Who would like to abolish the BBC Licence fee?

[cupid_stunt]

Best bit of the BBC is the World Service, and that's a govt propaganda arm funded directly by the Foreign Office.

The Foreign Office grant came to an end in 2014, the government did guarantee a continued contribution for a 5-year period, so it's mainly funded from the licence fee, and will be totally from next year.

Part of the fee also contributes to the UK broadband rollout, funding local TV channels and S4C, the Welsh language TV channel, and employing hundreds of 'local democracy reporters' that are basically on secondment to local newspapers & based in their offices.

Only 3% is spent on administration & collection of the licence fee.

 

[cupid_stunt]

I am not sure I can. If C4 wants to promote its own content it has to do that at the expense of not screening a paid for ad in its place. The BBC has none of this opportunity cost when promoting its own wares.

BIB - it doesn't work like that, there are OFCOM limits on the amount of commercial airtime, programme promotions are not included in that amount, they are carried in addition to paid advertising.

 

[hash tag]

I have remembered that when I worked in local authority managed sheltered housing all the qualify tenants paid just £7.50 for a television.
I think the only qualification for this was they had to be over 60 (some sheltered housing you can be 55), regardless of income, benefits, savings Etc.
There must be quite a few people in sheltered housing around the country who benefit from this at great cost to the BEEB.

 

[kabbes]

The main problem I have with the BBC licence fee is that it now looks such bad value. £12.50 a month versus £6 for Netflix or £6.67 for Amazon Prime (year’s subscription paid in one go, which also comes with other benefits. Or as a student it’s only £4 a month). That would be more acceptable if the BBC was of higher quality than the others but it’s not — there’s hardly anything really good on the BBC, whereas the others get loads of incredibly good dramas and films. The BBC spends a lot of money on lowest common denominator generic “entertainment” and I’m not remotely interested in that. Its documentaries are dumbed down to oblivion, its politic shows are risible and almost all its comedy content is predictable and dull. None of that is worth twice as much as its subscription rivals charge.

 

[The39thStep]

I have remembered that when I worked in local authority managed sheltered housing all the qualify tenants paid just £7.50 for a television.
I think the only qualification for this was they had to be over 60 (some sheltered housing you can be 55), regardless of income, benefits, savings Etc.
There must be quite a few people in sheltered housing around the country who benefit from this at great cost to the BEEB.

£1 a week in prison

 

[cupid_stunt]

The main problem I have with the BBC licence fee is that it now looks such bad value. £12.50 a month versus £6 for Netflix or £6.67 for Amazon Prime (year’s subscription paid in one go, which also comes with other benefits.

Agreed. Although it's worth pointing out only just over 50% of the licence is spent on TV, and out of that is the high cost of both the terrestrial transmission network, and satellite carriage, which has to include all the 29 different regional versions of BBC 1 separately, which can't be cheap.



What does your licence fee pay for? - TV Licensing ™

 

[hash tag]

The main problem I have with the BBC licence fee is that it now looks such bad value. £12.50 a month versus £6 for Netflix or £6.67 for Amazon Prime (year’s subscription paid in one go, which also comes with other benefits. Or as a student it’s only £4 a month). That would be more acceptable if the BBC was of higher quality than the others but it’s not — there’s hardly anything really good on the BBC, whereas the others get loads of incredibly good dramas and films. The BBC spends a lot of money on lowest common denominator generic “entertainment” and I’m not remotely interested in that. Its documentaries are dumbed down to oblivion, its politic shows are risible and almost all its comedy content is predictable and dull. None of that is worth twice as much as its subscription rivals charge.

Depends what your bag is of course. There have been some excellent art and history programmes on recently. The Equator from the air has been brilliant, not forgetting stuff like the blue planet.
The 21.00 slot on BBC4 on a Saturday night is usually pretty good for drama's; currently showing Inspector Montalbano, which is fine.
I can't compare to subscription channels as i don't have them. Happy with BEEB.

 

[weltweit]

BIB - it doesn't work like that, there are OFCOM limits on the amount of commercial airtime, programme promotions are not included in that amount, they are carried in addition to paid advertising.

Hi cupid_stunt, I didn't really mean any regulatory requirements, I meant more that there is only a viewer acceptable amount of advertising or promotion content and commercial channels need to screen ads for revenues during that time, while the BBC have all that time for content promotion.

 

[Gromit]

You really are a horrible person. I feel sorry for you.

I don't get your logic caller.

There is a genuine issue of pensioners being lonely and people are proposing that non pensioners subsidising rich pensioner's telly licenses is the solution and I'm the monster?

There you go lonely person sit indoors with your idiot box. We provided an overfunded poor quality channel for you when you can afford better yourself. Don't go outside. We don't want to be reminded of your existence and engage with you.

That's part of your solution is it?

Fuck you nasty piece of work that you are.
I've done more for pensioners than the BBC ever has

 

[hash tag]

Due to many funding cuts, there are many pensioners who live alone, cannot get out anymore and quite often never see anyone from one day to the next. Many have lost daily contact with meals of wheels, with carers, district nurses etc. Many sit at home with nothing but television or radio. I shall not bang on about them paying a lifetime of tax, national insurance etc. The harsh reality is many "live" a very sad, lonely existence. Do I begrudge them access to the one little bit of joy they have, not for a minute.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

The main problem I have with the BBC licence fee is that it now looks such bad value. £12.50 a month versus £6 for Netflix or £6.67 for Amazon Prime (year’s subscription paid in one go, which also comes with other benefits. Or as a student it’s only £4 a month). That would be more acceptable if the BBC was of higher quality than the others but it’s not — there’s hardly anything really good on the BBC, whereas the others get loads of incredibly good dramas and films. The BBC spends a lot of money on lowest common denominator generic “entertainment” and I’m not remotely interested in that. Its documentaries are dumbed down to oblivion, its politic shows are risible and almost all its comedy content is predictable and dull. None of that is worth twice as much as its subscription rivals charge.

Yep basically this. I don't see the risk-taking. This is the organisation that made Scum (chickened out of showing it in the end, but commissioned and paid for it), that made Cathy Come Home.

There is so much scope in austerity Britain for, well, anything. A drama about an ex-squaddie, Afghanistan/Iraq vet, who ends up homeless on the streets of London. Eg. There could be a thousand other stories. A young Asian person gets wrongly accused and ends up with a control order... I don't think the BBC would dare make such a thing now.

 

[hash tag]

Til death us do part was BBC was risky in its day, could not be shown now.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Til death us do part was BBC was risky in its day, could not be shown now.

Oh they've always made a load of crap. But they also used to take chances of a kind I don't really see now. Maybe I've missed them? But giving the modern-day equivalents of Loach, Clarke, Bleasdale, Leigh, Potter, etc space to create. Do they do that?

 

[Gromit]

Due to many funding cuts, there are many pensioners who live alone, cannot get out anymore and quite often never see anyone from one day to the next. Many have lost daily contact with meals of wheels, with carers, district nurses etc. Many sit at home with nothing but television or radio. I shall not bang on about them paying a lifetime of tax, national insurance etc. The harsh reality is many "live" a very sad, lonely existence. Do I begrudge them access to the one little bit of joy they have, not for a minute.

You mean the ones on pension credits? They'll still get it.

 

[hash tag]

I know a few who are not well off who don't know how to claim benefits etc. Which I would have thought they were entitled to. Sometimes, there are too many hoops, hurdles and forms to go through that they just can't be bothered or give up.

 

[mauvais]

The main problem I have with the BBC licence fee is that it now looks such bad value. £12.50 a month versus £6 for Netflix or £6.67 for Amazon Prime (year’s subscription paid in one go, which also comes with other benefits. Or as a student it’s only £4 a month). That would be more acceptable if the BBC was of higher quality than the others but it’s not — there’s hardly anything really good on the BBC, whereas the others get loads of incredibly good dramas and films. The BBC spends a lot of money on lowest common denominator generic “entertainment” and I’m not remotely interested in that. Its documentaries are dumbed down to oblivion, its politic shows are risible and almost all its comedy content is predictable and dull. None of that is worth twice as much as its subscription rivals charge.

This argument is a fine pair of trousers indeed, proudly sported, but you might look pretty silly all the same when the belt holding them up eventually fucks off and is never seen again. That belt is a little thing called Netflix's free cash flow, and how they as a company haemorrhage money to be where they are.

Also Netflix now costs £8 a month.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Netflix also has the advantage of being worldwide. 150 million subscribers, so their overall budget is quite a bit bigger than the BBC's.

But you don't have to have a huge budget necessarily to start taking more risks. What's the worst that can happen? They commission something that's really shit. Well they're doing that already.

 

[Saul Goodman]

This argument is a fine pair of trousers indeed, proudly sported, but you might look pretty silly all the same when the belt holding them up eventually fucks off and is never seen again. That belt is a little thing called Netflix's free cash flow, and how they as a company haemorrhage money to be where they are.

It's hardly the fault of Amazon or Netflix that the BBCs business model is shit.
The BBC should let go of last century, and realise that their days of free money will soon come to an end, and not a minute too soon.

 

[mauvais]

It's hardly the fault of Amazon or Netflix that the BBCs business model is shit.
The BBC should let go of last century, and realise that their days of free money will soon come to an end, and not a minute too soon.

It's not about competition, not on this occasion anyway. The point is that Netflix, in its current form, is not a sustainable endeavour either. Neither are the music streaming services, for that matter. So holding them up as the benchmark is somewhat short termist.

 

[D'wards]

What else, if anything, do over-75s get free?

(That everyone else doesn't, if it wasn't implicit)

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I know a few who are not well off who don't know how to claim benefits etc. Which I would have thought they were entitled to. Sometimes, there are too many hoops, hurdles and forms to go through that they just can't be bothered or give up.

yep. Means-tested benefits always miss a big chunk of the people entitled to them. Always. they're a shite way of doing things - costly to administer and inefficient at getting to the people who need them.

 

[Gromit]

Netflix also has the advantage of being worldwide. 150 million subscribers, so their overall budget is quite a bit bigger than the BBC's.

But you don't have to have a huge budget necessarily to start taking more risks. What's the worst that can happen? They commission something that's really shit. Well they're doing that already.

BBC has the advantage of being Worldwide.
Too Gear has made the Beeb a mint globally.
We paid for that to be made. Where's my share?

 

[Saul Goodman]

It's not about competition, not on this occasion anyway. The point is that Netflix, in its current form, is not a sustainable endeavour either. Neither are the music streaming services, for that matter. So holding them up as the benchmark is somewhat short termist.

What about Amazon Prime? I think it costs me about €7.50/month. I only availed of it for the free priority delivery, and the offers that are only open to Prime members, but it turns out I also get free TV, and free music.

 

[mauvais]

What about Amazon Prime? I think it costs me about €7.50/month. I only availed of it for the free priority delivery, and the offers that are only open to Prime members, but it turns out I also get free TV, and free music.

I have it, I never watch TV on it though, it seemed to be mostly shit. I've no idea if it breaks even. Amazon as a whole famously didn't for decades.

 

[Saul Goodman]

I have it, I never watch TV on it though, it seemed to be mostly shit. I've no idea if it breaks even. Amazon as a whole famously didn't for decades.

It's some of the best TV on TV.

 

[Gromit]

Honestly it cracks me up.
Housing and benefit cuts (that put pensioners into pension poverty) are what people should be getting emotive amount but no. Threaten a well off pensioner's access to Gardening Time though and wow the thread races off.

 

[Puddy_Tat]

I can see arguments both ways, but not convinced that a pensioner on £ 168 a week is "well off"....

 

[littlebabyjesus]

If you want to take more money off rich pensioners, increase the top rate of income tax. Pensions are taxable income.

This is similar to the argument against ending child benefit for higher-tax earners. Universal benefits/allowances are a powerful social good. Take money from the rich in other ways.

 

[xenon]

Wingeing old gammon cunts and irrelevant lefty chin stroking dullards.

 

[kabbes]

This argument is a fine pair of trousers indeed, proudly sported, but you might look pretty silly all the same when the belt holding them up eventually fucks off and is never seen again. That belt is a little thing called Netflix's free cash flow, and how they as a company haemorrhage money to be where they are.

Also Netflix now costs £8 a month.

That’s doesn’t really change the fact that as a consumer, the BBC’s offering comes across as incredibly poor value. If I was offered a choice, it isn’t the BBC I’d be spending my subscription money on.