Clear Channel ready to lay off close to 1,000 people so Rush Limbaugh gets a raise
http://mediamatters.org/columns/200905050007
Basically, Rush Limbaugh hammered out a $400 million 8 year contract with annual bonuses contract with Clear Channel, something they can't afford and now they are melting down and firing people left and right without scruples just to keep Limbaugh. Not just talk show hosts but programers, interns, engineers, DJ's...so much for caring about American values.
Re: Clear Channel ready to lay off close to 1,000 people so Rush Limbaugh gets a raise
Originally posted by Darth Jello
http://mediamatters.org/columns/200905050007Basically, Rush Limbaugh hammered out a $400 million 8 year contract with annual bonuses contract with Clear Channel, something they can't afford and now they are melting down and firing people left and right without scruples just to keep Limbaugh. Not just talk show hosts but programers, interns, engineers, DJ's...so much for caring about American values.
Getting the most money you can for the job you do is American values. 😉
Re: Re: Clear Channel ready to lay off close to 1,000 people so Rush Limbaugh gets a raise
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Getting the most money you can for the job you do is American values. 😉
Correcto.
However, I'm quite sure Limbaugh could take a $200 million dollar pay cut on his contract to save 500 or so jobs.
http://articles.latimes.com/1995-04-28/news/mn-59921_1
Well it's not like this is the first time if anyone remembers this story.
To sum it up, a weatherman got fired for failing to predict a sunny day on the day of the Rush Limbaugh picnic because it could discourage attendance. As it turned out, it rained.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Well, the company's assumption is that without Limbaugh less money would come in and there would have to be cuts anyways, or even worse, a total closure.
Don't you think that it would gain Ol' Rushie some brownie points with his audience, attract other listeners do to the "charity" of his "kindness", garner some short term praise from his contemporaries, and relieve some financial pressure off of his employer. Doing all that would also pave the way for him "sell" himself...books and other media deals.
IMO, he doesn't earn them very much short term. The ad and contract revenues due to increased "viewership" would not be felt until it started to accumulate. It is actually more expensive (unless chapter 11 or other bankruptcy "schemes" are employed) to fire your employs, short term, than it is to just cut their pay. However, cutting his pay by tens millions of dollars a year while also reorganizing and eliminating jobs would save money much more immediately..and it could actually increase ad revenue during his segments due to his "charitable" short term contribution.
Do you think the big banks would have been scolded if they publically announced that they were returning their bonuses, or the majority of them, back to their employees, or they Fed...to pay off the loans, or to keep more of their employees? Stuff like that would be big news.
It would be more so for Limbaugh as he could announce it during his show...badda boom.
Originally posted by dadudemonIt's possible that it would have been beneficial for the company, but that wasn't necessarily an option for them. It was probably more between losing limbaugh and going down the drain or keeping him at some expense but not as much as if we had lost them, rather than a third option of "Limbaugh gets a pay cut, we all continue being employed, we become rich and powerful and then we dance in the land of awesome while milk and honey shoots out our asses". And you and the others may be right that Limbaugh's a dick and could even have an advantage if he did it differently, but I wanted to address his employers instead.
Don't you think that it would gain Ol' Rushie some brownie points with his audience, attract other listeners do to the "charity" of his "kindness", garner some short term praise from his contemporaries, and relieve some financial pressure off of his employer. Doing all that would also pave the way for him "sell" himself...books and other media deals.IMO, he doesn't earn them very much short term. The ad and contract revenues due to increased "viewership" would not be felt until it started to accumulate. It is actually more expensive (unless chapter 11 or other bankruptcy "schemes" are employed) to fire your employs, short term, than it is to just cut their pay. However, cutting his pay by tens millions of dollars a year while also reorganizing and eliminating jobs would save money much more immediately..and it could actually increase ad revenue during his segments due to his "charitable" short term contribution.
Do you think the big banks would have been scolded if they publically announced that they were returning their bonuses, or the majority of them, back to their employees, or they Fed...to pay off the loans, or to keep more of their employees? Stuff like that would be big news.
It would be more so for Limbaugh as he could announce it during his show...badda boom.
Originally posted by Bardock42
It's possible that it would have been beneficial for the company, but that wasn't necessarily an option for them. It was probably more between losing limbaugh and going down the drain or keeping him at some expense but not as much as if we had lost them, rather than a third option of "Limbaugh gets a pay cut, we all continue being employed, we become rich and powerful and then we dance in the land of awesome while milk and honey shoots out our asses". And you and the others may be right that Limbaugh's a dick and could even have an advantage if he did it differently, but I wanted to address his employers instead.
No, you were correct, originally. They won Limbaugh with his HUGE ass contract. That's what got them Limbaugh. And they are "paying for it" now.
Of course Limbaugh doesn't want to be charitable like that...you bet your britches that he's going to make Clear Channel earn it's money.
Originally posted by dadudemonYean, I agree.
No, you were correct, originally. They won Limbaugh with his HUGE ass contract. That's what got them Limbaugh. And they are "paying for it" now.Of course Limbaugh doesn't want to be charitable like that...you bet your britches that he's going to make Clear Channel earn it's money.
Re: Re: Clear Channel ready to lay off close to 1,000 people so Rush Limbaugh gets a
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Getting the most money you can for the job you do is American values. 😉
You're quite wrong, sir. You are doing nothing but but helping to throw fuel on the fire with that kind of god damn attitude. American Values are something far different. Just because Socialism and dictatorships may rule the country but that doesn't mean it's people feel the same way. Stop bein a hater, dude.
But yeah, Rush..,he can choke on his goddamn money. I never liked that fat bastard and i have no idea why clear channel is caving.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Of course Limbaugh doesn't want to be charitable like that...you bet your britches that he's going to make Clear Channel earn it's money.
He'd probably lose money if he was charitable. It would seriously damage his image.
Originally posted by jinXed by JaNx
You're quite wrong, sir. You are doing nothing but but helping to throw fuel on the fire with that kind of god damn attitude. American Values are something far different. Just because Socialism and dictatorships may rule the country but that doesn't mean it's people feel the same way. Stop bein a hater, dude.
True, American values are supposed to be getting the most money for the least work but now socialism and facism have corrupted the country.