Why pay the TV Tax?

Nilrem

Deleted_User wrote: »

Technology has overtaken the licence fee so one has to ask if it's still relevant in the digital age (you don't pay if you only watch on demand TV via the Web) but you can still technically watch it live so it's open to abuse that is difficult to police.
The fee finances the BBC but some say they don't watch BBC so the easiest way would be to encrypt it and offer a yearly subscription equal to the licence fee to those who want the BBC.
That would seem to suit both the supporters of and opponents to the BBC and be technically viable as pay TV is already available through Freeview.

Unfortunately encrypting it would totally defeat the universal service provisions of a PSB.

It would also cost far more to admin than the TVL, and a vast majority of TV's don't have a suitable card reader for proper encryption, as hard to break, secure, long term* encryption tends to require smart cards used only in approved hardware (and you end up paying for not only the cost of the original smart card and reader, but an ongoing fee for the updates to the encryption).
You only have to look at the issues NTL/BY had before they managed to replace their encryption (and that was with them theoretically only letting authorised receivers on their network), or Ondigital had because their encryption was a little too open (and depending on if you believe the ongoing, repeated allegations, a rival encryption company accidentally "leaked" how to break it).

My guess is, that if the TVL in it's current form goes, it'll follow the example of various EU countries (and what Ireland is proposing),l and simply replace it with a fee added to your council tax, a "media" or similar tax where you pay it either for simply owning a TV (no question about watching it, as used in France)), or possibly added to your telecomms/electricity bill (both are in use in Europe)


*IE not nightly/weekly (which seem to be the versions you tend to find on receivers that don't require a card)

Blackbeard_of_Perranporth

The debate is moving onto the relevance of the BBC Tax in this day of internet and catch up tv. All other channels, from ITV, Channel 5, Crackle are funded by advertising and are free on catch-up services. Subscription services, such as LoveFilm, Qello and others also provide material. Yet the BBC, through its tax, insists that to watch live tv, via the internet, at the same as it is broadcast, you need to pay the tax.

Live sports events have been shown exclusively on the internet, including FA Cup games during the 2009-10 season, Rugby Union championship play offs 2013. Internet readied services include Sky, via their internet applications, and newcomer BT Sport. Their delivery over the internet is now so advanced, that near HD quality is available, for modest connections of 8mbps (Love film streams to us in HD already!) that the cost and expense of Direct Satellite and Terristerial broadcasting in the near future looks doomed.

Should Sky, switch off their satellite and move to their internet services, the need of millions of customers to have a tv licence will be earthquaked overnight. That day, with BT Sport now on the market place, is coming.

Then there is talk of subscription services and the like, such that the BBC should be scrambled and people who want to watch it pay the subscription. Unfortunately, this is a non starter due to the perverse way Freeview was set up, and the service on the BBC cannot be scrambled. Yet, the BBC maybe the only broadcaster left on terrestrial services, as itv, channel4 and others move onto advertising supported internet services.

So other talk of a tax added to the council tax, a media tax in effect. So now every house will be forced, by the BBC lovers to pay the tax?. This is a last gasp in a floundering market. The internet will lead to the demise of the BBC tax in the near future, just as the transistor radio finished the BBC Radio tax in 1971.

The day of broadcast, either by satellite or terrestrial for major players in the market (Sky) is ending.

When this happens, is only weeks away! And the reason why major players such as itv and sky will move to internet services.
More direct and interactive advertising!

VisionMan

Blackbeard - excellent post. Very knowledgeable. But your prediction of Freeview's demise due to the internet is about ten to twenty years ahead of its time. For many reasons.

Nilrem

VisionMan wrote: »

Blackbeard - excellent post. Very knowledgeable. But your prediction of Freeview's demise due to the internet is about ten to twenty years ahead of its time. For many reasons.

Not least because Freeview is cheap to set up, scales well, and easily to additional sets (with the use of very cheap, easy to use parts/cabling that almost anyone can buy and fit), and doesn't have an ongoing cost (especially per viewer/receiver) associated with it

I can't see Sky turning off their satellite service for a good couple of decades because they would lose millions of customers for whom the satellite provides them with channels their internet connection would not have the bandwidth to provide.
It's slightly depressing how many people can still only get 5-10mb*, and when you start taking good quality video over that the amount available for other use drops off fairly fast - especially if you've got two or more people watching different things.

I would also add that putting it on the council tax isn't just something suggested by "BBC lovers" (as you call them), it's an acknowledgement that the government rarely drops one tax/fee without having something to replace it, and it's happened in other countries (with at least one of our closest neighbours looking to do that within the next couple of years).

I'd also point out that the Government has already raided the TVL for BB funding (with the excess from the digital switch over scheme being used for that, rather than being refunded), and tried at least once to add a fee to the monthly telecomms bill for "improvements" because the commercial sector oddly enough wasn't keen on increasing prices to allow enough money to improve services in "unprofitable" locations.
So even if the BBC were to be sold off/disbanded I'd place a bet we'd still be paying some form of TVL or "new media" bill, probably under circumstances where it was impossible to opt out of as easily as it is at the moment.


*Although at least part of the reason for that is because people keep going for the cheapest internet option, without giving a thought to how the ISP's are going to make a profit, let alone improve their services (one of the main reasons there are a lot less ISP's now is because the price war has basically killed off most of the indies, so now you've got a lot of ISP's who are really only a header on the bill, owned by either Sky or BT).
Some of us could see this happening 5+ years ago but got poo pood by those who were busy chasing the cheapest deal (and then complaining at the lack of CS:p or that the BB they got free with their phone line oddly enough had serious limits or wasn't suitable for a house with 3+ users)

googler

I'd rather have a 'proper' TV, partnered with a hard drive or DVD recorder with a Freeview tuner.

That way I get better picture quality, an EPG, the ability to record programmes as I want, and, best of all - I don't have to have a laptop or PC whirring away beside the telly.

And that's even without considering the buffering stops and starts in streaming radio and TV .....

Blackbeard_of_Perranporth

Thanks fir the good responses, though I think the driver in all this is the more direct advertising possible with the Internet tv revolution.

With my blu ray box, the technology to deliver this on a 4 mb connection in hd already exists.

VisionMan

Blackbeard_of_Perranporth wrote: »

Thanks fir the good responses, though I think the driver in all this is the more direct advertising possible with the Internet tv revolution.

With my blu ray box, the technology to deliver this on a 4 mb connection in hd already exists.

Actually BoP, though what you say is relevent, thats not true HD and wasn't what I was talking about.

I'm using full blown Internet TV services on a hybrid PVR over fibre at broadcast TV quality. But if say I'm watching BT Sport HD on one channel, and recording say ESPN HD on another, that uses a whopping 20Mbps. But the majority of the internet network in the UK isn't currently capable of handling such services. But they will be one day. And this is the main reason why Freeview and Freesat are here to stay, for now.

googler

Blackbeard_of_Perranporth wrote: »

With my blu ray box, the technology to deliver this on a 4 mb connection in hd already exists.

In my house, there's four TVs connected to freeview and freesat; one freeview digibox, one PVR, and three HDD/DVD recorders. It's not unknown for the PVR and all three HDD/DVD recorders to be recording TV and/or radio at the same time, without any buffering issues.

Can you suggest how this would be achieved over my broadband which currently speedtests at 4.45Mbps ... with the convenience of an EPG on each to allow timer recording ... ?