Dee Forbes banging the RTE TV licence drum again 60m uncollected fee *poll not working - pl ignore*

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Who is ignoring it?

I said they should reduce wages in line with reduced advertisement...

That's no where near enough, when your dealing with a company that's running at a loss.

Let's say that we agree in principal about selling 2FM. I would immediately do the same with RTE 2, and probably a couple more of the radio stations. With the relevant staff either transferring to new private ownership, or being made redundant.

Do you know that the percentage split is in RTE's revenue between say : the licence fee, commercial advertising and other sources of income? I'm asking in a general context here, ideally looking for averages over say the least 3 years, rather than just what it might be you'd month, for example.

Ask yourself, if we sell off RTE2, 2FM etc then how does that split change, going forward? In broad terms, would you agree that advertising reduces, while the licence fee remains roughly the same?

So, should the licence fee then be reduced, or should the "right sized" RTE then get the benefit of the same level of licence fee income, to spend as it see's fit?

How can we be sales to have confidence in the current leadership and management in RTE, to spend that money wisely in the future, given what we've seen from them to date - particularly with regards to pay, and thereafter with regards to them giving their friends assignments any time they feel like it, regardless of how poor quality the resulting broadcast may turn out?

garrettod wrote: »

I would actually go a step further and say that RTE have a bias against anyone that hasn't worked in RTE. :rolleyes:

I'd partially agree on that. They tend to be none too kind to former employees.

I remember they never really spoke to Tony Fenton once he left RTE. His death barely even got a mention on the news at the time.

Shefwedfan wrote: »

Is it? Did they announce this?

Have you listened to the radio in the last week? The only 'ads' are for other RTE shows or government public announcements.

sligojoek wrote: »

Have you listened to the radio in the last week? The only 'ads' are for other RTE shows or government public announcements.

I don't buy it, but I noticed the RTE guide was also significantly reduced in the number of pages it had.
Saw a copy while getting groceries for the week, and the Covid 19 pamphlet had almost more pages.

2nd break

Government announcement Covid 19

An Post Covid 19

garrettod wrote: »

That's no where near enough, when your dealing with a company that's running at a loss.

Let's say that we agree in principal about selling 2FM. I would immediately do the same with RTE 2, and probably a couple more of the radio stations. With the relevant staff either transferring to new private ownership, or being made redundant.

Do you know that the percentage split is in RTE's revenue between say : the licence fee, commercial advertising and other sources of income? I'm asking in a general context here, ideally looking for averages over say the least 3 years, rather than just what it might be you'd month, for example.

Ask yourself, if we sell off RTE2, 2FM etc then how does that split change, going forward? In broad terms, would you agree that advertising reduces, while the licence fee remains roughly the same?

So, should the licence fee then be reduced, or should the "right sized" RTE then get the benefit of the same level of licence fee income, to spend as it see's fit?

How can we be sales to have confidence in the current leadership and management in RTE, to spend that money wisely in the future, given what we've seen from them to date - particularly with regards to pay, and thereafter with regards to them giving their friends assignments any time they feel like it, regardless of how poor quality the resulting broadcast may turn out?

whatever about 2fm, and i would expect that would be extreme luck if anyone bought it, there is no hope of anyone buying the others, at least not without turning them into a cloan of the already existing stuff which isn't exactly setting the world alight. and that is assuming that any objections to the change away from the public service content wouldn't be upheld, which it is likely they would be upheld and for good reason.
i would expect there are a whole load of other things that would have to be gone through also, so i would expect any sales would not be anywhere near as simple as the few who want them would like.

flanna01 wrote: »

Television License should be abolished, it's outdated, and no longer relevant in todays society...

Back in the day, shortly after the extinction of the dinosaurs, RTE was television, there was no other choice, and the programs had to be paid for, obviously by the viewing / listening public...

Fast forward to modern civilisation, and we no longer depend on what RTE has to offer, with the majority of the watching public choosing what they want to watch, and paying for it independently too.. (Sky / Virgin / TV Box)

Like many others, I subscribe to Sky, I pick out what I want to view and pay for it accordingly (Too much in my opinion, but that's for another thread).

So why should I be made pay for the service that RTE provide? I neither watch, want it, or use it.... But I am threatened with a conviction, my name splashed across the local papers, and an additional fine if I do not pay up for a TV License...???

RTE has no bearing in my life what so ever... Why should I pay for the directors wages???

It's time to wake up and smell the coffee guys, times have changed!

the funding from the tv license goes to rte to provide the news and current affairs output which is needed to insure we do not end up with particular media organisations becoming the main stay of our news which would be bad for plurality, times have changed means that we need rte's current affairs and news output more then ever.
directors and all other staff working in any company have to be paid for unless they all decide to work for free.

Deleted User wrote: »

Not just Sky, but there are homes all around the country where the television is used solely for NetFlix. 6.99 a month.

My sky went down during one of the big storms recently and I had zero terrestrial TV. Could not get RTE because I don't have a saorview box.

I'm honestly waiting for someone to legally challenge the law. A regular TV can no-longer access RTE without additional equipment.

it never really could unless you had one of the small television with a built in arial, if not then you had the rabbit ears on top of the television, or an external arial on the roof, both of which would technically be extra equipment.
now days televisions come with saorview boxes built in.
so i expect any challenge to the law on that basis would fail, all though i'm no legal expert.

sligojoek wrote: »

First break in the News at One.

TV licence
Government Covid 19 announcement.
Liveline

I'd say the Government agencies are paying very well for all that advertising. This is a terrible time for most, but a lot of Pork available for advertising agencies with an inside track to Government agencies etc.... A blank cheque to help make up for the drop in adverts from real businesses.
I'd expect the same is the case for RTE, why wouldn't they charge full whack when they can.......nobody in government is going to question it nowadays.

elperello wrote: »

Yes I do, why do you ask?

I would love to see a re-run.