I disagree......tom Jessie danny and will earn the money the market demands as people buy their music and their tickets etc
holly is paid by the tax payers by the tax funded BBC for £420000 for doing almost nothing....its crazy....and yes I do believe the show is meant to be about the not a talentless overpaid presenter who adds nothing and knows nothing about music

anyone who likes her should be ashamed of themselves

Oh No No Marsh, I'm sure it's just cos she only wants to hear her own voice :laugh:

the show works infinitely better in the blind auditions simply because she isn't involved and the singers can just talk to the judges.....this illustrates the fact she is simply not needed.

Actually, they too are paid by the tax payer in their fee for being on the show.

Jessie J giving advice to budding musicians when she has all of one album and no longevity under her belt. You could rip apart the credibility of this show on every level.

And, yes people buy their music, does it mean that their talent deserves millions and millions? No. As another poster said, doctors and nurses who save lives everyday deserve it more. But that's life, it's not always fair.

sarcasm is the lowest for of wit

anyone who pays her £420,000 for doing almost nothing should be truly ashamed of themselves

I really like Reggie, and i get annoyed at how they hardly show him? how does he justify his pay when hes on for even less than holly, they seem to just use him as a bit part :laugh:

Is this news? Welcome to showbiz, it's the name of the game.

Talentless fools like Jennifer Lopez can demand millions upon millions to make a movie and be treated like a goddess. Or show the world her vagina on a Saturday night family show.

It's never been fair. :laugh:

wrong....the 4 judges have experience singing, dancing, performing, entertaining millions of music fans, working alongside musicians, creating songs, music, videos etc etc

Willoughby has none of this knowledge or experience

heck tom used to present , sing solo, duets and do the monologues all on his own on his 1970s tv shows.....and they were terrific.....no wooden presenter in sight

yes it is news....its not the name of any game....lopez is a proven entertainer with a large number of movie appearances, hit records, sold out concerts etc

Willoughby has done zero in the music business

youre comparing apples with oranges, utter nonsense...no offence

a) I never said the 4 judges didn't do all of those things, but do I believe those things deserves millions in return? No.

But I'll also point out plenty popstars have done the things you listed and are worthless crap with no talent. So, even more, they don't deserve the money either.

b) The presenter doesn't need a knowledge of music, they stand there for a couple of minutes at a time giving out the phone numbers and introducing the acts. No music knowledge required.

Most presenters have no music knowledge, what does Dermot know?? he spends a lot of the time prancing about and getting attention etc

It's news to you that celebrities receive these vast sums of money for relatively very little work?

Lopez can't sing or act yet gets paid to release music and act in movies.
You're saying Willoughby can't present a TV show and gets paid as a presenter, so yes it is comparable.

Willoughby isn't hired as a music professional, that's not her purpose.
Just as the narrator of The Apprentice most likely knows bugger all about business, but that's not his purpose.

They are there to relay voting/contestant information to the audience. The music schtick is for the judges.

He's a man though :idc:

she not only fails and has zero knowledge of anything, in which case her skill/talent is not specialised at all..whereas the talent of the coaches is specialised and proven ..they could get 10001 people to read off the dummy cards, so her fee is simply unjustifiable on every level....on top of that she cannot even do the basics of a presenters job which is to not just read off autocue but to interact, to converse and listen...instead she simply talks over people....she simply lacks any skill or talent and doesn't even have the basic social skills to interact with people....reggie is vastly better...yet is hidden away back stage and paid a tiny fraction....he actually has a sense of humour and some personality....holly is simply useless....they could get anyone better at a snip of her fat salary

theres a load of female presenters way way way better than this overpaid fake

Which has what to do with her knowledge of music?

It's a glorified karaoke session.

so you think its worth all this money to pay a talentless bimbo a fortune to present a so called karaoke session?

I think the quality of singers is better than karaoke singers

why do you ignore all other points? if it was your show, called the voice, about the voice, would you pay someone with zero music knowledge or experience at all, with zero personality, no discernible talent, poor social and listening skills, £420,000 to read a few corny lines off dummy cards and talk over everyone else in a monotone voice?

How is she a bimbo? just because she's blonde and was showing her clevage doesnt mean she is..
She comes across quite clever and considerate on this morning, i just think the Voice portrays her as a bimbo

I never said she was worth the money, as I said I think these celebs in general earn way too much money regardless of their level of talent.

I never ignored your points, I addressed them in several previous posts, you seem to be ignoring those.

If it was my show I wouldn't care about the music knowledge of the presenter because all they need is to look good and have good presenting skills, the music expertise should come from the judges. The presenters aren't there to critique and assess.

You could stick Paul McCartney as the presenter of the show and his musical expertise would mean diddly squat in a presenter role.

She isn't there to add her expertise in the field of music, she is not a critic ,she is there to present and nothing more. If you have a problem with her presenting style, which you obviously do, then fine have a go, but her musical knowledge shouldn't really come into it. Out of interest do you have a problem with Reggie? He seems to add nothing in terms of critique even though he has a music backround.

And tbf, what sort of music knowledge are you after? You don't have to be an expert in the field to notice who has a decent voice and who doesn't, distinguishing the good from the bad is a pretty basic talent in regards to music, everybody has the ability to do so. As long as you are not a teenybopper that is more interested in looks than talent you're fine in recognizing talent.

Holly is worth every penny of our taxes

And even so, as presenter, Holly is supposed to be impartial, she's certainly not there to analyse the contestants performances

she is utterly useless in every aspect of her job....she doesn't even admire to be remotely sincere when she says woodenly how amazing each performance was....I doubt shes even a music lover....her total lack of passion for anything but self publicity , her vapid personality and dreadful listening/communication skills are embarrassing to behold....she is simply awful as a host for this show

then why doesn't she shut up and allow the music lovers and experts to talk?