Is the licence fee good value for money?

[Bajie]

I used to very much resent paying the licence fee, but recent develoupments like the iPlayer via TV have changed my mind a bit, as it is really good to be able to watch loads of BBC programes on demand.

Also the BBC childrens channel do produce some very good programes, and it is very good to have at least 2 kids channels where there is no adverts.

Radio 2, 1extra and 6music also have their moments of goodness.

So in balance my old hatred of the middle class complacency of the beeb has been abated a bit, because as a whole the corporation has done a good job at moving forwards.

 

[_angel_]

I don't think it's too much money - for me - but the way it is collected isn't right and the assumption that anyone without a TV license is lying is wrong too.

Fining people and even worse then, jailing them, for not having a TV license is absurd.

 

[kittyP]

Its totally worth it imho.

We don't own a TV but use the website daily, listen to Radio 4 and 7 daily, and use the iplayer more that once a week.

As others have said, the beeb is far from perfect but they are the best major news agency world wide imho, they give us David Attenborough and there are no frickin adverts.
All brilliant in my books.

 

[kittyP]

I don't think it's too much money - for me - but the way it is collected isn't right and the assumption that anyone without a TV license is lying is wrong too.

Fining people and even worse then, jailing them, for not having a TV license is absurd.

This is also true but I don't know a better way to police the license issue personally.
.
When we didn't have a TV and there was no iplayer, were skint and couldn't afford the license, we use to get bombarded with threatening letters which really upset me, as I am very honest person in regards to stuff like this (see the shoplifting thread).

 

[RubyBlue]

I'm happy to pay, but I think it would be better if people had more choice in the matter, i.e. as you do with other subscriptions, rather than criminalise people who have a tv and actually can't afford to pay, they should be able to watch commercial tv and not receive the BBC if they couldn't pay.

Fine people £1k is just out of order (or whatever the fine is)

^ this - when I was unemployed the licence fee was to expensive and to have had the choice of watching commercial tv free with BBC blocked would have been good. Saying that - now that I can afford it I would pay if it was subscription but I think we should be able to choose.

 

[Zabo]

I think we should be able to choose.

In the not too distant future that may become a distinct possibility. Easier to have pay-and-watch with digital streaming as opposed to the old analog.

 

[upsidedownwalrus]

I have argued that before on here. On the one hand, they should be making it easier for people abroad to pay and access BBC services on the web or whatever, which is currently impossible, and on the other they should be thinking about using the digital switchover as a time to enable people to get the choice to not receive things and also, astoundingly, not pay for them.

Just say, just say, you didn't want any of the domestic channels, you merely wanted to buy a Sky Box with access to Sky only, why in this day and age shouldn't you be able to? Last time I made this argument I was confronted with facile arguments about how why should people fund the NHS if they were able to pay for their own healthcare...

 

[El Jefe]

i think it's absolutely brilliant value for money.

Which is not the same as endorsing the current set-up re: flexibility of viewing habits etc.

 

[1927]

I would be happy to pay more tbh if it meant better quality. As been said before, go to America and watch tv and you will have an appreciation for the BBC you never had before. What I would like to see tho is a BBC that didnt compete for ratings and didnt pay huge salaries for talentless wankers like Graham Norton and Wossy. The beeb would be better off trying to discover some new talent, and by that I mean at all levels, newsreaders, presenters etc. Once the beeb's talent get to the point where they are offered mega bucks by rival broadcasters, let them go and bring new talent thru.

 

[upsidedownwalrus]

I would be happy to pay more tbh if it meant better quality. As been said before, go to America and watch tv and you will have an appreciation for the BBC you never had before. What I would like to see tho is a BBC that didnt compete for ratings and didnt pay huge salaries for talentless wankers like Graham Norton and Wossy. The beeb would be better off trying to discover some new talent, and by that I mean at all levels, newsreaders, presenters etc. Once the beeb's talent get to the point where they are offered mega bucks by rival broadcasters, let them go and bring new talent thru.

Mind you America produces way more quality in the way of drama et al...

 

[Dan U]

I have argued that before on here. On the one hand, they should be making it easier for people abroad to pay and access BBC services on the web or whatever, which is currently impossible

i'd agree with that

mate of mine lives in Hong Kong and he would definitely pay a reasonable amount of money annually to access iplayer easily.

 

[Cid]

Yes... Nature, radio, some of the docus are worth it for me. Not remotely interested in Strictly bollocks or how do you solve a problem like Andrew Lloyd webber? but then my gran loves that sort of thing (she used to do a lot of ballroom dancing) and I'd happily pay just for her. BBC has to have diverse programming, which obviously means a lot of it is going to seem shit to me, but great to others.

Having said that the comedy is in a truly dire state and the drama badly needs a boost, general news is pretty weak too. As an organisation I think it probably needs to look at executive salaries etc, but on the other hand it looks after employees/families of employees very well (my dad worked for them when he died and the pension helped my mum a lot). Also suffers from being disliked by both the tabloids and whichever shower is in charge of the country.

As above have always though they should have an overseas subscription deal, must be a huge market out there.

 

[stavros]

By its nature, the Beeb has to cater for all interests, so there's always going to be stuff each person doesn't like. Given that it covers all these bases, I think the licence is a cracking bargain.

 

[starfish]

For the amount of money we pay for it, yes, absolutely.

 

[Mrs Magpie]

Yup. A mate of mine pays a hell of a lot more for her satellite TV and as far as I can tell it's wall-to-wall shite. With adverts.

 

[Mr Moose]

It is extraordinary value if you think about the tons of stuff you've loved and the tons of stuff that would never get a hearing otherwise, whether its Peel to the Asian network, or The Office, or Alan Partridge, to news and its fab web stuff and the i-player etc.etc..

Its also upped its game hugely - back in the day it was a bit crap at times - y'know wobbly set sci-fi etc. Now its mostly panache and ITV and C4 look a bit grubby at times alongside it. Only SKY really competes.

The poor choices on salaries etc. still grate. It has to be run as a public treasure, rather than a club and perhaps its getting better....

The BNP hate it that's for sure.

 

[Hollis]

Sorry Garf but that's bollocks. There's no way the BBC could continue in its present form without the license fee.

Couldn't it be cut back to a 1940s style delivery service, and they leave all the jazzy stuff/costume dramas to the commercial channels?

 

[stavros]

In my house we do have the basic Sky package, as far as I can tell because one of my housemates loves some of their American import dramas. To be honest though, there's never anything on the non-Freeview channels that I ever want to watch, and I'd happily switch back to Freeview. The only channels I really watch are the BBC ones, C4, More4, Dave and C5 (but only for Neighbours), and the Beeb dominates in terms of viewing time.

 

[MikeMcc]

They could probably do with cutting back a bit. Do we really need 4 channels of TV? There's good stuff on all of them, but it could probably all be put on two channels if you thin out some of the dross. Why show previews on BBC3 and repeat it the next week on one of the other channels, it's what IPlayer is for.

 

[London_Calling]

They could probably do with cutting back a bit. Do we really need 4 channels of TV? There's good stuff on all of them, but it could probably all be put on two channels if you thin out some of the dross. Why show previews on BBC3 and repeat it the next week on one of the other channels, it's what IPlayer is for.

There's nine tv national channels I believe, plus regional programming (which is stronger in Scotland and Wales).

BBC1
BBC2
BBC3
BBC4
CBBC
Cbeebies
BBC News Channel (24 hour news)
BBC Parliament
BBC HD

Reason is, as I'm sure you understand, the BBC has to serve about 50 million different audiences and they all want value for their particular £139.50. They also have to offer what the Government thinks they should, in analogue and digital.

 

[ChrisC]

I think it's well worth it. You would never get anything like Dr Who or Merlin on any other channel. Mind you Sky did show some Terry Pratchett adapted stuff which I thought was very good.

 

[ATOMIC SUPLEX]

The things on C5 first thing are quite good, after a while he sort of graduated on to those...

Yeah, my daughter is already beginning to hate in the night garden. To be fair I think I have just about had my fill of it too.

 

[kyser_soze]

Without a doubt it's value for money. The thing people forget is that the fee funds radio, online, interactive services and the rest of it. Yes, BBC Worldwide contributes a lot of money to the Beeb, and possibly should be looked at in any kind of funding review. However, these ideas for top-slicing and the rest of the bollocks is just that.

The other point worth bearing in mind. TV advertising revenues are collapsing - internet advertising now accounts for the bulk of money spent in the UK (and elsewhere). Viewing figures for any one channel or show are also falling, meaning that spot rates are much lower than they were. Once TV ad revenue falls beyond a certain point, it's only the subscription channels that'll be left - you'll have to pay to watch TV whatever, and there'll be ads on it.

 

[London_Calling]

Yep, ITV is looking for a bailout from the Government and the License Fee because revenues are failing, and they're desperate for that brand waving thing during programmes (the phrase escapes me).

Great opportunity to get rid of all advertising on tv, imo.


Fwiw, BBC Worldwide contributed a little over £100 mill last year, almost all to 'front line' programming.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

Normally I would say no, it's not worth it.
However the only thing that is ever on my TV these days is Cbeebies and I don't want ads during that.

On the other hand is it really worth paying £100 and whatever pounds a year for 30 minutes of TV per day? And thinking about it, she is mostly watching DVDs not Cbeebies. Grrrr, what a waste of money.

Mind you I have just applied for a job at the BBC so i'm not going to grumble.

Mini-suplex will soon move on to Tiny Pop or some other such shite and you'll realise how blindingly brilliant Cbeebies actually is.

IMO the licence fee is cracking value for money. For a lot less than an average Sky package you get all the channels, national and local radio & web sites. Plus they make such great quality programmes, especially the natural history department, some of their shit just could not be made by National Geographic or anyone else, they simply cost too much and take too long.

Should Murdoch get his way it will be an exceptionally sad day, not just for those of us lucky enough to live in the UK, but for world TV as a whole.

 

[kyser_soze]

Yep, ITV is looking for a bailout from the Government and the License Fee because revenues are failing, and they're desperate for that brand waving thing during programmes (the phrase escapes me).

Great opportunity to get rid of all advertising on tv, imo.


Fwiw, BBC Worldwide contributed a little over £100 mill last year, almost all to 'front line' programming.

Product placement

 

[London_Calling]

having a bad day week

 

[kyser_soze]

And it's only Tuesday!!

 

[Badgers]

Totally worth the money for me.

Radio 4 is listened to for a least a few hours every day
Radio 7 is listened every night from getting into bed till CBeebies mad starts
The news + sport websites are read every day
iPlayer at least a few nights a week

 

[Ms T]

Couldn't it be cut back to a 1940s style delivery service, and they leave all the jazzy stuff/costume dramas to the commercial channels?

Have you seen the dire finances of ITV/C4 recently? Costume dramas are hugely expensive and one of the things the Beeb does very well.