Nine CEO Hugh Marks hits back on Lisa Wilkinson departure: ‘It’s not just a pay thing’
Nine CEO Hugh Marks has refuted claims the shock departure of Today Show host Lisa Wilkinson was primarily about money, arguing that she had declined to sign an exclusive contract, which restricted their ability to use her across Nine’s digital assets.
Marks said the reason the company walked away from the long-standing television host was because they couldn’t secure exclusive digital rights.
Marks: ‘It’s not just a pay thing’
To be honest most of these commentators are only worth $200K at their best and really Friday afternoon at the pub will deliver far more engaging and entertaining comment than we get on morning TV.
Enough from Hugh.
I have noticed that Karl is being very quiet about all this?? I think he is keeping quiet because he knows that he is on a better salary than Lisa, and he doesn’t want everyone to know that he is getting more money and as far as the public is concerned Lisa does the same job that Karl does, and sometimes a better job than him, so why should he be paid more money than Lisa for doing the same job? ? I personal think that Lisa is a better host out of the two of them, she is funnier, quick thinker, responds quicker and more than Karl, and I think that she prompts Karl a lot of the time or he would not make a comment about a lot of things that they are talking about. Lisa seems to be the most productive of the two, coming back with her comments about what it is they are talking about and so many times you can see Karl just sitting next to her like he has lost his train of thought and it’s Lisa who always fills in the blanks and keeps the conversation flowing and not only Karl but with some of the others too.
I am going to miss her so much, and no disrespect to anyone that is going to try and replace her but there is just no replacing her and because of that, I will not be watching the Today show in the morning anymore even if I have to watch the cartoons instead I don’t care because I just can’t watch someone else trying to replace her and I’m afraid that Karl just doesn’t have what it takes to do the show without Lisa beside him, because his personality is like a wet blanket without Lisa
I am so sorry to see Lisa leave and I will be watching her again on channel 10 soon but I am so sad about this, that I have no choice but to stop watching the Today show in support of Lisa. Good luck Lisa and I hope that you get what you deserve in your career because you have worked hard and deserve what is equal to any man
Very very sad to see you go Lisa, I am a very loyal fan of yours.
Congrats on standing up for yourself xox
JosieD
I agree with you, Josie. Lisa brought class, maturity and intelligence to her partnership with Karl. She will be missed 🙁
“so why should he be paid more money than Lisa for doing the same job?”
But… Karl does 60 Minutes, and This Time Next Year too, on top of the Today show? So they don’t seem to do the same job?
People only get one chance when renewing contracts to pitch for a pay rise! No doubt Karl will get more at his next review on the basis of this info too.
But slagging Lisa off as being of less value than Karl just looks bad, poor form Hugh Marks!!!! Saying nothing about the matter publicly would have afforded you better credibility.
But, since you are showing us your true colours, keep up the good work….can’t wait to meet your 10 new producers!!! Channel 9 must be so happy with your contributions right now. Maybe you will get the pay rise?
There is a terrific line from Ferris Bueller’s Day Off, where disgruntled sister Jeannie Bueller complains to her parents, “Yeah, right. Dry that one out and you can fertilise the lawn.”
Never a truer word said when applied to the cyclonic spin of Hugh Marks, the Nine PR machine and the various internal nine sources sprouting the details of the contract negotiations to various news outlets (i.e the Nine PR machine).
While Hugh might be a great ‘supporter of women in our business in terms of salary equity and position’ for every Erin Molan Footy Show announcement, there is a Jessica Rowe boning stored in the memory banks. Nine has form – even if not on Hugh’s watch.
Who cares ? Who watches free to air television any more ? The old networks are the walking dead of the new media landscape
Clearly people do: https://mumbrella.com.au/tv-ad-spend-climbs-6-september-thanks-afl-marriage-debate-477957
Just because you and your mates do not it doesn’t mean it’s the case for the rest of Australia.
Furthermore, in regards to “who cares” there is a wide scale debate around equal pay that surrounds this issue that, if you’d spent a little less time watching Netflix, you’d have likely noticed.
I see .. so you’ve found some figures that indicate one, momentary, recent spike in the number of viewers. Was there any special reason for that momentary spike ? But, let’s get to the crux of the matter and the general, long term trend in all of this.
Are you trying to argue that traditional, free to air television stations are still, very much in growth mode and that they are not losing audience share or revenue at a furious rate of knots ? How are their audience growth and revenue prospects looking for the long term ? Perhaps take a moment, go back to your Google search and you might find a “few” (cough) additional articles and news items (including several from Mumbrella) that don’t exactly lend solid support to your Disney view of the world.
And just for the record, I don’t have Netflix or, indeed, any pay TV service. However, again, just for the record, I was a producer on the “Today Show” – possibly before you were born. Just make sure that you’ve got a better idea in regard to WTF you’re talking about in future before you adopt such a supercilious attitude.
The only thing that’s “clear” is your utter desperation to talk up a lost cause by trying to glorify one, momentary, spike in viewers in what is, otherwise, a general, well documented , easily verifiable, terminal and irreversible decline in audience share. The one ray of light that you so boldly point to in the above link was due to the broadcasting of the AFL Grand Final. I suggest that you now take off the blinkers, go back to google and read the vast majority of other news items and articles which leave absolutely no doubt, what so ever, in regard to the current state of free to air television. And, for your information, I don’t have Netflix nor any other similar service. Also, I was a producer on the “Today Show”, possibly before you were born. Just make sure that you’ve , at least, got some idea what you’re talking about in future before you adopt such a supercilious attitude.
Take a trip out of the bubble and into the burbs buddy, it ain’t that bad. 99% of your client’s customers live outside a 3km radius of the CBD. They battle a god awful commute for an hour plus on the way home so they listen to the radio in the car, and when they get home they flick on the goggle box and try and find something worth watching cos they can’t be stuffed scrolling through youtube, or facebook or netflix recommendations. TV’s very much part of the mix.
I know cos I’m one of them.
With all due respect to Marks, a former talent agent himself, Nine Entertainment does not have the high quality digital assets or the audience recognition to demand exclusivity. It’s also myopic to suggest that the network’s best interest is for talent to support its own assets.
Mark’s has effectively backed an old world talent model whereby TV leads the audience relationship. He’s failed to recognise the opportunity for talent / to use their own brand to seek out and create new audiences for the network. Look at what’s been achieved by Warner Bros and Ellen Digital Ventures or ABC US’ Robin Roberts and her company Rockin’ Robin.
Talent is no longer cultivated purely in TV land. It seems Mark’s doesn’t get this. Perhaps 10 does. US networks certainly do.
Whilst I agree with you wholeheartedly, it is the clients (agencies and brands) that often want a holistic talent approach.
“I went to an incredible amount of trouble to build a $1.8 million package for her.” It sounds like he thinks he was doing her a favour. I suspect they don’t see this as a big PR nightmare or anything of great concern, because advertisers haven’t pulled out (yet). Very smart PR on Lisa’s part, especially as she would have likely had Ch 10 lined up before making the pay demands.
So true – does read like he thought he was being generous.The trite line yesterday from a 9 staffer that 10 producers (really – they get paid $20k p.a.) would lose their jobs when this was never part of the conversation when Karl negotiated his contract.
$500k of her proposed new contract was to be paid by a 3rd party (for endorsement). Karl’s BASE (whilst he may have done other shows) was $2m. He had up to an additional $1m more in bonuses for those activities and ratings wins – which she would have assisted him achieve. Then there’s the issue of her needing to sell her soul to 9 across every asset (where it would have inhibited the full potential of her personal brand) before she was able to even negotiate a number.
It’s no coincidence the Erin Molan announcement came on the same day – but let’s not forget, up until yesterday Erin was on something in like $600k less than the morally vacuous and talentless, Beau Ryan and there’s no transparency on her new contract.
I am not in PR but this release was a big mistake
nothing like a male CEO commenting on the pay gap and declaring what a woman who was obviously paid less than her male counterpart tried to negotiate with them
saying nothing here says everything
I lost respect for Lisa years ago when she jumped ship from the weekend sunrise show it appears money is high on her agenda.Not that there is anything wrong with that.When these people are earning so much more ads are needed to pay for them.Am getting to a stage not really interested in the morning shows.
Marks is the perfect man to skipper a sinking ship. And Lisa should thanks her lucky stars that she has had it so good.
So the way I understand it.
Hugh says he worked really hard to put together a $1.8 million package. To achieve this income Lisa would have to work harder and work exclusively.
Lisa under the new contract would probably be doing the same or more hours for the network as Karl currently does.
BUT Lisa would still be paid LESS than Karl for more output. Locked in at LESS money than her counterpart. But doing more work to make it worth the Nine commitment to her. Still not valued equally….
If Nine believes its digital assets are vitally important, and it seems to, it makes sense that they want to tie up their talent within their own platforms. I face similar situations in my job and it’s frustrating to see top talent writing for other outlets so they can earn extra on the side. If a presenter came to me and said they wanted a massive pay rise, but they wanted to keep their external contracts with organisations who were essentially competitors, I’d turn them down too. But I’d consider forking out for exclusivity. Framing this is as purely about gender pay disparity is disingenuous.
I find this whole pay rights thing obscene. She is a journo. So. Give some thought to the staff who work in Aged Care, who spend many hours a day caring for human beings trying to make their lives purposeful. How is this high rate of pay for a journo justified. Who sets the standard of pay rates. So unbalanced. Just give a thought to these people who work n sacrifice to bring joy to others. I will never understand this wages difference. Just not fair.
Just adding. I hate these morning shows. A load of time wasters, and obviously over paid, to sit on their comfy lounges and spend hours in front of camera n talk a lot of dribble. Get amongst the real people n learn about their daily lives. Ange
Both totally overpaid. Get some fresh talent Chanel 9 and Ten and give the viewers a break from the rantings of a couple of ego maniacs.