Admin, Finance, Members, Ratings, Crowds, Policies - its the 2016 AFL v NRL v ARU v FFA v BBL thread

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Not really, but then again not many people do.

A city V city and national foxtel ratings comparison is a pretty good guide.

Easily pleased, easily mislead?

Why no national FTA ? Here is some of your best work: AFL 902k NRL 656k

Do you realise people are easily mislead? You?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Easily pleased, easily mislead?

Why no national FTA ? Here is some of your best work: AFL 902k NRL 656k

Do you realise people are easily mislead? You?

Theres nothing wrong with comparing the 5 city metro averages or the foxtel averages - especially now that all NRL games are on Fox. Theres nothing misleading about it at all. It is what it is - Metro v Metro - and on that basis the AFL killed the NRL in metro 5 city ratings.

National FTA just isnt possible to compare unless the ratings for AFL games are published, which they generally arent for reasons already discussed. It doesnt invalidate that 5 city metro figures in any way. Nor does it make the Fox national figures irrelevant. (combining the two is a no no without regional fta though)
 
Easily pleased, easily mislead?

Why no national FTA ? Here is some of your best work: AFL 902k NRL 656k

Do you realise people are easily mislead? You?

How am I easily mislead ?, quite clearly it is ratings from 5 cities and Foxtel nationally.

I am going to attempt to post like you - ..... Cheerleader, easily mislead, relevance etc

You really sound like you have chip on your shoulder !
 
Theres nothing wrong with comparing the 5 city metro averages or the foxtel averages - especially now that all NRL games are on Fox. Theres nothing misleading about it at all. It is what it is - Metro v Metro - and on that basis the AFL killed the NRL in metro 5 city ratings.

National FTA just isnt possible to compare unless the ratings for AFL games are published, which they generally arent for reasons already discussed. It doesnt invalidate that 5 city metro figures in any way. Nor does it make the Fox national figures irrelevant. (combining the two is a no no without regional fta though)

EVEN you know why a capital city comparison when totalled is slanted .... & as the munchies demonstrated these numbers are added together, are posted and are believed to mean something - see the muncher AFL 902k NRL 656k .

All you need in this life is ignorance and confidence; then success is sure. ”

http://www.thinktv.com.au/media/THINK_TV_Commercial_TV_Viewing_Report.pdf
 
Last edited:
How am I easily mislead ?, quite clearly it is ratings from 5 cities and Foxtel nationally.

I am going to attempt to post like you - ..... Cheerleader, easily mislead, relevance etc

You really sound like you have chip on your shoulder !

So given you claim to know the subject, you have ignored the Northern NSW market, a NRL stronghold but include smaller TV markets in Perth & Adelaide - then you add your chosen numbers WHY? Cheerleader, draw your own conclusion. Easily mislead or deliberately misleading: more likely the former.

As I posted when querying the status of the changes posted by wookie:
That's (sic) for clarifying that, FWIW I will continue to ignore them as a worthwhile measure AFL vis-a-vis NRL ratings nationally.

A chip on my shoulder - alternatively you look in the mirror !!
 
You, relevance, capital cities and national Foxtel, mirror, easily please, mislead, ignorant, no- you look in mirror.

Oh and cheerleader of the highest brigade - sorry did I mention relevance ?
 
quite right. value of tv rights is probably a truer reflection of the popularity/ reach of various codes. Although evn then not the complete story. the AFL could probably get a big increase if they made a number of concessions to media rights holders, as some of its competitors have wisely already done.
AFL has made plenty of concessions to tv rights holders in recent years. The 3:15 start on a Sunday, staggered times for Saturday and Sunday to allow Fox Footy to go from one game straight into another, moved the start of Friday night games back to 7:50pm so Ch7 could run a pre-game talk fest with more ads. Not sure where you think they haven't bowed to tv rights partners, the only thing they haven't done is a night GF and that keeps getting raised as a discussion point by Ch7 to suit their needs no-one else. If anyone doesn't think that Ch7 gets input into who plays Friday & Saturday nights they are kidding themselves.

Would love to know what else the AFL could do for tv rights holders.

NRL has actually taken some things away from the tv partners, they no longer do a fixture start time schedule 6 weeks ahead instead do a full season fixture, the compensation was for Thursday night matches.
 
AFL has made plenty of concessions to tv rights holders in recent years. The 3:15 start on a Sunday, staggered times for Saturday and Sunday to allow Fox Footy to go from one game straight into another, moved the start of Friday night games back to 7:50pm so Ch7 could run a pre-game talk fest with more ads. Not sure where you think they haven't bowed to tv rights partners, the only thing they haven't done is a night GF and that keeps getting raised as a discussion point by Ch7 to suit their needs no-one else. If anyone doesn't think that Ch7 gets input into who plays Friday & Saturday nights they are kidding themselves.

Would love to know what else the AFL could do for tv rights holders.

NRL has actually taken some things away from the tv partners, they no longer do a fixture start time schedule 6 weeks ahead instead do a full season fixture, the compensation was for Thursday night matches.

So the NRL took something away and them gave them something - so in fact it is a trade off rather than taking things away as you have stated.

Good friday springs to mind.

Found any stats yet that says soccer has more kids playing in the Southern states than play footy and precisely that the figure is skewed 70/30 in soccers way at under 12 as you have stated - i am guessing not !
 
Not really, but then again not many people do.

A city V city and national foxtel ratings comparison is a pretty good guide.
Actually it is a lousy guide.

Regional NSW and Queensland has much stronger support for NRL than Brisbane or Sydney as a percentage of population. When you look at this and population size you quickly realise why the numbers using just major cities is flawed.

Lets look at major population centres that aren't included and see if NRL or AFL

Gold Coast pop. 620k - NRL
Hunter Valley 450k - NRL
Canberra 420k - NRL/AFL 60/40
Tasmania 400k - AFL
Wollongong-South Coast - 375k NRL
Sunshine Coast 300k - NRL
Geelong Region 300k - AFL
Townsville 200k - NRL
Cairns 150k - NRL/AFL 60/40
Darwin 150k - AFL
Toowoomba 120k - NRL
Bendigo 100k - AFL
Ballarat 100k - AFL
Albury Wodonga 90k - NRL/AFL 33/66

So to break that down we aren't looking at population bases of the following
NRL - 2.5m = Brisbane
AFL - 1.3m = Adelaide

That does make a sizeable difference in reporting when viewing number for both codes are higher per percentage of population than metro numbers.
 
So the NRL took something away and them gave them something - so in fact it is a trade off rather than taking things away as you have stated.

Good friday springs to mind.

Found any stats yet that says soccer has more kids playing in the Southern states than play footy and precisely that the figure is skewed 70/30 in soccers way at under 12 as you have stated - i am guessing not !
Ok, so we have two things, GF and Good Friday. That's it.

Ch9 doesn't like the international weekend that they have where there are no NRL games and want it moved to October.

As for the junior numbers I'm trying to get registered club numbers in the AFL system, not Auskick.
 
Actually it is a lousy guide.

Regional NSW and Queensland has much stronger support for NRL than Brisbane or Sydney as a percentage of population. When you look at this and population size you quickly realise why the numbers using just major cities is flawed.

Lets look at major population centres that aren't included and see if NRL or AFL

Gold Coast pop. 620k - NRL
Hunter Valley 450k - NRL
Canberra 420k - NRL/AFL 60/40
Tasmania 400k - AFL
Wollongong-South Coast - 375k NRL
Sunshine Coast 300k - NRL
Geelong Region 300k - AFL
Townsville 200k - NRL
Cairns 150k - NRL/AFL 60/40
Darwin 150k - AFL
Toowoomba 120k - NRL
Bendigo 100k - AFL
Ballarat 100k - AFL
Albury Wodonga 90k - NRL/AFL 33/66

So to break that down we aren't looking at population bases of the following
NRL - 2.5m = Brisbane
AFL - 1.3m = Adelaide

That does make a sizeable difference in reporting when viewing number for both codes are higher per percentage of population than metro numbers.


LOL, if mediaweek which i quoted earlier uses Oztam, the GC, Sunshine coast and nearly all the way out to Kingaroy and Warwick and North to Noosa is included in metro ratings.

The same goes for other cities

How about answering questions that are specifically put to you.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Ok, so we have two things, GF and Good Friday. That's it.

Ch9 doesn't like the international weekend that they have where there are no NRL games and want it moved to October.

As for the junior numbers I'm trying to get registered club numbers in the AFL system, not Auskick.

looks like you have been trying for years - and yet :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
LOL, if mediaweek which i quoted earlier uses Oztam, the GC, Sunshine coast and nearly all the way out to Kingaroy and Warwick and North to Noosa is included in metro ratings.

The same goes for other cities

How about answering questions that are specifically put to you.
The gold coast includes metro and country ratings
 
Actually it is a lousy guide.

Regional NSW and Queensland has much stronger support for NRL than Brisbane or Sydney as a percentage of population. When you look at this and population size you quickly realise why the numbers using just major cities is flawed.

Lets look at major population centres that aren't included and see if NRL or AFL

Gold Coast pop. 620k - NRL
Hunter Valley 450k - NRL
Canberra 420k - NRL/AFL 60/40
Tasmania 400k - AFL
Wollongong-South Coast - 375k NRL
Sunshine Coast 300k - NRL
Geelong Region 300k - AFL
Townsville 200k - NRL
Cairns 150k - NRL/AFL 60/40
Darwin 150k - AFL
Toowoomba 120k - NRL
Bendigo 100k - AFL
Ballarat 100k - AFL
Albury Wodonga 90k - NRL/AFL 33/66

So to break that down we aren't looking at population bases of the following
NRL - 2.5m = Brisbane
AFL - 1.3m = Adelaide

That does make a sizeable difference in reporting when viewing number for both codes are higher per percentage of population than metro numbers.
and yet, and yet
 
The numbers are there, its just that those who collate them sell them, they don't give them away ... remember the Grand Final numbers, the real ones get out eventually.

See this thinktv link p15 and read the small print stating how it is collated - apology for my limitations posting the page.
http://www.thinktv.com.au/media/THINK_TV_Commercial_TV_Viewing_Report.pdf
I am not actually sure that is more accurate. My understanding is part of the issue is double counting. Some areas show up in both Metro and regional numbers. All it seems they have done is taken total Metro figures, and added total aggregate regional figures.

If the issue is how they are collected, you can collate all you want, they are still rubbery.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk
 
I am not actually sure that is more accurate. My understanding is part of the issue is double counting. Some areas show up in both Metro and regional numbers. All it seems they have done is taken total Metro figures, and added total aggregate regional figures.

If the issue is how they are collected, you can collate all you want, they are still rubbery.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

Can you clarify the double counting issue for me?

I don't believe for one second the big media buyers don't have the best info available & would not accept something as easily fixable as double counting.

My issue is with comparing the codes nationally whilst ignoring the 4th biggest TV market, as I replied to Wookie when he posted details of changes to the ratings procedures.
 
It appears to me that besides saturdays when there is no FTA RL coverage that the RL ratings have tended to cannibalise each other, just wondering if we compare last years FTA against this years FTA and fox combined if there is much difference on thursday and friday night.

Not going to reproduce the whole season, but last thursdays and friday is a pretty good pointer.

Thursday - NRL #FoxSports #NRLRoostersBroncos 165k
NRLRoostersBroncos Nine 369k (Syd 193k Bri 177k) Gem 34k (Mel 20k Ade 7k Per 7k)

Fri TV #NRL #FoxSports #NRLBulldogsDragons Nine 389k (Syd 260k Bri 129k) Gem 20k (Mel 12k Ade 3k Per 5k)
#NRLBulldogsDragons 175k fox

They seem very soft to me.
 
Can you clarify the double counting issue for me?

I don't believe for one second the big media buyers don't have the best info available & would not accept something as easily fixable as double counting.

My issue is with comparing the codes nationally whilst ignoring the 4th biggest TV market, as I replied to Wookie when he posted details of changes to the ratings procedures.
I am no expert, and admit I may be wildly wrong, but my understanding was some areas considered within Metro areas for marketing purposes, and polled for Metro ratings numbers, are also considered regional areas and polled for regional ratings numbers.

Which makes sense in a way, there is not a clear distinction between outer Metro and regional. The company looking at regional reach for an advertising campaign, and the company looking at a Metro campaign will in some areas be targeting the same people. It makes some sense that ratings companies present these viewers in both sets of numbers, as they are of value to both sets of customer.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk
 
Can you clarify the double counting issue for me?

I don't believe for one second the big media buyers don't have the best info available & would not accept something as easily fixable as double counting.

My issue is with comparing the codes nationally whilst ignoring the 4th biggest TV market, as I replied to Wookie when he posted details of changes to the ratings procedures.
Perhaps a better explanation is to look at Mandurah in WA (I have no idea if it is double counted). It is clearly Metro, the southern most area of Perth, and any marketing campaign aimed at Perth has to include Mandurah. However it is also clearly regional, almost as close to Bunbury as the centre of Perth, it gets regional Radio, and TV, and has a regional feel and Outlook. If you are targeting the major regional areas of Perth, you have to include it.

The regional customers are looking for Mandurah figures, but so are Metro customers, what to do?

You put them in both.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk
 
Perhaps a better explanation is to look at Mandurah in WA (I have no idea if it is double counted). It is clearly Metro, the southern most area of Perth, and any marketing campaign aimed at Perth has to include Mandurah. However it is also clearly regional, almost as close to Bunbury as the centre of Perth, it gets regional Radio, and TV, and has a regional feel and Outlook. If you are targeting the major regional areas of Perth, you have to include it.

The regional customers are looking for Mandurah figures, but so are Metro customers, what to do?

You put them in both.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

6pr which I do admit I listen to basically cuts out as you get to Mandurah, not exactly any proof but I do get what you are saying
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top