RTE Rip offs

J

jasconius

Registered User
Messages
217
Just heard a phone-in competition on the Pat Kenny show on the radio.

Budget Travel are giving away a holiday in Europe next year. Phone in or text in the answer - What is currency in Bulgaria?

As Kenny stated, these calls cost 50c or more if you text. The revenue from these calls are going to RTE, the national broadcaster, to whom we pay our licence fee. Presumably Budget Travel are also kicking in with a contribution as well.
Why can't calls be free or at least the cost of a normal call, be it 6 or 10 cents?
Not only do we have to listen to ads, now we have to pay for them again!
 
I'd be more concerned with the percentage of our licence fee that's going towards:

Pay Kenny's salary
Joe Duffy's salary
George Hamilton's salary
Jimmy Magee's salary
You're A Star
Winning Streak
Fair City
Telly Bingo

and all the other tripe they show/present.
 
And don't forget Daniel O'Donnell (Wee Daniel does Rockn'Roll),
That new hair dressers show (Cut n' Wash?),
Rose of Tralee
etc.
 
Don't see why it's considered a rip-off - If you don't think the entry fee offers good value, then don't participate.
 
RainyDay said:
Don't see why it's considered a rip-off - If you don't think the entry fee offers good value, then don't participate.
Click to expand...

Deciding not to "participate " is not an option, if I (legally) want to watch any other station's output I have to have a TV licence, regardless of whether I tune into RTE or not. I don't like the fact that some of this fee is used to produce low quality programming including a lot of the so called "reality" shows.
 
This a.m. they were looking for families to ring in about the problems they had with their children so that RTE could make a programme (or a series) about how the kids could be controlled by a supernanny!

This type of programme have been shown for the last two years on BBC1, BBC2,BBC3,ITV and CH4. We are supersaturated with kids shouting and kicking and being put to bed - there is nothing new here - what a waste!
 
Carpenter said:
Deciding not to "participate " is not an option
Click to expand...
Oh yes it is - I was referring to the original post about the entry fee for the competition. If you don't like the fee, don't enter the competition - simple, eh?
 
I think that paying someone a €200K retainer out of licence payers money effectively not to work for another station (at no cost to the licence fee payer) is more of a rip-off.
 
Sorry Rainy Day I saw a reference to "licence fee" in CCOVICH's post, and this I think is a more substantive issue, whilst I can decide not to use a premium phone service I must pay for a tv licence, the proceeds of which are used to generate a lot of substandard programming. That said there is some quality programming on RTE, just not enough of it.
 
RainyDay said:
Oh yes it is - I was referring to the original post about the entry fee for the competition. If you don't like the fee, don't enter the competition - simple, eh?
Click to expand...


This is a rather flippant remark that contributes nothing to the arguement.

The point is that we have already paid the fee in our license bill. Why should I have to pay premium rates to answer a question from the national broadcaster?
If I ring Joe Duffy, the most I will pay is the flat rate.

It is getting like these UTV premium rate no-brainers on our screen - Who is the prime minister of Ireland - is it a> Bertie Wooster - b> Bertie Basset or c> Bertie Ahern?
But at least I don't pay a license fee to UTV
 
jasconius said:
This is a rather flippant remark that contributes nothing to the arguement.
Click to expand...
This is the nub of the issue. Your original post complained about the 50c cost of entering the competition. There is no gun pointing at your head forcing you to enter the competition. If you don't believe it offers good value for money, don't enter it. You are no worse off by RTE's running of the competition.

If RTE are able to bring in extra revenue by running competitions in this way (i.e. there are enough punters out there who do believe that 50c entry fee to a competition is reasonable), then fair play to them for taking a commercial attitude.
 
The National Lottery was once denounced as a tax on stupidity. These competitions are in the same category.
 
RainyDay said:
..If RTE are able to bring in extra revenue by running competitions in this way .. then fair play to them for taking a commercial attitude.
Click to expand...

But either they're a national broadcaster or a commercial one. If their claim on the licence fee is because of their public service broadcasting remit, then why should they have to themselves ? Other broadcasters, both TV and radio, fulfil this remit in part and deserve a slice of the pie.
Using the funding from the licence fee to provide, say, election coverage is fine by me. Using it to pay for Champions League coverage or the new series of The Sopranos is not.
 
TarfHead said:
But either they're a national broadcaster or a commercial one. If their claim on the licence fee is because of their public service broadcasting remit, then why should they have to themselves ? Other broadcasters, both TV and radio, fulfil this remit in part and deserve a slice of the pie.
Click to expand...
That's just not true - they are both a national broadcaster and a commercial one, as is evidenced by their current model of licence fee plus paid advertising. And the other broadcasters already get a slice of the pie by running their own competitions - why shouldn't RTE do the same?
 
TarfHead said:
Using it to pay for Champions League coverage or the new series of The Sopranos is not.
Click to expand...

Boo-urns!!!!!!!!

Cancel the Late Late, cancel Winning Streak etc. but the Sopranos and the Champions League are two of the main reasons for watching Bog 1 and Bog 2 imho.
 
It doesn't bother me about the 50c cost of entryfor any RTE competition, I would imagine that most of this goes to the SP anyway. As a number of posters have rightly pointed out, we are all free to opt out (or to enter the queue on Baggot St. when Budget give away their free holidays).

The licence fee is totally different, as we have to pay this even if we never watch RTE 1 and 2, but want to have a TV to watch other stations. But I guess it is in our collective interest to have a national broadcaster, but maybe that's a debate for a different day.

TarfHead actually raises an interesting point above. How much did RTE use it's licence fee 'muscle' to outbid others for sporting events in recent years? Or to 'overpay' our second rate 'TV personalities'? It would be interesting, but it may be difficult to allocate licence money to one project and advertising revenue to another, but I guess that you could allocate each according to the proportion of total revenue each stream provides.
 
CCOVICH said:
.. TarfHead actually raises an interesting point ..
Click to expand...

First time for everything :p

With regard to
RainyDay said:
That's just not true - they are both a national broadcaster and a commercial one
Click to expand...
what I had in mind was the UK model - BBC vs ITV.

The pie I meant was 100% of licence fee revenue. IMHO Newstalk 106 with Eamonn Dunphy, Damien Kiberd & George Hook regularly fulfil a public service remit and get nothing from the licence fee.

The model in place is in need of overhaul to reflect the new landscape.
And don't get me started on 2FM :mad: !
 
TarfHead said:
First time for everything :p

With regard to what I had in mind was the UK model - BBC vs ITV.

The pie I meant was 100% of licence fee revenue. IMHO Newstalk 106 with Eamonn Dunphy, Damien Kiberd & George Hook regularly fulfil a public service remit and get nothing from the licence fee.

The model in place is in need of overhaul to reflect the new landscape.
And don't get me started on 2FM :mad: !
Click to expand...

The UK model is not really applicable though, BBC probably gets at least ten times the licence fee that RTE gets so they have a larger pool of money even without advertising, RTE need the advertising to make up a little of the shortfall.

Newstalk 106 may provide some public service (and they are mandated to so by their licence) but they are a for profit private sector company, do you expect the taxpayer to contribute to their profits? The reward they get for their public service broadcasting is access to the licensed radio spectrum of the state.

I do feel it is legitimate for the state to subsidise a national broadcaster but of course RTE could be run better, it should be giving us a better return on this subsidy in the form of quality indigenous content.
 
CCOVICH said:
Cancel the Late Late, cancel Winning Streak etc. but the Sopranos and the Champions League are two of the main reasons for watching Bog 1 and Bog 2 imho.
Click to expand...
Indeed, but you should realise that TV3 were providing Champions League to you for free but RTE (on your behalf) bought the rights this year with your licence money so you have the pleasure of paying for something that was available to you for free.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top