and it all the same SH*** on there
2006-09-05 05:09:34 · 26 answers · asked by jim.adams45@btinternet.com 2 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Television
the tv licence is for bbc channels as they dont have adverts, sky is an entirely different thing as it is a subscription. and yeah its all the same ****
2006-09-05 05:11:50 · answer #1 · answered by officegirluk 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Probably is all sh**but nope you're not paying twice.
BBC licence fee pays for a very broad range of notionally free services BBC1-4 and radios 1 to whatever plus web sites etc...Sky have very cleverly over the years sought to tell people that the BBC is poor value for money (it may not be great but...it isn't that bad although highly questionable programming to justify remit but that is another question) while saying Sky is great value.
However, Sky also circulated about two years ago a memo syaing they not only wanted but had toget each subscriber paying around £150 a year (hmmm more than the licence fee and really full of a lot of crap) some people are paying a lot more for Sky through Movies SPorts Sky+ etc etc but inertia facotr means they stop questioning what they are being paid for...might also want to consider the role Sky played in pushing up the price of football for fans and what it did to the Premier..you can in fact blame Sky for ensuring that talentless footballers now get and expect to be paid millions for losign the World Cup but again that's another story...
2006-09-05 12:19:03 · answer #2 · answered by Gilly S 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A lot of people think that as they don't watch the BBC that they shouldn't have to pay the licence fee, of course there is no way to prove this that's why every Household with the capacity to watch TV has to have a licence.
The only way to get around the problem is to make the BBC channels commercial too.
To the person that said any BBC on Sky should be free - it is, you do not need to subscribe to Sky to watch any BBC Channel.
2006-09-05 12:18:23 · answer #3 · answered by Leo 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The licence is for the television receiver and not the channels.
The fee is collected by the BBC to supply the service, whereas Sky is a separate subscription service which collects monies from their advertisers to cover their costs.
I agree 100% that it is a rip off, but as it is a Government service it just has to be accepted.
This means that even if you never watch tv but simply watch Sky or videos/cd's etc. you still require a licence for your tv reception.
2006-09-05 12:32:30 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Tv licence is for the BBC Channels and Sky give you random channels like living TV etc and i'm guessing the reason Sky comes with BBC is cos they expect you to have paid your licence if you can afford sky
2006-09-05 12:22:53 · answer #5 · answered by Kimmyray 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The television licence is for the place that You live not the T V You can have as many TV s in your house and only pay one fee
2006-09-05 12:19:11 · answer #6 · answered by ganthony722@btinternet.com 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the television licence fee does support the bbc,however it is a licence to use a tv within the property....you look on the site for tv licences and it will all be explained....i knew of a case where a man said it would not recieve tv signals and used it for dvd/video but he was taken to court for not having one..he dragged his tv and a tv repair expert into court to prove his case...who said it was incapable of recieving..he got the licence guy to take a note of the tv serial number when he was nabbed...he was awarded costs against the licencing authority....and WON...as for sky..you are purchasing the progs..sky do not recieve any of the licence fee..
2006-09-05 12:25:29 · answer #7 · answered by hondanut 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yeah I feel like this. I pay for both Sky and TV License and I hardly ever watch the BBC (except for Dr Who and the odd drama series about once a year - I certainly don't watch it enough to have to pay for the priviledge!)
2006-09-05 14:29:43 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
We should all stop paying the TV licence fee at the same time.
2006-09-05 12:20:19 · answer #9 · answered by skelomalso 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The BBC is a service 'for the people' paid for 'by the people' it is meant to be unbiased and therefore cannot be 'owned' or funded through advertisers. You also pay your licence fee for all their radio stations and other services on-line etc.
Where as Sky is owned by a power mad megalomaniac Australian who owns several media titles and has to keep shareholders happy while handing his business over to his children and can slant the news in any political direction that suits him or his various media businesses
seems to me the wrong Australian got stung by a Ray!
2006-09-05 12:21:13 · answer #10 · answered by carter 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋