RTE want to double TV licence fee

Venom

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

If RTE were to charge than anyone on a subscription service would get that charge lumped on. So for most people there would be no overall change.

Anyway the licence isn't just for RTE. Any broadcaster who makes Irish content can apply for funding.


And besides the licence for the right to own a device that could receive a broadcast TV signal rather than for RTE. ( and there's less loopholes than in the UK )

Well I'v a feeling the likes of Virgin Media and Sky would be pretty quick to either lock such a service behind a pay wall like they do with movie and sports channels or just drop RTE entirely.

In this day and age, having to pay a license just for owning a TV is just insane and such legislation needs to be done away with. Also by such messed up logic, if I were to buy a tunerless TV, I could just plug in my TV box, still not watch RTE like I currently don't, not HAVE to pay the license fee and it would be perfectly legal.

Capt'n Midnight

Amalgam wrote: »

Does a radio only license exist at all these days, was it ever a thing? I'd pay for that.

No.
Yes and at one stage you needed a separate one for your car.

please helpThank YOU

RTE want to double Tv Licence fee.? is this a April Fools day joke ?ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahah

Arcade_Tryer

I'll gladly pay extra to support public and national services. Just as soon as this entitled scrounger agrees to receive half her current salary, and sorts out the exorbitant and unnecessary salary structure among her more higher paid staff.

animaal

Venom wrote: »

Also by such messed up logic, if I were to buy a tunerless TV, I could just plug in my TV box, still not watch RTE like I currently don't, not HAVE to pay the license fee and it would be perfectly legal.

I think it depends on what your "TV Box" is... if it's some form of Android box that plays content over the Internet, then it should be fine.

However, if it's a cable box (e.g. like those provided by Virgin Media), then I think it would qualify legally as a device capable of receiving a broadcast signal. But yes, the whole situation doesn't fit well with technological advances over the past 20 years.

If RTE is to be state-funded, then in principle I would prefer it to be from general taxation rather than some badly-fitting "license" to own a TV. However, with the tax base being as narrow as it is, we'd end up with a small number of people actually paying the increase in tax (far fewer than the number of people paying the license today), so the cost per payer would be higher.

inforfun

Said it before in these discussions about the tv license..... I am not paying €160 a year and then get the same **** i get from commercial tv-stations, i.e 20 minutes of commercials per hour.

Recently got rid of my tv subscription completely so i see definitely no reason to ever pay it again.

In The Netherlands they got rid of that fee years ago and lumped it on the providers who then of course increased the subscription price. I am fine with that, you subscribe, you pay.
But the whores at the state sponsored tv wanted the government to re-introduce the tax a few years ago. Hasnt happened so far.
At least they dont interrupt the programs every 20 minutes for commercials like RTE does, but only between the programs.

Wilders reduced his airtime on Dutch state tv to 0 minutes as soon as he announced he would cancel the €600 million a year the NPO (Dutch rte) get from the government. And before him Fortuyn had the same idea and the treatment he got from the sate TV contributed a lot to his assassination.

They are a dangerous bunch, these state sponsored propaganda channels everywhere.

Beta Ray Bill

filbert the fox wrote: »

Ok so now we have gotten to the crux of the matter.

Since time immemorial the threat of being caught without a TV Licence was emphasised whether it be "the TV detector van" or that moronic "...better way to blow €1000 than..."
there is a culture of evasion in this context.

The 265,000+ tv consumers who won't pay for a paltry €3.075 a week (19% of Television owners) are directly responsible for this situation.

Sorry but you are wrong.

Why should people have to pay for something that they do not use.

RTE needs to be wound down or made stand on it's own two feet.
They have advertisements on all the time, BBC doesn't have that.
I don't even watch TV anymore. I watch Netflix or Amazon mostly, and they have plenty of fantastic shows. Stuff I actually want to watch!
The only thing I'd watch is the news and maybe listen to breakfast republic on 2fm. (Once or twice a week tops)
I read news on other websites.

RTE is effectively owned by the state, if we are forced to pay a fee to the state then it should be called: Tax. (TV Tax!)
And any Joe will tell you that we are taxed to the hilt in this country as it is.

EDIT:
She must have read this thread:
RTE's new director general moves to distance herself from 'double licence fee' comments
http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/its-not-practical-rtes-new-director-general-moves-to-distance-herself-from-double-licence-fee-comments-35555930.html

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

filbert the fox

"The only thing I'd watch is the news"

You need a TV licence to do this.


I'm not wrong.

inforfun

grahambo wrote: »

EDIT:
She must have read this thread:
RTE's new director general moves to distance herself from 'double licence fee' comments
http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/its-not-practical-rtes-new-director-general-moves-to-distance-herself-from-double-licence-fee-comments-35555930.html

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

“We have €40-50m being lost every year and that’s money that’s not coming to us and not to the creative sector here in Ireland and that’s a great shame.

“What I’m saying we need to do is concentrate on reforming the licence fee collection - that’s where we need to go.”

What. a. twat.

Gunmonkey

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

I'll gladly pay extra to support public and national services. Just as soon as this entitled scrounger agrees to receive half her current salary, and sorts out the exorbitant and unnecessary salary structure among her more higher paid staff.

Just got a great idea for RTE's next hit show!

Kinda like Dragons Den, you have the RTE head and 4 of their higher paid "stars" sitting in a room. Members of public come in and pitch their ideas to cut RTE's budget. The panel will then laugh them out of the building (and probably bill them on the way out)

"Maybe you could not pay yourselves exorbitant wages for a sub-standard television/radio service!"
"AHAHAHAHAHAAH"
"Could you actually report the news truthfully and impartially, take the government to task when they **** up?"
"AHAHAHAHAHAHA"
"Can ya look at TnG, they make some good shows and documentaries with a far lower budget!"
"AHAHAAHAHAHA"

Glenster

Let the elderly and boggers who watch it pay for it.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Beta Ray Bill

filbert the fox wrote: »

"The only thing I'd watch is the news"

You need a TV licence to do this.


I'm not wrong.

Let me rephrase that a bit.
I'd watch the news maybe once a week.

Let me put it this way:
If I had a choice to not watch the news or listen to 2FM and have an extra €160 in my pocket, I'd take the €160 and read the news elsewhere.

Having to pay for something we don't need or want is wrong, it's that simple.

silverharp

collapse RTE into TG4 and get rid of the licence, let the gov give fund them centrally for a 1/5th of what they get now. Younger people are either watching less TV or only want on demand stuff so the concept of a TV station is like steam train thinking now. Collecting the TV licence must cost a fortune and just inflates salaries of their "stars" who would only make it on community stations in the US

Sephiroth_dude

The best thing about rte are the apres match lads.

cnocbui

Sephiroth_dude wrote: »

The best thing about rte are the apres match lads.

There is no 'best' thing about RTE.

Sephiroth_dude

cnocbui wrote: »

There is no 'best' thing about RTE.

They are the exception.

Billy86

Loved Apres match years and years ago, but to be honest I don't know that it's even got a milk chuckle out of me in over a decade.

Best thing RTE does is reeling in the Years. After that it's... uuuhhhhh... it's....

myshirt

Didn't RTE offer a compromise for the increased fee here? They said they will now record Fair City in HD didn't they?

railer201

Yea, they're going to start RTE 1 + 1 at 6pm instead of 7pm.

Beta Ray Bill

myshirt wrote: »

Didn't RTE offer a compromise for the increased fee here? They said they will now record Fair City in HD didn't they?

They'd have to sack two thirds of the cast they're that ugly
No one needs HD or even 4K ugly

Why do you think Anne Doyle retired when HD came?

citytillidie

Double the licence fee and cut 200 jobs

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-39352344

Seanachai

How are they going to enforce this without making it a mandatory payment like revenue? They can't go past the front door of an apartment building so unless they are given powers to extract the money from your bank account I don't see how they're going to be successful.

murpho999

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Could you imagine the criticism if RTE, a national broadcaster, did not have a correspondent in the States to cover the US Presidential elections.

Also, Champion's League is not as widely available as you say. BT Sport required for most matches.

Think of the average Saorview viewer, of which there are many, they do not have the channels you refer to.

As a national broadcaster, they like all others over the world would carry their own reports on major world events and I too would like an Irish angle this not a British one.

bladespin

murpho999 wrote: »

Could you imagine the criticism if RTE, a national broadcaster, did not have a correspondent in the States to cover the US Presidential elections.

Also, Champion's League is not as widely available as you say. BT Sport required for most matches.

Think of the average Saorview viewer, of which there are many, they do not have the channels you refer to.

As a national broadcaster, they like all others over the world would carry their own reports on major world events and I too would like an Irish angle this not a British one.

Agree with this, this is what they should be doing, not making "stars" with star salaries, core stuff,proper programmes, proper news, proper sport, I'd have no problem with that, trouble comes with the other muck, if you want light entertainment, get a light entertainment package etc, etc, let sky pay for the likes of Tubbers, Darcy etc, not sure they's be coining like they are.

Harry Palmr

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I always used to chuckle as RTE justified million euro PA salaries at the Tiger peak by telling us straight faced how the best who get paid that kind of money would leave. Well of course Pat Kenny left for Newstalk and was duly replaced and that slot trundles on regardless at about the same numbers. If Tubbs left no one would notice in a bad way, doubly so for D'Arcy. The star is the station not the presenter. BBC and ITV proved that many times between them over the years as famous faces moved from one to the other only to see their salary was no compensation for a career killed by a poor quality channel (see Des Lynam, Adrian Chiles, etc)

donegaLroad

I haven't had a TV in the house since 2003.. I don't see the point.

Seanachai

Harry Palmr wrote: »

I always used to chuckle as RTE justified million euro PA salaries at the Tiger peak by telling us straight faced how the best who get paid that kind of money would leave. Well of course Pat Kenny left for Newstalk and was duly replaced and that slot trundles on regardless at about the same numbers. If Tubbs left no one would notice in a bad way, doubly so for D'Arcy. The star is the station not the presenter. BBC and ITV proved that many times between them over the years as famous faces moved from one to the other only to see their salary was no compensation for a career killed by a poor quality channel (see Des Lynam, Adrian Chiles, etc)

If I was a producer I would find it hard to go to work knowing that I would be overseeing Tubridy creating another car-crash show. He flies through the interviews like somebody who has somewhere more important to be, if he's not squirming in his seat like a man demented by hemorrhoids he's trying to dredge up the most sorrow he can while tutting and frowning at the guest. He reduced John Hurt god rest his soul from effervescent to flat in about 30 seconds. I'm expected to pay for this crap for the rare times I pause while channel-hopping?, not if I can avoid it at all.

Venom

animaal wrote: »

I think it depends on what your "TV Box" is... if it's some form of Android box that plays content over the Internet, then it should be fine.

However, if it's a cable box (e.g. like those provided by Virgin Media), then I think it would qualify legally as a device capable of receiving a broadcast signal. But yes, the whole situation doesn't fit well with technological advances over the past 20 years.

Virgin and Sky box's work different to a normal TV tuner since you also need the wall connection or dish along with said box to make them work. You can't receive their signal with just your TV.

You can use Virgin's Horizon box with a computer monitor as it connects via a HDMI cable so the tuner part of a TV which is the reason you pay a license fee, is never used to receive Virgin Media's channels.

You can also use a laptop, mobile phone and tablet to watch RTE, Sky and Virgin's content for free in RTE's case or with a subscription fee for the latter two without needing to pay the TV license through their websites or via apps.

So in this day and age why the hell does the License fee really exist except to prop up the wasters in RTE!

bladespin

Venom wrote: »

Virgin and Sky box's work different to a normal TV tuner since you also need the wall connection or dish along with said box to make them work. You can't receive their signal with just your TV.

You can use Virgin's Horizon box with a computer monitor as it connects via a HDMI cable so the tuner part of a TV which is the reason you pay a license fee, is never used to receive Virgin Media's channels.

If you connect the android box to a HDMI tv, that still has the tuner (even if it's not used), you still have to have a licence? I think yes but open to correction.