UK regulator Ofcom isn't making as much money as it used to, thanks to the lack of radio auctions and irritatingly-law-abiding broadcasters. In the 12 months leading to the end of March Ofcom contributed £192.7m to the public purse, according to its reported accounts (pdf). Most of the money comes from radio-spectrum licences …

COMMENTS

House rules Send corrections

This topic is closed for new posts.

This post has been deleted by its author
Monday 19th July 2010 14:21 GMT Paul Crawford

Fundamental flaw

"he who pays most has greatest incentive to ensure the greatest efficiency of use" oh really?

More like they have the biggest profit to be made, and that is not always in the best UK public interest.

1 0
Monday 19th July 2010 14:28 GMT Kerberos

How about

How about maybe stepping in and stopping BT from forcing me to pay for a home phone that I have never used? The fact you have to pay for a physical phone on top of broadband is ludicrous.

4 1
1. Monday 19th July 2010 15:13 GMT Anonymous Coward
  
  Questions
  
  You mean the physical line that gives you broadband as opposed to the provision of the service at the other end?
  
  Or did you think that they're carried by pixies from the nearest Exchange?
  
  Or are you being naughty and stirring things up?
  
  4 2
Monday 19th July 2010 14:28 GMT Jelliphiish

hrm

Did they put the mega-auction off until this year to garner favor for increased income from the new incumbent HM govt, what with them being a tad strapped etc.. and ofcom being a glorified Quango..

just wondering mind, just wondering.

0 0
Monday 19th July 2010 16:17 GMT Anonymous Coward

Expenses waste

Perhaps Ofcom need to stop flying their associates around the world, to five star hotels, with lavish meals, lots of booze, and fun... all for the sake of having international meetings.

What's wrong with staying at home and using video conferencing? I can't believe this is allowed to go on in this financial climate.

1 0
Monday 19th July 2010 18:34 GMT Anonymous Coward

one track ofcom

Receiving fines are a good way to muddy up your accounts. I'd probably require dumping them into a convenient black hole (*cough* national debt *cough*) instead of succumbing to the temptation of assuming that next year there'll be another round of people doing baaad things. The latter leads to fine quota and frivolous fining.

Not entirely dissimilarly I think that ofcom thinking on licensing is a nice start but only half the story. "Greatest efficiency" has nothing to do with spectrum, in their minds, nor utility. That focus on greatest revenue means greatest pressure to pass as much cost burden as they can get away with onto the end user, that when taken to the extreme would see convoluted constructions to license licence-free bands like 27Mc, the various HAM bands, or even 2.4GHz and 5GHz.

So, on balance, I think that if all ofcom can do is saying "efficient spectrum use equals more money for us", they're not doing their job very well.

0 0
Monday 19th July 2010 21:35 GMT Alan Brown

Oh good.

Maybe they'll go after the more annoying lawbreakers such as silent caller autodiallers at £2 million a pop.

Of course if they had actually done what was intended (£50k per offence where each offence was calling an individual number they'd have achieved the government's goal of bankrupting the illegal operators in about 6 months. Pity about all those backhanders, eh?

2 0