Jump to content

TV licence thread

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, melthebell said:

and have a look how much other broadcasters stars are paid, how much film stars are paid

You fail to recognise that comparing private sector 'talent' or film stars to the public sector funded BBC is entirely irrelevant.

 

It's all to do with the unique way the BBC is funded you see (demanding money with menaces from every UK home).

 

Does Jennifer Lawrence or Johnny Depp come to our homes demanding we pay them money just in case we may be watching one of their films?

 

BBC leeches should face trial for their war on the poor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Car Boot said:

You fail to recognise that comparing private sector 'talent' or film stars to the public sector funded BBC is entirely irrelevant.

 

 

not really, if the BBC dont pay the going rate where do the talent go? not to the cheapest place i bet. Like it or not the public want talent, they want "faces" they want people who are known to them, the BBC have to pay up to get / keep them, its that simple

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, melthebell said:

not really, if the BBC dont pay the going rate where do the talent go? not to the cheapest place i bet. Like it or not the public want talent, they want "faces" they want people who are known to them, the BBC have to pay up to get / keep them, its that simple

Is Graham Norton or Gary Lineker going to head to Hollywood and mega bucks if the BBC doesn't pay them £millions of licence fee viewers money? Not on your nelly. These people could never get the huge amounts of money they are paid by the BBC anywhere else.

 

You really must drop this 'pay the going rate' nonsense. It doesn't apply to the BBC due to the unique way it is funded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Car Boot said:

Is Graham Norton or Gary Lineker going to head to Hollywood and mega bucks if the BBC doesn't pay them £millions of licence fee viewers money? Not on your nelly. These people could never get the huge amounts of money they are paid by the BBC anywhere else.

 

You really must drop this 'pay the going rate' nonsense. It doesn't apply to the BBC due to the unique way it is funded.

you telling me they wont go to ITV, C4, C5, Amazon or Netflix if the offers right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why have the BBC got presenters at an empty stadium giving their views on the England v Sweden match?  Marvellous how they moan about money yet they have these people at an empty stadium in France, they could have had them in a studio back in England, then again why not it is only licence payers money they are spending.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, melthebell said:

you telling me they wont go to ITV, C4, C5, Amazon or Netflix if the offers right?

Who cares if they go to the private sector? If they do they will be paid less than the BBC, as Jonathan Ross and others have quickly discovered.

 

It's the public sector and the unique way the BBC is funded that is at issue here. The public sector should not be creating £multi-millionaires at the expense of the poor and vulnerable pensioners. 

 

4 minutes ago, iansheff said:

Why have the BBC got presenters at an empty stadium giving their views on the England v Sweden match?  Marvellous how they moan about money yet they have these people at an empty stadium in France, they could have had them in a studio back in England, then again why not it is only licence payers money they are spending.

The BBC are an integral part of the ruling class. The ruling class have always looked down on the rest of us while picking our pockets.

Edited by Car Boot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's time for a judicial review of the bbc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Car Boot said:

Is Graham Norton or Gary Lineker going to head to Hollywood and mega bucks if the BBC doesn't pay them £millions of licence fee viewers money? Not on your nelly. These people could never get the huge amounts of money they are paid by the BBC anywhere else.

 

You really must drop this 'pay the going rate' nonsense. It doesn't apply to the BBC due to the unique way it is funded.

Oh yeah because no BBC presenter has ever gone to another channel because they’ve been offered more money have they...

 

It case it was obviously, that should be read with a heavy dose of sarcasm.. 

1 hour ago, Car Boot said:

Who cares if they go to the private sector? If they do they will be paid less than the BBC, as Jonathan Ross and others have quickly discovered.

 

It's the public sector and the unique way the BBC is funded that is at issue here. The public sector should not be creating £multi-millionaires at the expense of the poor and vulnerable pensioners. 

 

The BBC are an integral part of the ruling class. The ruling class have always looked down on the rest of us while picking our pockets.

They aren’t! The wage bill for presenters and the like is 0.5% of their costs. 

 

Please explain to me how reducing what they pay these people is going make any difference. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Car Boot said:

You fail to recognise that comparing private sector 'talent' or film stars to the public sector funded BBC is entirely irrelevant.

 

It's all to do with the unique way the BBC is funded you see (demanding money with menaces from every UK home).

 

Does Jennifer Lawrence or Johnny Depp come to our homes demanding we pay them money just in case we may be watching one of their films?

 

BBC leeches should face trial for their war on the poor.

Well said!     Archaic system.   Should be made Pay to View, although I for one wouldn't. 

Edited by kaytie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, kaytie said:

Well said!   

No.  Not well said.   Moronic.

 

The BBC is a broadcasting service not just some government infomation channel.    Broadcasters aim to provide content which attracts viewers and listeners.  To do that, they need to make programmes which people want to watch starring personalities who people want to see.

9 minutes ago, kaytie said:

Well said!     Archaic system.   Should be made Pay to View, although I for one wouldn't. 

You do know what the TV licence is for dont you.

 

Its not payment for a subscription service.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Robin-H said:

Oh yeah because no BBC presenter has ever gone to another channel because they’ve been offered more money have they...

 

It case it was obviously, that should be read with a heavy dose of sarcasm.. 

They aren’t! The wage bill for presenters and the like is 0.5% of their costs. 

 

Please explain to me how reducing what they pay these people is going make any difference. 

So the BBC paying Gary Lineker £1.75 million every year ISN'T using public sector money to create £millionaires?

 

Don't forget, persecuting the poor to fund the rich is all because of the unique way the BBC is funded. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.