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.
 
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
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.