TV licence fee cash guarantees house prices of relocated BBC staff

chris_spackman

Sir_Humphrey wrote: »

I donlt care who the money goes to provided it offers value for money. If the government can provide the service better for less (in a mixed economy) which is the case in TV and was with British Rail then honestly, I couldn't care less about the nominal choices involved. Right Libertarians ought to be more concerned about genuine liberty then the right to be ripped off by private sector oligarchs.

Sorry was not meant to 'thanks'

Give me some reasons why we should pay a tax to watch the TV and why we should not have the choice to fund a broadcaster.

chris_spackman

Generali wrote: »

I still don't see what is better about having a broadcasting service being paid for by taxation. It's expensive and denies people free choice as they have to pay for it if they want to watch any TV at all, regardless of whether or not they benefit.

You haven't made any sort of case at all for the BBC. You keep on about British Rail instead and whether or not the licence fee is a tax which it clearly is (or is very close to being).

It is a tax. Well documented as a tax

Sir_Humphrey

Generali wrote: »

I still don't see what is better about having a broadcasting service being paid for by taxation. It's expensive and denies people free choice as they have to pay for it if they want to watch any TV at all, regardless of whether or not they benefit. You haven't made any sort of case at all for the BBC. You keep on about British Rail instead and whether or not the licence fee is a tax which it clearly is (or is very close to being).

I have illustrated the example of an ex-public broadcaster that was privatised (TF1) that has had a major decline in quality, as a comparator. In many areas, the BBC leads. The BBC rejuvenated Saturday night TV with Doctor Who, leaving ITV to lamely copy-cat it with programmes like Primeval. The BBC licence fee funds Freeview, after the private sector calamity of ITV Digital. At a time when the advertising-paid TV business model is collapsing, it provides competition to Sky TV. Public Service TV news (Channel 4 news is the only better quality service but is less comprehensive). Arts programming on BBC2 and BBC4. World beating wildlife documentaries. The BBC wipes the floor with ITV and Sky with comedy. The list of top quality BBC shows over the years (we all know the ones). We see about the top 1% of US shows in this country, which includes pap like Joey. How bad must the other 99% be?

chris_spackman

Sir_Humphrey wrote: »

I have illustrated the example of an ex-public broadcaster that was privatised (TF1) that has had a major decline in quality, as a comparator. In many areas, the BBC leads. The BBC rejuvenated Saturday night TV with Doctor Who, leaving ITV to lamely copy-cat it with programmes like Primeval. The BBC licence fee funds Freeview, after the private sector calamity of ITV Digital. At a time when the advertising-paid TV business model is collapsing, it provides competition to Sky TV. Public Service TV news (Channel 4 news is the only better quality service but is less comprehensive). Arts programming on BBC2 and BBC4. World beating wildlife documentaries. The BBC wipes the floor with ITV and Sky with comedy. The list of top quality BBC shows over the years (we all know the ones). We see about the top 1% of US shows in this country, which includes pap like Joey. How bad must the other 99% be?

What comedy shows do they put on BBC? Yes they had some very good ones such as Only Fools, Fawlty Towers etc but now it's utter crap. Art programming is fine IF you want to watch them. How the hell the BBC provides competition to Sky or Virgin is beyond me. Sky or Virgin give you the choice to watch Discovery, History, National Geographic, films, music, drama...everything you could ever want to watch and lots of it are UK ones. . I to think Joey is pap and like me i bet you choose not to watch it or you make the CHOICE to subscribe and watch Sky or Virgin.With Virgin or Sky you make a CHOICE to watch or subscribe. The BBC can not put on a whole day of wildlife shows. It has to throw in the mix utter !!!! like Eastenders, Bargin Hunt, To Buy or not to buy and the BBC does not produce most of it's listings they are produced and sold to the BBC.

You can not say that your above post is a genuine reason for me or other people to be forced to fund the BBC and it sure as hell does not justify why Ross should be paid £16k a day and radio presenters nearly £200k per year.

mymatebob

I do think the licence fee will go - eventually - or be used to help fund Ch4/public service broadcasting in some way.

As for choice - Mr Murdoch doesn't really provide much of it.

I can only buy "packages" of channels, not the programmes I want.

I get channels that I never ever watch, I wonder how much I am subsiding them by?

As for comedy - Gavin And Stacey, Not Going Out, Count Arthur Strong, Genius, The News Quiz, QI and Live at The Apollo to name but a few of the BBC TV and Radio comedy output.

chris_spackman

mymatebob wrote: »

I do think the licence fee will go - eventually - or be used to help fund Ch4/public service broadcasting in some way.

As for choice - Mr Murdoch doesn't really provide much of it.

I can only buy "packages" of channels, not the programmes I want.

I get channels that I never ever watch, I wonder how much I am subsiding them by?

As for comedy - Gavin And Stacey, Not Going Out, Count Arthur Strong, Genius, The News Quiz, QI and Live at The Apollo to name but a few of the BBC TV and Radio comedy output.

Live at the Apollo is or was on to cover Ross who IS NOT FUNNY.

The BBC does not provide choice for me as Sky doesn't for you. The only difference is you get a choice to subscribe to Sky or not. Yes the TV tax will go but will be replaced with a tax on Laptops and Computers or even a levy on mobile phone packages.

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/media/article417851.ece

Generali

mymatebob wrote: »

I do think the licence fee will go - eventually - or be used to help fund Ch4/public service broadcasting in some way.

As for choice - Mr Murdoch doesn't really provide much of it.

I can only buy "packages" of channels, not the programmes I want.

I get channels that I never ever watch, I wonder how much I am subsiding them by?

As for comedy - Gavin And Stacey, Not Going Out, Count Arthur Strong, Genius, The News Quiz, QI and Live at The Apollo to name but a few of the BBC TV and Radio comedy output.

I suspect that increasingly it'll be a case of buying the programs that you're interested in rather than channels or packages for the reasons you state.

Ultimately, markets generally provide people with what they want to buy.

mymatebob

chris_spackman wrote: »

Live at the Apollo is or was on to cover Ross who IS NOT FUNNY.

The BBC does not provide choice for me as Sky doesn't for you. The only difference is you get a choice to subscribe to Sky or not. Yes the TV tax will go but will be replaced with a tax on Laptops and Computers or even a levy on mobile phone packages.

Years a go I thought Ross was quite amusing - now I cannot abide him on any radio or TV programme.

I wasn't meaning to infer that the BBC provided choice in the way you meant just that BSkyB has a clever way of manipulating its customers. Which is fair play to them - they are a business after all.

mymatebob

Generali wrote: »

I suspect that increasingly it'll be a case of buying the programs that you're interested in rather than channels or packages for the reasons you state.

Ultimately, markets generally provide people with what they want to buy.

Or better still let people build their own packages from available content.

Wonder how many of the niche channels would survive

Generali

mymatebob wrote: »

Years a go I thought Ross was quite amusing - now I cannot abide him on any radio or TV programme.

I wasn't meaning to infer that the BBC provided choice in the way you meant just that BSkyB has a clever way of manipulating its customers. Which is fair play to them - they are a business after all.

BSkyB have done some good things to UK TV. They've revolutionised sports coverage for example - the BBC was self-congratulatory and dull in a lot of its coverage, eg the Test match. I do find their tendency to talk up the significance and entertainment levels of soccer matches to be pretty annoying - then if I'd paid GBP1,700,000,000 for the rights I'd be trying to talk up the game too!

It is all about choice though and you don't get a choice whether or not to fund the BBC if you watch TV.