BBC licence fee

blueinsa said:
I will answer.

I don't believe any fucker should be earning amounts like this in a publicly funded organisation for presenting a football show once a week or a radio show or some daytime tv.

The BBC are crying they don't have any money yet they have little or no issue in paying ridiculous fucking salaries to often talentless twats like Linerkar who spends half his time trying to be edgy on twitter.

Time for an avowed socialist to explain the £Millions being spent on salaries?
Click to expand...

The thing that amazes me with his salary is the very little work he has to do. Zoe Ball presents that dancing program in the evening (when it's on) and she is on the radio daily. Graham Norton does a few shows and he also does radio.

Lineker meanwhile presents an hour of MOTD and he doesn't even do it on a Sunday. I can remember when he was moaning about quitting MOTD years ago because of the travel to Manchester. I know there is a work to do to prepare the show but I'd take doing a days work for a million quid a year, what does he do to earn that money for the rest of the week?

I don't mind him otherwise and everyone is entitled to their view but bring back the days of Des Lynam who were proper presenters and got about everywhere. Lynam is a UKIP supporter apparently though so fat chance of that if he wasn't past it...
 
MaineDAWG2008 said:
Linekar can earn whatever BBC pays him. Fact is TV license should not be a mandatory fee. Thats our argument.
Click to expand...
Pretty much, and it astounds me all the counter-arguments being presented that don't even relate to what many people are calling for.

Ending the licence fee doesn't mean we are calling for an end to the BBC. If the BBC wants to exist, it needs to generate its own funds to keep itself in business and not rely on taxing the public, especially when it pays its presenters and members over £1m a year and at the same time telling over 75's their free BBC is being cancelled.
 
The BBC have just reported a huge drop in licence fee payers. I wonder how much of it is down to Netflix, its recent politicisation or simply the fact that a lot of people can't afford to pay Lineker et al millions a year in the current climate. Either way, it's becoming increasingly clear that the licence fee is a dying model.

www.thetimes.co.uk

BBC licence fee paid by 250,000 fewer people

TV licence sales have collapsed by 250,000 as evasion and younger viewers’ preference for streaming services hit BBC revenues.Households bought 25.671 million licences in the past year, down from 25.927 million a year earlier. It was the sharpest drop in recent history. Sales dipped by 3
www.thetimes.co.uk www.thetimes.co.uk
 
Mëtal Bikër said:
Pretty much, and it astounds me all the counter-arguments being presented that don't even relate to what many people are calling for.

Ending the licence fee doesn't mean we are calling for an end to the BBC. If the BBC wants to exist, it needs to generate its own funds to keep itself in business and not rely on taxing the public, especially when it pays its presenters and members over £1m a year and at the same time telling over 75's their free BBC is being cancelled.
Click to expand...
Would it last beyond a week? I fumed at Hansen getting the equivalent of 167+ licence fees every time he parked his arse on the sofa, and I boil at the organisation dismissing genuine complaints with a cursory fuck off, we know better, approach to those licence payers.
 
Dave Ewing's Back 'eader said:
Would it last beyond a week? I fumed at Hansen getting the equivalent of 167+ licence fees every time he parked his arse on the sofa, and I boil at the organisation dismissing genuine complaints with a cursory fuck off, we know better, approach to those licence payers.
Click to expand...
If it became a subscription service, like Netflix or Disney+, i'm sure those defending the Beeb will flock to purchase a subscription to keep their big names in the manner to which they are accustomed for many many years, presumably.

I mean those defending taxing the public to pay for it are doing so because they love their BBC so much, i'm sure they'll be happy to pay whatever costs the BBC comes up with in order to keep the service running. ;)
 
Mëtal Bikër said:
If it became a subscription service, like Netflix or Disney+, i'm sure those defending the Beeb will flock to purchase a subscription to keep their big names in the manner to which they are accustomed for many many years, presumably.

I mean those defending taxing the public to pay for it are doing so because they love their BBC so much, i'm sure they'll be happy to pay whatever costs the BBC comes up with in order to keep the service running. ;)
Click to expand...

There are many people defending it but do they actually watch anything on it? I watch MOTD once a week but is that worth £12 a month for 9 months of football a year? It's the only thing in the world where we happily give away £155 for nothing because we have to. Netflix is half the price and I use that on a daily basis and I also pay for Amazon Prime for half the price which comes with free next day delivery on everything I buy.

The BBC is a weird thing because it somehow becomes embroiled in politics yet at the end of the day it's a terrible service for the cost. The only argument for it is indeed because it's a vital service for many but for most it's a complete waste of money.

It's a shame that these sort of arguments even go into politics at all because I don't see what's political about it. It would be like being forced to pay £155 a year for Royal Mail when you send one letter a year, it just makes no sense. I think the socialists would love that though.
 
Personally I’m a fan of it and never had an issue with the licence fee model. I’d worry if it went down a commercial route that some areas of interest it provides to people would just completely die a death due to them not being financially viable.

It is still my main go to for news as well, particularly on the radio.
 
meltonblue said:
Personally I’m a fan of it and never had an issue with the licence fee model. I’d worry if it went down a commercial route that some areas of interest it provides to people would just completely die a death due to them not being financially viable.

It is still my main go to for news as well, particularly on the radio.
Click to expand...

The sport part is run like a commercial corporation with there click bait articles so that won’t change at all.
 
Mëtal Bikër said:
If it became a subscription service, like Netflix or Disney+, i'm sure those defending the Beeb will flock to purchase a subscription to keep their big names in the manner to which they are accustomed for many many years, presumably.

I mean those defending taxing the public to pay for it are doing so because they love their BBC so much, i'm sure they'll be happy to pay whatever costs the BBC comes up with in order to keep the service running. ;)
Click to expand...

I would. Sounds like I'm in a minority on here but I think its great value for money. Think I only really regularly consume TMS and 6music, but there's some great documentaries, and other programmes. Am also happy that my licence fee contributes to programming that I don't personally enjoy but lots of others do. I know my one remaining grandparent listens to the radio a lot and whilst I imagine she's more of a radio 4 listener than 1extra, I think its great that it can provide so much for so many.
 
joe123 said:
I would. Sounds like I'm in a minority on here but I think its great value for money. Think I only really regularly consume TMS and 6music, but there's some great documentaries, and other programmes. Am also happy that my licence fee contributes to programming that I don't personally enjoy but lots of others do. I know my one remaining grandparent listens to the radio a lot and whilst I imagine she's more of a radio 4 listener than 1extra, I think its great that it can provide so much for so many.
Click to expand...

My sentiments too.
 
meltonblue said:
My sentiments too.
Click to expand...

Guess it's down to people's tastes, and it's a fair enough statement that if you're not consuming something, you shouldn't pay. I'd be amazed if everyone who hates the BBC/Licence fee has absolutely nothing to do with BBC content tho. After Google and social networks, its the UKs most visited website, so it's a fair assumption a lot of us are interacting with the BBC to some degree.
 
inbetween said:
There are many people defending it but do they actually watch anything on it? I watch MOTD once a week but is that worth £12 a month for 9 months of football a year? It's the only thing in the world where we happily give away £155 for nothing because we have to. Netflix is half the price and I use that on a daily basis and I also pay for Amazon Prime for half the price which comes with free next day delivery on everything I buy.

The BBC is a weird thing because it somehow becomes embroiled in politics yet at the end of the day it's a terrible service for the cost. The only argument for it is indeed because it's a vital service for many but for most it's a complete waste of money.

It's a shame that these sort of arguments even go into politics at all because I don't see what's political about it. It would be like being forced to pay £155 a year for Royal Mail when you send one letter a year, it just makes no sense. I think the socialists would love that though.
Click to expand...
Its all about advocating that people are given the choice, rather than have it be forced upon people.

Keep it advert free if they want, have it cost £7 a month still, but give people the option to NOT pay for it, too.
 
joe123 said:
I would. Sounds like I'm in a minority on here but I think its great value for money. Think I only really regularly consume TMS and 6music, but there's some great documentaries, and other programmes. Am also happy that my licence fee contributes to programming that I don't personally enjoy but lots of others do. I know my one remaining grandparent listens to the radio a lot and whilst I imagine she's more of a radio 4 listener than 1extra, I think its great that it can provide so much for so many.
Click to expand...
Then fine, make it a subscription service and then you can pay whatever the BBC demands for its service, allowing those of us who rarely if ever watch it, to not have to pay for a "tv licence" to enjoy the other live events that we do enjoy and willingly pay for.

Just don't advocate that others have to pay for a service that many no longer find value for money, worth the money or provides anything close to "quality" programming. You do, that's fine. Others don't, so we shouldn't be forced to pay a tv tax.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top