TV Licence
TV Licence
I’ve just seen that the cost of a TV licence is increasing again.
Anybody refuse to pay it?
Anybody refuse to pay it?
-
- Posts: 9601
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:45 pm
- Been Liked: 3150 times
- Has Liked: 10256 times
- Location: Staffordshire
Re: TV Licence
Why would anybody refuse to pay it ? It's tremendous value.
These 4 users liked this post: tim_noone levraiclaret Stalbansclaret longsidepies
-
- Posts: 18095
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:35 am
- Been Liked: 3874 times
- Has Liked: 2073 times
Re: TV Licence
Just go on their website and knock yourself off their list.
-
- Posts: 17272
- Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2016 1:57 pm
- Been Liked: 6490 times
- Has Liked: 2918 times
- Location: Fife
Re: TV Licence
Companies increasing prices while the world is suffering....hang your f*****g heads in shame!
-
- Posts: 3979
- Joined: Mon May 28, 2018 3:00 pm
- Been Liked: 1857 times
- Has Liked: 652 times
Re: TV Licence
It's going up by a mighty £1.50p.
-
- Posts: 7406
- Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2018 2:19 am
- Been Liked: 2310 times
- Has Liked: 2174 times
Re: TV Licence
That’s 00.04 a day, I’m not made of money! It’s the principle
This user liked this post: tim_noone
-
- Posts: 2123
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:57 am
- Been Liked: 895 times
- Has Liked: 134 times
Re: TV Licence
i can never understand why people complain about the price of a TV licence. The amount of TV people watch and the quality and quantity of programmes we get is unbelievable.
This user liked this post: Stalbansclaret
-
- Posts: 638
- Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2018 8:22 am
- Been Liked: 156 times
- Has Liked: 131 times
-
- Posts: 17272
- Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2016 1:57 pm
- Been Liked: 6490 times
- Has Liked: 2918 times
- Location: Fife
Re: TV Licence
Yea most days Frank .DustyBawls wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 7:35 pmAre you permanently pi$$ed?
It's no surprise at all that they have increased their price. And it's worth it to watch our highlight wins on Match of the Day.
These 2 users liked this post: tim_noone Volvoclaret
-
- Posts: 10328
- Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 10:36 pm
- Been Liked: 3341 times
- Has Liked: 1964 times
Re: TV Licence
Unbelievable value.
-
- Posts: 4292
- Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2018 11:30 pm
- Been Liked: 1029 times
- Has Liked: 1521 times
Re: TV Licence
If the government insist on the BBC keep being funded so they can spread their propaganda round the world, the foreign budget should cover it!
Re: TV Licence
tarkys_ears wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 7:45 pmIf the government insist on the BBC keep being funded so they can spread their propaganda round the world, the foreign budget should cover it!
-
- Posts: 3979
- Joined: Mon May 28, 2018 3:00 pm
- Been Liked: 1857 times
- Has Liked: 652 times
Re: TV Licence
The licence fee doesn't fund the World Service. It is funded by the Foreign Office.
Re: TV Licence
Subscribing to Netflix costs more than the tv licence
-
- Posts: 3979
- Joined: Mon May 28, 2018 3:00 pm
- Been Liked: 1857 times
- Has Liked: 652 times
Re: TV Licence
Oh, and so is the BBC World News TV service.
Re: TV Licence
It doesn’t - but I get your point !
Both good value and the recent % increase in Netflix fees much higher than the TV license increase.
Not sure why anyone would be outraged by this increase when you see the price increases imposed by the likes of Virgin, Sky, and the utility companies for gas & electricity. Add to that the rumoured big increase in Council Tax and these are far bigger issues for families than the TV License.
-
- Posts: 10915
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:56 pm
- Been Liked: 5560 times
- Has Liked: 208 times
Re: TV Licence
Hang on, I thought the defund mob all hate the BBC because it's apparently Woke, left wing and liberal.tarkys_ears wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 7:45 pmIf the government insist on the BBC keep being funded so they can spread their propaganda round the world, the foreign budget should cover it!
-
- Posts: 833
- Joined: Sat May 12, 2018 4:08 pm
- Been Liked: 235 times
- Has Liked: 21 times
Re: TV Licence
Brits should be ecstatic about having access to such high quality programming, no other broadcaster in the English speaking world even comes close. We get quite a bit of BBC broadcasts here in Ontario on out cables channels, I try to watch all I can. CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) produces some pretty good current affairs programmes. The rest is mostly claptrap programming originating in USA.
-
- Posts: 3979
- Joined: Mon May 28, 2018 3:00 pm
- Been Liked: 1857 times
- Has Liked: 652 times
Re: TV Licence
For me, it's worth the fee for its radio output. R5, R4, R4 Extra and R6.
This user liked this post: Stalbansclaret
-
- Posts: 622
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 8:51 am
- Been Liked: 289 times
- Has Liked: 311 times
Re: TV Licence
That was last week. Do keep up.TheFamilyCat wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 7:58 pmHang on, I thought the defund mob all hate the BBC because it's apparently Woke, left wing and liberal.
-
- Posts: 596
- Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2017 9:24 am
- Been Liked: 139 times
- Has Liked: 183 times
Re: TV Licence
I think its excellent value for money and no adverts
-
- Posts: 4070
- Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2016 9:40 pm
- Been Liked: 1507 times
- Has Liked: 581 times
Re: TV Licence
After experiencing the mass, mind numbing saturation of advertising on US TV and radio, I’d say be careful what you wish for.
As highlighted above, the radio coverage is worth it alone.
As highlighted above, the radio coverage is worth it alone.
Re: TV Licence
Yes but this is BBC. Do most people mostly watch BBC? I doubt it. Last Saturday afternoon they didn't have one sports event on the main two channels.pushpinpussy wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 7:35 pmi can never understand why people complain about the price of a TV licence. The amount of TV people watch and the quality and quantity of programmes we get is unbelievable.
Re: TV Licence
But this is TV. Not radio.Swizzlestick wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 8:51 pmAfter experiencing the mass, mind numbing saturation of advertising on US TV and radio, I’d say be careful what you wish for.
As highlighted above, the radio coverage is worth it alone.
-
- Posts: 1075
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:08 am
- Been Liked: 445 times
- Has Liked: 59 times
Re: TV Licence
I don't listen to the radio and I'm sure I'm not alone in that.Swizzlestick wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 8:51 pmAfter experiencing the mass, mind numbing saturation of advertising on US TV and radio, I’d say be careful what you wish for.
As highlighted above, the radio coverage is worth it alone.
Imagine if the BBC never existed and suddenly a TV station said you had no choice but to pay £13 a month for something you didn't want. And if you didn't pay up you could face a hefty fine and even imprisonment. It sounds like the world's worst dictatorship.
It would be nice to have the choice.
-
- Posts: 2105
- Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2016 9:28 pm
- Been Liked: 492 times
- Has Liked: 411 times
Re: TV Licence
The license is outdated. They should charge a subscription service and those who enjoy BBC content will pay for it.
This user liked this post: LeadBelly
-
- Posts: 5368
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:00 pm
- Been Liked: 1652 times
- Has Liked: 404 times
Re: TV Licence
Dearer than Netflix, lower quality, and I spend less time on it than Netflix. So it is far worse VFM. As are most things where choice is not a variable. Amazon Prime - also far better value, I get the annual cost back in parcel delivery savings alone. Sky costs more, as does BT, but only due to live sport being premium priced.
I use the BBC website out of habit, but there are probably better options.
The license fee is a regressive tax, the same cost for a billionaire as for a working age pauper. So it’s hard to justify it being the law. It is bound to be changed at some point soon. The only way the BBC can keep going in this way is if they are broad in appeal, and, the best. Neither currently,
I use the BBC website out of habit, but there are probably better options.
The license fee is a regressive tax, the same cost for a billionaire as for a working age pauper. So it’s hard to justify it being the law. It is bound to be changed at some point soon. The only way the BBC can keep going in this way is if they are broad in appeal, and, the best. Neither currently,
This user liked this post: LeadBelly
-
- Posts: 2094
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 10:18 pm
- Been Liked: 298 times
- Has Liked: 781 times
Re: TV Licence
BBC World News are Commercial TV channels across 7 regions of the World
Re: TV Licence
I’m happy to pay it if they hurry up and finish the new Line of Duty series.
-
- Posts: 4200
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 11:07 am
- Been Liked: 1007 times
- Has Liked: 2048 times
- Location: North Hampshire
Re: TV Licence
If you dont watch BBC, it's galling that you have to pay the BBC for watching SkySport/BT Sport (which you've already paid for).pushpinpussy wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 7:35 pmi can never understand why people complain about the price of a TV licence. The amount of TV people watch and the quality and quantity of programmes we get is unbelievable.
Many people think KFC food is wonderful and great value and thus buy it; those who prefer to eat other things arent forced to pay KFC money because other people think its good value are they? Why should I have to contribute to the huge salaries paid by BBC to a load of celebs who I dislike and for news/event coverage that is negative and sermonising?
Fairness would be making BBC subscription so that its adherents can pay for it, those who don't like it can give it a miss. Pretty much like all other consumables/services in the marketplace.
This user liked this post: Right_winger
Re: TV Licence
I get the points made above, but there is an argument along the lines of if there's no tv licence then the BBC has adverts. There is only so much ad money to go around so the quality will get worse. Not sure what the solution is though !
-
- Posts: 9601
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:45 pm
- Been Liked: 3150 times
- Has Liked: 10256 times
- Location: Staffordshire
Re: TV Licence
You don't watch the BBC, LeadBelly ?
Seriously ?
Seriously ?
-
- Posts: 4200
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 11:07 am
- Been Liked: 1007 times
- Has Liked: 2048 times
- Location: North Hampshire
Re: TV Licence
If I had a choice of watching/paying or not watching/not paying I would 100% take the latter.evensteadiereddie wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 10:09 pmYou don't watch the BBC, LeadBelly ?
Seriously ?
-
- Posts: 9601
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:45 pm
- Been Liked: 3150 times
- Has Liked: 10256 times
- Location: Staffordshire
Re: TV Licence
Fair enough, LB, but I think you'd be missing out on some cracking programmes, drama in particular - nobody else comes near.
I dip into Netflix occasionally - "The Dig" for example, and Amazon Prime has very little too but you can generally rely on the Beeb.
Add in your Repair Shop, Antiques Roadshow, Countryfile, Attenborough, Strictly, MOTD and a world class news and radio services, I don't think there's anything to complain about.
Most of the complaints seem to be politically inspired - weakening the BBC strengthens the hand of those not interested in truth or fairness.
We've seen that bubble burst to some extent in the States, let's hope it happens here.
I dip into Netflix occasionally - "The Dig" for example, and Amazon Prime has very little too but you can generally rely on the Beeb.
Add in your Repair Shop, Antiques Roadshow, Countryfile, Attenborough, Strictly, MOTD and a world class news and radio services, I don't think there's anything to complain about.
Most of the complaints seem to be politically inspired - weakening the BBC strengthens the hand of those not interested in truth or fairness.
We've seen that bubble burst to some extent in the States, let's hope it happens here.
This user liked this post: Stalbansclaret
-
- Posts: 9473
- Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:47 pm
- Been Liked: 1185 times
- Has Liked: 779 times
Re: TV Licence
You are only missing out on cracking programmes if you share the same opinion that there are cracking programmes, if you hardly watch TV the license doesn’t represent value for money.
-
- Posts: 638
- Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2018 8:22 am
- Been Liked: 156 times
- Has Liked: 131 times
Re: TV Licence
It's £159 a year. What's that, just over £12 a month. It's peanuts. BT Sport costs more and is absolutely dreadful.
This user liked this post: evensteadiereddie
-
- Posts: 9601
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:45 pm
- Been Liked: 3150 times
- Has Liked: 10256 times
- Location: Staffordshire
Re: TV Licence
Well,jakub, I guess that's the choice you make. Is the small amount of TV that you actually like worth paying anything for ? If nothing is to your taste, don't bother.
Fortunately, millions of others - judging by the viewing figures - are happy enough.
Fortunately, millions of others - judging by the viewing figures - are happy enough.
-
- Posts: 4070
- Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2016 9:40 pm
- Been Liked: 1507 times
- Has Liked: 581 times
-
- Posts: 2510
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 9:21 am
- Been Liked: 1666 times
- Has Liked: 2983 times
Re: TV Licence
Massive value for money...about 40p a day..I'd pay that for the radio alone.
Re: TV Licence
Fee is worth it alone for Line of Duty and Peaky Blinders.
Add to that loads of great comedy, drama, news, sport and it’s great value.
And looking at how the rest of the world buy our dramas and the tens of millions who watch it I’d say plenty of others agree.
Each to his own obviously and if you don’t like anything the BBC shows then you ain’t going to think it’s value.
Add to that loads of great comedy, drama, news, sport and it’s great value.
And looking at how the rest of the world buy our dramas and the tens of millions who watch it I’d say plenty of others agree.
Each to his own obviously and if you don’t like anything the BBC shows then you ain’t going to think it’s value.
-
- Posts: 10318
- Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:45 pm
- Been Liked: 2636 times
- Has Liked: 2798 times
Re: TV Licence
Demographics mean it's simply a matter of time before this unfair , regressive poll tax, that demands the same from someone unemployed as it does from a millionaire, through threat of fines then jail, even if you never ever watch or listen to its output, is scrapped.
The inevitable cant come quick enough.
The inevitable cant come quick enough.
-
- Posts: 638
- Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2018 8:22 am
- Been Liked: 156 times
- Has Liked: 131 times
Re: TV Licence
Are people complaining about it?
Re: TV Licence
It's easy to get distracted in this debate by some of the sheer crap that the BBC puts out, and while there is a load of great stuff made, too, I don't think that alone is a particularly compelling argument for why it should continue to operate and be funded according to its current model, which is why it's important to look pragmatically, if not romantically, at the BBC as an institution on the nation of Britain, and not merely as an entertainment provider. Its funding model means it doesn't need to chase ratings, which saves it from the ignominy of chasing the lowest common denominator at the expense of invaluable yet less popular content, but the minute you change its model to an opt-in subscription service, it becomes led by commercial imperatives rather than public service imperatives. When viewed in these terms, arguments against the licence fee essentially boil down to arguments against the existence of a cultural and arguably social institution.
There's also the fact the BBC is a projection of our soft power on the world. You can't argue with a straight face that a nation's cultural exports have no effect on its place in the world. The USA, for instance, has a very weak and underfunded public service broadcaster, meaning its cultural exports are wedded by dint of their funding models to the furtherance of US corporate hegemony. Think, "USA number 1" spoken in broken English, and the global fascination with US products. Sure, we can and do project UK interests by disseminating our culture around the world and there's no reason that can't theoretically be done by private funding any more than already happens, but consider that if we lose the BBC, there ceases to exist a projection on the world made by a public institution, and we hand over cultural soft power entirely to corporate interests with, at best, a casual, somewhat disinterested regard for what 'Britishness' even means and whose primary motivation is to make money. If under a subscription-funded model market logic dictates that self-censoring is essential in order to capture, for example, the Chinese market, then there could come a point where someone at the BBC might need to make an editorial decision to alter its output in a way that doesn't necessarily serve the British, because as mentioned above, commercial factors will come into conflict with whatever remnants are left of its public service objectives. If the BBC's funding is secure as it is under the licence fee system, it can deliver on its public service remit more effectively.
There's also the fact the BBC is a projection of our soft power on the world. You can't argue with a straight face that a nation's cultural exports have no effect on its place in the world. The USA, for instance, has a very weak and underfunded public service broadcaster, meaning its cultural exports are wedded by dint of their funding models to the furtherance of US corporate hegemony. Think, "USA number 1" spoken in broken English, and the global fascination with US products. Sure, we can and do project UK interests by disseminating our culture around the world and there's no reason that can't theoretically be done by private funding any more than already happens, but consider that if we lose the BBC, there ceases to exist a projection on the world made by a public institution, and we hand over cultural soft power entirely to corporate interests with, at best, a casual, somewhat disinterested regard for what 'Britishness' even means and whose primary motivation is to make money. If under a subscription-funded model market logic dictates that self-censoring is essential in order to capture, for example, the Chinese market, then there could come a point where someone at the BBC might need to make an editorial decision to alter its output in a way that doesn't necessarily serve the British, because as mentioned above, commercial factors will come into conflict with whatever remnants are left of its public service objectives. If the BBC's funding is secure as it is under the licence fee system, it can deliver on its public service remit more effectively.
Last edited by Spiral on Tue Feb 09, 2021 12:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 638
- Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2018 8:22 am
- Been Liked: 156 times
- Has Liked: 131 times
Re: TV Licence
Yeah.Spiral wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 12:42 amIt's easy to get distracted in this debate by some of the sheer crap that the BBC puts out, and while there is a load of great stuff made, too, I don't think that alone is a particularly compelling argument for why it should continue to operate and be funded according to its current model, which is why it's important to look pragmatically, if not romantically, at the BBC as an institution on the nation of Britain, and not merely as an entertainment provider. Its funding model means it doesn't need to chase ratings, which saves it from the ignominy of chasing the lowest common denominator at the expense of invaluable yet less popular content, but the minute you change its model to an opt-in subscription service, it becomes led by commercial imperatives rather than public service imperatives. When viewed in these terms, arguments against the licence fee essentially boil down to arguments against the existence of a cultural and arguably social institution.
There's also the fact the BBC is a projection of our soft power on the world. You can't argue with a straight face that a nation's cultural exports have no effect on its place in the world. The USA, for instance, has a very weak and underfunded public service broadcaster, meaning its cultural exports are wedded by dint of their funding models to the furtherance of US corporate hegemony. Think, "USA number 1" spoken in broken English, and the global fascination with US products. Sure, we can and do project UK interests by disseminating our culture around the world and there's no reason that can't theoretically be done by private funding any more than already happens, but consider that if we lose the BBC, it will cease to be be a projection on the world made by a public institution, and we hand over cultural soft power entirely to corporate interests with, at best, a casual, somewhat disinterested regard for what 'Britishness' even means and whose primary motivation is to make money. If under a subscription-funded model market logic dictates that self-censoring is essential in order to capture, for example, the Chinese market, then there could come a point where someone at the BBC might need to make an editorial decision to alter its output in a way that doesn't necessarily serve the British, because as mentioned above, commercial factors will come into conflict with whatever remnants are left of its public service objectives. If the BBC's funding is secure as it is under the licence fee system, it can deliver on its public service remit more effectively.
-
- Posts: 2105
- Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2016 9:28 pm
- Been Liked: 492 times
- Has Liked: 411 times
Re: TV Licence
What a load of drama queenery nonsense.Spiral wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 12:42 amIt's easy to get distracted in this debate by some of the sheer crap that the BBC puts out, and while there is a load of great stuff made, too, I don't think that alone is a particularly compelling argument for why it should continue to operate and be funded according to its current model, which is why it's important to look pragmatically, if not romantically, at the BBC as an institution on the nation of Britain, and not merely as an entertainment provider. Its funding model means it doesn't need to chase ratings, which saves it from the ignominy of chasing the lowest common denominator at the expense of invaluable yet less popular content, but the minute you change its model to an opt-in subscription service, it becomes led by commercial imperatives rather than public service imperatives. When viewed in these terms, arguments against the licence fee essentially boil down to arguments against the existence of a cultural and arguably social institution.
There's also the fact the BBC is a projection of our soft power on the world. You can't argue with a straight face that a nation's cultural exports have no effect on its place in the world. The USA, for instance, has a very weak and underfunded public service broadcaster, meaning its cultural exports are wedded by dint of their funding models to the furtherance of US corporate hegemony. Think, "USA number 1" spoken in broken English, and the global fascination with US products. Sure, we can and do project UK interests by disseminating our culture around the world and there's no reason that can't theoretically be done by private funding any more than already happens, but consider that if we lose the BBC, there ceases to exist a projection on the world made by a public institution, and we hand over cultural soft power entirely to corporate interests with, at best, a casual, somewhat disinterested regard for what 'Britishness' even means and whose primary motivation is to make money. If under a subscription-funded model market logic dictates that self-censoring is essential in order to capture, for example, the Chinese market, then there could come a point where someone at the BBC might need to make an editorial decision to alter its output in a way that doesn't necessarily serve the British, because as mentioned above, commercial factors will come into conflict with whatever remnants are left of its public service objectives. If the BBC's funding is secure as it is under the licence fee system, it can deliver on its public service remit more effectively.
Re: TV Licence
Thanks for the response. Some really interesting thoughts. Really making me rethink everything I've just typed. Cheers.
These 2 users liked this post: addisclaret Greenmile
Re: TV Licence
Not having to succumb to chasing the ratings, to the extent that commercial providers do, is a valid point.Spiral wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 12:42 amIt's easy to get distracted in this debate by some of the sheer crap that the BBC puts out, and while there is a load of great stuff made, too, I don't think that alone is a particularly compelling argument for why it should continue to operate and be funded according to its current model, which is why it's important to look pragmatically, if not romantically, at the BBC as an institution on the nation of Britain, and not merely as an entertainment provider. Its funding model means it doesn't need to chase ratings, which saves it from the ignominy of chasing the lowest common denominator at the expense of invaluable yet less popular content, but the minute you change its model to an opt-in subscription service, it becomes led by commercial imperatives rather than public service imperatives. When viewed in these terms, arguments against the licence fee essentially boil down to arguments against the existence of a cultural and arguably social institution.
There's also the fact the BBC is a projection of our soft power on the world. You can't argue with a straight face that a nation's cultural exports have no effect on its place in the world. The USA, for instance, has a very weak and underfunded public service broadcaster, meaning its cultural exports are wedded by dint of their funding models to the furtherance of US corporate hegemony. Think, "USA number 1" spoken in broken English, and the global fascination with US products. Sure, we can and do project UK interests by disseminating our culture around the world and there's no reason that can't theoretically be done by private funding any more than already happens, but consider that if we lose the BBC, there ceases to exist a projection on the world made by a public institution, and we hand over cultural soft power entirely to corporate interests with, at best, a casual, somewhat disinterested regard for what 'Britishness' even means and whose primary motivation is to make money. If under a subscription-funded model market logic dictates that self-censoring is essential in order to capture, for example, the Chinese market, then there could come a point where someone at the BBC might need to make an editorial decision to alter its output in a way that doesn't necessarily serve the British, because as mentioned above, commercial factors will come into conflict with whatever remnants are left of its public service objectives. If the BBC's funding is secure as it is under the licence fee system, it can deliver on its public service remit more effectively.
There was a comparison to SKY further up the thread, which I think stated that SKY is only more if you pay for Sports.
The lowest TV only package with SKY is around £27 a month, I think. So, BBC comes in at £13.75 a month cheaper.
You get a good few channels with the SKY basic package though it takes some channel surfing to find anything decent, outside of Atlantic. Interested in documentaries, pay more, want sports, pay more, want movies, pay more.
There is some good stuff on Netflix, SKY, Amazon and Apple, but there’s a hell of a lot of rubbish.
I can see the point regarding a fair share funding approach and understand to an extent, the frustrations at having to pay for BBC. Personally though, I’m more than happy with paying it and there’s a lot of great drama, comedy and documentaries produced by the BBC, which make it worthwhile.
-
- Posts: 14571
- Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
- Been Liked: 3437 times
- Has Liked: 6339 times
Re: TV Licence
BBC TV - I'll watch MOTD occasionally, sometimes Graham Norton and I'm looking forward to Line of Duty.
Norton - I can catch most of that on YouTube
MOTD - I only need our game, I don't watch the whole show anymore and if we've been pasted I won't watch any of it
Line of Duty - will appear on Netflix at some point, thats where I watched the other seasons.
I get better value for my money from Netflix, Amazon and Disney.
Channel 4 does a lot of stuff online for free too, just watch It's A Sin, for example which I believe the BBC turned down...
All of those are voluntary use and payment, the BBC is the only one that forces households to pay under threat of court action...
The BBC are also part of Britbox, subscription based service so they want your money twice...
Norton - I can catch most of that on YouTube
MOTD - I only need our game, I don't watch the whole show anymore and if we've been pasted I won't watch any of it
Line of Duty - will appear on Netflix at some point, thats where I watched the other seasons.
I get better value for my money from Netflix, Amazon and Disney.
Channel 4 does a lot of stuff online for free too, just watch It's A Sin, for example which I believe the BBC turned down...
All of those are voluntary use and payment, the BBC is the only one that forces households to pay under threat of court action...
The BBC are also part of Britbox, subscription based service so they want your money twice...
Re: TV Licence
It does represent great value for money. I think its just the way it's funded that causes issue.
It looks like it will be cutting costs by reviewing its "comedy" output too which is good. Personally I find my licence fee being spent on the modern woke stuff a bit gualing but each to their own.
I'm counting down the days until I can cancel everything associated with sky. That is horrendous value for money given the shite coverage of everything it puts out of late
It looks like it will be cutting costs by reviewing its "comedy" output too which is good. Personally I find my licence fee being spent on the modern woke stuff a bit gualing but each to their own.
I'm counting down the days until I can cancel everything associated with sky. That is horrendous value for money given the shite coverage of everything it puts out of late