Talking Footy

Topper wrote:

You are making no sense, enarelle, unless your post is actually supporting the AFL for a change.

cos789 wrote:

Topper wrote:

You are making no sense, enarelle, unless your post is actually supporting the AFL for a change.

Makes absolutely no sense to me either.
Like Parafeel promoting Kevin Sheedy on his signature - I love it.
If there is one guying winning the West for AFL - it's him and Parafeel is promoting him.
You couldn't get much dumber than that could you!

cos789 wrote:

cos789 wrote:

Topper wrote:

You are making no sense, enarelle, unless your post is actually supporting the AFL for a change.

Makes absolutely no sense to me either.
Like Parafeel promoting Kevin Sheedy on his signature - I love it.
If there is one guying winning the West for AFL - it's him and Parafeel is promoting him.
You couldn't get much dumber than that could you!

Yet another thread where our rl friends have conceded defeat and buried their heads in the sand.

enarelle wrote:

Topper the fact that you think I make no sense gives me great comfort.However, I must admit I am not quite supporting the AFL

cos789 wrote:

Attendances are real quantities and they can reinforce concepts like ratings and the TV products by having full stadia. Savvy people know they are only a guide and should be taken with a grain of salt. Nielson and Oztam both decry each other's product as rubbish. Ratings don't show the number of people viewing. They are a sample, where one box can = 20k viewers and it relies on the hugely unreliable human being to be accurate. It cannot distinguish between televisions turned on and left running in the background and people fervently watching a program and digesting it's content. Increasing, I have noticed rl viewers are turning on the sets but not tuning into the game's content.With betting becoming more prominent they becoming more "result" only conscious. Marketing people know these things and use them when selling time to clients or clients themselves know these things and don't accept a ratings figure as the total end. But since next year AFL will have the extra game per round and every game live and commercial free on Fox then there relative position should improve greatly.

ParraEelsNRL wrote:

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showpost. ... tcount=139

cos789 wrote:

Attendances are real quantities and they can reinforce concepts like ratings and the TV products by having full stadia. Savvy people know they are only a guide and should be taken with a grain of salt. Nielson and Oztam both decry each other's product as rubbish. Ratings don't show the number of people viewing. They are a sample, where one box can = 20k viewers and it relies on the hugely unreliable human being to be accurate. It cannot distinguish between televisions turned on and left running in the background and people fervently watching a program and digesting it's content. Increasing, I have noticed rl viewers are turning on the sets but not tuning into the game's content.With betting becoming more prominent they becoming more "result" only conscious. Marketing people know these things and use them when selling time to clients or clients themselves know these things and don't accept a ratings figure as the total end. But since next year AFL will have the extra game per round and every game live and commercial free on Fox then there relative position should improve greatly.

****** alert.

Hey cuzzy, do you look through peoples window in the early hours of the morning when Rugby League is shown in your part of the world to see if people are watching?


How farking paranoid is that?

cos789 wrote:

As usual Parafeel you lose.
You've thrown in the towel and gone off to la la land.
As usual you have nothing remotely sensible to say to disguise the fact you have nothing sensible to say to help your cause which gets weaker everytime you have nothing remotely sensible to say and abuse people.
Why don't you come back when you've sobered up.
I know you like that home brew of yours.!