TV licence non payment could be made a civil offence

[Jimmy-J]

I don't see it as cheating the system, I see it as the system cheating me.

What about people who have the means to receive live programs, but genuinely don't need a TV licence, do you see them as cheating licence dodgers?

[denphone]

BBC ready to contemplate alternative to the compulsory licence fee.

http://www.theguardian.com/media/201...-model-changes

[Jimmy-J]

The BBC is clearly nervous about proposing a voluntary subscription system – the model that funds Sky – and so one idea being aired is "an enforced membership scheme", which is a curious way to describe any kind of club.

I think they'll try for this alternative, in other words, no alternative what-so-ever for the public... Pay up, or suffer the consequences!

[Escapee]

Originally Posted by martyh

Rubbish ,the subscription will be roughly twice the amount of the current licence fee simply because that is the market rate set by sky and VM

What has the cost of subscription set by sky or VM got to do with what the BBC charge. The fee would be the cost to run the service divided by those who choose to subscribe.

The cost per subscriber would most likely be higher than the current licence fee because there would be no subsidy from those who decide not to subscribe, plus the additional cost introduced by encryption.

Originally Posted by Escapee

What has the cost of subscription set by sky or VM got to do with what the BBC charge. The fee would be the cost to run the service divided by those who choose to subscribe.

The cost per subscriber would most likely be higher than the current licence fee because there would be no subsidy from those who decide not to subscribe, plus the additional cost introduced by encryption.

Everything ,they will be the BBC's competition ,they have set the UK market for subscription tv and the BBC can only follow Sky and VM and since the BBC is a program maker the subscription will be high

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Jimmy-J

I think they'll try for this alternative, in other words, no alternative what-so-ever for the public... Pay up, or suffer the consequences!

More enforcement less choice

[Escapee]

Originally Posted by martyh

Everything ,they will be the BBC's competition ,they have set the UK market for subscription tv and the BBC can only follow Sky and VM and since the BBC is a program maker the subscription will be high

That statement makes no sense to me at all.

Just because they go to subscription their costs will not rise as a program maker. The only rise in costs will be from encryption for their programs delivered by the local TV transmitter, and any costs incurred by sky or VM to encrypt the service.

I still stand by my statement that the price of subscription will be:

Cost to run the BBC/number of subscribers

Originally Posted by Escapee

That statement makes no sense to me at all.

It's not difficult ,2 companies in direct competition will have similar pricing structurs

You're forgetting that unlike now the BBC will have to make a profit and keep shareholders happy ,it would most likely spend years as a loss making company ,much the same as Sky did ,you may even see the BBC selling BB and phone services and going head to head with Sky and VM

[Escapee]

Originally Posted by martyh

It's not difficult ,2 companies in direct competition will have similar pricing structurs

You're forgetting that unlike now the BBC will have to make a profit and keep shareholders happy ,it would most likely spend years as a loss making company ,much the same as Sky did ,you may even see the BBC selling BB and phone services and going head to head with Sky and VM

I must have missed the part that said the BBC would have to make a profit and keep shareholders happy.

I believe the BBC could never survive as a private company. I also think they could never compete or be in direct competition with the likes of sky or VM who are service carriers. (as well as program makers in the case of sky)

The BBC could only offer what they currently offer, but they know that they currently have an unfair funding scheme where they are subsidised by those of us who don't have a choice.

Originally Posted by Escapee

I must have missed the part that said the BBC would have to make a profit and keep shareholders happy.

I believe the BBC could never survive as a private company. I also think they could never compete or be in direct competition with the likes of sky or VM who are service carriers. (as well as program makers in the case of sky)

The BBC could only offer what they currently offer, but they know that they currently have an unfair funding scheme where they are subsidised by those of us who don't have a choice.

How do you think a company funded by subscriptions works ? Of course the BBC will have to make a profit ,removing it's status as a public service which is obviously what you and other detractors of the licence fee want ,means it will be a private company

Originally Posted by heero_yuy

That's not a given. There are plenty of models for private providers that are not for profit organisations. Building societies for a start. You're too blinkered by, in your eyes, the brilliance (NOT) of the BBC and its current funding model.

If the BBC can retain it's current excellent service and keep costs to the public the same then i am in favour of any model it chooses ,but i seriously doubt that as a private company it would be possible to run the BBC as a not for profit organisation ,it is quite frankly a ridiculous idea .I might add also that i am certainly not blinkered ,i simply favour the cheapest option to retain a national service that is used by 80% of the population

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by martyh

If the BBC can retain it's current excellent service and keep costs to the public the same then i am in favour of any model it chooses ,but i seriously doubt that as a private company it would be possible to run the BBC as a not for profit organisation ,it is quite frankly a ridiculous idea .I might add also that i am certainly not blinkered ,i simply favour the cheapest option to retain a national service that is used by 80% of the population

Why would the BBC become a private company if all they do is set a subscription charge based on the present charge set by the Government, that way those who wish to pay and watch can and those who don't want to pay don't watch.

A subscription linked to a decoder and card would NOT mean the BBC is a private company. All it would do is make the BBC produce quality programs because if they don't they will not get the subscribers. If it mean that the BBC's output gets better then that's great if not then the senior managers might at last get a kick in the behind unlike now where they know they get the money no matter how bad they perform.

Originally Posted by Sirius

Why would the BBC become a private company if all they do is set a subscription charge based on the present charge set by the Government, that way those who wish to pay and watch can and those who don't want to pay don't watch.

A subscription linked to a decoder and card would NOT mean the BBC is a private company. All it would do is make the BBC produce quality programs because if they don't they will not get the subscribers. If it mean that the BBC's output gets better then that's great if not then the senior managers might at last get a kick in the behind unlike now where they know they get the money no matter how bad they perform.

The question you have to ask is why would a public service broadcaster need a decoder ,the BBC is meant to be a public service with a shared cost ,any other model simply will not be a public service imo.
If you are saying that we no longer need a public service broadcaster like the BBC,CH4 and i think CH5 then that is a totally different discussion to one of should we have TV licence

[AdamD]

I'd imagine the BBC would do ok being a private entity, given the number of people who watch their amazing *gag* shows like Eastenders and the like, I bet they wouldn't mind paying £1-3 a month for access to all the BBC TV shows.

[tweetiepooh]

Originally Posted by Sirius

A subscription linked to a decoder and card would NOT mean the BBC is a private company.

Not all receivers have a card slot. The ones in my TV's don't and why should I have to buy something extra to watch the BBC?