Origin 3 TV ratings

[Mr_Ugly]

Origin Television Viewing Figures
Thursday, 6th July 2006

Queensland’s spectacular return to Harvey Norman State of Origin glory captivated television audiences with a peak of 2.4 million viewers tuning in to see the action at Melbourne’s Telstra Dome.

The game itself drew an average audience of 2,224,000 while Nine’s telecast from 7.30pm attracted an average 2.074 million viewers in Brisbane, Sydney, Melbourne and Adelaide.

In regional Australia the match peaked at 1,229,000 viewers with a game average of 1,171,000 viewers and a telecast average of 958,000.

Brisbane’s audience increased 16% on the same match last year as they joined the 54,833 fans at the Telstra Dome in savouring every moment.

Brisbane averaged 731,000 for the game itself, 685,000 during the entire telecast with a peak audience of 768,000.

Sydney scored the highest audience share for any network in the city this year.

The peak Sydney audience was 1,102,000 with the game averaging 1,105,000 and the telecast 925,000 (a 3% drop in average viewers for the 2005 decider).

Melbourne turned in an impressive peak of 418,000 viewers with 388,000 tuning in from kick off to full time and 374,000 staying for the entire telecast (up 49% on the same match in 2005).

“It was a great result all round and a really encouraging one in Melbourne,” ARL Chief Executive, Mr Geoff Carr, said today.

“It more than held its own in the market there and actually won a couple of the quarter hours towards the end.

”Nobody has ever suggested Rugby League was going to be the number one sport in Melbourne but last night showed that we can put on a great event there and that people will get behind it.

“The Melbourne Storm continue to go well and we’ve had a lot of positive interest in the fact we have a Tri Nations match there later this year and further matches in the years ahead.”

Viewing Figures:
Match Average: Kick off to Full Time
Sydney - 1,015,000
Brisbane - 731,000
Melbourne - 388,000
Adelaide - 89,000
Regional NSW/Queensland - 1,171,000

Telecast Average: Complete coverage
Sydney - 925,000
Brisbane - 685,000
Melbourne - 374,000
Adelaide - 90,000
Regional NSW/Queensland - 958,000

Match Peak:
Sydney - 1,102,000
Brisbane - 768,000
Melbourne - 418,000
Adelaide - 107,000
Regional NSW/Queensland - 1,229,000

ATR data prepared by NBN Television; OZTAM data prepared with the assistance of Channel 9 note that the match was not telecast in Perth on the Nine Network.

Good numbers, although I think the Sydney peak and average numbers must be back-to-front.


Source: http://www.nswrl.com.au/article.php?id=73

 

[Moffo]

great!

 

[Ice777]

I mentioned in another thread that i thought they were pretty impressive numbers in Melbourne. In Melbourne it was also up against the consistantly good rater Prison break which wasn't screened in Sydney and Brisbane Wednesday night so to go up against that in Melbourne and still pull good numbers was even more impressive.

 

[Perth Red]

Great stats from Melbourne. I'll send them to Ch9 WA to show that people outside NSW are interested in RL!!

 

[Nuke]

I note that it says that viewing figures could not be collected from Perth as it was not shown on the Nine Network. Bulldust. It was shown ... at 3:30am. It was advertised as being on at 2am, but the tennis continued on for a further hour-and-a-half.

I only got 3 hours sleep that night (I pressed the record button on my vcr then went to sleep), so I wasn't in a particularly good mood last Thursday!

 

[Perth Red]

Anybody got the email for Ch 9 WA?

 

[Perth Red]

ps does anyone know how these figures are acquired? Do the stations have a way of knowing what channel you are watching?

 

[Mr_Ugly]

I note that it says that viewing figures could not be collected from Perth as it was not shown on the Nine Network. Bulldust. It was shown ... at 3:30am.

I don't really know how the system works, but 3:30am may be a "non-ratings" period (I think the ratings period is from 6am to 12 midnight). Therefore, although it was actually on, as far as the ratings were concerned it may not have been (if you catch my drift).

ps does anyone know how these figures are acquired? Do the stations have a way of knowing what channel you are watching?

I think they use some sort of electronic data logger which relays the figures back to the ratings agency. I'm not sure if the system caters for how many people are actually watching the tv (as some overseas do) - I suspect it just counts the number of tvs tuned in and extrapolates.

 

[Woods99]

I don't really know how the system works, but 3:30am may be a "non-ratings" period (I think the ratings period is from 6am to 12 midnight). Therefore, although it was actually on, as far as the ratings were concerned it may not have been (if you catch my drift).




I think they use some sort of electronic data logger which relays the figures back to the ratings agency. I'm not sure if the system caters for how many people are actually watching the tv (as some overseas do) - I suspect it just counts the number of tvs tuned in and extrapolates.

It used to be the case that the viewer household was required to fill in a kind of diary showing the number of viewers for any half-hour period, which was used in conjunction with the electronic doodad. Don't know about now.

Foxtel Satellite service (and probably their digital cable service too, come to think of it) knows how many set-top boxes are tuned to one of their channels, but not the number of viewers obviously.

Maybe digital transmission allows set-top feedback to the FTA stations, too. But obviously the various channels would not trust each other to collect valid data.:sarcasm:

 

[Mr. Fahrenheit]

i thin it divides the number of tvs by ppl ni the household.

eg. in a house of 4 if only 1 tv is turned on whatever they are watching rates 4 people, but if there are 2 tvs then each tv has 2 ppl accredited to them.

 

[Green Machine]

It used to be the case that the viewer household was required to fill in a kind of diary showing the number of viewers for any half-hour period, which was used in conjunction with the electronic doodad. Don't know about now.

Foxtel Satellite service (and probably their digital cable service too, come to think of it) knows how many set-top boxes are tuned to one of their channels, but not the number of viewers obviously.

Maybe digital transmission allows set-top feedback to the FTA stations, too. But obviously the various channels would not trust each other to collect valid data.:sarcasm:

http://forums.leagueunlimited.com/showpost.php?p=2579364&postcount=693

 

[Mr_Ugly]

It used to be the case that the viewer household was required to fill in a kind of diary showing the number of viewers for any half-hour period, which was used in conjunction with the electronic doodad. Don't know about now.

Foxtel Satellite service (and probably their digital cable service too, come to think of it) knows how many set-top boxes are tuned to one of their channels, but not the number of viewers obviously.

Maybe digital transmission allows set-top feedback to the FTA stations, too. But obviously the various channels would not trust each other to collect valid data.:sarcasm:

I don't think you're right about that Woods. I'd be surprised if either the satellite service or digital terrestrial tv had any feedback system. Surely this would require some sort of transmission mechanism from the home to "beam" the data back to the tv station. [EDIT: Have since been corrected about Foxtel Satellite - apparently relays info by phone line - my mistake!]

I have a couple of set top boxes for terrestrial digital tv (gives me a couple of extra channels in Tassie), and they certainly have no way to feed info back to the tv stations.

 

[Woods99]

I don't think you're right about that Woods. I'd be surprised if either the satellite service or digital terrestrial tv had any feedback system. Surely this would require some sort of transmission mechanism from the home to "beam" the data back to the tv station. [EDIT: Have since been corrected about Foxtel Satellite - apparently relays info by phone line - my mistake!]

I have a couple of set top boxes for terrestrial digital tv (gives me a couple of extra channels in Tassie), and they certainly have no way to feed info back to the tv stations.

Some set-top boxes do, some don't.

 

[Woods99]

http://forums.leagueunlimited.com/showpost.php?p=2579364&postcount=693

Are you stalking me, GM?

 

[Green Machine]

Are you stalking me, GM?

Sorry Woods, I meant to post something else and I did not intentionally reply to your usual entertaining contribution. Somehow that link I provided, unbeknownst to me, fell out of my top pocket and ended up attached to the thread. Sincere apologies again and this post represents the bona fide opinions of the writer and is not intended to be provocative. By the way, what did you think of the ratings for State of Origin III?

http://forums.leagueunlimited.com/showpost.php?p=2579364&postcount=693
Whoops, it fell out again. My apologies,

 

[Mr_Ugly]

Whoops, it fell out again.

Same thing happened to Jerry Collins todger before the Bledisloe game ... how funny was that! The odd part was that even though we didn't get the replay until 10:30, they never cut that bit out

 

[Perth Red]

So basically it sounds like they make TV figures up pretty much then?

 

[DINGb@T]

The people responsible for collecting the ratings give out a whole set of set top boxes that record what people watch. They're given to a wide range of demographics and then that data is multiplied as if they represented all tv watchers.
It's a bit of a dark art but it's the best they've got so the advertisers go along with it. They dont actually know what everyone is watching they just have to have an educated guess.



The Urban Telegraph- the place to find out what's happening in Aussie culture

 

[Perth Red]

Would be interesting to know what % of population they are given to and how valid and relaible this methodology is. Always wondered how they got it so precise ie 65,386 but guess they are just taking a very small sample and extrapolating to a wider population. Veryy iffy!!

Probably why I prefer to look at bums on seats as a far more valid way of measuring a sports success.

 

[Woods99]

Would be interesting to know what % of population they are given to and how valid and relaible this methodology is. Always wondered how they got it so precise ie 65,386 but guess they are just taking a very small sample and extrapolating to a wider population. Veryy iffy!!

Probably why I prefer to look at bums on seats as a far more valid way of measuring a sports success.

There is a whole profession based on the use of statistics. It is possible to establish a "panel" whose make-up mirrors that of the total population, in age, sex, income and education levels, location, etc etc. That panel's opinion or actions will then closely resemble that of the total population.

There is always a margin for error. If you look at reputable political polls in the daily papers (eg Newspoll) you will see that the margin for error is always shown, for example "there is a +- 2% margin for error).

The larger the panel as a proportion of the total population, the lower is the margin for error.


However, tv ratings have their limitations, apart from the margin for error. For starters, they only measure home viewers, which means that viewers at places like pubs, clubs, etc are not measured. It is widely known that the Melbourne Cup's real viewership is at least double what the ratings indicate, because many people watch the event outside their homes.