Play Nice The Reach is King thread

[The Educator]

Maybe it's a ploy to the advertisers.

"If I was going to buy a grand total of one advertising slot on TV at random throughout the course of the entire year on either the AFL or NRL, which would likely get me more viewers?"

By some measurements the greater number might technically be the NRL. But it's a pointless question to ask!

Interestingly advertisers preferences was given as the reason for the shift to reach. This goes to your diminishing returns point. Most advertisers would be buying blocks of adds over several weeks of games (if not the whole season). It makes sense that reach would be more important for these considerations

 

[le dominateur]

On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Head to head clashes the AFL is way ahead.

 

[The Educator]

On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Head to head clashes the AFL is way ahead.

Truly astonishing that channel 7 would prefer the more relevant stat that more accurately reveals the level of AFL dominance!

 

[PenrithGWS]

I'm not sure if Vlandys knows he is talking shit or actually believes what he is saying.

Either way he is good fr the NRL.

 

[Bjo187]

I'm not sure if Vlandys knows he is talking s**t or actually believes what he is saying.

Either way he is good fr the NRL.

He is a promoter, most people believe it coz they only see the headline and news.ltd give him a platform and back him in, never call out his b.s.

It works well for their sport. If only we had an administrator promoting our sport. Not openly lying like Vlandy's does, but at least promoting the AFL's national dominances. It gives the competition free media and promotion and would be good for the game.

 

[The Educator]

He is a promoter, most people believe it coz they only see the headline and news.ltd give him a platform and back him in, never call out his b.s.

It works well for their sport. If only we had an administrator promoting our sport. Not openly lying like Vlandy's does, but at least promoting the AFL's national dominances. It gives the competition free media and promotion and would be good for the game.

Actually I think there is something to be said for not being cocky and hubristic particularly when you are the dominant sport (eg speak softly and carry a big stick).....perhaps a different scenario when you are numero dos but I also think that Vlandys isn't doing much that is sustainable for the NRL.

 

[Bjo187]

Actually I think there is something to be said for not being cocky and hubristic particularly when you are the dominant sport (eg speak softly and carry a big stick).....perhaps a different scenario when you are numero dos but I also think that Vlandys isn't doing much that is sustainable for the NRL.

I wouldn't address them directly, but subtlety highlight the crowds, tv ratings etc. Talking up the sport makes it grow even bigger. Hopefully Vlandy's has left the door open in QLD, if the new stadium goes ahead, that's even more of a boost to afl in Brisbane.

On another note, it's interesting to see this. People dancing around the fact the afl gets more viewers by still quoting the old formula. I think over time this rhetoric will change. I've always found it funny the nrl and league fans propagate they are being ripped off for tv money, when as I've always said, the tv networks aren't stupid, they know the true amount of eyeballs and value of both sports, so the money is likely accurate. The AFL should be getting about 1/3rd more, which they will be getting come next year.

NRL vs AFL: Who won TV ratings for the opening round?

The country’s two biggest football codes launched their 2024 seasons in extravagant fashion – the rugby league gambled in glitzy Vegas, while AFL embraced new territory with the first ever Sydney season opener.Both codes enjoyed unorthodox opening rounds, with the NRL splitting theirs across two...

mumbrella.com.au

 

[weewilly]

I'm not sure if Vlandys knows he is talking s**t or actually believes what he is saying.

Either way he is good fr the NRL.

All charlatans like bogan media tart V'Landy's know that they are spinning +++ + but they don't let that get in the way of the truth.

I blame the fawning Sydney sports media as well inc Fox Sports for falling for his half truths and out and out lies.

As master Nazi propagandist Goebels allegedly once said "Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth”

 

[Angus Young]

 

[The Educator]

I've worked out the perfect analogy

It is like he has a smaller penis by both length and girth but it is slightly relatively bigger in ratio to his tiny hands and so he is gloating to the world about that metric

Seriously why would you be posting a table that includes viewer minutes, reach and game length and claim victory?

 

[manicmagpie]

I've worked out the perfect analogy

It is like he has a smaller penis by both length and girth but it is slightly relatively bigger in ratio to his tiny hands and so he is gloating to the world about that metric

Seriously why would you be posting a table that includes viewer minutes, reach and game length and claim victory?

It's the ultimate win-win as both codes get exactly what they most desire.

The AFL get to reach more people for longer which will deliver them an actual better outcome for growth of the game and bigger media rights deals.

The NRL get a figure they can boast about in legacy and social media.

 

[The Educator]

It's the ultimate win-win as both codes get exactly what they most desire.

The AFL get to reach more people for longer which will deliver them an actual better outcome for growth of the game and bigger media rights deals.

The NRL get a figure they can boast about in legacy and social media.

Yeah I reckon the problem for them though is that metric only really works when you can't see the other metrics that put it into context (i.e highlight it is dumb to use averages to compare sports of different lengths)

 

[Angus Young]

I've worked out the perfect analogy

It is like he has a smaller penis by both length and girth but it is slightly relatively bigger in ratio to his tiny hands and so he is gloating to the world about that metric

Seriously why would you be posting a table that includes viewer minutes, reach and game length and claim victory?

But you see the propaganda machine works.

The common man has no chance of knowing the truth.

 

[The Educator]

 

[Bjo187]

View attachment 1939858

It's compelling really. I would reorder it to put the bvod audience a few columns back where it belongs, it's only habit and stubbornness as to why the so called tv experts keep ramming this old stat down our throats.

It's actually funny, for years I pointed out that the tv networks know the true viewer numbers and value of each sport and that's why they pay 1/3rd more for the AFL tv rights. It just proves they were digging deeper and knew information like this all along and what the tv networks truly value (ie. Amount of people reached and the hours of content being consumed, instead of the same league fan watching all 8 stand alone games every weekend by themselves and the averages metric misleadingly inflating the optics of popularity).

 

[threenewpadlocks]

It's compelling really. I would reorder it to put the bvod audience a few columns back where it belongs, it's only habit and stubbornness as to why the so called tv experts keep ramming this old stat down our throats.

It's actually funny, for years I pointed out that the tv networks know the true viewer numbers and value of each sport and that's why they pay 1/3rd more for the AFL tv rights. It just proves they were digging deeper and knew information like this all along and what the tv networks truly value (ie. Amount of people reached and the hours of content being consumed, instead of the same league fan watching all 8 stand alone games every weekend by themselves and the averages metric misleadingly inflating the optics of popularity).

Not entirely relevant for Fox who generates revenue mainly through selling of subcriptions.

Though it should be noted the FTA/Fox split between the two codes is fundamentally different to how the two companies sell their media deals. NRL gets more money by giving more exclusivity to Fox but presumably to the detriment of the longer-term health of the sport itsefl

 

[Bjo187]

I found this interesting and somewhat good news. The front bar is national on the main channel everywhere now and is getting reasonably good ratings. These idiots still use averages, which I think is only accurate for tv shows that aren't of the flick on, flick off nature. But still showing a good national audience and the comments are interesting.

Front Bar gamble paying off for Seven | TV Tonight

Seven show is building an audience through Live TV and a national AFL approach. ABC's The Weekly still wins the slot.

tvtonight.com.au

 

[weewilly]

I found this interesting and somewhat good news. The front bar is national on the main channel everywhere now and is getting reasonably good ratings. These idiots still use averages, which I think is only accurate for tv shows that aren't of the flick on, flick off nature. But still showing a good national audience and the comments are interesting.

Front Bar gamble paying off for Seven | TV Tonight

Seven show is building an audience through Live TV and a national AFL approach. ABC's The Weekly still wins the slot.

tvtonight.com.au

Yep well done to the Seven network in having the guts to run the The Front Bar in prime time in what is usually a hostile Sydney market!

 

[The Educator]

Just for the benefit of people wanting to decipher "what do these ratings figures mean when making comparisons between sports?" I provide Hunter Fujak's 2014 academic paper for your consideration

Evaluating Broadcast Strategy within Australian Football

The central aim this paper is to evaluate the broadcast strategies of Australia's two leading commercial sports, the Australian Football League (AFL) and the Na

papers.ssrn.com

Specifically....

Evaluating the performance of FTA broadcasters and their selection of sport programmingcan be a difficult process as ratings, whilst very important, are not the only factor that needsto be evaluated (Fujak, 2012). Factors such as ‘spill over’ into other content as well as contribution to the network ‘brand’ have been shown to be important considerations in bidding for sports content (Solberg & Gratton, 2008). The FTA performance of the AFL andNRL within this discussion however is centred on the quantitative evaluation of their ratings during the aforementioned period. Because AFL and NRL matches hold different broadcast durations (three hours compared to two hours), there is a need to standardise each codes ratings into a common unit to allow for fair comparison. This is achieved through analysis of not only ratings but also duration, henceforth defined as ‘viewing hours’.

 

[The Educator]

Just for the benefit of people wanting to decipher "what do these ratings figures mean when making comparisons between sports?" I provide Hunter Fujak's 2014 academic paper for your consideration

Evaluating Broadcast Strategy within Australian Football

The central aim this paper is to evaluate the broadcast strategies of Australia's two leading commercial sports, the Australian Football League (AFL) and the Na

papers.ssrn.com

Specifically....

OK, given this has been moved here now, let us acknowledge that this is an academic paper that clearly identifies:

Because AFL and NRL matches hold different broadcast durations (three hours compared to two hours), there is a need to standardise each codes ratings into a common unit to allow for fair comparison.

It doesn't even bother to elaborate more as presumably it assumes the reader can apply insights from grade 2 maths

Also note that this is using volume rather than reach so doesn't really belong here given the cringeworthy name this thread was given

 

[threenewpadlocks]

OK, given this has been moved here now, let us acknowledge that this is an academic paper that clearly identifies:



It doesn't even bother to elaborate more as presumably it assumes the reader can apply insights from grade 2 maths

Also note that this is using volume rather than reach so doesn't really belong here given the cringeworthy name this thread was given

We can quite clearly see when both codes are on the same time with people watching the same minutes (ie, the minutes between 8.00pm and 8.10pm on a standard Friday Night or whatever), more people are watching the AFL.

Like you said, Grade 2 Maths, Grade 2 common sense.

I've made the dumb point before that the AFL could award 2 premiership points instead of 4 for the winner of each half of football (so make one game two quarters instead of four), make zero changes to how the game is broadcast or presented or organised whatsoever (like the banners and the players run out the same way), claim that each half of football is now "another game", and then double their ratings averages from 140 million to 280 million. It's a thought experiment that makes you realise how inadequate the comparison of accumulated averages is, for any meaningful understanding of the nature of broadcast viewership of each sport. The accumulated averages does answer the question "how many times on average was a whole match broadcast viewed", but as you point out, a grade 2 student would understand that that questoin is not a meaningful question.

In fact it is of slight coincidence that both sports even play a similar number of broadcast games (NRL through more rounds, AFL through more teams) to make it even possible. If the difference between total matches played was even more, people would be pointing that out, as in the case in my experiment when the AFL would play over 400 games in a season.

 

[Bjo187]

I think I read in a John Ralph article the other day AFL games are consumed at a 40 percent higher content consumed rate than the NRL each season. I know it's more per individual game, but thinking about it in that context of a whole seasons worth, it seems a huge difference.

What's interesting is, if you assume the viewership of both sports is roughly the same (for arguments sake, not using v'landy's secret herbs and spices method), the AFL should be getting roughly 40 percent more tv money, coz it provides 40 percent more content. State of origin being huge and 3 games might bring it back a bit and the fact the NRL put more of the games in prime time with no overlap might bring it back a bit more too.

Effectively the difference in broadcast money should be in that 30 to 40 percent range, even if the ratings were the same. Which actually reflects the 2025 tv deal, of the NRL about 400 mill to the AFL about 640 mill.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

I think I read in a John Ralph article the other day AFL games are consumed at a 40 percent higher content consumed rate than the NRL each season. I know it's more per individual game, but thinking about it in that context of a whole seasons worth, it seems a huge difference.

What's interesting is, if you assume the viewership of both sports is roughly the same (for arguments sake, not using v'landy's secret herbs and spices method), the AFL should be getting roughly 40 percent more tv money, coz it provides 40 percent more content. State of origin being huge and 3 games might bring it back a bit and the fact the NRL put more of the games in prime time with no overlap might bring it back a bit more too.

Effectively the difference in broadcast money should be in that 30 to 40 percent range, even if the ratings were the same. Which actually reflects the 2025 tv deal, of the NRL about 400 mill to the AFL about 640 mill.

Worth noting that AFL should be worth less because a higher proportion of their fans are in bad time zones, and even though a Perthite has an interest in a Sunday 1.10 game, they're less likely to watch it at 11.10am on a Sunday for example.

On the other hand, AFL fans' being richer and concentrated more in the six major cities compared to NRL fans having more regional support (and therefore a fewer range of relevant products advertised to them) means NRL rights are worth less too.

 

[The Educator]

This thread should be called "'aggregated' average is the jester"....I know it has been named as it is due to the same world class pettiness reflected in other thread names the rubbed someone up the wrong way but it actually isn't reflective of the logic that has been exiled from the main ratings threads like a heretic in the medieval papal states....

....I reckon reach is the best readily available comparator when comparing finals particularly but perhaps standalone prime time games as "volume" biases to the AFL given the longer length

...however over the season volume is the best over the course of a round or season given (given similar rounds) as the average AFL fan is likely to watch a similar amount of game time over a given weekend to the average NRL fan