BBC to Reveal Stars Earnings
Discussion
pquinn said:
cqueen said:
I don't understand the Gary Linekar salary. He WAS a footballer, he aint anymore - so why pay him a footballers salary? Esp when any basic presenter could do the same.
Does the public even care who hosts MOTD? As a football fan, I sure don't..
But if they don't pay him that he'd go work for someone else,and have to find someone who could replace him.Does the public even care who hosts MOTD? As a football fan, I sure don't..
Except the first bit just isn't going to happen and the second bit is trivial. His salary is a joke.
El stovey said:
Not-The-Messiah said:
I fully agree but they defend the pay by saying they need to retain the so called talent. We all know it's a load of st there will be hundreds of people who could do the job better out there.
So why do you think the BBC doesn’t want to pay less and get people that “could do the job better” Seems odd that they’re paying more than they need to for worse presenters?
They need to able to say "of course I'm worth my £300k a year. I'm Gary Lineker's boss and he's on £1.75m!!!"
It's all back-scratching, and the money doesn't belong to any of them. Happens everywhere, but at the BBC there should be much, much better control as they're all essentially civil servants.
SpeckledJim said:
Simply because the people on the remuneration committees are all overpaid as well.
They need to able to say "of course I'm worth my £300k a year. I'm Gary Lineker's boss and he's on £1.75m!!!"
It's all back-scratching, and the money doesn't belong to any of them. Happens everywhere, but at the BBC there should be much, much better control as they're all essentially civil servants.
^This every time. It is rife, not only at the BBC, and the public sector in general, but also in many remuneration committees on the FTSE.They need to able to say "of course I'm worth my £300k a year. I'm Gary Lineker's boss and he's on £1.75m!!!"
It's all back-scratching, and the money doesn't belong to any of them. Happens everywhere, but at the BBC there should be much, much better control as they're all essentially civil servants.
Much easier to justify your own pay increase when you've facilitated hikes in other people's earnings. OPM is a dangerous thing. Fiduciary duties are frequently overlooked.
DoctorX said:
pquinn said:
cqueen said:
I don't understand the Gary Linekar salary. He WAS a footballer, he aint anymore - so why pay him a footballers salary? Esp when any basic presenter could do the same.
Does the public even care who hosts MOTD? As a football fan, I sure don't..
But if they don't pay him that he'd go work for someone else,and have to find someone who could replace him.Does the public even care who hosts MOTD? As a football fan, I sure don't..
Except the first bit just isn't going to happen and the second bit is trivial. His salary is a joke.
SpeckledJim said:
Simply because the people on the remuneration committees are all overpaid as well.
They need to able to say "of course I'm worth my £300k a year. I'm Gary Lineker's boss and he's on £1.75m!!!"
It's all back-scratching, and the money doesn't belong to any of them. Happens everywhere, but at the BBC there should be much, much better control as they're all essentially civil servants.
That's not how Remuneration Committees work, plus it won't have been the RemCom that set GL's salary/fee.They need to able to say "of course I'm worth my £300k a year. I'm Gary Lineker's boss and he's on £1.75m!!!"
It's all back-scratching, and the money doesn't belong to any of them. Happens everywhere, but at the BBC there should be much, much better control as they're all essentially civil servants.
Gary29 said:
abzmike said:
Quite - that number next to her name just boggles the mind
Is it one of those where she has her own production company and she produces the show out of her own pocket? It does seem a high number.Isn't Jeremy Vine usually in the top 10? No mention of him in the list.
Digga said:
SpeckledJim said:
Simply because the people on the remuneration committees are all overpaid as well.
They need to able to say "of course I'm worth my £300k a year. I'm Gary Lineker's boss and he's on £1.75m!!!"
It's all back-scratching, and the money doesn't belong to any of them. Happens everywhere, but at the BBC there should be much, much better control as they're all essentially civil servants.
^This every time. It is rife, not only at the BBC, and the public sector in general, but also in many remuneration committees on the FTSE.They need to able to say "of course I'm worth my £300k a year. I'm Gary Lineker's boss and he's on £1.75m!!!"
It's all back-scratching, and the money doesn't belong to any of them. Happens everywhere, but at the BBC there should be much, much better control as they're all essentially civil servants.
Much easier to justify your own pay increase when you've facilitated hikes in other people's earnings. OPM is a dangerous thing. Fiduciary duties are frequently overlooked.
Jeremy Vine is on everything now, plus his Ch5 stuff. I’m sure him and Norton earn theirs through production companies now.
I think Jeremy Vine is the thickest journalist I have ever heard. His interviews on Radio 2 are beyond useless as he doesn’t listen to what is being said to him.
I think Jeremy Vine is the thickest journalist I have ever heard. His interviews on Radio 2 are beyond useless as he doesn’t listen to what is being said to him.
Mikebentley said:
Jeremy Vine is on everything now, plus his Ch5 stuff. I’m sure him and Norton earn theirs through production companies now.
I think Jeremy Vine is the thickest journalist I have ever heard. His interviews on Radio 2 are beyond useless as he doesn’t listen to what is being said to him.
Companies house as Jelly Vine. Must be a contractor these days. Tax effecient, you seeI think Jeremy Vine is the thickest journalist I have ever heard. His interviews on Radio 2 are beyond useless as he doesn’t listen to what is being said to him.
cqueen said:
I don't understand the Gary Linekar salary. He WAS a footballer, he aint anymore - so why pay him a footballers salary? Esp when any basic presenter could do the same.
Does the public even care who hosts MOTD? As a football fan, I sure don't..
I agreeDoes the public even care who hosts MOTD? As a football fan, I sure don't..
And the fact Alan Shearer is on a quarter of the salary indicates to me theirs likely plenty of recognisable retired footballers willing to do the show for less than Linekars salary.
mikebradford said:
cqueen said:
I don't understand the Gary Linekar salary. He WAS a footballer, he aint anymore - so why pay him a footballers salary? Esp when any basic presenter could do the same.
Does the public even care who hosts MOTD? As a football fan, I sure don't..
I agreeDoes the public even care who hosts MOTD? As a football fan, I sure don't..
And the fact Alan Shearer is on a quarter of the salary indicates to me theirs likely plenty of recognisable retired footballers willing to do the show for less than Linekars salary.
bristolracer said:
I cannot fathom how any of these presenters are worth the salaries they are paid.
They are their own brands and the BBC are paying for that. People follow these presenters. The BBC keeps its audience share by employing these individuals. If they move to another "content producer (dahlings)" the BBC will lose viewers. How much is that worth? A few hundred thousand each? By any commercial production company's reckoning, that's not a difficult decision.Gassing Station | TV, Film, Video Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff