Then you could choose to purchase the BBC option while others could choose Sky/ITV + numerous others.Quote:
Originally Posted by Saurav
Printable View
Then you could choose to purchase the BBC option while others could choose Sky/ITV + numerous others.Quote:
Originally Posted by Saurav
I think if BBC was privatised, it would be more like a free channel with ads. Well ads would be there regardless of whether it was free or a subscription channel.Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-
Tbh, BBC have great content for all audiences. Heroes, Olympics, Commonwealth Games, Paralympics, Garden shows, House shows, documentaries on everything, wild life, ad free, apprentice, eastenders, Top Gear, Hustle etc
Then BBC Radio 1 which is great.
The BBC has adverts anyway with advertise its own breaks, the only difference would be slightly more adverts and they would be commercial rather than offical BBC adverts. The BBC would be paid for through people buying its services; you say its great so i'm sure the BBC wouldn't struggle to find a market for its services if it were privatised. It is not fair that everyone has to pay for a service that many do not even like when we have better options out there (in the eyes of many) such as Sky.Quote:
Originally Posted by Saurav
No advert in between shows. Only a short ad break at the end of the programme which is needed to promote other shows.Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-
They would have less money so they won't be able to afford all the big shows, hence they will end up buying crap shows. Then it will lose its audience. You have to remember, not all adults or over 60's or retired people like what Sky etc has. However BBC shows a wide range of shows for everyone. If it was privatised, it wont be able to do that, it wont be possible due to costs.Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-
Thats called business i'm afraid. I do not see why people should be forced to pay for something they may not like/even watch at all. The BBC does have a range of shows for everyone indeed and if that is the case then as I said earlier; then they should have no problem what so ever in being a competative rival in the television industry and raking in the money they need to keep shows running.Quote:
Originally Posted by Saurav
The state-run BBC is hurting ITV, Channel 4 and others. It suited its use as the first and only broadcaster all them years ago, but we live in 2010 where people have a wide range of choice.
Yes BBC is good, but I wouldn't mind the odd 1 minute advert interval, especially if it would result in better funding/programming for the BBC.
Like I said, the TV License is for GOOD quality TV SHOWS, RADIO etc. I am sure most people would pay the fee than have crappy shows on BBC and Radio 1 die away.Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-
And like I said; if the shows are as good as you say they are, then the BBC would have no problem in funding as people would continue to pay the fee rather than pay for rival channels/broadcasters.Quote:
Originally Posted by Saurav
Unless they are actually not as good as you make out.
Unless they are allowed the keep the funds from previous TV license fee's, its common sense that it would be extremely hard to just buy popular shows with hardly any money.Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-
Exactly. My dad often has arguments with Sky asking why we pay for the service then the cheeky buggers try and take more with asking you to pay for movies and games.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alkaz
Get real Sky.
---
And ITV Sport is **** compared to bbc and sky anyway.