2023 TV/Fox/Streaming Ratings

[Pneuma]

i heard you were blocking people on Twitter who made this argument

your reaction confirms it thanks buddy

Ffs shut up

 

[The_Wookie]

To have an argument one side actually needs to have facts. You have none.

And I grow tired of repeating myself here and on twitter. You can say hi to your new besty in richiti though.

 

[Pneuma]

hours watched is a legit statistic - and you know how we know this, because we literally get time data from Oztams 9 and Fox BVOD releases. Note that one of the components required to determine average viewership is the length of the broadcast.

And yes Ive taken feedback on board to make it more accurate by moving from game time length to programme time length.

And if there was actual comparable data for NZ it would be included. Its not, and theres no reasonable or remotely accurate way to arrive at that data.

God bless your patience and moderation.

 

[Wb1234]

To have an argument one side actually needs to have facts. You have none.

And I grow tired of repeating myself here and on twitter. You can say hi to your new besty in richiti though.

Keep wilfully ignoring an important nrl market

 

[APPSY]

...Why is everyone saying he's ignoring the NZ market? He isn't the sole person monitoring these stats, and I'm sure if he was he'd do everything he could to get the NZ ratings. Sky has not released, so until they do with FACTUALLY BACKED DATA, there is no reason for them to be included. Blame the companies both here in AUS and in NZ for not providing these stats. Blame the NRL for not making these statistics available in their EOY reports. He's tracking this all and creating these tables so that all of us who are intrigued but cannot be bothered trying to 1. read through it all and 2. Wouldn't know where to start can actually have access to all of this data and information.

The only thing we can hope for is that either Sky or the NRL release the ratings soon enough. Til then, we have to go off all that is available to us.

 

[Pneuma]

...Why is everyone saying he's ignoring the NZ market? He isn't the sole person monitoring these stats, and I'm sure if he was he'd do everything he could to get the NZ ratings. Sky has not released, so until they do with FACTUALLY BACKED DATA, there is no reason for them to be included. Blame the companies both here in AUS and in NZ for not providing these stats. Blame the NRL for not making these statistics available in their EOY reports. He's tracking this all and creating these tables so that all of us who are intrigued but cannot be bothered trying to 1. read through it all and 2. Wouldn't know where to start can actually have access to all of this data and information.

The only thing we can hope for is that either Sky or the NRL release the ratings soon enough. Til then, we have to go off all that is available to us.

The voice of reason.

 

[The Penguin #6.]

Population of NZ is just over 5 million. If the All Blacks had a million watching a test that’s 20%. 20% of Australians is over 5 million. We know that, apart from the Matilda’s we’ve never gone close to that afl or nrl. Either is lucky to get to 4 million. Ergo we have no idea what a million means in New Zealand reach or otherwise unless an official statement is released. In other words, as usual, you are correct.

If the previously unheralded Matildas can get 20 % of the population watching I`m pretty sure that the Kiwis` national icon the AB`s, playing in a similarly, if not more, globally prestigious tournament should not record similar figures, ergo we have a very good idea that one million viewers means exactly that , one million people sitting down to watch that match..
So if Sky follow this up by saying 700 000 watched the Wah`s, then we can pretty safely say that 700k people tuned in for the Warriors` game, not reach, not peak, they actually watched.
This in due course gives an indication of how popular the Warriors` have been on NZ TV this year.

 

[Iamback]

If the previously unheralded Matildas can get 20 % of the population watching I`m pretty sure that the Kiwis` national icon the AB`s, playing in a similarly, if not more, globally prestigious tournament should not record similar figures, ergo we have a very good idea that one million viewers means exactly that , one million people sitting down to watch that match..
So if Sky follow this up by saying 700 000 watched the Wah`s, then we can pretty safely say that 700k people tuned in for the Warriors` game, not reach, not peak, they actually watched.
This in due course gives an indication of how popular the Warriors` have been on NZ TV this year.

Nailed it. I doubt the All Blacks reach was only 1m

 

[Pneuma]

If the previously unheralded Matildas can get 20 % of the population watching I`m pretty sure that the Kiwis` national icon the AB`s, playing in a similarly, if not more, globally prestigious tournament should not record similar figures, ergo we have a very good idea that one million viewers means exactly that , one million people sitting down to watch that match..
So if Sky follow this up by saying 700 000 watched the Wah`s, then we can pretty safely say that 700k people tuned in for the Warriors` game, not reach, not peak, they actually watched.
This in due course gives an indication of how popular the Warriors` have been on NZ TV this year.

There is no statement by any source that describes what the figures meant so all we are doing is guessing. You can’t base statistical analysis on a feeling. You need a firm evidentiary source. 1 million could mean a number of things. You cannot assume it means something just because it suits your argument. Amen

 

[Pneuma]

Nailed it. I doubt the All Blacks reach was only 1m

It’s a guess that’s all. Including it in statistical analysis would be fallacious at best.

 

[Iamback]

It’s a guess that’s all. Including it in statistical analysis would be fallacious at best.

Yes but ignore it totally, The whole ratings are done mostly from guesses.

You can include the reach figures and use it there, There are ways around the limited data.

When the NRL release their review of the year, You don't think they won't include NZ and the pacific for that matter?

 

[Pneuma]

Yes but ignore it totally, The whole ratings are done mostly from guesses.

You can include the reach figures and use it there, There are ways around the limited data.

When the NRL release their review of the year, You don't think they won't include NZ and the pacific for that matter?

Not if they don’t have reliable data. Look a bit silly saying ‘we reckon …..’

 

[The_Wookie]

Yes but ignore it totally, The whole ratings are done mostly from guesses.

You can include the reach figures and use it there, There are ways around the limited data.

not if its literally the only data you have

When the NRL release their review of the year, You don't think they won't include NZ and the pacific for that matter?

they never have included NZ and the pacific in their ratings before

 

[Iamback]

not if its literally the only data you have



they never have included NZ and the pacific in their ratings before

So the table on the previous page on ratings per team is incomplete?

No where does it say that. I am sure people in NZ watched the Storm play for example. Yet only Warriors say Aust only

 

[Iamback]

Not if they don’t have reliable data. Look a bit silly saying ‘we reckon …..’

Do you think KIA as a sponsor cares if the data has been verified by several sources?

No chance, They want to be able to say to their board/share holders. What eyeballs their sponsorship in the game is bringing in.

NRL will take Sky on their word and pass that information on

 

[The_Wookie]

So the table on the previous page on ratings per team is incomplete?

No where does it say that. I am sure people in NZ watched the Storm play for example. Yet only Warriors say Aust only

For the apparently very stubborn and slow people in this thread

1. Ratings are sourced through OZTAM. This is an Australian ratings agency. In NZ Nielson have chosen not to make them public and Sky are notorious for not releasing them
2. There are no regular ratings provided for NZ and no way to calciulate them that is going to be anywhere near accurate since the data we have is 8 years old and we've received very spotty - literally 4 different data points since, none of which are the same or give a hard data figure.

The data is as complete as it can be made - if there was more data it would be there - my tables from 2012-2015 have US and NZ data on them - none of which we can get now. And after 12 years of doing this the fact I am still having these f**king arguments every year is just a blight on the intelligence and intransigence of certain members of the community.

 

[Wb1234]

Since nz is excluded then the only way to fairly compare the two codes is to also exclude Adelaide and Perth afl

let’s finally have a fair like for like comparison

 

[Pneuma]

For the apparently very stubborn and slow people in this thread

1. Ratings are sourced through OZTAM. This is an Australian ratings agency. In NZ Nielson have chosen not to make them public and Sky are notorious for not releasing them
2. There are no regular ratings provided for NZ and no way to calciulate them that is going to be anywhere near accurate since the data we have is 8 years old and we've received very spotty - literally 4 different data points since, none of which are the same or give a hard data figure.

The data is as complete as it can be made - if there was more data it would be there - my tables from 2012-2015 have US and NZ data on them - none of which we can get now. And after 12 years of doing this the fact I am still having these f**king arguments every year is just a blight on the intelligence and intransigence of certain members of the community.

I’d give up if I were you. These blokes don’t deserve the service you provide. The nonsense posted here is unbelievable.

 

[Pneuma]

Do you think KIA as a sponsor cares if the data has been verified by several sources?

No chance, They want to be able to say to their board/share holders. What eyeballs their sponsorship in the game is bringing in.

NRL will take Sky on their word and pass that information on

So no data analytics or evidence. Just a guess? Sounds like a good business model! NZ data is not available. Suck it up sisters.

 

[Iamback]

So no data analytics or evidence. Just a guess? Sounds like a good business model! NZ data is not available. Suck it up sisters.

SkyNZ themselves tweeted a figure though, just because it doesn't contain what YOU want doesn't mean it is a guess.

Like with Fox/Kayo they know what numbers they are getting. What they choose to release or not release is on them,