Not everyone on VM has a HD capable box or a HD TV to enjoy it with. So, many VM customers would still either require a HD box that seemlessly downscales to SD or for VM to downscale the HD feeds from BSkyB before retransmission to SD boxes. That sounds like a lot of capital outlay for VM.
---------- Post added at 11:36 ---------- Previous post was at 11:34 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Fry
no, the bbc trust,
this is the only bbc can surrvive with fading into obserity
|
I see you have a Norman Collier keyboard there Alan.
I don't see how you can suggest that the BBC be allowed to set the amount the public is charged for the TV licence. The BBC can put forward a business plan and a request for funding but should in no way set the licence fee themselves. In recent years some of the licence revenue has been used for DSO and some is to be used in the future for broadband rollout. As a public service broadcaster, Channel 4 and its regional variants also receive funding either directly or indirectly (via BBC subsidies) from the licence fee. So the BBC are not the only ones who are supported by what is, for legal purposes, public taxation and, even if they were, they should not be deciding the amount.
Don't forget that the BBC has other revenue streams through its Worldwide (formerly Enterprises) and other business interests. Given that they do not rely on commercial advertising, the BBC should be far less affected by the economic downturn than other broadcasters. Personally, I feel thet they should be able to make any necessary savings without degrading the quality of the service and without an increase to their licence fee subsidy.
New costs have been introduced in recent years such as upgrading to HD recording and transmission of programmes but technology has also made for great savings with, for example, the vast libraries of programming now being held digitally on disk rather than on video tape and film leading to savings in storage costs and instant access to the archives.