Talking Footy

Beaussie wrote:

As Daniel Green has pointed out regarding tv ratings for the AFL and NRL.

The above figures, of course, only take into account the capital cities, with Oztam ratings - being the currency by which television programs are bought and sold - only measuring the capitals. Most of the Rugby League persuassion would argue that the NRL has a far greater representation in the regional areas than the AFL. This is undoubtably true, with the decentralized states of NSW and Queensland encompassing large regional areas of Rugby League loving folk. But is this regional area, which, in Television terms makes up approximately 30% of the market, enough to claw back the 25 million viewer deficit (and a deficit in viewing time of 115 million hours?) Not by a long way.

http://www.talkingfooty.com/tv_ratings_2011.php

. But is this regional area, which, in Television terms makes up approximately 30% of the market, enough to claw back the 25 million viewer deficit (and a deficit in viewing time of 115 million hours?) Not by a long way

but fails to put up the actual regional figures from that year to prove his point

he just says .. they don't
without any figures to back up his claim ..... what a w@nker

theres no dispute
Rugby League whopped AFL in 2011, as they did in 2010 & 2009

whopped em good

Topper wrote:

There are no regional figures, Raiderdave. You are lying. The figures I quoted were correct.

Topper wrote:

ThinkTV?? That bunch have a reputation for gross inaccuracy. Dump them.

RegionalTAM fails to cover large chunks of the regional Australian mainland, and is therefore also unreliable.

So in effect, there are no regional ratings.

Topper wrote:

No they are not. 90 percent? That's a flagrant lie.

Topper wrote:

I know the maps, and they themselves are not accurate, particularly in South Australia where they claim part of the York Peninsula as metropolitan. That is false promotion and should be reeled in.

Raiderdave wrote:

. But is this regional area, which, in Television terms makes up approximately 30% of the market, enough to claw back the 25 million viewer deficit (and a deficit in viewing time of 115 million hours?) Not by a long way

but fails to put up the actual regional figures from that year to prove his point

Beaussie wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

. But is this regional area, which, in Television terms makes up approximately 30% of the market, enough to claw back the 25 million viewer deficit (and a deficit in viewing time of 115 million hours?) Not by a long way

but fails to put up the actual regional figures from that year to prove his point

As he points out:

But is this regional area, which, in Television terms makes up approximately 30% of the market, enough to claw back the 25 million viewer deficit (and a deficit in viewing time of 115 million hours?) Not by a long way.