Decision made. No more licence fee payments from now on.

wiogs

What a waste of paper and a stamp writing to the BBC

Honestly why bother?

If you don't need to have a licence then fine, no need to bleat about it to all and sundry.

System

Well done undermanager. You might want to check http://www.tvlicenceresistance.info/forum because the BBC will try setting you up

HappyMJ

Blackbeard_of_Perranporth wrote: »

In the same way that those who do not have Sky or other TV services, should be taxed to support them?

Sky is paid for by advertising, subscription and tax breaks on original UK productions worth double what they actually spend. So I suppose with all the tax breaks Sky gets for producing original UK content then the taxpayer already partially funds Sky and other TV services.

System

HappyMJ wrote: »

then the taxpayer already partially funds Sky and other TV services.

The public decide to fund Sky when they choose to subscribe. When it comes to the mighty BBC they don't have a choice if they wish to watch "live" feeds. Lets be honest the BBC can't be that great if they need to force a nation to fund them

Cornucopia

wiogs wrote: »

What a waste of paper and a stamp writing to the BBC

Honestly why bother?

If you don't need to have a licence then fine, no need to bleat about it to all and sundry.

That's the way it should be, obviously.

Unfortunately, the BBC has taken it upon itself to operate its Licence Fee enforcement activities in ways that are negligent, dishonest and bullying.

Against that background, writing to them, indicating that you are fully aware of the law around the subject is a good approach.

The jury is out on whether withdrawing the implied right of access is a good idea or not. There are other strategies that have a similar effect without the potential downsides.

System

HappyMJ wrote: »

Sky is paid for by advertising, subscription and tax breaks on original UK productions worth double what they actually spend. So I suppose with all the tax breaks Sky gets for producing original UK content then the taxpayer already partially funds Sky and other TV services.

Also for the terrestrial services, the licence fee goes toward funding the transmission infrastructure that all providers use.

System

!!!!!! wrote: »

Also for the terrestrial services, the licence fee goes toward funding the transmission infrastructure that all providers use.

Please stop pushing BBC propaganda because you know that isn't true. The transmitters are owned by private companies like SDN and Crown-castle and the transmission fees are paid by the broadcasters

http://www.crowncastle.com/

Something is very wrong here when so many lies are being said to make the BBC look the Saint it isn't, think about this people!

Kurtis_Blue

TheWise1 wrote: »

Please stop pushing BBC propaganda because you know that isn't true. The transmitters are owned by private companies like SDN and Crown-castle and the transmission fees are paid by the broadcasters

http://www.crowncastle.com/

Something is very wrong here when so many lies are being said to make the BBC look the Saint it isn't, think about this people!

SDN do not own any transmitters and Crown Castle haven't been in the UK since 2004.

At some point you are going to need to change your forum name, you are in breach of the trades descriptions act.

You are for some reason putting your self forward as a sage on TVL but your information is wrong and out off date.

Cornucopia

So.... what is the relationship between the BBC and Freeview? Who does pay for the infrastructure? Are LF payers subsidising commercial companies?

System

Kurtis_Blue wrote: »

SDN do not own any transmitters and Crown Castle haven't been in the UK since 2004.

Clearly the BBC has been giving you the wrong information because the BBC TV Licence has nothing to do with the infrastructure. By asking you to push false information on the public they are hurting themselves.

You know the BBC like the other broadcasters pays to have its feeds broadcast, unlike the other the BBC demands the public pays them for it.

Oh and just so people can see who's lying

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2005/apr/27/digitaltvradio.television

Kurtis_Blue wrote: »

At some point you are going to need to change your forum name, you are in breach of the trades descriptions act.

Oh I love the BBC humour...........or lack of it. As others can see I backup what I say with the facts, something the BBC PR struggles with.

Time to either put up or peddle the BBC line elsewhere