[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

As I said, you misunderstand. The Conservatives have long been sympathetic to the replacement of the licence fee with a subscription method. As long as this preference continues, then it will end up as legislation and the Beeb will be obliged to cease having the licence fee available to fund their operations.

That is my premise. If anything changes, then clearly that would alter my prediction.

Not so much alter your prediction as you be proven wrong.

I’ve been reading licence fee abolition stories since I was in nappies, OB. There’s nothing substantially changed.

And regardless - even if I accepted the premise which I don’t - I still think a commercial player would jump at being in a position to be there when someone presses “1” on their TV.

So pray tell me, if the government decides to go for the licence fee being abolished in favour of a subscription, how exactly is broadcasting from transmitters remotely possible?

Is that it, broadcast television is only viable with public subsidy?

That is your challenge, jfman. It’s not about personal preference or what you believe people want, it’s about practicalities.

There’s nothing more practical about being an exclusively streaming service than using that to complement broadcast television. It’s less practical.

My prediction is based on what I think will happen, not what I prefer will happen. Personally, as long as everything I want to watch is available to access without having to sit through adverts, I am happy. Others can do as they please.

But everything I predicted in 2015 is coming to pass. Nothing has happened that seriously challenges that prediction. And it’s still only 2022.

---------- Post added at 18:19 ---------- Previous post was at 18:17 ----------



I’ve never had problems with streamers either. Any more ‘problems’ you want to invent?

It’s not inventing things to say operators have internet outages. Most of them have a faults page such is the regularity these occur!

The bit in bold is demonstrably untrue by virtue of how frequently you wish to reduce consumer choice, not increase it.