Over 13,000 British households have black and white TVs

People are still paying 49 pounds a year for a licence to watch in monochrome.


Ians January 14, 2013
The number of people with black and white licences has declined from 212,000.

LONDON: Despite the steady stream of plasma, flat screen and high-definition TVs on offer, over 13,000 British householders still have black and white sets, Daily Mail reported.

Almost half a century after colour programmes were first beamed into British homes, people are still paying 49 pounds a year for a licence to watch in monochrome.

The number of people with black and white licences – which are nearly 100 pounds cheaper than the colour equivalent – has declined from 212,000 at the turn of the century to fewer than 50,000 in 2006.

Last week that number had fallen to 13,202.

According to television and radio technology historian John Trenouth, though 13,202 monochrome licences may sound a lot, "it's now a tiny percentage of the 25 million licensed viewers in the UK".

"The numbers of black and white TV sets in regular use has fallen dramatically over the last few years, hastened by the fact that it's now almost impossible to replace them.

"There will always be a small number of users who prefer monochrome images, don't want to throw away a working piece of technology or collect old TV sets."

COMMENTS (2)

JK | 11 years ago | Reply

Interesting Fact. Perfect fit for ODDITY Section. I Like ET's other sections with current affairs news as well.

Raja Imran | 11 years ago | Reply

This was the news I was waiting for. I am sure this will now help solve my financial problems and the fact that my house has no electricity or gas for this cold winter. Thank you for such useful information.

Can you also tell me how many people in Liberia don't use toilet paper or how many people in Hong Kong like to sleep without a pillow?

I am sure all this information is tremendously helpful to us.

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ