Apparently the Queen is in the gift-giving mood, as she's blessing, um, herself with a smorgasbord of LCD and plasma HDTVs from
Samsung. While the royal dwelling previously held sets that were either loaned or donated from various companies, this marks the first time anyone has paid "good money" for TVs to be installed in the domicile. The Korean giant will reportedly supply 100 televisions to scatter throughout the 775 rooms, with the ratio of LCDs to plasmas being a mystery right along with the size assortment. While the Royal family had requested brochures on the sets way back in June, they apparently waited to see how much of that luxury budget was leftover before blowing it all in a very good way. Notably, a Samsung spokesperson said that "the company will be entitled to use the seals of the British royal family for its products if the deal remains effective for more than five years," which could lead to a svelte (albeit gimmicky) lineup of limited edition sets a half decade from now. Nevertheless, Samsung purportedly stands to make around $217,000 from this order alone, which should make
European taxpayers just jolly.
P.S. Yes, we're well aware that the UK has many more than three stations, although that was not the case when we visited back in the 80's and had nothing to watch. Freeview rules!
[Via
RegHardware]
posted Dec 15th 2006 3:10PM
three channels?
Why should it make "European taxpayers just jolly."?
It's actually UK taxpayers for a start, and clearly the writer knows sweet FA in regards to what he's saying, because the royal family cost each individual British person 27p per year. That's about 55cents then; and it'd be less in America 'cause there's more people. It's literally a barely noticeable sum, so we're not angry at all. Except maybe anti-royalists.
Which taxpayer would
complain about 27p/year, considering the extortionate tax we Brits otherwise face!
I thought they had 4 channels.
have 5... many more with satalite
The Queen? Is she STILL alive and what the hell does she need 100 TVs for? Everyone knows it's physically impossible to watch more than 3.2 channels at the one time no matter how many TVs you have.
Rather weak journalism when half of the title depends on something you acknowledge as untrue!
OmG.. your an ass. LOL.
Sure, they may only have three channels, but they have Top Gear, which easily constitutes as a whole week's worth of television watching. So badass.
Your "three channels" attempt at humo(u)r failed miserably. And what does any of the article have to do with European tax payers?
I'd advise you not to give up your day job, but I fear writing such crap may actually BE your day job.
Hmm, didn't realise Buckingham Palace had so many rooms, I wonder what tvs they have in the other castles...
We have 41 Channels when using freeview.
Not 3/4 or 5.
The queen is a bloody joke.
Why would she need 100 flap panel TV's to watch shows about cheese making?
Cheese making, think you may have us mixed up with another nation Mr Geography :-/
Ah yes, the royal family.
Such a complete and utter waste of taxpayer money simply for 'tradition'.
"European taxpayers just jolly."
Surely you mean UK taxpayers.
I do believe that the British are European...
The monarchy costs about 75p a year per person in the UK...a ceremonial president would cost you more and politicize things that currently aren't.
Labour nightmare= "President Thatcher"
Tory nightmare= "President Blair"
With a monarch there is still someone who they have "bow" down to.
Guys, lighten up. Okay maybe they were off by like, 2 channels. No need to get uppity.
The Queen is also the Queen of Canada and Australia as well.
Canada and Australia aren't part of Europe.
She's the queen of many countries, as well as the head of the Commonwealth of Nations. She's also trusted and advises many of the leaders of those independent nations. That's a far cry from being a joke, just because some people think its a tired institution and have no pride in their nation's history or institutions.
The Royal Family is responsible for more money being spent by foreigners in the form of tourism to the UK far more than what it costs to pay for their expense. Sorry, but a President of Great Britain doesn't have the same ring to it. Ditching the monarchy would probably be the next step towards a federal European superstate that would suck the country dry of its monies to prop up the rest of the continent eager to stamp out innovation in favor of feel-good socialism.
Yes we have more than three channels. 5 Basic. About 50 with Digital. A couple hundred or something with satellite. Yep, more than three.
The only thing relevant about tax in the UK is we pay through the nose, mainly to pay for all the Queen's vast TV collection.
Now get over it, and stop attacking Engadget.
Very shabby bit of work....the author, I would not say 'journalist' as that would require actually having some of those annoying things, FACTS...should be feeling rather stupid. As already pointed out, the UK has 5 main terrestrial channels....50-ish on digital terrestrial, and hundreds on cable and satellite. If the author had been bothered to do any work they would have also found out that the UK has the highest rate of digital TV usage in the world...a very good reason for having some lovely Samsung TVs.
As for European tax payers, that makes about as much sense as Canada paying for the US president......the British crown is funded by the British state, and actually the Crown pays more to the British State than is drawn from the civil list. Again, if the author had bothered to actually RESEARCH the article, they would have found this out.
This matters because if Engadget cant get these simple facts right, how much more are they getting wrong. Not a very reliable news source of this article is anything to go by.
Bad show.
I think there's every need to "get uppity". Two of those channels are operated by the BBC; surely the finest, most respected broadcaster in the world. Another is Channel 4 which oozes with quality and innovation and is a major player in the British film industry.
As for the 27p for the civil list, well... I begrudge it. Who said anything about a British President? How about a president for Wales, Scotland, Ulster and England?
The Beeb? They may have been respected but their current output is trash interspersed with fluffy, visual candy documentaries voiced over by Richard Attenborough; the only channels I watch less are the ITV channels.
And as for Channel 4 being a major player in the British film industry...it *was* a major player until it's budget got slashed. It no longer produces the kind of films that get people talking about UK cinema, and instead outputs occasional flashes of talent that most people don't really take any notice of. The quality of Channel 4's output is also open to debate these days since they pump out equal quantities of shite and class compared to years ago.
I wonder if she pays for just one TV licence.
So many posts, so few senses of humo(u)r....
i agree. brits: learn to recognize sarcasm when appropriate.
The British INVENTED sarcasm (or was it the French?).
Regardless, the author was wrong on a number of facts. And not just a bit wrong, but REALLY wrong.
shall we discuss irony
The tv screens are so all the guests of the Palace can watch *Doctor Who* no matter where in the Palace they are at in any given moment.
Seems all the sets, outside of the Royal's rooms, will only receive constant replays of "The Queen".
lmao
To get the 'cheese making' reference you have to have watched "National Lampoon's European Vacation"
OMG LOL!! I love the way some people defend our country knowing that theres not much difference between us these days and DAMN! "We brits invented sarcasm" as if the guy who wrote it invented it himself! We are all human and theres not much difference between us but its a great laugh!
Yeah we really have 3 tv channels... Remember that British TV is better than American TV. This is a joke of a news post, go find some real news to post. But that would require you to shed your comfortable bubble of American ignorance.
Come on you brits, you all know you're backwards as hell compared to the US and continental Europe. Heck, you're more backwards than some developing countrys so lighten up. That's why the rest of the world got rid of their monarch by you've kept your for a laugh. So, you have more channels than you used to but seriously, it's mostly US tv on those satellite channels anyway. Seriously I don't even know why you bother to remain a sovereing nation. Should just apply to join the US as the 51 state. You might finally modernize!
your clearly stupid as the US has 51/52 states as it is. Also lets look at the people who have as many gun deaths in Florida each year as the rest of the western world does. Also we don't fall flat on our faces all the time e.g. Vietnam, Hurricane Katrina Relief Effort, President Bush
Channel 4 brought Big Brother to the UK. Nuff said on that matter, I think.
Plus remember that they'll prob be distributed between Buckingham Palace, Balmoral, Sandringham...'Buckingham Palace', like 'No 10' stands in for something else, not describing the actual place. So yeah. Um. Don't know why I went off on a tangent there about synecdoche. Sorry.
we have hundreds of channels on cable and stuff and we had 4 channels in the 80's
She has is also queen of the commonwealth.
Let's not be surprised: the guys that write for this site think attitude and inaccuracy equates to being cool.
Also, I have a feeling their scribbles are deliberately obtuse in order to feed the user posts, which are the only fun reading here (though not always in a good sense of fun). At least I hope it's deliberate otherwise they are all really ignorant jerks; which is a distinct possibility.
waddo
http://www.waddo.net/
@ Bunker
As regards WW2, I hardly think america felt it quite as much as we did.
Shitty NHS. Erm...does America even have an NHS?
Cameras everywhere...yes! Even our homes! Just like in that book everyone keeps banging on about
*jesus christ you're ignorant*
Do we need a high speed train system? Do you know how small this country is?!
...and to say that "the US enjoys a much higher quality of life" than us?
I just found this on Wikipedia:
"A shocking 37 million Americans live in poverty. That is 12.7 per cent of the population - the highest percentage in the developed world."
And i'll have you know our pubs are amazing.
Bite me.
Ah, more signs of Engadgets down turn in quality.
Seriously, what kind of idiots do you have working for you?
Engadget has been the worst of the tech blogs for a year or so now.
This is more typical American tripe, based on stereotypes and misinformation and you wonder why the rest of the world hates you!
Time you bloggers moved on and started reporting for fox news.
I'll be sticking with Techeblog, Gizmondo and the many other tech blogs that offer well written tech news.
I think some people need to calm down, enjoy an article that seems not to be horribly important, that was probably meant for fun, or just an interesting tid bit .... chill
@Warren.
Yes, sh*tty NHS, because you keep pouring money into it and nothing comes out. IT system anyone? Americans don't want socialized medicine cause nobody is stupid enough to pay for a giant beauracracy where barely a trickle of money go to patient care. Enjoy your creaking, underperforming NHS. We'll keep our private health care, thank you.
So, what if there are poor in the US. If they wanted to work, they would find a job and get out of poverty. Besides the poverty line is much higher in the US than the UK so even our poor do better than your council estate neverdowells. Who's bovvered now?
Yeah, US has much higher quality of life because we earn more per capita than you do. Go read the economist if you know what that is. But then you'll probably only read your weekly issue of Nuts.
I find it funny you brits bring up WW2 as a period of heroics because from my view, a country with a supposed empire should be more than able to defend itself against a country that wasn't even united a 100 years before. For your suppose industrial revolution, you got pounded by a bunch of depression era germans. What a laughing stock.
Your pubs are amazing for sure - that where you go to wank off with the rest of your dim wit friends cause your houses are too small and drafty.
@Simon Loo:
Were the NHS as bad as you describe it would have been abandoned long ago. We also have private healthcare and insurance like the US, only our state-provided level of care is much higher. Personally, my experience of the NHS has been positive and I've never felt the need to go private, and I'd rather not shell out thousands for a MRI when I can get one for free.
You're vastly oversimplifying the problem of poverty. If it were as easy as "poor people should get jobs" then eradicating world poverty would be trivial. But, if that's your attitude then I see little value in discussing the matter further.
Yes, the US has a higher GDP per capita, so on average you earn more money. Not that this actually means anything on an individual level. In both countries there are people earning right across the board from zero to billions. Unsurprisingly, given the massively greater population you have more of the latter, which skews the average. Perhaps you should go and read (insert generic american trash). I'm not sure why, but felt it was relevant.
You're obviously not too hot on history, as we actually DID defend ourselves against Germany sucessfully, and were one of the few European countries not to be conquered. I also find it hilarious how many Americans seem to think they "saved our ass" in WW2, when actually they only joined in after Pearl Harbour, and took 4 years to help save both our asses.
And your pubs comment is just childish.
first of all, 100 TVs?!?!?! second, no she is NOT the queen of the commonwealth, she is just the honorary figure-head of the commonwealth council, and yes, TOPGEAR ROXXXXX!!!! (1st the ipod, then all these tvs, next, the queen is racing tha_stig in a bugatti...)
Just my 2 pence: English Literature > American Literature.
Except Frank O'Hara. That guy was a legend.
This is great.
Look at all the British people getting upset over the amount of TELEVISION channels they have. My god, do you not have anything to argue/get upset about? How sad is your life that you must argue about the number of television channels you have?
I find this all too funny. Some how the amount of television channels the UK has, turned into a discussion about US states, gun violence, WW2 and a bunch of other crap that has NOTHING to do with the OP.
Gimme a break. Get the stick out of your asses and move on.