Talking to a telly presenter chum last night, we mused over the fact that you never hear broadcast execs bragging about how little they paid for talent.
Instead, the sum handed over is somehow supposed to represent an “independent” estimation of worth.
Don’t take the word of some hapless telly type reassuring you about X’s talent – look at their wad.
Now the BBC is reviewing salaries of its stars, like millionaire public servant Jonathan Ross.
Oliver & Ohlbaum Associates will be working out the details. O&O know a little about the BBC, as founder Mark Oliver was the corporation’s Head of Strategy from 1989 to 1995.
In Oliver’s day, of course, the BBC’s Jonathan Ross figure was Noel Edmonds, who raked in half a million a year for Saturday night schlocker, Noel’s House Party, and managed to keep his paws on various programme rights.
But Mark would have been advising on strategy, not working out crappy deals with presenters! And doubtless today he has young MBAs to carry out his work for him.
So will O&O look at BBC presenter salaries in the context of – say – UK public sector organizations like the National Health Service, or the judiciary, or the armed forces.
If you’re holding your breath – stop now.
One response to “Top talent salaries – how much would you pay to be on the BBC?”
I don’t really think it is the top range where the BBC pushes up salaries. Let’s be honest here, Natasha and Dermot have just moved to Five and Sky for vastly more than they were getting in W12 – apparently. I think it is actually in the mid-range where there is more chance that the BBC is distorting the market. That doesn’t grab headlines like the Ross salary though, but that is where I suspect O&O should be looking.