waz
I hope you're right about Kayo, but the fact remains that shows like Peppa Pig and Hawaii Five-O have no problem regularly getting over 100k on the secondary channels, and here we are sitting on 35k for a Saturday night game.  I really doubt Kayo, or any other type of streaming is explaining that.

@Waz, the absence of any streaming figures from FFA tends to indicate they are also shite.

@ AJF

The FFA don’t have the streaming figures. They are not given them.

Kayo have the streaming figures, why would they publish them? Have you ever seen Optus publish their streaming figures?

The simplest explanation is that a large section of the viewing audience has shifted from Fox to Kayo.

Is it unrealistic to think 10,000 might be watching on Kayo? Or 20,000?

Alternativly, it plausible that no one is streaming on Kayo? It’s possible but in a world where streaming is booming??

I have no evidence one way or another, there’s no doubt the code is struggling, all I’m saying is without knowing those numbers any commentary is incomplete.

And it always amuses me when people compare Peppa pig to football (it was a Mr Football favourite) ... there are 5,000,000 kids in Australia. Children’s programs should out-rate a minority sport like soccer.

@ bettega

Sorry, just saw your comment on the “secondary channel” after I posted to AJF .... and yeah, those numbers are perhaps more complex maybe.

I think the shift from Fox to Kayo is an easy jump. I’m one of them and I know plenty like me.

The Boss numbers, not easily explained by Kayo.

But again, I’m not trying to defend any one position or put lipstick on the donkey here. I’m just saying, those Kayo numbers are crucial, without them people are pissing in the wind on this debate.

In ten years we wont have threads about viewing figures anymore, because we won’t know them.

I dont understand how streaming can affect ratings

The ratings are done using a sample of ~1500 households with Foxtel. It is very unlikely that this sample would include just those who subscribe to the entertainment pack and not sports, otherwise they wouldnt get a balanced sample of what people are watching

It is also very unlikely that somebody would subscribe to just entertainment, and Kayo sports, when the sports upgrade pack is the same price. Satelite and HD, with more sports options

If streaming has affected Fox subscription numbers then Fox would have adjusted their sample so that instead of 1500 representing (as an example) 4 million, it now represents 3.8 million so each sample member is proportionately smaller. That hasnt been reported

What that means is that the exact same technique across the exact same number of people to produce the exact same calculation is in place

The only way streaming can make a difference is if the sample excludes Fox Go and people in the sample have a habit of watching Pepper Pig on the main TV, and other family members watch sport in their room using the Fox Go app. But why did that practice start this year?

How many problems have been resolved with blatant denial and delusion? Football is not in a good place at the moment. Fans are abandoning the game and steering the current course is not going to get them back

The WBBL final broke 300k metro for the second session. Our game has gone from out performing 20/20 cricket to being behind the women's game

@Waz  Will OzTam VOZ produce total viewing figures?  Its being implemented starting Q1 2019.

https://thinktv.com.au/research/voz/

@ bluebird

If we accept that OzTAM is an accurate way of representing viewership then it must be impacted by a shift in viewing habits eg if people shift from Fox to streaming.

If it’s not accurate enough to pick this up then the whole debate is a mute point, because their figures are useless and no more than a best guess.

Again, I have no idea what the numbers are or might be. I do though find it inconceivable that no one is watching Kayo.

I have Fox and Koyo. I haven’t watched a game on Foxtel since I got Kayo. Not streaming feels like driving a 1980’s car again.

My 16 y.o. boy hasn’t watched FTA in a decade, he streams shit all the time (as do my two daughters). He’s a roar member of 10+ years but has never watched a game on tv. But the bugger streams the HAL now using my account ... and I can hear him watching the mariners game now, while he’s playing fifa and chatting to some mate he’s never met in Melbourne.

At Roar we have a Uni Supporters group called uROAR - they never had Foxtel but I know dozens who have either got Kayo now or moved to Telstra to get the free app.

It’s all anecdotal I agree. But the viewership is there it seems.

@waz, online figures are known but aren’t published. I have seen previous stats for Telstra and they are a fraction of the regular tv audience. Plus if they were any good, why isn’t FFA crowing about them?

Also with the Fox figures, need to realise that people with subscription have been able to stream with Foxtel go at no additional cost (which is what I do) for ages. Those streaming numbers were not included in previous tv figures and the ftv (which we cant even get figures for most the time) and paytv ratings decline was noticeable before any of these new services were introduced.

The discussion about kayo has a lot of similarities to discussions regarding how a switch from sbs to a commercial ftv station would bring about massive audience growth and we all know how that ended up.

Unfortunately I agree with mouflo, think we have reach peak a-league 2 years ago and we are now in decline, only question is how low does it go

@ GyFox

There’s a question as to why OzTAM produce viewing numbers? It’s generally accepted that it helps with advertising spend plus provides feedback on the success/failure of a show.

Streaming companies don’t need that latter one; they know how many people are streaming although that doesn’t directly equate to viewership of course. But they don’t need it.

Will it help them with advertising spend?

If I was an advertiser would I accept an OzTAM estimate or would I want to see the company streaming figures - I’d prefer actual personally.

So it’s interedting that they’re doing this. I’m sure it can work in the same way as the current OzTAM system but it looks a bit like someone at OzTAM has seen a need to try and “stay in the game”.

Having seen the inside of IP TV the broadcasters don’t need it - they have all the analytics they need including streaming numbers, total and average duration and when people hop channels, and they have this +/- 1 and can drill down to IP address which opens up other possibilities such as targeted and geo-advertising.

So let’s see

@AJF

I’m told Kayo don’t tell the FFA the streaming numbers. If you know different that’s fine.

I worked at BT Vision and NOW TV in Hong Kong. Streaming figures were commercial in confidence. Extremely so if the content was in demand.

If Kayo are telling the FFA the numbers then they’re fucking idiots.

Bingo. TV ratings have never attempted to be a literal figure

If there are ~3500 households in the sample, and an average of 5 people per household, then each person represents ~1000 people to get the total metro population. It doesnt take into account that 30% (or whatever) have foxtel. So when you add FTA figures to paytv figures you get a guess based on 130% of the metro population

The A League ratings are so low that as a literal figure you might be talking 4 or 5 households. Thats where this kind of stats falls over. If you asked 1500 people what they did last night, and 1 person said they were sniffing their grandmas panties, you cant assume that 1000 people did the same thing

The only value ratings have, which is the only system we have, is they are comparable to one another (on the same platform) and also previous years because the system is the consistent. So we can compare A League games on payTV to previous A League games, or other sports on the same platform, and draw conclusions on viewing trends (on the sample at least). But it is not literal

Instead of seeing ratings as "number of people", its better to view it as a score

@ bluebird.

If I were the FFA I’d be all over the OzTAM stats, how they’re completed and where the sample boxes are located. It wont take much to move the needle up/down and so much emphasis is placed on these numbers.

But Again, I’m not trying to say anything other than these discussions are incomplete without adding in streaming.

There’s an extrapolation of this debate on how future broadcast deals will be handled - the FFA appear clueless in this area but in future they’re likely to have to sell the rights to multiple service providers, not just Foxtel who pay and on sell.

Kayo is foxtel, and if they dont tell FFA what the numbers are, how much do you think the broadcast rights will be worth based on current ratings?

So the entire industry accepts and uses these figures, except the FFA/HAL because the ratings have collapsed and it cant be right that the A-League is now getting out-rated by Peppa Pig re-runs.

Even if your view it as a "score" it is shizenhausen compared to Peppa Pigs score and has been going downhill for a number of years.

@ AJF

“Kayo is foxtel, and if they dont tell FFA what the numbers are, how much do you think the broadcast rights will be worth based on current ratings?”

I know who owns Kayo and I know why they did it. Late but better than never.

“and if they dont tell FFA what the numbers are, how much do you think the broadcast rights will be worth”

That’s the whole point. If they don’t tell the FFA what the numbers are they’re worth what Kayo says they’re worth.

Let’s say Kayo were to say that 50,000 watched on average, what would the FFA tell Optus? So that is the central point around streaming broadcast figures - whoever knows them has the power.

GyFox said OzTAM were looking to extend their work into streaming, my guess would be the FFA would be very interested in that (even though it will exclude mobile data).

My point is not whether viewing figures are good, bad or indifferent. It’s just that without streaming the figures are incomplete.

If football is going well for Kayo , I’d watch for Kayo picking up some NPL content to try and keep the subscribers through winter .. if the figures are low they won’t bother but I think we’ll be speculating on this for a long while.

All these excuses....

Ratings are small because people aren’t watching, people aren’t watching because they don’t care. It’s not because there’s a hidden tens of thousands of people suddenly streaming the league and no one wants to crow about it.

Well, people do care hence the fact there are 130 000 members, either these people aren't interested in watching games on TV or they don't all have Fox.

I'm not denying that we have a problem attracting a) your average AFL/League and Cricket fan and b) Euro/NSL fans but clearly there is still a strong fanatical support for the league that isn't reflected in Fox ratings.

I personally gave up Fox and took up Kayo and I would only assume that there are more like me. I think in terms of the game on the field it is up and down, clubs like WSW and Brisbane are really struggling while the Big Blue the other night was one of the best games and atmospheres I have seen, ever and as a spectacle it compared very favourably to anything in Australian sport..

So yeah, criticism is warranted but the idea that the league is dying based on Fox ratings is more wishful thinking from you guys I think.

I think we really need to hit the mainstream a bit more we have players with a personality get them on tv/radio sell the product. An example Riley mcgree’s his goal was outstanding we should do more with it

“but clearly there is still a strong fanatical support for the league that isn't reflected in Fox ratings.”

Rubbish.

The strong fanatical support is what we see in the active stands at games, and that has shrunk.

The less ‘fanatical’ support are those watching on telly from time to time - the ratings - and that has massively shrunk.

There is less now less interest in the HAL than there was 6 years ago. To suggest otherwise is to not live in the real word.

Rubbish, the fanatical support is the families who take their kids to watch Adelaide or CCM week in week out or the hundreds of SFC fans who travel interstate to watch away against Victory, or the people who will be in China or Japan to watch their team play Champions League.

Going off memberships this is stronger than it has ever been and in terms of the football being produced, I think it is stronger than it has ever been. That is the real world, not your TV Ratings/Trainspotting numbers.

What an unprofessional organisation to not know the value of their product.

That's your opinion and you're wrong .

When clubs like MV are selling 2 game memberships, what did you think would happen to the membership numbers, but this is not a true reflection of where the game is. Attendences are down, TV audiences are down, media interest is down, general public interest is down, but the HAL has never been better. Yeah right

So TV ratings are accurate but Membership numbers aren't....ok, no bias in your thinking.

Attendances are holding pretty firm considering WSW and SFC are playing in temporary grounds. Media is pretty solid from what I can see and on social media SydneyFC was in the top 10 most tweeted about sporting teams.....Socceroos, Matildas and A-league all amongst the most viewed organisations.

So if we don't get EPL ratings from Optus, are we to assume that they are rubbish?

If proper memberships are actually up, why isnt this being reflected in the attendances which have gone down.

So WSW & SFC members only support their teams at certain grounds, yep, thats a pretty solid excuse.

Matilda's & Socceroos are currently getting heaps of interest, but probably not the sort FFA wanted.

Using your logic, I should invest in a Peppa Pig merchandise store as the actual audience must be in the millions as the tv rating dont show the true tv audience

The only people counted in the ratings sample are those with a ratings box. To see how it works (with satirical humour) watch the Family Guy episode where Peter gets a ratings box. Whether a member goes to the game or stays home has no impact if they dont have a ratings box

The second point is the member figures obviously includes pets, member only (no games), or limited game passes. Or it is a skewed stat based on a 30% turnaround by two struggling clubs (like when season 7 was compared to season 5 and the only difference was 3 train wreck clubs were no longer train wrecks)

I honestly dont know how anybody can look at the interest in the A League as it stands and not see a problem

First of all, Optus is a phone company not a TV company and so they dont have TV ratings numbers (obviously).

Secondly their EPL rights purchase was used to drive subscriber numbers which is working as detailed in below link.

http://www.roymorgan.com/findings/7582-epl-drives-optus-subscriber-growth-march-2018-201805040640

When you run the numbers for Optus market share for mobile & fixed line internet & % that watch EPL, Roy Morgan estimates Australia has around 1.7 million EPL viewers.

If membership numbers aren't accurate now they weren't accurate before and so all we have is steadily growing inaccurate numbers which, never the less, indicate a pool of at least 130 000 people who are happy to throw some money at the a-league and who would presumably be happy enough to sit down and watch it for free on TV.

If TV ratings are collected as you say then there is even more reason to doubt their accuracy. It would be too easy to corrupt and are the people chosen an accurate reflection of Australian society and emerging viewing habits.

 

@eldar, problem with your arguement is HAL is currently available on free to air tv and when ratings for big games like mv v sfc on a sat night are so poor, it reinforces the view that HAL is in trouble.