BBC licence fee should be scrapped, says thinktank - The Guardian

Dan:_4

lucylucky wrote: »

That is correct but if the BBC funding model changed they may well encrypt all of their output on all platforms.

and so they should. SKY1 does this for there SKY Player. The website might not be so easy to block, but that is available worldwide so matters very little.

lucylucky

Easy enough to put a website behind a paywall putting encryption on radios might be harder.

lynzpower

Dan: wrote: »

Under current rules you do not need to pay for a TV license to use the BBC website, watch programmes on BBC Iplayer as long as they have finished transmitting on air.

Yes but if the rules were to be changed and people like I pay 50 quid a month to recieve BBC, Id have thought the rules would change, after all who would pay if you can get the free content at a slightly later date, or continue to listen to the radio or view the websites.

As a business it would fail, so there has to be restrictions on the free-for-all at the moment.

After all, I cant watch sky if I dont pay for it.....

Dan:_4

lynzpower wrote: »

Yes but if the rules were to be changed and people like I pay 50 quid a month to recieve BBC, Id have thought the rules would change, after all who would pay if you can get the free content at a slightly later date, or continue to listen to the radio or view the websites.

As a business it would fail, so there has to be restrictions on the free-for-all at the moment.

After all, I cant watch sky if I dont pay for it.....

They can block their iplayer to only subscribers like SKY1 does.

RJP33

Wouldn’t the whole thing be a false economy anyway – lets say you scrap the license fee, Sky etc would have less competition for programmes so they can put their prices up and we’ll all end up paying more anyway in the long run for lower quality TV.

Generali

FTBFun wrote: »

Good post.

BTW You're in Australia aren't you? From what I remember from my time there a few years ago there is no real state broadcaster to speak of (except a small one that shows really niche shows plus some football) plus a ton of commercial shows that mainly show reality TV programmes or US imports that are so bad even Channel Five wouldn't show them in their graveyard shift.

I'd be worried that UK television would go more down that route were the licence fee to be scrapped.

I am in Australia and we have a decent national broadcaster in ABC. Some of their TV output is very good, some very poor and most of it is mediocre, like most broadcasters whether public or private. Their news programing is notably good.

Their radio stations are pretty especially ABC National which broadcasts a mix of items from the BBC World Service, Deutsche Something (German English Language Radio) and also from a couple of US providers as well as local content.

The main difference between the ABC and BBC is that the ABC has a lower budget. As the population of Australia is 1/3rd of the UK's that is to be expected. They can't afford to make as much output and especially as much expensive drama so they use a lot of the expensive stuff the BBC sell on to us foreigners cheaply. ABC doesn't show so many US imports, the private channels do.

Most sport is shown on private channels and coverage is generally excellent and we have a list of events, mostly but not all domestic, that have to be on free-to-air TV. For foreign events we usually take a foreign feed, usually from BBC or US TV and then have a local summarizer to add local colour.

We have Foxtel which is our Sky. Strikingly similar to Sky actually. The sports channels are about the only ones with different content!

wymondham

lynzpower wrote: »

I would be quite happy to do this, I would pay 2,3 een 4 times over for the VFM that I get from the BBC.

.... not sure I'd pay up to £46 a month for the few BBC items I watch......

TV channels either have to advertise or get subscriptions. I'm happier with advertising since anyone can 'dip in and out'.

Dan:_4

RJP33 wrote: »

Wouldn’t the whole thing be a false economy anyway – lets say you scrap the license fee, Sky etc would have less competition for programmes so they can put their prices up and we’ll all end up paying more anyway in the long run for lower quality TV.

If anything there would be more competition between the main media services - SKY, VIRGIN and BBC

Snooze

People going on about the BBC and value for money in this thread. !!!!!!? Did anyone see the last series of Top Gear that's just finished (after only 5 episodes)? As a huge Top Gear fan I can't believe I wasted 5 hours of my life watching that !!!!!!. No substance whatsoever and with the exception of small bit at the Iceland volcano and the pathetic snowmobile race, they didn't leave the UK for the entire series. It was just utter bollox. And another thing - only 5 eps? They've been getting shorter and shorter every season. A good few years ago a season would run for 12 or more weeks and they'd be off to Vietnam, Africa, Bolivia etc.

The only other half decent stuff from the Beeb is Dragon's Den and Hustle, and some of the wildlife/nature progs but it ain't worth paying £145 a year for and I don't.

The licence tax should be scrapped. :mad:

marklv

There is too much TV anyway. It was better in the 1970s when we only had three channels - and even these didn't broadcast all day!

The BBC could save money by scrapping the moronic BBC3.