Digital Spy

Search Digital Spy
 

DS Forums

 
 
 

EXCLUSIVE: X Factor judges battle for huge wage rise


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 27-03-2013, 05:48
SpencerLevey
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,491

X FACTOR chiefs are on a collision course with ITV — as the planned wage bill for the new judges tops £6million.

For the first time, all four judges are seeking seven-figure deals, pushing the show over budget.

Sharon Osbourne, set to return after six years away from X Factor, is on course for between £1.5 and £2million. Gary Barlow is looking to boost his £1.5million after agreeing to come back following talks with Simon Cowell.

Nicole Scherzinger is holding out for a similar deal to Gary’s — plus benefits including flying her own stylist and make-up team over from the US.

Louis Walsh, who has a £1million deal, has been told he will be back.

Last year’s panel — who often tell singers: “You made that song your own” — cost a lot less. Tulisa Contostavlos earned a reported £450,000 and Nicole £750,000.

A source last night said ITV does not want to raise the £33million-a-series budget, agreed three years ago.

Tense talks between show chief Richard Holloway and ITV boss Peter Fincham are set to take place tomorrow.

Mr Holloway, who runs production company Thames TV, is keen to sign up the judges as soon as possible so audition planning can begin for June. An insider said: “Producers know it will cost significantly more than last year.

“If there’s a hold-up, it could mean someone is not given a judging role and it’s back to the drawing board.”

Other names have been mentioned as candidates but none followed up.

A production source said: “We know returning judges cost more. It’s what happens if you negotiate every series.”

A X Factor spokesman said: “No formal decisions have been taken.”

1 mill for Louis Walsh, WTF!
SpencerLevey is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 27-03-2013, 08:36
annushka
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 3,417

1 mill for Louis Walsh, WTF!
The program is steadily going down, and they want big raises... Maybe they should ditch all them all and go for new more unknown people working behind the scene in the industry.

Don't tell me they can't find another manager than louis? Someone working a syco would also be a good idea considering the winner is going to be signed there... They could also get a Vocal coach maybe, or even someone from the press (they are also very important when you are famous an should be able to spot or coach someone who will please the viewers!)...
All people who actually work behind the scenes and have something to do with making a pop star, whether technically or more from a promo point of view.
annushka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-03-2013, 11:10
LW09
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 3,278
The only judge that should get a payrise is Nicole, and thats because she'll be doing the full series this time around. The other judges can't really argue for one considering the way the ratings went last year.
LW09 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-03-2013, 11:52
xeo
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,178
Those figures are ridiculous. And why should Sharon get more than Gary and Nicole? Until this year she's been completely out of the public eye, at least in the UK.
xeo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-03-2013, 14:12
kitten12
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,649
Ratings down, judges wage demands up. Something not quite right here?

It just goes to show that there are winners on this show, not many of them are actual contestants.
kitten12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-03-2013, 15:05
fireemblemcraze
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 6,297
Those figures are ridiculous. And why should Sharon get more than Gary and Nicole? Until this year she's been completely out of the public eye, at least in the UK.
Because she's already been on the show. So she needs a more significant amount than what she used to get to make her come back on. It would make no sense that you get paid the same amount as before you went on the show.

Also the judges got paid way more back then because Simon was on the panel and he didn't have to be paid because it was his show. The profit was going to him anyway. So they had a much higher budget for the judges before.
fireemblemcraze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-03-2013, 01:41
C14E
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 29,617
Sharon's the only one they're chasing and thus the only one that should really be in any position to demand more money. Nicole was well received last year... to a point. The ratings were still sh*t. She should get the same rate, obviously giving her a higher total to reflect the fact she'll do all the auditions.

And as for Barlow, what the hell is up with ITV? It's no secret that Cowell wants him out and thinks he's awful at the job. In his two years on the show the ratings are sharply down. So ITV must be miles up his backside for him to think he can ask for more money.
C14E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-03-2013, 02:20
gpk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Neath, Wales, UK.
Posts: 9,861
Sharon's the only one they're chasing and thus the only one that should really be in any position to demand more money. Nicole was well received last year... to a point. The ratings were still sh*t. She should get the same rate, obviously giving her a higher total to reflect the fact she'll do all the auditions.

And as for Barlow, what the hell is up with ITV? It's no secret that Cowell wants him out and thinks he's awful at the job. In his two years on the show the ratings are sharply down. So ITV must be miles up his backside for him to think he can ask for more money.
that is assuming the reports are true of course, but its also been reported that simon and gary have called a `truce`. the thing is we know simon approached noel gallagher before itv appointed gary and i dare say he had other people in mind previously, but it looks likes we are stuck with gary again. itv and simon are hardly spoilt for choice really, the role takes a lot of commitment schedule wise and i dare say a few people were approached when simon initially exited the panel.

i do agree if these rumours are true, then itv are being extremely short sighted when it comes to barlow, but it really does depend on what options they have really. these alleged pay rises are obviously not based on performance, but more about making sure people are in place.

with sharon, she still has her co-host role on `the view` in the us, so i would imagine itv would have to put together an attractive package in order to tempt her back. personally, i think if they`re going to bring her back, then they should rest the show until the new year and launch it again with her and simon back on the panel. louis and nicole being the other judges to keep some consistency.
gpk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-03-2013, 05:20
Gill P
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 12,796
All that money (£33m a series!) doesn't make for a good show. Too much money is thrown at it in a desperate attempt to make it bigger and bolder! Perhaps it would be better if it was stripped down to a singer and a piano! And no audience in the preliminary rounds.
Gill P is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-03-2013, 05:40
C14E
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 29,617
All that money (£33m a series!) doesn't make for a good show. Too much money is thrown at it in a desperate attempt to make it bigger and bolder! Perhaps it would be better if it was stripped down to a singer and a piano! And no audience in the preliminary rounds.
It's not that much money when you work it all out (and the £33m doesn't fit with previous reports either). Obviously it's a lot to you or me, but for TV it's not insane when you actually look at everything that's included and the rewards ITV get from it.

I think the bigger and better strategy worked for them for years - it plainly did when you look at the ratings growth from series to series. And they defied the odds. It seemed impossible that they could do better in 2009 and even better again in 2010. But I think it got to a point where they couldn't be any bigger or louder or more controversial, especially with Simon and Cheryl gone.

There are probably ways to improve the show that could also save money. But it's that very difficult challenge of going in a new direction without making it seem like they are actually going backwards. For example, YouTube the first series auditions and you'll quickly see that anything like that would never pass on primetime TV today.
C14E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-03-2013, 08:16
kitten12
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,649
Who wants to watch that tired out old prune Osbourne anyway?
kitten12 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:11.