Laywoman's view of analogue switch off

"Ad C" wrote in message
k...
In article
ws.net,
LID says...


You really are a clue less little *unt, you wouldn't know what it
takes to make a radio or TV programme if it hit you between the
eyes....

And you do I presume?

Yes, as it happens!

"kim" wrote in message
...
"Heracles Pollux" wrote in message
...

Advertisers pay for TV commercials, and this is how the Western world
works. So what!

Consumers pay for TV commercials in the form of higher prices and do so
whether we watch them or not. For every £1billion spent on commercial TV
programmes, £8billion is added to the price of goods in the shops.

No-one forces consumers to buy products that are advertised on
the TV. The fact that they do just shows that the medium works.

If you don't like the deal that you get from advertised products
I suggest that simply buy the ones that don't advertise, as these
are bound to be cheaper, are they not?

tim

"Ad C" wrote in message
k...
In article ,
says...


If people do not want to watch ITV or Sky they should not have to
pay for it
either but they do in the form of TV commercials and training of
former-BBC
staff..


No they dont, this is the way things go, you gte a job, get trained
then
leave for something better.

At one time the only industry training was via the BBC, all tech'
grades passed though BBC training.


Anyway, how many don't watch ITV? ITV at the moemnt is showing some
things that are better than the BBC.


....and much that is not, ITV have completely lost the plot were news
and current affairs is concerned, whilst their sports coverage is
nothing but hype, to maximise the advertising revenue that is needed
to recoup their bid - the only saving grace is that in doing so they
have kept the sport on a non subscription channel.


BBc radio can have adverts and any other BBC non-television
services.

And that would put commercial radio stations completely out of
business
almost overnight.


We have been told that time and time again about multi channel
T.V./
channels would not get the avertisments and would fail.
It have not happened so far, well not to any main channel anyway.


Some of the radio stations deserve to fail.


Yes, most of them carry adverts....

"Ad C" wrote in message
k...
snip

It islike everywhere else, you go and do a job somewhere, get
trained
and then go somewhere that is better.

Not it's not, as the only tech' grade training was found at the BBC,
ITV didn't (and might still not) have it's own training. AIUI The
only broadcast organisation that could afford to run training depts.
was the BBC, due to it's assured income.

"Prometheus" wrote in message
...
In article
ws.net,
":::Jerry::::" writes

"Prometheus" wrote in message
...
In article , Ad
C
writes
In article ,
says...

Will computer retailers now have to notify TV Licensing?

That would not work, what about people like myself who build
their
own?

Possession of a CPU without a licence will be a criminal
offence,
of
course you could always build your own from TTL or perhaps even
double
triodes.

A CPU can't *receive*.

What has the government *hypothetically* making money by making
possession of a CPU without a licence a criminal offence got to do
with
receiving


Are you just an idiot who can't read the thread or are you just a
common troll, my money is on the latter....

On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 08:35:12 +0100, Ad C
wrote:

In article , says...


The license fee is for the right to use receiving equipment, it has =
nothing=20
to do with the right to watch programmes. The BBC was originally a =
branch of=20

I know that already, it still do not mean it is right.


the Marconi Radio Company and the government inherited all its patent =
rights=20
when it was incorporated in 1922. Regardless of where a programme =
originates=20

I did not know that, I think you are wrong there.


You are a prize ****wit. You don't know something so you think the
fact is fiction. Well the only person *wrong* is you. ( Though
sometimes you project such gross stupidity that it is possible to
conclude that you are not even wrong ! ). =20
If you knew a little of the history of the BBC then you would know how
it came to be that a tax on purchased wireless receivers AND a
licence fee were imposed to fund the BBC.=20

If you don't know then shut the f*** up.

--=20
cerberus

"tim (moved to sweden)" wrote in
message ...

"kim" wrote in message
...
"Heracles Pollux" wrote in message
...

Advertisers pay for TV commercials, and this is how the Western
world
works. So what!

Consumers pay for TV commercials in the form of higher prices and
do so
whether we watch them or not. For every £1billion spent on
commercial TV
programmes, £8billion is added to the price of goods in the
shops.

No-one forces consumers to buy products that are advertised on
the TV. The fact that they do just shows that the medium works.

If you don't like the deal that you get from advertised products
I suggest that simply buy the ones that don't advertise, as these
are bound to be cheaper, are they not?


That is far to simplistic, something you have to buy, and when there
are only a few companies / groups producing the product range what
ever brand is bought some of the cost is down to 'group' advertising
expenditure. Washing powder / liquid is a prime just one example.

:::Jerry:::: wrote:
"Ad C" wrote in message
k...
snip

It islike everywhere else, you go and do a job somewhere, get

trained

and then go somewhere that is better.


Not it's not, as the only tech' grade training was found at the BBC,
ITV didn't (and might still not) have it's own training. AIUI The
only broadcast organisation that could afford to run training depts.
was the BBC, due to it's assured income.

Some ITV companies did have training depts I think, notably Thames ? and the
IBA transmitter dept had a training centre in South Devon.

All gone now

--
Mark
Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.

Not it's not, as the only tech' grade training was found at the BBC,
ITV didn't (and might still not) have it's own training. AIUI The
only broadcast organisation that could afford to run training depts.
was the BBC, due to it's assured income.

Some ITV companies did have training depts I think, notably Thames ? and
the IBA transmitter dept had a training centre in South Devon.

All gone now

But replaced by training depts in ntl and Arqiva.

In article ws.net,
":::Jerry::::" writes

"Prometheus" wrote in message
...
In article
ews.net,
":::Jerry::::" writes

"Prometheus" wrote in message
...
In article , Ad
C
writes
In article ,
says...

Will computer retailers now have to notify TV Licensing?

That would not work, what about people like myself who build
their
own?

Possession of a CPU without a licence will be a criminal
offence,
of
course you could always build your own from TTL or perhaps even
double
triodes.

A CPU can't *receive*.

What has the government *hypothetically* making money by making
possession of a CPU without a licence a criminal offence got to do
with
receiving

Are you just an idiot who can't read the thread or are you just a
common troll, my money is on the latter....

You are the one with difficulty reading It was proposed that the licence
requirement might be extended to computers because of their potential to
'receive' TV programmes via broadband and therefor computer retailers
might be required to notify the purchaser's addresses to TVLA. Someone
countered this with the argument that they build there own, to which I
responded with the suggestion that the essential CPU could be licensed
since few people would build their own, and then it would probably not
be fast enough due to the technology available. I only included the
caveat about building ones own to forestall the hard of thinking.

Do try to keep up at the back.

N.B. Whilst TVLA will advise you that a licence is required to watch TV
programmes via broadband OFCOM state it is a "grey area"; of course the
fact that TVLA make their living selling TV licences can have no bearing
on their advice, can it.
--
Ian G8ILZ