I see the usual numpties have come out to add their 2 cents based on their zero experience working in the media and zero experience with the American television market.
Firstly, if you look at that ratings chart and don't realise how fractured TV viewership is then basically you've got guano for brains (Maximus can help explain his own particular condition to you). Anyone expecting these games to rate in seven figures is a moron. Nuggets and Lakers only rated 3 million. Or in Perth Red's language, "that's only 0.9% of all Americans watching NBA, AFL would have gotten 50% - the NBA must be a failure blah blah blah we need two teams in Hull."
Look at the MLS on the main -- 441k. That's an American sports league. Even the EPL, arguably the biggest foreign sports league with long term penetration for decades rated 416. Those are week in week out viewers who know the schedule and which gets regular advertising. Any AFL trolls here really want to claim that AFL or NRL should outrate long term EPL viewership?
What should have this game rated? Based on the lead in lead in numbers which drive flow on viewership, I would argue 100-150k. About a third of EPL and MLS and similar to the basketball lead in. Sports in the states get bumped to secondaries all the time just because there are more games on at the same time. You get used to it. Perhaps in this case because the NRL was more of an unknown, fewer people were willing to switch and switch back. We'll never really know for sure. I also agree that a 1:30am finish in the East was always going to cause a drop off. But this rating was low and if they can't pull 100-200k next year then I would question the benefits of the effort. But it's more like 60% of what it should have gotten, not the doom and gloom others suggest.
However, if this were Vegas, we'd drive Perth Red and Maximus out to the desert, make them dig their own graves and leave them there.