Rugby TV ratings 2015

[Train Without a Station]

Errrrr, yes, that is obvious. My little local franchise, the Rays, had a significant local following. Made up or not, it had a strong local flavour.

So you had a stronger affinity to a team playing out of a region different to the one it represents, in a forced merger, than the current entity, which is playing in their chosen region through a willing partnership?

Makes sense.

 

[Braveheart81]

So you had a stronger affinity to a team playing out of a region different to the one it represents, in a forced merger, than the current entity, which is playing in their chosen region through a willing partnership?

Makes sense.

Wamberal is a suburb on the Central Coast so maybe that was the reason for the greater affinity to the 2007 Rays?

 

[RedsHappy]

RH your points about Melbourne are correct. But this is an investment that is very likely to pay dividends long term.

The other thing to consider, is that the Rebels have also increased Australia's share. Extra TV market and extra game each week.

Presently the ARU are subsidizing them to a diminishing level. I believe the total is around $8M, not $10M+. Come 2016 they are now self-reliant, but also part of a $15M revenue increase to the ARU based on the same current costs if the rumoured TV deal is correct.

They have already provided some value.

You have to consider that marketing would not guarantee a greater return, and would not give any long term benefit.

TWAS, not to be too pedantic, but in the Notes to the latest ARU accounts I am sure you'll find that the $8m 'loan' for the Rebels was to 31/12/14 and that nearly $4m cash additional was earmarked to continue into 2015. Assuming a Rebels sale around now, that's going to be say $2m this year, hence c.$10m in total.

I was not necessarily attacking financial support to the Rebels - although we could one day have a robust debate re that in relation to contrasting other priorities for the code here, and priorities that are suffering. For another day. (The Rebels - now c.5 years old - are still struggling to get crowds of over 10k-12k.)

Rather I was highlighting that this investment (relative to the ARU's financial situation) and large diversion of cash to the Rebels (which is in a real sense 'emergency funding' as such was never originally planned for when the Rebels were incepted) is in significant part the reason the ARU has so little money for broader Aus rugby marketing.

And, in the Aus sports marketplace, astute code marketing is critical to code viability, it's not optional or discretionary.

Just one isolated example re how little effort + $s the ARU invests these days in proper event marketing: for last year's Brisbane Test, I detected not a single noteworthy promotional event or prominent tactical marketing spend to build interest in the Test.

As you'll recall, the crowd numbers for that Test v France were some of the worst ever for a Suncorp Test. Wallaby gate income (which partly correlates with long-term sponsor interest and income) is a large and critical income stream for the ARU.

 

[Floggn']

Just re declining Fox S15 viewership numbers:

Look, this is a comparatively small factor I grant, but I really believe a factor in this decline has to do with Fox's lack of change and serious refresh of the truly hapless Fox S15 commentators with their often heavily biassed and idiotic, cliche-saturated standards of contribution, etc. I'd pay for a button to turn most of them off and just get refs' feed and crowd noise.

It's getting worse I think, not better.

I agree. Greg Clarke is the most negative commentator on Television. For example the Reds game on the weekend. "TERRIBLE SCRUM for the Chiefs"

WRONG!!

GREAT SCRUM for the Reds. They constantly CONSTANTLY pick the negative out of situation rather than the positive. The League commentators on the other hand will never say terrible defence when a bloke doesn't even try to tackle another they will declare it to be the greatest try in the history of League. FOXsports need a real shake up here and need to find someone new. Sean Maloney isn't that guy either.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Do you have an update on the averages.

No exact numbers but there's barely been a game over 50k since then so the average is less than 58k now

 

[Gnostic]

Rather I was highlighting that this investment (relative to the ARU's financial situation) and large diversion of cash to the Rebels (which is in a real sense 'emergency funding' as such was never originally planned for when the Rebels were incepted) is in significant part the reason the ARU has so little money for broader Aus rugby marketing.

And, in the Aus sports marketplace, astute code marketing is critical to code viability, it's not optional or discretionary.

This part stands out particularly for me. How much has really been invested into the NRC. As much as I dislike the structure of that "competition" it really is necessary for the future of the game in Australia.

The only thing I can see that could be used to "justify" the expenditure on the Rebels is if the ARU has made some sort of contract/agreement with Fox and/or SANZAR to have 5 sides and having committed to Melbourne find themselves unable to move away for a variety of reasons, including opposition from the NSWRU to basing a second side in Western Sydney or Central coast to compete with the Tahs, who have never recovered their former supporter base.

 

[Train Without a Station]

The Rebels gave the ARU an increase in the revenue share based on the current deal.

 

[Train Without a Station]

I love how xenophobic Australian rugby fans are against anything in a traditional market.

The Rebels have popped up with a fraction of the assistance that the Swans, Lions, GC Suns and GWS have been afforded by the AFL over the years.

One is one of the most successful codes of football there is. The other one is us.

 

[Joeleee]

Australian rugby supporters are very tribalistic within the code. You look at the legitimate vitriol between, for example:

• NSW and QLD
• NSW and ACT
• Traditional vs non-traditional markets
• Club supporters vs the NRC
• GPS/Syd Uni/others vs those heavily against
• Country vs City

Some of this is positive, in making derbies interesting etc. but I feel like it's taken too far in so many ways. I know there's some of that in other codes etc. but I feel like it's just so heavily politicised in Australian rugby. I think the quote still very much holds that it's a "professional sport, run by amateurs".

 

[WorkingClassRugger]

Australian rugby supporters are very tribalistic within the code. You look at the legitimate vitriol between, for example:

• NSW and QLD
• NSW and ACT
• Traditional vs non-traditional markets
• Club supporters vs the NRC
• GPS/Syd Uni/others vs those heavily against
• Country vs City

Some of this is positive, in making derbies interesting etc. but I feel like it's taken too far in so many ways. I know there's some of that in other codes etc. but I feel like it's just so heavily politicised in Australian rugby. I think the quote still very much holds that it's a "professional sport, run by amateurs".

Tribalistic or myopic? I'd err on the side of the latter.

 

[wamberal]

So you had a stronger affinity to a team playing out of a region different to the one it represents, in a forced merger, than the current entity, which is playing in their chosen region through a willing partnership?

Makes sense.

What does"sense" have to do with becoming a follower of a particular team?

You follow your team or teams for your own reasons, and so do I.

I lived and worked in Melbourne for a few years, and was always amused at the stories people had to explain their choice of AFL team. The reasons ran the gamut from family tradition at one end of the spectrum, or district affiliation (far less significant) through to a random decision at the age of 6 or 7.

One of my neighbours grew up in Canberra when the Raiders ruled the roost in the loig. He decided to follow the Eels because he "felt sorry for them" when he was a kid. Still follows them.


Be as logical as you like, team choice does not have much to do with logic (although my attachment to Eastwood, and also the Rays, was because of geography, and personal relationships with the two organisations - as a player with Eastwood, too)

 

[half]

Does anyone have the average rating or know where to get them for each year of the Super Rugby.

I seem to remember a few years back it was somewhere in the 90's per match.

Train has expressed that Super Rugby may have had its day but we still need the revenue but if our rating keep falling keep falling how long will the revenue last.

What this all means I am no sure but it can't be good.

 

[p.Tah]

Offical TV ratings for the Rebels vs. Force was 11 people. That's how exciting that match was.

 

[wamberal]

Offical TV ratings for the Rebels vs. Force was 11 people. That's how exciting that match was.

Really? I thought it was pretty good, one of the better local derbies. A lot of passion by both sides.

 

[rugbyking2]

The ARU needs to face reality and man up. Hire someone proficient in marketing and ram Israel Folau into the faces of league fans who recognise him and think "Hey, lets go watch Izzy play" and there a new fan of the game is born.

Furthermore, when promoting Izzy get other clean cut, identifiable faces such as Bernard Foley and co to tag along and become recognised amongst a new market. Even promoting the relationship of Matt To'omua and Ellyse Perry could provide a niche support from woman who idolise Ellyse and thus may go on to watch her husband play.

Lastly, I read an idea about 'country week' where all franchises during the bye week go into a country competition and work with the local clubs, and not just a 1 hour clinic, but a proper 4 days or so where they engage with the clubs and the community. Going down to training for the senior grades, showing up at the junior competitions and having a chicken schnitzel down at the local RSL with the old boys. League is declining in country areas so it may be worthwhile to Rugby to fill the void.

 

[qwerty51]

Do you think people go to a game to watch one person play?

 

[rugbyking2]

Do you think people go to a game to watch one person play?

These people will identify with Israel Folau playing for a team and be more inclined to then watch. This also draws back into associating others with the recognisable figure as to promote identifiable figures in the game.

 

[p.Tah]

Really? I thought it was pretty good, one of the better local derbies. A lot of passion by both sides.

The score was close but I thought the skills and and tactics were pretty average.

 

[TOCC]

Really? I thought it was pretty good, one of the better local derbies. A lot of passion by both sides.

Passion doesn't equate to entertaining rugby when one team is doing its very best to continuously disrupt the ball and slow down the game.. Foley ball is a more boring and less successful version of Jake Ball, and the Rebels just weren't up to the task with their own skills and handling faltering under the pressure..

Foley needs to be sacked for the good of the game in WA

 

[TOCC]

People watch professional sports because the skills and talent of professional sportsmen is supposed to exceed the general public and lower levels of rugby...

Yet you then have games like last night which feature high error rate's and game plans which encourage little excitement and few opportunities for players to really display their skills.

People say winning rugby is entertaining rugby, and it might be to a certain extent but this needs to be reinforced with skilful and talented performances, and currently coaches like Foley and Graham aren't facilitating their players to do this.

What I will say, is that the REBvFOR match featured some of the best scrums I've seen all year, if all teams scrummaged like last night then scrums wouldn't be the time wasting burden that they are on the game..