SABC, TV Licence and DSTV

**Sadness** · 22-May-14, 09:08 AM

if any device designed or adapted to be capable of receiving a broadcast Television signal is considered a TV. Then SABC should start billing every citizen who owns or buys any device (Monitors, Cellphones, etc) that can receive a TV signal regardless of its nature.

What purpose does/will a TV licence serve?

**BusFact** · 22-May-14, 11:00 AM

Originally Posted by Sadness

What purpose does/will a TV licence serve?

Its just another form of taxation.

**Justloadit** · 22-May-14, 01:15 PM

Well you have to feed the fat cats who are running SABC

**BusFact** · 22-May-14, 07:39 PM

Originally Posted by Justloadit

Well you have to feed the fat cats who are running SABC

"Running"? A slow amble backwards maybe. Running requires too much effort for them.

**Hannes Botha** · 13-Feb-15, 11:35 AM

Originally Posted by Justloadit

Well you have to feed the fat cats who are running SABC

Or help pay for that matric certificate they lied about...

**Xplosiv** · 13-Feb-15, 03:03 PM

TV licenses are an outdated concept that needs to be scrapped.
The income from licenses is a drop in the ocean compared to advertising income.
Channels that broadcast quality programmes will attract more advertisers due to larger audiences, thereby increasing their revenue.
I may receive SABC channels on my PVR, but they were bundled in with a lot of other junk that I'm not interested in. They already get a cut from my monthly subscription and I never watch SABC.
That said, DSTV bundles are a rip-off as you cannot choose exactly which channels you want to have. Most of us want the sports channels, which are the most expensive and come bundled with SABC and Rhema Network and other inferior channels that wouldn't have a market if they weren't forced onto us.

**Justloadit** · 13-Feb-15, 04:20 PM

and do not forget the advertising. We pay for the channel, and still have to endure the endless advertising, no wonder they making so much money, both from the subscriptions and from the advertisers.

If I have to see another krapsurance advert I may fling my empty can at the screen.

**Hannes Botha** · 13-Feb-15, 04:57 PM

Thank goodness they don't interrupt movies...or catchup. By a show of hands, who would actually order SABC 1-3 and e-tv into their bouquet if they had a choice?

**wynn** · 16-Feb-15, 09:11 AM

DSTRepeat need I say more?

**KCS** · 17-Feb-15, 08:57 AM

Originally Posted by Xplosiv

DSTV bundles are a rip-off as you cannot choose exactly which channels you want to have. Most of us want the sports channels, which are the most expensive and come bundled with SABC and Rhema Network and other inferior channels that wouldn't have a market if they weren't forced onto us.

This is an interesting one. The new CPA clearly states that you may not force a consumer to buy goods they don't want buy bundling it into a package. But then many of the CPA rules are simply ignored by large corporations, for example the roll-over of airtime. The CPA states that your airtime has to roll over for three years. The cell companies just laughed that one off.

Cheers

KC