+ Visit Derby County FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 99

Thread: Silly money ?

  1. #1

    Silly money ?

    Can't beleive I just read that Boro have just paid Forest reportedly 15 million for Assombalonga or whatever his name is

    Just seems excessive to me

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Down South Darlings
    Posts
    3,309
    Just a bit!!! Dunno where they got the money from mind

  3. #3
    Parachute payments of £47 million this year and if they are still in the league over £30 million next year.

  4. #4
    On behalf of all Forest supporters I'd like to thank Boro for their unbelievable generosity. I'd be happy with 10m. 12m would be wunderbar. 15? We're having a laugh

  5. #5
    Even clubs that have been down for 2 seasons like Cardiff will still get £12 million this year!

  6. #6
    On the subject of silly money, why is£1.75M of our license fee being wasted on Lineker presenting about 30 match of the day programmes?

  7. #7
    Nice work if you can get it! The fee seems excessive but he does other presenting as well but thats the market and lots of people get paid silly money for what seem inconsequential jobs, £12 million a year for being a football manager, £250K a week to Rooney for playing football, mad mad world!

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by swaledale View Post
    Nice work if you can get it! The fee seems excessive but he does other presenting as well but thats the market and lots of people get paid silly money for what seem inconsequential jobs, £12 million a year for being a football manager, £250K a week to Rooney for playing football, mad mad world!
    Personally I think Lineker is better value at £1.75m than Shearer is for his occasional attempts at stating the bloody obvious for £500k per year. It does all highlight how ridiculous things have got though when footballers/managers and sports presenters/news readers are paid such exorbitant amounts and so many of the less fortunate don't know where their next meal is coming from.

  9. #9
    I wish they'd sack Lineker and employ Slaven Bilic from West Ham, can't remember if it was the World cup or the euros but his knowledge on football was unreal, the best pundit on tv I've ever seen. Hope they go for his services after he stands down from management.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by ramAnag View Post
    Personally I think Lineker is better value at £1.75m than Shearer is for his occasional attempts at stating the bloody obvious for £500k per year. It does all highlight how ridiculous things have got though when footballers/managers and sports presenters/news readers are paid such exorbitant amounts and so many of the less fortunate don't know where their next meal is coming from.
    I don't begrudge those talented or lucky enough to earn unrealistic amounts of money, BUT pay taxes accordingly and be prepared to pay decent wages for others.

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by swaledale View Post
    I don't begrudge those talented or lucky enough to earn unrealistic amounts of money, BUT pay taxes accordingly and be prepared to pay decent wages for others.
    I don't begrudge it in a covetous way either Swale but honestly...how hard can it be to host MOTD or read the news? People will watch both programmes regardless of who presents them anyway and while I accept that the likes of Wenger have forgotten more than most of us have ever known about football...£12m a year? Madness.

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by ramAnag View Post
    I don't begrudge it in a covetous way either Swale but honestly...how hard can it be to host MOTD or read the news? People will watch both programmes regardless of who presents them anyway and while I accept that the likes of Wenger have forgotten more than most of us have ever known about football...£12m a year? Madness.
    I'm not fussed about the 'true personalities/celebrities' but the bloody news readers, Jesus Wept! John Humphries on 650k, just let him go BBC. I'm F***ing livid that they had to offload F1 for the sake of £24m which by the look of it they could have saved just by culling some newscasters. Naga Munchetty, good God, she's just some woman reading off an autocue, at least Charlie Stayt has a bit of gravitas about him. This isn't about covetousness either, its about me defending the license fee for 40 years when many of my friends object to or avoid it, and now I feel I've been stitched up. I could barely listen to the morning news on R4 last thu and on friday I gave up and cranked up Planet Rock instead. Daylight robbery.

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by ramAnag View Post
    I don't begrudge it in a covetous way either Swale but honestly...how hard can it be to host MOTD or read the news? People will watch both programmes regardless of who presents them anyway and while I accept that the likes of Wenger have forgotten more than most of us have ever known about football...£12m a year? Madness.
    I think your doing them a disservice and whilst we know what the BBC pays its presenters we don't know what the other channels pay and therefore its difficult to judge whether its high or not, I suspect not, its most likely thelower end of the market and if thats what peple who can present etc. get paid then thats where the Beeb has to pay.

    It was the BBC hating daily mail that persuaded the Tories to make the BBC reveal what it pays its talent for no good reason, for me, having a public broadcaster which whilst it gets things wrong, is a far more trustworthy broadcaster than any of the TV channels in the States is something to cherish not attack, we are fortunate IMO.

    I would also query whether its "easy" to present, I've done TV interviews and believe me its not easy to appear calm and collected. There is an art to it and the best radio presenters are worth what they are paid, although i don't class Chris Evans in that category to be fair!!

  14. #14
    Steady Andy...won't hear a word against the lovely Naga...National Treasure no less!

    CNN is okay Swale, but while I agree with you about valuing the BBC you have to question some of the salaries. I'm sure I'd find John Humphries excellent company and that Fiona Bruce is a lovely woman but those salaries are surely insane for what they actually do.

    As for Chris Evans...just don't get him...what is the point?

    I've done a couple of radio interviews and a radio diary too...all only for Radio Derby but it wasn't that big a deal.
    Last edited by ramAnag; 22-07-2017 at 08:07 PM.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    West Yorkshire
    Posts
    37,328
    If I like watching and listening to a presenter on the telly or radio then I dont really want to know what they earn in fees etc.

    But footballers are a different story to be honest and this argument about parash*ite payments really pees me off.
    Why do clubs who fail and get relegated from the Premship, then get ridiculous pay-offs for the next few years ?. This gives them an unfair and undeserved advantage over the Champship clubs!!

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by ramAnag View Post
    Steady Andy...won't hear a word against the lovely Naga...National Treasure no less!

    CNN is okay Swale, but while I agree with you about valuing the BBC you have to question some of the salaries. I'm sure I'd find John Humphries excellent company and that Fiona Bruce is a lovely woman but those salaries are surely insane for what they actually do.

    As for Chris Evans...just don't get him...what is the point?

    I've done a couple of radio interviews and a radio diary too...all only for Radio Derby but it wasn't that big a deal.
    Believe me Anag Radio interviews are a piece of piss, being on camera is a whole different story and of course for a presenter its not just the presenting, theres a whole lot of other work including the research and knowing ones onions so to speak - they make it look easy as Messi makes playing football look easy or hamilton makes driving an F1 car look easy, but not everyone has the ability to do it right consistently.

    Your right Acido on parachute payments - the iea was that clubs needed assistance because of the drop in revenue and the higher wages they paid for players whilst in the Prem, but the suspicion is not of all of it is used for the purpose. but trousered by owners - cardiff would seem to be a case in point.

    For last season 16-17 - Newcastle and Norwich got £40.9 million, QPR £31.1 million, Wigan, Reading, Fulham and cardiff got £16.2 million.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    West Yorkshire
    Posts
    37,328
    Hey up Swale, how is your teams pre-season going then.

    You mention Q.P.Rangers, have they been fined at all yet for their blatant indiscretion against the FFP at the end of 2013-14 ?
    (FFP means the so called financial fair play rules of course, but who really sticks by that these days eh)

  18. #18
    £10 billion to the EU and £13 billion in foreign aid is where I'd start

  19. #19
    I believe parachute payments should firstly, be spent on club debts. Only after that has been settled, should they be allowed to spend any surplus

  20. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Trickytreesreds View Post
    £10 billion to the EU and £13 billion in foreign aid is where I'd start
    It would help if you got the maths and the facts right!

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •