Peter V'landys - New NRL/ARLC Chairman

[Vlad59]

Why would minutes watched be a key metric for subscription tv

Because it allows more opportunities for paid advertisements? That’s all I can think of.

 

[nko11]

There is a huge difference if the box was say on the TV my wife watches, verses myself or my kids

And that's in same household

Gone are the days of 1 TV per household

Let alone what we watch via streaming services, youtube etc, or on our phone/tablets/pcs

"OzTAM uses an advanced metering system that captures viewing to all broadcast television channels on all TV sets and
by all individuals in panel homes.
All household residents, and any guests, register their presence using a remote control. Data retrieved from the meter
details who was watching, what they were watching, when they were watching and to what TV set, allowing co-viewing to
a TV set to be determined".

 

[mongoose]

Because it allows more opportunities for paid advertisements? That’s all I can think of.

and an AFL game has a lot more ad breaks than an NRL one

 

[titoelcolombiano]

There are three metrics for TV.
Traditional ‘average viewers’ - NRL is in front of AFL here.
‘Reach‘ is used by advertisers and streaming services love ‘minutes watched’. The AFL is well in front on these two metrics and that is a main reason why their broadcast deal is higher.

Reach is a bullshit metric. What will be your excuse when Vlandys signs a record deal for Australian sport?

 

[Perth Red]

A sample of 5000 in a population of 2.5 million is actually a very good sample size. Has a margin or Error of +/-1.385%. Also very unlikely to have many polling biases, it records exactly what people are watching...

For context, most Australian Election Polling usually takes a sample of between 1000-3000. With a margin of Error of around ~2-3%. US Election polls are usually between 1000-5000 sample size with a MOE of ~3-4%.

Statistically it is actually very significant. Unless the sample is being tampered with or the sample is not representative of the population/weighted (Not familiar with how transparent OZTAM and VOZ are with their method, but I imagine advertisers spending millions would be ontop of this - so I would say this is unlikely), it should be pretty well right on the button.

For 12k in a population of 2.5 million - reliability of low sampled data even with a high sample size, does influence the reliability somewhat - generally why you won't see VOZ release data below a certain threshold - Top 30 programs for example. However realistically would maybe only effect it marginally - think a range of 7k-17k for the accurate size at the absolute worst.

To add to this, while a sample of 2.4 people people watching out of 5000 seems like not much information to go off. It's actually telling you that 4997.6 people on average weren't watching. Plenty of data to tell you that it's a low result. With statistical sampling you're never going to be able to say exactly 11,457 people were watching, unless the sample size is so high that you're actually just taking a total population sample.

How do you get 0.4 of a person watching a game?

Its pure chance of box placement, if me and my 5 RL loving friends had happened by chance to get an oztam box the Perth ratings for NRL games would be tripled. On just 5 different households in WA having a box.

 

[Perth Red]

and an AFL game has a lot more ad breaks than an NRL one

Always interested me if its more valuable to have more people watching your ad less times or less people watching your ad more times?
Given the ads are largely the exact same ones repeated during a game its a relevant question for sports FTa advertising between the two codes.
So just because AFL has is able to show the same ads more times to a lower audience than NRL does it make it more valuable?

 

[siv]

View attachment 103740

"OzTAM uses an advanced metering system that captures viewing to all broadcast television channels on all TV sets and
by all individuals in panel homes.
All household residents, and any guests, register their presence using a remote control. Data retrieved from the meter
details who was watching, what they were watching, when they were watching and to what TV set, allowing co-viewing to
a TV set to be determined".

Do people get paid to do this?

 

[Vlad59]

How do you get 0.4 of a person watching a game?

Its pure chance of box placement, if me and my 5 RL loving friends had happened by chance to get an oztam box the Perth ratings for NRL games would be tripled. On just 5 different households in WA having a box.

It’s a proven sampling formula used by government and industry for decades which is only doubted by ignorant twats who are too thick to get it.

 

[Maximus]

Why would minutes watched be a key metric for subscription tv

Weren't you bragging about Fox's minutes watched for Vegas a few months ago?

 

[Yosemite Sam]

How do you get 0.4 of a person watching a game?

Its pure chance of box placement, if me and my 5 RL loving friends had happened by chance to get an oztam box the Perth ratings for NRL games would be tripled. On just 5 different households in WA having a box.

It's all data collection and statistics. There's a lot of research behind it so you can educate yourself quite easily if you wish. Similar systems are used all over the world to detemine audience share.

Most figures are considered to be up to 95% accurate.
Billions of dollars are spent using this data so it's not just Mickey Mouse guessing like you seem to think.

 

[Vlad59]

It's all data collection and statistics. There's a lot of research behind it so you can educate yourself quite easily if you wish. Similar systems are used all over the world to detemine audience share.

Most figures are considered to be up to 95% accurate.
Billions of dollars are spent using this data so it's not just Mickey Mouse guessing like you seem to think.

Is not hard to find out either. For a bloke who has endless data about afl clubs at his finger tips he seems to struggle finding out anything about how statistics are collected and sampling is undertaken.

 

[Chief_Chujo]

Always interested me if its more valuable to have more people watching your ad less times or less people watching your ad more times?
Given the ads are largely the exact same ones repeated during a game its a relevant question for sports FTa advertising between the two codes.
So just because AFL has is able to show the same ads more times to a lower audience than NRL does it make it more valuable?

That's what reach is for. It's based off unique viewers over the whole program length. A unique viewer is someone that watches a minimum of one minute. So if an advertiser is trying to "reach" the most unique viewers possible, they will go with the program that has a higher reach. It's not an exact science and obviously trends towards longer programs.

 

[Chief_Chujo]

How do you get 0.4 of a person watching a game?

Its pure chance of box placement, if me and my 5 RL loving friends had happened by chance to get an oztam box the Perth ratings for NRL games would be tripled. On just 5 different households in WA having a box.

This is a very uneducated view of statistics.

 

[nko11]

How do you get 0.4 of a person watching a game?

Its pure chance of box placement, if me and my 5 RL loving friends had happened by chance to get an oztam box the Perth ratings for NRL games would be tripled. On just 5 different households in WA having a box.

That's what random sampling and weighting to match demographics corrects for in statistics. They wouldn't give it to you and your 5 mates, they would include a large variety of people in the sample. Given the amount of money that is reliant on this data to be accurate - I would say they are very careful to make sure the sample is representative of the population. By all means, if you think their data is poor and you can prove it, I'll come sail on your Super Yacht and tell you I was wrong.

Straying a bit too close to Trump vibes here.

In terms of the 0.4 - If it's average it absolutely makes sense. 2.4 people were watching on average- example: 2 people watched the whole game + 1 person watched 0.4 of the game OR 10 people all watched 24% of the game. Plus I'm not exactly convinced we're using accurate numbers here. So it was only a simplified example.

Do people get paid to do this?

Unsure, Google AI seems to think so. But I can't find an article confirming.

 

[cinders7]

Do people get paid to do this?

Nope, or at least I didn't. You get down-selected if you meet their criteria and they ask if you'd like to participate.

I had a ratings box for a couple of months pre-COVID. I thought it'd be interesting to be part of the ratings and see what effect, if any, I'd have on ratings for certain programs/channels.

The equipment at the time was ridiculously dated and knowing how it works (or worked at the time, hopefully it's different now) I had them remove it all not long after.

I have little to no respect for FTA tv ratings because of it. If someone like me, who was interested in the process, thought the equipment and way they tracked what you were watching is garbage it paints a very clear picture of the kind of people who do have the boxes and how their demographics skew.

 

[Jamberoo]

Why would minutes watched be a key metric for subscription tv

It is the scale by which the industry measures how many people are watching. Minutes watched is the most objective metric of who is watching what.

 

[Jamberoo]

Reach is a bullshit metric. What will be your excuse when Vlandys signs a record deal for Australian sport?

I agree that reach is almost meaningless, but in the advertising game they disagree.

PVL is a great ideas man but we are yet to see any evidence that he is a great negotiator. Nine has just bought the EPL rights, Seven isn’t interested. Foxtel is cutting the budget. I will give him great credit if he can do so.

 

[Vlad59]

I agree that reach is almost meaningless, but in the advertising game they disagree.

PVL is a great ideas man but we are yet to see any evidence that he is a great negotiator. Nine has just bought the EPL rights, Seven isn’t interested. Foxtel is cutting the budget. I will give him great credit if he can do so.

It’s pointless anybody saying reach is a bullshit metric if advertisers and tv networks don’t agree but here we are.

 

[Wb1234]

It is the scale by which the industry measures how many people are watching. Minutes watched is the most objective metric of who is watching what.

Fta yeh

Not really relevant to subscription tv

 

[Captain Apollo]

You mean PR isn't a master statistician also?! I thought he would be considering he's a master sports administrator, TV broadcast executive etc etc.