TAS Tas TV ratings vs Sydney TV ratings

[Doctor Jolly]

That little event didn't hurt the movie on channel 9 which got 278,000 viewers.

The olympics are clasified as a non-ratings period because they effect every other channel so dramatically. For example, seven is getting around 45% of viewer market. Usually the top channels get around 30%.
And it doesnt take einstein to work out that sport would be the most effected.

At the end of the day if RL trolls are resorting to rating figures up against Olympics, then they are in desperate times.

 

[ringleader]

And it doesnt take einstein to work out that sport would be the most effected.

Pretty lame excuse. Four times as many people watched a movie repeat instead of the Swans and that's all you can come up with.

 

[Doctor Jolly]

Pretty lame excuse. Four times as many people watched a movie repeat instead of the Swans and that's all you can come up with.

I'm not making excuses at all. I, like the rest of the TV industry, ignore olympic ratings.

Work your angles on other ratings all you like.

 

[catters05]

That little event didn't hurt the movie on channel 9 which got 278,000 viewers.

What was the movie?

 

[catters05]

Pretty lame excuse. Four times as many people watched a movie repeat instead of the Swans and that's all you can come up with.

The way the Swans play, i would watch a movie too.

If the played like Cats, Dogs and Hawks.......different story IMO.

 

[ringleader]

What was the movie?

National Lampoons Vegas Vacation

http://blogs.sunherald.com.au/whoweare/archives/2008/08/the_ratings_rac_77.html

 

[Doctor Jolly]

Love that Movie.

Lets all be honest, the Swans do not play an exciting brand of Footy.

Caters got 87,000 in Sydney last week. that extra 10,000 really was down to the cats excitement machines.

Lets hope you dont bore us to death like last years grand final. You do know that it was the lowest rating GF for many, many years ?

 

[Rob]

I suggest you look at the proper ratings http://www.ebroadcast.com.au/enews/...oice-On-Subscription-TV-This-Week-250808.html

Looks pretty close to me. The game with the most viewers was Eels v knights, only slightly ahead of Brisbane v Carlton. The former being a monday night game, with more people watching TV at that time.
The 2 Saturday night NRL games had less people watching than the Brisbane game.
Last Sunday, the AFL afternoon match had well and truly more viewers than the NRL Sunday arvo match.

The only area where the NRL can claim an advantage is average viewers, which naturally favours the NRL given it goes for an hour less than the AFL. A person watching both games for an hour counts for 50% more on the NRL averages. So it's not really an advantage at all.

 

[ringleader]

Looks pretty close to me. The game with the most viewers was Eels v knights, only slightly ahead of Brisbane v Carlton. The former being a monday night game, with more people watching TV at that time.
The 2 Saturday night NRL games had less people watching than the Brisbane game.
Last Sunday, the AFL afternoon match had well and truly more viewers than the NRL Sunday arvo match.

The only area where the NRL can claim an advantage is average viewers, which naturally favours the NRL given it goes for an hour less than the AFL. A person watching both games for an hour counts for 50% more on the NRL averages. So it's not really an advantage at all.

The top 3 were NRL games. What are you looking at

 

[Doctor Jolly]

Looks pretty close to me. The game with the most viewers was Eels v knights, only slightly ahead of Brisbane v Carlton. The former being a monday night game, with more people watching TV at that time.
The 2 Saturday night NRL games had less people watching than the Brisbane game.
Last Sunday, the AFL afternoon match had well and truly more viewers than the NRL Sunday arvo match.

The only area where the NRL can claim an advantage is average viewers, which naturally favours the NRL given it goes for an hour less than the AFL. A person watching both games for an hour counts for 50% more on the NRL averages. So it's not really an advantage at all.

Fair summary.

People can pull all sorts of numbers out, but the only one that matters is what the TV rights go for, and how much is on FTA TV.

As mike brady would say... "the footy wins hands down".

 

[Rob]

The top 3 were NRL games. What are you looking at

Audience reach. You know, the number of people that watched it.

Far more comparable than average audience, for reasons I said in my previous post.

 

[ringleader]

Audience reach. You know, the number of people that watched it.

Far more comparable than average audience, for reasons I said in my previous post.

You're taking the piss, right?

I gather you didn't read the notes at the bottom

· Weekly Reach (000s) represents the cumulative audience (reach audience) that watched any episode of the
program across the week (one minute viewing minimum). This figure includes all viewers who watched the
nominated broadcast, including any Plus2 audience, and viewers who saw any other episode of the program
shown during the week

Watch something for one minute and you're counted in the weekly reach. One lousy minute.

· B/Cast Only represents the average audience watching the program that was broadcast on the channel at the
nominated date and time

So the average that watched it for the etire time it ran. These are how they rank them from 1-50

You somehow think that someone who watches a program for a minute counts for more than someone who watches an enitre broadcast

Lukcily advertisers don't think that stupidly.

 

[Rob]

You're taking the piss, right?

I gather you didn't read the notes at the bottom



Watch something for one minute and you're counted in the weekly reach. One lousy minute.

Same measure for all programs, what's the problem? It's not like that doesn't apply equally.

So the average that watched it for the etire time it ran. These are how they rank them from 1-50

You somehow think that someone who watches a program for a minute counts for more than someone who watches an enitre broadcast

Of course, but without that breakdown, they are a far better way to measure audience than average where you're comparing 2 programs that go for different lengths of time.

For instance, compare the 2 Sunday arvo games - Richmond v Hawthorn and Raiders v Knights. Both had exactly the same average audience - 127k. Yet over 100k more people watched the Richmond v Hawthorn game -the reason the averages come out the same is because someone that watches both games for an hour counts as 0.5 for the NRL and 0.33 for the AFL, even though they watched it for the same time.
Using those figures, the average watch time for someone watching the AFL game was 56 minutes. The NRL game was 50 minutes. So much for your implication that the AFL figures are padded by people that watch for 1 minute.

Clearly, audience reach is a far, far better measure of audience when comparing an AFL and NRL game. That's not to say everyone included in audience reach really watched the game for more than a glance, but that applies to both games.
Audience reach also is more apt in the AFL's case, where for 3 of Foxtel's 4 games there is a FTA match on at the same time, so a lot of people would be flicking between the 2. No NRL match on Fox is competing with another NRL match.

Lukcily advertisers don't think that stupidly.

Funnily enough, they do. That's why the AFL gets far more TV dollars than the NRL. Pay TV audiences are similar (despite Fox having a better subscription base in NSW and Queensland), and the AFL's FTA audiences are miles ahead - and that's just using average audiences. Audience reach figures for FTA would more than likely utterly obliterate the NRL's.

I bet you're one of these people that whine that the NRL gets shortchanged by TV aren't you?

 

[ringleader]

I'm dealing with a two year old. You can try and cover your tracks as much as you like but the fact is that the weekly reach counts for diddly squat when one minutes viewing time is all that's required to be counted as a viewer. That's why the top 50 list doesn't work off highest reach.

Advertisers are looking for people with a longer attention span than that. Fact.

 

[Rob]

I'm dealing with a two year old. You can try and cover your tracks as much as you like but the fact is that the weekly reach counts for diddly squat when one minutes viewing time is all that's required to be counted as a viewer. That's why the top 50 list doesn't work off highest reach.

Advertisers are looking for people with a longer attention span than that. Fact.

So perhaps compare average viewing times for the reach figure.

Either way, it's a better bet than just average audience. Like I showed you before, 127k average audience for both an AFL & NRL game - yet the AFL game had over 100k more people watching at an average of 6 minutes longer than the NRL game. You would have us believe that the same number of people watched - which is obviously false.

If you can't see that, then you're lacking in basic math skills.

 

[Big Tassie]

Tassie AFL Figures Rounds 1-21 2008 (Total People Avg)

Friday Night: 70.6
Sat Arvo: 32.7
Sat Night: 49.1
Sun Arvo: 43.6

 

[Doctor Jolly]

I'm predicting ringleader is going to pull out the old "what about the regionals" line soon..

Thanks for the figures Big Tassie, makes 77 K for the swans last week look good!

 

[ringleader]

So perhaps compare average viewing times for the reach figure.

Either way, it's a better bet than just average audience.

You really are in some need of serious help. Pay TV pay the big bucks to get people watching the live broadcast. It's pretty simple.

 

[ringleader]

I'm predicting ringleader is going to pull out the old "what about the regionals" line soon..

Thanks for the figures Big Tassie, makes 77 K for the swans last week look good!

What are you on

Are you sharing the same brain with Rob and thinking that one minute counts for more than an entire broadcast?

If it did then they would list them 1-50 based on that figure. Fact is they list them based on the most watched at time of broadcast.

Seems you mob will try anything to get the AFL to be ranked number 1 despite ASTRA saying it's not.

 

[ringleader]

Thanks for the figures Big Tassie, makes 77 K for the swans last week look good!

This thread is about ratings in general. If Tassie had their own team you can guarantee they'd get more than 77k watching on a Saturday night and wouldn't have 4 times as many people watching a movie repeat on at the same time on another channel. You can also guarantee there's no way 50k Sydney viewers would've watched an AFL game on Saturday night if the Swans weren't playing in it.

If AFL FNF was shown into Sydney it would rate lower than what Tassie get.

 

[Doctor Jolly]

This thread is about ratings in general. If Tassie had their own team you can guarantee they'd get more than 77k watching on a Saturday night and wouldn't have 4 times as many people watching a movie repeat on at the same time on another channel. You can also guarantee there's no way 50k Sydney viewers would've watched an AFL game on Saturday night if the Swans weren't playing in it.

If AFL FNF was shown into Sydney it would rate lower than what Tassie get.

141K sydney-siders watched Adelaide and Richmond a week or so back.

I dont beleive tassy has ever got close to that for a H&A game.

Since you are the self proclaimed expert on Pay TV, can you give us the Sydney Pay TV figures for the pies game ?

 

[fishmonger]

I'm predicting ringleader is going to pull out the old "what about the regionals" line soon..

Thanks for the figures Big Tassie, makes 77 K for the swans last week look good!

Jolly, besides you and Beaussie, seriously how many people from Western Sydney really care ? I really don't see them lining up to back you.

 

[Doctor Jolly]

Jolly, besides you and Beaussie, seriously how many people from Western Sydney really care ? I really don't see them lining up to back you.

Interesting call. In the great WS v Tas debate, you want to count bigfooty posters as a telling statistic.

Thats left field.

 

[fishmonger]

Interesting call. In the great WS v Tas debate, you want to count bigfooty posters as a telling statistic.

Thats left field.

unless you can find any other statistics besides the fluffy intangibles you keep producing, then I'm quite happy to say that you and Beaussie represent a sample of the core of support for footy there is in Westen Sydney.

 

[ringleader]

141K sydney-siders watched Adelaide and Richmond a week or so back.

I dont beleive tassy has ever got close to that for a H&A game.

Since you are the self proclaimed expert on Pay TV, can you give us the Sydney Pay TV figures for the pies game ?

You don't believe = you don't know.

What we do know is that Sydney got 38,000 viewers on Saturday afternoon and Tasmania got 32,000. Not much difference except Tas don't have a team and their population is about 20% of Sydneys.