RTE Cutbacks The Plan

Itssoeasy

MrMusician18 wrote: »

It does work, it flawless presents three minutes of ads consistently...

Fair point actually. Those ads never fail. It’s the actual stuff we want to watch that never plays and if it does something goes wrong.

Itssoeasy

Duane Dibbley wrote: »

What’s the point in RTÉ 2.

If the plans go ahead as outlined then not much point.

MrMusician18

I wonder will the government cave to them though. They've said 5 years until theres a broadcasting charge so I doubt we'll see change before an election. However if the next election returns a decisive result, I wonder could the government turn with the aim of having a friendlier RTE?

Before the election, it is hard to see what demographic might be on RTEs side. Older, more naturally conservative have surely been alienated by RTEs liberal stance and for younger people RTE is now an irrelevance. Where does it get the love from?

Plumbthedepths

saabsaab wrote: »

Tubbs is grand, probably the best of them and not overpaid. Plus if they cut his salary he may well be off abroad.

I'm surprised with such an enormous talent he hasn't been headhunted by larger organisations such as the BBC. Like take Graham Norton for example.
Actually just realised why he hasn't...because he's crap.

Duane Dibbley

The Government should invest in running a national survey around what the public would like from a state broadcaster and then finance it based on the feedback.

odyssey06

Duane Dibbley wrote: »

The Government should invest in running a national survey around what the public would like from a state broadcaster and then finance it based on the feedback.

On a similar note, a poll on The Journal about funding RTE via a 'device charge' has 77% NO versus 17% in favour.

Loafing Oaf

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Older, more naturally conservative have surely been alienated by RTEs liberal stance

That demographic will stay loyal to RTE regardless, just like they'll keep voting for FF and FG despite those parties' wholesale embrace of the 'liberal agenda'. And the reason is similar: nowhere else for them to go...

Calhoun

MrMusician18 wrote: »

I wonder will the government cave to them though. They've said 5 years until theres a broadcasting charge so I doubt we'll see change before an election. However if the next election returns a decisive result, I wonder could the government turn with the aim of having a friendlier RTE?

Before the election, it is hard to see what demographic might be on RTEs side. Older, more naturally conservative have surely been alienated by RTEs liberal stance and for younger people RTE is now an irrelevance. Where does it get the love from?

Auld Mary is exactly what is keeping RTE afloat right now as they still cater to them with allot of boomer programming. Look at the likes of Joe Duffy.

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

That demographic will stay loyal to RTE regardless, just like they'll keep voting for FF and FG despite those parties' wholesale embrace of the 'liberal agenda'. And the reason is similar: nowhere else for them to go...

Maybe its time to start collecting a charge out of their pension if they want to keep it as it is.

10000maniacs

end of the road wrote: »

the license is to own a tv capable of receiving a terrestrial signal, rather then a license to watch rte.
virgin media is a commercial channel that i believe mostly buys in stuff from ITV, so to be fair isn't comparable to rte which is a public service broadcaster.
virgin media is also junk of the highest order in my opinion, i don't know how or why anyone watches it, but each to their own.

No the license is an RTE tax. Much like income tax, a tax you have to pay if you have a job/tv.

elperello

10000maniacs wrote: »

No the license is an RTE tax. Much like income tax, a tax you have to pay if you have a job/tv.

It's more like a car tax.
You need a job to earn money but you can decide whether you want a TV or not.
No TV and you are home free, no licence required and as a bonus you can listen to radio all day for free.

odyssey06

elperello wrote: »

It's more like a car tax.
You need a job to earn money but you can decide whether you want a TV or not.
No TV and you are home free, no licence required and as a bonus you can listen to radio all day for free.

Except the car tax isnt funding the roads. It is funding the TV version of a Lada even if you drive a Toyota.

elperello

odyssey06 wrote: »

Except the car tax isnt funding the roads. It is funding the TV version of a Lada even if you drive a Toyota.

We'll have to take that one over to the Motors Forum

Meanwhile the free listening is available 24/7 at a radio near you.

(maybe even a car radio)

H3llR4iser

elperello wrote: »

It's more like a car tax.
You need a job to earn money but you can decide whether you want a TV or not.
No TV and you are home free, no licence required and as a bonus you can listen to radio all day for free.

Actually, very wrong comparison - you can have a car and not pay the tax if you don't use it on the road. Say, a trackday car you bring to and from the track on a trailer.

If you have a TV and don't use it for watching TV, you should not have to pay. Make TVs unable to show RTE via software, and unlock them with a TV license code. And before anyone goes about the "cost", most TVs are already carrying tuning firmware specific for the country they're sold in.

elperello

H3llR4iser wrote: »

Actually, very wrong comparison - you can have a car and not pay the tax if you don't use it on the road. Say, a trackday car you bring to and from the track on a trailer.

If you have a TV and don't use it for watching TV, you should not have to pay. Make TVs unable to show RTE via software, and unlock them with a TV license code. And before anyone goes about the "cost", most TVs are already carrying tuning firmware specific for the country they're sold in.

You are right.

I forgot about off road vehicles.

Why not use a monitor if you want a big screen that won't need a licence?

Calhoun

How about those who love it pay for it, and the rest of us don't have to subsidize the crap.

If my options are no public broadcasting or RTE being a cash cow for the elite cohort in Montrose i will sacrifice public broadcasting.

H3llR4iser

elperello wrote: »

You are right.

I forgot about off road vehicles.

Why not use a monitor if you want a big screen that won't need a licence?

Point 1, any non TV screen above 32" were extremely hard to find and absurdly expensive until a couple of years ago; Now, yes, it's an option. But one that shouldn't be needed - you don't need to buy a racecar to use as a trackday car, you can enjoy yourself with any old Alfa or BMW. Why should you need special equipment in order NOT TO USE a service you don't want, while still having the hardware?

Point 2, more importantly, there is nowhere that says monitors are exempt - and trust me, I inquired. It's a grey area - depending on "inspector", anything you can connect a saorview box to, is liable to pay. Even projectors, monitors and whatnot.

I have a small TV with no tuner (foreign model that was sold "camless"). It physically doesn't have an antenna connector. Because it can be "modified" to work as a tv, it has to pay. The law is, simply, wrong.

I'm sorry, but defending the current arrangement is impossible.

decky1

Twister2 wrote: »

Are they cutting the licence fee too?

LOL, Think there is talk of an increase,+even more repeats.:mad:

elperello

H3llR4iser wrote: »

Point 1, any non TV screen above 32" were extremely hard to find and absurdly expensive until a couple of years ago; Now, yes, it's an option. But one that shouldn't be needed - you don't need to buy a racecar to use as a trackday car, you can enjoy yourself with any old Alfa or BMW. Why should you need special equipment in order NOT TO USE a service you don't want, while still having the hardware?

Point 2, more importantly, there is nowhere that says monitors are exempt - and trust me, I inquired. It's a grey area - depending on "inspector", anything you can connect a saorview box to, is liable to pay. Even projectors, monitors and whatnot.

I have a small TV with no tuner (foreign model that was sold "camless"). It physically doesn't have an antenna connector. Because it can be "modified" to work as a tv, it has to pay. The law is, simply, wrong.

I'm sorry, but defending the current arrangement is impossible.

Sorry I didn't mean to come across as defending the current arrangement.

As far as I'm concerned I'd do away with the licence and pay for public service broadcasting out of general taxation. Job done, no licence, no collection, no inspectors, no hassle.

But then I believe PSB is a good thing worth having and needs to be paid for.

Just on the monitors. I never heard of a prosecution for having a computer monitor without a licence.

odyssey06

elperello wrote: »

Sorry I didn't mean to come across as defending the current arrangement.
As far as I'm concerned I'd do away with the licence and pay for public service broadcasting out of general taxation. Job done, no licence, no collection, no inspectors, no hassle.
But then I believe PSB is a good thing worth having and needs to be paid for.

Issue with that is then RTE have even less reason to be concerned about financial reality. Expect their demands on the Exchequer to mushroom.

billcullen1

Sell the donnybrook site and move to balbriggan or something much cheaper. Cut the top presenters salaries before hammering the ordinary joe or the general public !

BDI

It should just be 9 or 10 people working in shifts reading the news with 10-20 investigative people.

No bells, no whistles state tv. It should have no interference from government provided it does its utmost to report the truth.

The rest can be provided by independent channels.

elperello

odyssey06 wrote: »

Issue with that is then RTE have even less reason to be concerned about financial reality. Expect their demands on the Exchequer to mushroom.

Yes, it would need some figuring out but I'm sure it could be done.

There would be some push and pull, a lot of turf wars but a fair level of funding could be arrived at.

Anything is better than where we are and the notion of taxing laptops and mobile phones is too stupid to contemplate.

sligeach

Just switched over at the latest second now to Primetime, and they're trying to blame the government for their problems. **** ***! Stop paying worthless tw&ts massive salaries, that would be a start. The government has subsidised RTE for years, actually in reality it's us, twice over.

One person especially at RTE is a right muppet. On a fat turkey salary for years, when there's more talent in a dirty sock. Should have been sent to Zog, instead of being allowed talk worthless dribble on the airwaves for an hour and a half a day and a garbage show on Saturday night full of Z list "celebrities". He's a disgrace to journalism.

bobbyss

Does anyone know what the position of the big earners is to pay cuts?

If any of them are reluctant to accept they could always ply their wares for the same money at the BBC, ITV or Channel 4 for example.

Yeah right!!!

SEPT 23 1989

billcullen1 wrote: »

Sell the donnybrook site and move to balbriggan or something much cheaper

D4’s said on the news that they had looked at that option but it was ruled out

BY THEMSELVES

These decisions need to be taken out of an insolvent companies hands

nkl12xtw5goz70

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

D4’s said on the news that they had looked at that option but it was ruled out

BY THEMSELVES

These decisions need to be taken out of an insolvent companies hands

They could sell their D4 site for €200 million easily.

Then relocate to an inexpensive part of the country and focus on running one good radio station and an on-demand subscription-based streaming service.

Public service remit sorted. Then they can go away, stop whinging, and leave people alone who don't want to watch RTE.

BDI

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

D4’s said on the news that they had looked at that option but it was ruled out

BY THEMSELVES

These decisions need to be taken out of an insolvent companies hands

They took a look at it and decided it was handier having it beside their house.

Then the thoughts of the media getting their knickers in a twist when they built their state of the art gym sauna and wall climbing centre.

Feck that stay where they are canteen more than adequate.

Calhoun

sligeach wrote: »

Just switched over at the latest second now to Primetime, and they're trying to blame the government for their problems. **** ***! Stop paying worthless tw&ts massive salaries, that would be a start. The government has subsidised RTE for years, actually in reality it's us, twice over.

One person especially at RTE is a right muppet. On a fat turkey salary for years, when there's more talent in a dirty sock. Should have been sent to Zog, instead of being allowed talk worthless dribble on the airwaves for an hour and a half a day and a garbage show on Saturday night full of Z list "celebrities". He's a disgrace to journalism.

Switched on to Radio 1 over the weekend and some absolute tosser talking about how us western economies need to go through a phase of degrowth and accept lower standard of living. Meanwhile the develop economy would be allow go nuts and do what they wanted to "catchup".

It must be great living in that bubble not worry about paying your bills and knowing you have a secure job, meanwhile the rest of us keeping them in a wage worrying about keeping your head above water.

Duane Dibbley

How hard would it be for the Government to run a census of the public’s expectations of the state broadcaster using the TV licence to finance the Census.

NIMAN

I see that idiot Paul Murhpy has the answer.

Tax the big miltinationals more to pay for rte.

Yeah Paul, great idea.