Dee Forbes banging the RTE TV licence drum again 60m uncollected fee *poll not working - pl ignore*

garrettod

Ironically, RTE recently reported on ITV lads taking a paycut...

https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2020/0403/1128277-itv-bosses-take-pay-cut/

While we know that others in media are seeing their pay cut also :

Comunicorp cut pay by up to 25% at its radio stations [\url]

end of the road

garrettod wrote: »

Sure, I knew that you've got to hire talent and capable management don't come at minimum wage, but I also know that there are a lot of very capable senior, experienced, management working for less than half of what RTE pay Dee Forbes for example.

I consider it very difficult to justify paying someone in RTE over €100k pa, and certainly not more than €150k pa no matter what position they have.

you may consider it difficult to justify such but ultimately it makes no difference as the various forces of the real world will come into play and will in turn decide the pay of certain grades whether they be within rte or any other large broadcaster.the same as it does in small and medium ones where pay would be lower due to having a smaller market.



the figure of 150 or 100k or whatever unrealistic figure that is usually churned out on this site is unlikely to ever be the final wage figure for the head and high management in rte, nor any other big broadcaster. middle management in a large organisation, management of a small broadcaster, i would expect something around those numbers.



those particular individuals you speak of are i would suspect either middle management or the organisation they manage is very small, hence they would be paid half the wage of the management of a large organisation such as rte.

RabbleRouser2k

ButtersSuki wrote: »

Lottie Ryan on the cover of 3 magazines at the checkouts in my local Super Valu last night. RTE pushing her harder than ever now, as predicted. RTE determined to make her a star (:rolleyes:) no matter what. They have a duty to enrich the offspring and extended families of former contractors at our expense.

I'd say this Covid-19 has scuppered their plans. RTE can't justify/ employ their regular staff.
Any show that requires an audience or audience participation is cancelled.
Shows that attract the elderly audience like Winning Streak can't go ahead cos of Covid.

RTE have lost a huge chunk of money via advertising (and yet they still show that advert about 'pay your license fee'... pr**ks).

AndyBoBandy wrote: »

Flicked past the Late Late last night during the segment when they had all the Aer Lingus pilots on. I watched for a few minutes as I'd have a mild interest in aviation.

Miriam was going round them all to have a brief chat with them, and then came up with the following gem when speaking to one of them;

Miriam: So, 'pilot', you were on annual leave when you got the call and were asked to pilot one of these flights. Tell me, what was that like?

Cutting edge as ever from Miriam "€300,000 a year" O'Callaghan

For me the absolute 'Oh f*** you!' moment of that show was Laura Whitmore going for woke points in the middle of people dying.

'I'm so proud, as a woman, to see a fellow woman broadcaster hosting the late late show... it's such a PROUD day for women...' :mad::mad::mad:

Now's not the ****ing time, Whitmore, you absolute vacuous virus. I suppose she's probably trying to get a new gig in RTE because Love Island isn't happening.

IF there's one thing this virus has done, it's shown the disgusting pieces of crap from the genuine people.

ButtersSuki

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

I'd say this Covid-19 has scuppered their plans. RTE can't justify/ employ their regular staff.
Any show that requires an audience or audience participation is cancelled.
Shows that attract the elderly audience like Winning Streak can't go ahead cos of Covid.

RTE have lost a huge chunk of money via advertising (and yet they still show that advert about 'pay your license fee'... pr**ks).



For me the absolute 'Oh f*** you!' moment of that show was Laura Whitmore going for woke points in the middle of people dying.

'I'm so proud, as a woman, to see a fellow woman broadcaster hosting the late late show... it's such a PROUD day for women...' :mad::mad::mad:

Now's not the ****ing time, Whitmore, you absolute vacuous virus. I suppose she's probably trying to get a new gig in RTE because Love Island isn't happening.

IF there's one thing this virus has done, it's shown the disgusting pieces of crap from the genuine people.

Go over to the Ciara Kelly thread in the radio forum for more of this wokeness.

RabbleRouser2k

ButtersSuki wrote: »

Go over to the Ciara Kelly thread in the radio forum for more of this wokeness.

I think I'd have an aneurysm if I did...

There's a reason I avoid Ciara Kelly... actually there's many. I'd clog the thread if I listed them.:D

garrettod

end of the road wrote: »

you may consider it difficult to justify such but ultimately it makes no difference as the various forces of the real world will come into play and will in turn decide the pay of certain grades whether they be within rte or any other large broadcaster.the same as it does in small and medium ones where pay would be lower due to having a smaller market.



the figure of 150 or 100k or whatever unrealistic figure that is usually churned out on this site is unlikely to ever be the final wage figure for the head and high management in rte, nor any other big broadcaster. middle management in a large organisation, management of a small broadcaster, i would expect something around those numbers.



those particular individuals you speak of are i would suspect either middle management or the organisation they manage is very small, hence they would be paid half the wage of the management of a large organisation such as rte.

Okay, let's talk about the real world, given you've referred to same...

In what "real world" does a company, that's loss making more years than not, continue to run loss making operations, refuse to cut pay or cut the workforce, rather than risk complete failure and liquidation?

I've no idea what you do for a living, or what relevant business experience you may have, but I know what I do and where my numbers come from, and I'm more than happy that I'm correct.

You can't justify inappropriate pay for a CEO here, simply because it's state owned. Pay at RTE is not comparable with the open market, for a company in the mess that RTE is in and its long past time someone put a stop to it.

If your want to reward Dee Forbes, then link her compensation to her preformance - smaller salary, but bonuses for achieving certain targets such as cost cutting, returning RTE to profit etc.

I would personally rather put Michael O'Leary into RTE as CEO for a few years and pay him 4 times what we've been paying Dee Forbes, as I know you'd get far more value for your money from him!

maestroamado

I heard a radio presenter on early morning Sunday last week "Mothers Day"
Because of the day she was playing songs for Mothers.
She played a Randy Newman song "mama told me not to come"
She had not done much research as the song was about "drunken sex orgy"
And the "come" was not come home son....

Brendan Bendar

garrettod wrote: »

Okay, let's talk about the real world, given you've referred to same...

In what "real world" does a company, that's loss making more years than not, continue to run loss making operations, refuse to cut pay or cut the workforce, rather than risk complete failure and liquidation?

I've no idea what you do for a living, or what relevant business experience you may have, but I know what I do and where my numbers come from, and I'm more than happy that I'm correct.

You can't justify inappropriate pay for a CEO here, simply because it's state owned. Pay at RTE is not comparable with the open market, for a company in the mess that RTE is in and its long past time someone put a stop to it.

If your want to reward Dee Forbes, then link her compensation to her preformance - smaller salary, but bonuses for achieving certain targets such as cost cutting, returning RTE to profit etc.

I would personally rather put Michael O'Leary into RTE as CEO for a few years and pay him 4 times what we've been paying Dee Forbes, as I know you'd get far more value for your money from him!

+10

Pa ElGrande

TV licence fee could be replaced by broadband levy, says BBC

The BBC has said the television licence fee could ultimately be replaced by a monthly levy on broadband connections, in response to the UK government’s proposals to decriminalise non-payment of the licence fee.

The public broadcaster said it strongly supported keeping the current court-enforced television licence fee system in place for the medium-term. But it is willing to consider following other European countries and implement a funding model “linked directly to an existing common household bill” such as an internet connection, council tax, or electricity supply.

source

There is also a body of opinion against the BBC within the UK and has been for several decades. Its biases have also become more apparent especially to the Brexit supporters and its pushing of identity politics is annoying a growing number of the UK public.


BBC comedian admits his own show could be 'tearing the country apart'

Comic Nish Kumar has admitted his savage Left-wing satire show could be tearing the country apart.

The host of The Mash Report said: “It’s constantly of a concern to me that I, personally, am ­making things worse.”

Kumar made the confession after veteran broadcaster Andrew Neil slammed the late-night BBC comedy show as “self-satisfied, self-adulatory, unchallenged Left-wing propaganda”.

The comic said he fears the politics and news satire programme is “reinforcing our politically polarising culture” and may even be preventing Britain coming together now that Brexit has finally happened.

source

They have been panicked by the suggestion from the Tory government of moving to a subscription fee and decriminalising non-payment of the licence.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ODfGYDm-30

end of the road

garrettod wrote: »

Okay, let's talk about the real world, given you've referred to same...

In what "real world" does a company, that's loss making more years than not, continue to run loss making operations, refuse to cut pay or cut the workforce, rather than risk complete failure and liquidation?

the real world we are living in where the organisation is an organisation designed to provide a public service, and where providing that public service would require more staff then an organisation providing simple entertainment programming.

garrettod wrote: »

I've no idea what you do for a living, or what relevant business experience you may have, but I know what I do and where my numbers come from, and I'm more than happy that I'm correct.

i'm sure you are very happy you are correct in your mind, but it seems rte and other big organisations don't agree.
they quite rightly don't care what you or i think about the wages they pay to their staff, it's between the staff and their employer.

garrettod wrote: »

You can't justify inappropriate pay for a CEO here, simply because it's state owned.

state owned or not, management with the experience of running a large organisation will acquire and require a high wage, thats just how it is .
300k and around that certainly seems to be appropriate pay for people capable of managing large organisations, and some even pay higher.

garrettod wrote: »

Pay at RTE is not comparable with the open market, for a company in the mess that RTE is in and its long past time someone put a stop to it.

it would be comparable to the open market to an extent, mid way between organisations such as the bbc and itv, and smaller organisations.

garrettod wrote: »

If your want to reward Dee Forbes, then link her compensation to her preformance - smaller salary, but bonuses for achieving certain targets such as cost cutting, returning RTE to profit etc.

as far as i understand, it is actually not in rte's remit to make a profit. sure it would be nice if it did but for it to do so would require i would suspect a paring back of the unprofitable public service output, and instead putting out even more of the entertainment fluff that it seems we all agree we do not want from rte.

garrettod wrote: »

I would personally rather put Michael O'Leary into RTE as CEO for a few years and pay him 4 times what we've been paying Dee Forbes, as I know you'd get far more value for your money from him!

Michael O'Leary is not the answer to solving issues with everything you know.
just because he was instrumental in the growth of an airline to being a very successful airline it doesn't mean he will automatically be successful in solving every other organisation's issues.
i can't imagine he has any experience of the broadcasting industry, so he would not really be a suitable candidate i would imagine.

end of the road

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

TV licence fee could be replaced by broadband levy, says BBC



There is also a body of opinion against the BBC within the UK and has been for several decades. Its biases have also become more apparent especially to the Brexit supporters and its pushing of identity politics is annoying a growing number of the UK public.


BBC comedian admits his own show could be 'tearing the country apart'




They have been panicked by the suggestion from the Tory government of moving to a subscription fee and decriminalising non-payment of the licence.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ODfGYDm-30

the body of opinion against the bbc in the uk are generally people who want to be told what they want to hear. i'm afraid in my experience that seems to be absolutely the case with a lot of brexit supporters.
there is no bias or identity politics in terms of bbc reporting, however i do agree that the attempts to implement divercity and representation among bbc staff rather then allowing it to happen organically probably isn't helping anyone, but it is certainly not something that should be used to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Brendan Bendar

end of the road wrote: »

the real world we are living in where the organisation is an organisation designed to provide a public service, and where providing that public service would require more staff then an organisation providing simple entertainment programming.




i'm sure you are very happy you are correct in your mind, but it seems rte and other big organisations don't agree.
they quite rightly don't care what you or i think about the wages they pay to their staff, it's between the staff and their employer.



state owned or not, management with the experience of running a large organisation will acquire and require a high wage, thats just how it is .
300k and around that certainly seems to be appropriate pay for people capable of managing large organisations, and some even pay higher.



it would be comparable to the open market to an extent, mid way between organisations such as the bbc and itv, and smaller organisations.



as far as i understand, it is actually not in rte's remit to make a profit. sure it would be nice if it did but for it to do so would require i would suspect a paring back of the unprofitable public service output, and instead putting out even more of the entertainment fluff that it seems we all agree we do not want from rte.



Michael O'Leary is not the answer to solving issues with everything you know.
just because he was instrumental in the growth of an airline to being a very successful airline it doesn't mean he will automatically be successful in solving every other organisation's issues.
i can't imagine he has any experience of the broadcasting industry, so he would not really be a suitable candidate i would imagine.

We know all that..

Pa ElGrande

end of the road wrote: »

the body of opinion against the bbc in the uk are generally people who want to be told what they want to hear. i'm afraid in my experience that seems to be absolutely the case with a lot of brexit supporters.
there is no bias or identity politics in terms of bbc reporting, however i do agree that the attempts to implement divercity and representation among bbc staff rather then allowing it to happen organically probably isn't helping anyone, but it is certainly not something that should be used to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

There very definitely is a bias there and one that usually follows a politically correct narrative on specific topics. The overt implementation of diversity has directly taken them from being impartial and objective and involved themselves in a political conflict between social conservatives and social liberals in the UK. Even a program like Gardeners World does not escape the diversity quotas, admittedly I have not seen it for a while but I did notice segments where they added "diversity" that added nothing to the program other than a tick box item.


You can see political topics affect RTE coverage is the same manner on topics like climate change with political activists complaining there is not enough coverage and using the cover of the public interest to push their agenda, even though I don't watch RTE. it is a fair assumption on my part that its coverage does not question the narrative. Here is an example of a blatant propaganda image that was shown one RTE last year, the image is unsupported by the science and draws from a catastrophists own imagination but it is used to support a particular political narrative.

Harry Palmr

Meanwhile in Channel 4land

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/apr/05/channel-4-pays-millions-in-bonuses-amid-coronavirus-tv-ad-slump

Channel 4 has paid out millions in bonuses to bosses and staff while opening talks with the government about potentially tapping an emergency £75m credit facility as the coronavirus hammers the TV industry.

The broadcaster, which is publicly owned but funds itself mostly through TV advertising, is estimated to have paid out more than £5m to its 903 staff last month.

The payouts, which include hundreds of thousands of pounds in bonuses each to the chief executive, Alex Mahon, the director of programmes, Ian Katz, and the commercial boss, Jonathan Allan, relate to the performance of Channel 4 last year.

It is understood Channel 4 will announce this week a range of cost-cutting measures for this year, one of which includes a temporary 20% reduction in the salary of the executive team and board.

Ad revenue is their entire income really at about 1.1bn, as idea of what's coming ITV revenue is tracking down by 34% at the moment. There'll be a massive hole by years end, even with 180m in reserves.

RabbleRouser2k

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

TV licence fee could be replaced by broadband levy, says BBC

They have been panicked by the suggestion from the Tory government of moving to a subscription fee and decriminalising non-payment of the licence.

That Kumar guy is an even bigger fart sniffer than I'd imagined.

The thing about identity politics is that audiences switch off. Without an audience, you can't justify your license fee.
All this 'DON'T MISGENDER ME!!!' bullcrap is starting to annoy the mainstream audience.

It's been a proven loss maker across every entertainment medium.

If they're panicked, they know that trying to conform to the 'woke' audience is going to lead to cutbacks and layoffs as money makers.

ButtersSuki

ButtersSuki wrote: »

Lottie Ryan on the cover of 3 magazines at the checkouts in my local Super Valu last night. RTE pushing her harder than ever now, as predicted. RTE determined to make her a star (:rolleyes:) no matter what. They have a duty to enrich the offspring and extended families of former contractors at our expense.

Having looked at the “Who’s Who of Celebrity Talent”, could it be Noel Kelly who’s pushing her? He’s as much to gain as anyone

RabbleRouser2k

Deleted User wrote: »

Having looked at the “Who’s Who of Celebrity Talent”, could it be Noel Kelly who’s pushing her? He’s as much to gain as anyone

https://www.independent.ie/lifestyle/why-rte-stars-call-noel-kelly-the-godfather-26793708.html

This explains so much. Wasn't Gerry Ryan's book pretty much a disaster? Many of the books were pulped.

The bit in that article about 'breaking' Tubridy into the UK... I only have to laugh.

Ryan fell on his ar*e over there.

ButtersSuki

Deleted User wrote: »

Having looked at the “Who’s Who of Celebrity Talent”, could it be Noel Kelly who’s pushing her? He’s as much to gain as anyone

Possibly; but either way it's a virtuous circle - Lottie on the cover of magazines shows how opoluar she is = more appearances on RTE because she's so popular = more shows = more magazine and on and on.....= more fees.

RabbleRouser2k

ButtersSuki wrote: »

Possibly; but either way it's a virtuous circle - Lottie on the cover of magazines shows how opoluar she is = more appearances on RTE because she's so popular = more shows = more magazine and on and on.....= more fees.

True... I suppose Jennifer Zamperelli's an example of this.

Was on The Apprentice UK, got noticed by RTE (probably booked Kelly too). Did a lot of interviews after the show. Wrangled herself into another Reality tv show, Failte Towers.

Then got into Republic of Telly, managed to get some sh**e dating show that died on its a**e and was cancelled not long after.
Slowly but surely wrangled her way into getting the Dancing with the Stars job... and that was one of those sure-fire ratings winners. No matter how sh**e it was, it would get the audience.

And it did-does better than the LLS on most occassions. So her agent can say 'well, this show gets a huge audience=it's because of Jen=give her more money'.

Lottie 'might' try the same angle... but so did Mairead Farrell (remember when RTE shoved her into EVERYTHING to see if she would catch on, including The Panel and the Republic of Telly. Or a revampled Movie Show that didn't even finish a season).
Lucky for Farrell, she married a NAMA millionaire.

maestroamado

Why not give all presenters say €100,000.
It should not be beyond technology to calculate revenue generated bhy a given programme and if they are good enough they be rewarded from this revenue. To my mind there are only a few good presenters in RTE and the rest are mediocre.
Let the people who are paying the advertising revenue decide where the spend their money and presenters rewarded accordingly.
AFAIK the way its done now it is done by time of day and prime rates probably between 8/10pm.
I see another thread here where it showed a presenter who did not even know how to dress herself and though i usually not take too much heed of this stuff i agree..
Michael O'Leary, i have a feeling he may be looking at the "aras" as he came out a few times in the last couple of years supporting FG candidates which surprised me, he may have his reasons.
I think he be great ambassador for Ireland.

RabbleRouser2k

I hope Noel Kelly isn't expecting a bonus for this.

https://www.msn.com/en-ie/entertainment/tv/irish-broadcasters-who-caught-covid-19-all-attended-the-same-charity-bash/ar-BB12budg?ocid=spartandhp

elperello

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

I hope Noel Kelly isn't expecting a bonus for this.

https://www.msn.com/en-ie/entertainment/tv/irish-broadcasters-who-caught-covid-19-all-attended-the-same-charity-bash/ar-BB12budg?ocid=spartandhp

I suppose the journalist who wrote that piece did get paid.

It's just a puff piece full of conjecture.

March 6th there were no restrictions. Pubs and restaurants were all open.

RabbleRouser2k

elperello wrote: »

I suppose the journalist who wrote that piece did get paid.

It's just a puff piece full of conjecture.

March 6th there were no restrictions. Pubs and restaurants were all open.

Oh I agree-this felt like Kelly wrote a puff piece to 'take one for the team', so to speak.

Make up an excuse about how all these folks got sick, then wrangle more money out of their employers to say 'well, they worked while they were sick'.

ijohhj

Ban the television license. Want money? Make things people want and are willing to pay for. Money up front with the result being reality series about women picking out their wedding dresses is some farce.

The balls on them to try and go after monitors too. No RTE, I don't watch your content because it's garbage. So I'm not paying for it.

end of the road

ijohhj wrote: »

Ban the television license. Want money? Make things people want and are willing to pay for. Money up front with the result being reality series about women picking out their wedding dresses is some farce.

The balls on them to try and go after monitors too. No RTE, I don't watch your content because it's garbage. So I'm not paying for it.

unviable and isn't going to happen quite rightly.
whatever about having a license to have a tv capable of receiving a terrestrial signal, public funding for rte in some form is necessary for the bits it actually does do well, few i would suspect are going to pay of their own will for something that has generally always been free to air, regardless of how good the content would be.

ijohhj

end of the road wrote: »

unviable and isn't going to happen quite rightly.

Completely viable and should happen.

If there's media of Irish interest to be made, it should be funded like all other media is. You seek funding either from private companies or from government culture funding schemes.

Varik

Worst thing that could happen is they get get directly funded as they are now, government would be upping their funding when it suited for good press and RTE finest would be able to hire the whole family.

Should be trimed down to just RTE 1 and news, and a ban on all purchased programming. If they want more they can fund that entirely themselves by ads.

ohnonotgmail

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

True... I suppose Jennifer Zamperelli's an example of this.

Was on The Apprentice UK, got noticed by RTE (probably booked Kelly too). Did a lot of interviews after the show. Wrangled herself into another Reality tv show, Failte Towers.

Then got into Republic of Telly, managed to get some sh**e dating show that died on its a**e and was cancelled not long after.
Slowly but surely wrangled her way into getting the Dancing with the Stars job... and that was one of those sure-fire ratings winners. No matter how sh**e it was, it would get the audience.

And it did-does better than the LLS on most occassions. So her agent can say 'well, this show gets a huge audience=it's because of Jen=give her more money'.

Lottie 'might' try the same angle... but so did Mairead Farrell (remember when RTE shoved her into EVERYTHING to see if she would catch on, including The Panel and the Republic of Telly. Or a revampled Movie Show that didn't even finish a season).
Lucky for Farrell, she married a NAMA millionaire.

Zamparelli starred in and co-wrote Bridget and Eamon so you cant compare her to the talentless lottie ryan.

Kivaro

When you see RTE supporters (employees) on here pushing for direct taxation to support the quango, then the rest of us should realise that it is a terrible idea. It would result in a blank cheque book for RTE to continue with their primary objective ........... which is to financially support RTE stars/staff/families/friends.
I am still amazed that RTE has not offered across the board salary reductions like many governments and businesses are doing across the world in solidarity with the massive amounts of people who have lost their jobs due to this pandemic.

Is Ryan Tubridy really worth paying almost €1/2 million every single year?
How many damn masks could we buy with that money?
It is obscene and an insult to all of us in Ireland.

end of the road

ijohhj wrote: »

Completely viable and should happen.

If there's media of Irish interest to be made, it should be funded like all other media is. You seek funding either from private companies or from government culture funding schemes.

likely unviable and is unlikely to happen and nor should it.
if there's media of Irish interest to be made such as programming of cultural and necessary signifficance such as a higher standard of news and current affairs and other non-commercially viable programming, it shouldn't be funded like all other media is when it is being broadcast by the state broadcaster, as the state broadcaster is necessary and exists for the good of the state and it's people, even if some of the programming happens to be rubbish in an individual, or multiple individuals opinion. you don't seek funding either from private companies or from government culture funding schemes, but public funding and government schemes if rte has access to them.

Varik wrote: »

Worst thing that could happen is they get get directly funded as they are now, government would be upping their funding when it suited for good press and RTE finest would be able to hire the whole family.

Should be trimed down to just RTE 1 and news, and a ban on all purchased programming. If they want more they can fund that entirely themselves by ads.

trimming it down would remove some public service content which would make the service less relevant.
certainly a bann on imported programming and entertainment fluff would be reasonable.
over all the amount of tv stations and radio stations rte have are just about right.