to the supermarket, whether you drink milk or not, so that everyone else can take their 2L milk bottle for free, because "most people drink milk".

I'm also unsire about your suggestion that "if you can afford a telly you can afford a license" - I could go on my local freecycling group right now and pick up 10 CRT televisions tomorrow for precisely £0.

The only people who should be paying for the BBC are the people who use the BBC and / or its broadcasting equipment. Period. If people don't want to pay a subscription charge for it - which should REALLY be less than £12 a month anyway - then there's no demand for the service and it simply shouldn't exist. And before people start bawling about Doctor Who - the intellectual rights to a show that successful would be snapped up by another network faster than you can say "fire-sale". The same goes for all successful BBC properties.

It's an outdated model. Broadcast television in general is on the way out in favour of on-demand services, and quite rightly. They're better. If the BBC was to switch to being an entirely on-demand, internet based service like Netflix tomorrow and charge a subscription fee, they would still make an absolute fortune.

I stand by my analogy. And yes, I understand if you drive your car on private land you don't need it to be taxed, but frankly that's got nothing to do with anything. Part of my Council Tax goes to street lighting and pavement upkeep. There are no street lights nor pavements where I live, but I still have to pay that part of the charge.

You currently have to have a licence if you watch the telly. That's the bottom line, despite your claim it's an outdated model. You can go and buy a cheap telly... but the fact is you will need a licence to watch it, like you need a your car taxed to drive it on the highway. Whichever way you spin it, if you watch the telly you must have a licence or you're breaking the law. I pay my licence and I resent people feeling like they should be entitled to get it for free.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Livia

I stand by my analogy. And yes, I understand if you drive your car on private land you don't need it to be taxed, but frankly that's got nothing to do with anything. Part of my Council Tax goes to street lighting and pavement upkeep. There are no street lights nor pavements where I live, but I still have to pay that part of the charge.

You currently have to have a licence if you watch the telly. That's the bottom line, despite your claim it's an outdated model. You can go and buy a cheap telly... but the fact is you will need a licence to watch it, like you need a your car taxed to drive it on the highway. Whichever way you spin it, if you watch the telly you must have a licence or you're breaking the law. I pay my licence and I resent people feeling like they should be entitled to get it for free.

I have heard of no streetlights (we have them but they are never on :/ ) but never no pavements

Do you live way out in the countryside or something where its all dirt paths and such? If so I sooo envy you

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Except that the two aren't really comparable; road tax is more like "road rent" as it pays for the upkeep of the roads and highways which, if you run a car, you will almost certainly be using. In fact if you're not - if you're only using your car on private land - then you DON'T need a tax disk.

The TV license is more akin to being forced to pay a £1 "milk tax" every time you go to the supermarket, whether you drink milk or not, so that everyone else can take their 2L milk bottle for free, because "most people drink milk".

I'm also unsire about your suggestion that "if you can afford a telly you can afford a license" - I could go on my local freecycling group right now and pick up 10 CRT televisions tomorrow for precisely £0.

The only people who should be paying for the BBC are the people who use the BBC and / or its broadcasting equipment. Period. If people don't want to pay a subscription charge for it - which should REALLY be less than £12 a month anyway - then there's no demand for the service and it simply shouldn't exist. And before people start bawling about Doctor Who - the intellectual rights to a show that successful would be snapped up by another network faster than you can say "fire-sale". The same goes for all successful BBC properties.

It's an outdated model. Broadcast television in general is on the way out in favour of on-demand services, and quite rightly. They're better. If the BBC was to switch to being an entirely on-demand, internet based service like Netflix tomorrow and charge a subscription fee, they would still make an absolute fortune.

Good post Toy Soldier, valid points, I, when I updated my TV, handed on my previous one to someone who needed a new one,I would guess a lot of families do that too.
Then as you say you can pick up TV's quite cheaply too anyway.

I would be quite happy for the BBC to go subscription,then people have the choice to sign up or not.
However,I still think it ridiculous in the 21st century to have to have a licence to watch a TV in your own home.
I don't even consider the TV as a luxury, for me it is an essential item and politicians would be well lost if they didn't have the TV media to communicate to the electorate with too.

My real pet hate however is TV Licensing, the people who work there are some of the most awful people you could come across.
Time they were well and truly closed down and got rid of.

[Vicky.]

£5.60 per week it is for a colour license to pay weekly sorry..was sure it was 7 quid but cose enough