Ray D'arcy on RTE Radio 1 **Mod Warning post 1, 1263, 1610**

thesandeman

Ray says he failed to be accepted for a media course three times. THEY KNEW!!

Also himself and his last guest need to go back and do a maths course as well.

sightband

horseburger wrote: »

I'm not trying to convert anyone.

I made the point before, that by continuing to listen to the show, and comment about it, that, that is helping the show - because it doesn't really matter to the programme makers, if the people commenting don't like the show, and don't like the presenter, as long as they keep listening.

It doesn't really matter to the presenter or the shows producers and researchers, as long as the people commenting are listening to it, and contributing to the listenership figures, which in turn helps the show attract advertising, which helps keep the show going.

I’ll admit without a hint of shame I listen to the talentless, miserable opinionated tosser regularly to remind myself of just how farcical my licence fee is. Same goes for Joe Duffy and Tubridy.

do you ever listen to anyone who disgusts you? Trump? that pig Hopkins? it’s rubber necking car crash stuff, it’s human nature, they profit off this also without caring. Suppose you don’t, I’ll give you that, but D’arcy and co, I pay their wages directly without choice so I’ll listen to the f**ker and take out my disgust at him whenever I want and the more disgust posted here, there or anywhere is better than sticking your head in the sand.

plus, I take an enormous amount of enjoyment listening to darcy expose himself for what he is, he really isn’t too bright, at all, or talented or....*this could go on for a while*

plodder

Maybe he's okay in small doses. I did smile at the story of his tee-total, religious, mother interviewing Shane McGowan..

Brendan Bendar

sightband wrote: »

I’ll admit without a hint of shame I listen to the talentless, miserable opinionated tosser regularly to remind myself of just how farcical my licence fee is. Same goes for Joe Duffy and Tubridy.

do you ever listen to anyone who disgusts you? Trump? that pig Hopkins? it’s rubber necking car crash stuff, it’s human nature, they profit off this also without caring. Suppose you don’t, I’ll give you that, but D’arcy and co, I pay their wages directly without choice so I’ll listen to the f**ker and take out my disgust at him whenever I want and the more disgust posted here, there or anywhere is better than sticking your head in the sand.

plus, I take an enormous amount of enjoyment listening to darcy expose himself for what he is, he really isn’t too bright, at all, or talented or....*this could go on for a while*

Top top post there.

Saying it as it is.

Well done !

Ash.J.Williams

sightband wrote: »

I’ll admit without a hint of shame I listen to the talentless, miserable opinionated tosser regularly to remind myself of just how farcical my licence fee is. Same goes for Joe Duffy and Tubridy.

do you ever listen to anyone who disgusts you? Trump? that pig Hopkins? it’s rubber necking car crash stuff, it’s human nature, they profit off this also without caring. Suppose you don’t, I’ll give you that, but D’arcy and co, I pay their wages directly without choice so I’ll listen to the f**ker and take out my disgust at him whenever I want and the more disgust posted here, there or anywhere is better than sticking your head in the sand.

plus, I take an enormous amount of enjoyment listening to darcy expose himself for what he is, he really isn’t too bright, at all, or talented or....*this could go on for a while*

My twitter follows would suggest I'm a right wing extremists when in reality I find their bullshi* more entertaining than most entertainment out there

sligojoek

ILikeBoats wrote: »

I wonder did Ray donate his refund

Did he pay it in the first place?

sligojoek

plodder wrote: »

Maybe he's okay in small doses. I did smile at the story of his tee-total, religious, mother interviewing Shane McGowan..

Was that your first time hearing it?

horseburger

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Not listening but wondering and wondering about this?

The water protestors seemed to keep insisting that it wasn’t a “money issue” so I am a bit puzzled that none of the bullhorn brigade,or the media chaps suggested that those who didn’t pay their charges donate what they should have paid to the homeless charities they all seem to be so concerned about.

Just a thought………………………hmmmm.

Seems strange to this poster.

How do you know that they aren't donating to homeless charities?

You are presuming that they aren't donating, or volunteering with the different organisations.

horseburger

sightband wrote: »

I’ll admit without a hint of shame I listen to the talentless, miserable opinionated tosser regularly to remind myself of just how farcical my licence fee is. Same goes for Joe Duffy and Tubridy.

do you ever listen to anyone who disgusts you? Trump? that pig Hopkins? it’s rubber necking car crash stuff, it’s human nature, they profit off this also without caring. Suppose you don’t, I’ll give you that, but D’arcy and co, I pay their wages directly without choice so I’ll listen to the f**ker and take out my disgust at him whenever I want and the more disgust posted here, there or anywhere is better than sticking your head in the sand.

plus, I take an enormous amount of enjoyment listening to darcy expose himself for what he is, he really isn’t too bright, at all, or talented or....*this could go on for a while*

It is stated in this article, that it is sponsorship money, that covers Ray D'Arcy's salary, rather than money from the licence fee.

http://www.thejournal.ie/ray-darcy-rte-salary-1907437-Jan2015/

http://www.thejournal.ie/rte-presenter-salaries-2088827-May2015/

In this item below, from 2013, it sounds like the salaries of the various radio presenters, are covered by the money from advertising and sponsorship, rather than from the licence fee. It also seems to be the case, that the more people who listen in, including people who don't like the presenters or the shows, the longer the shows can attract sponsorship and advertising, enabling the particular presenters to command such salaries.

Below is a transcript on the Broadsheet website - and the link to the audio - of an interview by Mary Wilson on the RTE Radio 1 Drivetime programme, with Mairead Ni Nuadhain RTE head of external relations, that was broadcast on Wednesday 27th March 2013.

Fergal Keane spoke on the show, discussing an item about the salaries of the various radio and TV presenters, and later in the show the interview with Mairead Ni Nuadhain, took place. The report by Fergal Keane occurs at the 1 hour 12 minute mark in the show, and the interview with Mairead Ni Nuadhain, is at the 1 hour 41 minute mark in the show.

https://rte.ie/r.html?rii=b9_10123705_83_27-03-2013_

http://www.rte.ie/radio1/drivetime/programmes/2013/0327/378709-drivetime-wednesday-27-march-2013/

Here is a part of the interview, relevant to the issue of the salaries, and audience figures helping to attract advertising and sponsorship.

Mary Wilson asked: "So, a figure of €630,000, of €495,00 or €300,000, that’s the figure to fix on today? And is that a good deal for RTÉ?”

Mairead Ni Nuadhain RTE head of external relations replied: "Well, who’s to say that that is the ultimate figure. These are our top presenters. They are very important to RTÉ. RTÉ is unusual among national broadcasters in that we’re dual funded: we’ve a licence fee and we’ve commercial income. The licence fee is not enough to run RTÉ. We absolutely have to make the commercial income. The top presenters. The big audiences that they get on radio and television, they’re integral to that. And we’ve to achieve a balance between reducing fees and maintaining our commercial income.”

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2013/03/28/rte-on-rtes-top-ten-earners/

https://rte.ie/r.html?rii=b9_10123705_83_27-03-2013_

https://rte.ie/r.html?rii=b9_20179331_83_27-03-2013_

http://www.rte.ie/radio1/drivetime/programmes/2013/0327/378709-drivetime-wednesday-27-march-2013/

Brian Scan

ButtersSuki wrote: »

If you think this thread is good, you should try Da Lahv Lahn Thread!

Yeah, some of the country's greatest wits post there.

TheHomeService

horseburger wrote: »

How do you know that they aren't donating to homeless charities?

You are presuming that they aren't donating, or volunteering with the different organisations.

You could say the very same about those who are getting IW refunds. Doesn’t stop the ridiculous media pressure to pass the refund over to the charity CEOs though.

Will the same pressure be put on those who got/are getting Tracker compensation?

plodder

sligojoek wrote: »

Was that your first time hearing it?

Hah yes. I'm not a regular listener.

horseburger

TheHomeService wrote: »

You could say the very same about those who are getting IW refunds. Doesn’t stop the ridiculous media pressure to pass the refund over to the charity CEOs though.

Will the same pressure be put on those who got/are getting Tracker compensation?

Indeed you could, but the poster, to whom I replied - by the way this poster made reference to those who opposed the water charges and the setting up of Irish Water - was suggesting that a whole number of people who objected to the water charges, were not supporting the various organisations, that are tasked with tackling homelessness.

In a sly, presumptuous kind of way, the poster - when the poster to whom I replied, referenced the people who opposed the water charges by using the phrase "they all seem to be so concerned about" - was presuming that people who opposed the water charges, were not already showing concern for organisations tasked with tackling homelessness, by donating to, or volunteering with, the organisations.

ThisRegard

horseburger wrote: »

Indeed you could, but the poster, to whom I replied, was suggesting that a whole number of people who objected to the water charges were not supporting the various organisations, that are tasked with tackling homelessness.

They didn't really. Moreso where's the campaign asking for those to pay what they would have to IW to charity instead.

Likewise I'm sure many who paid bills to IW also contribute to charity, financially or with their time.

horseburger

ThisRegard wrote: »

They didn't really. But where's the campaign asking for those to pay what they would have to IW to charity instead?

Likewise I'm sure many who paid bills to IW also contribute to charity, financially or with their time.

They didn't really what?

I never said that anyone hasn't contributed to charity.

I was talking about the presumptuous, negative characterisation, made by Brendan Bendar, about people who opposed water charges.

ThisRegard

He never said some weren't already supporting charities.

horseburger

ThisRegard wrote: »

He never said some weren't already supporting charities.

He asked why haven't people who didn't pay the water charge, been asked to donate, to charity, the same amount of money, as the water charge bill, that they received in the post, from Irish Water.

He asked why people who opposed water charges have not been asked to "donate what they should have paid to the homeless charities they all seem to be so concerned about", which suggests that he doesn't think, that the people who opposed water charges, are genuinely concerned about alleviating homelessness.

He was making a negative assumption about people who opposed water charges.

Apart from the issue of the setting up of Irish Water being a waste of money, it was shown that the charges that people were being asked to pay, would never have gone towards the upgrading of water systems, a claim that had been made by the 2011 - 2016 government representatives.

Stephen Donnelly addressed this point in an address to the Dail on 25th March 2015.

http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2015032500062#N6


https://beta.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/dail/2015-03-25/37/

http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/(indexlookupdail)/20150325~KKK?opendocument#KKK00500


Stephen Donnelly stated:

"There is a lot of politics in the Chamber this evening, as well as a lot of emotion, as one would expect in a debate on water charges. It is clearly going to be a key issue in the next election. However, I would like to revisit some of the facts because the numbers tell us pretty much everything we need to know about Irish Water".

"The money raised from water charges will at most cover the cost of raising that money. According to my calculations, it will not even cover those costs. The net amount that will be raised from Irish households is approximately €90 million, and the cost of getting that amount of money will be more than €90 million. Irish households are being charged to cover the cost of charging them. Not one cent paid by any household in Ireland will pay for one drop of water, one replacement for a lead pipe or one brick in a new reservoir. The money the Government is seeking to take from us will cover the cost of getting that money. All the talk about people needing to understand that water is not free and that we have to upgrade the system is well and good but not a euro of the money raised will be invested in the system.

"Even if it cost nothing to charge people for water because all the water meters were installed by volunteers with donations of concrete and shovels, all the people in the call centres worked for nothing in buildings constructed by philanthropists and An Post agreed to send the letters for free, it still would not be necessary to charge anybody for water. We know from the Irish Water capital expenditure programme that the only investment is an extra €200 million being invested in the system. These are Irish Water and Government numbers. This entire exercise is about investing an extra €200 million per year in water. Prior to this nonsense, Irish water cost approximately €1.2 billion to deliver. When Scotland brought its dispersed systems together, it managed to reduce operating costs by 40%. Let us be conservative and say we are only capable of achieving half of what Scotland saved. Even if we only reduced the cost base by 20% after bringing the dispersed utilities together and running it properly with new technology, we could pay for the entire additional investment in water with €40 million left over.

"Not a single penny raised from an Irish household will be used to upgrade the infrastructure. Even if that money could be raised for free, it would not be necessary to raise it because all we have to do is reduce the operating costs by €200 million and invest that money in the system. That would solve the problem. There would be no water meters, protests or people coming into my office to ask me how they will manage to pay for water".

"There would be no threats about turning people's water down to a trickle or taking money out of people's wages or social welfare payments. None of that would be necessary had this project been managed properly.
Deputy Rabbitte suggested that the lack of minutes in numerous meetings between the then Minister, Phil Hogan, and Bord Gáis are not relevant. Of course they are relevant. This entire exercise has been pursued in secrecy. The Joint Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform still cannot get evidence for the implications of off-balance sheet borrowing."

The question arises, why hasn't the current government done more - and why didn't the last government do more - to end homelessness, rather than waste money establishing a company, with the purpose of privatising water.

http://www.right2water.ie/blog/%E2%80%9Cprivatisation-irish-water-ultimately-envisaged%E2%80%9D-eurostat

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2015/09/07/privatisation-of-irish-water-is-ultimately-envisaged/

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2015/09/07/privatisation-of-irish-water-is-ultimately-envisaged/#comment-1439813

https://www.rte.ie/player/ie/show/the-ray-darcy-show-extras-30003588/10814068/

https://www.rte.ie/player/ie/show/claire-byrne-live-extras-30003215/10812052/

jooksavage

horseburger wrote: »

The question arises, why hasn't the current and last government done more to end homelessness, rather than waste money establishing a company, with the purpose of privatising water.

Don't think that was the purpose of Irish Water.

NIMAN

Plus, the Government are spending a fortune of money on the homelessness crisis.

If we could maybe get rid of the spongers and fakers who aren't really in need of a house desperately and just want one near their Ma's, and get the figures down to the real level, when maybe we could tackle the problem properly.

anthonyjmaher

Ray: "So you were born in Waterford".
Mario: "No I was born in London".

That's research for you.

horseburger

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=

jooksavage wrote: »

Don't think that was the purpose of Irish Water.

If privatization isn't intended, why are Fine Gael TDs still trying to bring in charges, insinuating that people are engaging in the "wilful waste" of water?

https://www.finegael.ie/fine-gael-statement-future-funding-water-services/

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/how-almost-100000-households-are-set-to-be-hit-with-new-excessive-water-charge-36426730.html

Why has a commitment not been given for a referendum on the ownership of water?

Fergus O'Dowd Fine Gael TD spoke of having a concern about privatization, in 2014.

http://www.thejournal.ie/fergus-odowd-irish-water-agendas-privatisation-1825719-Dec2014/

Vincent Browne discussed Fergus O'Dowd's concerns, at that time.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/privatisation-of-irish-water-possible-dail-hears-429879.html

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057795022

newcavanman

Ray Darcy, the only person who can make Mario Rosenstock , sound unfunny

jooksavage

anthonyjmaher wrote: »

Ray: "So you were born in Waterford".
Mario: "No I was born in London".

That's research for you.

How years did he pass Mario in the coridoor? 11?

ThisRegard

newcavanman wrote: »

Ray Darcy, the only person who can make Mario Rosenstock , sound unfunny

Can't blame Darcy on that one, Rosenstock does a pretty good job of that all by himself.

neris

mario had ray nailed on his tv show as Buzz Kill Darcy

Red Fred

anthonyjmaher wrote: »

Ray: "So you were born in Waterford".
Mario: "No I was born in London".

That's research for you.

In fairness to Ray Wikipedia does say that Mario was born in Waterford and as everything on Wikipedia is 100% fact, why would you check any other sources, especially when you're only on €500k per year with your own production team.

Itssoeasy

Red Fred wrote: »

In fairness to Ray Wikipedia does say that Mario was born in Waterford and as everything on Wikipedia is 100% fact, why would you check any other sources, especially when you're only on €500k per year with your own production team.

You think ray checked Wikipedia ? I would say he didn't as it might be a bit technical for him, if his lack of ability to work the radio desk with no signs of improvement is anything to go by.

Also, you don't think rte payed Raymond €500,000 per year to do the heavy lifting do you ?

No, they did not. The same with Marion and Joseph. They aren't payed the big money to do the heavy lifting.

sightband

horseburger wrote: »

It is stated in this article, that it is sponsorship money, that covers Ray D'Arcy's salary, rather than money from the licence fee.

http://www.thejournal.ie/ray-darcy-rte-salary-1907437-Jan2015/

http://www.thejournal.ie/rte-presenter-salaries-2088827-May2015/

In this item below, from 2013, it sounds like the salaries of the various radio presenters, are covered by the money from advertising and sponsorship, rather than from the licence fee. It also seems to be the case, that the more people who listen in, including people who don't like the presenters or the shows, the longer the shows can attract sponsorship and advertising, enabling the particular presenters to command such salaries.

Below is a transcript on the Broadsheet website - and the link to the audio - of an interview by Mary Wilson on the RTE Radio 1 Drivetime programme, with Mairead Ni Nuadhain RTE head of external relations, that was broadcast on Wednesday 27th March 2013.

Fergal Keane spoke on the show, discussing an item about the salaries of the various radio and TV presenters, and later in the show the interview with Mairead Ni Nuadhain, took place. The report by Fergal Keane occurs at the 1 hour 12 minute mark in the show, and the interview with Mairead Ni Nuadhain, is at the 1 hour 41 minute mark in the show.

https://rte.ie/r.html?rii=b9_10123705_83_27-03-2013_

http://www.rte.ie/radio1/drivetime/programmes/2013/0327/378709-drivetime-wednesday-27-march-2013/

Here is a part of the interview, relevant to the issue of the salaries, and audience figures helping to attract advertising and sponsorship.

Mary Wilson asked: "So, a figure of €630,000, of €495,00 or €300,000, that’s the figure to fix on today? And is that a good deal for RTÉ?”

Mairead Ni Nuadhain RTE head of external relations replied: "Well, who’s to say that that is the ultimate figure. These are our top presenters. They are very important to RTÉ. RTÉ is unusual among national broadcasters in that we’re dual funded: we’ve a licence fee and we’ve commercial income. The licence fee is not enough to run RTÉ. We absolutely have to make the commercial income. The top presenters. The big audiences that they get on radio and television, they’re integral to that. And we’ve to achieve a balance between reducing fees and maintaining our commercial income.”

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2013/03/28/rte-on-rtes-top-ten-earners/

https://rte.ie/r.html?rii=b9_10123705_83_27-03-2013_

https://rte.ie/r.html?rii=b9_20179331_83_27-03-2013_

http://www.rte.ie/radio1/drivetime/programmes/2013/0327/378709-drivetime-wednesday-27-march-2013/

so to pull one out of my hole and going by your belief on what our taxes are spent on do you think your motor tax goes on motor related matters alone? or is it by any wild chance chucked into a pool of government capital expenditure? has d’arcy got VW stamped on his pay cheques?

i find it even more discomforting an RTE executive is trying to justify d’arcys wage, almost embarrassingly so, by admitting it’s volkswagen that will blow their money on that waste of space and not the licence fee payer. Surely he should be saying d’arcys talent and contribution to our national broadcaster is a worthy investment any licence fee payer should feel they are getting value for money...but no, it’s ‘look, he’s shįte but don’t worry it’s volkswagen that are getting assf*cked and not you”

anthonyjmaher

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

The water protestors seemed to keep insisting that it wasn’t a “money issue” so I am a bit puzzled that none of the bullhorn brigade,or the media chaps suggested that those who didn’t pay their charges donate what they should have paid to the homeless charities they all seem to be so concerned about. Just a thought………………………hmmmm.

That's actually an excellent point. I wonder has Paul Murphy been calling for people to donate this money to charity. It would be hugely hypocritical for the left to call for the water refunds to be given to charity, given that it was the "burden" of having to pay the charge in the first place that got them out on the street.

Not that the country is short of hypocrites by any means.

horseburger

sightband wrote: »

so to pull one out of my hole and going by your belief on what our taxes are spent on do you think your motor tax goes on motor related matters alone? or is it by any wild chance chucked into a pool of government capital expenditure? has d’arcy got VW stamped on his pay cheques?

i find it even more discomforting an RTE executive is trying to justify d’arcys wage, almost embarrassingly so, by admitting it’s volkswagen that will blow their money on that waste of space and not the licence fee payer. Surely he should be saying d’arcys talent and contribution to our national broadcaster is a worthy investment any licence fee payer should feel they are getting value for money...but no, it’s ‘look, he’s shįte but don’t worry it’s volkswagen that are getting assf*cked and not you”

I did not say anything about what I believe taxes are spent on.

Get over yourself. And the "he" to whom you refer, is a she, Moya Doherty.

https://www.thejournal.ie/ray-darcy-rte-salary-1907437-Jan2015/

I looked up the issue, about from what funding the radio presenters are paid, and I saw some items that suggest that the salaries paid to the presenters, come from advertising and sponsorship, rather than through the licence fee.

If you can reply with items that suggest the opposite, please do, perhaps by using your method of pulling one out of your hole.