fastie Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 one quick question: Do I still need to pay it when using satellite tv receiver only? I'm using FREEsat so it shoulld be FREE as the name suggest of any kind of charge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wazir Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 one quick question: Do I still need to pay it when using satellite tv receiver only? I'm using FREEsat so it shoulld be FREE as the name suggest of any kind of charge Yes you do. The law is that any equipment which is capable or receiving any TV programme as it is being broadcast requires a licence. It's quite clearly pointed out on their website. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fastie Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 thx wazir. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wazir Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 thx wazir. No problem. Though I expect it's not the answer you wanted... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimcalagon Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 one quick question: Do I still need to pay it when using satellite tv receiver only? I'm using FREEsat so it shoulld be FREE as the name suggest of any kind of charge Yes you do. The law is that any equipment which is capable or receiving any TV programme as it is being broadcast requires a licence. It's quite clearly pointed out on their website. And that includes a computer with broadband internet access which could be used to access BBC iPlayer etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wazir Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 And that includes a computer with broadband internet access which could be used to access BBC iPlayer etc. No it doesn't. The delay in broadcast means it's not licensed. It's only if it's watching live TV as it's broadcast I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b4mbi Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 And that includes a computer with broadband internet access which could be used to access BBC iPlayer etc. No it doesn't. The delay in broadcast means it's not licensed. It's only if it's watching live TV as it's broadcast I think. correct sir. no licence needed for iplayer or for 4 on demand as it is not broadcast real time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tugger Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 How much do they collect from us in total? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b4mbi Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 roughly Say licence is £150 x 25,000 homes x 90% (no TV's and non-payers) = approx £3.5m ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Hedgehog Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Personally I refuse to help fund any broadcaster that would commission a second series of Hole in the Wall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MilitantDogOwner Posted October 22, 2009 Author Share Posted October 22, 2009 The divide seems to be 50/50 (this may not be true, I'm baseing this on the feedback on this forum, the BBC's own Have Your Say forum and a few others). So why not make the BBC channels/radio stations a subscription service and the let the consumer vote with their wallets. To be honest its very rare for me to watch a program on any of the BBC channels (maybe watch some of the comedy stuff on Dave but thats it.) Also I would imagine that a fair amount of "licence fee" (lets just call it a tax because thats what it is) is spent on American/Australian programs. I have a Sky system at home. If I don't want the movies package, I don't pay for it and it is locked by the system. Surely they could do the same with the BBC channels? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Login Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 The divide seems to be 50/50 (this may not be true, I'm baseing this on the feedback on this forum, the BBC's own Have Your Say forum and a few others). So why not make the BBC channels/radio stations a subscription service and the let the consumer vote with their wallets. To be honest its very rare for me to watch a program on any of the BBC channels (maybe watch some of the comedy stuff on Dave but thats it.) Also I would imagine that a fair amount of "licence fee" (lets just call it a tax because thats what it is) is spent on American/Australian programs. I have a Sky system at home. If I don't want the movies package, I don't pay for it and it is locked by the system. Surely they could do the same with the BBC channels? You do pay for the movie package wether or not you have it as part of your subscription, sky or whatever. All non BBC channels have adverts, the cost of that advertising, promotion is built into the cost of those goods, so in effect you are paying for the channels everytime you purchase goods rather than a one off fee. I am perfectly happy to pay for a subscription service but it should apply to all channels who in turn are not allowed to have adverts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Login Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 And that includes a computer with broadband internet access which could be used to access BBC iPlayer etc. No it doesn't. The delay in broadcast means it's not licensed. It's only if it's watching live TV as it's broadcast I think. correct sir. no licence needed for iplayer or for 4 on demand as it is not broadcast real time. But if you use it to watch live you do http://iplayerhelp.external.bbc.co.uk/help...layer/tvlicence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wazir Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 The divide seems to be 50/50 (this may not be true, I'm baseing this on the feedback on this forum, the BBC's own Have Your Say forum and a few others). So why not make the BBC channels/radio stations a subscription service and the let the consumer vote with their wallets. Because the reason the BBC is the best broadcasting corporation in the world is that it isn't commercial. Do you want to end up with CNN reporting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MilitantDogOwner Posted October 22, 2009 Author Share Posted October 22, 2009 The divide seems to be 50/50 (this may not be true, I'm baseing this on the feedback on this forum, the BBC's own Have Your Say forum and a few others). So why not make the BBC channels/radio stations a subscription service and the let the consumer vote with their wallets. To be honest its very rare for me to watch a program on any of the BBC channels (maybe watch some of the comedy stuff on Dave but thats it.) Also I would imagine that a fair amount of "licence fee" (lets just call it a tax because thats what it is) is spent on American/Australian programs. I have a Sky system at home. If I don't want the movies package, I don't pay for it and it is locked by the system. Surely they could do the same with the BBC channels? You do pay for the movie package wether or not you have it as part of your subscription, sky or whatever. All non BBC channels have adverts, the cost of that advertising, promotion is built into the cost of those goods, so in effect you are paying for the channels everytime you purchase goods rather than a one off fee. I am perfectly happy to pay for a subscription service but it should apply to all channels who in turn are not allowed to have adverts. I'm sure I don't pay for the movie package. I pay to Sky the cost of the minimum package. No more, no less. I'm sure the cost you are factoring in would be minimal per person and thus unnoticable. Unlike the £140 odd that the BBC are stealing off me every year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.