Switch to digital TV

ART6

I have looked through the Boards site and can't find a place where this seems to fit, but my observations are largely politico/economic, so mods please feel free to wave your wands!

I have just received a publication by our government about the switch over to digital TV. I am happy with the policy as I already have a digital set, and so I don't need to do anything. However:

The government booklet says that if I have an aerial my set won't work after the 24th October. It says I have two choices: I can switch to Soarview, the RTE owned system if I buy or have an enabled set or a set-top box. This is a free service. Or I can switch to a pay TV outfit like Sky or UPC.

Oh wait a minute, is Soarview really a free service? What about the TV licence money that goes to RTE?

I can indeed pay Sky or UPC "From about €25 a month" for their services and can then view RTE programmes there. I already do. But I am innocent enough to assume that neither Sky or UPC get the channels free of charge from RTE. Therefore, as I go down this route, I am paying Sky to pay RTE to whom I am already paying for their products. That sounds like a nice little earner to me!

Then we look at the next government rip-off strategy which seems to be that if anyone lives in anything more than a cave with no electricity he will be deemed to have a means of receiving TV and will have to possess a licence. All of this irrespective of whether they already pay once in their TV licence, or twice to that and to Sky et.al. or even three times if they don't actually have a TV but do have a computer that could receive TV signals and are paying for broadband from an ISP.

And the final question I feel obliged to ask, is what is the government making out of all of this and what pensions and expenses will it be spent upon?

ardmacha

And the final question I feel obliged to ask, is what is the government making out of all of this and what pensions and expenses will it be spent upon?

The government isn't making anything out of it, except some VAT on TVs. But that you ask the question is indicative of the quality of your post generally.

Blowfish

ardmacha wrote: »

The government isn't making anything out of it, except some VAT on TVs. But that you ask the question is indicative of the quality of your post generally.

That's not quite true. The whole point of switching off the analogue is so the spectrum can be freed up so licenses can be sold for 4g and beyond.

ART6

ardmacha wrote: »

The government isn't making anything out of it, except some VAT on TVs. But that you ask the question is indicative of the quality of your post generally.

Thank you. As an innocent abroad I was asking a question that you have so ably answered.

FreudianSlippers

Licence fees don't go to the government, they go to the state aided radio and television stations. You don't think running a FTA system and launching satellites is free do you?

ART6

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Licence fees don't go to the government, they go to the state aided radio and television stations. You don't think running a FTA system and launching satellites is free do you?

No, I don't think that. I even manage to understand that such outfits as Sky manage to launch satellites without expecting the whole population to pay for them irrespective of whether or not they use their services.

In this country we a about to go digital, and the attractions of that are obvious. However, it will cost money and it will require facilities that many will not currently enjoy. It is also the nature of the world that someone will make money out of it, and someone else down the line will pay.

So I go back to my original point (which I didn't make well I agree): How are all of these new channels going to be provided? Who is going to sell the licences? When they are all in place, why does the commercial channel RTE have to be subsidised by taxes paid by every viewer when Sky etc. are not?

FreudianSlippers

Apples and Oranges. UK has FTA and Freesat as well and the UK licences go to paying for that too.

If you own a device capable of receiving a broadcast signal, then you must pay your licence. That's about 40% of the funding of RTÉ television stations and a large chunk of the other Irish channels' funding as well. It also pays for the vast majority of "public" radio in this country.
The government sells the licence just as they always have. RTÉ is a semi-state body and is subsidised because we so choose it to be. They could probably go full commercial if we ever decided to sell them tbh (which we won't); we are paying for our Saorview and Saorsat services because we want to provide this service without a monthly subscription fee. Sky is a commercial entity that can do as it pleases and does. They're not in the business to provide services for free, they leave that up to the British government.

4.legs.good

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Licence fees don't go to the government, they go to the state aided radio and television stations. You don't think running a FTA system and launching satellites is free do you?

Free?

No its not free its downright lucrative!

shifting people of analogue and selling the freedup EM spectrum to all sorts.


To imply that our TV "tax" money is going towards moving to digital is disingenuous, in other countries the sale of the now free bands nets more than enough money to pay for roll out and then some more.

Sponge Bob

The government believes it will make €500m from auctioning the spectrum in part freed up by switching off analogue. Were it to give every household a set top box that would cost perhaps €80m....so yes they are making money.

ednwireland

ART6 wrote: »

No, I don't think that. I even manage to understand that such outfits as Sky manage to launch satellites without expecting the whole population to pay for them irrespective of whether or not they use their services.

sky dont launch satellites, ses astra and eutelsat do, sky rent space on them

just saying

FreudianSlippers

Sponge Bob wrote: »

The government believes it will make €500m from auctioning the spectrum in part freed up by switching off analogue. Were it to give every household a set top box that would cost perhaps €80m....so yes they are making money.

We're also way behind in the developed world when it comes to 4G, so...

antoobrien

ART6 wrote: »

I have looked through the Boards site and can't find a place where this seems to fit, but my observations are largely politico/economic, so mods please feel free to wave your wands!

For future reference Tech ->Cable / Digital TV -> Terrestrial

ART6 wrote: »

Oh wait a minute, is Soarview really a free service?

It's free in the sense that there's no continuing fees to use the service, unlike Sky, UPC et al. Buy a set top box, there are a lot off decent cheap ones around, or new TV (ditto) and there's no extra charge to you.

ART6 wrote: »

Then we look at the next government rip-off strategy which seems to be that if anyone lives in anything more than a cave with no electricity he will be deemed to have a means of receiving TV and will have to possess a licence.

Ever heard of something called IPTV? Did you hear that BT recently won the rights to some English Premier League matches?

TBH this thread looks like it belongs in conspiracy theories.

Here's a choice for you - pay the tv license or have US style advertising - breaks at least every 10 minutes. Imagine watching at 30 minute show, say Home & Away with 3 breaks - that's the way it is in the US for 30 minute shows.

Dr Galen

Not really up to the required standard tbh.

Cheers

DrG