The Murdoch men — Rupert, Lachlan and James — more than doubled their take from 21st Century Fox in 2017-18, with their collective remuneration surging from US$70.2 million or just over AU$97 million, to US$150.2 million, or nearly AU$208 million. Adding in the much smaller, but still satisfactory payout from News Corp, and the amount is close to US$156 million.
Rupert Murdoch’s total pay jumped to US$49.2 million in the 2017-18 as executive co-chairman, compared with US$29.3 million in 2016-17.
But he was surpassed by sons Lachlan and James. Lachie, co-chair of the company with dad, saw his take more than double to US$50.7 million, compared with US$20.6 million in the previous year.
All this just for being a Murdoch man and a shareholder in the Murdoch family trust, which controls 39.1% of the voting shares in Fox (and in the related News Corp). But in reality the holding is equal to around 17% to 18% of the total number of voting and non-voting shares in both companies.
And Fox CEO James Murdoch had a similarly rewarding year — his compensation for the year to June more than doubled to US$50.3 million, compared with US$20.3 million for the previous year. That will be James’ last full year pay bonanza as he is leaving the empire once the Disney carve-up is done.
In a proxy filing, the company’s directors (which includes the three Murdoch men) justified their decision to reward the Murdochs with massive raises, writing that they were “critical to the completion” of the Disney deal and lauding them for delivering “strong company performance during a time of substantial change”.
The higher payments came after Fox agreed to sell large parts of its business to Walt Disney for US$71.3 billion, but after eight years of attempting to takeover Sky plc failed when Comcast overbid it. Fox decided last week to accept the Comcast offer, which will give it AU$21 billion.
It is not just Fox that has seen Rupert Murdoch hold his hand out and take millions. He was paid a total of US$5.7 million for his chairmanship of News Corp for 2017-18 despite his “base” salary supposedly set at US$5 million. Lachlan, the other co-chair, was paid around US$330,000 and James received US$248,000 for being directors of News. Their big payoffs came at Fox, but dad Rupert still got more — a total of nearly $55 million in cash, shares and other perks. That’s around AU$76 million.
It appears there is never too little money for a Murdoch man at News or Fox — but don’t hurry to read anything in the News Corp papers about it.
But what you will read plenty of in the News Corpse papers are outraged comments about people like Michelle Guthrie earning $900,000 pa – ‘Your right to know’ indeed.
Rather than bleat about the Murdoch’s Glenn, what about a chart of CEO (and Board member) salaries and entitlements for the “top” 120 Australian companies – or is it just easier to sensationalise the incomes of the Murdoch family?
This article is representative of the kind of crap that is scrawled on Yahoo news.
I agree that a chart of CEO salaries for the top 120 Oz companies would be very illuminating, but don’t feel that all Glenn has done is “to sensationalise the incomes of the Murdoch family”.
They deserve every bit of scrutiny that comes their way. For far too long they have been allowed to call the shots in the US, Australia and the UK (although at least the British have had the sense to try to limit their influence latterly).
Glenn is absolutely correct when he writes “don’t hurry to read anything in the News Corp papers about it.
Have at it Kyle, but please keep your response brief and to the point. I find your usual responses far too long and detailed for my pea-sized brain to cope with, and thus I often have to skip what I’m sure are often valid points made by you.
The family income(s) is/are an easy target. As to scrutiny Dyer threw away an opportunity which, in fairness, he could correct tomorrow.
As to my constructing arguments what is actually going through my head when doing so are the aphorisms of Luther, Kant Popper, Ayer and Russell; viz., that I could be wrong. Then there are the nit-pickers whatever the length.
There’s your answer then Kyle. I got a bog-standard BA and only completed Philosophy 101. The single thing I remember from undertaking that course was Descartes “I think therefore I am”, and from memory, that’s not a correct quotation of what he said. As for Luther, Kant, Popper, Ayer and Russell, sure I’ve heard and even read a limited amount about them; some more than others.
I was strictly at uni to have fun and was a crammer just before exams. My special areas of interest were Asian History and English Literature.
Sorry to be a nit-picker. It’s impossible to please everyone.
The problem for Descartes is that if he is to reject everything except thinking, in terms of conscious states (sight, sound – sense experience as Hume wold have it), then (for the British tradition) he is also obliged to reject thinking because thinking is no more (or less) real than sense experience. A classic ‘pin’ in chess!
As to your comment of 2 Oct 13:06, I don’t try to please anyone but I don’t try to offend anyone either. Some become offended all by themselves.
Crikey is a good place to exchange ideas and perspectives and about a dozen or so contributors participate as such. Like Oliver we could all wish for more.
Why use the word “Bleat”?
It sounds very much like you are running some sort of defence for the Murdoch gang. Are you?
We prevail, not by engaging or emulating the antics of those to whom we object but, by acting contrary to them (and their behaviours). Dyer, clearly, attempted to create a sense of indignation among the readership yet anyone with half a clue as to how the ‘CEO and Board’ game is played need not and ought not to be so patronised.
Murdoch’s entire empire is sustained by an amalgam of half-truths and sensationalism. Dyer need not be so complicit by emulating Murdoch (if on the other side of the coin – so to write).
As an aside the same applies to topics such as climate change (which also draws the knee-jerkers).
Yes, no, you are right….Pointing out the Murdoch gang’s I’ll gotten gains is just a shabby attempt to wind up the envy and indignation…bad Dyer, naughty Dyer.
Climate change, what climate change?
Nurse, my meds…Stat!
Murdoch’s Dept; of Misinformation and Obfuscation is run like and a propaganda machine, to push his politics, influence voter perception (to swing elections off the back of a majority of the swinging vote) and protect him and promote his “special interests”.
Does he get anything for being on the Advisory Board of Genie Oil & Gas, while peddling coal, and slagging off climate change science, in his rags?
One of the many, MBA-waffle, euphemisms for salary is “compensation”.
For what, precisely, are the mudorcs being compensated? Is it some sort of salve to their, coff coff, souls for the evil they do?
Surely it is we, whose government & politicians are their puppets, who are more deserving of recompense?
Look at the photo no wonder Jerry Hall went for this virile stud.
Who cares what they are paid, it’s not like they earned it by contributing in any positive way to society. They will always be over paid for their efforts to subvert governments and further corrupt the ambitious and greedy.
Pwarrr…I bet he bangs like a dunny door
I think you are overestimating his ummmm ability?