
Don't think I'd be any good on a Lancaster bomber!
This comment reminded me of a joke, which I have now posted.GiveMeABreak wrote: 03 Oct 2019, 19:04 Bomb bay doors knowing my luck - with the knackered parachute.
I agree 100%. You also get BBC Radio don't forget. The licence fee is *very* good value in reality.mickthemaverick wrote: 03 Oct 2019, 21:09 I expect I'll regret joining in on this particular discussion as I have a different view. I use my television as a pair of ultra long range binoculars allowing me to watch things that are real and actually happening rather than as a home entertainment unit. Thus I watch a hell of a lot of live sport, mainly on Sky and BT but this evening I have BBC2 on with the world athletics championships when I could have chosen to watch a live football match on BT. As such I am quite happy to pay £32 a month for a huge range of live action which I simply could not get to to watch at the events. If I could get there I certainly couldn't afford the total admission costs it would involve with premiership football games costing anything from £30 to £85 per match and on average I watch 4 or 5 a week making 20 ish for my £32 plus all the F1 practice, qualifying and races, darts, snooker, cricket, golf and other less common events like sailing and skiing. For my BBC license fee of £12.50ish a month I get Wimbledon, the athletics, the news and various political specials like election coverage, conference speeches and parliamentary proceedings when shown. I consider that to be good value in every direction and have no complaint about the license fee at all. However I do agree that the varying salaries in both sport and TV are out of kilter with real life and perhaps would benefit from some sort of realistic appraisal and equalisation with regard to actual skills/responsibilities involved in each area!!![]()
Exactly. Gary Lineker on MOTD - people diss him as "just an ex footballer". He's actually a very good presenter, and a bright bloke. I'm sure he could earn much more at Sky - the quality of their sports presenters is dire in comparison to the Beeb, apart from Martin Brundle and Ted Kravitz on the F1 channel.Hell Razor5543 wrote: 03 Oct 2019, 21:21 Sometimes having a big name celebrity front a program can bring in a lot more viewers than would otherwise happen (and, if the program is any good, keep them and attract more).
The series he did in Europe was quite good, although I think I only saw a couple of them, one in France.Hell Razor5543 wrote: 05 Oct 2019, 06:34 I can recall two programmes where Jeremy Clarkson presented the subject matter. The first one was a series about (if my memory is correct) the top ten Great Britons, and he was championing Isembard Kingdon Brunel, and the second programme was about the Victoria Cross (and the people who earned them). In both occasions the programmes were about the subject matter which happened to be presented by JC, and were not JC presenting his case for IKB or talking about the VC (he was a presenter doing his job, clearly explaining the subject matter, without himself becoming the focus of the programme).
And it can work in reverse where I actively avoid any programme with certain people in it.Hell Razor5543 wrote: 03 Oct 2019, 21:21Sometimes having a big name celebrity front a program can bring in a lot more viewers than would otherwise happen...
Case in point. Anything and everything featuring him is tainted and to be avoided as far as I am concerned.