tele licence
 

I have just got my reminder today..due the last day of feb,,,,,,,£126..50.. I think its disgusting for some of the tripe we have to watch... i wish i could opt out ...........what your views/http://smilies.vidahost.com/cwm/3dlil/eek2.gif http://smilies.vidahost.com/cwm/3dlil/eek2.gif

Re: tele licence
 

Re: tele licence
 

The BBC should have to survive on it's own merit, like every other company. It's the last dinosaur left over from nationalised industry.

The licence fee should be scrapped.

I was unlucky enought to catch one of their programmes this week. The BBC thought it was wise to spend our money buying up perfectly habitable houses in the north-east, and then subjecting them to hurricane, fire and flood to see what would happen. A waste of money and housing.

Re: tele licence
 

I'm sure the beeb have lost it rindy lol .

I pay by dd too so dont really notice what I'm paying out for the stuff I don't really watch.

Re: tele licence
 

we are the only country in the world that has a tv licence

i always thought we had freedom of choice but we have to pay for the bbc even if we decide never to watch it

you shuold be able to buy tv's and satelite boxes that wont pick up the bbc's signal

as i understand it we have to pay for the bbc because they have a deal with the govenment to provide educational programs like open university, kids shows etc

that been the case adverts wouldnt hurt between programs and the amount of repeats is digracefull especialy since other channels like UK gold 1 and UK gold 2 are available on satelite/cable tv that cover a lot of bbc and itv shows etc

Re: tele licence
 

i watch an awfal lot of satelite programes,,i wish we could opt out of b.b.c. .all i would miss is prime ministers questions....and you can watch that on sky news anyway

Re: tele licence
 

It's time for the BBC to survive on its merits not on Government handouts like at present. Has anyone else noticed that you can't find any decent films to watch anymore without having to subscribe to Sky?
I used to be able to sit down on a Friday or Saturday night and find a decent film to watch. I disagree with the amount of money Sky charge. Whenever I want to watch a film I find myself looking through the French and Spanish channels for one on the many films transmitted in English.

Re: tele licence
 

I have a question. I think I read somewhere that they were phasing out analogue tv and in the near future (2010?) only digital tv will exist. That means that you either need to subscribe to Sky or Cable or something like that or you need to buy a digibox. Currently available via digibox you get the main uk channels which includes BBC. Therefore, I'm assuming that BBC get some sort of license from the makers of the digibox to be able to broadcast BBC. Would imagine that Sky also pay a subscription to BBC to be able to broadcast it.

So, my question is - when analogue is completely phased out and everyone has to buy digiboxes or subscribe to a digital service, will BBC still charge a license fee?

Re: tele licence
 

The licence fee is a joke. It's so so rare that I ever find anything interesting to watch on the BBC.
They should have to advertise like the other channels, heck maybe they'll even get decent content like ITV and C4.

The only things I watch on the BBC are Hustle (which is like a few weeks in a year) and QI which is also on a huge break right now and only on for a few weeks a year.

Re: tele licence
 

If they think they can get away with it they will....:rolleyes:

Re: tele licence
 

It doesn't quite work like that. Analog and digital are just transmission methods. The TV companies pay to have their TV channels transmitted whatever the method. Sky pay's money to ASTRA for using the satellites for their programmes. I don't know who owns the terrestrial transmitters but it doesn't matter if it is analog or digital, the TV channels pay to have its programs transmitted. It is, I think, a little different with cable because the cable companies own the network of cables etc. When you buy a satellite or terrestial digital receiver (digibox) the maker of the box gets the money. I think there is still a license to be paid by the box manufacturer to the digital standard owner.

One point I would like to make. Most people don't realise that when analog is switched your video will no longer be able to record terrestial TV. If you want to watch one channel and record another you will need two digiboxs. You also need one for every TV in your house if you watch different programs on each at the same time.

Re: tele licence
 

Thanks for answering that Neil. I didn't know so it's useful information.

Re: tele licence
 

There is loads of free TV on Sky without a subscription (legally :)). You can get, for about £20 last time I bought one, a freeview card for a sky digibox so you can get all your usual BBC1,2,3,4, ITV1,2, Ch4 and Ch5 plus dozens of other free chanels. Yes I know some are shopping channels but you get free music and news channels as well. More in fact than with a terrestrial digibox through your ariel.

Re: tele licence
 

Yes but you'd still need a licence to watch the BBC channels though.

Re: tele licence
 

As seems to be the general concensus it's about time the BBC were made to stand on their own two feet. We should have freedom of choice as to wether we want this channel or not. So few of us watch it much anymore but are forced to pay for it. It's outrageous and should be stopped.

Re: tele licence
 

It's a drug isn't it? You can see it in those glazed eyes that stare at the box. Those who say it's rubbish should try to break the habit. Get rid of the TV and you remove the control it exercises over your views, beliefs and attitudes.

Read books; they are so much more interesting and informative. What! Next thing you know everyone will
be anarchic. Having thrown the TV out of the window,
the population will throw out the Government and all religious leaders.

Re: tele licence
 

No you don't mate. You need a licence to own a TV.

Re: tele licence
 

I bow to your knowledge, but I do think you are allowed to own a tv set, and if you can prove you don't use it, you don't need a licence.

Re: tele licence
 

to be precise you must have a tv licence if you own anything capable of recieving the bbc signal

a broken tv would not need a licence

Re: tele licence
 

What is going to get interesting in that BBC now provide a lot of programs for download over the net. If you didn't own a TV or have a TV card in your PC would you still require a TV license to download the programs? Techically you do not own anything capable of receiving a TV signal, you do however own a PC capable of playing Mpeg movies.

I too believe the BBC should be self funded. Adverts are a way of life now and don't interrupt programs that much. In fact without a PVR(Sky+ etc) that can pause TV it becomes a pain watching a film on BBC as there are no toilet/beer breaks.

Another point you may not realise is that when you buy anything capable of receiving a signal the retailer is legally obliged to send your name and address to teh TV license people so that they know who has equipment.

Re: tele licence
 

Proving you don't use it could be difficult if it works.

Re: tele licence
 

Read this here

Re: tele licence
 

That still doesn't cover downloaded programs if you don't have anything as describe above. I've pinged an email off to ask

Re: tele licence
 

Even if you don't have a tv you still need a b&w license to have a radio.

Re: tele licence
 

That used to be the case but I think they have ditched that idea.
The license is to actually receive TV signals through the air. A bit like amater radio operators need a license. It has nothing to do with watching the BBC. So technically id I only ever watched French TV transmitted from France I would still need a license.

Re: tele licence
 

It's a drug. Just observe the glazed eyes of those that watch the box. You are being threatened by mass control by the media (drug barons) where attitudes, beliefs and values of a large proportion of the population are being homogenised. Children are particularly vulnerable.

So cast off the chains of authority. Be anarchic. Throw that TV out of the window. You never know, we may awake from the pacivity induced by the systems of education and entertainment and start thinking for ourselves of our condition. There is too much authority around that knows better than we do. And that includes Government and Religion.

I thought Gayle was having a joke on our behalf. Entwisi is probably right that downloaded video is cost-free.

Re: tele licence
 

well i am going to pay my bill tomorrow, but i dont half begrudge it...

Re: tele licence
 

Only another fourteen to buy and they'll give you a free one.:p

Re: tele licence
 

http://smilies.vidahost.com/contrib/...laugh1blue.gifooooh.i thought you were a friend,,,,

Re: tele licence
 

I am. I'll come round and watch your's with you.:p

Re: tele licence
 

do you mean when i am 80... or whatever age it is,when you get freebies

Re: tele licence
 

I am amazed that people still insist on equating the TV licence with the BBC.

Even if the TV licence was directly equated to the BBC, which it isn’t, it is still good value because there is more than just BBC1 and 2. There are several digital channels plus dozens of radio stations and of course all the other commercial channels be they cable or satellite. How many trips to the cinema would the cost of the licence fund?

Your licence authorises you to set up an audio and video receiving station in your house much in the same way that you need a licence to operate a CB radio or a Ham radio system or use a car/motor bike/lorry on the public highway. It has nothing to do with the BBC or any other organisation apart from the government.

Although a department of the BBC does the actual collecting of the licence money and monitoring who has and has not got a licence the money actually goes to the government and the government funds the BBC with an amount that is based on the licence fee. But you can bet your sweet life that the government keeps some of the money collected.

If you have a licence read what it states on the back.

To save you the trouble:
What you need a TV licence for

You need a TV licence to install and use any equipment to receive or record television programme services – for example a television set, video recorder, set-top box, PC with a broadcast card or any other TV receiving equipment.

Surely that is plain enough? The BBC doesn’t charge a licence fee – the government does.

Incidentally the BBC does fund itself with the sale of programmes to other TV stations around the world.

Re: tele licence
 

its still painful coughing up £126,50 ....http://smilies.vidahost.com/contrib/blackeye/deal.gif,still we all have it to do...

Re: tele licence
 

They've changed that recently, to include any other aswell as pc's. suppose thats to include mobile phones.
Bit complicated on set ups cos skybox's output analogue on the ariel lead. I wasn't sure what would be the best card to get for my pc, as I wanted to connect the skybox to it. If I had an analogue card the skybox would work but when analogue is turned if, I'd only be able to get the skybox. If I have a digital card, I'd have to connect the sky box another way, which i didn't want to do.I've since seen a dual analogue digital card , but don't know how well they work.

Re: tele licence
 

In answer to Jambutty.

How is the BBC funded then, as opposed to independent television companies, if not through the television licence fee?

Re: tele licence
 

Take a look at the BBC website

http://www.bbc.co.uk/info/licencefee/

Which explains how they spend the licence fee

I think it's pretty self explanatory and they themselves claim to receive all of the licence fee and spend it on programming.

Re: tele licence
 

I'm sure I have heard or read somewhere the license is going up to £131 in April.

Re: tele licence
 

It's cheaper if you dd

Re: tele licence
 

In the same way that the NHS or schools are funded garinda. From the money the government raises in various taxes and licensing fees.

As I said before the licence allows you to legally view TV. It doesn’t matter who the broadcaster is or how you receive the programmes. All those people clammering for no licence fee because they don’t like what is on the BBC channels should find their remote and switch to a channel that does have a programme to their liking. One man’s lousy programme is another person’s great programme.

If there were no licence fee the government would have to get the money to run the BBC by increasing taxes or close the BBC down. If we all didn’t pay the licence fee in one year the BBC would still exist and broadcast.

Whether the BBC gets all the licence fee is debatable in the same way that all of the Road Fund Licence doesn’t go to the maintenance of existing roads and the building of new ones.

Re: tele licence
 

If the were no bbc the gov would still have a licence system.

Re: tele licence
 

If you look at the BBC site, it clearly states that they get all the licence and that they spend it on programming. If they didn't have a licence they would have to put adverts on like ITV, Channel 4 and Five do. They've been going for quite some time now so it's obviously a successful way of doing it.

I suppose it can be broken down quite simply - what do you want - to pay a licence fee or to watch adverts.

You also have to weigh up the quality of some of the programmes. Whilst I can't say that BBC1 is particulary brilliant as it caters for the masses, the loss of the licence fee would affect the less mainstream programming on BBC2.

Re: tele licence
 

Those stats are for the public to argue over. Every year the BBC bigwigs negotiate with the government what funding they will get to run the BBC.

Sorry Gayle but you’ve got it wrong. It isn’t a case of pay a licence or watch adverts. It’s a case of pay a licence fee and watch anything or don’t pay a licence fee and watch nothing.

Re: tele licence
 

No it's a case of pay your licence fee and for that the government throws in the bbc programs. If you didn't have the licence clearly the government wouldn't pay for the bbc and you'd loose it. If they didn't have the bbc you'd still pay a licence fee and get less for it. so really in a wierd way, the bbc are bonus channels.

Re: tele licence
 

I'm quoting from the BBc's own website and that's what they say

Re: tele licence
 

the TV license is purely for the bbc they even ironicly run an advert occasionaly showing how they spend your TV license fee

the only thing the government has involvement with is upholdingthe rule that you have to have a licence

where did you get your information from jambutty because if you are rightthen the BBC are liars

Re: tele licence
 

hi Gayle ..i would rather have adverts... you can fast forward them off ,
http://smilies.vidahost.com/otn/happy/11zwinky.gif http://smilies.vidahost.com/otn/happy/11zwinky.gif http://smilies.vidahost.com/otn/happy/11zwinky.gif

Re: tele licence
 

I'd rather have sky plus

Re: tele licence
 

got that,,,,,beats b,b,c any day

Re: tele licence
 

good in it granny c

Re: tele licence
 

I too have Sky+ but i can't see how a piece of technology that records video can be compared to a broadcasters decision whether to have adverts or not?

there are other PVRs as well as Sky+

Re: tele licence
 

Don't start me on Sky. You pay Rupert £40 a month or whatever stupid amount it is now for 400ish channels and you can only watch one at once. Why charge extra for Sky+? You can only watch one at once still ( sort of ). The technology is in the Sky+ box so it cost's Sky nothing extra if you are recording a program. Rupert is not impressed that I am now able to put my sky card into my Dream Multimedia Dreambox and watch and record Sky programs that I pay for. It has benefits over the Sky+ as well, you can transfer the recorded programs to your PC and burn them to DVD, you can watch the programs on your PC by streaming them from the Dreambox, you can even watch them on the other side of the world over the internet (if your upload speed is fast enough ;) ).
Don't get excited, Sky has not been hacked. I can just watch channels I pay for in a non Sky Satellite receiver. He is that pee'd off he has tried to force them to stop manufacturing the Dreambox.

Re: tele licence
 

ive also just recieved my tv licence for end of feb!! cant believe the price!! where do they get it from, it will go up again in april to probably £131 cuz it always gos up a fiver :ф

Re: tele licence
 

Robbing bar stewards :mad: they should deffo get some adverts on there if they want to make money, and not take the mickey by charging us for what is, mostly, drivel and repeats. Apart from Porridge and Top Gear I can't think of much else that I watch on BBC.

I pay by DD too but I'm a proper scrooge so will notice the few extra £s it's costing this year .......... bah humbug.

Re: tele licence
 

Mines due at the end of the month but I am only paying it to avoid a 12 x 6 bedroom. :D

Re: tele licence
 

We buy a licence to view TV programmes by whatever means there are.
That licence money goes to the government.
The BBC is funded by the government from the proceeds of the licence fee. Whether the BBC gets the full amount or more or less is open to debate.

The Inland Revenue collects taxes and VAT on behalf of the government.
DVLA collects the Road Fund Licence on behalf of the government.
The manager of a newsagents, sells the goods, buys in stock and pays the staff wages on behalf of the shop owner.
The BBC collects the licence fee on behalf of the government. The BBC also has the authority to ensure that every household that has TV receiving apparatus installed in the house has a licence. If not they are empowered to taken the person to court. The BBC is very keen to get as much licence money as possible so that at the next round of funding negotiations they have a stronger case for increased funding.

Why is it so hard for people to understand that the TV licence fee has nothing to do with the BBC directly?

The BBC publishes that pie chart of how a typical licence fee is spent because it helps to establish that the BBC is independent of the government, which it is except for funding.

Even if the BBC goes down the advertising road we will still have to a pay a TV viewing licence fee. Read the back of the licence! It doesn’t matter which channel you watch you still have to buy a licence if you want to stay legit.

Re: tele licence
 

Good.

Like I posted earlier, the BBC should survive or fail on it's own merit, like every other company in the country.

Re: tele licence
 

Quote:

Like I posted earlier, the BBC should survive or fail on it's own merit, like every other company in the country.

OK! Fine! But you would still have to pay a licence fee.

Re: tele licence
 

No problem. I'm against unfair competition and monopolies.

Re: tele licence
 

Why if the BBC was self funding? The Government only charge the license so they can fund the BBC.

Re: tele licence
 

cos then they'd decide it's a good established form of income and the'yd carry on with it off course. You'll never get rid of the tv licence.

Re: tele licence
 

well i paid it today... :mad: so now i can watch all the rubbish they put on.... for another year:eek:

Re: tele licence
 

There is no unfair competition with the BBC and it certainly isn’t a monopoly. BBC TV and radio used to be a monopoly but Radio Caroline broke that mould as did ITV when that came on air.

There are myriads of TV channels to watch some for free and most for a fee. Although even the free commercial ones are not really free. We, the general public pay for the adverts in the cost of the goods that we buy that are being advertised.

On reflection the BBC gets the thin end of the stick as far as competition is concerned. The commercial channels and in particular Sky constantly outbids the BBC for programmes and sport.

The commercial channels might compete with each other for viewers but the BBC supplies a public service free to the public and independent of government influence.

The government, Neil, doesn’t charge a TV licence just so it can fund the BBC. It charges a viewing licence because the government has decreed that in order to view TV programmes we have to have a licence. You need a licence for CB radio or Ham radio. What do they fund? We are required to buy a Road Fund licence if we intend to use a motor vehicle on the public highway. The money raised does not fund road repairs and new roads, only some of it. The government creams off a lot for other things. If there were no TV licence but the government still wanted to run a public service broadcasting organisation they would still have to fund it from our taxes.

Whilst there is some company broadcasting TV programmes there will always be a licence.

Many years ago when there was only the ‘wireless’ and the only stations to listen to were the Home Service, the Light Programme and the Third Programme yet wirelesses were capable of receiving overseas programmes these same arguments raged.

Re: tele licence
 

ooh the days of radio luxembourg.....(HEAVEN)

Re: tele licence
 

Which rubbish is that grannyclaret? All the dross that they show on the commercial channels? It might be rubbish to you but to someone else it might be great television.

Try using the off switch or if that is too drastic use the remote control to find something to your liking. If you have a digibox there are at least a dozen other channels two of which are from the BBC.

Have you forgotten how to read a book? Maybe a listen to the wireless in the evenings would catch your fancy? There are plenty of good programmes on Radio 2 in the evenings. Then there are the digital radio channels that you can listen to through the digibox. It's not just for digital TV you know.

Remember The Navy Lark, Beyond Our Ken, Round The Horn, The Goon Show, Educating Archie (the only radio show that featured a ventriloquist’s dummy), Take It From Here, Hancock’s Half Hour to mention just a few on Radio 7.

There’s a whole world out there to watch and listen to if you can be bothered to look for it. Sadly no Radio Luxembourg as we knew it.

Re: tele licence
 

i loved all those programmes:o

Re: tele licence
 

They are on at noon weekdays on digital Radio 7.

Get the Radio Times for a full programme list. Funny name for a TV programme magazine.

Re: tele licence
 

True but if the Government took out the equivalent charge for the BBC the license would be a lot smaller

Re: tele licence
 

I don't care what anyone says as far as I'm concerned the licence fee is for the BBC and the BBC alone :mad: Bring on the adverts!!!!!

Re: tele licence
 

How many other companies are funded like the BBC?

None.

Re: tele licence
 

yes it is a monopoly

people actualy in govenment say so themselves

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debate....1550.4&m=1703

Re: tele licence
 

wrong posting

Re: tele licence
 

OK< response from TV licensing people

So it seems that if you watch archived programmes you don't, if its live even if it comes over the net and NOT a broadcasted(although that term could be applied to a Netcast) signal you do.

The bit that surprises me is the bit about if I am using a laptop somewhere away from home, on batteries I am covered by my home license, if I plug it in I'm not!

Re: tele licence
 

That has always been the case with TV's Ian. Your license covers att the TV's in your home and any you own that use batteries outside your home. This was to cover you if you had a handheld TV or in your caravan. If you are being technical they could argue that when you plug your caravan into mains on a site then you need a seperate TV license for your caravan because it is not longer on batteries. The reason for this is that I could have a license and you could say your TV belonged to me so my license covered it. This would be true if it ran only on batteries but not when plugged into the mains. Yes I know my explanation is naff but I am sure you will understand.

Re: tele licence
 

I find it hard to understand why some people still carp about the TV licence fee. At soon to be 36 pence per day (from 34p per day) we can legitimately view whatever there is being broadcast with at least 30 channels for free. Plus we get more radio stations to listen to than you can shake a stick at.

We can have a TV set in every room in the house for that same single licence fee so for 36p four members of a family can all be watching different programmes. Try taking a family of four to the cinema for 36p.

Some people may stubbornly stick their heads in the sand, insist that the licence fee is for the BBC and look forward to advertising funding the BBC in the hope that the TV licence will be discontinued. They should get real. No chancellor would ever give up a revenue of over one billion pounds per year even if some of it is paid out to fund the BBC. If the BBC did go down the funding by advertising road the quality of programmes would drop, as would the diversity. The advertising market is saturated already.

In short the TV licence fee is exceptionally good value for what we get for it.

I have no idea if there are any other companies funded like the BBC garinda but if there are we still pay for them in our exorbitant taxes. What about Learn Direct? That’s funded by the government isn’t it? The various railway companies are still being subsidised by the government. For subsidised read partially funded.

How can the BBC be a monopoly when there are other TV and radio broadcasters chav1? Surely monopoly means on its own or one of a kind, no competition.

I agree that the licence does have some strange conditions especially with regard to laptops and portables. But did you know that if you pop in next door to watch the TV there and it is not licensed and the detector van comes round and catches you out, everyone watching is liable to be prosecuted even if they have a licence for the TV in their own house. The licence covers the domicile not the householder although the householder’s name and address is on the licence. But someone without a TV licence for their own home can watch your licensed TV legally.

You can legally use a mains connected TV away from your house Neil but the TV at your home cannot be used at the same time by anyone. How that could be policed is a mystery to me. It’s all there on the back of the licence.

If you assume that there are at least 10 million homes in Britain (and there are probably many more) and they all have a TV licence that is an income of one and a quarter BILLION pounds per year. Then there are all the commercial licenses for pubs, clubs, hotels, guest houses etc. I doubt very much if the level of funding for the BBC is anywhere near that total. Gordon Brown will have his sticky fingers in the revenue.

Re: tele licence
 

I don't object so much to the licence fee, what I object to is the Big Brother attitude of the Licensing people. London is peppered with ads on buses and tube stations saying virtually "We know where you live". "Get in touch with us. If you don't - fine". Nice play on the word "fine" there.

We have had endless trouble with these people. We do not have a TV licence because we do not have a TV. However, when David wrote to tell them this, they wrote back saying "Fine, thank you, but we want access to your home to check" - i.e. we think you're lying. We refused access, and the whole process of letters, visits, etc, started again. THIS IS A TOTAL WASTE OF MONEY!!! Big Brother says that he can park his detector van outside your property and tell you which room your TV is in, even if it is switched off. Fine. Do that. It wastes less money. It might be interesting to see how much of the licence fee is wasted on pursuing people who choose not to have TVs.

Re: tele licence
 

I would'nt mind but i do have a licence but they dont want to come and see it!!

Re: tele licence
 

If the BBC is so good, then it should be able to exist like any other commercial channel - by advertising revenue. It carries large volumes of advertisments already - for itself. I am sick and tired of having to watch idiots poncing around in wheelchairs or dangling from some rooftop in the increasingly-long intermission between programmes. How much money is wasted on this? Not only that, it's political neutrality has long gone - it now has an agenda lying somewhere between that of the Liberal Sodomites - sorry, "Democrats" - and Al-Quida. The sooner it goes, the better.

Re: tele licence
 

If you dont have a telly Pendy where do you point all your furniture?:)

Re: tele licence
 

Round the fire and under the reading lamp!

Re: tele licence
 

The last time they changed the between programme logos it cost sixty millon pounds.


I also agree, they do advertise already, themselves, for approximately six minutes per hour.

Re: tele licence
 

Not that I make a point of agreeing with you but on this one I think I might have to! :D :D :D

Re: tele licence
 

£60,000,000 WOW. Why don't they just make the programes a tad longer or start them sooner? Oh yes I know the answer to my own question. The programes have to be that length so the adverts fit when they sell them to other TV stations like UKGold and others.

Re: tele licence
 

If they can sell their "offerings" then why do we still get reamed for more money every year?

Re: tele licence
 

The Independent reports on the BBC’s expenses bill, which under the Freedom of Information Act is open to public scrutiny. The corporation spent £19.5m on flights and £16m on accommodation. Director general Mark Thompson’s expenses bill apparently included £8.75 on a meal in a motorway cafe and £1.75 for a phone call.

Re: tele licence
 

While I have a bee in my bonnet, the BBC paid Graham Norton 3.5 million pounds in 2003, when they poached him from Channel 4. They didn't even have a vehicle planned for him at the time.

In the time since then he's presented a disco dancing competition and a thirty five minute chat show, which started airing on Fridays this year.

Will this expense bring the Beeb more viewers? I think not.

The money could have been better spent nurturing new talent, but the BBC seems to think 'it's' money is better spent aping the more successful proframmes from independent television companies.

Re: tele licence
 

Re: tele licence
 

Disagree with that JB since they throw this money about without a care then havethe audacity to ask for more and as a rule they get it.

Re: tele licence
 

Why is it a different issue - we pay our licence, they use £3.5m of it to pay for a presenter that has barely presented any programmes since he got poached?

Re: tele licence
 

They could do what they hell they like with their money, if they still weren't primarily funded by the licence fee.


Granada television could line the bar of the Rovers Return in gold leaf if they so wished, the fact is they have earned their right to do so by competing in the market place, something the BBC doesn't have to do at the moment.


BBC Scotland spent sixty million pounds on a Scottish soap that we don't even get here, and not many people in Scotland bother to watch either.

Then there was the financial disaster El Doraldo, the soap set in Spain with it's purpose built set and cast of muppets.................:eek:

Re: tele licence
 

I would not recommend River City to anyone not even as a form of punishment. It has been a huge waste of money and air time. Bring back Take The High Road. :rolleyes:

Re: tele licence
 

That's the main reason l left Glasgow.......well that and the fact that I was extradited.:rolleyes:

Re: tele licence
 

I've bought my first tv licence yesterday. Before it was in my mums name and because she was over 75 she got it free. I'd forgotten all about it until i started reading this thread and then i saw the accy observer and all the people who have got done for not having a tv licence. I cant afford the fine so i thought i'd best get one!

Re: tele licence
 

Yeah the Observer's full of them.

Fined for not having a television licence £250, more expensive than the licence.

Fined for driving without insurance £200, less than the cost of car insurance.

It stinks.

Re: tele licence
 

If you like I can record you a few episodes onto DVD and you could do a report on the soap for us.

Re: tele licence
 

I saw it when I lived in Scotland thanks.

My review-

Even more dire and depressing than Eastenders.

Re: tele licence
 

A little question for you all.

Why do we pay to watch Sky TV when they have adverts on? I know the movie channels don't but have to pay extra for those anyway. If you have the Family Pack or whatever its called like I do, every channel has adverts on.

Re: tele licence
 

I don't. I choose not too.

Re: tele licence
 

Eastenders is a party show in comparison. It does nothing for Glasgows image at all.

Re: tele licence
 

Sure they could do what the hell they like with their money, problem is, it's YOUR money!

Re: tele licence
 

Because sky is a business and has to pay for programs. I imagine some of the money goes towards keeping some of the less watched and free channels on air that create variety.
probably why they put that rubbish on with some bint lying half naked on a cushion on late at night to. Begging you to phone in on premium rate numbers. sky will get money for showing that.