Unaffordable TV

I've asked AI how much it would cost to have all the common streaming channels and the answer is £120 per month minimum, that dosent' include Sky, the licence fee or any sporting channels which would add another £30-50 a month.

Given how much rubbish there is on terrestial channels, especially now with all the football and the knock on effects of how much less funding there will be for other programing, is this a hidden part of the cost of living?

I don't have any of the streaming channels or Sky and signing up to them would make a serious dent in my finances, how do people afford them and are they worth it? DO you only really use them for one big series each like GoT?

Parents
  • is this a hidden part of the cost of living?

    It is far from a cost of living. It is an entertainment option - a luxury and something you don't "need".

    I use methods I can't discuss here to obtain the series or films I want to watch (many are not available on local services or are geo-blocked from my region anyway) but most of my casual entertainment is from YouTube where I follow a range of channels on my special interests and there is often plenty to choose from.

    With YouTube there are simple ways to avoid the adverts which have been discussed on other threads here before and this makes it altogether more pleasant. If you don't have good internet access so get low quality of buffering then you can download the videos to watch offline using other processes that are free.

    There are sites like the Internet Archive that have loads of old TV series that are not being broadcast anymore plus millions of other random bits of old TV if this takes your interest. 

    It isn't complex to have a load of entertainment options on zero budget and still be legal with them all. You won't have the latest but when you work out the price per year then it puts it in context - it is just an expensive luxury. 

  • Regarding being a luxury... Things like Satellite/Cable/Netflix/etc probably are. But a TV licence and the cost of the TV itself tend to be considered somewhat essential. For instance, if you put a claim in for free NHS services (known as an HC2 certificate), they compare your income to what they call "requirements". 

    Requirements include council tax, housing costs which are not covered by benefits, and "personal allowances". Personal allowances include water/fuel bills, telephone, insurance, and "TV rental".

    [source: HC1 application form]

    Do bare in mind that we have the BBC here which has a duty to try and cater to as many different people as possible, as well as providing impartial news (which may not be applicable in other countries).

    I maintain that TV isn't as good as it used to be but if you don't have internet (or can't access it or use it), an inexpensive TV and a license would be an important source of information.

    The cost of a TV licence has come down in real terms. In 2006 a colour licence was £126.50. Accounting for inflation, that is the equivalent of about £225 today, yet a licence now is only £180.

  • Some places you have to have a satellite as theres no way an arial can pick up a signal, lots of rural areas are like this and cable is still hit and miss a post code lottery within a postcode lottery. Where my son used to live they had cable, then he moved one street away, about 20 yards, and there was no cable. Freesats been a godsend for many people, its just a one off payment for the dish and decoding box 

Reply
  • Some places you have to have a satellite as theres no way an arial can pick up a signal, lots of rural areas are like this and cable is still hit and miss a post code lottery within a postcode lottery. Where my son used to live they had cable, then he moved one street away, about 20 yards, and there was no cable. Freesats been a godsend for many people, its just a one off payment for the dish and decoding box 

Children
No Data