Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen
Richard Lockwood wrote: If you want to even it up, why not put a charge, or an annual license on each device capable of viewing BBC content? Or, more reasonably, per-person (unless you know people who watch 2 devices at once?). Or make it PAYG? With a flat fee option? Discounted with a family plan? How much would that come out to a year? Oh wait... - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen
Someone who earns 14K per annum pays 1% of their income in TV Licensing, someone who earns 140K pays only 0.1%, (assuming both own a colour television), (figures not exact). Anyone else think that is a little bit unfair? Wouldn't a proportional or progressive tax be fairer? NO! H. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen
On 06/05/2008, Helen Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Someone who earns 14K per annum pays 1% of their income in TV Licensing, someone who earns 140K pays only 0.1%, (assuming both own a colour television), (figures not exact). Anyone else think that is a little bit unfair? Wouldn't a proportional or progressive tax be fairer? NO! Perhaps you could explain your thoughts. Are you a high earner? H. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ -- Please email me back if you need any more help. Brian Butterworth http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002
RE: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen
Andy wrote: Brian Butterworth wrote: There is quite a reasonable argument that the TV License, which is used to fund BBC television and radio, is a regressive tax, so someone on benefits pays the same as a millionaire. Or to put it another way The less you earn, the more you pay as a percentage of your income. Someone who earns 14K per annum pays 1% of their income in TV Licensing, someone who earns 140K pays only 0.1%, (assuming both own a colour television), (figures not exact). I wonder if anyone's done a study on the hours of television consumed in relation to income. Anyone else think that is a little bit unfair? Wouldn't a proportional or progressive tax be fairer? I also wonder if the value a licence fee payer places on television might be inversely proportional to their income. Gordon McMullan - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen
On 06/05/2008, Helen Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Someone who earns 14K per annum pays 1% of their income in TV Licensing, someone who earns 140K pays only 0.1%, (assuming both own a colour television), (figures not exact). Anyone else think that is a little bit unfair? Wouldn't a proportional or progressive tax be fairer? NO! Perhaps you could explain your thoughts. Are you a high earner? I know not whether Helen is a high earner. It doesn't matter - her position is quite right. The license fee is precisely that - a one off fee. It is not a tax. If you don't want to use the service, don't pay. Is there any evidence that high earners consume more output from the BBC than low earners? If I go to Morrisons this evening to buy four bottles of Timothy Taylor Landlord (other supermarkets and beers are available), do they ask me at the checkout how much I earn before deciding how much to charge me? No. Well then - it's exactly the same with the TV license. If you want to even it up, why not put a charge, or an annual license on each device capable of viewing BBC content? (Waits for Dave Crossland to start spitting feathers) That way, the wealthy with a TV in every room will pay more, as they will (probably) be consuming more output. :-) Cheers, Rich.
Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen
Andy wrote: Brian Butterworth wrote: There is quite a reasonable argument that the TV License, which is used to fund BBC television and radio, is a regressive tax, so someone on benefits pays the same as a millionaire. Or to put it another way The less you earn, the more you pay as a percentage of your income. Someone who earns 14K per annum pays 1% of their income in TV Licensing, someone who earns 140K pays only 0.1%, (assuming both own a colour television), (figures not exact). Anyone else think that is a little bit unfair? Wouldn't a proportional or progressive tax be fairer? Depends on your definition of fair. :-) Leaving aside politics though, it's worth noting that making the TV license progressive would only be practical if the BBC's funding was folded into general taxation, and collected by HMRC. I mean, let alone the cost of dealing with the additional information, how many people would be happy to give TV Licensing verifiable details of their employment status and income? S - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen
On 5/6/08, Richard Lockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If I go to Morrisons this evening to buy four bottles of Timothy Taylor Landlord (other supermarkets and beers are available), do they ask me at the checkout how much I earn before deciding how much to charge me? No. Well then - it's exactly the same with the TV license. But there's no British Supermarkets Corporation supermarket that you are required pay 140 a year to in order to obatain a supermarket licence so that you could legally go shopping at any supermarket (whether it's a BSC public service supermarket or a private one like Morrisons), backed up with the threat of a 1000 pound fine or jail time for anyone who goes shopping but doesn't have a licence. If you want to even it up, why not put a charge, or an annual license on each device capable of viewing BBC content? (Waits for Dave Crossland to start spitting feathers) That way, the wealthy with a TV in every room will pay more, as they will (probably) be consuming more output. That assumes that wealthy people will have more TVs per room than people on lower incomes, and I doubt that's true. Seeing as TVs are fairly low cost (and used TVs can be picked up for next to nothing) you can't equate TVs per room with wealth. Besides, it would be a nightmare to implement, requiring even more draconian invasions of people's privacy than the current system. Far better to go the simple option and fund the BBC straight from normal taxation, like most other public services. Scot
Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen
If I go to Morrisons this evening to buy four bottles of Timothy Taylor Landlord (other supermarkets and beers are available), do they ask me at the checkout how much I earn before deciding how much to charge me? No. Well then - it's exactly the same with the TV license. But there's no British Supermarkets Corporation supermarket that you are required pay 140 a year to in order to obatain a supermarket licence so that you could legally go shopping at any supermarket (whether it's a BSC public service supermarket or a private one like Morrisons), backed up with the threat of a 1000 pound fine or jail time for anyone who goes shopping but doesn't have a licence. It wasn't the greatest analogy, I'll admit, but it's valid - the British Supermarkets Corporation is irrelevent. If I want to watch TV, I have to pay for it. Once. No matter how much I use it. Also - and this is the point - there's no evidence that rich people use more of it than poor people. If I'm rich, why should I have to pay more for the same level of use of a non-essential good than someone who is less well off? If you want to even it up, why not put a charge, or an annual license on each device capable of viewing BBC content? (Waits for Dave Crossland to start spitting feathers) That way, the wealthy with a TV in every room will pay more, as they will (probably) be consuming more output. That assumes that wealthy people will have more TVs per room than people on lower incomes, and I doubt that's true. Seeing as TVs are fairly low cost (and used TVs can be picked up for next to nothing) you can't equate TVs per room with wealth. Besides, it would be a nightmare to implement, requiring even more draconian invasions of people's privacy than the current system. Far better to go the simple option and fund the BBC straight from normal taxation, like most other public services. Scot Not necessarily TVs per room, but number of devices that are capable of receiving TV? (Computers, laptops, whizzy phones etc) Possibly. And if you were to make it a value based tax, even more so. (Big -off plasma screens, home cinema equipment). It's unworkable, certainly, but less so than a sliding scale of TV license. Funding the BBC from normal taxation seems at first sight like a reasonable solution - but then it's a public service that you genuinely can opt out of (unlike the NHS, or policing (say)). Would you be able to opt out of part of your tax? (I'm well aware that even now it's a pain if you don't have a TV to have threatening letters coming through the door from the licensing authority - but you don't HAVE to buy a license.) The license fee is probably the worst and least fair way to fund the BBC, apart from all the others that have been dreamed up. :-) Cheers, Rich.
Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen
On Tue, 2008-05-06 at 19:39 +0100, Richard Lockwood wrote: If I go to Morrisons this evening to buy four bottles of Timothy Taylor Landlord (other supermarkets and beers are available), do they ask me at the checkout how much I earn before deciding how much to charge me? No. Well then - it's exactly the same with the TV license. But there's no British Supermarkets Corporation supermarket that you are required pay 140 a year to in order to obatain a supermarket licence so that you could legally go shopping at any supermarket (whether it's a BSC public service supermarket or a private one like Morrisons), backed up with the threat of a 1000 pound fine or jail time for anyone who goes shopping but doesn't have a licence. It wasn't the greatest analogy, I'll admit, but it's valid - the British Supermarkets Corporation is irrelevent. If I want to watch TV, I have to pay for it. Once. No matter how much I use it. Also - and this is the point - there's no evidence that rich people use more of it than poor people. If I'm rich, why should I have to pay more for the same level of use of a non-essential good than someone who is less well off? Well, that's how progressive taxation works. People paying higher rate tax don't necessarily use the NHS, the armed forces, or state schools more than low earners - yet we don't have flat-rate income tax (even if Mr Brown has made a strange move in that direction). The problem with the OP's analogy is rather that unlike eating, watching television is a purely optional pastime, and certainly several orders less necessary to well-being than say, listening to music, or going out to the pub and interacting with human beings (to say nothing of a good pint ;) Thus a fixed fee seems not too unreasonable. Admittedly if we were designing the system afresh now, it wouldn't be the most popular option - but like much of the British system it works reasonably well, and there isn't a better replacement waiting in the wings. - Richard -- Free Software: http://www.ubuntu.com/ Better browsing: http://www.mozilla.com/ Free Office suite: http://www.openoffice.org/ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen
_ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nick Reynolds-FMT Sent: 02 May 2008 13:13 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen in the BBC the many fund the many - but apart from that I agree entirely Just to clarify for the list/the world via archives, the many fund the few was meant in the context of everybody funds all the services on the BBC regardless of how many people listen or watch them (so you have everyone funding the kids' content even if only a fraction of the viewership/listenership gets any kind of use from them cf. Asian Network, foreign language / translated content, the h2g2 content (which I myself use) and the sadly missed /cult section), World Service ... but that's slightly different again). I didn't mean it in the sense of everyone in the UK funds the BBC while not many people make use of its array of output - I know what I said could be misconstrued or misinterpreted, so just wanted to clear that one up. ;) (And yes, I'm pro-licence fee. No, I'm not a mindless shill. Yes, I do aim to work in the Beeb one day and I'm slowly moving towards making that more of an attainable goal. No, I'm not out of touch with reality. And yes, I pay my licence fee. Flame away if thusly desired).
Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen
2008/5/4 Christopher Woods [EMAIL PROTECTED]: -- *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Nick Reynolds-FMT *Sent:* 02 May 2008 13:13 *To:* backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk *Subject:* RE: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen in the BBC the many fund the many - but apart from that I agree entirely Just to clarify for the list/the world via archives, the many fund the few was meant in the context of everybody funds all the services on the BBC regardless of how many people listen or watch them (so you have everyone funding the kids' content even if only a fraction of the viewership/listenership gets any kind of use from them cf. Asian Network, foreign language / translated content, the h2g2 content (which I myself use) and the sadly missed /cult section), World Service ... but that's slightly different again). The cynic knows the price of everything and the value of nothing. - Oscar Wilde The World Service is paid for by direct taxation, not the LF of course. I didn't mean it in the sense of everyone in the UK funds the BBC while not many people make use of its array of output - I know what I said could be misconstrued or misinterpreted, so just wanted to clear that one up. ;) *(And yes, I'm pro-licence fee. No, I'm not a mindless shill. Yes, I do aim to work in the Beeb one day and I'm slowly moving towards making that more of an attainable goal. No, I'm not out of touch with reality. And yes, I pay my licence fee. Flame away if thusly desired).* -- Brian Butterworth http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002
Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen
On Friday 02 May 2008 04:39:23 Brian Butterworth wrote: ... *ADD A 3% TAX TO SUBSCRIPTION TELEVISION* How do you justify this ? Why not DVD sales? Why not cinema tickets? Why not theatre? Why not ... ? Yoy may not have noticed but Channel 4 is a television channel. If you're going to attack me, when asked to justify your (bizarre) idea I'm not playing. Goodbye. Michael - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen
in the BBC the many fund the many - but apart from that I agree entirely From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Christopher Woods Sent: 02 May 2008 12:52 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen Whilst TV matters to a lot of people (including me :-) it is however *just* TV. Yes, a 3% level on subscription TV to support those people who can't afford it. Seems just and just TV to me. In most economic systems the few fund the many - the BBC is an exception to this due to historical reasons, you have the many funding the few. However, being British, we've somehow managed to come through all of the wrangling with quite a respectable end product, whatever the naysayers say (cf. a typically British result from decades of uncertainty can be seen in the British political system: only ever partially codified but still one of the most successful political and legal frameworks in the world imho!) rant time... look away now if you're not thusly inclined However, consumer acceptance of another broadcaster gaining funds via the many funding the few scheme would, I fear, meet with large amounts of disquiet and I've never had to pay this before, why should I now? The people will roll out their usual arguments, that's what it's like with the BBC already etc etc, but the BBC is a class apart - it's a trusted broadcaster, a trusted brand and a torchcarrier for the UK all over the world. You just cannot compare the Beeb with A. N. Other semi-publically funded PSB. Compare ITV's or C4's output to the BBC's - different leagues, even with Channel 4's comprehensive web site and digital offerings there's still leagues of difference between them. Even if they do benefit from their incumbency, they've not just sat on their laurels - innovation has always been high and they seem to be willing to push the curve a little more than others. Because of that cash injection? Yes, maybe, but as the British Broadcasting Company they are in a different class from other PSBs - my expectations for my country's national broadcaster are similarly far higher. I go elsewhere for news fixes, entertainment etc alongside the BBC, but I always come back to the BBC at the end of the day. I trust it almost implicitly (although these days my bullshit-and-spin filter is permanently turned to 'on', thanks for that Internet) I guess the crux of what I'm saying is that the BBC, due to the sheer breadth and volume of content it creates, commissions and outputs, plus all of the requisite infrastructure and platform support, deserves the bulk of the money from the licence fee. I'm happy to pay for quality by way of a licence if I make use of the resulting productions (be they TV, radio, online etc) - but I fear it's something I just wouldn't get from any other PSB. Plus, if any other broadcaster was funded by their own licence fee, I would expect them to cease advertising. Would they do that? Nah.
Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen
2008/5/2 Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Friday 02 May 2008 04:39:23 Brian Butterworth wrote: ... *ADD A 3% TAX TO SUBSCRIPTION TELEVISION* How do you justify this ? Why not DVD sales? Why not cinema tickets? Why not theatre? Why not ... ? Yoy may not have noticed but Channel 4 is a television channel. If you're going to attack me, when asked to justify your (bizarre) idea I'm not playing. Goodbye. Attack you? Good grief, if you think that's an attack you need some help my friend. :-o What do you want me to justify? A simple tax on television subscriptions to fund a PBS... can't be simpler... Michael - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ -- Please email me back if you need any more help. Brian Butterworth http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002
Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen
2008/5/2 Christopher Woods [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Whilst TV matters to a lot of people (including me :-) it is however *just* TV. Yes, a 3% level on subscription TV to support those people who can't afford it. Seems just and just TV to me. In most economic systems the few fund the many - the BBC is an exception to this due to historical reasons, you have the many funding the few. However, being British, we've somehow managed to come through all of the wrangling with quite a respectable end product, whatever the naysayers say (cf. a typically British result from decades of uncertainty can be seen in the British political system: only ever partially codified but still one of the most successful political and legal frameworks in the world imho!) There is quite a reasonable argument that the TV License, which is used to fund BBC television and radio, is a regressive tax, so someone on benefits pays the same as a millionaire. But the most interesting thing is that it is one of very few hypotocated taxes we have (another being the London Congestion Charge) it does give everyone both the choice NOT to pay it (if you don't have a television you don't pay) and it makes it everyone's business. This has two useful effects. Firstly, almost every thinks of the BBC has being 'theirs' because they pay for it, which makes many people take a good deal of interests and it means that the BBC has to be very careful to make sure everyone gets at least some level of service (hence 1Xtra, Asian Network, local radio etc). rant time... look away now if you're not thusly inclined However, consumer acceptance of another broadcaster gaining funds via the many funding the few scheme would, I fear, meet with large amounts of disquiet and I've never had to pay this before, why should I now? The people will roll out their usual arguments, that's what it's like with the BBC already etc etc, but the BBC is a class apart - it's a trusted broadcaster, a trusted brand and a torchcarrier for the UK all over the world. You just cannot compare the Beeb with A. N. Other semi-publically funded PSB. Compare ITV's or C4's output to the BBC's - different leagues, even with Channel 4's comprehensive web site and digital offerings there's still leagues of difference between them. The thing is that people HAVE been paying for Channel 4 and the PBS on ITV since they started. Channel 4 was funded by a level on ITV advertising revenues until Channel 4 make enough money from it's own ad revenues and the ITV 'safety net' was removed. It's just it was an 'invisible tax' so people didn't perceive it and the 'gifted airwaves' as having the value that it did. The reason for 'why now' is that TV ad revenues are falling. Even if they do benefit from their incumbency, they've not just sat on their laurels - innovation has always been high and they seem to be willing to push the curve a little more than others. Because of that cash injection? Yes, maybe, but as the British Broadcasting Company they are in a different class from other PSBs - my expectations for my country's national broadcaster are similarly far higher. I go elsewhere for news fixes, entertainment etc alongside the BBC, but I always come back to the BBC at the end of the day. I trust it almost implicitly (although these days my bullshit-and-spin filter is permanently turned to 'on', thanks for that Internet) There is the long-standing (since 1955) argument that another PBS 'keeps the BBC honest', and it seems inconceivable that this has no grain of truth about it. Another point worth considering is that Channel 4 is also a public corporation and does not have shareholders. I guess the crux of what I'm saying is that the BBC, due to the sheer breadth and volume of content it creates, commissions and outputs, plus all of the requisite infrastructure and platform support, deserves the bulk of the money from the licence fee. I'm happy to pay for quality by way of a licence if I make use of the resulting productions (be they TV, radio, online etc) - but I fear it's something I just wouldn't get from any other PSB. The Channel 4 model is broadcaster-publisher, rather than broadcaster-content-creator, which keeps our friends at PACT happy. The only other option is to have no Channel 4, and to also have no regional news network outside the BBC. Plus, if any other broadcaster was funded by their own licence fee, I would expect them to cease advertising. Would they do that? Nah. A 3% level would not be enough to make Channel 4 ad-free, I fear.But it could keep the channel on air, perhaps with the a regional news service, and would also allow a Channel 4 Kids service too. If it were my decision I would only allow them to commission UK productions - leave US imports to the subscription services, IMHO. Another part of the 3% deal could be to declare Sky News a 'public service' and gift the channel a space on Mux 2 too.
Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen
2008/4/30 Nick Reynolds-FMT [EMAIL PROTECTED]: The BBC Trust regularly looks at BBC services to see if they make sense in a rolling programme of reviews of service licences, which include public consultations. http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/framework/bbc_service_licences/service_rev iews.html I wonder what impact the recent launch of BBCGreen.com would have on investors considering whether to support a environment-focussed web start-up aimed at a UK audience? - Oh hang on, BBCGreen.com is done by BBC Worldwide and so isn't covered by bbc.co.uk's service licence. Neither is bbc.co.uk/iplayer. Is news.bbc.co.uk ? - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen
And (as I'm sure you know Tom) the BBC Trust signs off Worldwide's plans and has to consider the market impact of them. BBC News online is covered by the bbc.co.uk service licence. So is the iPlayer. In Annex 2. http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/assets/files/pdf/regulatory_framework/serv ice_licences/online/online_servicelicences/bbc_co_uk_servicelicence_30ap r2007.pdf -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Loosemore Sent: 02 May 2008 14:34 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen 2008/4/30 Nick Reynolds-FMT [EMAIL PROTECTED]: The BBC Trust regularly looks at BBC services to see if they make sense in a rolling programme of reviews of service licences, which include public consultations. http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/framework/bbc_service_licences/service_r ev iews.html I wonder what impact the recent launch of BBCGreen.com would have on investors considering whether to support a environment-focussed web start-up aimed at a UK audience? - Oh hang on, BBCGreen.com is done by BBC Worldwide and so isn't covered by bbc.co.uk's service licence. Neither is bbc.co.uk/iplayer. Is news.bbc.co.uk ? - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen
Yes, but it was no surprise that the first Service Licence review was yet another in-depth look at online, and not BBC One, was it? 2008/4/30 Brendan Quinn [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi Tom, You wrote: the public value test is a one way expansion valve, only allowing for new BBC services, never testing existing BBC services to see if they still make sense. That's right, existing services aren't put through a PVT -- that's what the service licence is for, isn't it? http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/framework/bbc_service_licences/bbc_co_uk_s ervice_licence.html The Trust are actually reviewing the online service licence right now... http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/framework/bbc_service_licences/bbc_co_uk.h tml Ready to be published in Spring 2008, ie any day now, I suppose. Brendan. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Loosemore Sent: 30 April 2008 12:15 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen New BBC services now have to go through a market impact assessment to ensure they are not anti competitive: http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/framework/public_value_test/#part-5 but existing BBC services (ie everything other than iPlayer and BBC HD) have not been and will not be subject to such rigour... the public value test is a one way expansion valve, only allowing for new BBC services, never testing existing BBC services to see if they still make sense. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ -- Martin Belam - http://www.currybet.net - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen
BTW, I've had a really bright idea to stop needing to 'top slice' the TV License Fee: There is a PSB funding option that no-one seems to be considering. It's a really, really, simple obvious one. It re-distributive, simple to implement, almost a no brainer, logical, doesn't hurt the BBC, no selling off of Chris Moyles and Terry Wogan. And here it is: *ADD A 3% TAX TO SUBSCRIPTION TELEVISION* Sky subscribers: Q4 2007, 8,297,000 Annual revenue per unit: £421 Total Sky subscription revenues: £3493.037m Virgin subscribers: Q4 2007, 3,478,100 Annual revenue per unit: £507 Total Sky subscription income: £1763.346m Total income from television subscriptions: £5256.383m Revenue required to support Channel 4 or PSB Publisher etc: £150m Tax on subscriptions would be: 150/5256.383 = 2.85% What do you think? On 01/05/2008, Martin Belam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, but it was no surprise that the first Service Licence review was yet another in-depth look at online, and not BBC One, was it? 2008/4/30 Brendan Quinn [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi Tom, You wrote: the public value test is a one way expansion valve, only allowing for new BBC services, never testing existing BBC services to see if they still make sense. That's right, existing services aren't put through a PVT -- that's what the service licence is for, isn't it? http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/framework/bbc_service_licences/bbc_co_uk_s ervice_licence.html The Trust are actually reviewing the online service licence right now... http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/framework/bbc_service_licences/bbc_co_uk.h tml Ready to be published in Spring 2008, ie any day now, I suppose. Brendan. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Loosemore Sent: 30 April 2008 12:15 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen New BBC services now have to go through a market impact assessment to ensure they are not anti competitive: http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/framework/public_value_test/#part-5 but existing BBC services (ie everything other than iPlayer and BBC HD) have not been and will not be subject to such rigour... the public value test is a one way expansion valve, only allowing for new BBC services, never testing existing BBC services to see if they still make sense. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ -- Martin Belam - http://www.currybet.net - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ -- Please email me back if you need any more help. Brian Butterworth http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002
Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen
On top of the 17.5% tax already on there? J On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 1:37 PM, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: BTW, I've had a really bright idea to stop needing to 'top slice' the TV License Fee: There is a PSB funding option that no-one seems to be considering. It's a really, really, simple obvious one. It re-distributive, simple to implement, almost a no brainer, logical, doesn't hurt the BBC, no selling off of Chris Moyles and Terry Wogan. And here it is: *ADD A 3% TAX TO SUBSCRIPTION TELEVISION* Sky subscribers: Q4 2007, 8,297,000 Annual revenue per unit: £421 Total Sky subscription revenues: £3493.037m Virgin subscribers: Q4 2007, 3,478,100 Annual revenue per unit: £507 Total Sky subscription income: £1763.346m Total income from television subscriptions: £5256.383m Revenue required to support Channel 4 or PSB Publisher etc: £150m Tax on subscriptions would be: 150/5256.383 = 2.85% What do you think? On 01/05/2008, Martin Belam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, but it was no surprise that the first Service Licence review was yet another in-depth look at online, and not BBC One, was it? 2008/4/30 Brendan Quinn [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi Tom, You wrote: the public value test is a one way expansion valve, only allowing for new BBC services, never testing existing BBC services to see if they still make sense. That's right, existing services aren't put through a PVT -- that's what the service licence is for, isn't it? http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/framework/bbc_service_licences/bbc_co_uk_s ervice_licence.html The Trust are actually reviewing the online service licence right now... http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/framework/bbc_service_licences/bbc_co_uk.h tml Ready to be published in Spring 2008, ie any day now, I suppose. Brendan. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Loosemore Sent: 30 April 2008 12:15 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen New BBC services now have to go through a market impact assessment to ensure they are not anti competitive: http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/framework/public_value_test/#part-5 but existing BBC services (ie everything other than iPlayer and BBC HD) have not been and will not be subject to such rigour... the public value test is a one way expansion valve, only allowing for new BBC services, never testing existing BBC services to see if they still make sense. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ -- Martin Belam - http://www.currybet.net - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ -- Please email me back if you need any more help. Brian Butterworth http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002 -- Jason Cartwright Web Specialist, EMEA Marketing [EMAIL PROTECTED] +44(0)2070313161
RE: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen
great idea Brian unlikely to happen as Sky and Virgin would scream the house down From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Brian Butterworth Sent: Thu 01/05/2008 1:37 PM To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen BTW, I've had a really bright idea to stop needing to 'top slice' the TV License Fee: There is a PSB funding option that no-one seems to be considering. It's a really, really, simple obvious one. It re-distributive, simple to implement, almost a no brainer, logical, doesn't hurt the BBC, no selling off of Chris Moyles and Terry Wogan. And here it is: ADD A 3% TAX TO SUBSCRIPTION TELEVISION Sky subscribers: Q4 2007, 8,297,000 Annual revenue per unit: £421 Total Sky subscription revenues: £3493.037m Virgin subscribers: Q4 2007, 3,478,100 Annual revenue per unit: £507 Total Sky subscription income: £1763.346m Total income from television subscriptions: £5256.383m Revenue required to support Channel 4 or PSB Publisher etc: £150m Tax on subscriptions would be: 150/5256.383 = 2.85% What do you think? On 01/05/2008, Martin Belam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, but it was no surprise that the first Service Licence review was yet another in-depth look at online, and not BBC One, was it? 2008/4/30 Brendan Quinn [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi Tom, You wrote: the public value test is a one way expansion valve, only allowing for new BBC services, never testing existing BBC services to see if they still make sense. That's right, existing services aren't put through a PVT -- that's what the service licence is for, isn't it? http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/framework/bbc_service_licences/bbc_co_uk_s ervice_licence.html The Trust are actually reviewing the online service licence right now... http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/framework/bbc_service_licences/bbc_co_uk.h tml Ready to be published in Spring 2008, ie any day now, I suppose. Brendan. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Loosemore Sent: 30 April 2008 12:15 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen New BBC services now have to go through a market impact assessment to ensure they are not anti competitive: http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/framework/public_value_test/#part-5 but existing BBC services (ie everything other than iPlayer and BBC HD) have not been and will not be subject to such rigour... the public value test is a one way expansion valve, only allowing for new BBC services, never testing existing BBC services to see if they still make sense. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/ discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/ discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ -- Martin Belam - http://www.currybet.net http://www.currybet.net/ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/ discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ -- Please email me back if you need any more help. Brian Butterworth http://www.ukfree.tv http://www.ukfree.tv/ - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002
Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen
2008/5/1 Jason Cartwright [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On top of the 17.5% tax already on there? Oh, like there isn't more than one tax on lots of other things ... petrol springs to mind. To be honest, I have not heard of a better idea from anyone anywhere else. J On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 1:37 PM, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: BTW, I've had a really bright idea to stop needing to 'top slice' the TV License Fee: There is a PSB funding option that no-one seems to be considering. It's a really, really, simple obvious one. It re-distributive, simple to implement, almost a no brainer, logical, doesn't hurt the BBC, no selling off of Chris Moyles and Terry Wogan. And here it is: *ADD A 3% TAX TO SUBSCRIPTION TELEVISION* Sky subscribers: Q4 2007, 8,297,000 Annual revenue per unit: £421 Total Sky subscription revenues: £3493.037m Virgin subscribers: Q4 2007, 3,478,100 Annual revenue per unit: £507 Total Sky subscription income: £1763.346m Total income from television subscriptions: £5256.383m Revenue required to support Channel 4 or PSB Publisher etc: £150m Tax on subscriptions would be: 150/5256.383 = 2.85% What do you think? On 01/05/2008, Martin Belam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, but it was no surprise that the first Service Licence review was yet another in-depth look at online, and not BBC One, was it? 2008/4/30 Brendan Quinn [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi Tom, You wrote: the public value test is a one way expansion valve, only allowing for new BBC services, never testing existing BBC services to see if they still make sense. That's right, existing services aren't put through a PVT -- that's what the service licence is for, isn't it? http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/framework/bbc_service_licences/bbc_co_uk_s ervice_licence.html The Trust are actually reviewing the online service licence right now... http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/framework/bbc_service_licences/bbc_co_uk.h tml Ready to be published in Spring 2008, ie any day now, I suppose. Brendan. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Loosemore Sent: 30 April 2008 12:15 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen New BBC services now have to go through a market impact assessment to ensure they are not anti competitive: http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/framework/public_value_test/#part-5 but existing BBC services (ie everything other than iPlayer and BBC HD) have not been and will not be subject to such rigour... the public value test is a one way expansion valve, only allowing for new BBC services, never testing existing BBC services to see if they still make sense. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ -- Martin Belam - http://www.currybet.net - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ -- Please email me back if you need any more help. Brian Butterworth http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002 -- Jason Cartwright Web Specialist, EMEA Marketing [EMAIL PROTECTED] +44(0)2070313161 -- Please email me back if you need any more help. Brian Butterworth http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002
Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen
2008/5/1 Nick Reynolds-FMT [EMAIL PROTECTED]: great idea Brian unlikely to happen as Sky and Virgin would scream the house down Ah, back to their self-interest... They could hardly claim that 3% would break the bank! These companies provide 'free' 'broadband' don't they... also, it is less than gets paid over to NDS too. The best part of it, of course, is that they already have to provide their figures to Ofcom every three months, and they brag about them to their shareholders. And to collect 3% from two (plus a few other) companies is really, really simple. If ITV dumps its PSB role - http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/apr/25/itv.television1 - then there will be 45% of Mux 2 to fund. This would be a great way to pay for a non-BBC children's channel without adverts, have a non-BBC regional news network and ensure Channel 4 can continue. (ITV owns Mux A, so it could remove Top-Up TV, Price Drop, Bid Up and QVC and move ITV1, 2, 3 and 4 there). And it's better than Peter Bazelgette's idea - http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/apr/23/channel4.bbc If anyone has a better idea I have yet to hear it! -- *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Brian Butterworth *Sent:* Thu 01/05/2008 1:37 PM *To:* backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk *Subject:* Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen BTW, I've had a really bright idea to stop needing to 'top slice' the TV License Fee: There is a PSB funding option that no-one seems to be considering. It's a really, really, simple obvious one. It re-distributive, simple to implement, almost a no brainer, logical, doesn't hurt the BBC, no selling off of Chris Moyles and Terry Wogan. And here it is: *ADD A 3% TAX TO SUBSCRIPTION TELEVISION* Sky subscribers: Q4 2007, 8,297,000 Annual revenue per unit: £421 Total Sky subscription revenues: £3493.037m Virgin subscribers: Q4 2007, 3,478,100 Annual revenue per unit: £507 Total Sky subscription income: £1763.346m Total income from television subscriptions: £5256.383m Revenue required to support Channel 4 or PSB Publisher etc: £150m Tax on subscriptions would be: 150/5256.383 = 2.85% What do you think? On 01/05/2008, Martin Belam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, but it was no surprise that the first Service Licence review was yet another in-depth look at online, and not BBC One, was it? 2008/4/30 Brendan Quinn [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi Tom, You wrote: the public value test is a one way expansion valve, only allowing for new BBC services, never testing existing BBC services to see if they still make sense. That's right, existing services aren't put through a PVT -- that's what the service licence is for, isn't it? http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/framework/bbc_service_licences/bbc_co_uk_s ervice_licence.html The Trust are actually reviewing the online service licence right now... http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/framework/bbc_service_licences/bbc_co_uk.h tml Ready to be published in Spring 2008, ie any day now, I suppose. Brendan. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Loosemore Sent: 30 April 2008 12:15 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen New BBC services now have to go through a market impact assessment to ensure they are not anti competitive: http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/framework/public_value_test/#part-5 but existing BBC services (ie everything other than iPlayer and BBC HD) have not been and will not be subject to such rigour... the public value test is a one way expansion valve, only allowing for new BBC services, never testing existing BBC services to see if they still make sense. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ -- Martin Belam - http://www.currybet.net - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ -- Please email me back if you need any more help. Brian Butterworth http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002 -- Please email me back if you need any more help. Brian Butterworth http
Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen
On Thursday 01 May 2008 13:37:35 Brian Butterworth wrote: BTW, I've had a really bright idea to stop needing to 'top slice' the TV License Fee: There is a PSB funding option that no-one seems to be considering. It's a really, really, simple obvious one. It re-distributive, simple to implement, almost a no brainer, logical, doesn't hurt the BBC, no selling off of Chris Moyles and Terry Wogan. And here it is: *ADD A 3% TAX TO SUBSCRIPTION TELEVISION* How do you justify this ? Why not DVD sales? Why not cinema tickets? Why not theatre? Why not ... ? Are you you going to fund (say) libraries next by taxing cheap pulp books an extra 3% ? Add a 3% tax onto cinema to fund arts theatre grants ? How about an extra 3% on petrol to pay for free bicycles, as long as they are provably used ? What about an extra 3% on restaurants to fund soup kitchens? Ask many people why they subscribe to subscription TV, and many will respond with Because public service broadcasting doesn't actually show anything I want to watch, so these people already feel underserved by the BBC, etc and you're asking them to fund something they have *zero* (or next to zero) interest in? Whilst TV matters to a lot of people (including me :-) it is however *just* TV. Michael. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen
2008/5/1 Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Thursday 01 May 2008 13:37:35 Brian Butterworth wrote: BTW, I've had a really bright idea to stop needing to 'top slice' the TV License Fee: There is a PSB funding option that no-one seems to be considering. It's a really, really, simple obvious one. It re-distributive, simple to implement, almost a no brainer, logical, doesn't hurt the BBC, no selling off of Chris Moyles and Terry Wogan. And here it is: *ADD A 3% TAX TO SUBSCRIPTION TELEVISION* How do you justify this ? Why not DVD sales? Why not cinema tickets? Why not theatre? Why not ... ? Yoy may not have noticed but Channel 4 is a television channel. Are you you going to fund (say) libraries next by taxing cheap pulp books an extra 3% ? Add a 3% tax onto cinema to fund arts theatre grants ? How about an extra 3% on petrol to pay for free bicycles, as long as they are provably used ? What about an extra 3% on restaurants to fund soup kitchens? No. That's just being silly. Ask many people why they subscribe to subscription TV, and many will respond with Because public service broadcasting doesn't actually show anything I want to watch, so these people already feel underserved by the BBC, etc and you're asking them to fund something they have *zero* (or next to zero) interest in? Because the principle is to do with providing something for those people who have had the content taken away from them because other people pay for it. Whilst TV matters to a lot of people (including me :-) it is however *just* TV. Yes, a 3% level on subscription TV to support those people who can't afford it. Seems just and just TV to me. Michael. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ -- Please email me back if you need any more help. Brian Butterworth http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002
Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen
He does have a point though that the BBC is anti competitive. I personally think the bbc is great for consumers, and that the quality of bbc news is the only thing stopping uk tv news turning into something like american news, but any of that could change, since the bbc isn't controlled by market forces. Brian Butterworth wrote: Or, how to divert attention away from the fact you have lost hundreds of millions of pounds buying into ITV... http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/apr/25/digitalmedia.television http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2008/04/d301f64cfccffda6cf94d3aff9971539952c363c.html -- *** OPEN COFFEE 10 - http://upcoming.yahoo.com/event/453644/ *** Glow New Media t: 0151 707 9770 m: 07730 987 574 www.glow-internet.com Suite 712 Gostins Building 32-36 Hanover Street Liverpool L1 4LN Map: http://tinyurl.com/2f5nxd - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen
Quoting Thom Shannon [EMAIL PROTECTED]: He does have a point though that the BBC is anti competitive. Coming from the owner of BSkyB and part-owner of ITV that's not the most convincing argument. ;-) - Rob. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen
Thom Shannon wrote: He does have a point though that the BBC is anti competitive. I personally think the bbc is great for consumers, and that the quality of bbc news is the only thing stopping uk tv news turning into something like american news, but any of that could change, since the bbc isn't controlled by market forces. Not subject to market forces and anti-competitive are different things. S - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen
New BBC services now have to go through a market impact assessment to ensure they are not anti competitive: http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/framework/public_value_test/#part-5 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Jolly Sent: 30 April 2008 11:16 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen Thom Shannon wrote: He does have a point though that the BBC is anti competitive. I personally think the bbc is great for consumers, and that the quality of bbc news is the only thing stopping uk tv news turning into something like american news, but any of that could change, since the bbc isn't controlled by market forces. Not subject to market forces and anti-competitive are different things. S - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen
New BBC services now have to go through a market impact assessment to ensure they are not anti competitive: http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/framework/public_value_test/#part-5 but existing BBC services (ie everything other than iPlayer and BBC HD) have not been and will not be subject to such rigour... the public value test is a one way expansion valve, only allowing for new BBC services, never testing existing BBC services to see if they still make sense. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen
Hi Tom, You wrote: the public value test is a one way expansion valve, only allowing for new BBC services, never testing existing BBC services to see if they still make sense. That's right, existing services aren't put through a PVT -- that's what the service licence is for, isn't it? http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/framework/bbc_service_licences/bbc_co_uk_s ervice_licence.html The Trust are actually reviewing the online service licence right now... http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/framework/bbc_service_licences/bbc_co_uk.h tml Ready to be published in Spring 2008, ie any day now, I suppose. Brendan. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Loosemore Sent: 30 April 2008 12:15 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen New BBC services now have to go through a market impact assessment to ensure they are not anti competitive: http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/framework/public_value_test/#part-5 but existing BBC services (ie everything other than iPlayer and BBC HD) have not been and will not be subject to such rigour... the public value test is a one way expansion valve, only allowing for new BBC services, never testing existing BBC services to see if they still make sense. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen
The BBC Trust regularly looks at BBC services to see if they make sense in a rolling programme of reviews of service licences, which include public consultations. http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/framework/bbc_service_licences/service_rev iews.html Presumably if someone thought a particular existing BBC service was distorting the market they could raise this as part of the public consultation (and indeed I think they may have done in the past). -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom Loosemore Sent: 30 April 2008 12:15 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen New BBC services now have to go through a market impact assessment to ensure they are not anti competitive: http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/framework/public_value_test/#part-5 but existing BBC services (ie everything other than iPlayer and BBC HD) have not been and will not be subject to such rigour... the public value test is a one way expansion valve, only allowing for new BBC services, never testing existing BBC services to see if they still make sense. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
[backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen
Or, how to divert attention away from the fact you have lost hundreds of millions of pounds buying into ITV... http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/apr/25/digitalmedia.television http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2008/04/d301f64cfccffda6cf94d3aff9971539952c363c.html
Re: [backstage] BBC iPlayer, loved by millions, disliked by a single US citizen
James Murdoch was born in the UK and is a British citizen. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Murdoch_(media_executive) http://www.referenceforbusiness.com/biography/M-R/Murdoch-James-1972.html It could be argued that they would lose more by not buying a stake in ITV. J On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 6:01 PM, Brian Butterworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Or, how to divert attention away from the fact you have lost hundreds of millions of pounds buying into ITV... http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/apr/25/digitalmedia.television http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2008/04/d301f64cfccffda6cf94d3aff9971539952c363c.html -- Jason Cartwright Web Specialist, EMEA Marketing [EMAIL PROTECTED] +44(0)2070313161
