Might as well bin my TV license ........

Wolf said:
Not for me it's not, I don't watch BBC, don't listen to BBC radio stations (not that they need a few for that), I don't use iPlayer, and my kids don't watch the BBC kids channels. I literally get no value out of my BBC licence paying fee. In fact I've watched one 40 min programme on it in 2018 so that equates to £147 for 40mins viewing what a bargain:oops:, could easily not have watched that 1 thing as well.

What value do I get from it then but do I have a choice not to pay it as I own a TV set absolutely no choice or value at all.

However the kids watch Sky, I watch Sky sports, Mrs loves the movie channels and box sets, we get so much more value from that.
Click to expand...

There's a lot of 'SAD' about rhat post!
 
KenL said:
Agree completely. What you get from BBC is far better value than Sky.
Click to expand...

No.

What YOU get from BBC is far better value than Sky.

What I get from BBC is far worse value than Sky.
 
So funny reading through this thread. It's quite unbelievable in this age that we are forced to pay money to watch television. Its no different to all of us being forced to pay for sky, Netflix etc.

Opinions of the quality or lack of is totally irrelevant. It should be as simple as - pay for it if you like it, don't if you don't. Purchases of any product or services should be a choice - that simple.

If there that good, then give people an option. Stand by your so called quality and value for money. Let the market speak
 
I remember a It’s Not the Nine O’clock News sketch about this , might try and find it.
Couple of Rowan Atkinson’s on here.

Most media now is pay as you view the beeb needs to modernise.
They do make SOME good programs but to many repeats.

Plus if you don’t pay your sky bill they just cut you off.
If you don’t pay your licence fee they can take you to court and make you.
 
Last edited:
MetalMickie said:
No.

What YOU get from BBC is far better value than Sky.

What I get from BBC is far worse value than Sky.
Click to expand...

Why not just stop paying your licence? YOU are clearly not happy.

The quality of (some of) the programming like Attenborough, Spring Watch the radio channels with sports coverage , Blue Peter etc are worth the licence fee to ME (apologies to anyone who took offence to my earlier use of "you").

Also advert free TV is a lot better than having endless gambling adverts.
 
Last edited:
KenL said:
Why not just stop paying your licence? YOU are clearly not happy.

The quality of (some of) the programming like Attenborough, Spring Watch the radio channels with sports coverage , Blue Peter etc are worth the licence fee to ME (apologies to anyone who took offence to my earlier use of "you").

Also advert free TV is a lot better than having endless gambling adverts.
Click to expand...

Is your opening line a serious question?

The whole point of this debate, as it evolved, is that it is not a choice open to us if we want to watch live television even on platforms other than BBC.

And, for what it's worth, none of the programmes you mentioned hold any interest for me.

However, I am happy that you find so much of their output appealing.

I just don't understand why you would think that I, and others, should subsidise your viewing choices.
 
MegaSteve said:
I
Genuine question then...

What are your thoughts on the growing number viewing content on kodi and other similar platforms?
Click to expand...

As a confirmed technophobe I have zero knowledge of kodl(?) or any similar platforms and what people can or cannot access.

Are there any financial consequences?
 
bobmac said:
They could buy 193 half a million pound houses for that.
How big is the set?
Click to expand...
But when it’s complete you can sit and watch it, proud in the knowledge you helped pay for it. ;)
 
Wolf said:
I couldn't agree less, we have a responsibility to be decent human beings, and if we are in position to help others then by all means I'm a huge advocate of doing whatever can be done to help and to help out charities that have meaning to us, but I don't agree we have a social responsibility to each other to ensure someone else has their TV licence paid, a roof over their head yes as nobody should have to be homeless, food in their bellies yes, heating yes, but a TV licence nope I can't buy into that paying money into something I myself would choose not to have if I had choice so someone else can watch a repeat of bargain hunt or antiques roadshow nope...
Click to expand...

I never mentioned anything to do with paying the licence fee for others.

I was talking about the the social responsibility I believe that we all have to share the cost of what is pretty much an essential and very valuable public service, and for which affordable alternatives are not available for many.

That I can afford to have Sky and Netflix - and that hence my watching and listening to BBC channels is as a result much less than it was even 5yrs ago - actually matters nothing to me when I pay my TV licence. I am fortunate - many others are much less so.
 
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
I never mentioned anything to do with paying the licence fee for others.

I was talking about the the social responsibility I believe that we all have to share the cost of what is pretty much an essential and very valuable public service, and for which affordable alternatives are not available for many.

That I can afford to have Sky and Netflix - and that hence my watching and listening to BBC channels is as a result much less than it was even 5yrs ago - actually matters nothing to me when I pay my TV licence. I am fortunate - many others are much less so.
Click to expand...
Have you actually read what you've posted.

Yes you mentioned social responsibility and it was done in context of me not agreeing to pay toward licencing for others to watch BBC as why should I.. You clearly said because you believe we have social responsibility to our neighbour and that includes paying toward things so the inclination was considering the thread at hand that it was inclusive of paying toward TV licence... Yes I've paraphrased because can't be bothered to scroll back through..

Then in this post above alone your opening line is you haven't said anything about TV licence then the very next paragraph is :
I was talking about the the social responsibility I believe that we all have to share the cost of what is pretty much an essential and very valuable public service, and for which affordable alternatives are not available for many.
Click to expand...
A direct point about social responsibility to pay for a public service (BBC via TV licence) a direct contradiction of what your claiming you didn't say initially.. As I say you can dodge using the words TV licence or BBC by saying "public service" but when that's been the conversation topic and your responses, your just making yourself look contradictory with your own words and imo a bit silly just to disagree with my opinions on the subject...

But feel free to debate what you didn't say even though its clear for all see the context considering the discussion at hand...
 
Just when did the BBC, or any other broadcaster, become "pretty much essential"?

Food, shelter, clothing, heating are all essentials but broadcasting services. Really?
 
MetalMickie said:
Just when did the BBC, or any other broadcaster, become "pretty much essential"?

Food, shelter, clothing, heating are all essentials but broadcasting services. Really?
Click to expand...
Yep same here I thought housing, food, shelter, heating and medical assistance or supplies would be a little more essential and I'm all for helping those in need of those fundamental essentials.. But access to BBC as an essential, where can I get off that bus at the next available stop as I don't buy into it
 
jusme said:
So funny reading through this thread. It's quite unbelievable in this age that we are forced to pay money to watch television. Its no different to all of us being forced to pay for sky, Netflix etc.

Opinions of the quality or lack of is totally irrelevant. It should be as simple as - pay for it if you like it, don't if you don't. Purchases of any product or services should be a choice - that simple.

If there that good, then give people an option. Stand by your so called quality and value for money. Let the market speak
Click to expand...

It is disingenuous for you to suggest that the BBC does nothing more than produce TV programmes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top