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

Scotty # wrote: »

Capped salaries? This is the real world! Tubs is not going to work for the same money as say, Claire Byrne, despite taking in 10x, maybe 20x times her revenue. You think any of those presenters would work for €150K a year knowing the millions they generate? Joe Duffy has 400K daily listeners. That's over 10% of the adult population of this country. He's an advertising gold mine!

As I said earlier, the hosts on the big money are generating income for RTE, not costing it money. If they all left, taking their listeners and advertiser revenue with them, it would just cause an even bigger deficit. Suggesting a cut in their salaries as a way for RTE to save money is nonsensical. RTE needs them. That's why they're on the big bucks!

You might want to tell RTÉ that this is the real world. I assume you assume that the revenue generated by the 10 people RTÉ that this revenue not only goes to pay their wages but also it trickles down to into other "public service" areas and that their shows also bring in an audience to other areas of "public service" that RTÉ provide.

Indeed I expect you think that 3.9 million spent on Children's Content is enough and that the small increase to 5 or so million in 2018 is more power to RTÉ in these Hard times?

So the problem occurs when RTÉ spend so little on one of their core public services that the idea that these top 10 presenters should take up 1% of the total budget (That's about 3m) beggars belief.

No if RTÉ need to make cuts and their top stars aren't happy to take a cut, I'd show them



From the other side.

Scotty # wrote: »

Capped salaries? This is the real world! Tubs is not going to work for the same money as say, Claire Byrne, despite taking in 10x, maybe 20x times her revenue. You think any of those presenters would work for €150K a year knowing the millions they generate? Joe Duffy has 400K daily listeners. That's over 10% of the adult population of this country. He's an advertising gold mine!

As I said earlier, the hosts on the big money are generating income for RTE, not costing it money. If they all left, taking their listeners and advertiser revenue with them, it would just cause an even bigger deficit. Suggesting a cut in their salaries as a way for RTE to save money is nonsensical. RTE needs them. That's why they're on the big bucks!

It's not the presenters bringing in the audience,it's the show itself.

Joe probably has a dedicated following though in fairness. Can't believe he gets those numbers.
All over 65 no doubt.

Scotty # wrote: »

Capped salaries? This is the real world! Tubs is not going to work for the same money as say, Claire Byrne, despite taking in 10x, maybe 20x times her revenue. You think any of those presenters would work for €150K a year knowing the millions they generate? Joe Duffy has 400K daily listeners. That's over 10% of the adult population of this country. He's an advertising gold mine!

As I said earlier, the hosts on the big money are generating income for RTE, not costing it money. If they all left, taking their listeners and advertiser revenue with them, it would just cause an even bigger deficit. Suggesting a cut in their salaries as a way for RTE to save money is nonsensical. RTE needs them. That's why they're on the big bucks!

Give it 5 years. The advertisers will realise that they're getting f all out of radio 1. Nothing but a load of old people who spend nothing and dentist waiting rooms tuned in. There's no value for them there. People tend to think print media is a big deal, but boards.ie has higher certified readership than the papers. RTE 'stars' are near worthless, and will be more so as every day goes by.

elperello wrote: »

From another very proficient broadcaster.

The format of the show is important but you need someone who knows what they are doing behind the microphone.

He's knows what he's doing alright, setting one caller against the other.

Kivaro wrote: »

Then why are we paying for television licenses if they are generating so much income?
The TV Tax is an antiquated concept ..... for a different century.

Quite a few countries have a license in fairness. Wouldn't be totally against it,even though I practically never watch RTE. It's the obvious waste and poor programming that pisses folk off.

The Late Late Show wrote: »

I know this is (slightly) off-topic but I've been wondering too about the 'benefit' of advertising. Think about it: when the ads come on, people often tune out, go get a cup of coffee/tea or can of beer/glass of wine, check their email, text someone back, etc.

Most ads about services most people use anyway such as banks, phones, etc. One time, ads were just a poster and a talkover on TV and were cheap. Now, they have to be almost mini-movies and they are expensive to make. When you have so-called 'stars' like this Dermot Bannon on them, you can be sure he will not come cheap! The costs will outweigh any gains I feel. It is only a matter of time before the advertising industry is radically altered and will revert back to more realistic affordable options.

Particularly ads when we had monopolies. Suppose it subliminal.

I always think the Dermot Bannon ads are for eir.

AndyBoBandy wrote: »

And quite a few don’t have it.

I lived in Lithuania for a while, a country with a little over half the population of Ireland, where there are 3 big national broadcasters, all capable of putting on very slick productions regularly, and guess what, no TV Licence in Lithuania.

There is one public broadcaster, the rest are private. It's much like here, but they are Polish and Swedish private companies AFAIK. There is one syndicated Sports channel which is decent, but Dutch I think.

They basically had to wrestle back their TV Towers less than 30 years ago from the Soviets.

They were never going to introduce a direct tax for public television, they needed it "free" to get away from years of propaganda. A license system is apparently in the works though.

The Late Late Show wrote: »

One time, ads were just a poster and a talkover on TV and were cheap. Now, they have to be almost mini-movies and they are expensive to make.

Not just now, it's been like that for decades, since VCR's became affordable really.

They figured out the more entertaining the Ad the more will watch them.

'The Lady Loves Milktray' - 'Who is taking the Horse to France'.

The Late Late Show wrote: »

When you have so-called 'stars' like this Dermot Bannon on them, you can be sure he will not come cheap! The costs will outweigh any gains I feel. It is only a matter of time before the advertising industry is radically altered and will revert back to more realistic affordable options.

Bannon wouldn't be a pimple on the arsé of Vodafones advertising budget.

They wouldn't do it if they didn't work.

It's about saturation, watch Ireland in the 6 nations, half time a relatable like-able chap hocking their products.

It will be around for a while yet.

Boggles wrote: »

Speaking of which, a large sway of people banging on about the license fee don't seem to have much a problem handing a grand over to a British Company, personally I don't think the programming is 5/6 times better.

You personally don't, but they personally do, and have voluntarily opted to spend their hard earned on it, good for them.

The fact that it's a British company is neither here nor there.

Boggles wrote: »

Maybe they could be factors, but it always comes back to money.

Complaining about nothing been on tv is not new, it's has been a national past time in all nations for decades. Springsteen wrote a song about the bones of 3 decades ago.

It comes back to money, but RTÉ have made cuts in some areas where they shouldn't (Drama and Children's Content) and made no moves to make cuts in other areas (partiularly 25m they spend on imported programming).

You look at what products are popular, we can't afford them and the ones we can are fair poor, if they tried to make a series about dumping a load of idiots on and Island and listening to them whittle for a month they would be castigated, all though revenues would probably sore.

What would you like to see made that is low budget and popular?

I have personally no problem with popular programming from RTÉ, I think it is just as important as high end stuff, but it is limited, DWTS and Ireland's Fittest Family are at the high end of this type of programming, but there is so little of it, at the lower end you have Winning Streak. There are no Quiz Shows, no other Game Shows, these are still stables of TV content weather you like them or not.

Love/Hate seems to be the anchor everyone reverts back to. But lets be honest it was decent but it was over hyped to within an inch of it's life, Sunday World esque crime porn is basically what it was. They got very lucky because they stumbled upon Vaughan-Lawlor and cast him.

I agree, I'd be one of those people that didn't take to Love/Hate, I always thought that RTÉ had created better home produced dramas/comedy in the years up to that show and in the years after pulled back completely.

He has been cast in Dublin Murders which TBF looks decent.

Will it resonate with a nation, it's a story about historical child murders linked to the present so I don't know if will resonate.

But we do love a good crime drama, both here and the motherland.

It looks decent but its clearly a co-production and often they don't work for a local audience. This maybe the exception to the general rule I am putting on Co-Pros.

I don't know what you mean by the Motherland. And yes Irish Detective serials are hard to come by much like all type of Irish content.

Also I would say that RTÉ's 2019 line up of Drama's consists of Dublin Murders and The Resistance and nothing else. This looks bad and is bad.

Speaking of which, a large sway of people banging on about the license fee don't seem to have much a problem handing a grand over to a British Company, personally I don't think the programming is 5/6 times better.

I agree but you can't stop people, the BBC effectively get an extra Billion from content rights.

Boggles wrote: »

Pumping money into Children's content IMO would be futile.

Futile for what exactly

1. A Training Ground for young content producers?
2. Ability to sell animation worldwide?
3. To give children in Ireland an option to watch content produced in Ireland?
4. From a public service point of view, as in RTÉ are a public service content provider?

Where's the futility?

1. Buying programming that you have no control over for 25m per year?
2. Investing 25m in programming that provides nothing to your national economy?
3. Spending 25m on content that you don't have rights to put online (e.g. film and some other imported content)?
4. From a public service point of veiw wasting your income on programming that no one is watch on your service because they can get it everywhere else?

AndyBoBandy wrote: »

Most of what my son watched over the last year or 2 came out of Ireland, including Peter Rabbit, The Octonauts, Bing and a few more. (a lot of the CBeebies roster)

A lot of Irish produced stuff on Nickelodeon as well.

Ireland punches handsomely above its weight in terms of cartoon/animation production. Handsomely.
(It seems every other year an Oscar nominee in animation is Irish)

And no thanks to RTÉ and its great to see, but pulling the rug from all your own content does not help.

Again this isn't just about Children's Content but its as important as other content. They are cutting where they shouldn't.