American Actors VS UK Actors

[Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 36
Forum Member
Why do American actors earn £100,000 + per episode compared to English actors that probably don't earn that much?

David Boreanaz my favourite actor earns $225,000 per episode. Yet Eastenders actors will be lucky to earn that in a year?

I've been looking at General Hospital which I believe is a soap in the US and they earn alot more then English soap stars.

House actor Hugh Laurie earns $700,000 per episode. House is a drama which runs for around 24 episodes per year or at least it did, so compare this to Silk a BBC drama the actors on Silk which could be classed as a similar show format to House don't earn $100,000 per episode probably not even that throughout the series.

Why is this?

Brian
«1

Comments

  • AdelaideGirlAdelaideGirl Posts: 3,498
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Bigger audience for USA shows mean more advertising dollars mean bigger wages for the stars. The cast of Eastenders make far more than the equivalent cast of Home and Away or Neighbours.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 36
    Forum Member
    The cast of Eastenders make far more than the equivalent cast of Home and Away or Neighbours.

    Just because of the audience levels?
  • AdelaideGirlAdelaideGirl Posts: 3,498
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Audience numbers determin what the advertising can be sold for so yeah.

    Certainly doesn't seem to be about talent :D
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 36
    Forum Member
    Right okay. I understand, just looking at the two Shameless's US and UK.

    Frank Gallagher in the UK probably doesn't make $125,000 like the US Frank Gallagher.

    Thanks for helping :)
  • cazzzcazzz Posts: 12,218
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I agree its due to the audience and advertising but also if the show can be sold worldwide it also bumps up the money made.
  • MandarkMandark Posts: 47,930
    Forum Member
    cazzz wrote: »
    I agree its due to the audience and advertising but also if the show can be sold worldwide it also bumps up the money made.
    I don't think Charlie Sheen would have been paid over $2m an episode for Two and a Half Men if the show was only seen in the US.

    I also think that Americans are more aggressive with their salary demands. Look at their CEO pay. I've read that they get paid far more than foreign CEOs of equivalent sized corporations. In fact Brit CEOs used that as an excuse over the last 20 years or so, to get their pay raised. They probably fight to maximise their pay whereas Brits and actors from other nations may be don't so much, unless they work in America.
  • stvn758stvn758 Posts: 19,656
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I'm surprised by the ratings, always thought the big shows had hundreds of millions of viewers but some are comparable to our own viewing figures yet they make millions. Must be that US shows last longer than ours, they play for years in syndication and around the world.
  • BungitinBungitin Posts: 5,356
    Forum Member
    Negotiated contracts in star reliant US series.

    Over here with EE's and others its a series of short-term contracts and a revolving door of plotlines where an actor may not be necessary in all episodes.
    Besides if you are too demanding you can be written out where you can die a few times in Soapland. (Get shot by some flowers).
  • LyricalisLyricalis Posts: 57,958
    Forum Member
    Perhaps we should all have agents? It must be nice to have someone to do the negotiating on pay for you.
  • AdelaideGirlAdelaideGirl Posts: 3,498
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Well that was the original idea behind having unions.
  • LiamforkingLiamforking Posts: 1,641
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Actually American ratings are surprisingly low, their top shows do well to get 20 million, in a country of 350 million so i don't think the salary difference is based on numbers.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 36
    Forum Member
    Actually American ratings are surprisingly low, their top shows do well to get 20 million, in a country of 350 million so i don't think the salary difference is based on numbers.

    I guess the UK doesn't have the money to produce the shows that Hollywood have.
  • Saltydog1955Saltydog1955 Posts: 4,134
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Don't forget the US has syndication of shows - something we don't have in the UK.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 3,100
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Because we do everything bigger in the US. Sometimes it's bad, but hey, it's the American way.
  • kxkkxk Posts: 148
    Forum Member
    LOL
    Just as well they can get good money on TV, since Brit and Aussie guys have taken over most of the movie roles:)
  • MandarkMandark Posts: 47,930
    Forum Member
    BlinkBrian wrote: »
    I guess the UK doesn't have the money to produce the shows that Hollywood have.
    Really big budget shows like Terra Nova and Falling Skies with their movie style special effects would never be made in the UK.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 7,888
    Forum Member
    There's more episodes per series maybe? So the actor spends a greater deal of time on set etc, or maybe it depends now big the name is of now big the hype is or how long the show is on for.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 495
    Forum Member
    AdelaideGirl answered it.

    Bigger market means more income from advertisements resulting in bigger fees. Basic economics. Simon Cowell makes far more in the US for doing exactly the same thing in the UK.

    Hugh Laurie (does a better yankee accent than the yanks) was (probably still is) the world record holder for most money per episode.
  • MandarkMandark Posts: 47,930
    Forum Member
    DC 17 wrote: »
    Hugh Laurie (does a better yankee accent than the yanks) was (probably still is) the world record holder for most money per episode.
    He's never earned what Charlie Sheen has though has he? Like I posted earlier - over £2m per episode for Two and a Half Men.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1
    Forum Member
    If it's any consolation, I've just cancelled my cable because North American programming is horrible - it's a load of garbage, and the "Actors" are overpaid beyond belief.
    The UK has far better programming, in my opinion, and the crews produce better shows with more believable visuals...Now I have to watch it all on YouTube, but at least I'm no longer being forced to purchase dozens of channels of useless, mind-numbing, crap just to view a couple of channels. If I were in the UK, I'd gladly pay for TV access...and I like that the actors earn a reasonably comfortable income, as opposed to ridiculously inflated ones. I'd pay for that.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 3,100
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Mandark wrote: »
    He's never earned what Charlie Sheen has though has he? Like I posted earlier - over £2m per episode for Two and a Half Men.

    Nope. Charlie Sheen was the highest paid actor on TV during his time on 2 and a Half Men.

    Fun fact: Sofia Vergara is now the highest paid television actress in the US.
  • zx50zx50 Posts: 91,227
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Bigger audience for USA shows mean more advertising dollars mean bigger wages for the stars. The cast of Eastenders make far more than the equivalent cast of Home and Away or Neighbours.

    Yeah, I'd say this is the case. Britain is small compared to America. I'd have thought that the Neighbours and Home and Away cast were more highly paid than our soap stars over here? Unless most of Australia's just open land or whatever you want to call it. But yeah, America will have an absolute TON of people living there. No wonder their programmes etc have quite a few adverts in them, from what I've heard.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 3,100
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    zx50 wrote: »
    Yeah, I'd say this is the case. Britain is small compared to America. I'd have thought that the Neighbours and Home and Away cast were more highly paid than our soap stars over here? Unless most of Australia's just open land or whatever you want to call it. But yeah, America will have an absolute TON of people living there. No wonder their programmes etc have quite a few adverts in them, from what I've heard.

    The Voice started back last night and there was a commercial after almost every single performer who had an intro, so basically every 3-5 minutes. It's a two hour show. It was so annoying. Not to mention the tacky and blatant product placement all throughout the entire show. I love the show, but it costs a shit load of money to maintain so the product placement is bananas. We have a Starbucks on every corner and every Safeway(a grocery store on the west coast), pretty much, I don't need it in my singing programs too.
  • milliejomilliejo Posts: 2,230
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    BlinkBrian wrote: »
    Right okay. I understand, just looking at the two Shameless's US and UK.

    Frank Gallagher in the UK probably doesn't make $125,000 like the US Frank Gallagher.

    Thanks for helping :)

    Shameless US has William H Macy, he is expensive.
  • milliejomilliejo Posts: 2,230
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    The UK actors have much more flexibility, because a season here is only six or eight episodes. So they can do theatre and other things. I remember the Late John Spencer was doing The West Wing in LA and theatre in NYC at one point, probably contributed to his death.
Sign In or Register to comment.