Play Nice 2024 AFL TV Ratings

[The_Wookie]

Internal trials starting this weekend.

Will be keeping the ratings thread separate to the attendance thread this year.


Notes

Oztam have now moved completely to VOZ. At present this means no Fox or Kayo streams seem to be appearing on the oztam lists. Reach is now the focus of the Oztam reporting although an average for Linear is still being reported.

* NOTE: NEW METRICS AND REPORTS *​

• Total TV Overnight Top 30 and Consolidated 7 Top 30 reach is calculated using cumulative unique audiences watching 1 min of broadcast TV and 15 sec of BVOD.
• Total TV National audience is calculated using the audience average for the program as time-coded by the Network across 5CM and all regional markets nationally watching on broadcast TV.
• BVOD national audience is calculated using the total number of minutes watched (multiplied by co-viewing factor) divided by the length of the program.

Will attempt to get as much data as possible, but Oztam not making it easy any more.

 

[The Educator]

Roy Morgan has always been significant higher on audiences than the ratings.

Yep, which is why I am a sure the actual number is some where between the two.

 

[The_Wookie]

Yep, which is why I am a sure the actual number is some where between the two.

yeah most likely.

I do doubt we'll get out of home ratings here any time soon unfortunately.

 

[The_Wookie]

Monday, 30 September 2024

Seven’s AFL Grand Final: #1 program of 2024
Reaches 6.09 million. Total TV audience 4.024 million. Soars 44% on 7plus Sport

The Seven Network’s live, free and exclusive coverage of the 2024 AFL Grand Final captured the attention of the nation on Saturday, reaching 6.09 million Australians and becoming the most-watched program of 2024.

The Grand Final, which saw the Brisbane Lions take the 2024 crown in a dominant 60 point victory over the Sydney Swans, captured a total TV audience of 4.024 million, including 655,000 on 7plus Sport – the biggest ever audience for an AFL match on a streaming platform. Viewing on 7plus Sport was up 44% on 2023.

This year’s showdown was the most watched AFL Grand Final since 2021 and up more than 20,000 total TV viewers on the 2023 season closer between Collingwood and the Brisbane Lions.

The AFL Grand Final now accounts for two of top three programs so far in 2024, with the Grand Final at #1 and AFL Grand Final Presentations at #3 (total TV audience 3.39 million, national reach 5.11 million).

The Grand Final, Presentations, On The Ground and Pre-Match Entertainment were the four most-watched programs in all people, 25 to 54s, 16 to 39s and grocery shoppers on Saturday. 7NEWS ranked #5.

The 2024 Grand Final captured an 89.9% commercial audience share in its timeslot. From 6am to 6pm on Saturday, Seven had an 81.7% audience share. 7plus dominated BVOD viewing on Saturday, with 236.5 million minutes viewed, a 76.7% commercial share of live streaming and a 73.2% commercial BVOD share.

The Grand Final capped a high-flying 2024 Final Series on Seven. Excluding Saturday’s match, the Final Series reached 8.5 million people, with the two preliminary finals reaching more than 3 million people each.

Seven’s AFL Grand Final by the numbers:

· AFL Grand Final: National reach 6.09 million, national total TV audience 4.024 million, including 655,000 on 7plus Sport (up 44% on 2023)
· AFL Grand Final Presentations: National reach 5.11 million, national total TV audience 3.39 million
· AFL Grand Final On The Ground: National reach 3.77 million, national total TV audience 2.98 million
· AFL Grand Final Pre-Match Entertainment: National reach 3.54 million, national total TV audience 1.37 million
· AFL Grand Final Countdown: National reach 1.13 million, national total TV audience 504,000
· AFL Grand Final Brunch: National reach 974,000, national total TV audience 386,000

The AFL Grand Final and the Charles Brownlow Medal five days earlier heralded the arrival of 7plus Sport, the live and free home of the best sport in Australia.

The launch of 7plus Sport means every Australian can now live stream for free AFL matches and the best international and domestic cricket on home soil, including the upcoming Test summer between Australia and India, BBL, WBBL, the Women’s International Series and the Women’s Ashes series.

Adding AFL and cricket to Seven’s already extensive digital sport offering – which includes horse racing, boxing, Supercars, AFLW, LIV Golf, cycling, hockey, athletics, netball and much more – means Australians can now be able to watch every Seven sport, live and free on any device from anywhere in Australia at any time.

Seven Network Director of Sport, Chris Jones, said: “Following one of the most unpredictable AFL seasons in recent memory, what a fitting finale it was. Chris Fagan, who is one of the best people in the industry, has overcome so much through his entire career and has now led his Lions to premiership glory.

“Congratulations to the players and thank you on behalf of our production team to everyone within the AFL who allowed us to tell their stories.

“As we finish the 2024 season, we have our sights set firmly on a bigger and better 2025 AFL Premiership Season with more programming and analysis than ever before. And like Saturday’s Grand Final, every game we cover live will be streamed for free on 7plus Sport. It’s going to be massive,” he said.

Gereurd Roberts, Group Managing Director, Seven Digital, said: “The record-breaking number of people who watched the AFL Grand Final on 7plus Sport clearly demonstrates how the addition of AFL and cricket to 7plus will forever change the way Australians watch and engage with sport, and create unprecedented opportunities for our clients and agency partners.

“We’ve always said the arrival of AFL and cricket on 7plus would be a defining moment in the digital streaming revolution, and Saturday’s numbers prove that. With a massive summer of cricket to come, including five Tests between Australia and India, Australians can now watch every Seven sport, live and free on any device from anywhere in the country, at any time. And the weekend’s Grand Final shows just how important that is to them.”

Seven National Television Sales Director, Katie Finney, said: “The AFL once again proved to be the #1 winter sport for audiences and brands. Seven’s AFL coverage reached 6.09 million viewers, offering unparalleled reach and engagement across all demographics and with AFL now streaming live and free on 7plus Sport in 2025, it’s set to grow even further.

“Free live sport is where brands can connect with audiences and cultural moments at scale, and the biggest events this summer are on Seven and 7plus Sport, including the upcoming Bathurst 1000 in two weeks and the Australia vs India Test match starting 22 November.”

Seven’s Head of AFL and Sport Innovation, Gary O’Keeffe, said: “In a fantastic story for football in Australia’s northern states, we are thrilled to have captured every corner of the nation on Australian sport’s biggest day.

“Footy is in our DNA, and Seven’s coverage showcase the entertainment and passion of the AFL competition like no one else. We thank the AFL, its players, Clubs and most importantly the fans whose passion for the game drives everything we do at 7AFL.”

National total TV commercial shares (%): 6am to 6pm:

	All people​	25 to 54s​	16 to 39s​	Grocery shoppers​
Seven Network	81.7​	85.3​	89.6​	80.2​
Nine Network	12.8​	10.3​	6.9​	14.2​
Network Ten	5.4​	4.4​	3.5​	5.7​

 

[The_Wookie]

Primary Description	BVOD Audience	BVOD Reach
LIVE: NRL: PF STORM V ROOSTERS	389,000	617,000
LIVE: NRL: PF PANTHERS V SHARKS	365,000	562,000
LIVE: MOTORSPORT: F1: SINGAPORE RACE	281,000	394,000
LIVE: MOTORSPORT: F1: CHEQUERED FLAG	72,000	218,000
LIVE: MOTORSPORT: MOTOGP: EMILIA ROMAGNA RACE	49,000	62,000
LIVE: NETBALL: AUSTRALIA V ENGLAND G2	46,000	78,000
LIVE: NETBALL: AUSTRALIA V ENGLAND G3	46,000	75,000
LIVE: QLD CUP: GF DEVILS V DOLPHINS	44,000	101,000
LIVE: AFL GRAND FINAL BREAKFAST	42,000	104,000
LIVE: CRICKET: ODI: ENG V AUS G3 IN1	39,000	85,000
LIVE: NFL: FALCONS V CHIEFS	39,000	111,000

 

[The_Wookie]

AFL Finals Ratings *known

Home	Away	Total TV	Reach	BVOD	BVOD Reach	Agg Ave
Port Adelaide	Geelong	832,000	2,493,000	356,000	642,000	1,188,000
Western Bulldogs	Hawthorn	972,000	2,426,000	413,000	710,000	1,385,000
Sydney	GWS	718,000	2,092,000	369,000	750,000	1,087,000
Brisbane	Carlton	887,000	2,342,000	374,000	706,000	1,261,000
Port Adelaide	Hawthorn	1,082,000	2,623,000	440,000	780,000	1,522,000
GWS	Brisbane	922,000	2,645,000	388,000	788,000	1,310,000
Sydney	Port Adelaide	1,206,000	2,993,000	432,000	802,000	1,638,000
Geelong	Brisbane	1,334,000	3,251,000	506,000	914,000	1,840,000
Sydney	Brisbane	4,024,000	6,087,000			4,024,000

NRL Finals Ratings *known

Home	Away	Total TV	TV Reach	BVOD	BVOD Reach	Agg Ave
Penrith	Sydney	776,000	1,641,000	274000	485000	1,050,000
Melbourne	Cronulla	572,000	1,380,000	315000	535000	887,000
North Queensland	Newcastle	723,000	1,524,000	282000	498000	1,005,000
Canterbury	Manly	828,000	1,788,000	353000	554000	1,181,000
Cronulla	North Queensland	868,000	1,786,000	281000	512000	1,149,000
Sydney	Manly	836,000	1,754,000	285000	510000	1,121,000
Melbourne	Sydney	1,171,000	2,323,000	389000	61700	1,560,000
Penrith	Cronulla	1,156,000	2,164,000	365000	562000	1,521,000
						0

 

[The_Wookie]

 

[RedV3x]

View attachment 2129576

Why then why do the NRL say thier league is more watched ?

 

[The_Wookie]

Why then why do the NRL say thier league is more watched ?

NRL fans believe everything is about the averages.

 

[Hoops]

Roy Morgan has always been signficantly higher on audiences than the ratings.

The reason is simple, I probably watched only 80% of the broadcast from start to finish, but if Roy Morgan asked me did I watch the game? The answer is yes, my wife also, though she probably only watched 60% of it.

 

[steviewonder36]

Why then why do the NRL say thier league is more watched ?

Because its BS.

RL is about hype, they model themselves on the US sports.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Why then why do the NRL say thier league is more watched ?

NRL fans believe everything is about the averages.

A person who sits down and watches 4 hours of NRL, two back-to-back two-hour broadcast games that they stack on Friday night, gets counted as "two people" (adding together fact that x amount of people averaged out the broadcast of one game).

A person who sits down on a Friday night and watches four hours of AFL broadcast on Round 9, when matches overlapped, counts as 1.3333 people as they watched one game for three hours and the other games' broadcast for one hour, so they count as "one third" of a person.

NRL's shorter game broadcast time is bad because they sell less ad space in a game and total minutes of people watching, when it's one game vs. one game (such as final series), but it's a benefit as they can organise their entire season without overlapping games, meaning that a typical fan of the sport will watch a far higher percentage of the total weekend's game than an AFL, which the AFL cannot do without overlapping some games.

Other than this, it's clear that more Australians watch AFL on TV in any general purpose understanding of the statement, or in the context of literally accumulating minutes watched of the sport.

The statement "most-watched" can be interpreted in many ways but the both the most meaningful and most common sense ways have AFL as the most watched, which is not surprising, simply because other, non TV measurements of its broadcast, such as polling data or google trends data, have it as the more popular competition in the country.

 

[Bjo187]

It's made pretty clear during finals when there is no overlap and they go head to head as standalone and in similar prime time slots (other than the gf), its typically a thrashing across all finals. They can't get away with their secret herbs and spices more viewers claim in September.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

It's made pretty clear during finals when there is no overlap and they go head to head as standalone and in similar prime time slots (other than the gf), its typically a thrashing across all finals. They can't get away with their secret herbs and spices more viewers claim in September.

It's really not secret herbs and spices.

They don't overlap games. Given that most games practically have to be broadcast on the weekend or on friday nights, the AFL cannot avoid overlapping games. The NRL can, because they only play eight games (and not nine).

The shorter game broadcast means that people will watch a slightly higher proportion of the overall game broadcast. So the AFL can broadcast more "content" on a per-game basis, but the willigness of viewers to watch a longer broadcast is not linear with the increase in game length, ie, there is not a one-third increase of viewer minutes with a one-third increase in broadcast length (2 hours vs 3rd).

A lot of this was suspected and inferred without being confirmed until "reach" statistics were published on TV under a new methodology this year.

There is probably some small diferences in e.g. a portion of the AFL's support as a code comes out of Perth, and with a different time zone, means they probably don't engage with the TV viewership of the code despite being engaged with the code generally (e.g. afternoon broadcasts beginning before midday on a weekend), which means that the NRL has a natural advantage despite being a smaller code in terms of numbers.

But on the flipside, we can argue that the AFL is a "richer" and therefore "biggert" sport due to the fact that more of its fanbase is concentrated in the five major cities, which tend to have the richer Australians, and there still is a bit of a class divide in Sydney, poorer Sydneysiders are less likely to be League fans but richer Melburnians are still AFL fans.

A more extreme difference of a similar nature is found in the US e.g. about 45% of Americans have at least some engaged interest in NASCAR, while less than 40% of American have at least some engaged interest in Golf. Golf is the "bigger" sport by virtue of the fact that their fans are richer, naturally, though.

It remains a smaller overall sport otherwise, as the proportion of people willing to engage with a TV broadcast remains roughly proportionate to the interest in the sport generally as measured by mechanisms such as polling data and google trends searches. The AFL is approximately a one-third bigger sport.

There's no trick, it's just common sense and basic division, and the ability to trust sources such as Roy Morgan polling and Google Trends data.

 

[Bjo187]

It's really not secret herbs and spices.

They don't overlap games. Given that most games practically have to be broadcast on the weekend or on friday nights, the AFL cannot avoid overlapping games. The NRL can, because they only play eight games (and not nine).

The shorter game broadcast means that people will watch a slightly higher proportion of the overall game broadcast. So the AFL can broadcast more "content" on a per-game basis, but the willigness of viewers to watch a longer broadcast is not linear with the increase in game length, ie, there is not a one-third increase of viewer minutes with a one-third increase in broadcast length (2 hours vs 3rd).

A lot of this was suspected and inferred without being confirmed until "reach" statistics were published on TV under a new methodology this year.

It remains a smaller overall sport otherwise, as the proportion of people willing to engage with a TV broadcast remains roughly proportionate to the interest in the sport generally as measured by mechanisms such as polling data and google trends searches. The AFL is approximately a one-third bigger sport.

There's no trick, it's just common sense and basic division, and the ability to trust sources such as Roy Morgan polling and Google Trends data.

I know and I get all that, I'm referring to the selective lies pushed by v'landy's, his mates in the nrl media and then the nuffie fans of the sport. So it's not secret to anyone that actually looks is into it, but it's secret to 90 percent of the Australian sports population, that just believe what they hear.

 

[The_Wookie]

I know and I get all that, I'm referring to the selective lies pushed by v'landy's, his mates in the nrl media and then the nuffie fans of the sport. So it's not secret to anyone that actually looks is into it, but it's secret to 90 percent of the Australian sports population, that just believe what they hear.

And for the final time this year, Ill say that this is something believed almost exclusively on Bigfooty and nowhere else. I dont completely believe the answer lies in either reach or averages. Nor do I believe that the fate of the world hangs on 12,000 people and then extrapolated to the population.

There's no trick, it's just common sense and basic division, and the ability to trust sources such as Roy Morgan polling and Google Trends data.

It comes down to the fact that no other survey or data Ive seen published over the last 20 years puts the NRL ahead - the only place they are ahead is in ratings averages when aggregated and unfortunately this seems to be overlooked in discussions by and large.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

I dont completely believe the answer lies in either reach or averages. Nor do I believe that the fate of the world hangs on 12,000 people and then extrapolated to the population.

Yes, but there's no point having a discussion about anything at all if it's always imprecise and imperfect.

the only place they are ahead is in ratings averages when aggregated and unfortunately this seems to be overlooked in discussions by and large.

And V'Landy's made that statement. But it's not meaningful at all.

If we want to measure what's broadly the more popular sport - Roy Morgan polled the country and more Australians stated that they watched AFL. Or we can see which group of fans engage with Google on the sport more (Google trends measures things beyond google searches and attaches all topics to the sport, and measures things like the rate in which people open google news links on their android phones etc.).

If we want to measure what is the "more consumed television product" distinct from the more popular sport generally we can use accumulated viewer minutes in their totality, which the AFL leads.

If we want to use it as a proxy to see what's a more valuable product in its totality for broadcasters, the very fact that the AFL can broadcast longer matches achieves that, which contributes to the greater viewer minutes.

So given there are far better ways of achieving its aims, we basically have to boil V'Ladys' statement as nothing other than propaganda, not a good statistic to achieve any good faith comparison of the two sports.

Perhaps the only answer is "if a broadcaster was aiming to look at, at a given point in time, how many eyeballs were watching that specific game [and therefore how valuable a single 30 second ad slot would be], for a game at random", perhaps it is true that there are more eyeballs on that NRL game.

But it's a reductive and pointless argument. No ad slot for the NRL or the AFL is being purchased independent of a package. There's no point isolating out a single game from wider context, and adding together the matches in aggregate but aggregating them all from that context being removed doesn't really achieve anything, other than to propagandise that one sport is bigger than the other.

The act of V'Landys aggregating numbers is essentially taking the viewing habits of a subsection of society who watches those games on TV and adding together the same person over and over across the season in a manner that's inherently different to the AFL but really achieves nothing.

We can't context out that the two sports have different match lengths. That is material to the nature of both sports. In terms of generating broadcast revenue for the AFL it is beneficial to the code, even if such benefit is somewhat mitigated by the downside of having to overlap games in a weekend (though it is not that much of a downside as the AFL actively chases such overlap by e.g. not playing thursday nights every week in order to increase matchday revenue among other things)

If the AFL was a two-hour match and not a three-hour match, and divided its match broadcasts in identical timeslots to the NRL, I can say with complete confidence that the AFL would gather more viewers and win a majority of head-to-head matchups, inferred by the existing numbers we already have.

 

[The_Wookie]

And V'Landy's made that statement. But it's not meaningful at all.

as far as Im aware, Im quoting myself

Its not just Vlandys and the NRL who aggregates. The AFL does it - you can literally read it in in their annual reports, Cricket does as well.

Maybe they'll mention reach this year.

Media are writing about averages because apparently thats all they are being given by Seven and Nine (according to two separate sport and media journos at the AFR). Ironically, the NRL believes the AFR has it in for rugby league.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

as far as Im aware, Im quoting myself

Its not just Vlandys and the NRL who aggregates. The AFL does it - you can literally read it in in their annual reports, Cricket does as well.

Maybe they'll mention reach this year.

Media are writing about averages because apparently thats all they are being given by Seven and Nine (according to two separate sport and media journos at the AFR). Ironically, the NRL believes the AFR has it in for rugby league.

fair enough to all of the above.

Perhaps I should be more critical of both the AFL and CA as well as I agree it's all a bit pointless.

I'm curious as to the extent that the AFL and NRL had more detailed breakdowns of viewer habits and the information they possessed when they negotiated previous TV deals. We can assume it's more and different to what they publish in their annual reports.

FWIW Jarrod Kimber, a cricket journalist who among a lot of other things spends some time looking at the vague philosophy of cricket media rights, believes that Test Cricket should not be dying, because you have a product that can insert an ad between every over, and it should be a far more valuable TV product generally across the world than it currently is.

I agree with him to an extent, but it's a bit reductive thinking, you can't monetise a broadcast like that. You can't sell 90 x5 individual ad slots and expect good money for all of them - there are not 450 different advertisers all battling for an ad slot. Eventually there's going to be a reduction in rights by virtue of the fact that the same advertiser will be advertising multiple times.

Interesting to think about.

 

[The_Wookie]

fair enough to all of the above.

Perhaps I should be more critical of both the AFL and CA as well as I agree it's all a bit pointless.

I'm curious as to the extent that the AFL and NRL had more detailed breakdowns of viewer habits and the information they possessed when they negotiated previous TV deals. We can assume it's more and different to what they publish in their annual reports.

FWIW Jarrod Kimber, a cricket journalist who among a lot of other things spends some time looking at the vague philosophy of cricket media rights, believes that Test Cricket should not be dying, because you have a product that can insert an ad between every over, and it should be a far more valuable TV product generally across the world than it currently is.

I agree with him to an extent, but it's a bit reductive thinking, you can't monetise a broadcast like that. You can't sell 90 x5 individual ad slots and expect good money for all of them - there are not 450 different advertisers all battling for an ad slot. Eventually there's going to be a reduction in rights by virtue of the fact that the same advertiser will be advertising multiple times.

Interesting to think about.

Ive always maintained that theres more to the rights deals than the publicly released ratings. In the end it doesnt matter what we believe, its what broadcasters and their advertisers do.

 

[Bjo187]

And for the final time this year, Ill say that this is something believed almost exclusively on Bigfooty and nowhere else. I dont completely believe the answer lies in either reach or averages. Nor do I believe that the fate of the world hangs on 12,000 people and then extrapolated to the population.

What's that mate? What is only believed on Bigfooty and nowhere else?

 

[RedV3x]

Ive always maintained that theres more to the rights deals than the publicly released ratings. In the end it doesnt matter what we believe, its what broadcasters and their advertisers do.

I believe that the ratings are flawed, easy manipulated and inaccurate at the lower end - at best a guide,
but what I think or any of us think is irrelevant - it's what the advertisers think or more accurately what the advertisers spruik.

Advertisers will come up with an equation of x ratings = y eyeballs = $ z.
That's the simple cost of adverting and there's the advertisements themselves.
Why would I buy car insurance from a company that promotes sending two neatly dressed women in red and white driving a semi-trailor to a breakdown when a person really wants is a mechanic with a tow truck, tools and diagnostics ?

Yes, the media rights aren't just about ratings, money, demographics and contra. Union is basically in the situation it is in because it took the money over FTA exposure. IMO the AFL have pretty much the right balance.
Then there are the stations themselves trying to get the best deal for their situation or inspiration not necessarily what the market demands.

 

[The_Wookie]

 

[Bjo187]

That's what happens when you use the advatageous averages metric, have no overlapping games and count the same person as 8 people every weekend.

How can someone make a claim of more viewers, when a viewer is someone that tunes into a match whether it's one minute or 2 hours? The reach is actual eyes on your sport and number of people that 'tune in' and that has the afl streets ahead. All they are doing is setting up their fans for another let down when the tv deal spits out the true figures of where they sit.

 

[The_Wookie]

How can someone make a claim of more viewers,

They can do it because - right or wrong - its the accepted standard for that term across the industry. According to annual reports, even the AFL subscribes to this theory.

Might change this year with the move to Reach on VOZ, or it might wait until VOZ becomes official ratings currency in January.

 

[The Tilt]

They can do it because - right or wrong - its the accepted standard for that term across the industry. According to annual reports, even the AFL subscribes to this theory.

Might change this year with the move to Reach on VOZ, or it might wait until VOZ becomes official ratings currency in January.

At the risk of prolonging an argument that's already been going for a while now, don't the AFL (and others) use this as a way of comparing their own numbers against previous years? To the extent that previous years had the same number of matches, with the same match length, and roughly the same share of matches played concurrently, you can generate an apples for apples comparison.
None of this indicates they think it's a good way of comparing numbers of viewers between sports with varying match lengths etc.