Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
pinfireman

BBC LICENCE FEE - TOO HIGH!

    Recommended Posts

    If you started paying the TV licence fee in your student days and are now 75, you would – at today’s rates – have paid approximately £7,500 into the BBC’s coffers. After half-a-century of being forced to fund the likes of Gary Lineker’s multi-million pound fees, it seems not unreasonable that your retirement from working should coincide with getting him and all the other overpaid celebrities off your back. That is why the government exempted OAPs from facing jail for non-payment of the BBC’s regressive telly poll tax.

    BBC-FEE-TOO-HIGH.jpg?resize=540%2C429&ssl=1

    The BBC is lobbying hard for the government to pay the licence fees, claiming it is costing them hundreds of millions. This is not really a “cost”, it a loss of revenue. The BBC collects some £3.5 billion from the telly tax and £1.5 billion from commercial revenue. It greedily wants to get a few hundred million more from the over-75s. Here’s a suggestion, cut back on Lineker and the likes’ bloated pay packets and generate some more revenue from iPlayer worldwide.

    If Netflix and Amazon can generate billions worldwide from online streaming, so can the BBC. There is no technological reason the BBC can’t do it. The reason they don’t do it is purely political. If iPlayer was a pay-as-you-go streaming service the rationale for the licence fee, such as it is, would be destroyed.

    The BBC funding model is based on coercion, it is out of date. Netflix’s global success shows just how badly the BBC missed the opportunity to be a global streaming media company with the headstart it had with iPlayer. Now they want to make OAPs or younger taxpayers pay for their commercial mistakes…

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    The licence fee shouldn't exist anymore, every other TV company relies on advertising or subscriptions for its income. The BBC should be the same. Its simple, make decent programs that people want to watch and command decent prices for primetime advertising

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Agree ,grubby greedy troughsnouters ,Chris blooming evans was on 1.5 mil to present a radio show .Linneker and his ilk are overpriced and over opinionated that make a fortune from advertising as well as .Cancel the licence fee and theyl soon trim the fat.

    Do we need 50 reporters at the Olympics and how many at the world cup or tennis ,NO its a biased self serving format for the Guardianistas sink or swim on your own .The BBC bank balance would make interesting viewing imho

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    The license fee should be scrapped and the mobs of uneducated morons who they send out to inspect houses without a fee by claiming someone's reported them is insane....

    In reality like you said, if people paid for Iplayer monthly like Netflix, Amazon or Now TV... You'd soon realise Iplayer wouldn't be worth the money as all of the other streaming sites offer such a better quality of movies and TV shows. 

    I personally don't watch anything on the 'main' channel's as watching old auction programmes or a soap doesn't appeal to me and once you realise you're paying for it, it rubs salt into the wound!

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Non payment of tv licence is not a police matter.If thay call you just close the door don’t talk to them.Remember the detector vans thay were dummies.Google it.

     

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    You get to bloody weather reports with in 10 minutes in the morning get rid of them and all the hangers on 

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Scrapping the fee is long overdue. 

    The sooner we do so the better.

    Strongly urge everyone to stop watching live TV and to stop paying the fee

    1 hour ago, dipper said:

    Remember the detector vans thay were dummies.Google it.

     

    A campaign of fear. Scum

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Bargain. Happy to pay. We should be collecting from pensioners as well.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Right tin hat strapped thoroughly on...

    As a BBC employee I do agree the licence fee is not popular and would be better funded indirectly through taxation like many public service broadcasters over the world. In my experience not many people are rabidly anti BBC but very many are anti licence fee and it's aggressive enforcement so addressing that would be a good start.

    You can't compare Netflix and Amazon to anything except them, they are both chucking money at star talent, way more than any other broadcasters so if you hate some of the money paid to BBC people then these amounts would really make your ears bleed. Sadly both of these broadcasters are also running at an enormous loss which is only sustainable through Amazon's shopping portal propping up Prime, and Netflix having deep pocketed private backers who will at some point want to start making money.

    The importance of a public service broadcaster is massive, unless you only want what Murdoch wants you to know? I am pre-emptively acknowledging the fact that most of the naysayers will say the BBC is biased etc etc but we really do strive for balance.

    The over 75's licence fee is a disgrace, government used to fund it and dropped it onto the BBC to figure out. I don't think you'd find anyone disagreeing it should continue but it real terms it means roughly 1/5 in loss of revenue and I don't know any organisation that could survive that without massive cuts (cue lots of people suggesting where they could save money by sacking Lineker etc)

    I realise I might as well be shouting this into the wind but like most BBC people we really do love working for a world respected broadcaster and don't earn nearly as much as we would in the private sector - think NHS versus private healthcare and you're probably not far off.

    I can't do anything about Packham however - but think how many countryside shows are on the other channels....

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    2 minutes ago, The Mighty Prawn said:

    The importance of a public service broadcaster is massive, unless you only want what Murdoch wants you to know? I am pre-emptively acknowledging the fact that most of the naysayers will say the BBC is biased etc etc but we really do strive for balance.

    Whilst you may strive, whilst the management is made up of rampant snowflake left w(h)ingers the output will sadly remain  strongly biased.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    11 minutes ago, Yellow Bear said:

    Whilst you may strive, whilst the management is made up of rampant snowflake left w(h)ingers the output will sadly remain  strongly biased.

    Totally correct anti,shooting,anti country sports ,anti brexit and totally left wing biased bunch of overpaid fascists .The totally objective organisation has been dead for years ,they have an agenda to push and a gravy train to fuel 

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    29 minutes ago, The Mighty Prawn said:

    Right tin hat strapped thoroughly on...

    As a BBC employee I do agree the licence fee is not popular and would be better funded indirectly through taxation like many public service broadcasters over the world. In my experience not many people are rabidly anti BBC but very many are anti licence fee and it's aggressive enforcement so addressing that would be a good start.

    You can't compare Netflix and Amazon to anything except them, they are both chucking money at star talent, way more than any other broadcasters so if you hate some of the money paid to BBC people then these amounts would really make your ears bleed. Sadly both of these broadcasters are also running at an enormous loss which is only sustainable through Amazon's shopping portal propping up Prime, and Netflix having deep pocketed private backers who will at some point want to start making money.

    The importance of a public service broadcaster is massive, unless you only want what Murdoch wants you to know? I am pre-emptively acknowledging the fact that most of the naysayers will say the BBC is biased etc etc but we really do strive for balance.

    The over 75's licence fee is a disgrace, government used to fund it and dropped it onto the BBC to figure out. I don't think you'd find anyone disagreeing it should continue but it real terms it means roughly 1/5 in loss of revenue and I don't know any organisation that could survive that without massive cuts (cue lots of people suggesting where they could save money by sacking Lineker etc)

    I realise I might as well be shouting this into the wind but like most BBC people we really do love working for a world respected broadcaster and don't earn nearly as much as we would in the private sector - think NHS versus private healthcare and you're probably not far off.

    I can't do anything about Packham however - but think how many countryside shows are on the other channels....

    Good grief man, you are defending the **** poor performance of the "National" Broadcaster by saying if we don't put up with it we will end up with a Murdoch sponsored system!

    Not much of a defence for the rabid snowflakers that turn out a load of carp, sell off most of their assets off so that other stations can show them constantly and couldn't give a truly balanced viewpoint if their very lives depended upon it!

    Close it down, sell it off or make it behave properly!

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    5 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

    Good grief man, you are defending the **** poor performance of the "National" Broadcaster by saying if we don't put up with it we will end up with a Murdoch sponsored system!

    Not much of a defence for the rabid snowflakers that turn out a load of carp, sell off most of their assets off so that other stations can show them constantly and couldn't give a truly balanced viewpoint if their very lives depended upon it!

    Close it down, sell it off or make it behave properly!

    BBC or murdoch? Errr bbc every day of the week, thanks - even with all its faults. 

    Apart from channel 4 news I suspect that bbc is the most balanced overall, and that is despite me I having huge reservations about their independence during the 2014 Scottish independence referendum.

     

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    28 minutes ago, clakk said:

    Totally correct anti,shooting,anti country sports ,anti brexit and totally left wing biased bunch of overpaid fascists .The totally objective organisation has been dead for years ,they have an agenda to push and a gravy train to fuel 

    I don’t want to just argue semantics but you saying left wing fascists is exactly perfect, it is impossible to be both so which is it? Are they left wing or fascists? Is it possible that by trying to hold the middle ground that those to the left of the BBC think it is too right wing and those to the right think it is left wing? Confirmation bias has proven we place more value on things that confirm what we already believe so there is quite possibly more than a shadow of truth in this.

    20 minutes ago, kenholland said:

    repeated repeats there laughing all the way to the bank ripping us off year after year and nobody gives a ####.

    There are nowhere near as many repeats as people think, again confirmation bias in action, my department make over 100 hours of network drama per year much of which gets repeated in other slots to give people an opportunity to watch who missed it first time around - not everyone is catch up service savvy. They got on average one repeat each per year, ie each show is broadcast twice.

    7 minutes ago, hod said:

    BBC or murdoch? Errr bbc every day of the week, thanks - even with all its faults. 

    Apart from channel 4 news I suspect that bbc is the most balanced overall, and that is despite me I having huge reservations about their independence during the 2014 Scottish independence referendum.

     

    I agree, unfortunately it’s a Brexit level of polarisation so despite knowing I will not get anywhere with the naysayers I still feel the need to put my case forwards - it’s my BBC need to provide balance you see... 😜

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    You are attempting to defend the indefensible, they are not up to much and should they have to become self financing and enter the competitive commercial world it would surely run out of steam and shudder to a halt.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Burglars. Don't mind paying a fair price for a fair service but at least **** Turpin did wear a mask!
    The various under talented and overpaid nobs on the TV these days must surely realise that the salaries they are are paid are bloody obscene.
    When the Newsroom is shown, one newscaster and a thousand hangers on in the background.
    Sod em all enough, enough.
     

    Sorry, on this post it should have said 'Richard Turpin' or should it be 'Penis Turpin'?🤔

    Edited by das

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    As I already stated we’re never going to agree but just to mull over the “they are not up to much” in the last 12 or so months, Bodyguard - biggest drama audience in modern times, killing Eve, Dynasties from NHU sells all over the world, Shakespeare and Hathaway the biggest seller at  MIPCOM of all programmes released worldwide by any broadcaster in the last year.

    those are just the first ones that came to mind, but obviously we’re just sitting on our gravy train snorting cocaine

    it isn’t about being self financing, if that happened most risk taking stops and you end up with ITV trying to appeal to mass market for advertising purposes. Without the pressure of commercial operation you can have an NHU, take chances on projects that would not ever make money so wouldn’t get made otherwise - who would back the recolouring of WW1 footage for the amazing “lest we forget” except the BBC?

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    I haven't mentioned anyone's drug habits, you did that.

    So if they (the BBC) are selling so much so well why can they not let the licence fee go?

    I would love to see an unbiased, level headed, fair approach from the National Broadcaster but time travel is only make believe!

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    1 hour ago, oowee said:

    Bargain. Happy to pay. We should be collecting from pensioners as well.

    You do like to stir the pot Grant but don't become a troll 😂

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    They sell so much but still need our money because it’s very expensive. If you have sky you probably pay about fifty quid a month for roughly the same number of tv channels as the BBC which costs about fifteen quid a month. I’m. Sure they’d love to not have to sell things on but the licence fee would go up and that’s not going to be very popular.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites
    2 minutes ago, Lloyd90 said:

    You do like to stir the pot Grant but don't become a troll 😂

    Your too late 😂😂 he's probably got his own bridge.

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    No I don't waste money on Sky and the massive rise in the licence fee you foresee is a non starter!

    Edited by TIGHTCHOKE
    Syntax!

    Share this post


    Link to post
    Share on other sites

    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now
    Sign in to follow this  

    • Recently Browsing   0 members

      No registered users viewing this page.

    ×