The Television License Fee?

Morals?
Didn't mention morals.
It's just hypocritical to lambast the licence fee and TV in general and then enjoy the benefits of them.
Especially when other people have paid the licence fee.
 
The BBC has clearly stated that you do not require a license to watch iplayer.You only need l license if you are watching live streaming.

"You do not need a television licence to watch television programmes on the current version of the BBC iPlayer. You will need to be covered by a TV licence if and when the BBC provides a feature that enables you to watch 'live' TV programmes on any later version of the BBC iPlayer which has this option... A 'live' TV programme is a programme which is watched or recorded at the same time (or virtually the same time) as it is being broadcast... "

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2008/01/iplayer_does_not_require_a_tv_1.html


Try it for yourself.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01j8l9h/Countryfile_20_05_2012/

It will only ask if you have a license if you try and watch live streaming.
 
Then complain to the BBC and ask them why they are giving things away for free.As a license payer you have a right to know.
 
My point was more one of download ala itunes style vs piracy. If some of the high quality series the Beeb produced was downloadable and could be saved to dvd I'd be less tempted to use other means. The pricing of tv dvd box sets is nothing like music so is it any wonder. I still buy (and sell) music but am put off when some shows that have epi running times of 25 mins cost the same as shows that are double, with sometimes more epi per series/season.
 
Well it's a matter of perspective. The BBC gives away it's programming to anyone in the world outside of the UK for free. Lots of stuff is repeats and frankly for the most part I have not made use of the I-player option. Still why would you think it necessary to pay for something that is expressly offered as a free service? I rarely have time to watch telly and if it was my habit to sit watching the thing all day then I guess I could see the point in paying. It's the same as when the newspapers were giving away free editions. If you wanted to pay to have the newest edition then go ahead and pay for it. If you would rather just see the news that had already been published why would you go and buy the newest edition? Do you object to people using the library to read the paper? It's again a similar situation.

If the costs were applied to all users rather than just UK residents I would have more sympathy for your position. Each to their own. Personally I find that most of the news is already available online faster than the TV.

FWIW

LFD
 
The TV license people are bullies. I have had them get info from me and I explained that I did not watch TV as it was being shown. I know lots that have had a rep show up and pretend to be some sort of officer (they have no right of entry unless you let them in). The rep gets paid for checking to see if your TV is attached to an antennae. This process gets repeated every couple of years with the guy at the door trying to intimidate the person who is being questioned. Last time told him to take a flying leap and was told he would come back with a constable to check me out. Of course a complete bluff. Nothing happened. I know that they have convince the foreigners living near me that they were allowed in and ,although these non english speakers did not use their TV, they were fined because out of their ignorance they had plugged in their antennae.

Let's just take the fee out of general revenue or don't charge and harass the general public. Seems a real waste of funds. They have spent far more than the license fee on hassling me.

FWIW

LFD
 
The only problem I have with the BBC is that you are pretty much forced into paying for it. You should have the choice. As of now you try proving that you do not watch BBC or use BBC services. Even Digital Channels force you to have BBC as part of their packages.

You are forced into having to pay for a TV license. You are forced to pay for BBC, whether you want it or not.

You should be given a choice. I won't sit here and say I have never watched a programme on BBC but in all honesty I could live without it and without the extra expense. There is no real reason why I should not be given a choice other than corporate greed.
 
You should complain to a supervisor. Everyone has bad employees. I didn't have a TV license for 3 years, I sent off the form to say I didn't need one and never saw an inspector once.
 
Exactly what I quoted.



It is up to them to investigate, yes. If you state you only use your TV for certain activities, or only use a black and white over a colour TV, you have to prove it, supply evidence, when they visit.



With a colour TV license costing £145 a go and at a population of what 60-70 million? You're telling me they don't make any money out of it?

I find that very hard to believe.

Regardless, it doesn't change my opinion. I don't see why I should get this forced down my throat. I should have a clear cut choice to opt out rather than threats of fines and/or imprisonment. You pay for BBC, not for any other channel. So why can I not watch any other channel for free? Can't have one without the other, see?

Subscribe to Sky? Need a TV license because you have to take on BBC. You don't get to opt out (as far as I'm aware).

It is in essence, ridiculous.
 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/annualreport/exec/financial/overview/income.shtml

http://www.bbc.co.uk/annualreport/exec/financial/overview/balance.shtml

http://www.bbc.co.uk/annualreport/exec/financial/overview/cashflow.shtml

I assume what they call "Group Surplus" (£483,000,000) is in essence profit.

Thats like 3,331,034 TV Licenses....
 
Sorry, I'm late to the party - but while I do think that the licence fee is a little steep, but I don't mind the principle behind it.

Ad breaks get right on my wick - especially when the show you are watching has a 'previously on...' at the start & then a 'coming up today', then about 5 minutes of actual content followed by 'coming up after the break' and then after about 5 minutes of adverts which are about a minute long each now (I swear they weren't that long when I was a kid) they have a 'before the break' followed by a 'still to come' and the entire process repeats so that it takes an hour to an hour and a half to watch about 20 minutes of original content, all of which has been ruined because they have shown you a clip of the best bit every ad break for 2 weeks before the show, then at the start and at the end of last weeks and if you're unlucky, before & after every ad break in the show!

Even the catch-up services have started sneaking adverts in on us now!!

[/rant ends]
 
I forgot where I was in the states but I was watching an episode of Friends. After the pre-credit sequence placed it went to ad break, then the title song, ad break, about 5 mins of the show, ad break, 5 more mins or so, ad break, rest of the show, ad break, end credits, then ad break before the next program.

Is it like this everywhere?
 
Serves you right for watching Friends! Don't expect sympathy from any blokes around here.

(I was going to call you a big girl's blouse, but seeing as you're a mod I won't push my luck. )
 
TVL is run by a company called Capita.Its salesmen have no more authority than the person they are visiting but as you say,use intimidation and other underhand tactics to fool frightened and vulnerable people into buying a license they possibly don't even need.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

G
Doctor Who: Boom review: All hail the conquering hero
Replies
0
Views
44
Geek
G
G
Doctor Who: The Devil’s Chord review: Is this madness?
Replies
0
Views
44
Geek
G
G
Doctor Who Space Babies review: Bet you didn’t expect that
Replies
0
Views
47
Geek
G
G
The Tribeca Film Festival will debut a bunch of short films made by AI
Replies
0
Views
21
Geek
G
A
Enovix Corp (ENVX) Q1 2024 Earnings Call Transcript Highlights: Surpassing Revenue Expectations ...
Replies
0
Views
1
admin
A
Back
Top