Ratings disaster for Seven

[iggy plop]

In today's Daily Telegraph there is a story on page 11 titled "No rugby heaven for Seven"

The opening paragraph reads "Channel Seven's World Cup coverage is a debacle with the network scoring its lowest nightly ratings since the introduction of electronic people meters 12 years ago".

Seven came third in the ratings on sunday night, not too far ahead of the ABC. Nine got 36 percent, Ten 30.6 percent, Seven 16.1 percent, ABC 13.4 percent.

What a shame, there were a couple of good games on Sunday night.

Obviously the hype and excitment generated at the grounds are not translating to the mainstream. I'm sure the World Cup Soccer played in Asia was a much better TV performer here than the current tournament being played on our soil and with far greater promotion.

 

[Rustay]

How many ppl approx have these people meter things. That is something i have never got about ratings, do they not even consider the other ppl in the country?

 

[zulu]

How many ppl approx have these people meter things. That is something i have never got about ratings, do they not even consider the other ppl in the country?

Excuses :roll: Let's just face it, league is a consistent top rater on television and union is good for events and opening ceremonies. I have no doubt there will be some good figures for union in the semis and finals, but unfortunately World Cups are not held every year.

zu

 

[bazza]

How many ppl approx have these people meter things. That is something i have never got about ratings, do they not even consider the other ppl in the country?

They give them out to people at NRL games

 

[salivor]

How many ppl approx have these people meter things. That is something i have never got about ratings, do they not even consider the other ppl in the country?

They give them out to people at NRL games

Maybe thats why theres so few of them around.

 

[Rustay]

Believe it or not, that was actually a serious question as i dont know how it works.

 

[Dean Moriarty]

They pick what they think is a representative sample of the population as a whole - so there should be some rural people in there, some league fans, some union fans, some Anglos, some lebanese, some chinese, some families with young kids, some old couples...you get the picture.

Statistically, the bigger the sample size (the people with the boxes), the more confident you can be that the relative popularity of each show in the sample group is the same as it is in the whole population. Usually, they would put out enough boxes to be 95% confident of getting it right, as the margin of error then is quite small. The actual number you need for this is surprisingly small (can't remember how small - it's a while since I studied statistics). So if the returns show 40% of people in the sample watched a show, they are reasonably confident that 40% of the entire population with TVs watched that show.

So they're not ignoring you because you don't have a measurement box - they just assume that someone in that sample population pretty much represents your preferences already.

 

[Rustay]

Ah, ok. Thank you sir.

 

[ali]

Dean has summed it up pretty well. From memmory each person who watches TV in a household with one of these boxes has to log in when they are watching. So for instance if you invite 10 mates over to watch the footy, you get your 10 mates to register their presence and record their details such as sex, age, income etc. So the advertisers don't only have just overall figures, but they can look at the ratings by age group, income etc.

As someone who has studied a fair bit of stats I believe in TV ratings. It only seems to be people who don't have a clue about how they work who bag them off.

 

[Edwahu]

Actually doesnt the OZtam system only take into account the 5 main capitals citys? I remember there was a big difference for the league GF between its figures and the other systems (the name of which escapes me) and it was because the other system takes into account regional figures as well.

Seven must be praying Australia make it to the final. They are guarenteed one blockbuster for the semi but they would be desperate for another one.

 

[bayrep]

......

Seven must be praying Australia make it to the final. They are guarenteed one blockbuster for the semi but they would be desperate for another one.

That would be the same for any code in any country.

 

[Edwahu]

deleted

 

[zulu]

The union people couldn't wait to quote the opening ceremony and Aus v Argies TV ratings, but distance themselves from the current disasters and start questioning the ratings process.

Gotta laugh.

zu

 

[Marcus]

When I hear the ratings on the radio, there is always one program that tops it, 'National Nine News'.

I started to think, "now why is that?". Then it dawned on me. The people who participate in these ratings things, are the same people that participate week in and week out, for who knows how long - a year maybe?

Considering how people are creatures of habit, how much variation is their viewing patterns going to change from week to week? Very little I would think. If your set in your ways and you love sitting down on the couch at 6pm to watch NNN, then NNN is going to win everytime you sit down at 6pm.

TV ratings are only as good as the amount of people that is surveyed. Same goes for polls and any other survey that research companies carry out.

 

[Razor]

How many ppl approx have these people meter things. That is something i have never got about ratings, do they not even consider the other ppl in the country?

OzTam have 3000 in each of the 5 capital cities.

ACNeilson have boxes in all of the country areas and in cities not covered by OzTam.

 

[Marcus]

OzTam have 3000 in each of the 5 capital cities.

So 3,000 across 5 cities. Thats roughly 600 boxes for each city.

Brisbane has got 1.7 million people, and probably between 400,000-500,000 houses in the whole city. If I say there is 450k houses and 600 boxes, then that makes 1 box = 750 households. That means where I live, if I'm watching a certain program, then the 749 houses around me are watching the same thing.

 

[incredible_holc]

hmmmm 3000 in each of the 5 capital cities!!!!

 

[El Diablo]

When I hear the ratings on the radio, there is always one program that tops it, 'National Nine News'.

I started to think, "now why is that?". Then it dawned on me. The people who participate in these ratings things, are the same people that participate week in and week out, for who knows how long - a year maybe?

Considering how people are creatures of habit, how much variation is their viewing patterns going to change from week to week? Very little I would think. If your set in your ways and you love sitting down on the couch at 6pm to watch NNN, then NNN is going to win everytime you sit down at 6pm.

TV ratings are only as good as the amount of people that is surveyed. Same goes for polls and any other survey that research companies carry out.

Excuses. There's no AFL or NRL on Friday nights yet the RUWC doesn't seem to be attracting those viewers and their normal habit on a Friday is to watch footy.

Unlike the Union spin doctors would have some believe, Australia has not "embraced" Union. Shit, more people would rather watch a 20 year old movie on a Sunday night that has already been shown 1,000 times.

 

[Marcus]

hmmmm 3000 in each of the 5 capital cities!!!!

I got this from the oztam site,

Question:
What is the distribution of homes on the OzTAM Panel?

Answer:
There are two panels: the metropolitan panel which comprises 3000 homes (Sydney 750, Melbourne 700, Brisbane 600, Adelaide 475, Perth 475) and the national subscription television panel which comprises 1000 subscription television homes.

 

[Marcus]

When I hear the ratings on the radio, there is always one program that tops it, 'National Nine News'.

I started to think, "now why is that?". Then it dawned on me. The people who participate in these ratings things, are the same people that participate week in and week out, for who knows how long - a year maybe?

Considering how people are creatures of habit, how much variation is their viewing patterns going to change from week to week? Very little I would think. If your set in your ways and you love sitting down on the couch at 6pm to watch NNN, then NNN is going to win everytime you sit down at 6pm.

TV ratings are only as good as the amount of people that is surveyed. Same goes for polls and any other survey that research companies carry out.

Excuses. There's no AFL or NRL on Friday nights yet the RUWC doesn't seem to be attracting those viewers and their normal habit on a Friday is to watch footy.

Unlike the Union spin doctors would have some believe, Australia has not "embraced" Union. sh*t, more people would rather watch a 20 year old movie on a Sunday night that has already been shown 1,000 times.

Over 1 million have already attended games, average works out to be 33k. It will get higher as we play in bigger stadiums. These are PAYING customers not some channel-flicker.