This is similar ratings to the AL couple years back.

Why aren't these girls getting paid their fair share?

Mediaweek ‏@MediaweekAUS 15 minutes ago
Sun STV #ALeague #FoxSports #ADLvCCM 61k



Mediaweek ‏@MediaweekAUS 17 minutes ago
Sun STV #ALeague #FoxSports #PERvWSW 77k

 After Rd 5 .. 25 games 

40 ==== 1 == 4%
50 ==== 2 == 8%
60 ==== 3 == 12%
70 ==== 3 == 12%
80 ==== 5 == 20%
90 ==== 2 == 8%
100 === 6 == 24%
125 === 3 == 12%

Total 25 games ..

Just to compare similar sports all trying to break through. We are not doing to bad.

Sunday

BeInsport [rugby] Wales V Aus == 31k
Fox [W-League] ========= 25K
Fox [Supercar] ========== 111 K
Fox [NBL] ============= 19K
ABC [W-League] ======== 32 k
Gem [league] Four Nations ==79/63 K

Saturday

Fox NBL ============= 22 K
ESPN [US NBL Final] === 30 K
ESPN [Lakers V Warriors] = 35 k
Fox [Supercars] ======== 80k

Not special, but up against cricket reasonably solid. Would have been 40k and 55k in previous seasons.

No no, don't make me go back and find the numerous times you mentioned that ratings wouldn't make one iota of difference by switching channels. Now you're saying that "peak audience" is the claim that there would be no difference. You say this because you know that you stated a number of times that we reached 175k in the past and you're using this as your argument, basically trying to claim that people are able to find SBS if they want to and that not being seen is not a possibility.

However what you fail to realise idiot is that many of us here have always talked about a range of factors playing a part in ratings. One of which is production value, and you have always ignored it. Another factor is the casual viewers, and how many dont actively seek sbs. Of course it's possible for people to find SBS if they really want to hunt for it, jesus just look at the world cup and the massive ratings sbs got. But that's not the point. We are talking about the number of viewers that aren't watching because they aren't actively seeking it because they aren't die hard supporters. We are also talking about people that actively switch off because they see how bad the production value is, and coming from a backwater channel with very little funds to invest results in poor production quality. 

This is why many of us here from the very start have been advocating that a switch to a bigger fta channel is imperative, whilst you have always maintained that any switch wouldn't make a difference in ratings overall. So we shall see whether average ratings change with a switch. No one here except for you is going to be looking at the peak audience on a small handful of games. It will be looked at as an overall average over the course of a season. THat's how you determine whether a swith has been successful with regards to ratings and any increase.

Stop trying to change the parameters of what was first argued a number of years ago. The argument was simple. At the time we said there would be a positive change in ratings if we switched to a bigger fta partner. At the time you said no change would be seen because only the sport rates and no other factors (other than scheduling) would make one iota of difference. We then came back with factors that cant be ignored such as casual tv surfing viewers and production value which also includes cross promotion and overall presentation. You ignored both of these factors and you still seem to ignore them, although now you are holding onto your "peak audience" metric. 

You are an absolute joke and as predicted, someone that can't ever handle being wrong, so resorts to changing the goal posts just to suit his agenda. Nice try Bluebird, that wont slide. 

You really are a muppet

I'll put it simple for you: If you think 7, 9 or 10 can improve on the peak numbers that SBS managed to get, then (when the time comes) you are 100% right. I'll admit I was wrong and apologise for wasting the forum's time

If you have reason to believe that 7, 9 or 10 wont be able to improve on SBS's peak numbers then give it up already. Because drawing a straight line between the current crap numbers and SBS's good numbers on a different channel isn't going to fly with me


If you think channel 7, 9 or 10 getting 70k instead of 56k is an "improvement" and demonstrates beyond doubt production value, cross promotion, casual viewers and station loyalty then you really don't have a point to prove. Because whether you want to accept it or not, SBS managed to get 175k outside of season opener, finals or derby games. And if you doubt 7, 9 or 10 can improve on that then get off your high horse

Blueballs you've always talked above averages now you're talking about peak. Make up your mind son. Shifting arguments is hardly helping your monotonous weak pov

You must seriously be brain dead. Here you are again re phrasing the same tripe I have just mentioned was not relevant in my last post.

Let me be clear again seeing as you are as thick as shit.

WHO CARES ABOUT PEAK NUMBERS!!!! We are talking about overall averages. That's how it is determined. Why on earth would execs go off peak ratings for a couple of one off games when the reality is the overall average viewing for the games over the course of a season is what really counts. That's what they will be going off, which is what we have been saying all along, that AVERAGE RATINGS OVERALL WILL RISE IF ON A MAJOR FTA CHANNEL!!!

Seriously you are calling me a muppet and then here you are going on again over the same crap i have just mentioned with regards to peak numbers and how irrelevant they are to the whole equation.

If you are trying to prove a point by saying that people are able to find SBS because they got a few high rating games back in the day and if people hunt for the sport they will find it, well of course they bloody will. As I mentioned before, the World Cup pulled huge ratings, so obviously people that want to find the games will find the games. That's not the argument.

The argument is and has always been that there is a section of the community that casually watch sport or tv for that matter, that don't bother searching for SBS and as a result aren't going to find A-league on a Sunday because they haven't actively searched for it. That doesn't mean they wouldn't watch if they however saw it on their screens whilst surfing through a few of their usual channels. So that's one rating factor right there. And you have been pretty clear that that isn't a real rating factor at all which myself and others here firmly disagree with you with. 

The other rating factor which I raised years ago now, was that production value and cross promotion has an effect as well. Again you have mentioned that this isn't a factor either. You have ignored both of these factors and have stuck to you solitary view that nothing will change ratings other than the scheduling if there is a shift in tv station. 

So let me rephrase my point again, if ratings improve by even 20-30% ON AVERAGE, then the shift across to a major fta channel will be completely justified. If ratings go to 180k and then average out at say 70k for the season then I can admit and say that I was wrong, that the shift had no effect on average ratings. But to start using your metric of peak numbers is utterly stupid and is clearly just an attempt of you trying to find a way out as you know very well that ratings will move north if there is a shift as I think even you can see that getting 50-60k on a fta station is insanely shit and any other main channel would do better than that.

Thank you.

Seriously this whole peak argument has only come up recently with him. It's a clear sign that he's lost it and is trying to get out of an obvious losing battle by moving the goal posts. No matter what he tries to say from now on I'll be going off average ratings as that is what the very vast majority of us here were intending all along. I don't think I have ever argued back with him with regards to "peak ratings". Not going to start now and let him think that this is what we have been talking about all along. Because that is false.

Has anyone been watching the test cricket on 9? Has there been any cross promotion for the Aus v Thailand match? Maybe during the second test as that starts just before and runs through the wcq. It's a 11pm aedt kickoff so surely Nine will put it on their main channel rather than GO.

Fox ratings only
          12-13   13-14  14-15  15-16  16-17
30K === 0 ===== 1 ===== 1 ===== 2 ===== 0
40K === 0 ===== 0 ===== 3 ===== 1 ===== 1
50K === 2 ===== 3 ===== 3 ===== 5 ===== 2
60K === 2 ==== =4 ===== 2 ===== 9 ===== 3
70K === 5 ===== 3 ===== 2 ===== 6 ===== 3
80K === 0 ===== 3 ===== 6 ===== 2 ===== 5
90K === 2 ===== 5 ===== 1 ===== 0 ===== 2
100K+ = 10 ==== 5 ===== 4 ===== 0 ===== 6
125K+ = 3 ===== 0 ===== 0 ===== 0 ===== 3
150K+ = 1 ===== 1 ===== 1 ===== 0 ===== 0

Avg fox ratings to Round 5
12-13: 96.0k
13-14: 85.9K
14-15: 81.3K
15-16: 63.0K
16-17: 89.0K

Credit to The Wookie for collecting the ratings, the ratings are from his site http://www.footyindustry.com/

I don't buy this 20%-30% average increase bullshit because as we saw in SBS's second season there was a 20% increase. Was SBS reaching more viewers? No. They just had a better line up of games, and better viewer retention. That's why the average increased but the peak stayed the same

You're the one talking about shifting networks for casual viewers and cross promotion, but then you don't think 7, 9 or 10 will reach SBS's peak numbers. How??? Do you think all these extra people will take it in turns watching so that the average will increase but the peak will stay the same? Sounds like you don't even understand or believe in your own viewpoint

People have been saying all along we need to go to 7, 9 or 10 to reach more people. But then you want to use average numbers to determine the success. Do you even know what the word average means?

If there is no increase in peak viewership then you cant say there is an increase in casual viewers or better cross promotion. Pure and simple

Give up mate the jig is up. For people that have been following long enough they are well aware of what u first argued and now its just a case of changing to suit ur agenda.

You're not fooling anyone anymore. 

Those ratings don't do us justice as they don't include SBS. When you add SBS, this season we have had more 150s and 125s. 

Must also be remembered that in the 12-13 year there was no SBS broadcasting, and we had the big three marquees for SFC, WSW and Jest.

The challenge will be during the Big Bash can we hold a greater % of the ratings..

With both the Mariners and Jest showing lots of improvement there is hope also I get and maybe its wishful thinking ... but I feel cricket will drop a little in ratings and we will hold better or closer to our ratings...

SBS are a real worry whether its on purpose because they are fighting FFA or whatever there overall coverage especially on there web page has often been negative and TWG show hardly mentions the A=League.... seems to me somehow somewhere along the way SBS ego's took over from logic and their belief that they best know how to run Football in Australia has created as Bozza said a few years ago the enemy within ... not so much the enemy more the spoilt kid told they can't have what they want ...

I am aware of some people who will stream a Fox broadcast rather that watch the SBS call and that is actually sad as they were the flag bearer in the bad times .... but for SBS to be rating on Friday night roughly 50% of Fox is almost impossible and I hope they hang their heads in shame as they have let their ego's get in the way of doing the right thing for Football.

 

Yes its lower without SBS (or NZ ratings) but that is measuring total audience. These statistics are measuring something completely different. This is measuring subscription which is a much better comparison year on year.

If you include SBS we actually look worse when compared to prior years since SBS's ratings have gone through the floor. But there are so many different variables that could be causing this i.e SBS changing from SBS1 to SBS2, the weak commentators, the quality of the matches they have been given since they only get one game a week.

Hold the phone. To try and make some kind of point, you are now backing the argument that there was a 20% increase in SBS's second season? Would that be the same second season when they moved the broadcast from SBS2 to SBS1? The same second season when we had no big marquees or the excitement of new teams like the years before and things started feeling a bit flat, but still managed to achieve a 20% increase? Yes, we were reaching more viewers because we were on a more popular channel (albeit only slightly more popular, it is still SBS after all). So despite peak staying the same due to the drop in interest and excitement, the change of station contributed to overall ratings increasing. The same facts you argued so vehemently against you are now using to support your argument?

And while we are at it, the argument has never been about peak numbers. It is about overall ratings which is most effectively tracked through averages. Even though all the planets may have aligned one night and SBS managed to pull a 200,000 before dropping off to a consistent base of 70,000 throughout the year, if we go to 7/9/10 and hit 200,000 and then hold it consistent throughout the year, we may not have exceeded the peak but that would reflect an obvious success compared to SBS. Well, to anyone with half a brain, except for you obviously.

Jeez Bluebird, you walked right into that one, I expect better from you.

Actually, no I don't. You have been a walking, talking contradiction for years now trying everything under the sun to support your deluded argument while hoping people simply forget the things you have previously claimed.

Agree just keep it to the fox figures they are the only constant ... my comment pertaining to 12-13 is it had the 3 marquees, WSW and no FTA  and no BB on FTA... which had an effect how much is not known...

As I said the biggest test will be when the BB starts can we hold near what we have.

Does anyone know how timeshifting is measured?I time shift most matches these days.You would think more people would be using this each year.
2012/2013 along with ADP also had the WSW hype.Still it's sad to think FFA have been steering the ship in reverse for three years since then.

Or you can just add them up. Its the same game. 

Not end of story

Davo, Nulla etc... have been claiming for years that going to 7, 9 or 10 will see an increase in number of people watching the A League (due to casual fans, more visible, cross promotion etc...)

I have said that this will not happen

Now they can think they are painting me in the corner with some retarded literal argument as if ratings never change from season to season but all they do is show they are out of their depth. I am at a loss at the amount of aggression shown to me when I'm not the one making such pathetic and ill thought out statements

If 7, 9 or 10 increase the number of viewers like you have all been saying they will undeniably and inevitably do, then I'll admit I am wrong

But don't be fucking retarded on what it means to increase viewers like some 10 year old trying to win a school debate. We all know what it means and what to look for

Saying that 7, 9 or 10 will do better than the current SBS numbers is a change of argument. Yes, that's great. I think anybody can see that SBS's numbers are damaging. But this is a different argument. What I have been trumpeting on the forum for years to a point people are physically sick is that 7, 9 or 10 will not increase the number of people watching

If you don't think they will then STFU. No point trying to close the issue with an unrelated point

Oh blueballs. If on a major fta we average over the course of a season sbs' peak then we will have had games which exceeded the peak = more viewers! Is it really that hard. Until two days ago I had no idea what sbs' peak was. Now I'm well aware because all of a sudden you've made it a core component of your argument. And I've been reading your negatives papaya for years along with you are davo's back and forth. Just admit it mate. For some reason you hate the aleague/ffa. Not sure why, neither are perfect but it's what we've got, it's improving and it's a hell of a lot better than the past.

"I am at a loss at the amount of aggression shown to me"..

This usually happens when you label others in a derogatory manner. More so still when you, yourself change a position to suit your argument. As some here have said, this whole "peak numbers" issue is only quite new in the whole argument, but clearly brought in to help your current position.

But anyhow back to the real discussion matter. I want you to please explain this to me:

How is it that I occasionally will watch NRL or AFL for that matter (as im a sports fan) when I flick through some of the usual channels I watch, yet don't find what could be a more interesting program on SBS? I can assure you I don't go hunting for the NRL or AFL, but I will occasionally watch games when I stumble across.

Now you can say that I am in the vast minority, but you can't prove it. What im doing is giving you an example of a real situation of a viewer doing exactly what you believe does not happen. And I can assure you that others do it too as I have watched them when Ive been over at friends houses in the past. So this whole notion of casual viewers not existing and that ONLY if they really wanted to watch the aleague they would etc etc doesn't sit with me because I have seen it first hand. It's part of the reason why many of us here (perhaps) have reason to believe that the shift will gain casual viewers to our game. 

How do you not see this as a FACTOR? Now i didn't say it was the only factor but a factor in ratings. 

If you can explain how what I mentioned above is not possible in my circumstance then you may have a point, but that is impossible for you to do because Im telling you hand on heart that I do stumble across those other sports on occasion, having no actual idea that those particular games are on etc, but that once the channel is on and the game is intriguing because it's a tight game etc, it keeps me viewing the game. And that never would have happened had I not stumbled on the channel. I would never ever think of going to SBS because most programs on there don't interest me so I don't even bother. That doesn't mean however that there are no progams of interest to me, but that I just forget to even check.

How many times have you watched the VFL / SANFL / WAFL? These are prime time on the main channel yet the ratings are very poor

There is a difference between finding something when flicking and sitting on it. Ratings require at least 5 consecutive minutes for that purpose

The gulf between A League games suggest that match importance, teams playing, scheduling, players etc... all have an impact on whether or not people want to watch. Even on SBS where they only have one game we have seen a gulf between 175k one week and less than 100k not long after

It is ridiculous to think people with little to no interest in the A League will start to watch it indiscriminately when the habits of semi-interested fans and even hardened fans show apathy a lot of the time

Why would casual or disinterested fans show more interest than rusted on supporters?

Again you are using a hypothetical mindset whereas Im stating a factual viewing habit. 

I have watched countless games of NRL or AFL, and in very rare circumstances (ie outside of GF or State of Origin) have I purposely sort out the games on tv, yet occasionally will watch if I come across the game on tv as im surfing through and the game is a close encounter and looks exciting, despite having no real affiliation with the sports. That's why it's called casual viewing. And I have witnessed with many people around me do the same.

On FTA in the advertisers eyes, they don't care if the viewer is a rusted on fan or someone that is watching the game on a rare basis, the messages they are sending to the viewer is likely to apply to whoever is watching as long as it is generally speaking hitting their target audience. A car manufacturer who is advertising a Toyota vehicle could have the same effect with me as it would to a Sydney Swans rusted on supporter could it not? 

Point being is this isn't a case of watching the game for the first time and after that switching off. The idea of the casual viewer is someone that has a passing interest in sport in general and will tune in if they see the game as exciting perhaps. It doesn't mean they wont watch again if they decide to flick past the first time they see it on tv, nor will it mean they will watch a full game next time it's on tv. Ive flicked passed many AFL games that seemed won by the second quarter and have then flicked to something else, but if it's nearing the end of the third and the game looks exciting, I do sometimes watch to the end. And guess what? I was exposed to advertising during that 20 min odd time period and in the AFLs minds that is a win to them. 

Theres a reason that these are also paid for content - cost of production and broadcast is paid for by each of the state associations themselves with some costs recuperated through advertising revenues which are shared with the broadcaster. Matches are generally shown on Saturday and Sunday afternoons - which are not prime time, and neither the WAFL or SANFL seasons are broadcast in full or entirely on the main channel, many games re shown on 7mate (hell in WA many AFL games are shown on 7mate).