RTE stars pay list for 2006 just released, they worth it?

Standard Toaster · 29-02-2008 12:35AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsYU_hB2FgI

If similar happened every Friday I'd gladly pay my TV license.

gurramok · 29-02-2008 01:07AM

The_Edge wrote: »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jsYU_hB2FgI

If similar happened every Friday I'd gladly pay my TV license.

It was staged.

best link on that page was http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNT7uZf7lew&NR=1 , Men at Work, but that's not on topic regarding Rte 'stars'

Zonda999 · 29-02-2008 01:23AM

Most of those on the list do a fair bit of broadcasting but Finucane really stands out.Thats a nice bit of dosh for a weekend only job!!!

Jesus Wept · 29-02-2008 01:46AM

The_Edge wrote: »

I'm canceling my TV license.

lol.

Call them and tell them that. :rolleyes:

You don't cancel your TV license, you just ignore the renewal notices.

IanCurtis · 29-02-2008 01:54AM

Yes I have no intention of paying my licence this year.

It's a joke on the Irish people.

The BBC have channels with no advertising, with huge ratings winner TV & radio shows like Wogan, Jonathan Ross, MOTD, etc. etc.

We have a fat **** Gerry Ryan getting paid 500,000 a year.

If everyone were not to renew the licence, RTE would be in with the creditors within 6 months, advertisers would pull the plug within 9 months and they would go belly-up from their normal service within one year, bar the intervention of the Government.

Worth a shot methinks.

Let's do it!

Skyuser · 29-02-2008 02:43AM

How the hell does Joe Duffy get paid €1500 per hour? He does a 75min show 5 days a week for about 40 weeks of the year. Work it out.

Jesus Wept · 29-02-2008 02:51AM

IanCurtis wrote: »

We have a fat **** Gerry Ryan getting paid 500,000 a year.

What's weight got to do with it?!

Skyuser wrote: »

How the hell does Joe Duffy get paid €1500 per hour? He does a 75min show 5 days a week for about 40 weeks of the year. Work it out.

You are making the presumption that he starts just before he goes on air and leaves the second he is off air.

That's a really silly presumption to make.

Regardless of whether or not he is value for whatever hours he actually works, your figures are fudged.

Dennis the Stone · 29-02-2008 02:52AM

It's great to know our money is going towards Joe Duffy's pinstripe suits and robococks for Pat Kenny to pleasure his wife with.

Skyuser · 29-02-2008 02:57AM

The-Rigger wrote: »

You are making the presumption that he starts just before he goes on air and leaves the second he is off air.

That's a really silly presumption to make.

Regardless of whether or not he is value for whatever hours he actually works, your figures are fudged.

His show doesn't exactly demand huge research. It's a bunch of complainers shouting about some crap.

He is on more than Ryan Tubridy which does way more hours on radio and tv with a lot more research needed.(not sticking up for Tubridy, i'd like to see his resignation asap)

AlmightyCushion · 29-02-2008 03:00AM

I'm applying for a job in rte in the morning. Easy money.

Dennis the Stone · 29-02-2008 03:00AM

How about RTÉ grow some balls and actually develop some new talent. Leave Pat Kenny shag off to TV3, it's not like anybody would care. He'd be ideal as a showbiz correspondent on Exposé

Standard Toaster · 29-02-2008 03:16AM

The-Rigger wrote: »

You don't cancel your TV license, you just ignore the renewal notices.

Ah, ye know what I meant! :rolleyes:

http://static.flickr.com/117/315963524_d1ba859b16_o.jpg

Wertz · 29-02-2008 03:24AM

Kemos wrote: »

Leave Pat Kenny shag off to TV3, it's not like anybody would care. He'd be ideal as a showbiz correspondent on Exposé

Now that might be worth paying for...

BTW I have nothing against Finucane, I liked her on liveline more than Duffy, but her shows now consist of what I'd equate to a coffee morning and a quick scout through the week's papers, with whoever RTÉ could drag out of bed on a weekend morning...
Nice work if you can get it...

jtsuited · 29-02-2008 03:59AM

ok while i agree kenny is ****e and all, there are a few things you're forgetting here.

rte have to pay these people these ridiculous salaries to stop them heading elsewhere for more money. the predicted loss of advertising revenue resulting from their departure is obviously greater than the salary they pay them. believe me rte would not pay a penny more than they have to.

secondly, the airtime is no reflection on how much time they spend working there. Those guys are in there every second of the day working. I've been in there a lot and have seen the hours they work.

however, i do agree that they're all crap. The problem is, the rte audience are very conservative and if any of these people went to TV3, BBC, UTV, etc. huge ratings would be lost.
look at what happened to rte radio's listenership figures after today fm got people like Ian Dempsey. The exact same thing would happen if any of the people mentioned in the list left for greener pastures.

dRNk SAnTA · 29-02-2008 04:23AM

gurramok wrote: »

The full list is:

1. Pat Kenny €849,139
2. Gerry Ryan €558,990
3. Marian Finucane €455,190
4. Joe Duffy €367,804
5. Ryan Turbidy €346,667
6. Derek Mooney €242,408
7. Marty Whelan €229,056
8. Miriam O'Callaghan €221,383
9. John Kelly €204,675
10. Bryan Dobson €193,610

Pat Kenny is a hero to me, so 850k isn't enough.

The most overpaid:
Marian ****ing Finucane. She's awful!
Marty ****ing Whelan (what is he even doing? is he still on 2fm?)

Most underpaid:
Jooooeeeee Duuuuuuffffyyyyy - his program is politically pretty powerful and he has to listen to old people crow on about rubbish every day
Byan Dobson - unless he reports it - it didn't happen.
Mark Little - way better than miriam "cheaper by the dozen" o'callaghan
George Lee - because economics is hard.

Spastafarian · 29-02-2008 04:56AM

dRNk SAnTA wrote: »

Pat Kenny is a hero to me, so 850k isn't enough.

You should really tell us when you're being sarcastic to avoid confusion.

AlmightyCushion · 29-02-2008 05:03AM

Spastafarian wrote: »

You should really tell us when you're being sarcastic to avoid confusion.

Given the username I'd say he's more likely drunk. They should make this into a diageo ad. Same ad as the one where yer man wakes up after getting shítfaced and gets all embarrassed with himself and all his friends hate him except, replace the fighting, spilling drink on some hot chick and vomiting all over the place with standing on a table in a busy pub and screaming "Pat Kenny is my hero.".

It might be more effective.

rubadub · 29-02-2008 05:11AM

jtsuited wrote: »

look at what happened to rte radio's listenership figures after today fm got people like Ian Dempsey. The exact same thing would happen if any of the people mentioned in the list left for greener pastures.

So if they left audiences would drop. So what? They get less revenue from advertising? then what?

I honestly don't see the problem, if they went to TV3 (your greener pasture) for more money then what does that mean to the average punter? Auld Biddy will still get to see them on TV3 yes? but she will not have to fork out for 50% of their wages via the licence. She will simply have to suffer ads on TV3 to pay for it. Everyones a winner.

Why not have rte inline with other station?. Are they running scared that they have to have the government make it a crime not to subscribe to their service if you have a TV. Years ago a TV was a luxury item, it sort of made sense to tax it as such, now 99% of homes have them, why is there a licence fee, why not just include it in normal taxes?

But really why have it forced upon people at all? Why not offer it as a subscription service like any other TV stations? give people the choice.

I have asked in several other threads why don't they introduce a cooker licence. I expect a similar 99% of households have a cooker these days. The government could issue households with recipes and/or food for the bargain €160 per year. If you do not like the recipes/food then STFU, just bin it, let it go to waste, like unwatched TV, someone out their might enjoy the food, nobody is forcing you to eat it, just forcing you to pay for it. You do it for TV so why would you complain about doing it for food? Of course to get people attention we would have to employ "celebrity" chefs and pay them 500,000 per year for these recipes. I mean, WTF would watch some guy being interviewed by some no-name wooden plank rather than Pat Kenny, and WTF would cook anything thought up by someone who is not even on the telly. If you turn your cooker on just once a year to heat the room, then you pay full whack, doesnt matter if you eat food or not, just like you pay full whack if you only watch dvds on your tv.

jtsuited · 29-02-2008 06:27AM

ok there is a very good argument for having a state broadcaster. i won't get into it now.

should people in the UK have to pay their television licence?

If your answer is 'yes as they don't have to watch ads', then I'd point to the fact that license revenue alone would not cover a fraction of the cost to run a decent state broadcaster in this country. It is simply necessary to have advertising revenue.

then you might say 'no why should we have to pay a licence, we don't need a state broadcaster'. Well I firmly believe we do. You only have to compare the standard of programming on TV3 to RTE to see why we need a state broadcaster.
Or if any of you have witnessed the 24 hour infomercial that is US television you'll see why having some sort of non-commercial control of a TV station is vital.

Hagar · 29-02-2008 08:52AM

That's just their RTE wages. It would be interesting to know how much other income their "celebrity" generates for them.

Blitzkrieger · 29-02-2008 09:26AM

No.

An Irish TV license has to be the least value per money stealth tax ever.....

rubadub · 29-02-2008 09:59AM

jtsuited wrote: »

ok there is a very good argument for having a state broadcaster. i won't get into it now.

If you are going to insist that we need a broadcaster can you tell my why we should pay a licence fee. i.e. why does it simply not come out of normal taxation?

Why go through the hassle of collecting fees if 99% of households have to pay it. The administration costs must be huge. How much is spent tracking down non-payers, how much is spent prosecuting them? How much is the admin costs in tracking people who do pay?

How much is spent simply producing and broadcasting ads about paying the licence?

jtsuited wrote: »

should people in the UK have to pay their television licence?

If your answer is 'yes as they don't have to watch ads', then I'd point to the fact that license revenue alone would not cover a fraction of the cost to run a decent state broadcaster in this country. It is simply necessary to have advertising revenue.

UK has more licence payers too

jtsuited wrote: »

You only have to compare the standard of programming on TV3 to RTE to see why we need a state broadcaster.

I think TV3 do very well, I would like to see how well they could do with €160 from every household every year. What you are doing is like comparing the metro to the irish times, and saying "now you can see why we need papers that you have to pay for".

jtsuited wrote: »

Or if any of you have witnessed the 24 hour infomercial that is US television you'll see why having some sort of non-commercial control of a TV station is vital.

Why should people be forced into it? you want it, so fair enough, you can pay for it just like any other cable TV. If you want the sports package you pay NTL/UPC for it every month, then they pay sky & setanta on your behalf. Why should RTE not operate the same way? If they have such good programming surely they will get a good subscription base.

BigEejit · 29-02-2008 10:08AM

The-Rigger wrote: »

You are making the presumption that he starts just before he goes on air and leaves the second he is off air.

That's a really silly presumption to make.

Regardless of whether or not he is value for whatever hours he actually works, your figures are fudged.

Do you know what, he's right!!

Its those damn researchers, producers and other ne'er-do-wells that do nothing, flipping-taxpayers-money-wasters

/me grabs pitchfork

tomred1 · 29-02-2008 10:15AM

Who is John Kelly?
They are all probaly getting more money now.This was 2 years ago!

Wook · 29-02-2008 10:24AM

Mossy Monk wrote: »

Pat Kenny does have a large viewing audience which does mean lots of advertising money. I am sure a lot of people listen to the radio show too.

If that is the case why the **** do they want me to pay for my tv

Sherifu · 29-02-2008 10:36AM

I wouldn't give Plank and Duffy a penny. But since i'm not paying I don't really care.

mike65 · 29-02-2008 11:21AM

rubadub wrote:

I think TV3 do very well, I would like to see how well they could do with €160 from every household every year.

I would'nt, everything about TV3 screams lowest common denominator cheap tat. The station is almost entirely irrelevant to Ireland. If I wanted to watch some programme featuring a planning dispute in an English village I'd watch it on ITV. I dunno how they get away with it tbh.

Mike.

Wertz · 29-02-2008 11:43AM

jtsuited wrote: »

rte have to pay these people these ridiculous salaries to stop them heading elsewhere for more money. the predicted loss of advertising revenue resulting from their departure is obviously greater than the salary they pay them. believe me rte would not pay a penny more than they have to.

secondly, the airtime is no reflection on how much time they spend working there. Those guys are in there every second of the day working. I've been in there a lot and have seen the hours they work.

I hear your first point trotted out every time this subject comes up and it's a flawed argument...where are these high rollers going to go? TV3? Is sky going to headhunt them? I very much doubt it at those prices. That argument is spurious at best and I don't think that the license fee payer should have this imaginary gun put to their head that all their fave RTÉ big names are going to end up on digital telly that you need one of them fancy dishes for...

On your second point, yes I'm sure most of us realise that there is a lot of time spent behind the scenes, doing research, background work, promotional stuff hours spent in make up and administrative duties in general...but that still doesn't excuse relative hourly rates that stillrun into what equates to hundreds of euro per hour

Yes most of them are crap, but the fact is they're established names, deservedly so or not, people feel comfortable when they listen to/watch them, and these people are license fee payers....but at the end of it all I think those license payers and the likes of myself and other dissenters still deserve value for money and WRT high wages to the few, we simply aren't getting that value.
It's indefensible, no amount of counter argument would convince me otherwise...

rubadub · 29-02-2008 11:47AM

mike65 wrote: »

I would'nt, everything about TV3 screams lowest common denominator cheap tat. The station is almost entirely irrelevant to Ireland. If I wanted to watch some programme featuring a planning dispute in an English village I'd watch it on ITV. I dunno how they get away with it tbh.

Mike.

What are they getting away with exactly?

If most people wanted to watch the same program on ITV they would have to pay for that.

TV3 is free, so the only thing I can think of that they could be "getting away with" would be overcharging advertisers. But obviously the advertisers think it is worth the money.

mike65 · 29-02-2008 11:53AM

The majority of TV3 viewers also have UPC cable/MMDS/FTA - only Skyers can't watch ITV at the moment. The TV3 recipe of retransmitting chunks of ITV is a bankrupt policy and would be seen as such if it were not for a handful of programmes like Emmerdale, Corrie and Dancing on Ice which probably deliver sufficent numbers to bring in a decent advertising revenue stream.

And that stuff not ITV is trash from the states like Americas Top Next Model Idol which can also been elsewhere.

Mike.

RTE stars pay list for 2006 just released, they worth it?

Comments