Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[STEMO]

If any of us on here were offered a job with the beeb on half a million quid a year who would honestly refuse it ?

I think some of the oldies on here are joining the social media crowd. I honestly couldn't give a toss and I don't think it's any of our business.

[tunnie]

If any of us on here were offered a job with the beeb on half a million quid a year who would honestly refuse it ?

I think some of the oldies on here are joining the social media crowd. I honestly couldn't give a toss and I don't think it's any of our business.

For the likes of Sky, which is an optional service I agree with this. You can pay [X] amount to have Sky, it's your choice and if you don't want it you cancel it.

BBC however it's forced, if I don't pay it I can have people banging on my door, demanding license fee payment. It is basically a tax-payer funded service, they closed down BBC Three and put it online to save money....

I quite liked BBC 3, I would have preferred that still on the air than Chris Evans 

[aaronjb]

If any of us on here were offered a job with the beeb on half a million quid a year who would honestly refuse it ?

Damn straight. I'd even work nights or weekends for that kind of money.

[STEMO]

If any of us on here were offered a job with the beeb on half a million quid a year who would honestly refuse it ?

I think some of the oldies on here are joining the social media crowd. I honestly couldn't give a toss and I don't think it's any of our business.

For the likes of Sky, which is an optional service I agree with this. You can pay [X] amount to have Sky, it's your choice and if you don't want it you cancel it.

BBC however it's forced, if I don't pay it I can have people banging on my door, demanding license fee payment. It is basically a tax-payer funded service, they closed down BBC Three and put it online to save money....

I quite liked BBC 3, I would have preferred that still on the air than Chris Evans 

So you think, if the BBC reduced the pay limit to 50K, that the license would be cheaper? Dream on. As for them using the money to improve the quality of programmes, that's subjective, isn't it?

[Viral_Jim]

Personally, I'm not bothered by the levels of pay at the BBC. Do I think Chris Evans is worth £2.2m p.a.? Of course not. But he earns less than a lot of professional footballists and provides me with significantly more enjoyment than any one of that lot. Everything in this world is worth what someone else will pay you for it,

Evans has managed to convince someone that his time is worth £2.2m p.a. Good for him, I wouldn't mind some of the same. There's a lot of sour grapes in the UK about people who earn large sums of money.

That said, I do see the argument publishing salaries, as a quasi-public-sector institution, there is a public interest argument there.

[aaronjb]

Evans has managed to convince someone that his time is worth £2.2m p.a. Good for him, I wouldn't mind some of the same. There's a lot of sour grapes in the UK about people who earn large sums of money.

As a nation (thus, this is a generalisation) we don't like anyone who has done well for themselves, regardless of what profession they chose..

[STEMO]

Evans has managed to convince someone that his time is worth £2.2m p.a. Good for him, I wouldn't mind some of the same. There's a lot of sour grapes in the UK about people who earn large sums of money.

As a nation (thus, this is a generalisation) we don't like anyone who has done well for themselves, regardless of what profession they chose..

You just said a mouthful, Aaron. 

[2boxerdogs]

Good luck to them I say, why all the fuss? Some people earn little some earn lots that's life, won't ever be any different, always have the choice of binning the TV if you don't want to contribute..

[tunnie]

If any of us on here were offered a job with the beeb on half a million quid a year who would honestly refuse it ?

I think some of the oldies on here are joining the social media crowd. I honestly couldn't give a toss and I don't think it's any of our business.

For the likes of Sky, which is an optional service I agree with this. You can pay [X] amount to have Sky, it's your choice and if you don't want it you cancel it.

BBC however it's forced, if I don't pay it I can have people banging on my door, demanding license fee payment. It is basically a tax-payer funded service, they closed down BBC Three and put it online to save money....

I quite liked BBC 3, I would have preferred that still on the air than Chris Evans 

So you think, if the BBC reduced the pay limit to 50K, that the license would be cheaper? Dream on. As for them using the money to improve the quality of programmes, that's subjective, isn't it?

Of course not 

But 2.2 million could have been better spent in other areas, rather than on one quite annoying presenter.

[tunnie]

Good luck to them I say, why all the fuss? Some people earn little some earn lots that's life, won't ever be any different, always have the choice of binning the TV if you don't want to contribute..

But what if you only want to watch ITV/C4/C5 and other freeview channels?

You still have to pay it.

[STEMO]

If any of us on here were offered a job with the beeb on half a million quid a year who would honestly refuse it ?

I think some of the oldies on here are joining the social media crowd. I honestly couldn't give a toss and I don't think it's any of our business.

For the likes of Sky, which is an optional service I agree with this. You can pay [X] amount to have Sky, it's your choice and if you don't want it you cancel it.

BBC however it's forced, if I don't pay it I can have people banging on my door, demanding license fee payment. It is basically a tax-payer funded service, they closed down BBC Three and put it online to save money....

I quite liked BBC 3, I would have preferred that still on the air than Chris Evans 

So you think, if the BBC reduced the pay limit to 50K, that the license would be cheaper? Dream on. As for them using the money to improve the quality of programmes, that's subjective, isn't it?

Of course not 

But 2.2 million could have been better spent in other areas, rather than on one quite annoying presenter.

Subjective, as I said.

[tunnie]

One example, but do they really need to pay just one news reader £750k to read the news for a couple of hours a day? 

[2boxerdogs]

Personally speaking worrying about the the cost of a TV licence or what others earn have never been high on my list of concerns, it is just another story in a few days it will be something else to wind people up.

[tunnie]

Personally speaking worrying about the the cost of a TV licence or what others earn have never been high on my list of concerns, it is just another story in a few days it will be something else to wind people up.

Nor mine, but when a tax payer funded service pays someone 5x more than Prime Minster, just to read some news out

Not fused what ITV/C4 or other corporations pay people, but BBC is public service.

[Kevin Wood]

I quite liked BBC 3, I would have preferred that still on the air than Chris Evans 

I would prefer root canal surgery.. and that includes paying for it.