Xman wrote:More raiderdave denial. They were the figures shown in the thread, which had nothing to do with an argument about the swans, so the sample was random.Raiderdave wrote:Xman wrote:Jeeps youre a liarRaiderdave wrote:ah ... no wankerXman wrote:A one off. They had plenty of ratings in the low 20s with no concurrent foxtel ratingsRaiderdave wrote:NRLCrap1 wrote:Dave! 60K? Bullshit.
a bet cockhead ?
if & when you finally find your testicles
you know where I am
those were NRL games not involving the Storm on FTA in Melbourne
the FTA games the Storm played rated much ... much higher then that .... averaging 60K for 2013
about as well as the Swines did in Sydney with pay added![]()
that's with both sides the defending premiers
but... after just 2 years of regular broadcasts for the Storm In Melbourne .... compared to 30 years for the Swines in Sydney![]()
wow
just wow![]()
![]()
![]()
:_<> :_<> :_<> :_<> :_<>
viewtopic.php?f=43&t=3759
This thread shows some of the swans ratings, without foxtel, were 65,57,70, 95....the Stom werent near this on average, let alone adding foxtel
jeeps you're a wanker![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
:_<> :_<> :_<>
4 above 60K
& 18 well below it ... even with pay![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
:_<> :_<> :_<>
& doesn't even show any Storm ratings you complete dick![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
when will the lies stop with fumblers![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Where are these storm ratings?
4 over fuckwit
18 under... well... under
end of
