Antony
Alex Ross (28)
From the looks of things (and maybe this is mentioned elsewhere) - it got 372K on Ten, 104K on One and 222K on Foxtel.
So 698K all told.
Rugby TV ratings 2015
- Thread starter Strewthcobber
- Start date
- Status
From the looks of things (and maybe this is mentioned elsewhere) - it got 372K on Ten, 104K on One and 222K on Foxtel.
So 698K all told.
p.Tah
John Thornett (49)
That's just metro for Ten and One we don't know what regional was
p.Tah
John Thornett (49)
Interestingly on TEN 460k watched the post game interviews. Which is 90k MORE than watched the game. It suggests a lot of people started tuning in towards the end of the game and those numbers carried over to the post match interviews. Not sure if the same was seen on One.
This says one thing to me. People like watching the Wallabies when they win. When we start winning regularly again the ratings will increase substantially.
I'm guessing but at peak (last 15mins) just under 1M people would have been watching the game across Fox, Ten and One (regional/metro)
http://www.tvtonight.com.au/2015/08/saturday-8-august-2015.html
This says one thing to me. People like watching the Wallabies when they win. When we start winning regularly again the ratings will increase substantially.
I'm guessing but at peak (last 15mins) just under 1M people would have been watching the game across Fox, Ten and One (regional/metro)
http://www.tvtonight.com.au/2015/08/saturday-8-august-2015.html
TahDan
Cyril Towers (30)
The Bledisloe being so one sided has undoubtedly hurt its pulling power, but so has he resurgence of League. For a while there the Bledisloe and Origin were both rating about 2 million apiece, but as league has gotten bigger and recovered from the Super League war the audiences that seemingly left have gone back to them and aren't watching us
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
TahDan
Cyril Towers (30)
This year on aggregate, yes, but over the past 10 years and for Origin? No.
Parse
Bill Watson (15)
With the CH9 NRL rights for 4 games thursday, friday, saturday and sunday. Well whats to stop Fox from getting the other 4 games on the proviso they are also on thurs/fri/sat/sun and at a time 2 hours before the games on 9.
And then, just to throw a spanner in the works, since Fox are partnering up with TEN, they might like to offer TEN delayed telecast of those 4 games. With that delay accidentally colliding with the time of 9's matches....
And then, just to throw a spanner in the works, since Fox are partnering up with TEN, they might like to offer TEN delayed telecast of those 4 games. With that delay accidentally colliding with the time of 9's matches....
Fox will pay whatever they need to to keep the league. The alternative is losing a massive number of subscribers and stuffing up their entire business. I really don't see them taking this option.
That would be more like an ARU decision than a business one. Fox will make the business decision.
That would be more like an ARU decision than a business one. Fox will make the business decision.
T
Train Without a Station
Guest
And what competition is going to drive up the price? 9 have maxed themselves out getting 4 games. They cannot afford to pay for the remaining 4. If Foxtel offered $50M a year, could the NRL afford to forgo that income to have the remaining games on FTA?
TahDan
Cyril Towers (30)
No, but they could also just as easily shop those to 9, 7 or 10 as well.
Pretty sure 10, even with Lachy, are desperate enough for any sport that they'd go for it, and if Fox are only offering to pay for the 4 remaining games at a minimum it would be within the NRL's interest to give them to another FTA network, even if it were for marginally less.
The only play Fox has here is to bid for all of it... Your assumption assumes no other network would consider bidding for the remaining matches and I just don't think that's likely.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
T
TOCC
Guest
Everyone's arguing hypotheticals and we don't know the finer details of the contract, I think it's about time this discussion shifted to a NRL thread
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
T
Train Without a Station
Guest
But what does another network get for that? To go head to head with 9 to fight for League ratings.
9 has wrapped up Thursday night, Friday Night, Saturday night and Sunday afternoon in their deal as well as SOO.
What top rating product is still available?
If I'm Channel 7 or Channel 10 why would I pay even half as much for the worst 4 time slots, or one of the top time slots but already competing with 9 (if there is a 2nd Friday or Saturday night game), and no SOO?
Remember the 9 deal includes origin which is the highest 3 valued games already. Does it also include finals?
What valuable product is left? Nobody is going to pay per game for the worst 4 games of the round what 9 have paid per game for the best 4 games, origin and finals.
TahDan
Cyril Towers (30)
Of course TWAS, but you were arguing the NRL would have to take whatever Fox offers, and that's a different question as to whether the remaining games are worth as much as the 9 deal.
Yes 9 have all days sown up, but that doesn't mean 10 might not find a Friday night game, back to back matches on Saturday and an Sunday afternoon game wouldn't be a worthy investment.
They wouldn't be going up against 9, as the games would be played consecutively, so if you're a channel 10 exec desperate for sporting content why wouldn't you put a bid in?
With your suggestion that Fox might just give them a $50 take it or leave it approach, if I'm an FTA network I immediately come to the NRL with an offer and say "I'll give you the same and you'll get all of Australia, and not just 30% of the county".
Not rocket science. If just one FTA network has interest then even a lesser offer than a low FOXTEL one makes more sense for the NRL because the audience is more than 3 times larger.
The question is, if the NRL went totally FTA, how many people in NSW and Qld would bother keeping Fox? Pretty big gamble for FOXTEL, whilst it's not such a big deal for the NRL.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yes 9 have all days sown up, but that doesn't mean 10 might not find a Friday night game, back to back matches on Saturday and an Sunday afternoon game wouldn't be a worthy investment.
They wouldn't be going up against 9, as the games would be played consecutively, so if you're a channel 10 exec desperate for sporting content why wouldn't you put a bid in?
With your suggestion that Fox might just give them a $50 take it or leave it approach, if I'm an FTA network I immediately come to the NRL with an offer and say "I'll give you the same and you'll get all of Australia, and not just 30% of the county".
Not rocket science. If just one FTA network has interest then even a lesser offer than a low FOXTEL one makes more sense for the NRL because the audience is more than 3 times larger.
The question is, if the NRL went totally FTA, how many people in NSW and Qld would bother keeping Fox? Pretty big gamble for FOXTEL, whilst it's not such a big deal for the NRL.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
T
Train Without a Station
Guest
But let's have a look at the games right.
Friday night - Channel 7 have AFL Friday night's. I imagine they'll want to keep it. That reduces the betting war to 10 and Foxtel for a 2nd Friday game. And again, with the first one being in the same time slot, it doesn't offer the value of an exclusive game as 50% of your target audience won't tune in because the teams in the other game suits them better.
Saturday Afternoon - Currently 7 have the AFL afternoon game. Again, can't see them walking away from that. Therefore the NRL afternoon game offers no value to them. That leaves 10 and Foxtel to fight it out.
Saturday night - Same again. On 7.
Sunday - Again. 7.
I absolutely doubt Channel 7 will even make a bid. All they would be bidding on is product that competes with all their current product.
That leaves 10. There's been talk of them wanting live sport but they have never previously gone big for sport. I think they peaked at 1 AFL Game on Saturday nights in fact.
I wouldn't be surprised if they see a bit more value for money in their international rugby also.
But my point is there are 4 total players. 9, 7, 10 and Foxtel.
9 are tapped out. They've spent almost everything they can afford to get what suits them.
7 are well tied into AFL. They already basically have what 9 have just bid for in NRL. Can't see them looking to walk away from their prime AFL coverage to be the secondary NRL coverage.
That leaves 10 and Foxtel as the real competitors. Ignoring the potential Foxtel buy into 10, when has 10 in the past shown an inclination to throw $100Ms at sports? What they have shown is the inclination to step away when it gets to that level.
There's more money there for the NRL. Anybody who thinks that there's going to be huge bidding wars is filled with NRL head quarters hubris there.
Friday night - Channel 7 have AFL Friday night's. I imagine they'll want to keep it. That reduces the betting war to 10 and Foxtel for a 2nd Friday game. And again, with the first one being in the same time slot, it doesn't offer the value of an exclusive game as 50% of your target audience won't tune in because the teams in the other game suits them better.
Saturday Afternoon - Currently 7 have the AFL afternoon game. Again, can't see them walking away from that. Therefore the NRL afternoon game offers no value to them. That leaves 10 and Foxtel to fight it out.
Saturday night - Same again. On 7.
Sunday - Again. 7.
I absolutely doubt Channel 7 will even make a bid. All they would be bidding on is product that competes with all their current product.
That leaves 10. There's been talk of them wanting live sport but they have never previously gone big for sport. I think they peaked at 1 AFL Game on Saturday nights in fact.
I wouldn't be surprised if they see a bit more value for money in their international rugby also.
But my point is there are 4 total players. 9, 7, 10 and Foxtel.
9 are tapped out. They've spent almost everything they can afford to get what suits them.
7 are well tied into AFL. They already basically have what 9 have just bid for in NRL. Can't see them looking to walk away from their prime AFL coverage to be the secondary NRL coverage.
That leaves 10 and Foxtel as the real competitors. Ignoring the potential Foxtel buy into 10, when has 10 in the past shown an inclination to throw $100Ms at sports? What they have shown is the inclination to step away when it gets to that level.
There's more money there for the NRL. Anybody who thinks that there's going to be huge bidding wars is filled with NRL head quarters hubris there.
TahDan
Cyril Towers (30)
Maybe mate, we'll just have to wait and see. It's all conjecture really, as we're trying to assume what's in the heads of the FTA networks.
All I'm saying is that from the NRL's perspective they've already got enough money to keep themselves going from 9, so it's in their interest to play hard ball with Fox and even deny them any content at all if they take the piss and offer them a piddling $50 million.
Again though, the point is Fox would be up shit creek without a paddle without the NRL, but the NRL are just fine without Fox now thanks to 9.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
All I'm saying is that from the NRL's perspective they've already got enough money to keep themselves going from 9, so it's in their interest to play hard ball with Fox and even deny them any content at all if they take the piss and offer them a piddling $50 million.
Again though, the point is Fox would be up shit creek without a paddle without the NRL, but the NRL are just fine without Fox now thanks to 9.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
half
Dick Tooth (41)
Back to the ratings game the NRL / 9 deal is clever in this respect. Most future media talk says FTA broadcasting will be News, Sport and Reality TV.
On Thursday, Friday & Saturday nights the Nine news followed by the ACA and then the NRL. With Sunday afternoon + News + Reality in the voice blockbusters etc and then Monday to Wednesday nights the reality shows.
Summer time they have the cricket and are said to be chasing the A-League as well.
The trick for us and this is where the timeslots with NZ & SA make it difficult is to have a time slot that every week could be at the same time. I am sure if we could get a variety of Friday or Saturday night match played in Australia at 7:30 over a reasonable period say 12 weeks it could be sold to 10.
What the other codes do is offer regular prime time timeslots that a broadcaster can lock in.
I do sometimes wonder if the SA's have to much say in the SANDZAR broadcast agreement and as some have already suggested the Currie Cup deal being jointly signed does leave an impression if nothing else that the Currie Cup may have been boasted a little.
Back on topic Rugby needs to look at how the NRL has read the current FTA future broadcasting needs and arranged regular weekly matches over a time period that allows for an audience to build. Sadly I doubt the ARU has the ability to push this as other costs and travel consideration could be argued are of greater importance.
On Thursday, Friday & Saturday nights the Nine news followed by the ACA and then the NRL. With Sunday afternoon + News + Reality in the voice blockbusters etc and then Monday to Wednesday nights the reality shows.
Summer time they have the cricket and are said to be chasing the A-League as well.
The trick for us and this is where the timeslots with NZ & SA make it difficult is to have a time slot that every week could be at the same time. I am sure if we could get a variety of Friday or Saturday night match played in Australia at 7:30 over a reasonable period say 12 weeks it could be sold to 10.
What the other codes do is offer regular prime time timeslots that a broadcaster can lock in.
I do sometimes wonder if the SA's have to much say in the SANDZAR broadcast agreement and as some have already suggested the Currie Cup deal being jointly signed does leave an impression if nothing else that the Currie Cup may have been boasted a little.
Back on topic Rugby needs to look at how the NRL has read the current FTA future broadcasting needs and arranged regular weekly matches over a time period that allows for an audience to build. Sadly I doubt the ARU has the ability to push this as other costs and travel consideration could be argued are of greater importance.
On the flipside of that, Murdoch controls pretty much all the biggest rugby league newspapers in the country and Foxsports produces a lot of non-match NRL broadcasts (i.e. Sterlo etc.).
It's not like Foxtel is without leverage in their dealings with the NRL.
It's not like Foxtel is without leverage in their dealings with the NRL.
- Status