RTE Salaries

[Keyser soze]

You're a haranguer of haranguers!!

[whitey]

I hardly recognise any of them, and I've very little time for those I do (altho 'danger here' george is associated with many great memories).

I just resent the ever more common hypocritical populist outcry over other peoples wealth.

Agree in general, but if they're getting paid by the taxpayer, then people have a right to have their say

[Minder]

No Des Cahill or Marty Morrissey? Now there are two fellas stealing a living

[Franko]

I hardly recognise any of them, and I've very little time for those I do (altho 'danger here' george is associated with many great memories).

I just resent the ever more common hypocritical populist outcry over other peoples wealth.

A poor haranguer to boot.

You do understand the difference between people's wealth and people's salaries?  (Which we pay, incidentally).  Nobody mentioned these people's wealth.

What's your view on pharma companies overcharging state health agencies for drugs?  I take it you are happy with that?  After all, to follow your own logic, they are only people who are 'trying to get paid as well as possible'.   

[Owenmoresider]

So what? I'm sure everyone here is trying to get paid as well as possible. And the usual solution applies - if you think they're overpaid, apply for their job...

If they want to pay them such big wages that's one thing, but the fact that the quality of programming is in constant decline (look forward to another Christmas season of repeats they'll be putting on) and they have lost so much of the sports rights they enjoyed in the past suggests that the money (which is substantially provided by us taxpayers lest we forget) could be put to better use.

[haranguerer]

I hardly recognise any of them, and I've very little time for those I do (altho 'danger here' george is associated with many great memories).

I just resent the ever more common hypocritical populist outcry over other peoples wealth.

A poor haranguer to boot.

You do understand the difference between people's wealth and people's salaries?  (Which we pay, incidentally).  Nobody mentioned these people's wealth.

What's your view on pharma companies overcharging state health agencies for drugs?  I take it you are happy with that?  After all, to follow your own logic, they are only people who are 'trying to get paid as well as possible'.   

You understand that my statement was generalising? And its not a massive leap to correlate high salaries and wealth, is it?

Re the situation you describe, define over-charging. Are the drugs available elsewhere cheaper? If they are, that would be a procurement failing.

Are the drugs not available elsewhere? Then the pharma company can and will charge a premium to cover the development of the drug. To what level however, can and should be regulated, if not, that's a regulation failing.

But I'm sure if you were a pharma boss you'd take the living wage and give the drugs out freely 

[haranguerer]

I hardly recognise any of them, and I've very little time for those I do (altho 'danger here' george is associated with many great memories).

I just resent the ever more common hypocritical populist outcry over other peoples wealth.

Agree in general, but if they're getting paid by the taxpayer, then people have a right to have their say

Perhaps, but people find it very difficult to be objective in these matters. Its a classic populist issue. So I suppose you could say people have a right to have their say, but should expect to be ignored, because their say is predictable and hypocritical...

[haranguerer]

So what? I'm sure everyone here is trying to get paid as well as possible. And the usual solution applies - if you think they're overpaid, apply for their job...

If they want to pay them such big wages that's one thing, but the fact that the quality of programming is in constant decline (look forward to another Christmas season of repeats they'll be putting on) and they have lost so much of the sports rights they enjoyed in the past suggests that the money (which is substantially provided by us taxpayers lest we forget) could be put to better use.

Is the quality of programming in constant decline, or is that just a statement which, coupled with nostalgia, sounds true?

[trailer]

These people are overpaid not because of their ability but because the way we consume entertainment is changing. In our house we have one TV. Children watch it yes but it's on demand Amazon and Netflix. We also have laptop, Ipad and phones. Sure the News and political debate, talkshows need an anchor, but there'll be no need to pay them so much. I listen to podcasts and watch loads of stuff on youtube. I'd say all I really watch is the News on TV and the odd TV show that's recommended.
Technology has disrupted the mainstream media. These guys are Xtra Vision Video in a Netflix world. 

[manfromdelmonte]

Does George Hamilton have to turn up at work every day, even though he could go weeks without a commentary gig?

He's on Lyric FM as well

[Franko]

I hardly recognise any of them, and I've very little time for those I do (altho 'danger here' george is associated with many great memories).

I just resent the ever more common hypocritical populist outcry over other peoples wealth.

A poor haranguer to boot.

You do understand the difference between people's wealth and people's salaries?  (Which we pay, incidentally).  Nobody mentioned these people's wealth.

What's your view on pharma companies overcharging state health agencies for drugs?  I take it you are happy with that?  After all, to follow your own logic, they are only people who are 'trying to get paid as well as possible'.   

You understand that my statement was generalising? And its not a massive leap to correlate high salaries and wealth, is it?

Re the situation you describe, define over-charging. Are the drugs available elsewhere cheaper? If they are, that would be a procurement failing.

Are the drugs not available elsewhere? Then the pharma company can and will charge a premium to cover the development of the drug. To what level however, can and should be regulated, if not, that's a regulation failing.

But I'm sure if you were a pharma boss you'd take the living wage and give the drugs out freely 

And hey presto, with a little leading, you finally got there.  You couldn't have made it any easier if you tried.  You even set out examples.

So, to use your own words and examples, this type of behaviour is caused by flaws in the regulation or procurement processes which govern RTE.

Will we go back to my original point, offer them 100k each a year, and see what happens?

The prosecution rests.

[Franko]

So what? I'm sure everyone here is trying to get paid as well as possible. And the usual solution applies - if you think they're overpaid, apply for their job...

If they want to pay them such big wages that's one thing, but the fact that the quality of programming is in constant decline (look forward to another Christmas season of repeats they'll be putting on) and they have lost so much of the sports rights they enjoyed in the past suggests that the money (which is substantially provided by us taxpayers lest we forget) could be put to better use.

Is the quality of programming in constant decline, or is that just a statement which, coupled with nostalgia, sounds true?

Well you could heed the evidence of your eyes and ears... if you wanted to.  You could look at a company that is selling off assets to meet daily running costs.  But be careful now, because apparently that can be considered populist and hypocritical by some.   

https://www.independent.ie/entertainment/television/tv-news/doh-level-of-repeats-being-aired-is-just-not-acceptable-says-rte-chief-30936892.html

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/viewers-can-kiss-goodbye-to-new-rte-shows-on-this-summer-of-repeats-3z80cvjn7

https://www.independent.ie/entertainment/television/tv-reviews/pat-stacey-rte-is-showing-20-repeats-today-why-are-we-paying-160-a-year-for-this-31428735.html

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/media-and-marketing/repeats-but-not-much-recovery-in-sight-for-rt%C3%A9-1.3159411

http://animationireland.com/travails-on-permanent-repeat-at-rte-ad-competition-licence-fee-evasion-and-ascent-of-netflix-complicate-life-at-montrose/

[Main Street]

This just released...
Ryan Tubridy - €495,000
Ray D'Arcy - €450,000
Joe Duffy - €398,000
Sean O'Rourke - €308,964
Marian Finucane - €300,167
Miriam O'Callaghan - €299,000
Claire Byrne - €216,000
Bryan Dobson - €198,600
George Hamilton - €186,195
Mary Wilson - €185,679

I am all for talent getting rewarded but can I ask who is going to try to poach anyone there? Marian coughs her way through two chats a week.
Even more amazed that George Hamilton, who I like, is on that. What does he actually do??

There needs to be a clear-out and a new generation on 50% less brought in.

George does 2 shows weekly on Lyric fm, that's surely worth a few euros of his 186,000.
If George is a regular employee he'd have a take home salary of about Eur100,000.
which isn't too outrageous, but he should be deducted Eur 1,000 everytime he says "oh  ... danger here"  for the superstitious dread that befalls the tens of thousands of viewers.

[haranguerer]

I hardly recognise any of them, and I've very little time for those I do (altho 'danger here' george is associated with many great memories).

I just resent the ever more common hypocritical populist outcry over other peoples wealth.

A poor haranguer to boot.

You do understand the difference between people's wealth and people's salaries?  (Which we pay, incidentally).  Nobody mentioned these people's wealth.

What's your view on pharma companies overcharging state health agencies for drugs?  I take it you are happy with that?  After all, to follow your own logic, they are only people who are 'trying to get paid as well as possible'.   

You understand that my statement was generalising? And its not a massive leap to correlate high salaries and wealth, is it?

Re the situation you describe, define over-charging. Are the drugs available elsewhere cheaper? If they are, that would be a procurement failing.

Are the drugs not available elsewhere? Then the pharma company can and will charge a premium to cover the development of the drug. To what level however, can and should be regulated, if not, that's a regulation failing.

But I'm sure if you were a pharma boss you'd take the living wage and give the drugs out freely 

And hey presto, with a little leading, you finally got there.  You couldn't have made it any easier if you tried.  You even set out examples.

So, to use your own words and examples, this type of behaviour is caused by flaws in the regulation or procurement processes which govern RTE.

Will we go back to my original point, offer them 100k each a year, and see what happens?

The prosecution rests.

You've never made an original point in your life. Alter your procurement then - offer them €100k and you'll see exactly what would happen, they'll all f**k off elsewhere for much more, and we'd be left with idiots like you and serious falls in advertising revenue.

[haranguerer]

So what? I'm sure everyone here is trying to get paid as well as possible. And the usual solution applies - if you think they're overpaid, apply for their job...

If they want to pay them such big wages that's one thing, but the fact that the quality of programming is in constant decline (look forward to another Christmas season of repeats they'll be putting on) and they have lost so much of the sports rights they enjoyed in the past suggests that the money (which is substantially provided by us taxpayers lest we forget) could be put to better use.

Is the quality of programming in constant decline, or is that just a statement which, coupled with nostalgia, sounds true?

Well you could heed the evidence of your eyes and ears... if you wanted to.  You could look at a company that is selling off assets to meet daily running costs.  But be careful now, because apparently that can be considered populist and hypocritical by some.   

https://www.independent.ie/entertainment/television/tv-news/doh-level-of-repeats-being-aired-is-just-not-acceptable-says-rte-chief-30936892.html

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/viewers-can-kiss-goodbye-to-new-rte-shows-on-this-summer-of-repeats-3z80cvjn7

https://www.independent.ie/entertainment/television/tv-reviews/pat-stacey-rte-is-showing-20-repeats-today-why-are-we-paying-160-a-year-for-this-31428735.html

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/media-and-marketing/repeats-but-not-much-recovery-in-sight-for-rt%C3%A9-1.3159411

http://animationireland.com/travails-on-permanent-repeat-at-rte-ad-competition-licence-fee-evasion-and-ascent-of-netflix-complicate-life-at-montrose/

Oh lord.

Let me slow it down - increased repeats (not just an issue RTE are getting slated for btw [ https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/backlash-bbc-boss-defends-decision-13702396 ] is a QUANTITY issue. It was the QUALITY which was being discussed. I don't remember RTE having too many shows of the quality of say Love/Hate 20 years ago.