PDA

View Full Version : TV RATINGS: Toronto vs New York...



Carts
06-15-2009, 01:42 PM
SportsNet (Ontario Region Only) 8:00pm-10:00pm / MLS Toronto vs New York: 38,000

Of note; the 55-Plus age bracket had a 22,000 reading - well over half the audience was over the age of 55... Advertisers target the male 18-34, or in some cases the 25-49 age bracket most aggresively...

Other notables... (not much else on)

TSN (National) 1:00pm-4:15pm / MLB Florida vs Toronto: 273,000

Carts...

kodiakTFC
06-15-2009, 01:52 PM
Isn't ratings something that comes with time? I bet the ratings sky rocket next summer when the World Cup spikes interest in the sport.

sulfur
06-15-2009, 01:54 PM
As an aside, there were ~8 of us listening to the Fan590 this weekend for the game... as the TV we had didn't get reception of the game.

The commentary guy on the Fan590 was (and I've said this before) fantastic. Blob Lenardouchy? Not so much. Had nothing good to say about anyone on either team. Constant criticism.

C.Ronaldo
06-15-2009, 02:47 PM
this rating thing is too skewed

many of us watch it through many different means.


ps
who gets surveyed. What are the odds of me becoming a surveyee

TFC07
06-15-2009, 03:35 PM
What was NBA Game 5 rating (it was on TSN)? What was age group watching that game?

mighty_torontofc_2008
06-15-2009, 04:53 PM
Isn't ratings something that comes with time? I bet the ratings sky rocket next summer when the World Cup spikes interest in the sport.


not if cbc picks and choose which games will be on tv and what ones will be on the net only..it will kill interest..which seems like what the cbc has planned for the sport anyways.

Beach_Red
06-15-2009, 05:00 PM
^ You think CBC make plans for anything?

MrHawk
06-15-2009, 05:02 PM
Cause I'm fairly certain, people want to stay home saturday night and watch TFC.

ExiledRed
06-15-2009, 05:06 PM
this rating thing is too skewed

many of us watch it through many different means.


ps
who gets surveyed. What are the odds of me becoming a surveyee

I absolutely distrust the ratings system.

I got a tooney in the mail, as an advance payment for noting down the radio stations I listen to every day. Didn't respond, kept the tooney.

They'd get better results monitoring the power grid during commercial breaks.

ensco
06-15-2009, 05:15 PM
This does tell you, over the course of a few eeks, that not very many are watching. But the week to week moves mean nothing. 50K people are rounding error, in terms of how this works.

mighty_torontofc_2008
06-15-2009, 05:18 PM
^ You think CBC make plans for anything?


no nothing surprises me at the ineptness of the cbc anymore...if it were not fot HNIC they would be nothing...

Toronto_Bhoy
06-15-2009, 05:30 PM
Isn't ratings something that comes with time? I bet the ratings sky rocket next summer when the World Cup spikes interest in the sport.

On the contrary, MLS TV numbers will drop next summer with an over saturated selection of football on TV. Casual viewers will watch World Cup games…footy aficionados won't bother with MLS games after gorging on the world's best.

With all due respect, can you imagine how crappy this product will look when you can see the best in the world play…everyday…for almost a month!!!

MrHawk
06-15-2009, 06:28 PM
On the contrary, MLS TV numbers will drop next summer with an over saturated selection of football on TV. Casual viewers will watch World Cup games…footy aficionados won't bother with MLS games after gorging on the world's best.

With all due respect, can you imagine how crappy this product will look when you can see the best in the world play…everyday…for almost a month!!!

I guess it was how it was last year.

Carts
06-16-2009, 09:06 AM
What was NBA Game 5 rating (it was on TSN)? What was age group watching that game?

Let me see if I still have the ratings report from that day...

For those who 'dont trust' or think the ratings system is 'flawed' and didn't count 8 people sitting in one living room - that doesn't matter! Advertisers pay based on these numbers (which are now electronically gathered - cable & satelite lines go two ways, aka they know what you're watching), and networks pay leagues & teams based on these numbers...

So, whether you like it or not, this is what the TV world is based on (that and 'title' sponsors - that's a whole new ballgame, and the most profitable!)...

It is what it is. I can stop posting them if you all want? (I get them as part of my job everyday, and just thought people would be interested)...

Carts...

Ladies Love Julius James
06-16-2009, 09:31 AM
dont stop LOL I always find them interesting

Pachuco
06-16-2009, 09:39 AM
this rating thing is too skewed

many of us watch it through many different means.


ps
who gets surveyed. What are the odds of me becoming a surveyee

They may be skewed, but you can still use them to compare the ratings to other events going on. For example, Blue Jays ratings were MUCH better. There's no excuses there. Baseball probably has MUCH higher ratings on the radio then soccer does anyways. So at the end of the day, those ratings are still very poor. Oh, and with MLB.TV, there are even better means to watch/listen to the Jays outside of sportnet then there is for TFC

Cas87
06-16-2009, 09:58 AM
not if cbc picks and choose which games will be on tv and what ones will be on the net only..it will kill interest..which seems like what the cbc has planned for the sport anyways.

More than Likely MLSE will have all TFC games occuring during the World Cup on GolTV Canada and Sportsnet so that they don't have to be worried about being pushed to cbcsports.ca

rocker
06-16-2009, 10:26 AM
Let me see if I still have the ratings report from that day...

For those who 'dont trust' or think the ratings system is 'flawed' and didn't count 8 people sitting in one living room - that doesn't matter! Advertisers pay based on these numbers (which are now electronically gathered - cable & satelite lines go two ways, aka they know what you're watching), and networks pay leagues & teams based on these numbers...

So, whether you like it or not, this is what the TV world is based on (that and 'title' sponsors - that's a whole new ballgame, and the most profitable!)...

It is what it is. I can stop posting them if you all want? (I get them as part of my job everyday, and just thought people would be interested)...

Carts...

ya, from what I've read, the whole ratings thing is a sort of "wink wink, nudge nudge" system between advertisers and TV stations.

But the problem is most people see it as this statistically representative thing, the way they see election polls in the media as the same.

the way I see it is that hockey may have a statistically biased result (in a positive direction) because the types of people monitored are more culturally traditional, white, with higher incomes... the people who have hockey ingrained in the bones. Any new sport, or ethnic sport, or growing sport, is gonna look low in the ratings until it gets into the traditional culture, and then it will be measured as higher in the ratings.

But that's naturally what advertisers want, so among that subset, we get a report on what that group of Canadians (not all Canadians) is watching. Since that's the group advertisers want to target, they are happy with these ratings systems.

The thing is, no matter what monitoring system they have, they don't actually know that 1.75 million people watched hockey on Saturday, yet they publish those numbers as if they are fact..

ExiledRed
06-16-2009, 10:39 AM
Let me see if I still have the ratings report from that day...

For those who 'dont trust' or think the ratings system is 'flawed' and didn't count 8 people sitting in one living room - that doesn't matter! Advertisers pay based on these numbers (which are now electronically gathered - cable & satelite lines go two ways, aka they know what you're watching), and networks pay leagues & teams based on these numbers...

So, whether you like it or not, this is what the TV world is based on (that and 'title' sponsors - that's a whole new ballgame, and the most profitable!)...

It is what it is. I can stop posting them if you all want? (I get them as part of my job everyday, and just thought people would be interested)...

Carts...

I wasn't stating that your ratings are irrelevant, or complaining about your posting of them.

I just find it odd that there is little precision when it comes to ratings. If they're not getting the numbers directly from units receiving each show, how do they do it?

It was impossible to get ratings in Britain when everybody got their service from a rooftop aerial , so they used to monitor the powergrid before and after the start time of each show and also during commercials. Fluctuations at these times would indicate people were leaving the living room, turning on lights, making tea etc... They had it down to a science, but it was still inaccurate.

Given that we can get the number of individual users on any particular website, it blows me away that they wouldn't have a better way of tracking TV ratings.

Carts
06-16-2009, 11:00 AM
I wasn't stating that your ratings are irrelevant, or complaining about your posting of them.

I just find it odd that there is little precision when it comes to ratings. If they're not getting the numbers directly from units receiving each show, how do they do it?

It was impossible to get ratings in Britain when everybody got their service from a rooftop aerial , so they used to monitor the powergrid before and after the start time of each show and also during commercials. Fluctuations at these times would indicate people were leaving the living room, turning on lights, making tea etc... They had it down to a science, but it was still inaccurate.

Given that we can get the number of individual users on any particular website, it blows me away that they wouldn't have a better way of tracking TV ratings.

Cable ratings are tracked based on the signal being received by the cable box / satelite receiver - its far more complicated than my simple sports mind understands LOL...

People complain "...but 8 of us were in the room...!" that is why the number represents the number of TV's watching the game...

Yes there's flaws in it - but its how its done...

If you're jacking your cable and spliting it, they can tell how much signal you're pulling out (proving that cable companies really dont care if you split your cable / especially now that you need a box for full service - I mean, do people think Sears pays for 80 cable outlets for their store LOL!)...

In the end, its a debate about nothing. I was just providing some information for everyone that I thought would be interesting...

Carts... :(

menefreghista
06-16-2009, 11:05 AM
What was NBA Game 5 rating (it was on TSN)? What was age group watching that game?

Chris Zelkovich of The Star posted it as 183,000 (Canadians watching on ABC weren't counted though).

http://thestar.blogs.com/sportsmedia/2009/06/here-are-the-weekend-sports-ratings-according-to-bbm-nielsen-media-research-overnight-figures1-hockey-penguins-at-red-win.html

One other interesting event of note, the Spain v New Zealand game managed to get 61,000 viewers.


I can stop posting them if you all want?

Please continue posting them. It is greatly appreciated.

Carts
06-16-2009, 11:15 AM
Chris Zelkovich of The Star posted it as 183,000 (Canadians watching on ABC weren't counted though).


183,000 is correct...

55-plus = 34,000...
18-34 = 83,000...

I won't bother going into the other breakdowns... Needless to say, the "ratings age" of the NBA finals (on TSN not ABC) is much younger than the TFC/NY match...

Carts...

ExiledRed
06-16-2009, 02:25 PM
Cable ratings are tracked based on the signal being received by the cable box / satelite receiver - its far more complicated than my simple sports mind understands LOL...


See, I didn't realise the ratings were electronically recorded. I thought they relied on mail in surveys and opinion polls. I'm not sure where I got this notion now you've busted it on me.

menefreghista
06-16-2009, 02:28 PM
See, I didn't realise the ratings were electronically recorded. I thought they relied on mail in surveys and opinion polls. I'm not sure where I got this notion now you've busted it on me.

I think radio ratings get measured by surveys.

TFC07
06-16-2009, 02:57 PM
Chris Zelkovich of The Star posted it as 183,000 (Canadians watching on ABC weren't counted though).

http://thestar.blogs.com/sportsmedia/2009/06/here-are-the-weekend-sports-ratings-according-to-bbm-nielsen-media-research-overnight-figures1-hockey-penguins-at-red-win.html




183,000 is correct...

55-plus = 34,000...
18-34 = 83,000...

I won't bother going into the other breakdowns... Needless to say, the "ratings age" of the NBA finals (on TSN not ABC) is much younger than the TFC/NY match...

Carts...

Thanks guys. :)

BTW, how exactly do you know how many people in certain age group is watching the game?

ensco
06-16-2009, 07:05 PM
Carts, this is great raw data. No need for :( Please keep putting it up.

You should include your own analysys with it more often - that way you can be more certain of getting machine gunned by know-nothings such as myself every week!

My take: at TFC's ratings level, it's the absolute, not the relative, ratings, that matter. 50,000 people is rounding error in the data collection process. So the absolute message (that not many are watching) is relevant, but the week to week changes are just noise.

GhostPK
06-16-2009, 07:15 PM
Don't forget the numbers lost because Rogers is afraid to commit TFC to Canada as a whole. I had to watch the internet stream in low quality because I don't live in Ontario. Lame...

Mark in Ottawa
06-17-2009, 07:22 AM
It is what it is. I can stop posting them if you all want? (I get them as part of my job everyday, and just thought people would be interested)...

Carts...

Keep posting them... it is interesting to see if the trend is upwards or not.
As long as the collection methodology is consistent it gives us some idea as to the interest out there.

Yea.. yea.. lots of folks watching/listening via various other means and as soon as thet can measure those consistently they will surely be added to the numbers for a more complete picture of things.

Thanks for this.