Posts by RichardCoulter

    BBC1 shamelessly is putting on at peak viewing time tonight a programme called "Big Gay Wedding" presented by that well known homosexual Tom Allen..

    So much for the BBC being unbiased ... Putting on such a divisive programme to suit a small minority and ignoring catering for normal people.

    Shocking disregard for the License payers..

    Time to scrap the License Fee ---- NOW. X(

    Why do you have a problem with homosexuals (who also pay the TVL) being reflected on mainstream TV?

    You're coming across as a bigot.

    Actually, I don’t want any bias at all, be it left or right wing. I think my posts have made that clear.

    Advertising on the BBC would be extremely popular. Trouble is there is only a finite amount of ad revenue, so this would be at the expense of the existing commercial channels.

    They are already squealing over BBC plans to run ads on some podcasts and would soon be lobbying their friends in Parliament to stop this if it was ever a a consideratio to extend it to TV.

    Replacing the TV licence with a household tax would not satisfy those who are opposed to the licence fee. It would still be a tax to support an entertainment service, which is a little bizarre, since entertainment channels cannot be described as essential services.

    Receipts from the TVL go into the Government's Consolidated Fund and various things, including the BBC are financed from this.

    The BBC does more than just provide television with their monthly grant each month from the fund. It broadcasts radio, is obliged to undertake research & development for future services for the whole of the broadcasting industry, pays for journalists to report for local newspapers etc.

    If the BBC went subscription only as you want it to there would be some who wouldn't subscribe, this would lead to you paying more in return for less.

    The speech by Tim Davie today seems to me to be an indication that the TVL will continue, but reformed so that it is more related to the ability to pay.

    The obvious thing to do would be move the NI burden to income tax and VAT. Having a payroll tax on employers just deters them giving people jobs.

    I don't think that will be a priority, AFAIK they are only thinking about scrapping employee NI contributions.

    It's a surprising aspiration as the Tories tend to like to cut income tax as a headline soundbite (whilst increasing taxes directly or indirectly in other areas.)

    Doing this would throw this strategy out of the window as the headline rate of income tax would have to rise. It would also draw those who don't work for their income into effectively paying pseudo NI. Many of these will be pensioners who are exempt from paying NI & the grey vote is very important for all parties.

    It will be different if they end up replacing the TVL with a household tax as this would probably be collected by local authorities via the Council Tax and voters more likely to vent any anger at their local council.

    No it doesn't.

    As I said earlier, they appear more interested in the globalmarket status than those that fund it.

    The saying on BBC news irritates the chit outs me

    "Around the world and across the UK"

    I even get the impression that BBC verify only fact checks what it wants to check and ATM that's the government. An example being Kuenssberg's Sunday interview with Annaliese Dodds, she stated that there is a £48bn black hole in your spending over their pledge to get rid of NI. When in fact Hunt expressed several weeks ago that at some point in the future the government would like to get rid of NI, but there was no pledge. The impartiality and fact checking is selective at best.

    It's employee NI that gives entitlement to contributory benefits. Will they be scrapping these if employee NI is abolished? If so, only the poorest would be able to obtain help via Universal Credit.

    If income tax is increased in order to abolish employee NI, then many people who don't work will be worse off.

    Yeah, as Steve says, it's the transition to an online only world.

    Clearly, Freesat is in the crosshairs and will be the first to face the chop, then Freeview at some point later. Why make new deals with broadcasters for the platform, when it's going to be shut down soon? So, this is the start of the death of Freesat and other channels will follow as existing deals expire and are not renewed.

    I do not know of anyone who has Freesat, so I am surprised this service has been going on for so long, but I suppose if you were in the Highlands and Islands and a long way away from a tv transmitter, then perhaps Freesat may have been the only free tv option for those people. But most of these areas will get upgraded to fibre optic cable and will be able to stream like the rest of us.

    I don't think that Freesat will be closing anytime soon. Its primary purpose is to provide TV for those without a useable Fteeview signal.

    Tiny Pop is due to go online only soon and I suspect that removing these channels from Freesat is a test to see if the 20% of people that use it will happily move online for the remaining channels before taking the channels off Sky.

    Eventually Freely will take channels from Freeview, satellite or the internet and the viewer won't know or care how the content is delivered. At this point I suspect that broadcasters will gradually stop broadcasting on satellite & DTT to cut costs.

    It's inevitable but sad though as Sky Sport over satellite is close to live (about 7 seconds delay due to MPEG) but IP based streaming can be 30 seconds or more behind. And less reliable.

    The cost of launching and ground serving those satellites has go to be much higher than having those streaming servers so our twin Sky HD boxes will inevitably become a relic but all the time they work we'll keep them. And we have another sat feed direct to the TV which we never use as it's to the old Astra satellite location so is mainly German channels

    Does the old satellite location still get any channels? I might have a play with my old analogue system.

    We never watch the BBC (Channel 4 is also propped up by the License fee channel 4 is the woke channel.

    I research serious confidential matters - Saville - Rolf Harris - lies and corruption et al. Because I want to point out the rotten side of the BBC.

    It is a sick, corrupt institution. To think people pay for that yet despise Trump and slag him to hell because of alleged corruption etc.

    No, it isn't.

    They (TV Licensing) threaten, via the use of violence, people who do not inform them why they do not have a license.

    For something you are not obliged to have. I do not own a JCB Digger, I will not inform JCB or the DVLA, I do not own one and they have never threatened me vis the use of violence or any other way, on the matter.

    I have the TV LA Letter stuck inside my front door to remind me they could knock on the door. I have my response to their goons. "Please leave my land, thank you"!!

    What do you mean by they 'threaten the use of violence'?

    Now there's a thought. What the BBC needs is more government oversight and control over it. They could start by putting a maximum limit on how much presenters get paid. There should also be more allowances for those who don't have as much money when it comes to paying for the license. There's plenty of OAPs who are sitting on a tonne of wealth but there's also many that have nothing and the TV maybe the only companion they have in life with a window to the outer world. There's needs to be some kind of means testing. THe TV license goons also need removing as the way they hunt down and intimidate the elderly is disgusting. There needs to be some kind of independent non private enforcement. It woukd probaly be far simpler if the license was removed and it simply came out the tax payers pot.

    Free TV licenses for the over 75's are now effectively means tested and are only for those in receipt of Pension Credit.

    That could be unfair. There may have been a contract they were waiting to expire.

    And it wasn't that long since it went HD only on satellite, they aren't far behind compared to previous syrup speed updating for other channels.

    The HD version has been available for ages and Virgin still only provided the SD feed. I wasn't happy that it went HD on Freesat, but was still SD only on a service that I pay for.

    It could indeed have been a contractual thing, but the average customer won't know or care about such things. They just want a channel that they particularly want to watch to have a good picture and will move to another platform if the one they have doesn't provide one.