BBC TV licence fee rises again from April

[Dominic 11,922]

I should cancel mine, I rarely watch terrestrial TV now. Paying it has become such the norm that you rarely think about it. 

[Better Day 5,766]

6 minutes ago, Smithy said:

Can’t believe they have the audacity to increase the license fee and yet the queens on drag race UK still only win a RuPeter Badge each week

I think it’s the fact that BBC doesn’t do big cash prizes and doesn’t do sponsors. 

[Eggs 2,678]

The UK will miss what the BBC was the day it becomes a subscription service. Which will happen within the coming decades. BBC News is far from perfect, but the services that the BBC provides beyond just television are not something any privately-funded company would be able to recreate. 

[Smithy 2,268]

20 minutes ago, Miss Dolly said:

I think it’s the fact that BBC doesn’t do big cash prizes and doesn’t do sponsors. 

Yes it does?

Pointless, Eggheads, Who Dares Wins, The Wall... I could go on. There’s numerous shows on BBC where there’s cash prizes, I don’t know why they couldn’t do £1k for a challenge win and then the winner gets £25k, that’s still less than other prizes on some shows 

 

 

 

[Smithy 2,268]

2 minutes ago, Eggs said:

The UK will miss what the BBC was the day it becomes a subscription service. Which will happen within the coming decades. BBC News is far from perfect, but the services that the BBC provides beyond just television are not something any privately-funded company would be able to recreate. 

It doesn’t need to become a subscription service it can follow the same model of ITV/Channel4 and bring onboard advertisers 

[Better Day 5,766]

2 minutes ago, Smithy said:

Yes it does?

Pointless, Eggheads, Who Dares Wins, The Wall... I could go on. There’s numerous shows on BBC where there’s cash prizes, I don’t know why they couldn’t do £1k for a challenge win and then the winner gets £25k, that’s still less than other prizes on some shows 

 

 

 

The cash prizes are rubbish compared to the other tv channels. 

[Eggs 2,678]

2 minutes ago, Smithy said:

It doesn’t need to become a subscription service it can follow the same model of ITV/Channel4 and bring onboard advertisers 

The quality and diversity of the service the BBC provides would definitely decrease if they had to concern themselves with chasing ad revenue.

[KORG 4,756]

I dont pay. They have no right of entry to see my TV. Sucks for them.

[KNJ 4,170]

59 minutes ago, thatfoxyfeeling said:

I wouldn't say the content from BBC is rubbish at all, I mean we wouldn't have Rupaul UK if it wasn't for BBC. I can name a few shows off the top of my head I've watched recently from BBC like Bodyguard, I May Destroy You, Killing Eve, Line of Duty, Years & Years and Normal People. 

The way BBC is like PBS with HBOs budget... 🤯 

Another example of US' priorities around the arts being f#cked up

57 minutes ago, bionic said:

With the rise of streaming services this argument is defunct. Netflix, Amazon Prime, etc could've picked up any of these

This is debatable for a variety of reasons. The BBC is the main producer but they team up with these specific companies to split cost and bolster distribution. After the success of all the series I and @thatfoxyfeeling listed (forget Fleabag too), believe it or not, BBC-backed TV is a seal of quality. There is a unique perspective and storytelling coming from Britain, specifically via BBC TV, that Hollywood, IMO, has a risk-aversion to making in kind, especially, in such volume and consistency. 

Ex: Sherlock and Luther have about 20 eps each over the span of 5-9 years. In UK-wood culture, it seems, seasons start when they have a quality script and story arc worth doing and are willing to take years-long gaps to do so; and release their actors to work elsewhere. In Hollywood, these series would've been diluted as they would've been beaten like a dead horse stretched over the standard 13 episode commitment....unless HBO or Shotime decided to take a gamble. Even with I May Destroy You, HBO split the heavy lifting with BBCOne.

[Eighteen 5,424]

6 hours ago, dynamite said:

The BBC uses a licence fee in place of having adverts. But it's stupid because you may watch other channels and never watch BBC... and you still need to pay it 

does that mean you have to pay the license fee and then pay for cable on top of that? 

[dynamite 50,362]

Just now, Eighteen said:

does that mean you have to pay the license fee and then pay for cable on top of that? 

There are a lot of free channels, you'd only have to pay if you wanted more channels on a subscription service like Sky

[Smithy 2,268]

14 hours ago, Miss Dolly said:

The cash prizes are rubbish compared to the other tv channels. 

They still have cash prizes though, that’s the point, lol