Funding of the BBC

[OLD BOY]

Here is a prime example of how the licence fee system actually hinders the BBC from delivering its content to viewers. Ofcom is playing hardball with the Beeb's plans to provide more content on the i-Player and they are continuing to restrict the amount of time it is on there, in most cases, to a 30 day period.

Moving to a voluntary subscription model should resolve this problem as this would mean the BBC was competing fairly and on a level playing field. Thus, they would have more freedom from Ofcom as the competition concerns would no longer be there.

This decision clearly shows that the existing licence fee system is actually detrimental to viewers as well as to competing providers.

https://advanced-television.com/2018...layer-changes/

[Mr K]

Think you've succeeded on boring us to death on your many threads/posts on this one OB !

Compared to Sky/VM subs it's terrific value, £12 a month. The cost is only so low because of its universal nature, moving to a subscription would mean costs increasing significantly and it content being the same as commercial channels, ie. crap. The BBC make programmes others don't because of its funding stream.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by Mr K

Think you've succeeded on boring us to death on your many threads/posts on this one OB !

Compared to Sky/VM subs it's terrific value, £12 a month. The cost is only so low because of its universal nature, moving to a subscription would mean costs increasing significantly and it content being the same as commercial channels, ie. crap. The BBC make programmes others don't because of its funding stream.

Whilst others might agree with OB's sentiments l am with you for once on this Mr K as l think for the breadth of content they make the license fee is well worth the the value IMO.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Mr K

Think you've succeeded on boring us to death on your many threads/posts on this one OB !

Compared to Sky/VM subs it's terrific value, £12 a month. The cost is only so low because of its universal nature, moving to a subscription would mean costs increasing significantly and it content being the same as commercial channels, ie. crap. The BBC make programmes others don't because of its funding stream.

I agree about the comparison of the cost of the licence fee with the pay tv operators, but I think it will prove unsustainable to continue to fleece those who don't want to access BBC content.

You may be bored with the debate on this, Mr K, but for some people this is a real issue. We keep hearing people prattle on about fairness, and yet for some curious reason, those same people are silent on this clear example of unfairness.

[denphone]

Well if you think you or others are being fleeced by the BBC then like any customer who goes out shopping for something you don't have to buy it OB as its that simple at the end of the day..

[Mythica]

Originally Posted by denphone

Well if you think you or others are being fleeced by the BBC then like any customer who goes out shopping for something you don't have to buy it OB as its that simple at the end of the day..

But you do have to buy it if you want to view other content that is classed as live TV.

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

I agree about the comparison of the cost of the licence fee with the pay tv operators, but I think it will prove unsustainable to continue to fleece those who don't want to access BBC content.

You may be bored with the debate on this, Mr K, but for some people this is a real issue. We keep hearing people prattle on about fairness, and yet for some curious reason, those same people are silent on this clear example of unfairness.

Its peanuts compared to what people shell out on pay tv subscriptions. I don't really believe there are that many that don't access any BBC services, which include much more than just TV. Services like Local Radio, website, news weather - it has a public service remit, who would fill these roles of they weren't 'profitable' ?

Originally Posted by Mr K

Its peanuts compared to what people shell out on pay tv subscriptions. I don't really believe there are that many that don't access any BBC services, which include much more than just TV. Services like Local Radio, website, news weather - it has a public service remit, who would fill these roles of they weren't 'profitable' ?

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Mr K

Its peanuts compared to what people shell out on pay tv subscriptions. I don't really believe there are that many that don't access any BBC services, which include much more than just TV. Services like Local Radio, website, news weather - it has a public service remit, who would fill these roles of they weren't 'profitable' ?

It's not peanuts to everyone, and certainly not in comparison with Amazon or Netflix.

---------- Post added at 13:34 ---------- Previous post was at 13:30 ----------

Originally Posted by denphone

Well if you think you or others are being fleeced by the BBC then like any customer who goes out shopping for something you don't have to buy it OB as its that simple at the end of the day..

I am prepared to pay a subscription to the BBC. But I agree with those who watch other channels and not BBC channels that they should not have to pay.

A subscription would ensure that they operated on a more commercial basis, which would ensure that much of the waste and bureaucracy that we are paying for would end. The BBC needs more financial discipline and needs to be able to act as a commercial broadcaster in order to do what it wants to do (eg provide programmes for longer than 30 days on the BBC i-Player)

---------- Post added at 13:36 ---------- Previous post was at 13:34 ----------

Originally Posted by denphone

Whilst others might agree with OB's sentiments l am with you for once on this Mr K as l think for the breadth of content they make the license fee is well worth the the value IMO.

It's not good value if you don't watch it, Den. It's a waste of money.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

It's not peanuts to everyone, and certainly not in comparison with Amazon or Netflix.

Well, when Netflix or Amazon provide 10 national radio stations, 40 local radio stations, a World News service, and an extensive website with news, educational, and factual information, that would be a valid comparison.

Until then you’re comparing apples with hedgehogs.

Originally Posted by Hugh

Well, when Netflix or Amazon provide 10 national radio stations, 40 local radio stations, a World News service, and an extensive website with news, educational, and factual information, that would be a valid comparison.

Until then you’re comparing apples with hedgehogs.

Exactly!

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Well, when Netflix or Amazon provide 10 national radio stations, 40 local radio stations, a World News service, and an extensive website with news, educational, and factual information, that would be a valid comparison.

Until then you’re comparing apples with hedgehogs.

I was talking about the amount of money, Hugh, I was not making that kind of comparison in response to this particular post.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

I was talking about the amount of money, Hugh, I was not making that kind of comparison in response to this particular post.

But the amount of money is what provides the breadth of services - they charge slightly more than Netflix and Amazon per month, but provide so much more...

[SnoopZ]

I don't watch BBC TV so I don't want to to be forced to pay £12 a month.

I do use the BBC websites but I would stop doing that in an instant if it was subscription as it is alot of money in my opinion, we should get the choice.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Hugh

But the amount of money is what provides the breadth of services - they charge slightly more than Netflix and Amazon per month, but provide so much more...

They do in terms of breadth of services, Hugh, I agree, but Netflix provides much more excellent scripted content.

To be clear, I would still pay for the BBC if it scrapped the licence fee in favour of a subscription, and I think most households would do the same. But the Beeb would be much more accountable to its subscribers, much more careful with how it spends its money and would no longer charge people who didn't watch its output. What's more, the Government would interfere less than it does now and the BBC could pursue its on demand ventures to its heart's content without being slapped down by Ofcom.

I think a subscription based service has benefits to all, actually.