Guess their salary

[tikay]

Just having a nosey around this.

http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/insidethebbc/reports/pdf/bbc-annualreport-201617.pdf

and this stuck out on page 31.

Radio 1 costs £36m and costs 1.2p per user hour
Radio 2 costs £51m and costs 0.5p per user hour
Radio 3 costs £37m and costs 5.7p per user hour
Radio 4 costs £88m and costs 1.3p per user hour

of others
Radio 6 music costs £11m and costs 0.9p per user hour
Radio Asian Network costs £7m and costs 3.4p per user hour

They wanted to close 6 music and asian network and radio 1 gets its fair share of knockers.  

Why are we paying so much for Radio 3, which performs so dismally in comparison to the others?  I assume this is similar to why Yentob gets paid so well for his presenting.

That figure is only so high because hardly anybody listens to it.

Isn't that the point of having the BBC publicly funded though, so that even the things that hardly anybody wants to watch or listen to still get a chance to be aired?

If it wasn't publicly funded then radio 3 would obviously disappear based on those figures but that wouldn't be nice for the bloke who listens to it would it

Exactly that, IMO.

This is the very essence of the BBC.

If it were all about popularity, we'd have wall to wall SCD, BGT, X Factor and the like.

There has to be room for stuff like Springwatch and the like though.

Personally, I'd let the commercially funded channels do all the so-called light entertainment, leaving the BBC to do the stuff for grown ups.

[RickBFA]

It's a weird marketplace. A few surprised me though :

Jeremy Vine £700K plus
Huw Edwards £500k plus
Stephen Nolan £400k plus
Alex Jones £400k plus
Jason Mohammed £250k plus

For me, they are not worth that money. Plenty of up and coming talent available for less money IMO.

[TightEnd]

Jason Mohammed earns more than John Inverdale

not a fan of either really, but it surprised me

[4KSuited]

Norton  - £4m
Lineker - £2m
Evans - £2m
Marr - £500k
Kuenssberg - £250k

None of it is clear cut.

Norton is listed as £900,000, but that is only for Eurovision & his Radio 2 work.

His "highly-rated" BBC1 Show is not included in the £900k, as the fees are paid via a Production Company, similar to the Jonathan Ross scenario I outlined earlier.

Why do you put highly rated in quotation marks?

Norton is clearly the most talented of BBC performers and deserves the highest salary IMO

Well it's just my opinion, but there is nothing I admire about Graham Norton, not one single thing, & I'd not cross the road to watch him if the tickets were free. I have him on a par with that Miranda woman.

Whereas if it were Chris Evans, that's a different matter altogether of course.

IMO......

I'd put Evans in the same room as Piers Morgan and Lewis Hamilton.... And throw away the key.

And yes, Norton is probably the Beeb's greatest talent.

[tikay]

Jason Mohammed earns more than John Inverdale

not a fan of either really, but it surprised me

To be fair, even Graham Norton is worth more than John "Never gonna be a looker" Inverdale.

[Graham C]

Tickets generally are free to see Graham Norton, you could be put to the test here Tikay

[tikay]

Tickets generally are free to see Graham Norton, you could be put to the test here Tikay

I'd not watch him if they paid me.

Gill enjoys watching him though, but she tends to watch a lot of shite TV.   

[Doobs]

Just having a nosey around this.

http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/insidethebbc/reports/pdf/bbc-annualreport-201617.pdf

and this stuck out on page 31.

Radio 1 costs £36m and costs 1.2p per user hour
Radio 2 costs £51m and costs 0.5p per user hour
Radio 3 costs £37m and costs 5.7p per user hour
Radio 4 costs £88m and costs 1.3p per user hour

of others
Radio 6 music costs £11m and costs 0.9p per user hour
Radio Asian Network costs £7m and costs 3.4p per user hour

They wanted to close 6 music and asian network and radio 1 gets its fair share of knockers.   

Why are we paying so much for Radio 3, which performs so dismally in comparison to the others?  I assume this is similar to why Yentob gets paid so well for his presenting.

That figure is only so high because hardly anybody listens to it.

Isn't that the point of having the BBC publicly funded though, so that even the things that hardly anybody wants to watch or listen to still get a chance to be aired?

If it wasn't publicly funded then radio 3 would obviously disappear based on those figures but that wouldn't be nice for the bloke who listens to it would it

I get that, but 6 music is the same.  It very much plays stuff the commerical stations don't, and they tried to close that.  

I am surprised it costs so much.  I can't beileve the presenters get paid that much as they aren't stars and presumably, they don't have to pay so much in royalties as Beethoven is long gone.

But more importantly, it is good to aim another kick at Yentob.

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2015/12/alan-yentobs-resignation-only-makes-him-less-accountable-at-the-bbc/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/10102522/BBCs-Alan-Yentob-paid-two-salaries.html

Yuck, just realised I agree with Philip Davies on something.  

[tikay]

Just having a nosey around this.

http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/insidethebbc/reports/pdf/bbc-annualreport-201617.pdf

and this stuck out on page 31.

Radio 1 costs £36m and costs 1.2p per user hour
Radio 2 costs £51m and costs 0.5p per user hour
Radio 3 costs £37m and costs 5.7p per user hour
Radio 4 costs £88m and costs 1.3p per user hour

of others
Radio 6 music costs £11m and costs 0.9p per user hour
Radio Asian Network costs £7m and costs 3.4p per user hour

They wanted to close 6 music and asian network and radio 1 gets its fair share of knockers.  

Why are we paying so much for Radio 3, which performs so dismally in comparison to the others?  I assume this is similar to why Yentob gets paid so well for his presenting.

That figure is only so high because hardly anybody listens to it.

Isn't that the point of having the BBC publicly funded though, so that even the things that hardly anybody wants to watch or listen to still get a chance to be aired?

If it wasn't publicly funded then radio 3 would obviously disappear based on those figures but that wouldn't be nice for the bloke who listens to it would it

I get that, but 6 music is the same.  It very much plays stuff the commerical stations don't, and they tried to close that.  

I am surprised it costs so much.  I can't beileve the presenters get paid that much as they aren't stars and presumably, they don't have to pay so much in royalties as Beethoven is long gone.

But more importantly, it is good to aim another kick at Yentob.

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2015/12/alan-yentobs-resignation-only-makes-him-less-accountable-at-the-bbc/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/10102522/BBCs-Alan-Yentob-paid-two-salaries.html

Yuck, just realised I agree with Philip Davies on something.  

I would assume the transmission costs & "backend costs" of all mainstream BBC Radio Stations are very similar, so if the audience falls below a certain threshold, the "per user" costs escalate rapidly.

I very much doubt that much of the 5.7p per user hour can be attributed to Presenters, "on-air" salaries, or PRS costs.

The BBC has Central Accounting, Services & Management, too, so smaller enterprises such as Radio 6 are bound to be penalised by central charges.

[Doobs]

Just having a nosey around this.

http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/insidethebbc/reports/pdf/bbc-annualreport-201617.pdf

and this stuck out on page 31.

Radio 1 costs £36m and costs 1.2p per user hour
Radio 2 costs £51m and costs 0.5p per user hour
Radio 3 costs £37m and costs 5.7p per user hour
Radio 4 costs £88m and costs 1.3p per user hour

of others
Radio 6 music costs £11m and costs 0.9p per user hour
Radio Asian Network costs £7m and costs 3.4p per user hour

They wanted to close 6 music and asian network and radio 1 gets its fair share of knockers.  

Why are we paying so much for Radio 3, which performs so dismally in comparison to the others?  I assume this is similar to why Yentob gets paid so well for his presenting.

That figure is only so high because hardly anybody listens to it.

Isn't that the point of having the BBC publicly funded though, so that even the things that hardly anybody wants to watch or listen to still get a chance to be aired?

If it wasn't publicly funded then radio 3 would obviously disappear based on those figures but that wouldn't be nice for the bloke who listens to it would it

I get that, but 6 music is the same.  It very much plays stuff the commerical stations don't, and they tried to close that.  

I am surprised it costs so much.  I can't beileve the presenters get paid that much as they aren't stars and presumably, they don't have to pay so much in royalties as Beethoven is long gone.

But more importantly, it is good to aim another kick at Yentob.

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2015/12/alan-yentobs-resignation-only-makes-him-less-accountable-at-the-bbc/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/10102522/BBCs-Alan-Yentob-paid-two-salaries.html

Yuck, just realised I agree with Philip Davies on something.  

I would assume the transmission costs & "backend costs" of all mainstream BBC Radio Stations are very similar, so if the audience falls below a certain threshold, the "per user" costs escalate rapidly.

I very much doubt that much of the 5.7p per user hour can be attributed to Presenters, "on-air" salaries, or PRS costs.

The BBC has Central Accounting, Services & Management, too, so smaller enterprises such as Radio 6 are bound to be penalised by central charges.

Meh, Springwatch gets decent audiences as far as I know. 

I know there isn't much between them, but I was pretty surprised it costs more than radio 1. We have to pay the likes of grimshaw near 400k (I obviously don't like the fella, but guess he is popular enough to deserve that, so not going down that dark alley), so guessing the total presenter bill for radio 1 is a, significant, few million pounds more than Radio 3.  The royalty costs must be a significant difference too?   

My wife does a lot of classical music stuff, and the daughters are learning to play too.  I just think the audience is literally dying off.  You go to a classical music concert, and I guess it is mainly friends and relatives, and a fair few of those are just doing their duty.  The rest are mainly pensioners.  I can't see it getting any better any time soon.  On your side, I guess a fair few of the audience for radio 3 aren't searching on the interent for their music anytime soon.

[Doobs]

Jason Mohammed earns more than John Inverdale

not a fan of either really, but it surprised me

Isn't that just because Inverdale has lost a few TV gigs recently?  I wouldn't be suprised if it was the first year this had happened.   

[DaveShoelace]

Jason Mohammed earns more than John Inverdale

not a fan of either really, but it surprised me

Isn't that just because Inverdale has lost a few TV gigs recently?  I wouldn't be suprised if it was the first year this had happened.   

I thought this too, didnt he slag off his employers live on telly this last year or something?

[AndrewT]

What does Inverdale do for BBC anyway? Five weekends of Six Nations, a bit of Wimbledon, some rowing highlights once in a blue moon?

What else?

[TightEnd]

What does Inverdale do for BBC anyway? Five weekends of Six Nations, a bit of Wimbledon, some rowing highlights once in a blue moon?

What else?

radio 5 eg the Open.

[4KSuited]

Alan Shearer
£400-£450k

W.T.F.

Absolutely shocking waste of license fee payers' money.