Should there be a compulsory Netflix licence?

worried_jim

Malthusian wrote: »

The only problem with this proposal is that even the BBC manages to produce better material than the straight-to-video absolute garbage on Netflix.

The BBC produces just enough quality stuff that appeals to every demographic to make the population as a whole resistant to the idea of abolishing it.

When is that going to be on?

westernpromise

If Netflix collected £144 a year from everyone with a TV set regardless of whether they ever watched it or not, I'm sure Netflix could also "produce better material than the straight-to-video absolute garbage".

RealElement47

Everytthing is available for free from Kodi and similar file sharing sites.

Everytime one gets shut down another two pop up.

I know it's piracy and wrong, but it is what it is, people would prefer something for free than pay for it

Green_Bear

RealElement47 wrote: »

Everytthing is available for free from Kodi and similar file sharing sites.

Everytime one gets shut down another two pop up.

I know it's piracy and wrong, but it is what it is, people would prefer something for free than pay for it

That's fine until the copyright owner asks your ISP for your download details - then hits you with a lawsuit (or worse, criminal charges) for copyright infringement.

westernpromise

RealElement47 wrote: »

Everytthing is available for free from Kodi and similar file sharing sites.

Everytime one gets shut down another two pop up.

I know it's piracy and wrong, but it is what it is, people would prefer something for free than pay for it

So you're still up to your browneye in debt even though you steal broadcast content. What else do you steal?

Cornucopia

westernpromise wrote: »

... Mel and Sue ...

I like Mel & Sue, so I would definitely favour your plan.

MisterMotivated

westernpromise wrote: »

everyone would then get to enjoy the benefits that I enjoy, such as no ads and programmes I like to watch. The programmes are all very good and so everyone else would enjoy them as well

Thanks, but I don't want the benefit of being able to watch programmes you like to watch. I used to use my (ex-)partner's Netflix account occasionally and struggled to find anything I'd want to watch.

MisterMotivated

Malthusian wrote: »

The BBC produces just enough quality stuff that appeals to every demographic to make the population as a whole resistant to the idea of abolishing it.

For my particular demographic, there seem to be only 2 shows that appeal. There used to be three but I can't stand Top Gear now with the Paddy/Freddie/Chris combo. I'd happily sacrifice these, however, to scrap the TV licence. I do also watch BBC News 24, but mostly due to it having fewer ads (though there are still the constant ads for The Film Review and The Papers, etc) and would happily switch to one of the other dedicated news channels/regular broadcasts on other channels, if the BBC ceased to exist.

I'm always sceptical about the polls around the TV licence; for example, do they ask straight out "Would you like to keep or abolish the TV licence?" or do they frame it as "Do you regularly enjoy the broad spectrum of entertaining, enlightening and informative programming provided to you, commercial-free, by the British Broadcasting Corporation as part of their excellent service in exchange for a teenie-weenie contribution?" and assume that anyone who says 'yes' supports keeping the TV licence?

MisterMotivated

I think this is one industry where competition is a bad thing. For me to watch the few things I do want to, I’d have to pay for Sky, BT Sport AND Amazon Prime

westernpromise

Forced subsidy is also a bad thing though. The BBC's average audience share is about 25%, yet the other 75% who aren't watching it have to pay for a licence too. If the BBC had to recover its revenues from just those who actually use it, it would cost 4x more - about £700 a year.

Now at £60 a month nobody's going to use it, not when Netflix is 10% of that or something, so it would lose subscribers all over the place and would rapidly converge on the Netflix price and production model. You'd end up with a lot of independent content producers pitching and selling their programme ideas to different channels all hunting ratings and subscribers.

If the way the BBC is funded is so special and marvellous, there is no reason not to roll it out; so everybody should be forced to subscribe to everything. And if that's unsustainable (which it is), why should it be the BC that gets carved out and privileged? Why not Netflix, or Sky, or Rakuten? Netflix at least is not stuffed full of ads like the BBC (oh yes it is - it's just that all the ads on the BBC are for other BBC products).