Because of the exact reason you said: it's a legal requirement. We could all spend all day every day moaning about unjust laws and taxes, many of which are far worse than the TV licence. There's little you can do about it, aside from axeing "normal" TV completely and watching entirely on demand.
But if you don't want to do that, then you must pay the licence fee. Whether you think it's poor value for money or not, many people think it is, and besides, it's the law, in this and many other countries. To put in bluntly: it doesn't matter about your whinging. Either pay it, find an alternative, or face the consequences.
I have a right to express my views/opinions regarding the TV licence, I'm the one who has to pay it, why should I refrain from doing that on your say so?
Yes, there is nothing currently I can do about it, that doesn't change the fact I consider the amount I watch is poor value, precisely why I feel ripped off.
I have found an alternative, but I'm still forced to pay the license fee.
I live in the UK, what other countries do regarding licensing has a bearing on what?
I'm very happy with all my Sky subscription channels and also the free to air channels. I've got no complaints regarding channels such as the BBC, ITV, etc or any of the Sky subscription channels.
Ian.
I live in the UK, what other countries do regarding licensing has a bearing on what?
The relevance is that what a lot of UK punters like to call The BBC Tax is far from unusual and is in fact a very common means of funding PSB. It would help these discussions if people realised that the TVL is exactly that - a licence to operate a TV that can receive live broadcasts. That it's used primarily to fund the BBC - or more truthfully to fund public service broadcasting across a variety of platforms and outlets - is neither here nor there. This country and many others implement a form of taxation to fund PSB. Your failure to make use of it to gain what you call value for money is no different to paying NICs and not using the NHS. If you want to watch live tv, you need to obey the rules; that's applied in the UK and numerous other countries that operate a similar revenue-raising system.
I take the full Sky package with Multiroom boxes and I currently enjoy a full 50% of ALL ny Sky bill making it £59.09
Sky TV
Billing Period Charges
HD Pack Discounted 26 Dec - 25 Jan - £3.59
Variety with Sports & Movies HD 26 Dec - 25 Jan £71.25
Viewing Subscription Discounted 26 Dec - 25 Jan - £30.50
Sky Multiscreen 26 Dec - 25 Jan £11.25
Sky Multiscreen Subscription Discounted 26 Dec - 25 Jan - £3.94
Sky Multiscreen 26 Dec - 25 Jan £11.25
Sky Multiscreen Subscription Discounted 26 Dec - 25 Jan - £3.94
Sky Multiscreen 26 Dec - 25 Jan £11.25
Sky Multiscreen Subscription Discounted 26 Dec - 25 Jan - £3.94
Sky Go Extra 26 Dec - 25 Jan £5.00
Sky Go Extra Subscription Discounted 26 Dec - 25 Jan - £5.00
Yours at no extra cost
Sky+ Subscription FREE
Sky 3D FREE
Sky TV total: £59.09
Making it good value , the 50% is for 12 months at the end of that offer period I will expect the same offer or similar again,if not I will cancel
I'm very happy with all my Sky subscription channels and also the free to air channels. I've got no complaints regarding channels such as the BBC, ITV, etc or any of the Sky subscription channels.
Ian.
Agree and now (as of this week) we're getting ITV Player in HD, Sky's even better value.
Every PSB's On Demand service with HD downloads. How many Freeview/Freesat/Freetime/YouView boxes offer that?
Agree and now (as of this week) we're getting ITV Player in HD, Sky's even better value.
Every PSB's On Demand service with HD downloads. How many Freeview/Freesat/Freetime/YouView boxes offer that?
So you reckon having a freeview channel's player on Sky makes Sky even better value?
You need to raise your expectations
Considering C5 HD is nicely put behind Sky's paywall you can't say every PSB on demand service is on Sky when it is actually a pay channel anyway. Can you watch C5 HD without paying money to Sky?
No you can't so them being on their on demand makes no difference at all.
Also I can go back 7 days on EPG and watch programmes instantly on my youview box including BBC's HD channels;
How many Sky boxes offer that? Let me guess, errr none
Also Freeview & Freesat boxes have proper on demand you can even copy your recordings to play on your phone/tablet on the go.
Can you do that with Sky recordings? Errr no again
The relevance is that what a lot of UK punters like to call The BBC Tax is far from unusual and is in fact a very common means of funding PSB. It would help these discussions if people realised that the TVL is exactly that - a licence to operate a TV that can receive live broadcasts. That it's used primarily to fund the BBC - or more truthfully to fund public service broadcasting across a variety of platforms and outlets - is neither here nor there. This country and many others implement a form of taxation to fund PSB. Your failure to make use of it to gain what you call value for money is no different to paying NICs and not using the NHS. If you want to watch live tv, you need to obey the rules; that's applied in the UK and numerous other countries that operate a similar revenue-raising system.
No doubt Labour will soon be announcing free TVLs for "the poor" funded from their bottomless bankers bonus / mansion tax / 50p tax rate kitty.
I'm sure that's what the objectors have in mind - "rich folk should pay".
So you reckon having a freeview channel's player on Sky makes Sky even better value?
Having ITV Player and 4OD in the same HD quality as broadcast and ad free is added value, without doubt.
Considering C5 HD is nicely put behind Sky's paywall you can't say every PSB on demand service is on Sky when it is actually a pay channel anyway. Can you watch C5 HD without paying money to Sky?
You can't watch any PSB on demand without paying Sky.
Also I can go back 7 days on EPG and watch programmes instantly on my youview box including BBC's HD channels;
720p HD and that's only the BBC. All the others are SD and ad supported. So you can't watch instantly as there are always ads first.
Also Freeview & Freesat boxes have proper on demand you can even copy your recordings to play on your phone/tablet on the go.
Can you do that with Sky recordings? Errr no again
You can download with Sky Go on a phone/tablet and watch it on the move.
No doubt Labour will soon be announcing free TVLs for "the poor" funded from their bottomless bankers bonus / mansion tax / 50p tax rate kitty.
You don't half sound like a Hooray Henry there.
Labour will not be offering free TV licences for the poor. I think everyone (besides pensioners and the partially sighted) should pay the same flat rate for the licence fee. And I say that as a left-winger who has always believed in a higher rate of tax for the wealthy.
I'm sure that's what the objectors have in mind - "rich folk should pay".
The irony is most of the people I see crowing about having to pay the £12 a month licence fee are the same lot with disposable incomes who dont think twice about paying upwards of £70 for a full Sky package. A service, might I add, that is choc-full of advertising and rarely represents any true value for your money.
In essence, you're paying twice for Sky. Once for your sub fee, then again when you're buying all the products advertised. At least with Sky+, on demand viewing etc, you are able to skip a lot of commercials these days. I remember some years ago TiVo was almost sued by some large US corporations because they felt people watching recordings via PVR was tantamount to "stealing" from the companies!
Quite why they hadn't made this decision twenty years previously when VCRs were on the rise I don't know...
I fully support the TV Licence and I think it should have risen with inflation the cost of the TV Licence should have increased over the last few years to stop the cuts at the BBC. But I also subscribe to Sky and have Sky's full package along with BT Sport as well. I really do get fed up with all these anti BBC and Sky TV threads. All TV platforms have there good and bad points.
Ian.
Labour will not be offering free TV licences for the poor. I think everyone (besides pensioners and the partially sighted) should pay the same flat rate for the licence fee. And I say that as a left-winger who has always believed in a higher rate of tax for the wealthy.
The irony is most of the people I see crowing about having to pay the £12 a month licence fee are the same lot with disposable incomes who dont think twice about paying upwards of £70 for a full Sky package. A service, might I add, that is choc-full of advertising and rarely represents any true value for your money.
In essence, you're paying twice for Sky. Once for your sub fee, then again when you're buying all the products advertised. At least with Sky+, on demand viewing etc, you are able to skip a lot of commercials these days. I remember some years ago TiVo was almost sued by some large US corporations because they felt people watching recordings via PVR was tantamount to "stealing" from the companies!
Quite why they hadn't made this decision twenty years previously when VCRs were on the rise I don't know...
BiB - but I'm sure Labour would love to announce it, along with the other populist "bash the rich" policies they keep coming up with.
I'm far from a HH and I'd pay the LF just for Radio 4.
You do realise that "downloading" the programmes without the copyright owners' consent is effectively stealing (although it is debatable as to whether the end user or the company making it avaiable for download is committing the crime, or whether it's both parties), not massively different from going into a store and shoplifting DVD's.
Having ITV Player and 4OD in the same HD quality as broadcast and ad free is added value, without doubt..
I guess it is added value but those on demand services are full of ads to start with so many people record their programmes on their Freeview HD PVR then fast forward the ads. I tried using ITV Player once only and gave up due to ads, so now everything is recorded.
720p HD and that's only the BBC. All the others are SD and ad supported. So you can't watch instantly as there are always ads first.
.
Sky on demand is not 1080p is it? Also whether you watch the ad first or last you can go back 7 days on EPG and catch up with Freeview boxes but Sky box never allows you to go back on epg so you are actually very limited what you can catch up on sky box comparing to Youview box.
You can download with Sky Go on a phone/tablet and watch it on the move.
Yes you can download it with Sky Go if you pay extra for it and even if you do pay extra what you can download is very limited and SD only, when you can have more choices with freeview and nicely in HD as well.
The relevance is that what a lot of UK punters like to call The BBC Tax is far from unusual and is in fact a very common means of funding PSB. It would help these discussions if people realised that the TVL is exactly that - a licence to operate a TV that can receive live broadcasts. That it's used primarily to fund the BBC - or more truthfully to fund public service broadcasting across a variety of platforms and outlets - is neither here nor there. This country and many others implement a form of taxation to fund PSB. Your failure to make use of it to gain what you call value for money is no different to paying NICs and not using the NHS. If you want to watch live tv, you need to obey the rules; that's applied in the UK and numerous other countries that operate a similar revenue-raising system.
I'm aware the TV license is for the operation of a TV/live broadcasts and the £3.7bn generated primarily goes to the BBC for its services, I very rarely use any of those services, therefore I regard the fee I pay is poor value.
Also aware there are certain countries that have a TV license, just as there are many countries that are commercially/government funded that don't, just because there are other countries that have TV licence I can't see why UK viewers can't voice their opinions.
I fully support the TV Licence and I think it should have risen with inflation the cost of the TV Licence should have increased over the last few years to stop the cuts at the BBC. But I also subscribe to Sky and have Sky's full package along with BT Sport as well. I really do get fed up with all these anti BBC and Sky TV threads. All TV platforms have there good and bad points.
Ian.
One of the very few sensible posts on this forum (outside the Football Commentators Thread of course ).
Yes you can download it with Sky Go if you pay extra for it and even if you do pay extra what you can download is very limited and SD only, when you can have more choices with freeview and nicely in HD as well.
Sky Go Extra is free for multiscreen customers otherwise it costs £5, adds the ability to download and watch without an internet connection anywhere on four devices including mobiles, tables, laptops, xbox and ps3 - potentially 70 channels including sports/movies, catch up and box sets, hardly limited content.
Totally agree with the first post. Sky is a complete rip off.
I cancelled after about 6 years. The only think that kept me subscribing for the last 2 years was Sky Atlantic. Apart from that I was mainly paying to watch Freeview channels.
Got BT TV for £5.00 per month and NowTV (run by Sky) for £6.99 a month so I can watch everything I need for half the price.
BiB - but I'm sure Labour would love to announce it, along with the other populist "bash the rich" policies they keep coming up with.
I'm far from a HH and I'd pay the LF just for Radio 4.
Fair enough, apologies for the Hooray Henry comment
I still disagree a Labour govt would ever give low-income people a free or even reduced licence though. Wouldn't Blair or Brown have tried it if it'd had the potential to be a goer?
Out of interest: are you any more approving of the Tories/Coalitions "bash the poor" policies?...
Totally agree with the first post. Sky is a complete rip off.
I cancelled after about 6 years. The only think that kept me subscribing for the last 2 years was Sky Atlantic. Apart from that I was mainly paying to watch Freeview channels.
Got BT TV for £5.00 per month and NowTV (run by Sky) for £6.99 a month so I can watch everything I need for half the price.
I'd be interested to know an approx figure of how many longtime Sky subscribers cancelled and went with Now TV instead.
No restrictive contracts, pretty much the same on-demand content, and a fraction of the price of a Sky sub: sometimes I can't believe Now TV ever started offering entertainment alongside films and sport, knowing how cheaper it is.
I'm aware the TV license is for the operation of a TV/live broadcasts and the £3.7bn generated primarily goes to the BBC for its services, I very rarely use any of those services, therefore I regard the fee I pay is poor value.
Also aware there are certain countries that have a TV license, just as there are many countries that are commercially/government funded that don't, just because there are other countries that have TV licence I can't see why UK viewers can't voice their opinions.
.
The gist of it is Sky is poor value compared to Freeview/Freesat so that makes Sky subscribers akin to the people who take up Bupa when they already have the NHS.
The gist of it is Sky is poor value compared to Freeview/Freesat so that makes Sky subscribers akin to the people who take up Bupa when they already have the NHS.
The gist of it is Sky is poor value compared to Freeview/Freesat so that makes Sky subscribers akin to the people who take up Bupa when they already have the NHS.
This year our Sky bill went DOWN by about £20 pm via a deal they offered without us asking.
Today - the day after our Virgin deal ended so went up from £27 pm to £47 pm - we got a letter telling us that in 6 weeks our Virgin bill will rise again by an annual inflationary busting increase of 10% to nearly £52.
Comments
Yes, there is nothing currently I can do about it, that doesn't change the fact I consider the amount I watch is poor value, precisely why I feel ripped off.
I have found an alternative, but I'm still forced to pay the license fee.
I live in the UK, what other countries do regarding licensing has a bearing on what?
Ian.
Making it good value , the 50% is for 12 months at the end of that offer period I will expect the same offer or similar again,if not I will cancel
Agree and now (as of this week) we're getting ITV Player in HD, Sky's even better value.
Every PSB's On Demand service with HD downloads. How many Freeview/Freesat/Freetime/YouView boxes offer that?
So you reckon having a freeview channel's player on Sky makes Sky even better value?
You need to raise your expectations
Considering C5 HD is nicely put behind Sky's paywall you can't say every PSB on demand service is on Sky when it is actually a pay channel anyway. Can you watch C5 HD without paying money to Sky?
No you can't so them being on their on demand makes no difference at all.
Also I can go back 7 days on EPG and watch programmes instantly on my youview box including BBC's HD channels;
How many Sky boxes offer that? Let me guess, errr none
Also Freeview & Freesat boxes have proper on demand you can even copy your recordings to play on your phone/tablet on the go.
Can you do that with Sky recordings? Errr no again
No doubt Labour will soon be announcing free TVLs for "the poor" funded from their bottomless bankers bonus / mansion tax / 50p tax rate kitty.
I'm sure that's what the objectors have in mind - "rich folk should pay".
Having ITV Player and 4OD in the same HD quality as broadcast and ad free is added value, without doubt.
You can't watch any PSB on demand without paying Sky.
720p HD and that's only the BBC. All the others are SD and ad supported. So you can't watch instantly as there are always ads first.
You can download with Sky Go on a phone/tablet and watch it on the move.
You don't half sound like a Hooray Henry there.
Labour will not be offering free TV licences for the poor. I think everyone (besides pensioners and the partially sighted) should pay the same flat rate for the licence fee. And I say that as a left-winger who has always believed in a higher rate of tax for the wealthy.
The irony is most of the people I see crowing about having to pay the £12 a month licence fee are the same lot with disposable incomes who dont think twice about paying upwards of £70 for a full Sky package. A service, might I add, that is choc-full of advertising and rarely represents any true value for your money.
In essence, you're paying twice for Sky. Once for your sub fee, then again when you're buying all the products advertised. At least with Sky+, on demand viewing etc, you are able to skip a lot of commercials these days. I remember some years ago TiVo was almost sued by some large US corporations because they felt people watching recordings via PVR was tantamount to "stealing" from the companies!
Quite why they hadn't made this decision twenty years previously when VCRs were on the rise I don't know...
Ian.
BiB - but I'm sure Labour would love to announce it, along with the other populist "bash the rich" policies they keep coming up with.
I'm far from a HH and I'd pay the LF just for Radio 4.
Who cares!!!
I guess it is added value but those on demand services are full of ads to start with so many people record their programmes on their Freeview HD PVR then fast forward the ads. I tried using ITV Player once only and gave up due to ads, so now everything is recorded.
Thanks that was exactly my point. Sky is selling their customers what is actually free on other platforms.
Sky on demand is not 1080p is it? Also whether you watch the ad first or last you can go back 7 days on EPG and catch up with Freeview boxes but Sky box never allows you to go back on epg so you are actually very limited what you can catch up on sky box comparing to Youview box.
Yes you can download it with Sky Go if you pay extra for it and even if you do pay extra what you can download is very limited and SD only, when you can have more choices with freeview and nicely in HD as well.
I'm aware the TV license is for the operation of a TV/live broadcasts and the £3.7bn generated primarily goes to the BBC for its services, I very rarely use any of those services, therefore I regard the fee I pay is poor value.
Also aware there are certain countries that have a TV license, just as there are many countries that are commercially/government funded that don't, just because there are other countries that have TV licence I can't see why UK viewers can't voice their opinions.
.
One of the very few sensible posts on this forum (outside the Football Commentators Thread of course
Sky Go Extra is free for multiscreen customers otherwise it costs £5, adds the ability to download and watch without an internet connection anywhere on four devices including mobiles, tables, laptops, xbox and ps3 - potentially 70 channels including sports/movies, catch up and box sets, hardly limited content.
I cancelled after about 6 years. The only think that kept me subscribing for the last 2 years was Sky Atlantic. Apart from that I was mainly paying to watch Freeview channels.
Got BT TV for £5.00 per month and NowTV (run by Sky) for £6.99 a month so I can watch everything I need for half the price.
Fair enough, apologies for the Hooray Henry comment
I still disagree a Labour govt would ever give low-income people a free or even reduced licence though. Wouldn't Blair or Brown have tried it if it'd had the potential to be a goer?
Out of interest: are you any more approving of the Tories/Coalitions "bash the poor" policies?...
I'd be interested to know an approx figure of how many longtime Sky subscribers cancelled and went with Now TV instead.
No restrictive contracts, pretty much the same on-demand content, and a fraction of the price of a Sky sub: sometimes I can't believe Now TV ever started offering entertainment alongside films and sport, knowing how cheaper it is.
Guess you may be a fan of sport then?
Too you maybe...but for me not at all.
This year our Sky bill went DOWN by about £20 pm via a deal they offered without us asking.
Today - the day after our Virgin deal ended so went up from £27 pm to £47 pm - we got a letter telling us that in 6 weeks our Virgin bill will rise again by an annual inflationary busting increase of 10% to nearly £52.
Guess if I think Sky are ripping us off?