Talking Footy

Xman wrote:

pussycat wrote:

According to your AFL website site, Xman. Your regionals were less than 30%, based on Anzac Day figures.

1029k FTA metro and 358k regiona FTA.

therefore the regional audience was 34.8% or over 1/3rd of the metro audience.

piesman2011 wrote:

Xman wrote:

pussycat wrote:

According to your AFL website site, Xman. Your regionals were less than 30%, based on Anzac Day figures.

1029k FTA metro and 358k regiona FTA.

therefore the regional audience was 34.8% or over 1/3rd of the metro audience.

Sorry X man this is not quite right 358K of a total audience of 1387K = 25.8% which is about the AFL average. It is however a very big figure given the simulcast

Xman wrote:

piesman2011 wrote:

Xman wrote:

1029k FTA metro and 358k regiona FTA.

therefore the regional audience was 34.8% or over 1/3rd of the metro audience.

Sorry X man this is not quite right 358K of a total audience of 1387K = 25.8% which is about the AFL average. It is however a very big figure given the simulcast

No, youre including ptv. This is a calculation showing FTA regional ratings as a percentage of metro FTA ratings. The numbers are usually about 1/3rd. Foxtel is additional to these numbers.

piesman2011 wrote:

Xman wrote:

piesman2011 wrote:

Sorry X man this is not quite right 358K of a total audience of 1387K = 25.8% which is about the AFL average. It is however a very big figure given the simulcast

No, youre including ptv. This is a calculation showing FTA regional ratings as a percentage of metro FTA ratings. The numbers are usually about 1/3rd. Foxtel is additional to these numbers.

I added metro to regional and then worked out the percentage that was regional. reread my late edit. I understand what you are saying howeever.

Xman wrote:

piesman2011 wrote:

Xman wrote:

No, youre including ptv. This is a calculation showing FTA regional ratings as a percentage of metro FTA ratings. The numbers are usually about 1/3rd. Foxtel is additional to these numbers.

I added metro to regional and then worked out the percentage that was regional. reread my late edit. I understand what you are saying howeever.

Ahh I see. I wasnt trying to show what percentage the regional audience is of the total.

Its essentially a formula that allows us to estimate the total and regional figures from just the metro figures.

What I'm not sure of is if these regional figures include WA and TAS which are not quoted by thinkTV, a common site used by RL fans

Xman wrote:

piesman2011 wrote:

Xman wrote:

No, youre including ptv. This is a calculation showing FTA regional ratings as a percentage of metro FTA ratings. The numbers are usually about 1/3rd. Foxtel is additional to these numbers.

I added metro to regional and then worked out the percentage that was regional. reread my late edit. I understand what you are saying howeever.

Ahh I see. I wasnt trying to show what percentage the regional audience is of the total.

Its essentially a formula that allows us to estimate the total and regional figures from just the metro figures.

What I'm not sure of is if these regional figures include WA and TAS which are not quoted by thinkTV, a common site used by RL fans

pussycat wrote:

Xman wrote:

The AFLs highest Paytv rating was about 270k last year.

Already after 4 rounds they've rated over 300k three times! 2 of the 4 saturday nights have had concurrent foxtel games which have rated over 300k when added together.

They are smashing last years foxtel ratings for highest figures and totals (of course). No doubt this will grow each year when people see the value of live games in hd. Decent coverage on foxtel is new to AFL fans and it will still be catching on.

Nrl on PTV must also be improving at a similar rate (from a much larger base) because the numer of AFL matches in the top 30 is very similar to that of years gone by.

Yahoooo wrote:

pussycat wrote:

Xman wrote:

The AFLs highest Paytv rating was about 270k last year.

Already after 4 rounds they've rated over 300k three times! 2 of the 4 saturday nights have had concurrent foxtel games which have rated over 300k when added together.

They are smashing last years foxtel ratings for highest figures and totals (of course). No doubt this will grow each year when people see the value of live games in hd. Decent coverage on foxtel is new to AFL fans and it will still be catching on.

Nrl on PTV must also be improving at a similar rate (from a much larger base) because the numer of AFL matches in the top 30 is very similar to that of years gone by.

Four rounds of AFL vs 8? Of nrl.

piesman2011 wrote:

What I found interesting about the AFL ANZAC game was that it was a 5 hour broadcast on C7 that averaged more then 1 million FTA viewers metro. It would have had 3-4 times the amount of advertising then say a NRL SOO or the NRL Grand final. This could mean from a purely monetary point of view that the AFL ANZAC game could be worth more then a single SOO or maybe even the NRL grand final due to all of the advertising revenue generated. Even with an SOO getting 3.2 million viewers nationally (it that right?) the AFL ANZAC game getting about 1.3 million FTA nationally would be worth about the same as an SOO generating 3.9-5.2 million (3-4 times the advertising space). That was just the FTA component. Add to that the 340,000 or so who watched it on Fox and this game was a big pay day for all. Yeah I know this was an extreme view in the favour of the AFL but I thought I would play with it a little.

eelofwest wrote:

piesman2011 wrote:

What I found interesting about the AFL ANZAC game was that it was a 5 hour broadcast on C7 that averaged more then 1 million FTA viewers metro. It would have had 3-4 times the amount of advertising then say a NRL SOO or the NRL Grand final. This could mean from a purely monetary point of view that the AFL ANZAC game could be worth more then a single SOO or maybe even the NRL grand final due to all of the advertising revenue generated. Even with an SOO getting 3.2 million viewers nationally (it that right?) the AFL ANZAC game getting about 1.3 million FTA nationally would be worth about the same as an SOO generating 3.9-5.2 million (3-4 times the advertising space). That was just the FTA component. Add to that the 340,000 or so who watched it on Fox and this game was a big pay day for all. Yeah I know this was an extreme view in the favour of the AFL but I thought I would play with it a little.

Were did you get 1.3mill fta nationally from?
it was 1030.000 FTA for the Anzac Test.

Xman wrote:

pussycat wrote:

Quiet the revere CH7 and the other networks will be desperate to invest in things that make money

What? Ratings are what makes money. We both know which code rates better, and for longer.

This report will scare the bejeezus out of all the networks and probably make them reconsider a large tv deal.

Sorry, poor timing indeed!

eelofwest wrote:

Xman wrote:

pussycat wrote:

Quiet the revere CH7 and the other networks will be desperate to invest in things that make money

What? Ratings are what makes money. We both know which code rates better, and for longer.

This report will scare the bejeezus out of all the networks and probably make them reconsider a large tv deal.

Sorry, poor timing indeed!

What do you mean, NRL is a sure ratings winner, and imporves every year with the same amount of coverage.
Seven invested in shows and told there partners the show was going to rate xxx and it failed to get close so the partners are getting there money back.
Seven will want to invest in something they know will rate xxxx so this doesn't happen again.

If lack of revenue was the only issue, then maybe Ten (down 0.6 per cent at 82 cents) and Fairfax (down 2.8 per cent at 70c) would have been down more. Seven is investing in television programming with the AFL to cost another $100 million this year, which on Deutsche Bank numbers means television costs are increasing by 8.3 per cent.

Without the AFL rights, the cost increase would only be 1.4 per cent, on Deutsche calculations.

Others misinterpreted early Seven guidance but, either way, Seven is pumping more money into programming just when a dismal economy is making it virtually impossible to recover costs.

That advertising revenues are down came as no surprise to anyone.

pussycat wrote:

There are some things that the AFL keep hiden in the closet.

TV advertising revenue for Sydney is x3 that of Perth and X5 that of Adelaide. And regional NSW revenue is x5 that of regional WA and regional SA combined


http://www.thinktv.com.au/SiteMedia/w3s ... r_2011.pdf