Channel 4 would like to turn Sky "retransmission fees" into programming
Brian Butterworth published on UK Free TV According to C4 breaks 'retransmission fees' silence - News - Broadcast, Channel 4's Dan Brooke told a VLV event that:
"At the moment, we don’t have a say in it – we are given a rate card, which is agreed by Ofcom and Sky. If that money wasn’t going out of the door we’d be delighted, and would put that money back into programming. Fees were introduced to give Sky a leg up when they first launched here – I don’t think anyone would say they need a leg up anymore. "
Brooke was joined on the panel by academic Steven Barnett, who pushed fervently for retransmission fees to be dropped, describing the current situation as “ludicrousâ€Â.
He called for existing "must offer" rules that apply to all the PSBs to be matched by "must carry" rules from platforms at "zero terms".
Help with Which system?
In this section
Monday, 24 October 2011
K
Kentman2:20 PM
Duncan
Sometimes I wonder if you are on the same Planet as me!
The Licence fee paid is to fund the BBC, it is not a subsidy, it is a way of paying for a Radio TV system without advertising revenue or a subscription to pay for an alternative system.
I used the reference to the price of a Pint of Beer as cost equivalence. But as you wish to use beer as an analogy then I would conpare it with the way English beer, in the main a very good product, was very nearly destroyed by Monopoly big business, who tried to foist upon the nation the very beer that you mention, frothy watery rubbish, a bit like Sky TV.
I have never worked for the BBC infact for ITV as Coms Engineer I was working at Martlesham Heath Post office research Station in 1988, (we injected signals into the PO infrastructure) when I was informed that the PO did infact want to put fibre optic cable throught the nation but was stopped by Mrs Thatcher, who allowed companies such as NTL into the country who dug up our roads and put in copper wire cable. NTL lost $11 billion and had to be refinanced, what a loss to the country.We could be ahead of the world on Broadband coverage not lagging behind once again due to ignorant politicians, some with vested !! interests.
| link to this comment |
D
Duncan4:39 PM
@ kentman ...wonder all you like (lol)
Surely by 1988 the research station you mention was in fact run by British Telecom and not the Post Office, was by then partly privatised and was being pruned down into a lean telecoms company and not some vestige of a 1950's civil-service attitude to business.
I think the retarded attitude to technology of UK government and the profit motives of large corporations deserves a thread all to itself and so don't get me started on that.
It really does not matter how much the TV Tax is (and it has been declared a tax since around 2006), or how it compares in price with everyday commodities, the point is freedom of choice! If you were made by law to pay three quid a week to have delivered The Guardian or Daily Telegraph for example, even though you did not read these organs of truth and unbiased comment, would you be happy to do so? I could subscribe to Sky if I want to or buy any newspaper I like but I choose not to do so. The same isn't true with the BBC and I have to pay for their biased propaganda and politically correct programming whether I want it or not!
The correct approach for funding of the BBC is a combination of advertising and subscription in the same way Sky operates. This is no longer the 1930's when there was only one channel and the only choice was to have a TV or not.
| link to this comment |
Ian: This is quite a useful listen if you want a bit of a backgrounder. BBC iPlayer - Archive on 4: Murdoch at 80 .
Very interesting, He sounds like a great business mind and to be honest now worse than any other high flyer's in the world and as said by the union leader at whopping, his word is his bond. Unlike Maxwell!
| link to this comment |
Ian's: mapI's Freeview map terrainI's terrain plot wavesI's frequency data I's Freeview Detailed Coverage
Tuesday, 25 October 2011
U
U12:10 PM
All British public service tv channels are offered by UPC on cable tv package in Switerland.UPC Austria offers only free to air German satellite package with Austrian regional variations.All of these channels with the exception of ORF eins are available free to air from astra 1 satellite.It appears that British channels are being relayed in one market while a Germam language channel choice only applies in Austrian market.I wonder are British tv companies in receipt of remuneration for use of their tv channels?
| link to this comment |
K
Kentman12:19 PM
Duncan
The Government did not sell all of it's share of the PO until the early nineties
and most of the efforts of the Engineers and investment in the research regarding fibre optics was during the Post Office management time.
Again what Planet do you live on, you have fallen for the old choice myth, propogated by
so called free marketers. Look at the Utility companies what a choice, the Banks what a choice? The bus companies/railways what a choice.
Leave the choice to Fruit and veg sellers etc,should we run a parallel Electrical Grid system, Gas infrastructure or more to the point Radio & TV system. No! Privatisation only piggy backs on these systems and cherry picks the market.Radio and Television is far to important to be left in the hands of commercial interests or governments. The UK had evolved a very successful compromise system, that had served the people well, would the privateers have bothered with the less profitable areas of the listening or viewing population. Many people do not wish to have advertising interupting a program and they are entitled to a choice, to have an alternative system available and are happy to pay a licence fee, your ideas would put a stop to their choice.
| link to this comment |
U: This is allowed under the EU "Teleivison Without Frontiers" directive, it is called "retransmission" and it is specifically allowed.
No payment, however, can be taken by the company doing the retransmission, for services from other EU states.
So, as no charge is made, no payment is made either.
This applies to any TV channel transmitted in the EU free-to-air.
| link to this comment |
U
U6:57 PM
Switzerland is not a member of the EU.Thats why I was wondering if Broadcsting companies received fees for retransmission
| link to this comment |
U: I think that the EEA EU-Switzerland agreement bilaterally implements the Television Without Frontiers Directive in Swizerland, so again no fees are chargeable or payable.
| link to this comment |
Wednesday, 26 October 2011
D
Duncan11:58 AM
Brian that's quite interesting I didn't know viewers in other EEA countries can legally watch re-broadcast programmes from others without having to pay any licence fees or royalties to the originating broadcster. I am somewhat confused though as the BBC limits where its i-PLAYER can be consumed via the internet and claims this is due to terrortorial copyrights.
When visiting the Alicante area I was made aware of a private concern that was picking up UK TV broadcasts, PSB and Sky, and re-transmitting them via their own aerial based system to UK expatriates for a fee. Very large dishes are needed here as it is at the fringes of Astra 2D reception making individual reception difficult.
As I understood it they were not doing so with the broadcasters permission and were certainly not paying them for the service. A previous company had been busted by the Spanish authorities but re-emerged under a new quise, it was rumoured, when the appropriate officials palms were crossed with silver. (Isn't corruption wonderful??)
@ kentman
actually I rather like commercial breaks in tv programmes, it is a useful time to get up and make a coffee, use the loo or make a quick phone call. I always mute the sound when they come on and hardly ever watch an ad but am happy they are paying for the programme. With the BBC they expect you to sit there for the whole time and quite often what they show is just not worth the investment of my time and certainly not my money. It certainly is not healthy to be sat down in one place for too long, concentrating on one thing and I would encourage others to do the same.
The thrust of my argument for funding of the BBC is that a "licence" is a very outdated concept when there are so many televsion channels available who do not benefit from it and it obliterates the need for the BBC to care what it's audience thinks (rather like government) when it's funding comes regardless whether they produce what the consumer actually wants. A selective subscription system in the same way Sky operates would soon fix this!
| link to this comment |
Select more comments
Your comment please