Stop Murdoch's BBC robbery

[#1]

For anyone Interested...http://www.avaaz.org/en/stop_murdochs_bbc_robbery_2/?copy

[#2]

The BBC is not forced to buy programming from Sky are they?  I's a commercial decision on their part.

[#3]

Why don't the BBC stop paying and wait for the squeals when BBC isn't available on Sky which i assume is what this is about

[#4]

Ah!! Never thought of that Jim, not being a Sky subscriber.

[#5]

I'm amazed. Never knew that and if someone in the street told me that I would have assumed they were joking.
No wonder the BBC are costing the licence payer so much.
Maybe as well as paying Sky the BBC should also be paying the licence payer.
It's like something out of Bizzaro world.

[#6]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/aboutthebbc/2011/10/retransmission-fees---to-pay-o.shtml

Quote

It is worth noting however that there remains one area outside the BBC's control that could deliver us substantial additional annual savings. This is the area of 'retransmission fees'. Put simply, the BBC currently pays Sky a fee so that it can be broadcast on their platform, this was something that was agreed many years ago in order to help satellite broadcasters justify the investment they needed to build their platform. The annual cost to the BBC is £10m. The question now is whether or not this money is still flowing in the right direction. A new study due to be published shortly argues that the UK is the only country of all those examined (including the US, Canada, France, Germany and Spain) that operates in this way. When you consider that the majority of viewing time remains firmly within these networks it begins to look like the balance here may be the wrong way round.

[#7]

How long has Sky been paying the licence payer? and why haven't they given me anything?  I've been paying for Sky for years!
I have to admit to being surprised that the BBC pays Sky to air their programmes.  I'd have thought that at best they'd be free, or even that Sky would pay BBC for the privilege.  I would imagine that having all of the freeview channels would be a minimum for Sky if they wanted to get a decent market share.  If Sky didn't include BBC, ITV etc, then I'd be looking for a reduction in my Sky charges, and simply plug the aerial in the back of the set again to get them on terrestrial digital.
Sounds like the BBC needs a decent negotiator, or at least the courage to to call Sky's bluff for a few months. 
John

[#8]

And not before time, at the end of year,  the BBC is expected to stop paying Camelot £800,000 p.a. for the privilege of promoting the Lottery by showing the live draw.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/the-number-is-up-for-the-bbcs-national-lottery-draw-...

[#9]

Are the BBC paying Sky to broadcast programmes on Sky Channels or are they paying Sky to Broadcast BBC channels using Sky Satellites? I believe it's the latter so no different to LLU companies paying BT to use their infrastructure

[#10]

From memory TV companies pay Sky money to be listed on their channel system, if you encrypt the channel so you need a Sky subscription to watch it you get a rather large discount, if however (like the BBC) you air it unencrypted so anyone with a dish can watch it then the cost goes way, way up.  I think the cost for an encrypted channel to be on the Sky listing is £100,000 per year, though it's from memory and from something I read about quite a while ago.  Should the BBC be paying £10m?  Not really no, it should be paying the same rate as any other channel which broadcasts unencrypted on the Sky system.

[#11]

I would think Sky may need the BBC more than the BBC needs Sky.  If I was looking to save money at the BBC I would stop the payment and see what Sky's reaction is.

[#12]

Where does Freesat fit into this? Freesat seems to be a joint venture between BBC and ITV. But don't Freesat transmissions come from the same satellites as Sky's? So who owns the satellites? Is it Sky? If so then the BBC would be paying to have its transmissions carried by the satellites even if Sky subscribers were denied access.
If you think that you are avoiding Murdoch by watching Digital Terrestrial Television think again.
"DTV Services, trading as Freeview, is the name for the collection of free-to-air services on the Digital Terrestrial Television platform in the UK. The service is jointly run by its five equal shareholders, BBC, ITV, Channel 4, Sky and transmitter operator Arqiva. "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeview_%28United_Kingdom%29

[#13]

No Alan - I'm not trying to avoid Murdoch as such. Like I said, I'm a Sky subscriber (mainly for Sky Sports to be honest), but I could just as easily get BBC and or for that matter ITV, Channels 4 & 5 etc, via non-Sky methods if it came to it (it would be a bit less convenient, and in fact may lead many customers to debate whether they really wanted Sky at all), so I'd be surprised if Sky wasn't willing to renegotiate if it came to it.
But who knows what goes on inside the heads of egomaniacs  

[#14]

Quote

These are our millions — handed over in license fees to fund British content, not to boost Murdoch’s profits. But an unfair system of “retransmission fees” designed by Murdoch leaves the BBC and other broadcasters with no choice. They are forced to pay BSkyB to show their channels, even though they add huge value to the satellite platform — accounting for 41% of all shows watched on BSkyB and vastly increasing customer retention. Amazingly, Murdoch has argued the exact opposite in the US — there, he charges cable TV companies over $250 million a year to show his content. With the same deal Murdoch gets in the US, our public service broadcasters would have hundreds of millions of pounds extra every year to invest in quality content. This money would allow the BBC to reverse its cuts to BBC4 and local radio overnight. Murdoch’s cozy relationship with our politicians has won him this outrageous UK scheme — but his power is starting to crumble, and together we can end it. Labour has already come out against this deal, and Culture Secretary Hunt is about to make his decision in his communications review

[#15]

I'd bet that if BBC channels were not on SKY then SKY would loose customers.  BBC should be charging SKY for the privilege of including their programmes in SKY packages.
I have SKY but I mainly watch Freeview, the SKY box is only used for the few programmes we watch that aren't on Freeview (mainly my daughter watching terrible kids stuff).