BBC - Is it value for money?

[Narnia]

I say it is. Between TV and Radio I would say I'm happy to pay my fee. What do you say?

PS There's a lot of prime time stuff I just can't watch but mostly it's very good.

[jaybee82]

I only watch The Apprentice and the odd Top Gear to be honest, which at about ?20 an episode over the duration of a year is a bit steep.

[mockney piers]

Today programme every morning in the bathroom and breakfast.

Five live sport coverage, Newsnight, Question Time, Family Guy, Being Human, Saturday Swap Shop (I turned over to tiswas when my parents were't around though). Oh I don't know, I could go on for about 30 forum pages on my own about the value that the beeb has given the world over the years, and though it has dumbed down a bit, and never recovered from birtspeak, still is absolutely worth the money.

Should the licence be shared out a bit? Perhaps, but only if in saving ITV it promises to occasionally do something worthwhile.

[matthew123]

It's more value for money that the education system

[Mikecg]

EastEnders, if ever there was a reason to cut your own throat, The Beeb has a lot to offer but there are quite a few negatives, I personally like current affairs so the BBC news channel gets my vote but Bill Turnball is a hideous boor on the BBC breakfast show if ever there was one, the license fee is a bit steep thou'.

[cupid_stunt]

Yep, for the practicality of the iPlayer alone, i'm happy to pay the stealth tax. It's a pity that even now they have a fair number of clock watching under-employed staff at TVC. And i should know, i used to be one of them before my obscene pay-off :-$

Another topic for another post methinks....

[Peckhamgatecrasher]

For the piece on Radio 4 last week alone - yes. Anyone else catch "The Men Who Fell to Earth"? I blubbed.

[????]

I reckon I get my value off the website alone....however, I think (and know by experience) it's bloated, horrendoulsy inefficiently run and pretty poorly managed, so pretty typical for the public sector

[PeckhamRose]

I hate that the BBC uses the news to advertise its own programmes.

I hate that the BBC news presenters smile too much at the camera/us specially 6.00 news.

I hate the way one can sort of feel the producers bosses telling them to dumb down and be appealing.

I love that BBC was brave enough to broadcast Jerry Springfield musical.

I love that BBC still broadcasts people with opinions and personality and character that divides people (like J Clarkson, and I love him).

But as far as licence fee is concerned, I think it is value for money, the question should be is there an alternative to paying for it. The only way one can watch television at all, let alone the BBC, now, without a licence is by watching all its programmes via iplayer on computers and ditch the telly altogether.

It's a massive question. I don't have the answers. But of the question of the topic I would answer: just about.

[charliecharlie]

@ ?2.74 per week News 24 and bbc iplayer alone seem excellent value to me(tu)

and then you get the other occasional gems to boot...

plus it's a lot cheaper than buying a paper everyday and saves on the recycling!

[bigbadwolf]

I can honestly say hands down that to this day I've never had a T.V license as I'd much rather spend my money on Credit crunch punch (White lightning) and lotto tickets, nah wot I mean.

[AllforNun]

yes charlie my friend but the point being that the bbc could still provide the iplayer and bbc news for about 31p a week from every person in the country with a TV, i could then top that up with a few other bits i want and be left with 8 quid a month to spend somewhere else. If you are to have such a debate then you need to set your bar slightly higher, you would also need to think about the things that you do not know about, things that if you did would make you react in the same way as say an MP claiming for firelighters and paint from farrow and ball !

[HonaloochieB]

Declan Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I say it is. Between TV and Radio I would say I'm

> happy to pay my fee. What do you say?

>

> PS There's a lot of prime time stuff I just can't

> watch but mostly it's very good.

Can't possibly disagree with you on this one, Bertie.

See you at The Drones.

[charliecharlie]

hhhhmmmm.... tricky

not quite sure where to start looking for these "things" I don't know about, that I clearly should know about, when I don't know what those illusive things might be

should I start by looking into the "TV i" that you mention above?

possibly some new form of technology that I should know about???

[Narnia]

HonaloochieB Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Declan Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I say it is. Between TV and Radio I would say

> I'm

> > happy to pay my fee. What do you say?

> >

> > PS There's a lot of prime time stuff I just

> can't

> > watch but mostly it's very good.

>

> Can't possibly disagree with you on this one,

> Bertie.

>

> See you at The Drones.

Do Bertie and I have something in common?

[AllforNun]

Well i think we are talking known unknowns - like golden handshakes, 1st class flights, deals in Michelin starred restaurants, massively self inflated wages, back handers, comfortable, unaccountable and completely arrogant.

[Narnia]

and crap spelling programmes!

[charliecharlie]

[quote name=golden handshakes' date=' 1st class flights, deals in Michelin starred restaurants, massively self inflated wages, back handers, comfortable, unaccountable and completely arrogant.

]

that somehow also reminds me of the square mile, politicians, large commercial corporations, locally authority planning deptartments...etc.etc.

but I still like iplayer

(or is that ipayer)?

[Marmora Man]

Probably. While I'd agree with ???? that it's probably bloated, inefficient and too "public sector" at ?140 / year it represents the best payback for a taxation ? across the spectrum. The radio services are worth the price alone.

[Huguenot]

Absolutely.

You can never really know the true value of something until you see the alternative, and I consider myself something of an aficionado of global telly.

The BBC is an extraordinary achievement in terms of programming, costs less than a third of Sky, who make none.

The only organisation globally that come close to the BBC in terms of quality is HBO, but you'd have to say they're a one-trick pony.

[SteveT]

The true test of whether it is value for money is to attempt to sell it's services into the market to compete with Sky and co.

Sky packages are much better value if you compare how long one is tuned in to which channels.

Since I moved to Sky the beeb are way down the field and I use it less and less.

I find it appalling that we do not have the choice to invest, or not, with the Beeb.

[Huguenot]

Possibly, depends what channels you watch.

Do remember that Sky does very little investment in original programming. It pays a fraction of production costs to TV studios who recoup overall expenses by syndicating the programmes globally.

The only studios big enough to do this are American. If you left TV to the likes of Sky and Setanta, then you might as well be living in the US, you'll see no different.

The BBC does great original programming: drama, documentary and news gathering. The BBC's natural history output is quite simply the best in the world. America doesn't do natural history programmes because of religious issues. No BBC, no education.

[charliecharlie]

[quote name=The BBC does great original programming: drama' date=' documentary and news gathering. The BBC's natural history output is quite simply the best in the world. No BBC, no education.

]

Absolutely right on the button, Huguenot

[SteveT]

I agree Huguenot the beeb does produce wonderful stuff, sadly they do not harbour talent in high enough percentages.

They seemingly prefer to house managers, administrators, and accountants, rather than creative talent.

They do not help themselves to the best of their ability either, it would not cost much to have a +1hour or a +2hour on bbc1 and bbc2 hence doubling your channels for minimum outlay.

['bout now]

On the whole, I think yes it is. However I,m also totally sick of the beeb's self promotion of three programmes that I absolutely 'kin hate. The Apprentice, Strictly Toss and Dr Who. You'd think Russell T Davies was beatified or sumfink. ( what does the "T" stand for, oh wait don't answer that)