BBC to Reveal Stars Earnings

Author
Discussion

anonymous-user

54 months

Saturday 22nd July 2017
quotequote all
would love to see what the pension deal is as well.

i think the bbc is one big gravy train, they should be made public, as salaries etc are just artificial bubble created by the bbc.


The Surveyor

7,576 posts

237 months

Saturday 22nd July 2017
quotequote all
Raygun said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Yes, because he's really struggled to find lucrative employment over the years rolleyes
That didn't answer my question. Would Heart pay him £2.25 million to do a breakfast radio show?
Chris Evans isn't paid £2.25m for presenting a breakfast show though... That salary includes his Top Gear earnings.

Jonesy23

4,650 posts

136 months

Saturday 22nd July 2017
quotequote all
The Mad Monk said:
Naga Munchetty gets £150,000 to £199999 for presenting on BBC 1 Breakfast.
Obviously been a lot of pay rises as wasn't she on £90K a only little while back? (Or was it another female presenter who admitted that on air?)


The Surveyor

7,576 posts

237 months

Saturday 22nd July 2017
quotequote all
The Mad Monk said:
Naga Munchetty gets £150,000 to £199999 for presenting on BBC 1 Breakfast.

Charlie Stayt who sits next to her on the sofa doesn't appear in the rankings.

No wonder she looked so cheerful yesterday and he looked so grumpy!

Publication of these figures must have upset a few people when they found out how much their colleagues are getting paid!
They will know what the industry salary scales are, this won't be any more of a shock to those in the BBC than when Suzanna Reid left the same sofa for a £1m salary with ITV doing exactly the same job.

hyphen

26,262 posts

90 months

Saturday 22nd July 2017
quotequote all
The Surveyor said:
They will know what the industry salary scales are, this won't be any more of a shock to those in the BBC than when Suzanna Reid left the same sofa for a £1m salary with ITV doing exactly the same job.
Half of that according to this http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/itv-bosses-worr... Not bad when piers is probably the bigger draw.

And BBC Breakfast still trounces them in audience figures (BBC had a record high of 38% audience share recently, Reid and co at 17%), so letting her go again highlights the need to say no to these 'talents'

Edited by hyphen on Saturday 22 July 12:06

Dazed and Confused

979 posts

82 months

Saturday 22nd July 2017
quotequote all
The Surveyor said:
The Mad Monk said:
Naga Munchetty gets £150,000 to £199999 for presenting on BBC 1 Breakfast.

Charlie Stayt who sits next to her on the sofa doesn't appear in the rankings.

No wonder she looked so cheerful yesterday and he looked so grumpy!

Publication of these figures must have upset a few people when they found out how much their colleagues are getting paid!
They will know what the industry salary scales are, this won't be any more of a shock to those in the BBC than when Suzanna Reid left the same sofa for a £1m salary with ITV doing exactly the same job.
Again, unlike their competitors the BBC has no financial reasons to chase big ratings. The more viewers something like Good Morning Britain has, the more they make advertising revenue. So they would see poaching someone like Suzanna as some kind of investment. This is very much not the case at the BBC

Simple as that.

TwigtheWonderkid

43,346 posts

150 months

Saturday 22nd July 2017
quotequote all
Dazed and Confused said:
Again, unlike their competitors the BBC has no financial reasons to chase big ratings.
Yes it does. Big ratings are an indication of quality and/or popularity. The BBC should absolutely be striving to achieve those goals.

TwigtheWonderkid

43,346 posts

150 months

Saturday 22nd July 2017
quotequote all
The Spruce goose said:
i think the bbc is one big gravy train, they should be made public, as salaries etc are just artificial bubble created by the bbc.
If that's the case, why does talent often leave the BBC for higher salaries elsewhere in the industry.

TwigtheWonderkid

43,346 posts

150 months

Saturday 22nd July 2017
quotequote all
Dazed and Confused said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Raygun said:
Dazed and Confused said:
Would have been nearly £4m if these figures had come out last year.
Kin unbelieveable!!
Rather than feel embarrassed this week they take the piss with Evans saying "Ask me mum what she thinks" and Lineker saying he's "annoyed that Evans is getting more than him". You've got to hand to them they've got some front.
If I was one of these highly paid bods, I would just be answering every question with "mind you own fking business". The govt can force the BBC to reveal individual's salaries (which I think is utterly disgraceful but that's by the by), but the govt cannot force an individual to discuss or justify it.

My salary and if I'm worth it or not is not something i would discuss, even if the figure was in the public domain.
Why are you so angry about this?

Do your wages come directly from the back pockets of the Great British public?
No, I don't work in a school, hospital, civic centre, town hall, job centre, library or any of the other numerous organisations funded by the public. I just don't think it's right that individuals pay should be published. It's a private matter, regardless of who funds it.

hyphen

26,262 posts

90 months

Saturday 22nd July 2017
quotequote all
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Dazed and Confused said:
Again, unlike their competitors the BBC has no financial reasons to chase big ratings.
Yes it does. Big ratings are an indication of quality and/or popularity. The BBC should absolutely be striving to achieve those goals.
Big ratings are not an indication of quality I would say, the latest Eastenders love triangle may get 15 million viewers, but it isn't original and innovative entertainment, or even well written or acted.- the most popular stuff is relatively low quality. Apart from some stuff that crosses over to the mainstream like Frozen Planet, a brilliant documentary of history/art will only ever get a few hundred thousand viewers.

The reason for ratings is different- BBC need to give the masses sufficient amounts of popular stuff for them to gather the general publics loyalty and affection, as otherwise the grumblings about scrapping the license fee would turn into an unstoppable tide. Hence paying so much for Football rights.

If the BBC was funded directly from the public purse rather than tv licenses, it would not need to chase ratings and there lies the issue.

Robertj21a

16,476 posts

105 months

Saturday 22nd July 2017
quotequote all
TwigtheWonderkid said:
No, I don't work in a school, hospital, civic centre, town hall, job centre, library or any of the other numerous organisations funded by the public. I just don't think it's right that individuals pay should be published. It's a private matter, regardless of who funds it.
Tough ! - if I'm paying for something I want to know if it's being spent properly. If employees don't like that then they can switch to a private company.

hyphen

26,262 posts

90 months

Saturday 22nd July 2017
quotequote all
TwigtheWonderkid said:
No, I don't work in a school, hospital, civic centre, town hall, job centre, library or any of the other numerous organisations funded by the public. I just don't think it's right that individuals pay should be published. It's a private matter, regardless of who funds it.
But we already know pretty much what every public sector employee works, as the pay scale is published. You know roughly how much that teacher, nurse or doctor is earning. Same with many private companies if you put in the effort.

All this is doing is adding transparency to the outliers, I don't see why you have a problem with it. The more transparency there is, the more governance there is.

TwigtheWonderkid

43,346 posts

150 months

Saturday 22nd July 2017
quotequote all
Robertj21a said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
No, I don't work in a school, hospital, civic centre, town hall, job centre, library or any of the other numerous organisations funded by the public. I just don't think it's right that individuals pay should be published. It's a private matter, regardless of who funds it.
Tough ! - if I'm paying for something I want to know if it's being spent properly. If employees don't like that then they can switch to a private company.
No, you want to know if you think it's being spent properly, which may be at odds with what other taxpayers think. As this debate over BBC salaries proves.

If key talent at the BBC gets fed up of this annual faux outrage over their salaries, they may well leave for other tv companies. How will that be in the best interests of the BBC?

Jonesy23

4,650 posts

136 months

Saturday 22nd July 2017
quotequote all
Maybe they realise that there aren't an unlimited number of channels or presenting jobs and that their best option is to hold on to what they have?

Mobility in the radio and TV business is not as easy as some think, especially when most will recognise they are interchangeable with a dozen others offering the same thing.


K-Cee

238 posts

188 months

Saturday 22nd July 2017
quotequote all
Biggest shock I got (as I thought that really there's no surprises with the usual crowd) was seeing what this wooden head of an actor gets...Derek Thompson from Casualty get's £350,000 + per year, I don't know how he's survived, as he's the most hopeless actor I've come across.., No wonder he's smiling.
!

anonymous-user

54 months

Saturday 22nd July 2017
quotequote all
K-Cee said:
Biggest shock I got (as I thought that really there's no surprises with the usual crowd) was seeing what this wooden head of an actor gets...Derek Thompson from Casualty get's £350,000 + per year, I don't know how he's survived, as he's the most hopeless actor I've come across.., No wonder he's smiling.
prime example of the BBC gravy train. Does he draw people in to watch, no? Would he get paid the same if they sacked him, no? CHOO CHOO all aboard.

cuprabob

14,606 posts

214 months

Saturday 22nd July 2017
quotequote all
K-Cee said:
Biggest shock I got (as I thought that really there's no surprises with the usual crowd) was seeing what this wooden head of an actor gets...Derek Thompson from Casualty get's £350,000 + per year, I don't know how he's survived, as he's the most hopeless actor I've come across.., No wonder he's smiling.
!
You've got to remember he's giving up his Saturday night everywheresmile

Quite a few Casualty and Holby actors on the list, which I must admit did surprise me.

Earned his money tonightsmile


Edited by cuprabob on Saturday 22 July 22:27

DoctorX

7,273 posts

167 months

Saturday 22nd July 2017
quotequote all
cuprabob said:
K-Cee said:
Biggest shock I got (as I thought that really there's no surprises with the usual crowd) was seeing what this wooden head of an actor gets...Derek Thompson from Casualty get's £350,000 + per year, I don't know how he's survived, as he's the most hopeless actor I've come across.., No wonder he's smiling.
!
You've got to remember he's giving up his Saturday night everywheresmile

Quite a few Casualty and Holby actors on the list, which I must admit did surprise me.

Earned his money tonightsmile


Edited by cuprabob on Saturday 22 July 22:27
Fair play to him, he's been doing it 30 years and it wouldn't be the same without him.

hyphen

26,262 posts

90 months

Sunday 23rd July 2017
quotequote all
DoctorX said:
Fair play to him, he's been doing it 30 years and it wouldn't be the same without him.
When the worlds audience discuss the current golden age of television, I'm not sure Casualty is included rofl

hyphen

26,262 posts

90 months