Why do I need a TV Licence…… (1 Viewer)

[Ivory55]

I think that they would be better thought of if they used up and coming people, who I am sure could do as equally good job as people like lineaker for a fraction of the cost. If these people think that they would be paid more elsewhere let them go. I think it’s the gravy train part that upsets people.

 

[69473]

Dispite paying for online subscription services, Now tv, netflix etc i would say 95 % of all viewing available to watch is of no interest to me.
As with the BBC, we all have our favourites and our very own perceived rubbish.
Just because we personally dont like something doesn't mean the provider is failing.

 

[Larrynwin]

Dispite paying for online subscription services, Now tv, netflix etc i would say 95 % of all viewing available to watch is of no interest to me.
As with the BBC, we all have our favourites and our very own perceived rubbish.
Just because we personally dont like something doesn't mean the provider is failing.

I don’t see the issue is about the provider failing , the issue is that to watch any live tv provider we have to pay the BBC whether we use their service or not, that imo is extortion.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[DDJC]

I reckon that Netflix, Now, Amazon Prime etc are close to the answer, but they all miss the target.

The problem is that all providers, including the BBC, provide a wide range of programmes for the wide range of people that live in Britain. This means that it is highly likely that they are showing mostly stuff that is of no interest to swathes of the population.

If you find that you have an hour to spare, you could spend it just deciding what to watch - indication that very little has any interest to you. The ability to stream on demand goes some way to address this, but you are still paying for a service. The solution is to only pay for what you want to watch, not the 95% of tut that you have no interest in.

I used to have Sky sports for the footy. Then BT bought some of it. Did the Sky subscription go down? Did it hell. They simply substituted some crappy niche sport (extreme alpine tiddly winks or something) to con everyone that that they still had an offer. I never got BT and cancelled Sky sports and instead get Sky Sports through a Now dongle for a third of the cost.

Problem with that, is that without subscriptions to pay for it, little now content would get made. However, once someone starts a free service, where you can watch, ad-free, anything from any provider, for a charge per programme, they will make a mint.

None of which helps the poor old BBC which is an anachronism, a dinosaur, full of grotesquely overpaid, politically motivated, front and back-office non-entities (more than 80% of their budget for advertising vacancies goes to the Guardian, in case you are wondering why they are so execrably biased). They are commissioners now, making very little content, and very little of what they do make, is quality anymore.

The sooner the BBC is shut down and the licence fee scrapped, the better IMO.

 

[63720]

I'd be happy for it just to be funded directly from general taxation.

This is a joke, no?

 

[63720]

Dispite paying for online subscription services, Now tv, netflix etc i would say 95 % of all viewing available to watch is of no interest to me.
As with the BBC, we all have our favourites and our very own perceived rubbish.
Just because we personally dont like something doesn't mean the provider is failing.

Agreed but you can't opt out of the TV tax.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[62272]

Really, what a load of tripe.

I think they meant part of the ‘unofficial’ government propaganda