Viewing Thread:
"£9 For Just Two Channels !"

Everyone who owns a tv is, with a few exceptions, paying £9 a month (or more if not using Direct Debit) for 2 channels. Why ? The TV licence which the BBC draws its funding from. ITV, C4, C5 use advertising and the satellite/digital broadcasters also use advertising. Now Sky's basic packages start from around £14, but for this you get more than two channels, and you can CHOOSE whether to have SKY/ITV Digital. I don't watch anything on BBC1, 2, or their digital channels, neither do my parents. We subscribe to Sky, like many others, and find that it alays has something to watch. Now I know not everyone wants/can afford digital or satellite tv, but why should digital owners have to pay the tv licence if they do not want to receive the BBC's programming ? Yes, the BBC has all this boring excuse about being a British institution and part of our heritage blah blah blah e.t.c but if it considers itself so good why not give people the choice ? Surely, with all this revenue the BBC gets, it coukd buy some decent programming away from the other broadcasters...but no; every SCI FI show, apart from Farscape (yawn) is bought up by Sky, football is mainly spread between ITV digital and Sky, and new dramas like Friends, ER, Third Watch all go to the digital broadcasters. The BBC churns out endless costume dramas (after all they'v got to get the money's worth from them), boring real life documentaries, and show most Sci Fi edited or so late at night that most people have gone out, feel half asleep or have gone to bed. On ratings the BBC can claim high viewings, but how many of these viewers are actually watching the program as opposed to having it on because there is nothing else ? When you ocnsider all the money the BBC gets then either;

a) there is a really big, massive budget production in the works, which has been kept secret for tens of years.

b) someone at the BBC has a VERY large offshore bank account.

c) the money is wasted trying to make a wide variety of pointless programs with a lot going ot one off projects such as Walking With Dinosaurs - which win awards but are soon forgotten, and allow the BBC to claim they are educational... Also allow money for self congratulatory programming such as Parkinson, awards shows, bloomers shows, this is your life e.t.c.

:)

So what does everyone else think ?

Dr Gonzo wrote:
> BBC is mostly all I watch, even though we have a full quota of digital channels
> too. For, as you put it, £9 a month you could see maybe two movies -
> that's 5 hours entertainment. On particularly dull days I'll get that in one
> evening from BBC.

Obviously it depends what programs you like ,and your age probably. My original point was thta surely we shoudl get the choice as to whether we each actualy want to receive BBC channels... I don't watch 5 hours of the BBC in a couple of months, let alone 1 night, I'd like die of boredom or something :)

All I watch on BBC is the simpsons

BBC is mostly all I watch, even though we have a full quota of digital channels too. For, as you put it, £9 a month you could see maybe two movies - that's 5 hours entertainment. On particularly dull days I'll get that in one evening from BBC.

Bloody hell, I'd pay £9 a month just for Big Train and The Office to be on every Monday night.

Try ebay. People will spend money on any old crap there. :-)

There was one woman moaning that she'd forked out £100 on restoring a drawer on her Chest on Chest but she soon shut up when he told her it was worth about 20 grand.

Why do I never find anything like that?

Surely Bigtrack is worth something nowadays?

(Cue a look of confusion from the kids...)

I like watching the crestfallen relatives when they realise that the pot that granny left them is, in fact, rubbish and "worth about £30".

Have Sky but I have to say when it boils down to quality broadcasting the beeb do it for me.

Mind you I like Antiques Roadshow so that says a lot. Last night I correctly guessed the year of a georgian Chest on Chest and the price of a Samuel Carter watercolour.

Hmmm... who said sundays has crap tv eh?

Most TV is rubbish, but BBC do have some movies on, and some football matches, so they're alright.

I also caught something on BBC2 yesterday with big scary insects. Awesome.

Everyone who owns a tv is, with a few exceptions, paying £9 a month (or more if not using Direct Debit) for 2 channels. Why ? The TV licence which the BBC draws its funding from. ITV, C4, C5 use advertising and the satellite/digital broadcasters also use advertising. Now Sky's basic packages start from around £14, but for this you get more than two channels, and you can CHOOSE whether to have SKY/ITV Digital. I don't watch anything on BBC1, 2, or their digital channels, neither do my parents. We subscribe to Sky, like many others, and find that it alays has something to watch. Now I know not everyone wants/can afford digital or satellite tv, but why should digital owners have to pay the tv licence if they do not want to receive the BBC's programming ? Yes, the BBC has all this boring excuse about being a British institution and part of our heritage blah blah blah e.t.c but if it considers itself so good why not give people the choice ? Surely, with all this revenue the BBC gets, it coukd buy some decent programming away from the other broadcasters...but no; every SCI FI show, apart from Farscape (yawn) is bought up by Sky, football is mainly spread between ITV digital and Sky, and new dramas like Friends, ER, Third Watch all go to the digital broadcasters. The BBC churns out endless costume dramas (after all they'v got to get the money's worth from them), boring real life documentaries, and show most Sci Fi edited or so late at night that most people have gone out, feel half asleep or have gone to bed. On ratings the BBC can claim high viewings, but how many of these viewers are actually watching the program as opposed to having it on because there is nothing else ? When you ocnsider all the money the BBC gets then either;

a) there is a really big, massive budget production in the works, which has been kept secret for tens of years.

b) someone at the BBC has a VERY large offshore bank account.

c) the money is wasted trying to make a wide variety of pointless programs with a lot going ot one off projects such as Walking With Dinosaurs - which win awards but are soon forgotten, and allow the BBC to claim they are educational... Also allow money for self congratulatory programming such as Parkinson, awards shows, bloomers shows, this is your life e.t.c.

:)

So what does everyone else think ?