• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

The BBC needs money!

KilowattKat

KilowattKat

In order to generate much needed revenue, the BBC is proposing:

Bringing back the radio licence fee, which will help offset the increase of the TV licence fee.

Charge a fee to use the BBC websites.

Charge a fee to subscribers of Netflix.

And charging rich households more.

www.thetimes.com

BBC considers return of radio levy to cut licence fee for all

New options for funding the corporation also include charging the fee to Netflix viewers or charging richer households more
www.thetimes.com www.thetimes.com
 
They're done.

If they bring back the UK radio tax, I can't think of a faster way to get listeners to start asking hard questions about the Beeb.
 
KilowattKat said:
Charge a fee to use the BBC websites.
Click to expand...

I already saw that on a news page. I never turned on my VPN so fast. The problem with the BBC is they're trying to do too much. Too many TV Channels, too many national radio stations.

And look at the TV stats. They're obviously doing something very wrong

Monthly Share of Total UK Viewing (Barb – Nov 2024)
Approx. Monthly Share (%)
Channel / Service
Owner
Avg Daily Minutes
BBC One
BBC
21.01%
32:23
ITV1
ITV plc
15.21%
23:26
BBC Two
BBC
5.20%
8:01
Channel 4
Channel 4 Corp
4.88%
7:31
Channel 5
Paramount (5)
3.99%
6:09
BBC Non-linear (set)
BBC
2.57%
3:57
ITV3
ITV plc
2.11%
3:15
E4
Channel 4 Corp
1.80%
2:46
BBC News
BBC
1.05%
1:37
5USA
Paramount (5)
1.04%
 
The overserving can be a problem. Especially with corporate networks, who find well traveled niches and create networks to compete with existing ones. Only to find they have more big ideas than big capital. I don't see the point of having Extra or Plus/+ networks if there's overlap or not enough compelling programming.
 
In US dollars, the yearly fee is $220-240 dollars for a TV licence.

So do poor households that cannot afford it.. do they simply go without being able to watch television at all in their home? Is there a way to get around the system, and watch for free?

I just find the whole idea of paying large fees to use radio, TV, and websites unbelievably outrageous.

Makes you appreciate the 'free' broadcasting we take for granted in the US
 
KilowattKat said:
So do poor households that cannot afford it.. do they simply go without being able to watch television at all in their home?
Click to expand...

The license is strictly for the BBC.

The reason we in the US had taxpayer funding for public broadcasting was exactly for the point you make. Public broadcasting was meant to be free and available for all taxpayers. That system served everyone well for almost 60 years. Until we had a president who felt the news was biased.

So right now, the US public broadcasting system is basically in the same position as the BBC. How to fund something when the mission is to be free and available to everyone, without a way to collect the fee from the users. The FCC doesn't allow broadcasting stations to put their signal behind a paywall. That means most people simply watch for free and ignore the membership drives. Typically about 7% of the viewers actually become paying members.
 
TheBigA said:
The license is strictly for the BBC.

The reason we in the US had taxpayer funding for public broadcasting was exactly the point you make. Public broadcasting was meant to be free and available for all taxpayers. That system served everyone well for almost 60 years. Until we had a president who felt the news was biased.

So right now, the US public broadcasting system is basically in the same position as the BBC. How to fund something when the mission is to be free and available to everyone, without a way to collect the fee from the users. The FCC doesn't allow broadcasting stations to put their signal behind a paywall. That means most people simply watch for free and ignore the membership drives. Typically about 7% of the viewers actually become paying members.
Click to expand...
I will point out though, that public broadcasting has the option of receiving donations, underwriting, and grants. I far as I know, the BBC doesn't have that luxury.
 
KilowattKat said:
I will point out though, that public broadcasting has the option of receiving donations, underwriting, and grants. I far as I know, the BBC doesn't have that luxury.
Click to expand...

I'd suggest the fee is a bigger "luxury" than begging for money. Nobody at the BBC has brought up the idea of donations, underwriting, and grants.

Years ago the music industry suggested a form of music tax that would be collected by ISPs. That idea quickly went away.

Everybody wants an automatic way to collect money from users.
 
KC8UOK said:
I already saw that on a news page. I never turned on my VPN so fast. The problem with the BBC is they're trying to do too much. Too many TV Channels, too many national radio stations.

And look at the TV stats. They're obviously doing something very wrong

Monthly Share of Total UK Viewing (Barb – Nov 2024)
Approx. Monthly Share (%)
Channel / Service
Owner
Avg Daily Minutes
BBC One
BBC
21.01%
32:23
ITV1
ITV plc
15.21%
23:26
BBC Two
BBC
5.20%
8:01
Channel 4
Channel 4 Corp
4.88%
7:31
Channel 5
Paramount (5)
3.99%
6:09
BBC Non-linear (set)
BBC
2.57%
3:57
ITV3
ITV plc
2.11%
3:15
E4
Channel 4 Corp
1.80%
2:46
BBC News
BBC
1.05%
1:37
5USA
Paramount (5)
1.04%
Click to expand...
Thank you for listing this.

At first, I didn't realize that the fee only applies to the BBC. And that that there are other viewing options for free (i.e. ITV, Channel 4, and others). I have to agree with Bongwater, this is going to further push the BBC over the edge of oblivion.
 
In some ways, I think that for the BBC to survive, it must begin acting more like U.S. public radio. When the network was set up, it was the only game in town. That is no longer true. And because it is no longer true, the Brittish broadcaster ought to consider shedding those services that are shown to be better handled by private folks and concentrate on those formats with less profitability.
 
ted chittenden said:
concentrate on those formats with less profitability.
Click to expand...

That's a guaranteed way to insolvency. That's why the commercial folks don't do them.

My prediction is that with the loss of federal funding, you'll see US public stations shifting away from fringe formats and more towards those that people will pay for.
 
And the Netflix fee! You know d*** well Netflix will be fighting that one. How can they specifically go after a Netflix subscriber...and charge them a fee for a network they may have no interest of in the first place?

These are proposals right now, and I will be shocked if all this gets passed.
 
I’m keeping an eye on future funding for BBC World Service Radio. It appears they want a focus on online distribution and podcasts with local FM rebroadcasts where practical. I suspect they would like to get out of what is left of their shortwave output, but there are probably a few very specific languages and target areas they might keep a while longer on that legacy medium.
 
KilowattKat said:
Thank you for listing this.

At first, I didn't realize that the fee only applies to the BBC. And that that there are other viewing options for free (i.e. ITV, Channel 4, and others). I have to agree with Bongwater, this is going to further push the BBC over the edge of oblivion.
Click to expand...
Actually no. According to UK law if you watch ANY live TV whether BBC or otherwise you must pay a TV license. The money however only goes to the BBC. This also includes live streaming on YouTube, Hulu etc.
 
You now how creative some people can be in finding a way around the system to get things FREE (illegal black boxes for cable, sharing passwords).

I wonder if the Brit's have some clever ways to avoid the fee and watch for free?
 
KilowattKat said:
You now how creative some people can be in finding a way around the system to get things FREE (illegal black boxes for cable, sharing passwords).

I wonder if the Brit's have some clever ways to avoid the fee and watch for free?
Click to expand...

Here's the issue. Inspectors literally have to either catch you in the act or see an antenna connected. And of course antenna TV is getting far rarer than it used to be.

"In the 2024/25 annual report, the BBC now estimates that licence fee evasion stands at 12.52%, up from a restated 12.04% in 2023/24. This represents around £550 million in lost income."

www.cordbusters.co.uk

BBC Crisis: TV Licence Fee Evasion Hits 30-Year High | Cord Busters

BBC licence fee evasion hits another record high as 300,000 households stop paying. Digital viewing soars but traditional funding model faces crisis
www.cordbusters.co.uk www.cordbusters.co.uk
 
KilowattKat said:
Thank you for listing this.

At first, I didn't realize that the fee only applies to the BBC. And that that there are other viewing options for free (i.e. ITV, Channel 4, and others). I have to agree with Bongwater, this is going to further push the BBC over the edge of oblivion.
Click to expand...
The licence fee money goes to the BBC, but you need a licence to watch any TV channel "live". So if you watch ITV, Channel 4, Sky Sports, Red Hot XXX or any other TV broadcast channel, you have to have a licence, even if you never watch a second of BBC. That even applies if you only ever watch foreign TV - so immigrants who have a satellite dish and only watch Polish or Pakistani TV, or people who stream American TV, should all have a licence.

One of the problems is that the law was designed in the days when the only way to watch live TV was on a TV. It was never designed for modern media. Strictly speaking, you should have a licence if you watch any live stream on YouTube or Twitch, for instance, but was that ever the intention of the law? Is Twitch "TV" in the sense that it was meant when this was dreamed up? Who knows. You don't need a licence if you watch on-demand dramas on Amazon Prime Video, but the moment you stream a second of one of the live Premier League games they show, you do.

And does it count if you're watching live video on a smartphone in your house? What about on the beach, or on the train? Buildings, rather than people, are licensed - your house is what has the licence, not you. So again, it's a super murky area because the people who wrote the law couldn't dream of an era when you could watch live streaming video on the train to work.

The whole thing is a mess, and needs re-looking at, because it's just not suitable for today's media environment. I don't have the answer! I also don't currently have a licence - when I moved and went to move my licence, I looked at how much I was using the services for which a licence is required and realised it wasn't nearly enough to justify the cost. I now get endless letters from TV Licensing threatening me with an inspection. (I don't watch live British TV without a licence, although I do occasionally watch YouTube live streams, so strictly speaking I'm an outlaw.)
 
Miss Tuned said:
The whole thing is a mess, and needs re-looking at, because it's just not suitable for today's media environment. I don't have the answer! I also don't currently have a licence - when I moved and went to move my licence, I looked at how much I was using the services for which a licence is required and realised it wasn't nearly enough to justify the cost. I now get endless letters from TV Licensing threatening me with an inspection. (I don't watch live British TV without a licence, although I do occasionally watch YouTube live streams, so strictly speaking I'm an outlaw.)
Click to expand...
Thanks for explaining how it all works. Can people refuse the inspections? Also, are there enough inspectors to be able to cover the entirety of the UK? Do businesses like restaurants/pubs have to have a TV license also, or is it just part of their business license?
 


Back
Top Bottom