egafd.com

mrchapel wrote:

> BBC`ll miss Ross, he was a draw and they don`t have many of those.

Quite. They've become very slack in cultivating new talent of recent.

> Who`s going to replace him?

The smart money is on Graham Norton, whose recent run of shows have, I'll admit, been a great improvement and very much superior to Ross' rubbishy friday night offering.

Perhaps, but that doesn't mean we have to watch those useless fucking articles, does it?

They (sorry that should be ?us? as Licence payers) were paying Ross ? 6 million a year (?18 million over three years).

Norton is being paid ? 2 million a year (?4 million over two years).
Norton is the same product as Ross but at least we are getting it for a lot less.

The BBC make me laugh with their ?you have to pay if you want talent?.

Not if you develop new talent all the time you don?t, because those at the top of the tree will be looking over their shoulder all the time and have to adjust their pay cliams accordingly!

Let?s see if ITV, Channel 4 or Sky (all cash strapped media companies) are going to pick Ross up at ? 6 million a year.