What's new
By:
Advanced search…
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

2024 TV and Streaming Ratings Discussion

The_Wookie

The_Wookie

Bench
Messages
3,248
Ride the Lion to Zion said:
From my limited understanding, you were always deemed a viewer if you watched a single minute. But official ratings were previously calculated as an average of minutes. Reach is an aggregate of all individuals watching one minute. With the obvious consequence that longer programmes are rating higher.


In search of enlightenment, I fearlessly ploughed into the thicket of Bigfumble. One poster draws a distinction between "standalone average" and "cumulative average". Couldn't make sense of his argument. People sometimes conflate the meaning of "cumulative" with "aggregate".

He seemed to want 4 separate ratings for AFL quarters, 2 separate ratings for NRL halves. Similar to sessions in cricket.
Click to expand...

As Ive said before, theres a segment on Bigfooty and at 7 HQ who believe fervently in reach, whereas the rest of the ratings world mostly favours averages still.
 
R

Ride the Lion to Zion

Juniors
Messages
800
BTW, there's a poster on Bigfumble styling himself "PenrithGWS".

His contributions to the debate were "NRL killing it" and "Ratings (NRL) stronger than ever".

Curious, in light of the "Penrith Fan" character on L.U.

What is it with Penrith?
 
R

Ride the Lion to Zion

Juniors
Messages
800
docbrown said:
I will always lean towards averages because I want to know how many times an ad spot has been seen. A one minute reach doesn't tell me that and it never will. In fact it's almost the opposite, because those reach viewers mostly flick to another channel once the football commercial break starts.

That said this conversation is entirely of its time and in 15 years no one will be talking about reach. We will mostly be talking about subscribers.
Click to expand...
Some posters have said all that matters is what advertisers value. If that were true, this topic would be a private concern for media companies and sports governing bodies. Not much to discuss on a RL forum.

Most fans don't care how many ads are seen during FTA games. We're more interested in metrics which indicate the wider deeper relative popularity of our favourite sports.

AFL indisputably attract higher attendances. Question is whether this only reflects the nature of Fumble as a live event. And to what extent TV ratings allow NRL to close the gap. In that respect, Average is more relevant than Reach and Pay TV is more relevant than FTA.
 
Vlad59

Vlad59

Bench
Messages
4,048
The_Wookie said:
Im not drunk. And Ive given the post I responded a fair reponse. I have no idea whats got under your bonnet.

I mean I didnt even mention the fact that the AFL didnt come up with Reach at all.
Click to expand...
Just keeping you on track. You brought up reach and the nrl not me. I’ve rarely if ever seen reach used as a measure for the nrl. It was at its peak with the Matilda’s as a false reflection of their games audience. Their ratings were big enough without relying on that crap.
 
W

Wb1234

Immortal
Messages
33,651
Perth Red said:
no no no it’s a conspiracy. Afl has managed to convince all tv companies and tv rating companies to change the system so it benefits them. Wb said so. lol
Click to expand...
AFL games going from 14 th to 3rd because channel seven came up with a new way to present their ratings

keep polishing that afl turd
 
W

Wb1234

Immortal
Messages
33,651
Ride the Lion to Zion said:
BTW, there's a poster on Bigfumble styling himself "PenrithGWS".

His contributions to the debate were "NRL killing it" and "Ratings (NRL) stronger than ever".

Curious, in light of the "Penrith Fan" character on L.U.

What is it with Penrith?
Click to expand...
What’s a pommie doing on an afl forum ? Lmao
 
R

Ride the Lion to Zion

Juniors
Messages
800
Wb1234 said:
What’s a pommie doing on an afl forum ? Lmao
Click to expand...
Just breezy reconnaissance at this stage.

I'm half tempted to join. Quite like the sound of this thread - "Does the AFL have anything to fear from the Matilda's recent success and the NRL's TV ratings"

Apostrophe in the wrong place. Thought Fumblers were better educated.
 
W

Wb1234

Immortal
Messages
33,651
B
Ride the Lion to Zion said:
Just breezy reconnaissance at this stage.

I'm half tempted to join. Quite like the sound of this thread - "Does the AFL have anything to fear from the Matilda's recent success and the NRL's TV ratings"

Apostrophe in the wrong place. Thought Fumblers were better educated.
Click to expand...
Wookie is a moderator there you’ll be fine
 
M

Mother Nature's Son

Juniors
Messages
655
Ride the Lion to Zion said:
Some posters have said all that matters is what advertisers value. If that were true, this topic would be a private concern for media companies and sports governing bodies. Not much to discuss on a RL forum.

Most fans don't care how many ads are seen during FTA games. We're more interested in metrics which indicate the wider deeper relative popularity of our favourite sports.

AFL indisputably attract higher attendances. Question is whether this only reflects the nature of Fumble as a live event. And to what extent TV ratings allow NRL to close the gap. In that respect, Average is more relevant than Reach and Pay TV is more relevant than FTA.
Click to expand...
Mate NRL television viewing numbers far more than compensate the higher attendance numbers f-ball enjoys, by several million in fact.
What I`d be interested in knowing is that with a decent size and quality stadium for every NRL team or one within relatively easy access (i,e. close the football stadium gap) how close we could go to closing or possibly surpassing the aggregate or even average crowd advantage that fumbleball has, in line with our television viewing numbers advantage.
 
The_Wookie

The_Wookie

Bench
Messages
3,248
Ride the Lion to Zion said:
Just breezy reconnaissance at this stage.

I'm half tempted to join. Quite like the sound of this thread - "Does the AFL have anything to fear from the Matilda's recent success and the NRL's TV ratings"

Apostrophe in the wrong place. Thought Fumblers were better educated.
Click to expand...

zealots and bullshit exist on every forum.
 
R

Ride the Lion to Zion

Juniors
Messages
800
Mother Nature's Son said:
Mate NRL television viewing numbers far more than compensate the higher attendance numbers f-ball enjoys, by several million in fact.
What I`d be interested in knowing is that with a decent size and quality stadium for every NRL team or one within relatively easy access (i,e. close the football stadium gap) how close we could go to closing or possibly surpassing the aggregate or even average crowd advantage that fumbleball has, in line with our television viewing numbers advantage.
Click to expand...
Reach ratings help confirm the belief on Bigfumble that attendances accurately reflect the relative popularities of AFL and NRL. Whereas Average ratings largely confound it. Reach is a gift horse for AFL. Could even be classed as extra contra in the deal with Seven.

When PVL was appointed, his first interview carried a claim that NRL engagement was substantially higher than media elites assumed. He alluded to closet fans who follow the comp via TV and other media. Implicitly invoking certain more affluent NRL supporters in NSW/QLD/ACT, who rarely or never attend games and perceive no social cachet from overt association with RL.

It's well over a century since the split with RU in Oz, but I think this assessment remains valid. So long as the corpse of ARU is twitching, NRL will struggle to match AFL.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Top