Grand Prix anyone watch it?
- Thread starter Mandy
- Start date
don't get me going, lol!!
They should go independent like ITV and source their funding using alternative methods.
Whilst it may irritate me on occasions that adverts are paramount together with competitions in any viewings on ITV together with many other channels. I just feel it is about time the beeb entered into the 21st century and started to fund themselves instead of relying on the general public to fund them!
The beeb is still way back there in days gone by and wouldn't know the first thing about supporting themselves.
I know two people that worked for them who thought the whole organisation to be a joke and stated it was renowned as sleepy valley and money for old rope.
Blimey they can't even monitor what goes out on air for goodness sake
Well it won't put me off F1 but I bet the coverage will be even worse than it was with ITV.
Sorry Rant over,
Yep and that is thanks to the TV license!Aye, still, they've got 1.2 million going spare at the moment
They should go independent like ITV and source their funding using alternative methods.
Whilst it may irritate me on occasions that adverts are paramount together with competitions in any viewings on ITV together with many other channels. I just feel it is about time the beeb entered into the 21st century and started to fund themselves instead of relying on the general public to fund them!
The beeb is still way back there in days gone by and wouldn't know the first thing about supporting themselves.
I know two people that worked for them who thought the whole organisation to be a joke and stated it was renowned as sleepy valley and money for old rope.
Blimey they can't even monitor what goes out on air for goodness sake
Well it won't put me off F1 but I bet the coverage will be even worse than it was with ITV.
Sorry Rant over,
I very much disagree on the funding. The BBC had no trouble monitoring itself and maintaining standards up to 1980, but after Thatcher interfered, insisted on them trying to be "commercial" and imposed a stooge as Director General that it all fell apart.
They should go independent like ITV and source their funding using alternative methods.
I just feel it is about time the beeb entered into the 21st century and started to fund themselves instead of relying on the general public to fund them!
Traditionally the BBC was not spendthrift and was notorious for it's poor salaries and entertainers fees, but with ITV increasingly bribing away it's best talents with inflated payments the Beeb was forced to do the same eventually, so we ended up with Ross et al and their obscene rewards for little talent.
Switching to advertising instead of the licence fee would finally destroy any value the BBC still has, and there is no other way of commercial funding. We already have a rather lame ITV 1, 2, 3 and 4, plus channels 4, Five and many others supported by advertising, and I believe the last thing anyone wants or needs is yet another with the same dreary production standards that most of those have.
.
Last edited:
Sorry Flecc but I beg to disagree
Well it certainly hasn't improved since 1980 has it?
I beg to differ also with other channels. Channel 4 have amazing documentaries such as animals in the womb, walking with dinosaurs amongst many others well worth watching.
ITV offers X factor, lol and many other popular light entertainment shows.
The tax payer continues to be a crutch for the BBC and whilst some may not like change it would sure be a help during these troubled financial times to not have to pay the over inflated liscense fees!
Personally, I found Jonathan Ross quite funny but not Jo Brand/bland or whatever his name is? As for Jeremey Clarkson, where would we be without Top Gear!! It wouldn't be the same without him
All bloopers on the BBC front and is still sleepy valley!Well the two people I know that worked for the BBC were paid mega money and were bored as hell with nothing to do, one left in around 2000 and the other in 2001.
I am sure others would agree with me also on or off the forum
Regards
Last edited:
Stop it! Stop it. I can't bear to read that. My dream job - being paid mega money for a boring job with nothing to do.
- Tsk! I never get the breaks
(Lucky ba####ds!)
Last edited:
Stop it! Stop it. I can't bear to read that. My dream job - being paid mega money for a boring job with nothing to do.
- Tsk! I never get the breaks
One of them is my best friend and is gonna recieve a pension too as hers was redundancy with a huge payout way above national average !!! God it makes me mad, but do wish it was me, Me too, never get the breaks and always had to graft for a living,
I'm more than happy to pay the licence fee. I think the beeb commissions much better drama, which the other channels then react to. Their comedy product is generally top-notch too. Then there's news coverage, which no one else in the UK can touch at present. Sky had it and lost it, and ITN have scaled back dramatically in the last few years. There's also the wealth of programming for children. CBBC and Cbeebies while not my cup of tea, do an excellent job of commissioning shows both entertaining and educational rather than simply buying in endless hours of cartoon drivel. BBC4 for documentaries, BBC3 for... Well no one knows what the hell BBC3 is for anymore. But it used to be good
I'd hate to see ads on the beeb. It would destroy all that original programming and reduce the stations to producing lowest common denominator drivel in pursuit of the all important audience figures.
I'd hate to see ads on the beeb. It would destroy all that original programming and reduce the stations to producing lowest common denominator drivel in pursuit of the all important audience figures.
But you aren't disagreeing Mandy! That's exactly what I said, made worse from 1980 onwards thanks to Thatcher's interference.
Again what I said, pointing out that payment was poor originally, i.e. before 1980, the inflated salaries coming later from then up to the 2000s that you quote.
But the first member commenting on the rights and wrongs didn't agree!
.
Last edited:
I couldn't agree more Rad, it would just be another pathetic ITV 1 clone.
X factor Mandy? Well, there's certainly a market for trash programs like that and Big Brother and ITV and other channels serves it well, so we have no need for more of the same. The BBC is not a suitable home for them since we also need a source of quality.
I wonder why people don't realise independent TV isn't free, and that they pay far more for each advertising channel than they do for the beeb in licence fees. I'm quite sure almost everyone gets far more than their money's worth from the licence fee, watching far more hours each year than that fee would buy in DVD purchases or rentals.
On the other hand, the greater amount extra they pay on the goods they buy to finance commercial advertising not only pays for the channels but also lines shareholders pockets, something the licence fee doesn't have to do. Since ITV we've all been far poorer than the licence fee amount every year just to pay for the inflated price of it's advertising and shareholder dividends.
.
Last edited:
I started as you did and disagreed with you on the funding Flecc and was taking the points in turnflecc said:
You have just selected snippets of my post and missed the point I was making and put them in the wrong context. Again this was a question, statement call it what you like and was just stating that the beeb is ready for a change as in "well it certainly hasn't improved since 1980 has it?" again a snippet of my post, MmmmMandy said:
.flecc said:
As outlined above, mearly using snippets of my post and taking my points out of context.
Baggy my turn for snippets
Errmm dreary production standards? Have you watched BBC Breakfast TV lately? It's enough to make you want to go staight back to bed! Give me GMTV any day with the light hearted banter which manages to also cover important news topics and eases me into my busy day, lol.flecc said:
There are many many channels out there that are not dreary in any way and very informative that are not related to the BBC.
Oh and you state the BBC is so good?flecc said:
Slight contradiction of posts there I think? and what about Strictly come dancing? Just another although different spin on the X Factor really. At the end of the day, one person's trash is another person's good viewing and the ratings can't all be wrong, can they? After all we should have a choice?flecc said:
What like the discovery channels, National Geographical channels together with Channel 4's excellent documentry's. Pathetic ITV clone's? Kind of don't think soflecc said:
Well we all have a choice to either buy or not buy the products advertised don't we? So would you rather have advertising removed from TV altogether?flecc said:
I personaly would like a choice whether to watch BBC or not and would gladly pay a minute margin of that fee for what I would watch on BBC rather than have no choice at all. I subscribe to SKY and that is my choice and that is my point, there is no choice with the Beeb and we are all forced to pay for a TV license or do without a TV altogether, Not fair and completely wrong in my book and just because they can't get with the programme, lol. Pardon the pun
Regards
You're early tonight Mandy!
I just took your posting as it read, so no intention of removing context. I can't read your mind so am left only with what you post to understand what is meant.
I completely agree with you about the trash TV productions on the BBC that you mention, this being my point about the BBC being forced into commercialism from the 1980s on which led to this loss of standards.
It's far from being all like that though, so I don't want it all to become like ITV 1 which I regard as the pits.
The fact is that when buying goods throughout each year, everyone has to pay the added amounts that support the cost of TV advertising to provide what you might like to watch. Therefore I fail to see why everyone should not pay via a licence to support what I like to watch. That's just fair play after all, everyone paying for all tastes.
I don't understand what you mean about paying a part of the fee for what you watch on BBC. You don't have that choice with advertising channels, the costs of advertising added to all the things you buy which are advertised there, regardless of whether you watch the channels or not.
.
I just took your posting as it read, so no intention of removing context. I can't read your mind so am left only with what you post to understand what is meant.
I completely agree with you about the trash TV productions on the BBC that you mention, this being my point about the BBC being forced into commercialism from the 1980s on which led to this loss of standards.
It's far from being all like that though, so I don't want it all to become like ITV 1 which I regard as the pits.
The fact is that when buying goods throughout each year, everyone has to pay the added amounts that support the cost of TV advertising to provide what you might like to watch. Therefore I fail to see why everyone should not pay via a licence to support what I like to watch. That's just fair play after all, everyone paying for all tastes.
I don't understand what you mean about paying a part of the fee for what you watch on BBC. You don't have that choice with advertising channels, the costs of advertising added to all the things you buy which are advertised there, regardless of whether you watch the channels or not.
.
Last edited:
LOL Yes I was watching something on Ebay so entered the world of the web a little earlier than normal. Are you saying my posts don't make sense Flecc? Or is my opinion just simply not valid to you?
Ah but you dissected my post into little pieces
so that is why I clarified my position or view and was nothing to do with mind reading But Flecc, one person's trash is another person's treasure and just because you feel something is trash doesn't make it so. Just because you don't like ITV or as you said the other advertising channels, it doesn't mean everyone has to be of the same opinion does it?
By the same token, why should I pay for a TV license for a channel I just watch on occasions? After all it should work both ways shouldn't it? We have a choice of whether we pay for advertised goods or not so why do I have no choice in having to purchase a license?
What I mean't by paying a portion of the cost was by way of an idea that if you want to watch a programme of your choice you could pay a subscription for that programme. So this could apply with the BBC --- a bit like BT are advertising at the moment?
OMG did I mention advertising? LOL
Okay, lets take advertising? If we didn't have advertisements we wouldn't know what new products were available out there would we? Well certainly not as effectively anyway. It is certainly not such the bad thing that you make out
At the end of the day, why should someone who wishes to purchase a TV have to pay the licensing fee laid down by the Beeb when they hardly or never wish to tune into their channels? I am not saying I don't watch BBC but do have several 100 other channels to choose from which I subscribe to.
If you have any problems with understanding my post please let me know and I will try to clarify my position and views further and attempt a mind meldflecc said:
Yours Truly
If we didn't have the BBC, we'd have American TV.
Have you ever watched TV in America? It's a painful experience. Ads just after the preamble and before the titles. Ads just after the titles. Ads ads ads. Ads make up nearly a third of programming time on U.S. TV and that's without infomercials. They're absolute killers.
Have you ever watched TV in America? It's a painful experience. Ads just after the preamble and before the titles. Ads just after the titles. Ads ads ads. Ads make up nearly a third of programming time on U.S. TV and that's without infomercials. They're absolute killers.
The facts:
W/ending the 26th October: (You have to pay if you want the latest info) -
BBC 1 & 2 = 28.6% of the total viewing audience share.
ITV (inc GMTV) = 19.1% of the total viewing audience share.
The remainder of all channels and viewings being made up of single digit percentage points.
All figures from the highly respected BARB:
BARB
Monthly figures are similar: approx 30% for the Beeb and high teens% for ITV.
In fact, for total audience share, ITV has been trounced by the BBC for the past couple of years, which is a reversal of prior to that period. (Although ITV's Coronation Street holds up well for individual highest show ratings against the BBC).
When Michael Grade took over at ITV, all thought the company would come back with a flourish and the shares rose in anticipation on news of Grade's appointment, but ITV has continued to decline; I've watched it's shares sink steadily even lower with Grade in charge - and that was before the stockmarket crash! (Talks of takeover at ITV continue unabated, despite BSkyB latest failure to do so in September just gone; meanwhile advertising revenues continue to decline at ITV; we've had banks almost go to the wall - ITV next?)
Whatever you think of the BBC's programmes, it's on a roll. For the moment ITV has no answer to it.
W/ending the 26th October: (You have to pay if you want the latest info) -
BBC 1 & 2 = 28.6% of the total viewing audience share.
ITV (inc GMTV) = 19.1% of the total viewing audience share.
The remainder of all channels and viewings being made up of single digit percentage points.
All figures from the highly respected BARB:
BARB
Monthly figures are similar: approx 30% for the Beeb and high teens% for ITV.
In fact, for total audience share, ITV has been trounced by the BBC for the past couple of years, which is a reversal of prior to that period. (Although ITV's Coronation Street holds up well for individual highest show ratings against the BBC).
When Michael Grade took over at ITV, all thought the company would come back with a flourish and the shares rose in anticipation on news of Grade's appointment, but ITV has continued to decline; I've watched it's shares sink steadily even lower with Grade in charge - and that was before the stockmarket crash! (Talks of takeover at ITV continue unabated, despite BSkyB latest failure to do so in September just gone; meanwhile advertising revenues continue to decline at ITV; we've had banks almost go to the wall - ITV next?)
Whatever you think of the BBC's programmes, it's on a roll. For the moment ITV has no answer to it.
I have no trouble understanding what you write Mandy, only with it having a different interpretation put on it when you reply. As soon as I commented that you hadn't disagreed with me since in the adjoining sentence you agreed, you claim that as me quoting out of context. No it was not. You strung those two sentences together, so if they were out out context with each other, it was you who put them that way. I just quoted what you wrote, inconvenient though that may have been to you.
Your contention that you have a choice to buy the advertised products that support independent TV is not true. The sheer breadth of product advertised across all the channels means we cannot avoid paying without a severe effect on our lives.
People just don't realise the huge amounts they pay in this way. As an example, I remember Volkswagen many years ago admitting to between £1000 and £1500 per car going on advertising, the bulk of that to TV. It would be far higher now, and the same is true of the other main manufacturers. Buy a car and keep it for the typical three to five years and after the residual value is deducted, there's still £200 to £500 a year at least gone to advertising from it's costs.
As another example, have a look at breakfast cereals. The supermarkets say that their low price own brand products are their most profitable lines, but the same type of branded cereals cost around 60% more. Obviously most of that isn't going in extra retailer profit, the bulk of that difference going into the advertising. Those same differences exist in all the other own brand/branded product comparisons.
The probability is that the average individual is paying between £400 and £1000 a year in advertising costs incorporated into all of their purchasing, the bulk of that going to the TV channels. The licence fee is a bargain by comparison and I'm sure you easily get it's value each whole year from those things you do watch on the BBC channels, something thats true for virtually everyone.
Whether trash TV or not, I am forced to pay dearly for those who watch independent TV and listen to independent radio, so I see no problem with them equally being forced to pay the very much lower cost for my public service broadcast channels on TV and radio. The fairness of that system might annoy you, but fair it is.
To end this, I hope you now see that your blunt statement that most in here would support you was an unwise assumption to say the the least, since both others who've commented have disagreed. The support for the BBC in this country is far stronger than I believe you think it is, and it's supporters understand that the licence fee is the only realistic way to finance it. Many politicians would love to get rid of it, but each time they've broached the subject the scale of the reaction and depth of feeling has frightened them off.
Despite it's current defects due to political interference, the BBC remains one of the gems that make Britain unique in this world.
.
Your contention that you have a choice to buy the advertised products that support independent TV is not true. The sheer breadth of product advertised across all the channels means we cannot avoid paying without a severe effect on our lives.
People just don't realise the huge amounts they pay in this way. As an example, I remember Volkswagen many years ago admitting to between £1000 and £1500 per car going on advertising, the bulk of that to TV. It would be far higher now, and the same is true of the other main manufacturers. Buy a car and keep it for the typical three to five years and after the residual value is deducted, there's still £200 to £500 a year at least gone to advertising from it's costs.
As another example, have a look at breakfast cereals. The supermarkets say that their low price own brand products are their most profitable lines, but the same type of branded cereals cost around 60% more. Obviously most of that isn't going in extra retailer profit, the bulk of that difference going into the advertising. Those same differences exist in all the other own brand/branded product comparisons.
The probability is that the average individual is paying between £400 and £1000 a year in advertising costs incorporated into all of their purchasing, the bulk of that going to the TV channels. The licence fee is a bargain by comparison and I'm sure you easily get it's value each whole year from those things you do watch on the BBC channels, something thats true for virtually everyone.
Whether trash TV or not, I am forced to pay dearly for those who watch independent TV and listen to independent radio, so I see no problem with them equally being forced to pay the very much lower cost for my public service broadcast channels on TV and radio. The fairness of that system might annoy you, but fair it is.
To end this, I hope you now see that your blunt statement that most in here would support you was an unwise assumption to say the the least, since both others who've commented have disagreed. The support for the BBC in this country is far stronger than I believe you think it is, and it's supporters understand that the licence fee is the only realistic way to finance it. Many politicians would love to get rid of it, but each time they've broached the subject the scale of the reaction and depth of feeling has frightened them off.
Despite it's current defects due to political interference, the BBC remains one of the gems that make Britain unique in this world.
.
Last edited:
Hi Danny
Well that makes 47.7% between ITV and BBC 1 & 2 Yes?
Mmmmm well I wasn't just backing ITV in my posts at all. I was actually backing the many excellent channels out there like Discovery, National Geographical, Animal Planet etc etc etc all of which advertise.
So if my calculations are correct those single digit percentages you talk about equal around 52.3% which if you add to ITV 19.1% then the advertising channels actually come out on top!
In fact it's 71.3% against the 28.6% of the BBC, now that's what I call a majority vote! LOL Thanks for the info