Inside TV Exclusive TV News and Scoop
'The Big Bang Theory' salary renegotiations: Do they all deserve the same pay?
- Comments 159
- Add comment
CBS
One of the more fascinating salary negotiations in TV history involved the Friends cast, when Courteney Cox, David Schwimmer, Jennifer Aniston, Matthew Perry, Lisa Kudrow and Matt LeBlanc chose to negotiate their salaries together, having decided that no one actor on the cast was worth more than the other. That pleased Warner Bros. TV to no end, of course, because it meant they could say, “Pay everyone LeBlanc money, not Cox money!” Even today, former execs from that era brag about how the actors left money on the table at the expense of keeping things harmonious on the set. (That might be true, but the cast’s friendships sure remained intact.)
Cut to 2010, when another salary renegotiation is winding its way through the halls of Warner Bros. TV. It just so happens to involve a comedy that’s pretty much replaced Friends in terms of popularity, critical praise, and its ability to generate millions in revenue: The Big Bang Theory. As is customary for any successful show approaching its fifth and sixth years (Bang is currently in its fourth season), the core ensemble of five have jockeyed for more money. Interestingly, three of those castmembers — Jim Parsons, Kaley Cuoco and Johnny Galecki — initially decided to follow in the footsteps of the Friends actors by negotiating as one but, as first reported by Deadline, the Emmy-winning Parsons made the decision to break away and negotiate on his own. Lucky for Cuoco and Galecki, his strategy didn’t work, and now all three are earning roughly $200,000 per episode this season — up from $60k last year — and will see $50,000 bumps each year over the next three years, as well as a piece of the comedy’s rich syndication profits.
That left Simon Helberg and Kunal Nayyar, who negotiated separately. Though it can be argued that Parsons, Cuoco and Galecki are lead material, both Helberg and Nayyar are certainly integral to the show’s success. Indeed, some of the comedy’s best moments are when Parsons, Galecki, Helberg and Nuyyar are together. But clearly, the studio wasn’t looking to follow a favored nations strategy because Helberg, who plays Howard Wolowitz, just closed a deal to earn north of $100,000 per episode, EW has confirmed. That’s up from around $40,000, but nowhere near what Parsons, Galecki and Cuoco are making.
Though Nayyar (Raj) has yet to sign a new pact of his own, it doesn’t appear that he was offered the same amount as Helberg or else he would have signed by now. Reportedly, Nayyar is expected to close a deal shortly; if not, the negotiations could be postponed to season’s end and he’ll have to continue earning around $25k per episode under his current, six-year contract. But it would be wrong to assume this was a contentious negotiation, said one interested party. “Granted, no one was skipping to the mailbox and cashing a check — there was some teeth pulling — but in the end, everybody is going to make a ton of money,” the source said.
- EW.com Home
- Inside TV Main
-
maiv Tue 11/23/10 5:10 PM
Realistically, I don’t really see why they should earn the same amount. I don’t watch this show anymore, but when I was, it was pretty much the Sheldon show…
Still sad for Raj tho. I would have expected him to make as much as Wolowitz. And I can see why they don’t make as much as the other three.Reply-
TJ. Church Wed 11/24/10 12:44 AM
You need to watch some of this season; Ironically, as Jim makes more money, he is featured in storylines less.
Reply-
Richard Whitman Wed 11/24/10 4:49 PM
Big Bang Theory = unfunny lowest common denominator crap for morons.
-
Holly Wed 11/24/10 5:00 PM
Haha funny post Richard – I get it, you’re saying the “opposite of the truth” right? Like, irony? Hilarious.
-
Richard Whitman
-
Zakry Wed 11/24/10 11:24 AM
Then why do you feel qualified to comment on a show you no longer watch?
Reply -
Garry Wed 11/24/10 3:44 PM
It SHOULDN’T be The Sheldon Show.
It began as an ensemble show, but the Sheldon character took over, and became increasingly obnoxious in the process. Once in a while, he is relegated to the background, which allows the others to shine. I’m hoping for more episodes like that in the future.Reply -
musica1 Wed 11/24/10 7:27 PM
Parsons makes the show. Period. There wasn’t one person like that in Friends. But Galecki and Cuoco are important, too. The show wouldn’t be the same without them. On the other hand, you could probably replace the other two with two different weirdos and the show wouldn’t suffer.
Reply-
Garry Wed 11/24/10 10:32 PM
musuica 1, you’re crazy. Parsons does NOT make the show. If anything, he is dangerously close to ruining it. With this cast, the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. I would enjoy TBBT just as much without so much Sheldon.
But thanks for the generous observation that “Galecki and Cuoco are important too.” Gee whiz!
-
Garry
-
TJ. Church
-
Liva Tue 11/23/10 5:12 PM
I think all five deserve ‘Cox money’.
Reply-
Miss Talk Tue 11/23/10 6:35 PM
I don’t get it.Why “Cox money” ? As far as I remember, those who got their salary reduced were Aniston and Schwimmer, not Cox.
Reply-
Liva Tue 11/23/10 9:35 PM
My point is that all deserve really big bucks. The writers, too.
-
Liz Tue 11/23/10 11:20 PM
No, Courtney was the only big name when the show started (from Ace Ventura). No one had ever heard of the other five. Then a few years in when salary negotiations started, she was fresh off of Scream/Scream 2 and could’ve demanded more than the rest of the cast.
-
Joe Wed 11/24/10 10:09 AM
@Liv: Cox was famous from Family Ties and the Dancing in the Dark video with Bruce Springsteen way before Ace Ventura. Ace Ventura and Friends came out the same year.
-
Hilary Sat 05/21/11 5:57 AM
Cox was by far the most annoying, aside from Pheobe. I do believe Ross and Anniston carried the show by the end. Friends would not have worked as a single-woman star show. She is just too annoying for that.
-
Liva
-
Rand Tue 11/23/10 11:55 PM
I’d call 1,000,000 dollars per episode ‘cox’ money, at the very least…
Reply-
Jeri Fri 11/26/10 5:58 PM
Cox was supposed to be the star of Friends but it soon became obvious it was an ensemble show and Cox was went along with that and did not push for “star” status as so many others do.
BBT is also an ensemble and all the characters certainly contribute and any one of them would be sorely missed.
-
Jeri
-
Miss Talk
-
JLC Tue 11/23/10 5:14 PM
Seriously? The cast meshes well, but for the most part, it’s “Sheldon and the Seven (actually four) Dwarves.” The only other actor that I would consider even remotely irreplaceable is Leonard.
Reply-
Kat Tue 11/23/10 5:55 PM
They are all irreplacable.
Reply-
wooster182 Tue 11/23/10 11:35 PM
I disagree. I could easily do without Penny and Leonard and watch more of Amy and Howard and his girlfriend.
-
thin Wed 11/24/10 2:51 AM
Fortunately for the rest of us, you neither write nor cast the show.
-
reason Wed 11/24/10 8:36 AM
really? I thought the Pennyless episodes were sorely lacking and just pointed out how integral she is to the show.
-
Vinny Sat 11/27/10 5:58 PM
true.
-
wooster182
-
nunnya Wed 11/24/10 10:16 AM
I agree that the Penny episodes were bland, but that may have been because they had to be written in response to her accident. I don’t think I want to see the show survive without Penny or Leonard.
Reply
-
Kat
-
p Tue 11/23/10 5:18 PM
with the friends cast it made since given that they had fairly equal screen time, and likewise submitted for the same category at the emmys. With BBT, there’s a clear distinction between the main three, and the supporting two (who sometimes only have one scene per episode). However, Helberg and Nayyar should both have the same salary in my opinion
Reply-
Adam Tue 11/23/10 6:46 PM
Agreed.
Reply-
Agreed Wed 11/24/10 9:47 AM
Agreed, but wish Helberg (and his mom) & Nayyar had as much screen time. I find it tooo much when the show is mainly about the other three. I think that will hurt the show (b’c it can be boring). Friends gave us equal variety, BBT needs that as well.
-
Agreed
-
Lisa London Wed 11/24/10 8:07 AM
Ditto
Reply -
musica1 Wed 11/24/10 7:32 PM
I really hate Helberg’s character when it’s featured at all. He’s great as a side character, but as soon as they bring him to the front even a bit, the humor goes straight to the toilet.
Reply
-
Adam
-
Nicoleq Tue 11/23/10 5:22 PM
Maybe if they’d let Raj get over his (at this point really annoying) fear of speaking in front of women, he’d have the same number of lines as Wolowicz instead of just whispering in his ear all the time. I mean, c’mon – it’s been 4 seasons. Time to give up the joke. Although even as it is, I can’t believe they won’t give him “Wolowicz” money. Not cool, man.
Reply-
Brian Tue 11/23/10 6:05 PM
Seriously. That is getting old real fast.
Reply -
ajay c Wed 11/24/10 9:40 AM
I agree…They have to give Raj the same as his Jewish best friend. That’s is just pure B.S that they would give him less. Raj may not be the lead, but he certainly should not be earning the least. He earned to have a good pay day coming.
Reply -
Dan Wed 11/24/10 9:54 AM
I so agree. Raj and Wolo are 3rd tier and should be paid the same. Penny and Leonard are 2nd tier and should be paid the same. Sheldon is 1st tier and should be paid the most.
And YES! enough with the stupid ‘not able to talk to women’ joke. It got old after the first season. Now it sounds like a stale stand up comic’s joke and drags down each episode it is featuredReply -
Rob Wed 11/24/10 2:45 PM
I could not agree more. It’s time to send Raj to the shrink and get him over his fear of talking to women.
Reply-
Garry Wed 11/24/10 11:32 PM
What if the shrink he schedules an appointment with turns out to be a woman?
-
Garry
-
bootsycolumbia Wed 11/24/10 4:53 PM
I couldn’t agree more. I keep hoping that Raj will meet the right woman, and in an effort to win her over, he’ll finally confront his “selective mutism”.
Reply
-
Brian
-
wait, what? Tue 11/23/10 5:23 PM
critical praise?? no way, friends was better than tbbt is today; it has his bumps. About the salary negotiation; Parsons does work harder, he has more screen time than the others – it’s only fair different salaries…
Reply-
jen Tue 11/23/10 5:58 PM
and parsons has won an emmy, for crying out loud. he SHOULD get more than the other main two, who imho, aren’t as good.
Reply
-
jen
-
Daw Johnson Tue 11/23/10 5:26 PM
Depends how you look at it. This show could go on without anyone but Parsons and Cuoco, so they should technically be making the most money. Galecki isn’t quite as valuable as a performer, but I’ll lump him into that category just because the dynamic of the show is built around his universe.
The other two are great, but replaceable. You don’t necessarily look at them as “lesser,” so I could see the argument for paying them the same on that ground, but they’re also totally replaceable.
gipoco.com is neither affiliated with the authors of this page or responsible
for its contents. This is a safe-cache copy of the original web site.gipoco.com is neither affiliated with the authors of this page nor responsible for its contents. This is a safe-cache copy of the original web site.