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

kneemos

Here it is from the Department bof Communications.
Question number six. No license required for a computer.


https://www.dccae.gov.ie/en-ie/communications/topics/broadcasting-media/tv-licence/Pages/TV-Licence-FAQs.aspx

elperello

kneemos wrote: »

That's according to some loony Facebook site. Where does RTE say it?

We seem to be at cross purposes.
I was talking about the Anti Licence crowd and you thought I was talking about RTE.
Sorry for any confusion.

For Forks Sake

Idbatterim wrote: »

“Boycott RTand the tv license rally”. Just came across the below on fb. Ten out of ten to the organizers. That cesspit needs a light shone on it!!!

https://www.facebook.com/events/624989054605409/?ti=ia

Hosted by Yellow Vest Ireland?

Well, I'm just on the verge of paying €160 for a tv licence, even though I finally cancelled the tv subscription a few weeks ago and therefore have no tv stations at all. It's a tv licence, not an access to a tv service licence.

TV, and all the inbred vacuous wafflers who populate it, is so past its sell by date. It would be nice if somebody could invent a high quality screen that is not liable to a tv licence, so that we could watch ad-free documentaries and the like of our choice on it. While it's painful paying €160, it was even more painful having to wade through the 100 channels of utter rubbish that pass as tv choice in 2019.

sligojoek

You can by a HD or 4K monitor with no tuner. Take down any dish or aerial.

Beta Ray Bill

sligojoek wrote: »

You can by a HD or 4K monitor with no tuner. Take down any dish or aerial.

This is what I plan to do, then Plug in a Chrome Cast to make it "Smart"

However they are looking at changing the TV licence to a media licence. in which case you'll be caught.

I think the TV licence thing will come to a head in the next 5 or 6 years.
Young people don't watch TV anymore, it's all on demand stuff.

If enough people don't pay it, they'll have to scrap it. ("It" being a significant portion of RTE)

grahambo

grahambo wrote: »

If enough people don't pay it, they'll have to scrap it. ("It" being a significant portion of RTE)

I got a 2nd notice from An Post TV Licence section, both of which were addressed to 'The Occupier' at my address, and I'm not too keen on giving them my name for the first time. However, the last one said 'Unfortunately he/she did not speak with you at the time, but he/she did observe evidence of a Television Set (not sure why they made it a proper noun!) at the premises on that date.'

My concern is that the quality of a TV tuner free monitor would be inferior to my existing Sony TV, and if I could be sure of one of equal sound and picture quality, I'd put the €160 licence fee towards buying it. I have no use at all for tv channels.

Beta Ray Bill

Deleted User wrote: »

I got a 2nd notice from An Post TV Licence section, both of which were addressed to 'The Occupier' at my address, and I'm not too keen on giving them my name for the first time. However, the last one said 'Unfortunately he/she did not speak with you at the time, but he/she did observe evidence of a Television Set (not sure why they made it a proper noun!) at the premises on that date.'

My concern is that the quality of a TV tuner free monitor would be inferior to my existing Sony TV, and if I could be sure of one of equal sound and picture quality, I'd put the €160 licence fee towards buying it. I have no use at all for tv channels.

Gaming Monitors are substantially better than regular TV's
You can only really get up to 40 inch at the moment, the refresh rate on them can be up to 240 Hz

The other Option is a commercial display like the Samsung Dc55E Dce Series

Idbatterim

A large amount of the old watch it with their free tv license. The young don’t and are expected to pay for the S**t?!

Absolute farce. There are thousands of new houses being built every year, if they are stupid enough to pay it , that is more than enough extra revenue to negate the need for a license fee hike!

Imagine what a vote winner license fee abolition would be for a party that adopted it !

Beta Ray Bill

Idbatterim wrote: »

Imagine what a vote winner license fee abolition would be for a party that adopted it !

But you'd need to Axe about 1,400 Jobs in RTE.

The reality is, they'd keep the big shots and sack the regular staff.

Supporting anything that could cut jobs is political suicide in Ireland.

Idbatterim

grahambo wrote: »

But you'd need to Axe about 1,400 Jobs in RTE.

The reality is, they'd keep the big shots and sack the regular staff.

Supporting anything that could cut jobs is political suicide in Ireland.

They can do it whatever way they want. Nobody should be forced to pay a license for the scandalous crap they produce! Don’t forget that it is RTÉ that decide me to make these nobodies, the “ big shots” they can create new big shots on less than half the salary if the likes of tubridy, o’callaghan etc aren’t happy with their new remuneration!

Gunmonkey

grahambo wrote: »

This is what I plan to do, then Plug in a Chrome Cast to make it "Smart"

However they are looking at changing the TV licence to a media licence. in which case you'll be caught.

I think the TV licence thing will come to a head in the next 5 or 6 years.
Young people don't watch TV anymore, it's all on demand stuff.

If enough people don't pay it, they'll have to scrap it. ("It" being a significant portion of RTE)

But I wonder....why does viewing a media broadcast require licensing, or owning a device capable of viewing media broadcasts? Apart from "its de law!", because old laws can be abolished, what reasoning is there for requiring a license? The only other objects that require a license to own/operate are driving and gun licenses, which are due to the dangerous nature.

If its just "to fund RTE", why dont they just tax TVs and phones or whatever people are using to view broadcasts at POS then? If thats the reason, why isnt there a radio license or requirement to own a TV license to listen to the radio?

Has anyone ever asked this of the Gov? Or has the response always been "because its de law!"?

Ace2007

grahambo wrote: »

But you'd need to Axe about 1,400 Jobs in RTE.

The reality is, they'd keep the big shots and sack the regular staff.

Supporting anything that could cut jobs is political suicide in Ireland.

The majority of "big shot" don't actually work for RTE - they are all contractors, and in any line of business, contractors get paid a higher base rate, because they don't get the other benefits usually.

Ace2007

Gunmonkey wrote: »

But I wonder....why does viewing a media broadcast require licensing, or owning a device capable of viewing media broadcasts? Apart from "its de law!", because old laws can be abolished, what reasoning is there for requiring a license? The only other objects that require a license to own/operate are driving and gun licenses, which are due to the dangerous nature.

If its just "to fund RTE", why dont they just tax TVs and phones or whatever people are using to view broadcasts at POS then? If thats the reason, why isnt there a radio license or requirement to own a TV license to listen to the radio?

Has anyone ever asked this of the Gov? Or has the response always been "because its de law!"?

You mean like buying a house - you pay stamp duty, but now you pay LPT

ninja 12

I see the producer of Dancing With The Stars is claiming that there might not be another series if there is no licence fee increase :rolleyes:

https://evoke.ie/2019/03/24/showbiz/gossip/future-of-dancing-with-the-stars-hinges-on-tv-licence-fee-increase

Larry Bass, executive producer for DWTS, believes that only an increase to the €160 annual licence fee can secure the future of his big-budget TV show which has Nicky Byrne and Jennifer Zamparelli at the helm.

‘We are in a negotiation phase at the minute so we don’t know where we stand at this stage, it is too early’, he says. Nothing is certain now and I definitely feel that a licence fee increase would help everyone.’

Maybe if the likes of Nicky Byrne wasn't paid so much ( just like the rest of the "stars" within RTE) , RTE could actually afford to make decent programmes , within their generous combined taxpayer and ad revenue funded budget .

https://www.independent.ie/entertainment/television/tv-news/revealed-rts-top-10-highest-paid-presenters-ray-darcy-sees-50000-increase-37620219.html

kneemos

ninja 12 wrote: »

I see the producer of Dancing With The Stars is claiming that there might not be another series if there is no licence fee increase :rolleyes:

https://evoke.ie/2019/03/24/showbiz/gossip/future-of-dancing-with-the-stars-hinges-on-tv-licence-fee-increase




Maybe if the likes of Nicky Byrne wasn't paid so much ( just like the rest of the "stars" within RTE) , RTE could actually afford to make decent programmes , within their generous combined taxpayer and ad revenue funded budget .

https://www.independent.ie/entertainment/television/tv-news/revealed-rts-top-10-highest-paid-presenters-ray-darcy-sees-50000-increase-37620219.html

Had the misguided belief that these shows made a few bob.
It's long enough God knows.

suicide_circus

ninja 12 wrote: »

I see the producer of Dancing With The Stars is claiming that there might not be another series if there is no licence fee increase

washiskin

Well, every cloud and all that.....

Idbatterim

grahambo wrote: »

But you'd need to Axe about 1,400 Jobs in RTE.

The reality is, they'd keep the big shots and sack the regular staff.

Supporting anything that could cut jobs is political suicide in Ireland.

Possibly. But in this case , the people are paying for this farce out of their own pocket. They might feel differently. They don’t have to lose jobs. They can have pay cuts. Possibly sell off more land. Sell the loss making stuff if there is a buyer ... make them a subscription service

end of the road

Idbatterim wrote: »

Possibly. But in this case , the people are paying for this farce out of their own pocket. They might feel differently. They don’t have to lose jobs. They can have pay cuts. Possibly sell off more land. Sell the loss making stuff if there is a buyer ... make them a subscription service

rte is very unlikely to become a subscription service and rightly so. there is plenty of subscription tv for those who want subscription tv. even on the off chance it did, the tv licence would remain. it's a licence to own a television, for which the procedes happen to go to fund the state broadcaster. i would rather rte was funded from general taxation but we have what we currently have.
selling off this and that seems to be a tried and failed strategy where the provision of public services is concerned, it seems to only ever end up strangling and decreasing the efficient operation of those services long term. pay cuts aren't going to happen. whether you like it or not some of the big names are getting what they are likely worth. even if they were to go elsewhere, the tv licence wouldn't be abolished, wouldn't decrease and increases couldn't be ruled out.
the whole point of rte is to provide programming of interest to as much of the population as is possible. from stuff loss making and minority, to programming of a wider interest. if rte were to sell off everything that was loss making then that would be at an over-all loss to them and the services they provide. even then what would they be selling, as not a chance are they selling off national network infrastructure, + staff and studios would stay with them.

Cienciano

ninja 12 wrote: »

I see the producer of Dancing With The Stars is claiming that there might not be another series if there is no licence fee increase :rolleyes:

https://evoke.ie/2019/03/24/showbiz/gossip/future-of-dancing-with-the-stars-hinges-on-tv-licence-fee-increase




Maybe if the likes of Nicky Byrne wasn't paid so much ( just like the rest of the "stars" within RTE) , RTE could actually afford to make decent programmes , within their generous combined taxpayer and ad revenue funded budget .

https://www.independent.ie/entertainment/television/tv-news/revealed-rts-top-10-highest-paid-presenters-ray-darcy-sees-50000-increase-37620219.html

Fúcking hell, that's the best argument for no tv license. It's compulsory for the public to pay for Dancing with the fúcking stars.

Balanadan

Thank **** I don't have a tv.

Dr_serious2

end of the road wrote: »

rte is very unlikely to become a subscription service and rightly so. there is plenty of subscription tv for those who want subscription tv. even on the off chance it did, the tv licence would remain. it's a licence to own a television, for which the procedes happen to go to fund the state broadcaster. i would rather rte was funded from general taxation but we have what we currently have.
selling off this and that seems to be a tried and failed strategy where the provision of public services is concerned, it seems to only ever end up strangling and decreasing the efficient operation of those services long term. pay cuts aren't going to happen. whether you like it or not some of the big names are getting what they are likely worth. even if they were to go elsewhere, the tv licence wouldn't be abolished, wouldn't decrease and increases couldn't be ruled out.
the whole point of rte is to provide programming of interest to as much of the population as is possible. from stuff loss making and minority, to programming of a wider interest. if rte were to sell off everything that was loss making then that would be at an over-all loss to them and the services they provide. even then what would they be selling, as not a chance are they selling off national network infrastructure, + staff and studios would stay with them.

What about 2fm, for example? Or RTE2 with their repeats of the Big Bang Theory? What public good are they serving, pray tell?

end of the road

Dr_serious2 wrote: »

What about 2fm, for example? Or RTE2 with their repeats of the Big Bang Theory? What public good are they serving, pray tell?

rte 2 i'd imagine brings in quite a bit of income to the service all though certainly it should be going in harder to get premiers of various programs.
2fm is the youth music service, all though it needs to go back to putting out more minority type programming like it used to do. in the late 90s to mid 2000s 2fm for example really went for the dance music market at the weekends, something perfectly in line with it's remit. if rte don't wish to do that, then the network could be taken over by 1 of the digital stations. rte gold for example. that would bring minority programming also.
it's not about what good rte 2 or 2fm currently serve, it's about what good they can serve. if they were to be sold off, and i'm not sure what exactly rte would be selling off, possibly air time only in the form of a provider paying to use the transmission network for a fee, we'd just end up with more of what is already available and we'd still be paying the licence and facing an increase. + rte would not have access to that network to carry something different or new until the contract runs out. we already have a couple of commercial tv stations and a couple of national commercial radio stations available and tbh there is nothing on the tv stations and very little on the radio stations, so i'm not sure if we need more of them IMO.

kneemos

end of the road wrote: »

rte 2 i'd imagine brings in quite a bit of income to the service all though certainly it should be going in harder to get premiers of various programs.
2fm is the youth music service, all though it needs to go back to putting out more minority type programming like it used to do. in the late 90s to mid 2000s 2fm for example really went for the dance music market at the weekends, something perfectly in line with it's remit. if rte don't wish to do that, then the network could be taken over by 1 of the digital stations. rte gold for example. that would bring minority programming also.
it's not about what good rte 2 or 2fm currently serve, it's about what good they can serve. if they were to be sold off, and i'm not sure what exactly rte would be selling off, possibly air time only in the form of a provider paying to use the transmission network for a fee, we'd just end up with more of what is already available and we'd still be paying the licence and facing an increase. + rte would not have access to that network to carry something different or new until the contract runs out. we already have a couple of commercial tv stations and a couple of national commercial radio stations available and tbh there is nothing on the tv stations and very little on the radio stations, so i'm not sure if we need more of them IMO.

2FM plays generic noise available on literally a million other stations,serves no public service whatsoever.
RTE2 used to be good for sports but they don't do that much anymore. What they have left could be accommodated on RTE1 or TnaG.

2FM loses millions hand over fist I might add.

AndyBoBandy

kneemos wrote: »

2FM loses millions hand over fist I might add.

Yeah well how else is Lottie Ryan going to fund a large home in a leafy South Dublin suburb?

kneemos

AndyBoBandy wrote: »

Yeah well how else is Lottie Ryan going to fund a large home in a leafy South Dublin suburb?

Not to mention the ****ing nepotism. No wonder they have no talent.

KildareP

end of the road wrote: »

rte is very unlikely to become a subscription service and rightly so. there is plenty of subscription tv for those who want subscription tv. even on the off chance it did, the tv licence would remain. it's a licence to own a television, for which the procedes happen to go to fund the state broadcaster. i would rather rte was funded from general taxation but we have what we currently have.
selling off this and that seems to be a tried and failed strategy where the provision of public services is concerned, it seems to only ever end up strangling and decreasing the efficient operation of those services long term. pay cuts aren't going to happen. whether you like it or not some of the big names are getting what they are likely worth. even if they were to go elsewhere, the tv licence wouldn't be abolished, wouldn't decrease and increases couldn't be ruled out.
the whole point of rte is to provide programming of interest to as much of the population as is possible. from stuff loss making and minority, to programming of a wider interest. if rte were to sell off everything that was loss making then that would be at an over-all loss to them and the services they provide. even then what would they be selling, as not a chance are they selling off national network infrastructure, + staff and studios would stay with them.

2FM has 9 "personalities" on air on a weekday 7-7 schedule. That's on-air only.
Add at least a producer per show is +5. Add in News, Sport, Entertainment - 3 each over 2 shifts is +6. That's 20 staff. Then add in all your ancilliaries - technical, HR, production staff, albeit shared out amongst the overall Radio IBD. You could be looking at 25 or 26 - for the 7-7 weekday slots only.

That doesn't factor in weekends.

For a pop music station that's obscene.

I's be surprised if the likes of Spin, Beat or iRadio had as many staff on the book across the entire week as RTE do on the weekday 7-7 yet they are essentially providing the same service.

As for RTE2 TV, they have a habit of buying in first run US drama and running it in the graveyard slots - is that in their remit, to provide a PSB for insomniacs who are fans of US drama?

The problem with RTE is that a lot of their output, by nature, won't turn a profit and it thus can be used as an excuse for waste to creep in. Just because it won't turn a profit does not mean it should not be run with commercial sensitives and efficiencies front and foremost.

As advertising spend was at record highs they were able to get away with it. Indeed that was their primary excuse for the huge salaries their top earners were getting, that they pulled in ad revenue to justify it.

Ad spend is on a sharp downward spiral in recent years and they're seeing serious pressure being put on the license fee subvention to keep the books balanced but they are not willing to adapt to a changing operating market where they rolled in ad revenue, instead it's easy to go crying that the license fee needs to be increased to keep the status quo.

If they want to see how a PSB needs to be run, go look at TG4. PSB at it's finest.

Dr_serious2

KildareP wrote: »

2FM has 9 "personalities" on air on a weekday 7-7 schedule. That's on-air only.
Add at least a producer per show is +5. Add in News, Sport, Entertainment - 3 each over 2 shifts is +6. That's 20 staff. Then add in all your ancilliaries - technical, HR, production staff, albeit shared out amongst the overall Radio IBD. You could be looking at 25 or 26 - for the 7-7 weekday slots only.

That doesn't factor in weekends.

For a pop music station that's obscene.

I's be surprised if the likes of Spin, Beat or iRadio had as many staff on the book across the entire week as RTE do on the weekday 7-7 yet they are essentially providing the same service.

As for RTE2 TV, they have a habit of buying in first run US drama and running it in the graveyard slots - is that in their remit, to provide a PSB for insomniacs who are fans of US drama?

The problem with RTE is that a lot of their output, by nature, won't turn a profit and it thus can be used as an excuse for waste to creep in. Just because it won't turn a profit does not mean it should not be run with commercial sensitives and efficiencies front and foremost.

As advertising spend was at record highs they were able to get away with it. Indeed that was their primary excuse for the huge salaries their top earners were getting, that they pulled in ad revenue to justify it.

Ad spend is on a sharp downward spiral in recent years and they're seeing serious pressure being put on the license fee subvention to keep the books balanced but they are not willing to adapt to a changing operating market where they rolled in ad revenue, instead it's easy to go crying that the license fee needs to be increased to keep the status quo.

If they want to see how a PSB needs to be run, go look at TG4. PSB at it's finest.

Well said, If there was licence just for tg4 I would happily pay it.

oneilla

end of the road wrote: »

rte is very unlikely to become a subscription service and rightly so. there is plenty of subscription tv for those who want subscription tv. even on the off chance it did, the tv licence would remain. it's a licence to own a television, for which the procedes happen to go to fund the state broadcaster. i would rather rte was funded from general taxation but we have what we currently have.
selling off this and that seems to be a tried and failed strategy where the provision of public services is concerned, it seems to only ever end up strangling and decreasing the efficient operation of those services long term. pay cuts aren't going to happen. whether you like it or not some of the big names are getting what they are likely worth. even if they were to go elsewhere, the tv licence wouldn't be abolished, wouldn't decrease and increases couldn't be ruled out.
the whole point of rte is to provide programming of interest to as much of the population as is possible. from stuff loss making and minority, to programming of a wider interest. if rte were to sell off everything that was loss making then that would be at an over-all loss to them and the services they provide. even then what would they be selling, as not a chance are they selling off national network infrastructure, + staff and studios would stay with them.

RTE is on all subscription TV providers already as standard.

It's a license to own a Tv with a tuner capable of picking up the terrestrial signal.