2024 TV and Streaming Ratings Discussion

[Ride the Lion to Zion]

I mean i cant rule that out given thats true most years. I think 2020 they ran at the same time though - but again circumstances were different - shorter matches etc, that resulted in a ratings boom for the AFL.

Someone on BF reckons a Swans/Lions GF would maximize nationwide viewership. On the premise that everyone in VIC/WA/SA will watch irrespective of participants. Whereas casuals in NSW/QLD will only tune in for a local team.

From memory, the ratings for GF 2019 Fumbles wouldn't support the hypothesis. Although, probably a gulf in pulling power between Swans and Giants.

I think all Storm NRL GFs have rated well across the board.

 

[Ride the Lion to Zion]

No meltdown here. I picked the Storm.

Should always keep in mind that managements come and go.

Club identities belong to fans.

 

[Wb1234]

Those Sydney ratings are pathetic, even for games involving the Swans and Giants. And people still think the Swans are huge? lol You can pretty much fit their TV audience into Accor Stadium. Brisbane not much better. AFL outside of Melbourne and the wasteland states is a myth.

The giants suns lions and swans all have a common feature where their crowds exceed their tv ratings

40 years of afl expansion for basically nothing

 

[Vlad59]

Should always keep in mind that managements come and go.

Club identities belong to fans.

Wooppee

 

[Vlad59]

The giants suns lions and swans all have a common feature where their crowds exceed their tv ratings

40 years of afl expansion for basically nothing

Bring back the NSWRL!

 

[Wb1234]

Ratings are collated by an independent source they are an excellent gauge of each codes popularity

crowds are less reliable because

1. they lie (hello giants$
2. They include free tickets or memberships who don’t show up
3. They include large numbers of stadium members who don’t pay

afl being a big sport could be exaggerated because the mcg and scg have a lot of members

 

[Vlad59]

Ratings are collated by an independent source they are an excellent gauge of each codes popularity

crowds are less reliable because

1. they lie (hello giants$
2. They include free tickets or memberships who don’t show up
3. They include large numbers of stadium members who don’t pay

afl being a big sport could be exaggerated because the mcg and scg have a lot of members

Bullshit

 

[The_Wookie]

The giants suns lions and swans all have a common feature where their crowds exceed their tv ratings

Swans and Lions should be beating their crowds on tv this year. GWS have historically had a higher broadcast average than their crowds as well, not hard givenThe Suns is a little harder to quantify given they are in a regional market, and Brisbane isnt technically their home broadcast market, and we dont get QLD regional breakdowns.

 

[The_Wookie]

Ratings are collated by an independent source they are an excellent gauge of each codes popularity

Ratings are a survey based on an extremely limited number of households and designed to ensure the hegemony of Free to Air tv networks. To the point that Foxtel claimed they were massively undercounted and SBS have never trusted them due to their commercial bias. They are an excellent gauge of what about 7,000 households watch and a guess at the rest.

crowds are less reliable because

1. they lie (hello giants$
2. They include free tickets or memberships who don’t show up
3. They include large numbers of stadium members who don’t pay.

afl being a big sport could be exaggerated because the mcg and scg have a lot of members

Free tickets are still scanned in at attendance, and the AFL doesnt operate the scanners. The venues do.

This is borderline conspiracy bullshit. How you attend or whether you pay or not is irrelevelent, as long as you attend. Stadium members at the MCG in particular, and probably even the SCG, are likely to be members in part because of the football. MCG members for example have a thing called club support where they pay extra towards their club membership as part of their MCC membership.

 

[Vlad59]

Ratings are a survey based on an extremely limited number of households and designed to ensure the hegemony of Free to Air tv networks. To the point that Foxtel claimed they were massively undercounted and SBS have never trusted them due to their commercial bias. They are an excellent gauge of what about 7,000 households watch and a guess at the rest.



Free tickets are still scanned in at attendance, and the AFL doesnt operate the scanners. The venues do.

This is borderline conspiracy bullshit. How you attend or whether you pay or not is irrelevelent, as long as you attend. Stadium members at the MCG in particular, and probably even the SCG, are likely to be members in part because of the football. MCG members for example have a thing called club support where they pay extra towards their club membership as part of their MCC membership.

100% correct.
In the first instance he has yet again demonstrated his complete lack of knowledge of how the ratings are measured. We’ve pointed it out to him so many times but he’s too thick too understand it.
And the crap he writes about crowds is self serving bullshit.

 

[Perth Red]

Ratings are collated by an independent source they are an excellent gauge of each codes popularity

crowds are less reliable because

1. they lie (hello giants$
2. They include free tickets or memberships who don’t show up
3. They include large numbers of stadium members who don’t pay

afl being a big sport could be exaggerated because the mcg and scg have a lot of members

The data collection method for fta tv is laughable. When its smaller numbers it pure pot luck which household got a box.

 

[Vlad59]

The data collection method for fta tv is laughable. When its smaller numbers it pure pot luck which household got a box.

It’s called sampling, it’s a system that’s been in place for decades and is used by the ABS for forecasts on unemployment, and the economy at large. But hell what would they know?

 

[Wb1234]

The data collection method for fta tv is laughable. When its smaller numbers it pure pot luck which household got a box.

It’s collated by a system designed by ph d

literal rocket scientists

and unlike crowds independently collated so trustworthy

 

[Perth Red]

It’s collated by a system designed by ph d

literal rocket scientists

and unlike crowds independently collated so trustworthy

Its bollox! Theres about 500 boxes in Perth. It only takes a random chance selection to have ended up with 15 households out of that 500 in perth that are NRL fans and the 7k current tv audience would show as 60k!

 

[Wb1234]

Its bollox! Theres about 500 boxes in Perth. It only takes a random chance selection to have ended up with 15 households out of that 500 in perth that are NRL fans and the 7k current tv audience would show as 60k!

You vs rocket scientist

make it a tough choice lol

 

[The_Wookie]

It’s collated by a system designed by ph d

literal rocket scientists

and unlike crowds independently collated so trustworthy

Crowd data comes from the venue not the league.

And given the NRLs spotty history with crowd accuracy, this is not the most productive argument you could be having.

 

[Vlad59]

Crowd data comes from the venue not the league.

And given the NRLs spotty history with crowd accuracy, this is not the most productive argument you could be having.

I can’t imagine a scenario in 2024 where a venue would lie about an attendance. Why would they? There is no advantage to them. WBs argument is self serving twaddle.

 

[Vlad59]

Its bollox! Theres about 500 boxes in Perth. It only takes a random chance selection to have ended up with 15 households out of that 500 in perth that are NRL fans and the 7k current tv audience would show as 60k!

Sampling is a refined science and not as simple as you’ve described. And if it’s used by government for employment data why wouldn’t it work for tv ratings?

 

[Perth Red]

Sampling is a refined science and not as simple as you’ve described. And if it’s used by government for employment data why wouldn’t it work for tv ratings?

because of the example I showed for Perth. When dealing with small sample size and extrapalitaing to make statements about large populations it is incredibly flawed. There is literally no accuracy one way or the other to say 7k watched an NRl game in Perth.

 

[Iamback]

because of the example I showed for Perth. When dealing with small sample size and extrapalitaing to make statements about large populations it is incredibly flawed. There is literally no accuracy one way or the other to say 7k watched an NRl game in Perth.

That is my issue with it.

I get FTA can't be measured but Fox knows every single tile I click on when watching Kayo.

Yet still have to guess to stick with the rest