Is the TV Licence fee worth it? Poll results/discussion

mymatebob

ronben wrote: »

Its only good value for money if you use the service, if you dont your still meant to pay, this is a crazy notion.

And I personally don't think the BBC can continue in the way it has for the last few years. I do think there needs to be a new funding model but I don't know what that is.

magyar

mymatebob wrote: »

Why is it that when anyone questions you then they become a BBC employee?

Tell me about it. I've been a BBC employee and work for TV Licencing on this thread so far.

I might start standing up for chief executives who get seven-figure salaries soon, at least that way I'd get a pay rise...

mymatebob

ronben wrote: »

Maybe if there was some kind of card scheme like a sky box or top up box, but not another box just configured into an existing freeview box or something.

Just go to a Etop up shop and get some credit on the card.

Remember the BBC is much more than TV - I think there would need to be funding for the internet and the radio aspects

mymatebob

ronben wrote: »

Aaah but thats already taken care of in the charges for the year, because you dont hear anyone banging on your door asking for a radio or internet licence, thats because radio and internet dont have TV programs like Eastenders, unless you use Iplayer, its far easier to turn a radio station over as the same music is everywhere and a different website will hold the same info.[/quote

What charges for the year?

Not sure what Eastenders has to do with anything but I have never seen it so maybe there is a story line thing there

Defiant_3

mymatebob wrote: »

And I personally don't think the BBC can continue in the way it has for the last few years. I do think there needs to be a new funding model but I don't know what that is.

I agree they should make it subscription and then you and all those (haha) who love the BBC pay for it.

MymateBBC, I did answer your question again and asked you not to add to my quotes so people didn't think it was me saying those things but it seems you have friends high up because my post was removed (admin will be informed of this abuse of power)

magyar wrote: »

Tell me about it. I've been a BBC employee and work for TV Licencing on this thread so far.

I might start standing up for chief executives who get seven-figure salaries soon, at least that way I'd get a pay rise...

This would be the guy who's gone through tunes of pages and yet to give a good reason why you should force the majority into paying for YOU :rolleyes:

mymatebob wrote: »

Remember the BBC is much more than TV - I think there would need to be funding for the internet and the radio aspects

LOL now the advertising script and remember people he doesn't work for the BBC :rotfl:

magyar

ronben wrote: »

Aaah but thats already taken care of in the charges for the year, because you dont hear anyone banging on your door asking for a radio or internet licence, thats because radio and internet dont have TV programs like Eastenders, unless you use Iplayer, its far easier to turn a radio station over as the same music is everywhere and a different website will hold the same info.

Is that not more for simplicity's sake than anything else? If you removed the BBC TV licence fee then they'd have to create a radio or internet fee.

Personally I'd really miss BBC radio.

magyar

Defiant wrote: »

This would be the guy who's gone through tunes of pages and yet to give a good reason why you should force the majority into paying for YOU :rolleyes:

I had a good reason which you failed to successfully answer, which was that if you removed the licence fee, you're left with advertising-funded television which we equally had to pay for.

You didn't comment on my post #243 where I suggested how this might work in theory?

magyar

ronben wrote: »

Look you work for the TVL and are biased and are also afraid of losing your job as the Tax is a dinosaur.

Whats wrong with people

Which one is it? BBC or TVL? Make your mind up guys!

Defiant_3

magyar wrote: »

I had a good reason which you failed to successfully answer, which was that if you removed the licence fee, you're left with advertising-funded television which we equally had to pay for.

That wasn't a reason why everyone in this country should be forced into paying for the likes of YOU :rolleyes: Also I did answer you but you refused to accept it #186 (shock horror) so we agreed to disagree! (lets not let the truth get in the way hey)

magyar wrote: »

Which one is it? BBC or TVL? Make your mind up guys!

We've gone through 15 pages and now he admits he doesn't even know that those are one of the same

Domain name:
tvlicensing.co.uk

Registrant:
British Broadcasting Corporation

Registrant type:
Unknown

Registrant's address:
Broadcasting House
London
-
W1A 1AA
GB

Registrar:
Markmonitor Inc. t/a Markmonitor [Tag = MARKMONITOR]
URL: http://www.markmonitor.com

Relevant dates:
Registered on: 17-Jun-1997
Renewal date: 17-Jun-2009
Last updated: 18-May-2007

Registration status:
Registered until renewal date.

Name servers:
ns.bbc.co.uk
ns1.thdo.bbc.co.uk
ns1.thls.bbc.co.uk
ns1.thny.bbc.co.uk

WHOIS lookup made at 11:54:44 20-Apr-2008

mymatebob

You have failed to answer my question because you seem to confuse being "forced" to buy a licence fee with BBC News being forced upon people.
The two things are different.

As I have stated I think the fee is worthwhile but I have also acknowledged that many people do not.

I never at any point suggested that there would need to be advertising for any BBC platform I said there would need to be a new funding model.

I shall not use my inserting method of commenting to your posts again as it seems to upset you.

And thanks for reminding anyone who is reading that I don't work for the BBC