SABC's proposed TV Licence plan will hammer DStv - Analyst

Hanno Labuschagne

Hanno Labuschagne

Journalist
Staff member
Joined
Sep 2, 2019
Messages
6,544
Reaction score
4,845
SABC's proposed TV Licence plan will hammer DStv - Analyst

The SABC and Department of Communications and Digital Technologies' plan to force DStv subscribers to pay TV Licences could be highly damaging to South Africa's largest pay TV broadcaster, which is already getting hammered by streaming services.

The proposals for TV Licence amendments have been detailed in the White Paper on Audio and Audiovisual Content Services Policy Framework, and more recently discussed during a Portfolio Committee on Communications meeting in Parliament.

According to the proposed regulations, MultiChoice would either be required to have DStv decoder buyers present a TV Licence upon purchase or when they subscribe to its service.

 
What most of these articles don't seem to get is that a TV licence has got nothing to do with whether or not you consume SABC content. It is literally a licence to possess a TV with a tuner, which the SABC just happens to administer and benefit from. Whether you watch, consume or otherwise enjoy SABC content has absolutely nothing to do with it. The SABC knows this, which is why they would never consider a subscription fee, or access fee model, because they know that nobody would subscribe to it. Their only hope of forcing people to pay is to get them at the point that they buy their TV, or whatever other devices they're crazily trying to add to the definition of a "TV".
 
I doubt this plan will hammer DStv, since it will never actually see the light of day.

As always our government are great with plans and talking, implementation is something they're pretty much fscking useless at.
 
SABC demonstrating entitlement, like the Uber drivers
SABC are to useless and inept to do it on their own; must spunge off others
 
deweyzeph said:
What most of these articles don't seem to get is that a TV licence has got nothing to do with whether or not you consume SABC content. It is literally a licence to possess a TV with a tuner, which the SABC just happens to administer and benefit from. Whether you watch, consume or otherwise enjoy SABC content has absolutely nothing to do with it. The SABC knows this, which is why they would never consider a subscription fee, or access fee model, because they know that nobody would subscribe to it. Their only hope of forcing people to pay is to get them at the point that they buy their TV, or whatever other devices they're crazily trying to add to the definition of a "TV".
Click to expand...
That is what it is right now. The proposals they are bringing forth are no longer about the SABC being consumed; tuner or otherwise. It is about funding the SABC by people who have a means to fund them regardless if they have the capability to consume it. Meaning the proposals are becoming about the fact that the SABC is entitled to state funding (far as they are concerned) and those "fortunate enough" to be able to buy certain luxuries are being told to pay for SABC so those without the luxuries can consume SABC.
 
You see moaning choice this will happen when you rub shoulders with your gov friends. Someday they will bend you over and load you like a shotgun
 
I seriously wonder how many of those claimed 9.5 million SABC license holders, have long since departed this realm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X