TBH, the two most recent big name British presenters who went to America, failed or became washed, being piers morgan and james corden (how he's still on the air when nobody likes him is baffling) respectively. The grass isn't always greener, even if your paycheque is.Obscene amounts of money end up in the pockets of almost every TV presenter on mainstream TV channels; if anything other more commercial channels probably pay out at least as much, possibly even more, to their presenters/personalities, the difference is at the BBC they're required to disclose the salaries. I agree the BBC staff are paid excessive amounts, but the reality is until all other channels drive down their salaries too, the BBC are probably pressured into higher amounts to try and be competitive somehow. But hey, that's capitalism for you.
Exactly. If a Sky or Virgin package doesn't interest you or you don't need it, you can either not take it when you take out your contract or cancel it. If you're unhappy with them, you can also leave once your contract is up and won't get sent snotty letters and thuggish goons by an outsourcing firm, threatening you with jail if you don't pay them £159.Or perhaps thinks they should have the choice of only being forced to pay for what they want to watch ?
Correct, although knowing the people in charge there, they'd probably introduce a TV tax for all residents and it'd be no different than having the bbc. It'd be the same system, just now it's wearing a funny hat.But, should the BBC disappear (which I hope it does not) there would be nothing to stop the Scottish and Welsh Governments setting up their own publicly funded channels, along with their own licence fee ?
Yes, but when they are commanding too much of a premium, maybe it's time to find some new, cheaper talent that are just as good.Making television is an expensive business and the stars of the day can command a premium.
Another nails on chalkboard personality though. What is it with the bbc and hiring these people?Gary Lineker is an extremely experienced live sports presenter - a safe pair of hands for programmes watched by millions - there are not many people who can do that and they all get well compensated. He also gets paid significantly more for his non-BBC work - he is in the category of person who will take a pay cut in order to work for the BBC over its rivals.
It is still part of a government organisation, so it should be not only posting its profits, but then outlining how said profits are spent. The main problem though, isn't where the money's going, but why we have to pay £159 to them when they have a commercial arm.Question still stands, if the BBC's commercial arm is hiding away it's profits, where are they going? You can't really argue that them being spent on presenters isn't contributing to the programming.
The bbc has been on a self destruct path for years and it's about time someone hit the kill switch to prevent them from becoming an even bigger national embarrassment.I agree, the BBC is not what it used to be for sure. However what's proposed will make it even worse than it currently is, cultural vandalism which is not unexpected from this government and this minister in particular.
You mean cricket man and mr I'm only famous because of Peter Kay, whom the bbc have been trying their hardest (and failing) to non person CH&M with?Top Gear (now they've stopped trying to reinvent it with crap presenters)
Again, why are we paying them £159 when they're making putting on and making shows exclusively for netflix?I have also watched some series made by the BBC on Netflix.
Wonder who they did that with...They have ruined Question of Sport
To be fair, momentum loathe anyone who doesn't almost perfectly align with them.....and Momentum loathe them.