Jeremy Clarkson suspended by BBC...

[don4l]

Countdown said:

Wills2 said:

Don't worry he has staff to work that out for him. I hope they're better at primary school maths than he is.

They probably are, that's why I employ them

I've asked Don4l a couple of times but he seems to be avoiding the question - can you give me an example of an organisation where the average employee cost is £100k per annum?

I haven't avoided the question at all.

You don't understand my answers, which is completely different.

I see the overall cost of providing employment, whereas you think that the salary bill represents the full cost.

Perhaps you could tell us how the BBC will absorb an annual £50m reduction in revenue?

[blueg33]

Scuffers said:

Countdown said:

They probably are, that's why I employ them

I've asked Don4l a couple of times but he seems to be avoiding the question - can you give me an example of an organisation where the average employee cost is £100k per annum?

Just about any company in EC4 etc.

If you pay somebody 40k in the public sector, in central London, the total cost including pension etc is close.

My company is in EC as it happens. I get to see and sign off the accounts (lucky me). Our average staff cost on salary, employers NI, childcare vouchers, healthcare and pensions is just over £100k per employee. If we factor in desk space its more.

If I look at the figures for all of our regional offices too, then its less than £100k on salaries and benefits, but London does house the most senior people and only 5 admin staff and 25 accounts types.

Our total operating costs (service industry for this part of the business, ie no manufacture and deal specific costs are attributed to projects not overhead) are in excess of £100k per person

[longblackcoat]

don4l said:

Countdown said:

don4l said:

Have you worked out the figure for the NHS costs?

Do you expect us to believe that you can hire a nurse, build a hospital, heat it and run the x-ray machines for £22,500 a year?

Get real.

Your NHS figures were only for salaries.

I suspect that you work in the public sector, and therefore you have no understanding of how the real world works.

Edited by don4l on Monday 30th March 22:38

Do you genuinely think the average hospital employee costs £100k per annum?

By the way building hospitals and buying x-ray machines are capital costs. I'm not sure if you understand the implications.

I do understand the difference.


Are you suggesting that the BBC can reduce their spending by £50m by cutting capital costs?

If so, shouldn't they be doing this anyway?

The £50m is, as I've explained, a red herring. Or do you disagree?

[McWigglebum4th]

TankRizzo said:

Andy Wilman gone as well apparently

http://jalopnik.com/top-gears-head-producer-says-f...

He reminds you of one of the things that made topgear stand out

It was one of the best shot programs out there


When Adam Savage was talking about the reboot of Mythbusters he wanted it to look as good as topgear

[Scuffers]

richie99 said:

Provision of technology infrastructure? Whilst sticking to the BBC, Since the useless tts managed to spend £100 million on delivering nothing, the total costs must be a lot more.

in your example, I'd be surprised if your Total IT costs come in under a grand per employee....hopefully you are not doing any of the sums and have staff top do that!

did the BBC not just write off a shed load on (yet another) failed IT project?

http://www.computerworlduk.com/news/public-sector/...

Oh well, what's £125m between a few lefties?

edit - that's some £7,350 per head (based on 17,000 employees)

[richie99]

Scuffers said:

did the BBC not just write off a shed load on (yet another) failed IT project?

http://www.computerworlduk.com/news/public-sector/...

Oh well, what's £125m between a few lefties?

Yes just my point. Sorry for underestimating the costs. still what's a wasted 25 million between friends.

[don4l]

longblackcoat said:

The £50m is, as I've explained, a red herring. Or do you disagree?

As you haven't quoted what you explained, and I cannot be bothered to trawl back through the thread, I have no idea.

I think that you can safely assume that I do disagree.

[Astacus]

Countdown said:

They probably are, that's why I employ them

I've asked Don4l a couple of times but he seems to be avoiding the question - can you give me an example of an organisation where the average employee cost is £100k per annum?

I used to work in R and D for a Life Sciences Company. The on-costs were huge. I think the per head costs there were about 100k but I could be mis remembering

[turbobloke]

richie99 said:

Scuffers said:

did the BBC not just write off a shed load on (yet another) failed IT project?

http://www.computerworlduk.com/news/public-sector/...

Oh well, what's £125m between a few lefties?

Yes just my point. Sorry for underestimating the costs. still what's a wasted 25 million between friends.

Indeed. 25 million of other people's money (total £125m of course) flowing in automatically, another common feature when peanuts are involved.

[Scuffers]

don4l said:

longblackcoat said:

The £50m is, as I've explained, a red herring. Or do you disagree?

As you haven't quoted what you explained, and I cannot be bothered to trawl back through the thread, I have no idea.

I think that you can safely assume that I do disagree.

the £50M is indeed a red herring.

the reality is that TG was worth a lot more than this to the BBC, they sold it to over 180 countries (real time for the last series), just on the current TV shows, you telling us that they get less than £300K a country (average) for the broadcast rights?

that's before you cover repeats, the specials, access to the back catalogue, the live shows, the magazine, the DVD's, etc etc.

I would not be surprised if the majority of BBC worldwides accounts were related to TG, dumping it is going to be somewhat challenging for them.

[turbobloke]

Scuffers said:

don4l said:

longblackcoat said:

The £50m is, as I've explained, a red herring. Or do you disagree?

As you haven't quoted what you explained, and I cannot be bothered to trawl back through the thread, I have no idea.

I think that you can safely assume that I do disagree.

the £50M is indeed a red herring.

the reality is that TG was worth a lot more than this to the BBC, they sold it to over 180 countries (real time for the last series), just on the current TV shows, you telling us that they get less than £300K a country (average) for the broadcast rights?

that's before you cover repeats, the specials, access to the back catalogue, the live shows, the magazine, the DVD's, etc etc.

I would not be surprised if the majority of BBC worldwides accounts were related to TG, dumping it is going to be somewhat challenging for them.

We may never know as BBC Worldwide have been busy making their accounts opaque, as per this 2014 review in The Guardian BBC Worldwide Smoke and Mirrors.

"Until recently turnover and profit numbers were reported for each of the major business activities – sales, production, channels and so on – and then broken down by territory. So it was possible to see, for example, that in territories where Worldwide chose to produce itself – rather simply sell and license – profitability fell."

"The business has (recently) been reorganised around geographical areas, which might make sense, but all the critical detail is hidden from view."

When piggybacking off public money as per BBC Worldwide, this inforation should be openly available and wholly transparent.

[The Don of Croy]

One of the few uncontested facts about this whole sorry saga...

...today is the last day JC is under contract to the BBC.

So for the heinous crime of workplace violence his 'employment' has continued.

[TTwiggy]

turbobloke said:

We may never know as BBC Worldwide have been busy making their accounts opaque, as per this 2014 review in The Guardian BBC Worldwide Smoke and Mirrors.

"Until recently turnover and profit numbers were reported for each of the major business activities – sales, production, channels and so on – and then broken down by territory. So it was possible to see, for example, that in territories where Worldwide chose to produce itself – rather simply sell and license – profitability fell."

"The business has (recently) been reorganised around geographical areas, which might make sense, but all the critical detail is hidden from view."

When piggybacking off public money as per BBC Worldwide, this inforation should be openly available and wholly transparent.

Odd. When I pointed out that BBC Worldwide had a half share in the UKTV channels (which includes Dave, who show old Top Gear series) your response was along the lines of 'BBC Worldwide are an entirley self-funding commercial arm of the BBC.'

[eccles]

otolith said:

TankRizzo said:

Andy Wilman gone as well apparently

That url is not what I thought it was (though I bet I wasn't far off the truth )

A bit premature of you there.....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-32128...

[longblackcoat]

Scuffers said:

I would not be surprised if the majority of BBC worldwides accounts were related to TG, dumping it is going to be somewhat challenging for them.

I typed a sensible response, but realied that no matter what I said, I'd not convince you or the others who, without any knowledge whatsoever of the media world, manage to come up with numbers so far of the make it hurts.

So I'm out.

Edited by longblackcoat on Tuesday 31st March 10:28

[turbobloke]

longblackcoat said:

Scuffers said:

I would not be surprised if the majority of BBC worldwides accounts were related to TG, dumping it is going to be somewhat challenging for them.

I typed a sensible response, but realied that no matter what I said, I'd not convince you or the others who, without any knowledge whatsoever of the media world, manage to come up with numbers so far of the make it hurts.

Without any knowledge whatsoever? An obvious assumption, and unjustified.

[Scuffers]

longblackcoat said:

I typed a sensible response, but realied that no matter what I said, I'd not convince you or the others who, without any knowledge whatsoever of the media world, manage to come up with numbers so far of the make it hurts.

So I'm out.

Edited by longblackcoat on Tuesday 31st March 10:28

Nice.....


In the meantime:

http://thenewdaily.com.au/entertainment/2015/03/30...

[Countdown]

blueg33 said:

My company is in EC as it happens. I get to see and sign off the accounts (lucky me). Our average staff cost on salary, employers NI, childcare vouchers, healthcare and pensions is just over £100k per employee. If we factor in desk space its more.

Your total salary bill may well be £100k. (I'd be interested in knowing how many people you employ and what line of work it is where £100k is the average)

However the average for a large organisation is nowhere near £100k. The average for the Beeb is nowhere near £100k. The average salary is £26k, add on employer on costs of 35% (let's be generous) and you are still looking in the region of £35k. And it would be a bonkers organisation which had indirect overheads of £65k per employee.

Appreciating that PH salaries are in a different world here's a link which shows average salaries;

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-28...

ps Childcare vouchers are £243 per month max. And the employee pays for them. They actually save the employer money rather than being an extra cost.

[Countdown]

[redacted]

[98elise]

Countdown said:

blueg33 said:

My company is in EC as it happens. I get to see and sign off the accounts (lucky me). Our average staff cost on salary, employers NI, childcare vouchers, healthcare and pensions is just over £100k per employee. If we factor in desk space its more.

Your total salary bill may well be £100k. (I'd be interested in knowing how many people you employ and what line of work it is where £100k is the average)

However the average for a large organisation is nowhere near £100k. The average for the Beeb is nowhere near £100k. The average salary is £26k, add on employer on costs of 35% (let's be generous) and you are still looking in the region of £35k. And it would be a bonkers organisation which had indirect overheads of £65k per employee.

Appreciating that PH salaries are in a different world here's a link which shows average salaries;

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-28...

ps Childcare vouchers are £243 per month max. And the employee pays for them. They actually save the employer money rather than being an extra cost.

Most lower paid jobs will not be BBC employees. Cleaning, security, catering etc will not be on the books. I suspect this will push the average wage up.