How much do radio djs earn weekly?

[::Art::]

Well I'm thinking of being a radio dj when I grow up. Oh and if any1 knows how much a personal trainer would get please let me know thanks.

[Jordy]

Incredibly varying, it depends very much on how many slots you would do and at what times they are.

I imagine some late nights one's on local radio stations are something between 20k-30k a year. When it comes to national radio though it can be millions.

[Black_Apalachi]

Pretty much all the BBC DJs are millionaires as far as I know.

[::Art::]

Thanks for that. I was looking to be a dj at a local radio station or make my own 1. I'm sure the local ones would make a good bit

[Mitch4?]

I doubt they make their 'millions' just from the radio. Obviously national radio DJ's earn a lot more like Radio 1, but i'd be surprised if it exceeded a Million because most of them only work a bit, but then they earn extra stuff because people want them to play DJ sets in clubs, events etc.

[RedStratocas]

Thanks for that. I was looking to be a dj at a local radio station or make my own 1. I'm sure the local ones would make a good bit

it depends on what type of station it is. radio stations in general are struggling, and the industry is fast changing. im not sure how old you are, but by the time you are able to get a job in the field there's likely not going to be local radio anymore. it's all going to be satellite channels, probably.

[alexxxxx]

it depends on what type of station it is. radio stations in general are struggling, and the industry is fast changing. im not sure how old you are, but by the time you are able to get a job in the field there's likely not going to be local radio anymore. it's all going to be satellite channels, probably.

local radio in the UK is in no danger of being killed off due to the BBC. There are so many in london, and the BBC has one in every town/county in the UK. Plus the for-profit advert-sponsored local radio. Infact, the only countrywide FM radio station that isn't BBC is Classic FM. And AM has only a few like TALKSport and Virgin (Maybe a couple of others). On DAB there are still barely many national ones, mostly all bbc.

[RedStratocas]

local radio in the UK is in no danger of being killed off due to the BBC. There are so many in london, and the BBC has one in every town/county in the UK. Plus the for-profit advert-sponsored local radio. Infact, the only countrywide FM radio station that isn't BBC is Classic FM. And AM has only a few like TALKSport and Virgin (Maybe a couple of others). On DAB there are still barely many national ones, mostly all bbc.

im not saying the bbc is going to kill it, im saying saying new technology will, the same way the internet is killing local newspapers. there may still be "local radio" in a sense that reports on local happenings, but theyre going to be universally available, so in essence not really local. if that makes sense lol. im just saying the industry is going to look very different in give or take 10 years. i expect the role of the dj will change significantly as well.

[Arch]

If you want a job on a famous station it is very difficult to get a job as a DJ, on local stations its easier although you make alot less m00nies

[The Professor]

Ye absolute radio is where its at. Get on there and medal for you :D

[-:Undertaker:-]

The BBC only pay millions because they have our money to waste, one of the main reasons why it should be privatised. On DJ'ing, as others have said it can vary a lot but the chances are you will not be on a good wage/even make it as a DJ unless you are exceptionally good and exceptionally lucky. There are only so many radio stations and only so many jobs.

[alexxxxx]

The BBC only pay millions because they have our money to waste,

you don't need to pay a penny to the bbc to get bbc radio (Y)

[-:Undertaker:-]

you don't need to pay a penny to the bbc to get bbc radio (Y)

BBC radio is funded by the license fee/government is it not?

[Robbie]

Have a look at the connexions jobs4u site

[Seatherny]

BBC radio is funded by the license fee/government is it not?

Just don't have a TV in your house if you think its a waste :).
I listen to the radio regularly and Radio 1 DJ's are always the best imo.

Also no ads ever on TV or the radio, so its even better.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Just don't have a TV in your house if you think its a waste :).
I listen to the radio regularly and Radio 1 DJ's are always the best imo.

Also no ads ever on TV or the radio, so its even better.

Why should I not have access to a television because the BBC charge a stupid amount for a small choice of channels when Sky offers hundreds of Channels for a cheaper price. BBC - £139.50 per year compared to Skys range of appear to be cheaper deals with more choice, and as far as I know you don't have to pay anything like £139.50 per year for Sky TV services.

The BBC is not only biased (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-411846/We-biased-admit-stars-BBC-News.html) but also pays its staff obscene amounts of money (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1246524/BBC-Trust-claims-11-000-lunches-hospitality-expenses.html) (such as Jonathan Ross) and has jobs created year on year which contribute nothing, hence why they have such vague titles. There was a job in the news the other day which made no sense what so ever but I can't seem to find it now. The BBC does not need to be owned by the government, privatise it - maybe then it wouldn't be able to waste heaps and heaps of taxpayer money on lavish dinners with MPs.

[Robbie]

Why should I not have access to a television because the BBC charge a stupid amount for a small choice of channels when Sky offers hundreds of Channels for a cheaper price. BBC - £139.50 per year compared to Skys range of appear to be cheaper deals with more choice, and as far as I know you don't have to pay anything like £139.50 per year for Sky TV services.

The BBC is not only biased (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-411846/We-biased-admit-stars-BBC-News.html) but also pays its staff obscene amounts of money (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1246524/BBC-Trust-claims-11-000-lunches-hospitality-expenses.html) (such as Jonathan Ross) and has jobs created year on year which contribute nothing, hence why they have such vague titles. There was a job in the news the other day which made no sense what so ever but I can't seem to find it now. The BBC does not need to be owned by the government, privatise it - maybe then it wouldn't be able to waste heaps and heaps of taxpayer money on lavish dinners with MPs.Was that job the director of change or something? Lol I think i remember seeing it

[MrGazet]

depends how popular u are?

[Seatherny]

Why should I not have access to a television because the BBC charge a stupid amount for a small choice of channels when Sky offers hundreds of Channels for a cheaper price. BBC - £139.50 per year compared to Skys range of appear to be cheaper deals with more choice, and as far as I know you don't have to pay anything like £139.50 per year for Sky TV services.

The BBC is not only biased (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-411846/We-biased-admit-stars-BBC-News.html) but also pays its staff obscene amounts of money (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1246524/BBC-Trust-claims-11-000-lunches-hospitality-expenses.html) (such as Jonathan Ross) and has jobs created year on year which contribute nothing, hence why they have such vague titles. There was a job in the news the other day which made no sense what so ever but I can't seem to find it now. The BBC does not need to be owned by the government, privatise it - maybe then it wouldn't be able to waste heaps and heaps of taxpayer money on lavish dinners with MPs.

If BBC doesn't pay such high amounts to presenters such as Jonathan Ross, other channels happily will - hence showing the demand for presenters such as him.

BBC takes money as it is ad free and tries to provide good TV.

[::Art::]

thanks for this :)

[Sharon]

Wouldn't go into the millions but near enough.

This is turning into a debate....

[alexxxxx]

Why should I not have access to a television because the BBC charge a stupid amount for a small choice of channels when Sky offers hundreds of Channels for a cheaper price. BBC - £139.50 per year compared to Skys range of appear to be cheaper deals with more choice, and as far as I know you don't have to pay anything like £139.50 per year for Sky TV services.

The BBC is not only biased (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-411846/We-biased-admit-stars-BBC-News.html) but also pays its staff obscene amounts of money (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1246524/BBC-Trust-claims-11-000-lunches-hospitality-expenses.html) (such as Jonathan Ross) and has jobs created year on year which contribute nothing, hence why they have such vague titles. There was a job in the news the other day which made no sense what so ever but I can't seem to find it now. The BBC does not need to be owned by the government, privatise it - maybe then it wouldn't be able to waste heaps and heaps of taxpayer money on lavish dinners with MPs.

seeing as the minimum sub for sky is £18 12 month contract +set up and with that you get limited channels showing generally poor re-runs all day crammed with adverts, and the money that's paid to TV Licensing also funds digital switchover and all the BBC's services, provided as a public service to those who don't even want a tv, I can't see how you can complain. you don't even need a license to watch iPlayer or listen to the radio.

tv is a luxury, if you don't want one because of the price, don't get one.

[Misawa]

I've never listened to Absolute Radio, but Adrian Hieatt is a colleague of mine.

http://i.absoluteradio.co.uk/images/pages/4328.1/main_content.jpg

By the way, Chris Moyles was on 630K per year.

[Jordy]

The BBC is a remarkable organisation, it's one of the best things about Britain tbh. No adverts are fantastic, it's worth paying the premium just for that alone, that also means that 1 hour TV Programmes are about 10 minutes longer than they would be on ITV etc.

The quality is immense, the vast majority of what I watch is on the BBC, and that may well be my opinion but I know I'm not alone here. It provides a number of quality radio stations and then there's the internet. It's website is brilliant, particularly for news, once again no adverts. And of course it's brought innovative features like the iPlayer, would all the other channels of hurried up with On-Demand TV if the BBC didn't release such a successful service, no?

It sets the standards for media throughout the organisation. I can live with them asking a few harsh questions to Tory MPs and easier ones to Labour MPs seeing as I form my opinion on far more than "what the news says".

[::Art::]

Thanks everyone :)

[Black_Apalachi]

I've never listened to Absolute Radio, but Adrian Hieatt is a colleague of mine.

http://i.absoluteradio.co.uk/images/pages/4328.1/main_content.jpg

By the way, Chris Moyles was on 630K per year.

It's just what Virgin Radio was (unless you knew that :P).

[myke]

It depends on what section you go into, like what station, area and how long you've been there.

I think the starter wager is 12k p/a ... I remember seeing it on connexions once.

I will warn you however, there's LOTS of competition out there, and lots of people wanting to go into radio broadcasting ;)

So find what makes you unique and play on it. :)

[Misawa]

It's just what Virgin Radio was (unless you knew that :P).

I didn't.

[Aidobmac]

Well us here at Habbox we make about 50,000 a month.....wait.....woops....was that a secret?

Uh oh....
:P