Tv Licence

[PrickLocater]

In all honesty, yes.

Can you please tell everyone what the Public Service is ? I mean it must do something the other channels don't do.

 

[digidude]

I'm not interested in european TV and I doubt that many people here are

we have a whole section dedicated to it m8

https://www.digitalworldz.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?f=132

and some forums are ONLY about european tv

BBC world is a subscription channel, yet you cant subscribe if youre in the UK

 

[karym6]

For gods sake Choice, if anyone likes watching things trooping the colour or the remberance day parade then this is a public service.

I think the BBC also does a whole bunch of educational programmes late at night for kids doing the GCSE's. And as stated here already, they provide free programmes for things like S4C.

And - can someone let em know what other channel covers the elections?

Choice, no one is telling you that you are wrong in what you are saying - everyone has their own view. You cannot expect people to agree with you if you are just trying to shout them down all the time.

 

[karym6]

we have a whole section dedicated to it m8

https://www.digitalworldz.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?f=132

and some forums are ONLY about european tv

BBC world is a subscription channel, yet you cant subscribe if youre in the UK

This is something that has intrigued me for quite some time. I was upset to read in the news recently that a pub in England was fined for showing Premiership games via a european sattelite broadcaster. If memory serves, yes they were paying the TV license.

I think people should have the right to choose where they get the broadcast from, the pub was fined for showing games that BSkyB wouldnt show due to lack of demand, even though they had the rights to do it. So the enterprising landlady signed her self up for some European stuff (legally, probably not from info you can get here).

 

[PrickLocater]

For gods sake Choice, if anyone likes watching things trooping the colour or the remberance day parade then this is a public service.

So this is something only the BBC can do ? You seem to have forgotten the other channels also have PSB obligations

I think the BBC also does a whole bunch of educational programmes late at night for kids doing the GCSE's.

The Education department could offer bids to the TV stations to do this because it would be a damn site cheaper

And as stated here already, they provide free programmes for things like S4C.

Can you please be honest when making posts because the BBC does nothing for free it has a budget (this year) of £3.5 BILLION

And - can someone let em know what other channel covers the elections?

Err well I know ITV does it for sure and Skynews so perhaps you should try harder

Choice, no one is telling you that you are wrong in what you are saying - everyone has their own view. You cannot expect people to agree with you if you are just trying to shout them down all the time.

All I'm saying is those who want it should pay for it simple as.

Ps I'm not shouting people just tend to get annoyed when their funding gets criticised

 

[digidude]

the womans name was karen murphy, of the red white and blue pub, she had a legal subscription to a greek broadcaster, at less than 10% of the price sky wanted to charge her for less games

sky, setanta and the FAPL hole ALL uk pubs and clubs to ransom with the formation of an illegal cartel, and using taxpayers money to take a civil matter to criminal courts using a private prosecution firm that is purely paid for by sky, there is info in the main news room about all of this

in the UK you have NO choice, domestic HAVE to pay the BBC, if pubs want footy then they HAVE to pay hugely inflated prices to sky

but the pubs are now fighting back

 

[little_pob]

Why do those who like the BBC think they should have a god given right to screw everyone else blind ?

Make your mind up! Either the money is the BBC's and they have been forced to pay for the digital upgrade. Or the government has taken the proactive(?) choice to use some of the licence fee to free up the analogue bandwidth to sell off to the highest bidder, rather than getting the money from elsewhere (borrowing/taxation).

I'm not interested in european TV and I doubt that many people here are

As pointed out by digidude, I think those who've got a euro sat setup might disagree

Back to what I said about language

But why should the argument and comparisons be limited to English speaking countries?

India abolished their TV licence and Iran has never had one. Despite the fact that these could bolster your argument, you're saying they should they be ignored because their official language isn't English?

Why not have the choice after all according to those who like the BBC it's smashing, super & great I mean who wouldn't want to subscribe to that lol

I agree to some extent. But as it is currently illegal to own/rent equipment capable of receiving a broadcast TV signal without a TV licence, its a bit like arguing that you don't use the NHS and you want that part of your taxes back. Yes, I'm calling the TV licence a tax...

Actually it's around the same as the UK but they have their ads spread out differently and the proof is in the shows running times You see this is another one I've seen a hundred times before played by the BBC people

Not quite sure on the point you're trying to make here...

Are you saying that UK made shows now have international running times to allow syndication to the lucrative North American markets? If so, I agree! Even the BBC's Dr Who program has a ~44 minute running time, rather than the traditional 28-30 or 55-60 minutes.

Or that you've seen the number of adverts increase in recent years? Ofcom rules actually state no more than 12 mins per hour (not the 12.5 I mentioned earlier), and no commercial break longer than 5 mins. However, channel "idents" and adverts for upcoming shows, films, documentaries etc don't count towards the length of a commercial break, so perhaps its the addition of these that have caused a perceived increase in ad breaks?

(Actually the BBC's ability to cross advertise its stations is something that annoys Sky and ITV as they effectively loose the advertising revenue from that slot when they do so.)

Actually the need to pad the breaks out is largely due to the number of US shows we now show, and that UK shows are now made for the international market.

If an ad break does run longer than the time allowed complain to Ofcom.

Back to the above and ask me if I really care about adverts

I cannot stand adverts, but that doesn't make me watch the BBC. I'll download the US shows with them cut out or buy the DVD.

And again the BBC abuses it's position by making shows for BBC World. You see they've started putting shows on their own channels instead of selling them to the highest bidder!

If the 75% figure of the BBC's income is from the licence fee is assumed to be correct. That leaves £875m from other ventures that hasn't been raised from the licence fee, even if the £75m they 'give' to S4C comes from this you've still got £800m. Who is to say that this isn't what is funding the BBC World programs? Actually, that's rhetorical as the beeb refuse to be audited!

Do you honestly believe your BBC is really a public service ?

Using the definition of PBS, yes. In terms of importance to the country, no. But some would argue otherwise.

 

[karym6]

So this is something only the BBC can do ? You seem to have forgotten the other channels also have PSB obligations



The Education department could offer bids to the TV stations to do this because it would be a damn site cheaper




Can you please be honest when making posts because the BBC does nothing for free it has a budget (this year) of £3.5 BILLION



Err well I know ITV does it for sure and Skynews so perhaps you should try harder



All I'm saying is those who want it should pay for it simple as.

Ps I'm not shouting people just tend to get annoyed when their funding gets criticised

No,, it is not something only the BBC can do - but no other broadcaster does it as there is little money in showing it.

As for the election coverage - I dont get Sky news, the only decent 24hr news channel I get is BBC News 24. As for free programming for S4C - it is free, we have been over this before.

Now, Choice - you can continue to go round and round and round over this issue - you will only end up with the same comments as all the other TV License threads here. Nothing you say here is going to change the way it is, all you can do is refuse to pay and run the risk of getting yourself a fine. Nothing you say here is going to change the way the BBC is funded and this thread wont last long enough to see a change in the way it is funded.

At the end of the day, you are just going to have to come to terms with the fact that some people enjoy paying for the BBC and its programmes. I am sure they will be able to come to terms with the fact that you dont want to pay.

Also, on licensing in other countries, and as an aside to prevent this thread from going stale. A freind of mine who is Finnish just told me that 99% of Finland thought they didnt need to pay for a license after this year - thier anaologue service goes of this year. They thought that the digital switch over would stop all that, which it hasnt, now they are all trying to pay for their license.

 

[karym6]

the womans name was karen murphy, of the red white and blue pub, she had a legal subscription to a greek broadcaster, at less than 10% of the price sky wanted to charge her for less games

sky, setanta and the FAPL hole ALL uk pubs and clubs to ransom with the formation of an illegal cartel, and using taxpayers money to take a civil matter to criminal courts using a private prosecution firm that is purely paid for by sky, there is info in the main news room about all of this

in the UK you have NO choice, domestic HAVE to pay the BBC, if pubs want footy then they HAVE to pay hugely inflated prices to sky

but the pubs are now fighting back

I dont agree with all of this, but I do think that if the landlady has paid her TV License - she should then be able to get any subscription TV she wanted from anywhere as long as it was all done properly (if you know what I mean).

I think it is totally unfair that she souldnt be able to sort out a deal with Nova over this in the UK.

 

[PrickLocater]

Make your mind up! Either the money is the BBC's and they have been forced to pay for the digital upgrade. Or the government has taken the proactive(?) choice to use some of the licence fee to free up the analogue bandwidth to sell off to the highest bidder, rather than getting the money from elsewhere (borrowing/taxation).

Sorry but I never changed my mind. When the BBC got it's increase the Digital upgrade was taken into account after all it's supposed to be the TV Licence even though we all know it's direct link with the mighty BBC. I know the BBC moans about it's below inflation settlement but then again if they didn't waste hundreds of millions each year they wouldn't have a problem would they.

As pointed out by digidude, I think those who've got a euro sat setup might disagree

Okay little_pob what TV Licence funded channels to you enjoy watching in Europe ?

But why should the argument and comparisons be limited to English speaking countries?

Think and ye will understand

India abolished their TV licence and Iran has never had one. Despite the fact that these could bolster your argument, you're saying they should they be ignored because their official language isn't English?

India has a population of over 1.3 billion so the language problem doesn't exist. Iran is an Islamic state and so is a different kettle of fish so perhaps you should fish a little longer

I agree to some extent. But as it is currently illegal to own/rent equipment capable of receiving a broadcast TV signal without a TV licence, its a bit like arguing that you don't use the NHS and you want that part of your taxes back. Yes, I'm calling the TV licence a tax...

I don't know why you are refusing to read anything that contradicts you but It's already been pointed out that you can own a TV without needing a TV Licence

Not quite sure on the point you're trying to make here...

Are you saying that UK made shows now have international running times to allow syndication to the lucrative North American markets? If so, I agree! Even the BBC's Dr Who program has a ~44 minute running time, rather than the traditional 28-30 or 55-60 minutes.

Yes like The Bill which is around 44/46

http://nforce.nl/index.php?switchto=nfos&menu=quicknav&item=viewnfo&id=121019

Or that you've seen the number of adverts increase in recent years? Ofcom rules actually state no more than 12 mins per hour (not the 12.5 I mentioned earlier), and no commercial break longer than 5 mins. However, channel "idents" and adverts for upcoming shows, films, documentaries etc don't count towards the length of a commercial break, so perhaps its the addition of these that have caused a perceived increase in ad breaks?

Ads have increaed but like I've said this doesn't bother me and it seems to be the only real argument the pro BBC lot can come up with which shows how lame the argument for a TV Licence is

(Actually the BBC's ability to cross advertise its stations is something that annoys Sky and ITV as they effectively loose the advertising revenue from that slot when they do so.)

Yep another case of the BBC abusing it's position because they get billions every year no matter what

If an ad break does run longer than the time allowed complain to Ofcom.

LOL this one still, look seriously ads don't bother me I know you'd love them too but they don't

I cannot stand adverts, but that doesn't make me watch the BBC. I'll download the US shows with them cut out or buy the DVD.

I had a sneaky suspicion you would hate them lol Perhaps you should buy a pvr

Using the definition of PBS, yes. In terms of importance to the country, no. But some would argue otherwise.

And we both know the real reason why they'd argo otherwise don't we

 

[karym6]

I don't know why you are refusing to read anything that contradicts you but It's already been pointed out that you can own a TV without needing a TV Licence

yes, we have seen this already here - but we also know that the set must be de-tuned and not connected to an ariel or other device capable of receiving a signal. So you can own it and have it plugged into a DVD/PVR/VCR - but can only watch pre-recorded media.

 

[PrickLocater]

No,, it is not something only the BBC can do - but no other broadcaster does it as there is little money in showing it.

But like I said you just need the education department to put it out to bid so the education programmes still get made but for alot less.

As for the election coverage - I dont get Sky news, the only decent 24hr news channel I get is BBC News 24.

Now I have heard everything. BBC news decent ?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=411846&in_page_id=1770

Also why do you think the BBC used £200.000 of TV Licence money to stop the Balen Report going public ? Do you think it really was just a coincidence that the report had information which shown the BBC to be biased ??

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/10/15/nbeeb15.xml

As for free programming for S4C - it is free, we have been over this before.

The taxpayer has to fund it even though it only has a hand full of viewers. £85 million from the government and whatever it is from the mighty BBC. Please don't insult people by telling them thats free because it's cost everyone here

Now, Choice - you can continue to go round and round and round over this issue

You've been shot down more times than a world war 1 pilot

- you will only end up with the same comments as all the other TV License threads here.

You mean the ones which clearly prove the majority are being fleeced by the minority.

Nothing you say here is going to change the way it is, all you can do is refuse to pay and run the risk of getting yourself a fine.

I'll never get fined because I know how the system works and they never get anything from me

Nothing you say here is going to change the way the BBC is funded and this thread wont last long enough to see a change in the way it is funded.

Never ceases to amaze me how arrogant the Pro Licence people can be. You really can't see how your coming across to others can you.

At the end of the day, you are just going to have to come to terms with the fact that some people enjoy paying for the BBC and its programmes.

Never disagreed with that :silly:

Why not just be honest and say your not comfortable with the anti TV Licence threads because you never want your subsidises to finish. You clearly don't want people to know the truth either which would explain why you have told lies here

 

[digidude]

As for the election coverage - I dont get Sky news, the only decent 24hr news channel I get is BBC News 24.

unless youre a virgin customer, if you recieve news24 then you also recieve sky news

and just by de-tuning your tv and disconnecting from the aerial isnt enough to not have a license, you still have equipment capable of recieving the broadcast (even though its not recieving it)

you have to have the tuner circuit completley removed to be exempt

 

[little_pob]

Sorry but I never changed my mind. When the BBC got it's increase the Digital upgrade was taken into account after all it's supposed to be the TV Licence even though we all know it's direct link with the mighty BBC. I know the BBC moans about it's below inflation settlement but then again if they didn't waste hundreds of millions each year they wouldn't have a problem would they.

You've missed my point here the money cannot be both the BBC's and the Government's with the level of autonomy the BBC (currently) has.

Okay little_pob what TV Licence funded channels to you enjoy watching in Europe?

Personally, none. But it was you who made the sweeping statement about people on this site not wanting to watch European TV.

Think and ye will understand

Its quite clear we're not singing from the same song sheet here, so humour me... rather than just suggesting I read/think a bit more, provide a starting point.

India has a population of over 1.3 billion so the language problem doesn't exist. Iran is an Islamic state and so is a different kettle of fish so perhaps you should fish a little longer

Nothing to do with fishing or trolling (or what ever you want to call it). Just pondering why you feel that English is so special that it should be that only TV licences in English speaking countries should be under discussion.

You shouldn't use the argument that the US produces programs in English, as many are broadcast across Europe too. Either dubbed, subbed or broadcast untouched.

I don't know why you are refusing to read anything that contradicts you but It's already been pointed out that you can own a TV without needing a TV Licence

I admit that sentence was badly worded. I know perfectly well that you can own a detuned TV for the purpose of watching DVDs or playing consoles.

But did you know that pairing said TV with a VCR (even if that is detuned also) means that you should be paying for a TV licence under the current rules?

Ads have increaed but like I've said this doesn't bother me and it seems to be the only real argument the pro BBC lot can come up with which shows how lame the argument for a TV Licence is

I've stated the UK guidelines as given by Ofcom. Admittedly I watch very little 'live' TV.

I'm neither pro- nor anti-BBC, just clearing up some misconceptions. If you see any in my posts do keep pointing them out.

LOL this one still, look seriously ads don't bother me I know you'd love them too but they don't

I had a sneaky suspicion you would hate them lol Perhaps you should buy a pvr

Heck, even the 'adverts' between BBC programs annoy me

I can just about put up with the "next time on..." ones. Hence the downloads/dvds remark.

I'm even using the Ad-Block Plus plug in for firefox... In fact the only adverts I willingly watch are movie trailers.

And we both know the real reason why they'd argo otherwise don't we

Some of us like a debate, even though by now its clear neither 'camp' is going to change its mind...

 

[karym6]

But like I said you just need the education department to put it out to bid so the education programmes still get made but for alot less.



Now I have heard everything. BBC news decent ?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=411846&in_page_id=1770

Also why do you think the BBC used £200.000 of TV Licence money to stop the Balen Report going public ? Do you think it really was just a coincidence that the report had information which shown the BBC to be biased ??

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/10/15/nbeeb15.xml



The taxpayer has to fund it even though it only has a hand full of viewers. £85 million from the government and whatever it is from the mighty BBC. Please don't insult people by telling them thats free because it's cost everyone here



You've been shot down more times than a world war 1 pilot



You mean the ones which clearly prove the majority are being fleeced by the minority.



I'll never get fined because I know how the system works and they never get anything from me



Never ceases to amaze me how arrogant the Pro Licence people can be. You really can't see how your coming across to others can you.



Never disagreed with that :silly:

Why not just be honest and say your not comfortable with the anti TV Licence threads because you never want your subsidises to finish. You clearly don't want people to know the truth either which would explain why you have told lies here

Choice, I can see why you were banned the last time.

As little_pob says - some of like a debate - but if you just want to sit on this merry go round and keep repeating your self ad-infinitum untill more people agree with you go ahead. At the end of the day, I doubt many people care about your views on the matter, instead they will care about the matter itself. People will make up their own mind as to whether they want to pay it, regardless of how you wish to portray them.

And as for me being pro license, where did you get this? I just dont mind paying for it.

And, Digidude, it looks like you can just get away with it being de-tuned and disconnected etc: https://tvlicensing.metafaq.com/tem...opicID=$general&id=JT0CEVUQUC2AUL91URCM03DIP8

But thats vague enough to give people strange ideas.

 

[digidude]

the enforcement officer will visit, look at your tv and declare that you do need a license as it has a tuner to recieve the broadcasts, the back of a license also says that if you have a PC tuner card, you need a license.

tell them you havent got a telly, you watch DVDs on a laptop and if they want entry to check then bring a warrant, otherwise to stop harrassing you

 

[PrickLocater]

Choice, I can see why you were banned the last time

I'm not the one on this thread that's pretending to be the big head and know everything like you've done a few times now. Whether you like it or not people aren't daft and so you've made alot of enemies in my opionion

As little_pob says - some of like a debatep

So do I but as we've seen the pro BBC TV Licence people hate to be proven wrong don't you karym6

but if you just want to sit on this merry go round and keep repeating your self ad-infinitum untill more people agree with you go ahead.

LOL Kary open your eyes and you'll see even here you're a minority because this thread and the poll proves it so yes keep attacking yourself with the merry go round rubbish lol

And as for me being pro license, where did you get this? I just dont mind paying for it.

Your posts prove it

And, Digidude, it looks like you can just get away with it being de-tuned and disconnected etc: https://tvlicensing.metafaq.com/tem...opicID=$general&id=JT0CEVUQUC2AUL91URCM03DIP8

But thats vague enough to give people strange ideas.

Now why do you think that is duh

 

[PrickLocater]

unless youre a virgin customer, if you recieve news24 then you also recieve sky news

and just by de-tuning your tv and disconnecting from the aerial isnt enough to not have a license, you still have equipment capable of recieving the broadcast (even though its not recieving it)

you have to have the tuner circuit completley removed to be exempt

No this is the actuall law and this is was on the tvl website before they changed it

Q What if I only watch videos?

If a television or video recorder (VCR) can receive signals, then you need a licence. However, you don't need a licence if the equipment is not connected to an aerial, satellite receiver or cable and you only use it to watch pre-recorded tapes. This sometimes happens in schools and colleges.

It was replaced with this,

What if I only use a TV to watch videos/DVDs/as a monitor for my games console? Do I still need a licence?

You need to notify us in writing that this is the case and one of our Enforcement Officers may need to visit you to confirm that you do not need a licence.

Please write to us including your name, address and the reason you believe that you don't need a licence at:

TV Licensing
Bristol
BS98 1TL

Of course this is bull and you under no obligation to inform TV Licensing

 

[digidude]

No this is the actuall law and this is was on the tvl website before they changed it

Quote:
Q What if I only watch videos?

If a television or video recorder (VCR) can receive signals, then you need a licence. However, you don't need a licence if the equipment is not connected to an aerial, satellite receiver or cable and you only use it to watch pre-recorded tapes. This sometimes happens in schools and colleges.

It was replaced with this,


Quote:
What if I only use a TV to watch videos/DVDs/as a monitor for my games console? Do I still need a licence?

You need to notify us in writing that this is the case and one of our Enforcement Officers may need to visit you to confirm that you do not need a licence.

Please write to us including your name, address and the reason you believe that you don't need a licence at:

TV Licensing
Bristol
BS98 1TL

Of course this is bull and you under no obligation to inform TV Licensing

and this was at the same time the text on the back of a license was changed to something along the lines of 'equipment able to recieve'

i lived so close to a mast for 21 years that you didnt need an aerial, yet people still had to have licenses. i hate the thought of paying it as much as everyone else (which is why i dont ) but what they tell you that you can get away with, they then use as evidence in a court that you do need one as you have equipment that is capable of recieving the signal

 

[PrickLocater]

The latest letter I've had from them digidude even says owning a computer or mobile phone requires a BBC TV Licence which I'm sure you're aware is complete bull. You only need a licence if you watch live transmissions but they forget to add that to the letter