Yeah, just unlikely.
The fats cats will *never* have the motivation to implement it.
Yeah, just unlikely.
The fats cats will *never* have the motivation to implement it.
I just looked it up. "The Bill" lasted 27 years would you believe, and ran to 2,400 episodes. What may have finally killed it off in the end was the cost of all the outside locations in addition to the sets. As compared with other comparable programs which were purely set based. Plus maybe coming up with new stories after 27 years. ISTR a lot of now famous actors have appeared in it down the years in single episodes. Often as villains, ne-er do wells, or their rellys.
michael adams
...
To earn £2m:
Think of something you can sell for £100 profit.
Sell 20,000.
Because watching/paying Sky is a choice, and BBC tax is not?
Is choosing a good (and/or well-connected) agent a talent?
Would that be the argument that the public has a right to know how much the highest earners in the BBC are paid? I do not see why you need to be a 'free loader' or 'pathological liar' to want to know. My interest is as a licence fee payer. I would quite like to know where the money is going.
It's not total transparency. Individuals are grouped into bands.
By your curious logic none of this should be made public since you seem to be opposed to 'total transparency' which may reveal sensitive information to our competitors on the world stage. .
What does that have to do with the fact that watching/subscribing to Sky is a choice, and BBC is not?
SFW, provided you turn the sound down
tim
>
that's right
but there was a time when what Evans gets used to be normal.
It's progress that he and Lineker are the only ones
there needs to be a huge ramping down of the men towards the women's salaries, not the other way round
tim
compared to some of the others on the list
The soap stars are not the problem
tim
ITYF that the number of now famous actors who played bit parts is swamped by the number who played bit parts, never to be seen again
tim
I think you're right
look at PC Tony Stamp
barely worked since he left
he wasn't even invited back to Dr Who to revise his role of cyberman :-)
The only figures quoted are for those engaged directly by the BBC either as employees or through their own service company. Amounts paid to independent production companies who then pay the individual are not included. So for example Dimbelby is not included as QT is produced in such a way.
In article , Mark writes
It also demonstrates the weakness of BBC management over the years. They should have a conveyor belt of capable young people so they can kick out these "talents" when they get too big for their boots and start again. There are only so many alternative posts out there.
In article , Brian Gaff writes
It's not up to the licence payers (you know nurses teachers etc.) to carry on funding the extravagant lifestyles of past sportsmen and women. Lineker must be the worst TV presenter - ever.
In article , michael adams writes
You have the EU to thank for that.
The way to limit Murdoch is to revise the way sports rights and in particular football are sold. Football clubs (and other sports) are allowed to combine together to sell their product in a way that no other businesses are.
They are a cartel. They do not own football, It belongs to the people. Just imagine if all the petrol suppliers got together and said to the Supermarkets "We're only going to supply one of you so you must bid for it. There would be uproar. One way to clip their wings might be to insist that a package of 1 match per week be reserved for free-to-air television.
Football was just as exciting when players were paid ?20 per week,
In article , michael adams writes
All this information is available to competitors via the individuals agent.
Excellent point, Bert. EXCELLENT!!!
Yeah! That felt good! Been meaning to do that for quite a while now. :)
You might look at the *astronomical* and undeserved salaries paid to Lefty lickspittles by the BBC licence payers today, yesterday, and 10 years ago.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.