2025 TV Ratings

[GenericUsername202]

A few things here:

• the NRL w state of origin rates very well, it's only 3 games though and only on free to air.
• It's on 9 main nationally, the AFL only on 7 main in Melbourne, Brisbane, Adelaide.
• the AFL ratings are up 41% on Thursday nights from last year on fox.
• the gap would be minimal when you add in fox and kayo ratings for the AFL.
• the AFL game last night had little appeal, everybody including myself expected us to lose by 80 to 100 points and it looked that way in the first quarter, which would have had a high switch off rate.
• the AFL killed AFL w by expanding too quickly meaning a poor standard got even worse and it's a missed opportunity coz we came up with the concept and the nrl copied.

Few corrections.
1. You're right, it's a national FTA exclusive game, but Fox/Kayo figures aren't making up the almost 2/1 deficit. These figures are embarrassing for the AFL
2. Origin is on 9 nationally, but OriginW was only on 9 in 3 states. QLD, NSW, VIC. It was on secondary channels in SA and WA
3. So what? Overall ratings are down in the league, and being 41% up on fox, despite losing Saturday and 7 being down means the overall ratings are down.
4. Again, no. 7 holds a sizeable advantage over fox. OriginW won convincingly. Even if you add the highest rated Kayo/Fox game (which was around 380k for the Coll v Gee game). It still wouldn't be enough
5. Maybe so, but these ratings are a trend, which is that the new broadcast deal coupled with the problems the game is currently facing has made the game unattractive to the viewer.
6. Youre right. NRL is a lot better at their womens program, and the AFLW comes into each season with even less fanfare than the previous, while NRLW gets stronger and stronger with each season

The AFL needs to look seriously at improving their own product
1. Have every game on 7 air live on the main channel. Even in northern states (would bump up the ratings)
2. Bring back Saturday FTA. The way AFL can counter NRL is to have more FTA games. More eyes on the product can only be a good thing
3. Bring back State of Origin
4. Primetime Grand final.
5. Remove 2-4 AFLW teams, rebrand the comp, and reintroduce it to the public.

 

[Bjo187]

The AFL needs to look seriously at improving their own product
1. Have every game on 7 air live on the main channel. Even in northern states (would bump up the ratings)
2. Bring back Saturday FTA. The way AFL can counter NRL is to have more FTA games. More eyes on the product can only be a good thing
3. Bring back State of Origin
4. Primetime Grand final.
5. Remove 2-4 AFLW teams, rebrand the comp, and reintroduce it to the public.

Agree with all these points the AFL admin have been terrible the past few years lead by Richard the useless, as per my rants in the Laura Kane thread.

Every game on 7 main 7 wouldn't agree to as they don't wanna seem like the AFL channel in Sydney and Brisbane.

When we go to 20 teams in the next tv deal I hope we add the extra game to fta, it's a competitive advantage, 4 on fta and 6 on pay tv, the 4 of fta split 2 games ch7, two games ch9 or 10 and have that as a Saturday on fta to take advantage of the NRL blackout on fta that day.

State of origin I agree, the afl should come out publically and state they want w.a and qld to match Victoria in 10 years and nsw in 20 years. Not for depth but for 22 players that can compete in a true competitive and ferocious state game.

Prime time gf I agree would be better than day time, but twilight strikes the balance and would be unique, I love that timeslot.

I agree on removing W teams, or you could make it 2 conferences with the bottom 10 being an amatuer comp with promotion and relegation. Saves money too, it's ridiculous how much the players get paid when the comp is losing tens of millions per year. Have 10 teams worth of players earning current salary and the other 10 earning half that, would save heaps of money, although the payments are already too high, you can't put the genie back in the bottle, but you can reduce the damage a little.

 

[Angus Young]

Few corrections.
1. You're right, it's a national FTA exclusive game, but Fox/Kayo figures aren't making up the almost 2/1 deficit. These figures are embarrassing for the AFL
2. Origin is on 9 nationally, but OriginW was only on 9 in 3 states. QLD, NSW, VIC. It was on secondary channels in SA and WA
3. So what? Overall ratings are down in the league, and being 41% up on fox, despite losing Saturday and 7 being down means the overall ratings are down.
4. Again, no. 7 holds a sizeable advantage over fox. OriginW won convincingly. Even if you add the highest rated Kayo/Fox game (which was around 380k for the Coll v Gee game). It still wouldn't be enough
5. Maybe so, but these ratings are a trend, which is that the new broadcast deal coupled with the problems the game is currently facing has made the game unattractive to the viewer.
6. Youre right. NRL is a lot better at their womens program, and the AFLW comes into each season with even less fanfare than the previous, while NRLW gets stronger and stronger with each season

The AFL needs to look seriously at improving their own product
1. Have every game on 7 air live on the main channel. Even in northern states (would bump up the ratings)
2. Bring back Saturday FTA. The way AFL can counter NRL is to have more FTA games. More eyes on the product can only be a good thing
3. Bring back State of Origin
4. Primetime Grand final.
5. Remove 2-4 AFLW teams, rebrand the comp, and reintroduce it to the public.

Primetime Grand Final for sure. That's just common sense.

But too many people start crying about getting with the times.

 

[shammersting]

Few corrections.
1. You're right, it's a national FTA exclusive game, but Fox/Kayo figures aren't making up the almost 2/1 deficit. These figures are embarrassing for the AFL
2. Origin is on 9 nationally, but OriginW was only on 9 in 3 states. QLD, NSW, VIC. It was on secondary channels in SA and WA
3. So what? Overall ratings are down in the league, and being 41% up on fox, despite losing Saturday and 7 being down means the overall ratings are down.
4. Again, no. 7 holds a sizeable advantage over fox. OriginW won convincingly. Even if you add the highest rated Kayo/Fox game (which was around 380k for the Coll v Gee game). It still wouldn't be enough
5. Maybe so, but these ratings are a trend, which is that the new broadcast deal coupled with the problems the game is currently facing has made the game unattractive to the viewer.
6. Youre right. NRL is a lot better at their womens program, and the AFLW comes into each season with even less fanfare than the previous, while NRLW gets stronger and stronger with each season

The AFL needs to look seriously at improving their own product
1. Have every game on 7 air live on the main channel. Even in northern states (would bump up the ratings)
2. Bring back Saturday FTA. The way AFL can counter NRL is to have more FTA games. More eyes on the product can only be a good thing
3. Bring back State of Origin
4. Primetime Grand final.
5. Remove 2-4 AFLW teams, rebrand the comp, and reintroduce it to the public.

Few corrections.
1. You're right, it's a national FTA exclusive game, but Fox/Kayo figures aren't making up the almost 2/1 deficit. These figures are embarrassing for the AFL
2. Origin is on 9 nationally, but OriginW was only on 9 in 3 states. QLD, NSW, VIC. It was on secondary channels in SA and WA
3. So what? Overall ratings are down in the league, and being 41% up on fox, despite losing Saturday and 7 being down means the overall ratings are down.
4. Again, no. 7 holds a sizeable advantage over fox. OriginW won convincingly. Even if you add the highest rated Kayo/Fox game (which was around 380k for the Coll v Gee game). It still wouldn't be enough
5. Maybe so, but these ratings are a trend, which is that the new broadcast deal coupled with the problems the game is currently facing has made the game unattractive to the viewer.
6. Youre right. NRL is a lot better at their womens program, and the AFLW comes into each season with even less fanfare than the previous, while NRLW gets stronger and stronger with each season

The AFL needs to look seriously at improving their own product
1. Have every game on 7 air live on the main channel. Even in northern states (would bump up the ratings)
2. Bring back Saturday FTA. The way AFL can counter NRL is to have more FTA games. More eyes on the product can only be a good thing
3. Bring back State of Origin
4. Primetime Grand final.
5. Remove 2-4 AFLW teams, rebrand the comp, and reintroduce it to the public.

Agree That women's state of origin is obliterating the AFL has to be a worry no matter how the Afl try to spin it. You can talk up foxtels ratings all you want but you can bet the NRL are still getting those big fox numbers. I know ratings aren't accurate but there needs to be changes coming...

 

[The Educator]

NRLW absolutely smashed the AFL last night, and they have been beating the AFL all season. Questions has to be asked of the AFL admin, and how they gave away FTA games, which has lead to this decline

Few corrections.
1. You're right, it's a national FTA exclusive game, but Fox/Kayo figures aren't making up the almost 2/1 deficit. These figures are embarrassing for the AFL
2. Origin is on 9 nationally, but OriginW was only on 9 in 3 states. QLD, NSW, VIC. It was on secondary channels in SA and WA
3. So what? Overall ratings are down in the league, and being 41% up on fox, despite losing Saturday and 7 being down means the overall ratings are down.
4. Again, no. 7 holds a sizeable advantage over fox. OriginW won convincingly. Even if you add the highest rated Kayo/Fox game (which was around 380k for the Coll v Gee game). It still wouldn't be enough
5. Maybe so, but these ratings are a trend, which is that the new broadcast deal coupled with the problems the game is currently facing has made the game unattractive to the viewer.
6. Youre right. NRL is a lot better at their womens program, and the AFLW comes into each season with even less fanfare than the previous, while NRLW gets stronger and stronger with each season

The AFL needs to look seriously at improving their own product
1. Have every game on 7 air live on the main channel. Even in northern states (would bump up the ratings)
2. Bring back Saturday FTA. The way AFL can counter NRL is to have more FTA games. More eyes on the product can only be a good thing
3. Bring back State of Origin
4. Primetime Grand final.
5. Remove 2-4 AFLW teams, rebrand the comp, and reintroduce it to the public.

Agree That women's state of origin is obliterating the AFL has to be a worry no matter how the Afl try to spin it. You can talk up foxtels ratings all you want but you can bet the NRL are still getting those big fox numbers. I know ratings aren't accurate but there needs to be changes coming...

There is no way of know whether the AFL is doing better than the NRL this year without the Kayo numbers.

We know the AFL is doing better than last year if we trust fox's announced kayo numbers as they easily account for the slight fall in the TV numbers. They actually imply a significant increase overall.

The AFL has had significant change this year with the new broadcast deal with foxtel now having its own commentary and also Saturday exclusivity.

Again, the hundreds of millions more it will get over the next 7 years tells the story where each code is at

The NRLW state of origin was inevitably going to grow legs given the cultural dominance of SoO within that sport.

The AFL's advantage, its club competition, has put it at a short to mid term strategic disadvantage at least in terms of eyes on sets (not much else) in the women's game. It means it was inevitable that it had to move fast to 18 teams and that it doesn't have a rep format that could be easily adapted to the women.

In ten years time the AFLW will be a marvel of a competition and the NRLW will still be pussy footing around full club representation.

The AFL should bring back a well crafted state of origin concept for both men and women that exploits its actual national imprint though.

 

[The_Wookie]

Thu #AFL update
Seven 520k Metro 370k,
Regional 150k
Broadcast only. BVOD not included

Metro 396Syd 11k Mel 225k Bri 49k Ade 69k Per 42k
BVOD included

Data: Oztam via Mediaspy

Friday, May 30 #AuSportTV
#AFL
Pies/Hawks
Seven 611k (BVOD 49k) reach 1.731m

 

[Bjo187]

Thu #AFL update
Seven 520k Metro 370k,
Regional 150k
Broadcast only. BVOD not included

Metro 396Syd 11k Mel 225k Bri 49k Ade 69k Per 42k
BVOD included

Data: Oztam via Mediaspy

Friday, May 30 #AuSportTV
#AFL
Pies/Hawks
Seven 611k (BVOD 49k) reach 1.731m

Do you have the reach for Thursday and Friday nights compared to last year? That's where the truth will lie in the migration from 7 to fox, coz this year there have been barely any close games on the Thursday and Friday night slots.

Last year there were plenty, so 'averages' would be significantly affected and not the most accurate reflection of viewing habits.

 

[Rabman]

That's a smashing, and it it didn't even involve a Victorian team. Hold dat.

 

[Bjo187]

That's a smashing, and it it didn't even involve a Victorian team. Hold dat.

View attachment 2336208

It's interesting, maybe we'll get more games with two interstate teams off those numbers.

It also shows the success you get when the lions are on the main channel into Brisbane. The reach figure doesn't matter of course, only 700k difference of people actually tuning in to one sport over the other. Apparently the nrl are winning the fta tv ratings this year when you exclude that number of actual eyeballs turning into the two sports though .

 

[bigleague]

That's a smashing, and it it didn't even involve a Victorian team. Hold dat.

View attachment 2336208

The nrl was a 50pt blowout

 

[bigleague]

It's interesting, maybe we'll get more games with two interstate teams off those numbers.

It also shows the success you get when the lions are on the main channel into Brisbane. The reach figure doesn't matter of course, only 700k difference of people actually tuning in to one sport over the other. Apparently the nrl are winning the fta tv ratings this year when you exclude that number of actual eyeballs turning into the two sports though .

Lions rated less than 49k on Brisbane fta on seven main channel last Thursday, while women’s origin rated the same on fta in Melbourne. The lions aren’t moving the needle. Reach favours longer programming, while average captures the number of viewers actually sticking around to watch the programme. Origin 1 had 5.5m reach FFS.

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

The nrl was a 50pt blowout

The reach shows it doesn’t matter, more still stuck around to watch it then the longer AFL match.

 

[Bjo187]

Lions rated less than 49k on Brisbane fta on seven main channel last Thursday, while women’s origin rated the same on fta in Melbourne. The lions aren’t moving the needle. Reach favours longer programming, while average captures the number of viewers actually sticking around to watch the programme. Origin 1 had 5.5m reach FFS.

Lol oh good another leaguie troll. Not even trying to hide it either.

 

[The Educator]

That's a smashing, and it it didn't even involve a Victorian team. Hold dat.

View attachment 2336208

This is fantastic numbers for the national competition. The competition will be in a great place the more the number of prime time games between non vic teams are proportionate to the share of those games in the fixture

 

[The Educator]

Lions rated less than 49k on Brisbane fta on seven main channel last Thursday, while women’s origin rated the same on fta in Melbourne. The lions aren’t moving the needle. Reach favours longer programming, while average captures the number of viewers actually sticking around to watch the programme. Origin 1 had 5.5m reach FFS.

This is so stupid

It is fair to say that viewer hours favours the longer game certainly for a single game (i would argue it is the best measure over the season though)

How does reach materially favour the longer game? If people are seeking out the game just to watch a bit of, the relative number of additional people would be somewhere between minor and negligible.

Average doesn't capture "the number of viewers actually sticking around to watch the programme". It works out the average people wathcing at any one time over the course of the programme. It materially advantages sports that go for less time when we know a lot of people only watch some proportion of a match.

Basic logic shows this. If someone watches 30 minutes of the NRL the show up as 0.25 in the average (assuming a 2 hour game). If someone watches 30 minutes of the AFL the show up as 0.166.

Looking at last nights numbers:

The 1.836M AFL viewers watched on average 68 minutes (38% of the match). The NRL's 1.185M viewers watched on average 51 minutes (42% of the match)

Obviously you are have neither the brain power or the self awareness to grasp it. Suggest you run along.....perhaps Run It Straight into a brick wall or something

 

[bigleague]

This is so stupid

It is fair to say that viewer hours favours the longer game certainly for a single game (i would argue it is the best measure over the season though)

How does reach materially favour the longer game? If people are seeking out the game just to watch a bit of, the relative number of additional people would be somewhere between minor and negligible.

Average doesn't capture "the number of viewers actually sticking around to watch the programme". It works out the average people wathcing at any one time over the course of the programme. It materially advantages sports that go for less time when we know a lot of people only watch some proportion of a match.

Basic logic shows this. If someone watches 30 minutes of the NRL the show up as 0.25 in the average (assuming a 2 hour game). If someone watches 30 minutes of the AFL the show up as 0.166.

Looking at last nights numbers:

The 1.836M AFL viewers watched on average 68 minutes (38% of the match). The NRL's 1.185M viewers watched on average 51 minutes (42% of the match)

Obviously you are have neither the brain power or the self awareness to grasp it. Suggest you run along.....perhaps Run It Straight into a brick wall or something

You don’t see the inherent contradiction that average favours shorter programming, but reach doesn’t favour longer programming? Whatever you have to tell yourself… ad buyers buy on average audience, they don’t buy on reach, because they don’t know what spots will spike. The whole reach thing has been elevated by fta to exaggerate their prominence in media releases, it’s all smoke & mirrors.

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

Whatever you have to tell yourself… ad buyers buy on average audience, they don’t buy on reach, because they don’t know what spots will spike. The whole reach thing has been elevated by fta to exaggerate their prominence in media releases, it’s all smoke & mirrors.

They might have to do what they do with cricket and break the game up.

 

[bigleague]

Lol oh good another leaguie troll. Not even trying to hide it either.

So that’s your contribution? But I’m the troll… nothing i said isn’t true, you just don’t like it.

 

[bigleague]

They might have to do what they do with cricket and break the game up.

It will happen at some point, we already see it with pre & post game, the problem is if there’s a blowout it leaves the network having to cover their arse somewhere else throughout the year.

 

[Bjo187]

So that’s your contribution? But I’m the troll… nothing i said isn’t true, you just don’t like it.

Go back to leaguie unlimited mate, get a life ffs, surely you have better things to do.

 

[The Educator]

You don’t see the inherent contradiction that average favours shorter programming, but reach doesn’t favour longer programming?

Reach negligibly favours a longer sporting event, average favours the shorter game by pretty much the percentage it is shorter.

The fact that you are assuming there has to be some symmetry shows a complete lack of logic.

Funnily enough, I actually identified the third measure "total viewing hours / minutes" as being particularly biased towards the longer game (at least when comparing one game. It is the best measure over a season IMO).

Reach is easily the least "biased" figure for comparing two sports of different lengths.

Whatever you have to tell yourself… ad buyers buy on average audience, they don’t buy on reach, because they don’t know what spots will spike.

The whole reach thing has been elevated by fta to exaggerate their prominence in media releases, it’s all smoke & mirrors.

Said from a position of ignorance.

And obviously completely at odds with the revealed evidence of the much bigger TV deal the AFL has.

Funnily enough a channel 7 exec said at the time (they shifted to having reach as the primary measure) that it better aligns with how advertisers buy spots.

This makes sense when you think about it. If they are selling a block of spots over several weeks, reach will tell them how many people they will get their advertisements in front of.

 

[Cmarsh]

You don’t see the inherent contradiction that average favours shorter programming, but reach doesn’t favour longer programming? Whatever you have to tell yourself… ad buyers buy on average audience, they don’t buy on reach, because they don’t know what spots will spike. The whole reach thing has been elevated by fta to exaggerate their prominence in media releases, it’s all smoke & mirrors.

The advantage the AFL has had is that they have alot more natural opportunities to show ads at goal breaks.

 

[bigleague]

The advantage the AFL has had is that they have alot more natural opportunities to show ads at goal breaks.

Definitely

 

[bigleague]

Reach negligibly favours a longer sporting event, average favours the shorter game by pretty much the percentage it is shorter.

The fact that you are assuming there has to be some symmetry shows a complete lack of logic.

Funnily enough, I actually identified the third measure "total viewing hours / minutes" as being particularly biased towards the longer game (at least when comparing one game. It is the best measure over a season IMO).

Reach is easily the least "biased" figure for comparing two sports of different lengths.






Said from a position of ignorance.

And obviously completely at odds with the revealed evidence of the much bigger TV deal the AFL has.

Funnily enough a channel 7 exec said at the time (they shifted to having reach as the primary measure) that it better aligns with how advertisers buy spots.

This makes sense when you think about it. If they are selling a block of spots over several weeks, reach will tell them how many people they will get their advertisements in front of.

Racing, golf, cricket all get huge reach numbers because they go all day, which means more opportunities for people to tune in and out of. it doesn’t mean the audience is engaged beyond the minute they are recorded as having watched. A network could throw a movie on every night and get over 1.2m reach while only recording an average audience of 200k because people didn’t actually stick around to watch. Yet they don’t… because ad buyers don’t buy by reach.

Seven, as part owner of OzTAM along with other fta networks, switched to reach because they want to inflate their audience in an increasingly fragmented market. Most ad buyers buy by average.

 

[bigleague]

Go back to leaguie unlimited mate, get a life ffs, surely you have better things to do.

Maybe you should? All you seem to do is post about the nrl.