Talking Footy

Melbournes Most Popular Sportsman - Billy Slater

Melbournes Most Popular Sporting Event - A presentation

pussycat wrote:

Melbournes Most Popular Sportsman - Billy Slater

Melbournes Most Popular Sporting Event - A presentation

Billy Slater?

The presentation was part of the GF

Yes, a poll on Melb radio a few months back.

Xman wrote:

pussycat wrote:

Melbournes Most Popular Sportsman - Billy Slater

Melbournes Most Popular Sporting Event - A presentation


:

The presentation was part of the GF

really .... I didn't see any fumbling .. bumbling or missing during it ?

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

pussycat wrote:

Melbournes Most Popular Sportsman - Billy Slater

Melbournes Most Popular Sporting Event - A presentation


:

The presentation was part of the GF

really .... I didn't see any fumbling .. bumbling or missing during it ?

glad you were one of the massive numbers in Sydney watching Dave! =D>

Just had another look at the AFL's pay ratings during the finals. Man did we smash it. 417k, 381k, 394k, 422k, 502k, 396k. And that was in the first year of the 5 year deal. Will only get bigger and better going forward. NSWRL really missed the boat on simulcasting.

What is it that you think simulcasting achieves? It simply divides your ratings for FTA. It was only done to increase take-up levels in the Southern states. As you can see from the reguar season , The NRL, generates a lot more interest, and has a much larger take-up rate in this area. So Fox obviouly thought there was no point in offering this, and c9 would have screamed like a banchee if they were forced to go domn the same loseing path as C7 has this year.

pussycat wrote:

What is it that you think simulcasting achieves? It simply divides your ratings for FTA. It was only done to increase take-up levels in the Southern states. As you can see from the reguar season , The NRL, generates a lot more interest, and has a much larger take-up rate in this area. So Fox obviouly thought there was no point in offering this, and c9 would have screamed like a banchee if they were forced to go domn the same loseing path as C7 has this year.

The NRL have had good coverage on foxtel for years, while their FTA coverage has been poor. The opposite is true for the AFL. Its no surprise subscription rates in both heartlands is so different. this will begin to change now as it did significantly this year.

pussycat wrote:

What is it that you think simulcasting achieves? It simply divides your ratings for FTA. It was only done to increase take-up levels in the Southern states. As you can see from the reguar season , The NRL, generates a lot more interest, and has a much larger take-up rate in this area. So Fox obviouly thought there was no point in offering this, and c9 would have screamed like a banchee if they were forced to go domn the same loseing path as C7 has this year.

The reduction in FTA ratings was more than offset by the increase in Pay ratings. What it does, is allow AFL clubs to take these new bigger ratings figures with them when they're negotiating for sponsorships, government funding, etc.

People ar'nt stupid , they'll realise the results only come from ratings manipulation. People will recognise a dieing code when they see it.

pussycat wrote:

People ar'nt stupid , they'll realise the results only come from ratings manipulation. People will recognise a dieing code when they see it.

They also recognise illiteracy

Xman wrote:

pussycat wrote:

What is it that you think simulcasting achieves? It simply divides your ratings for FTA. It was only done to increase take-up levels in the Southern states. As you can see from the reguar season , The NRL, generates a lot more interest, and has a much larger take-up rate in this area. So Fox obviouly thought there was no point in offering this, and c9 would have screamed like a banchee if they were forced to go domn the same loseing path as C7 has this year.

The NRL have had good coverage on foxtel for years, while their FTA coverage has been poor. The opposite is true for the AFL. Its no surprise subscription rates in both heartlands is so different. this will begin to change now as it did significantly this year.

More pathrtic excuses . AFL coverage on Fox began in 2006.

pussycat wrote:

Xman wrote:

pussycat wrote:

What is it that you think simulcasting achieves? It simply divides your ratings for FTA. It was only done to increase take-up levels in the Southern states. As you can see from the reguar season , The NRL, generates a lot more interest, and has a much larger take-up rate in this area. So Fox obviouly thought there was no point in offering this, and c9 would have screamed like a banchee if they were forced to go domn the same loseing path as C7 has this year.

The NRL have had good coverage on foxtel for years, while their FTA coverage has been poor. The opposite is true for the AFL. Its no surprise subscription rates in both heartlands is so different. this will begin to change now as it did significantly this year.

More pathrtic excuses . AFL coverage on Fox began in 2006.

and until this year had the 6,7,8th game. 4 FTA games has always meant for most people Foxtel wasnt necessary

Xman wrote:

pussycat wrote:

Xman wrote:

The NRL have had good coverage on foxtel for years, while their FTA coverage has been poor. The opposite is true for the AFL. Its no surprise subscription rates in both heartlands is so different. this will begin to change now as it did significantly this year.

More pathrtic excuses . AFL coverage on Fox began in 2006.

and until this year had the 6,7,8th game. 4 FTA games has always meant for most people Foxtel wasnt necessary

That was supposed to read 1996!

@MediaweekAUS Sat TV #AusvNZ rugby league test 891k (Syd 415k Mel 130k Bri 336k Ade 5k Per 5k) Nine + (Ade 11k Per 16k) GEM

Pathetic ratings for melbourne, adelaide and perth 130K? on a saturday night with no competition what so ever!

And don't get me started on those adelaide and perth figures