What is more important, crowds or TV ratings?

[yakstorm]

Both really should be on par, and clubs should be looking to maximize both.

Let look at it economically for a club. Clubs currently get a $3.4 million grant from the NRL, which is made up of TV revenue + New Media and other sponsorship revenue. Lets say that means the club would get roughly $3 million directly from TV.

Now a strong membership club like the Rabbitohs and Dragons would earn around $2 million odd from membership revenue, plus then additional gate receipts on top. Considering a club like the Bunnies get roughly $100K per ANZ home game, suddenly they have close to their $3 million there.

From that point of view both are extremely important for ones bottom line, and they thus they should be looking to grow both.

It's just like they should be looking to grow online audiences, and merchandise sales. The more consumption of their product, the stronger the club, the stronger the brand.

 

[BunniesMan]

ask a statistician if they feel a sample group of 3,500 out of 20million will provide a valid and reliable data set. Especially when you also consider all the other factors. We worked it out that for every person in Perth who has a box = 20k on the viewing figures. That means if me and my 3 mates where the fortunate ones to get boxes Perth viewing figures for NRL would be 80k better off!

Well polls that often decide the fate of Prime Ministers and Opposition leaders sometimes have an even smaller sample size than that.

If sample sizes are good enough for that, they're good enough to give us an idea about ratings.

 

[Perth Red]

They don't just select random people to give boxes to. They make sure they they have all key demogrpahics covered and you need to be qualified to recieve to one. You need to answer all sorts of questions to fit the requirements of what OZTAM require, that includes number of members in the household, what age group they fall into, income, disposable income, what products you spend your disposable income on, whether you rent or own your place, your hobbies and interests. They require a 30 question or so questionaire to fill out and only then if you fit the bill do you qualify part of the ratings survey. It's not like they just knock on your door and say "here you go, wanna box?". Maybe you should learn a bit more about the advertising and media industry before making such assumptions.

I am well aware of all that, I still don't see how you can get an accurate cross representation of people with the amount they sample. If they were talking ball park figures then ok but they quote figures like there is a high degree of accuracy in them. I'd love to know how they work out audiences of less than 10k, it would equate to a 1/2 of a person watching! It probably workes generally with large audiences for main shows but when you get down to much smaller audiences, like NRL in Perth just one or two people can significantly alter the supposed viewing figure.

In the UK the sample level is only 5,000 out of 11million households so the Oz sample level might actually be lower than the 3,500 mentioned. There are no official figures quoted for sample group size so dificult to say.

 

[Eels Dude]

I am well aware of all that, I still don't see how you can get an accurate cross representation of people with the amount they sample. If they were talking ball park figures then ok but they quote figures like there is a high degree of accuracy in them. I'd love to know how they work out audiences of less than 10k, it would equate to a 1/2 of a person watching! It probably workes generally with large audiences for main shows but when you get down to much smaller audiences, like NRL in Perth just one or two people can significantly alter the supposed viewing figure.

In the UK the sample level is only 5,000 out of 11million households so the Oz sample level might actually be lower than the 3,500 mentioned. There are no official figures quoted for sample group size so dificult to say.

Mate, that's why they're very particular and make sure that they only offer the digiatal recording boxes to those households that are applicable to the cause. If you're interested in knowing more about how it works you're more than welcome the PM me. It's a lot more complex than you're making it out to be.

 

[40/20]

Why are the Broncos so much better off (money wise (at least in general)) then all of the other clubs. Answer: Large crowds. It doesn't matter what the TV deal is, Gallop will always give the clubs just enough to survive or a bit less because the players will always ask for and get more money and the league will want to skim off the top to grow grass roots, however if you really want to thrive you need good crowds. This is where the clubs need to improve over the next 10 years.

I disagree the broncos get far more exposure than others club due most of their games being telecast on nine and a majority are on friday nights
This enables them to get more money through sponsorship which leads to them having the biggest revenue in the league their crowds contribute but are not the primary reason

 

[Everlovin' Antichrist]

And you can f**k off too your bitch as you never have a discussion on these forums just all you same to do is look for an opening when someone post's there own opinion and then go in for the kill with your nasty sly f**king comments.
You are a f**king horrible man.

And you are a skirt.

This was an interesting thread until you started yakking on. You turn a game off if there isn't a decent crowd?

genius.

 

[Everlovin' Antichrist]

If this question had been asked in 1965 then the answer would have been crowds but now it's definitely TV.

There is way too much money available based on ratings. That money isn't dependent on crowds.

 

[bobmar28]

Crowds.

Hopefully when the IC comes in they can come up with a plan to make footy a bit more affordable for families.

They could do that by getting the billion dollar TV contract and using some of that money to subsidise ticket prices. That makes TV ratings more important.

 

[Brutus]

Go away Teddyboy.

You are a constant thread ruiner.

 

[THE CHAMP]

I disagree the broncos get far more exposure than others club due most of their games being telecast on nine and a majority are on friday nights
This enables them to get more money through sponsorship which leads to them having the biggest revenue in the league their crowds contribute but are not the primary reason

Before you post try to have a little think.

 

[Stormarekings]

I disagree the broncos get far more exposure than others club due most of their games being telecast on nine and a majority are on friday nights
This enables them to get more money through sponsorship which leads to them having the biggest revenue in the league their crowds contribute but are not the primary reason

I believe that sponsership is important as well, however crowds are more important. For example if you increase your crowd by 10000 at approximately $30 a seat (cheap for some) that is 10000X30X12 (home games). That is $3.6 million more a year. That is mostly profits because your club has already payed for the venue. Not only that they will buy food and drinks as well.

 

[BDGS]

TV brings in more money then anything else.

We are after reality not perception here folks, like the AFL.

 

[ParraEelsNRL]

I believe that sponsership is important as well, however crowds are more important. For example if you increase your crowd by 10000 at approximately $30 a seat (cheap for some) that is 10000X30X12 (home games). That is $3.6 million more a year. That is mostly profits because your club has already payed for the venue. Not only that they will buy food and drinks as well.

True, but if you are not shown on TV with mass exposure, where are the new fans going to come from?

With out TV exposure, the crowds will eventually fall until you are left with nothing.

 

[juro]

Just have to look at the NBL, a-league, super rugby to see the impact of not having free-to-air coverage...

 

[Stormarekings]

True, but if you are not shown on TV with mass exposure, where are the new fans going to come from?

With out TV exposure, the crowds will eventually fall until you are left with nothing.

Totally agree with what you are saying. We need to get Friday/Sunday FTA live to all parts of Australia even if it cost money to have it broadcast Into VIC/SA/WA. In the end it will get more for League in the longrun. I would argue that both are extremely but equally important.

Now back to my previous point on crowds. Imagine that all (future) 18 clubs got 10000 average more people into a game. That is 3.6 million X 18 = 64.8 million per year (maybe closer to 100 million with food/drink/mercandise). That is 324 million more over five years (500 million with all the extras see above). That is 324 million extra, (hope my figures aint to dodgy) not just total and that is not including finals. That is a strong base for the future of RL in Australia.

 

[user_nat]

Assuming the average ticket price at $30 is probably a bit optimistic IMO.

 

[Stormarekings]

Assuming the average ticket price at $30 is probably a bit optimistic IMO.

Probabaly correct, although Titan fans may disagree.

 

[Digeze]

TV ratings are the most important this season due to the impending TV Rights negotiations.

However, if you don't have a little black tv ratings box in your house then get yourself to a footy ground near you as watching it at home is not contributing anything to the game

 

[Teddyboy]

And you are a skirt.

This was an interesting thread until you started yakking on. You turn a game off if there isn't a decent crowd?

genius.

Well yes each to there own as I get depressed when I say shit crowd for a game of League and Union as well as Boxing and MMA.
Horses for courses.

 

[Teddyboy]

Go away Teddyboy.

You are a constant thread ruiner.

Just f**k off you narrow minded prick.