Indeed!😁

So would I.

We can all pray 🙏

Biased reporting,covering up genocide being committed by Israel!!

Im 4 years

Good for you. That moneys better off in your back pocket rather than theirs. 15 years for me. 👍

12 years now for me and i dont even get a visit anymore

I have not bought a license since 1997

7 years

BBC employees should pay for their pensions, just like other private sector people do.

If the BBC was closed down tomorrow (it should be) their pensions liabilities would ultimately become paid by the rest of us beleaguered taxpayers. That’s how it works 👎

​@englishciderlover7347 They do pay. Some people's obsession with pensions is mis-placed.

what's the problem with pensions? every company has to offer a work place pension to its employees, they can't just not offer one. It is where a lot of money goes though, think about your local council. Everybody has a salary and a pension, a lot of council tax is spent on that.

The original BBC pension scheme, which closed circa 2006, was a 3:1 job. Employees could put in as much of their (inflated) salaries as they wanted and the BBC used license fee money to put in three times what the employee did. (In reality all four parts of the contribution came out of the licence fee of course.) Hence we had BBC employees retiring with £4 million pension pots. That's when we got rid of our TV and licence. When that scheme was closed a black hole immediately opened up - no new contributors or BBC contributions to the old scheme. The BBC filled that black hole by taking 7.5% of the licence fee for two consecutive years; a huge amount of money. So yes, hatred of the BBC is all about pensions, pensions, pensions.

Correct

Bwahahahaha. 🤣😂

You are so absolutely on the money here. But, I think Lineker is more of a lame duck than an old hen.

True that 😅

Go woke , go broke ! BBC

Only 2 years for me. It was meant to be temporary to save money but I ended up being quite content without it so I never bothered with paying it.

Thirteen years for me

I didn’t intend to cancel, they did it by losing over £90 of payments. All i came away learning was that 4 out of five people at their phone centre are asian and the other one stutters. They were so smug and i really feel like they were trying to catch me out and prosecute the white rather than give me my money back. I had to get my mp’s office to help, if i didn’t keep the receipts and have a popular make of pc and scanner (oh yes naturally the lady from Pakistan/India/Bangor Diesh couldn’t open my scan that i sent to prove i’d paid) i’d be as screwed as a post office manager.

I would love some info leaflets I could drop off at CAB, foodbanks etc. Even if it's a fact sheet I can print off myself I'd happily pay fopr a few copies to drop around some places.

Your advice to unemployed people would be to not watch day time TV. Guess that's why you used the past tense regarding work.

The thing is.... you have to waste a lot of braincells convincing them you are NOT a customer and therefore, not a "criminal" that they imply "you might be". They simply don't believe there are people around who just do not watch (or WANT to watch) tv programming, live or otherwise.

The tv licence is NOT a priority bill. Having a tv is not essential to life/wellbeing - quite the reverse in fact! Anyway, as we all know, you can still regularly ‘enjoy’ watching tv perfectly legally, u dear the circumstances outlined by CJC here.

@@sayitlikeitis8759 The difference between a priority and non-priority debt depends on the punitive measures a creditor can take. Council tax debt can, so they say, result in imprisonment for non-payment. The same goes for fines or HMRC debts. Energy companies can disconnect your supply but they frequently abuse the Gas/Eectricity Acts to justify breaking into homes to swap credit meters for prepayment meters. The Gas Act, for example, only allows for forced entry to prevent damage or destruction to persons or property. Since when does changing a meter become an emergency? As for non-payment of TV licence, it can be criminalised and (very rarely) result in imprisonment. Also, you can end up with a fine which, as stated above, is a priority debt. The public need educating about what rights they have and as ChilliJonCarne says, do not to open doors to the goons or close the door and make no comments. You do not have to say anything but it may harm your defence blah blah... Heed the advice; DON'T SAY ANYTHING!

That is so bloody true.They've definitely run out of mugs to pay them the money. Is it £160 Maybe £180 for a licence to pump complete shit into my living room.

Because the royal family has declared it to be perfectly acceptable (andrew)

MPs totally do that and much more dodgy stuff too so they're not much different in most ways!😂

Rich people are never loyal to any country, only themselves. This is why "trickle down economics" never works, it only destroys the economy of any country that tries it.

Three years for me. Not missed it at all.

Fine, carry on giving your money to Jeff Bezos, Rupert Murdock and his offshore mates for the alternative services they provide....

Signed by Ross McTaggart?

​@@englishciderlover7347yes R McTaggart or MC nugget or something lol

I’m sure I’ve had similar letters after two years without a tv licence but I’m not sure because I never read them. Haven’t had the goons visit either to my knowledge. They can go ahead and investigate. Won’t do them any good.

I had that letter also only yesterday lol

They can investigate as much as they want, they still won't find me watching live tv or iPlayer, because I don't.

And it is the best I've seen for a long time.

The BBC could never have done that drama/ documentary because like the Post Office they are a government body so will never hilgh light failings on the government.

Go woke and go broke

I went to work in a local town hall recently. It's been closed since the scamdemic. BBC were filming there. Public cannot go in to their own towns municipal building. BBC get it though. I also studied film in uni. All it takes to make a new program is a camera and an idea. That's it. BBC used to know this. But now it's not about making TV shows. It's about propoganda. And that requires big funding for it to take root.

Indeed, and then you see KZfaqrs with a camera and mic make better content

I have, too. It was a number of years ago and I could see Casualty being filmed from the secondary school I was attending at the time. I was rather surprised at the sheer number of the people and vehicles there, crowding the street. All for a single scene of two paramedics jumping out of an ambulance and running down the street to a ‘patient.’ Over and over again. Or at least I think it was casualty. I don’t know for sure.

@@mikoto7693 Clearly the BBC budgets are open chequebook and the staff are on the pay roll anyway. Compare it to a film crew making a film (I've also seen that too, the film '71) they were far more constrained and even hired locals for extra work. I think they did about 30 minutes in a few days.

Financial news, outside the Bank of England. Was like 3-4 people, tops. And that was for a live broadcast

I should be so poor.

The “Interlude” was very good too. Yes, I do remember it (the potters wheel being one), I am that old.

Under UK anti-monopoly laws the commercial arm of the BBC, known as BBC Worldwide cannot exchange funds with the non-commercial, publicly funded BBC for any reason. There are strict and severe legal penalties for all this that would be in the tens of millions of pounds in fines, if the BBC even try anything like that.

I believe youre right ... can Chilli investigate this ????

​@@willboa5365You can see the denial of FOI requests flying back even before he puts them in.

'terrestrial loving'??

the whole licence is based on using old technology, so penalises the elderly@@andygozzo72

well of course she did but chances are she is either the niece or a "niece nudge nudge" of some-one in BBC hierarchy.

Hahaha I had exactly the same thought.

No, No, No! Doctor Who is a POOR example... Especially now Disney have a hand in it! That still has Reasonable Viewing Figures... EastEnders - Per Episode, 4 Times a week... 1.26 Million Viewers - AND FALLING!!!!! Oh, And it costs them more to make EastEnders than it does Doctor Who!

Pretty much

and me 6+ yrs lol im not paying bbc to tell me how bad i am for being white

Channel 4 revenue for 2022 - £1.14 billion. Publicly owned corporation. Funded entirely by commercial activities/ publicity. Receives no public funding. Most popular channels in UK. 1. 76% ITV 2. 75% CHANNEL 4 3. 71% NETFLIX 4. 63% BBC 1 5. 62% CHANNEL 5 6. 60% FILM 4 7. 59% BBC 2 8. 59% MORE 4

Talking Pictures TV. Last published accounts. 2 full-time employees (father and daughter) profit £103K. BBC should be ashamed.

45 million is a little short of 6 billion. your math is not mathing

@@kencampbell-rf6ot. Are you American?

Are you setting up for the American't joke ?@@mikdavies5027

People drink water. Less and less are interested in the gruel the BBC are pumping out.

Exactly. They’re getting paid regardless of how good or bad the programs are so they don’t need to care. Dr Who being an example.

erm...I think you might have mis spelled extortion

Authoritarianism is their default setting, so it's no surprise that they don't even consider other options.

Honestly I’m just waiting for the tv licence fee to be turned into a “media tax.”

At one point the BBC wanted everyone with a computer, phone or tablet to have a TV licence because these devices could possibly watch a TV programme. I believe that they want their income guaranteed by a tax so everyone has to pay whether you use the service or not.

They don't and won't get anything from some of us!

​@@annapachaclarke2392when the tax is priced into income tax you won't have a choice

Amazon Prime is just as bad, stopped using them too, many years ago.

Top Gear doesn't fit the narrative, so it will be pulled.

​@@harrynking777It wouldn't go down well in the 15min cities and travel and speed restrictions they're planning to introduce.

The main reason top gear was a success is due to Clarkson, Hamond and May. Without them people have mover to watch their antics elsewhere

@darreno9874 I agree with you, and yes it was its downfall when they sacked Clarkson. But that's not what I am on about. The Top Gear Brand, as long as it's with BBC Studios, will continue to bring in revenue for them through its syndication, and the Magazines will continue along with country specific variants. In addition tv shows in other countries will still continue.

Well said and fantastically put.

Perhaps, like me, you have now reached Nirvana, and no longer have any idea what is on TV, who any of the people mentioned are, or have any concept at all of why you would sit down at a predetermined time and date to watch something that someone else said you should watch. I work a part time job that I get 30 mins notice of work, leave the house anytime between 11:00 and 13:00 and get back between 16:00 and 21:00. None of it makes any sense at all to me anymore, and there will be millions of others just the same. BBC belong in the last century.

It is very well named though

I remember watching that when I was in hospital. There was one tv remote between like a dozen patients so it was hard to change channel. It was boring, even after the nurses had come around to dosed me half to oblivion with medication.

Still more interesting than opening boxes with Noel Edmond’s.

There is no doubt a free KZfaq channel for even that

Jeeze, I hate that show.

shows like nobenders i think

Some of it on shuttling people up and down from London and putting them up in expensive hotels.

Absolutely but at least that guy forced himself on someone of legal age

I understand what you're saying, and for many people it is indeed easier. I've chosen not to tell them, deliberately, just so they waste a little bit of money having to send me letters and perhaps send someone round. I see it as part-payback for the woke nonsense they peddle.

@@robertstallard7836 Totally understand were your coming from, the questions they ask on the no licence needed omitted the word ( LIVE) Making it impossible to pick the right answer.

@@timhitchman2881 I see. Sneaky lot!

They can only ruin it, like everything else they do

Ratings only matter if you are chasing advertisers, the BBC is meant to do more worthwhile programs and not just the celebrity reality shows which are cheap to make and get ratings until they tank after a scandal.

Why, would you rather provide work for UK people or just give it to Bezos, Murdock and the offshore gang for the services they provide as an alternative?

@fattyboombatty7736 Sky TV isn't owned or run by the Murdock family anymore, it's been wholly owned and run by Universal/Comcast for a couple of years so far. The Murdock family only own News International, which runs Fox News in the US and several newspapers around the world.

When digital TV was first introduced it was proposed that every TV or digibox would have to have a card slot to be sold, making it compatible with scrambled signals. The BBC fought hard to remove this requirement because it would have made it easier to do what you suggest. Nowadays just about every TV has a card slot because it is cheaper to include it and they are built for world markets.

Woke? The BBC is right wing. Under Tory government, VERY right wing!

At least you don't get S**tty adverts and end up paying Rupert Murdock and friends(who are completely unaccountable to you).