R5 - Adelaide v Port Reserves Post Match

[johntheclaret]

Channel 7 Media Release...

PORT and CROWS SET SANFL RATINGS RECORD

SANFL IGA LEAGUE telecast draws 63,000 viewers

Seven’s historic SANFL IGA League clash between the Adelaide Crows and Port Adelaide on Sunday drew the biggest audience for a home and away telecast since 2001.

The LIVE telecast (2.00 to 5.00pm) averaged 63,291 viewers on 7mate with a peak audience of 81,000 viewers.

The MAC Game of The Week partly clashed with the AFL match between Geelong and Richmond which averaged 56,712 viewers (2.30 to 5.30pm) on Seven.

The broadcast, with commentators John Casey, Mark Soderstrom and Tim Ginever and boundary reporter Tom Wilson, saw Port Adelaide claim top spot and Crows key forward Taylor Walker kick four goals before his expected return to the Crows’ AFL squad.

The previous highest rating SANFL home and away match since the start of the OzTAM people meter ratings system in 2001 was the Sturt v Woodville West Torrens match in 2005 (56,743 viewers).

Seven’s SANFL IGA League telecasts are averaging 47,841 viewers after five rounds – a jump of almost 28,000 viewers per match after five rounds (20,193) of the 2013 season on the ABC.

HIGHEST RATING SANFL TELECASTS SINCE 2001

Year Match Viewers
2014 Crows v Port 63,291
2005 Sturt v Eagles 56,743
2014 Norwood v Port 54,884
2003 Norwood v Sturt 54,641
2004 Sturt v Eagles 54,150


Seven’s SANFL IGA LEAGUE telecasts are supported by MAC, RAA, IGA and Bank SA.

That's a bit confusing as I'm sure they announced the Norwood v Port Thursday night game as a record breaker and I'm sure it had a higher average ?

[Big Phil]

That's a bit confusing as I'm sure they announced the Norwood v Port Thursday night game as a record breaker and I'm sure it had a higher average ?

Yep - http://www.sanfl.com.au/news/sanfl_news/page_5/2428/

[johntheclaret]

That's a bit confusing as I'm sure they announced the Norwood v Port Thursday night game as a record breaker and I'm sure it had a higher average ?

Yep - http://www.sanfl.com.au/news/sanfl_news/page_5/2428/

Thanks Phil. I was sure I'd read it before.
Which does beg another question, why are Ch7 releasing yet another "record breaking" claim. Am I missing something obvious?

[bennymacca]

I think it might have been peak vs average.

[klaan]

5000 attendees and 60000 viewers would suggest someone is interested in this game. Maybe noone on this site, but someone!

[Bounce of the ball]

Regardless of all that , the coverage is better as expected. TV is now at least looking professional .People won't look or listen to amateur crap .

[matt35]

I think I can clear this up.

The average figure of 63 thousand mentioned in that media release is for the entire telecast-that is pre match, the game itself, plus post match interviews etc. Same for the figure of 54 thousand mentioned for the round 1 Norwood v Port game.

Where it gets a bit confusing is that they mention an average figure of 72 thousand for Norwood v Port. That figure is for the actual match only, excluding both pre match and post match.

So, bottom line is, yesterday's telecast had both a higher average and a higher peak audience than the Norwood v Port game.

[sjt]

5000 attendees and 60000 viewers would suggest someone is interested in this game. Maybe noone on this site, but someone!

I hope "someone" can convert their interest into somehow adding value to the sanfl.

[matt35]

Just an admittedly off topic observation: can't help noticing that Sturt feature prominently in those ratings records! Interest certainly seems to be boosted when they are in the mix.

[johntheclaret]

I think I can clear this up.

The average figure of 63 thousand mentioned in that media release is for the entire telecast-that is pre match, the game itself, plus post match interviews etc. Same for the figure of 54 thousand mentioned for the round 1 Norwood v Port game.

Where it gets a bit confusing is that they mention an average figure of 72 thousand for Norwood v Port. That figure is for the actual match only, excluding both pre match and post match.

So, bottom line is, yesterday's telecast had both a higher average and a higher peak audience than the Norwood v Port game.

Thanks Matt. All that confirms that statistics can be manipulated to suit the agenda.

[RB]

Just an admittedly off topic observation: can't help noticing that Sturt feature prominently in those ratings records! Interest certainly seems to be boosted when they are in the mix.

I think they feature prominently in the attendance records too.

[the joker]

5000 attendees and 60000 viewers would suggest someone is interested in this game. Maybe noone on this site, but someone!

I hope "someone" can convert their interest into somehow adding value to the sanfl.

more people through the gates and bigger tv ratings means more revenue for the SANFL and therefore more value

[johntheclaret]

5000 attendees and 60000 viewers would suggest someone is interested in this game. Maybe noone on this site, but someone!

I hope "someone" can convert their interest into somehow adding value to the sanfl.

more people through the gates and bigger tv ratings means more revenue for the SANFL and therefore more value

Yep, the gate money went to the SANFL although that would have happened whether it was televised or not.
As for better ratings generating more income, I understood that the SANFL was funding the TV deal to the tune of more than $1m a year, all be it through sponsorship, which was already tied up this year.

You would think though that next year the SANFL would have a stronger bargaining position considering all the rating records that are being broken.

[the joker]

5000 attendees and 60000 viewers would suggest someone is interested in this game. Maybe noone on this site, but someone!

I hope "someone" can convert their interest into somehow adding value to the sanfl.

more people through the gates and bigger tv ratings means more revenue for the SANFL and therefore more value

Yep, the gate money went to the SANFL although that would have happened whether it was televised or not.
As for better ratings generating more income, I understood that the SANFL was funding the TV deal to the tune of more than $1m a year, all be it through sponsorship, which was already tied up this year.

You would think though that next year the SANFL would have a stronger bargaining position considering all the rating records that are being broken.

yeah hopefully. That's a good thing for the SANFL. More money means bigger salary cap therefore meaning the standard will only go up


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk