What a waste of money!

2018 - BBC 1. Prime time slots filled with repeats 6.6%

If you think about Sky Sports, which costs 3 times the amount per month, and you pay extra if you want it in HD, then there are PLENTY of repeats.

Right now - Theres the Premiership Years 97/98, the Football Years 99/00, The Best of The Open Zone (golf), a re-run of the Austrian GP, Darts Play Gold from 1995, SSN and the only live thing is WOmens Ashes Cricket. Plus all of this is filled with frequent adverts.

£3 a week, i cannot believe people bitchhhh about it so much. Costs less than a weeks supply of The Sun

comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Metro.⚽️ (U6770)
posted 1 minute ago
Give me Lineker presenting MOTD on his wages than Robbie Savage on half that, any day of the week.
----

I see your point but Linekar isn't exactly punditry gold.

He says very little that's noteworthy.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
He gets people watching. MOTD, BBC Sport etc is very successful and classed as one of the more reputable for output.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Really? People tune into MOTD for Gary Linekar?

Who are these people ?

comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 1 minute ago
Sky costs what? 20 times what the BBC costs? For far, far more repeats and jammed full of adverts - like literally 15 mins of every hour is ads.

I just don't get why people moan about the BBC.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Because one is consumer choice - the other is a tax.

comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 51 seconds ago
2018 - BBC 1. Prime time slots filled with repeats 6.6%

If you think about Sky Sports, which costs 3 times the amount per month, and you pay extra if you want it in HD, then there are PLENTY of repeats.

Right now - Theres the Premiership Years 97/98, the Football Years 99/00, The Best of The Open Zone (golf), a re-run of the Austrian GP, Darts Play Gold from 1995, SSN and the only live thing is WOmens Ashes Cricket. Plus all of this is filled with frequent adverts.

£3 a week, i cannot believe people bitchhhh about it so much. Costs less than a weeks supply of The Sun
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Consumers choose to pay for Sky.

Think we're on the same page HenrysCat

comment by Metro.⚽️ (U6770)
posted 21 seconds ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 51 seconds ago
2018 - BBC 1. Prime time slots filled with repeats 6.6%

If you think about Sky Sports, which costs 3 times the amount per month, and you pay extra if you want it in HD, then there are PLENTY of repeats.

Right now - Theres the Premiership Years 97/98, the Football Years 99/00, The Best of The Open Zone (golf), a re-run of the Austrian GP, Darts Play Gold from 1995, SSN and the only live thing is WOmens Ashes Cricket. Plus all of this is filled with frequent adverts.

£3 a week, i cannot believe people bitchhhh about it so much. Costs less than a weeks supply of The Sun
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Consumers choose to pay for Sky.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

You dont have to pay the TV Licence.

But if you dont you cannot watch any BBC TV, even through a freeview or iplayer and cannot listen to the radio either.

I honestly dont know anyone who would opt out of this £3 a week cost and forego everything that the BBC has!

comment by Metro.⚽️ (U6770)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 1 minute ago
Sky costs what? 20 times what the BBC costs? For far, far more repeats and jammed full of adverts - like literally 15 mins of every hour is ads.

I just don't get why people moan about the BBC.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Because one is consumer choice - the other is a tax.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, it's not. There is no obligation to have a TV licence.

Both are choices. One is cheap compared to pretty much any other option for TV content and offers a national radio service and excellent online content, the other is about the most expensive way to buy TV content and offers a sh-t website that just tries to sell you more crap.

There is an obligation if you want to watch TV in real time.

It's actually a choice between watching/recording real time TV and using BBC services or not.

So you cannot watch Sky real time without the licence either.

As soon as you add the word 'if', you can't really use the word 'obligation'. You don't have to have a TV in your life at all, fairly sure you struggle to get Amnesty to take up your case.

comment by Hod idol the x factor - Mo's posh tin set... (U5117)
posted 2 hours, 10 minutes ago
There is an obligation if you want to watch TV in real time.

It's actually a choice between watching/recording real time TV and using BBC services or not.

So you cannot watch Sky real time without the licence either.


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

May be so, but i think that if BBC became a subscription service and you got BBC1 and BBC2, radio, iplayer and all online services for £3 a week, few if any would opt out.

People should try living their life without the BBC...see how they get on.