[Kyryllo]

Originally Posted by Benji Snap

lol are u trying to be retarded?

the picture proves me right

see that little black box on top of the TV? That records what channel the person is on, then it automatically uploads to the ratings database.

Ugh... Are you sure you spent more than 2 seconds viewing this picture? Do you actually know what this black box is? Do you know how to get one? This is not a satellite or cable set top box, it is a people meter!

People meter - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It even stands there in the text!

In short: survey>selection of panel households and installation of people meters>cohort study

[Benji Snap]

Originally Posted by Kyryllo

Ugh... Are you sure you spent more than 2 seconds viewing this picture? Do you actually know what this black box is? Do you know how to get one? This is not a satellite or cable set top box, it is a people meter!

People meter - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It even stands there in the text!

In short: survey>selection of panel households and installation of people meters>cohort study

The survey is a very thorough and extensive process done to select the households to make sure its an accurate cross section of the general public that is reflective of true society. The survey is not to ask what they watch and its done to make sure that the households are reflective of society as opposed to randomisation.

Its hilarious that you sight a 2cent phone survey that no one uses for any purpose as reliable then u question data which is responsible for hundreds of billions of dollars and data that is utilised by billion dollar corporations to decide where to spend their money. You really have nfi.

[Kyryllo]

Dude, just a moment ago you thought your set top box would record data about your TV and even pay Tv behavior and transfer it somewhere and linked me a site of an organization that ONLY collects program rankings for free to air tv and even in a completely different way as you thought. And now you are suddenly an expert in how to collect data on media reception? What was your complaint about sweeney again? Oh yes:

is based on a random phone surveys and does not bother to include regional Australia.

and that TV ratings are so great because:

TV ratings atleast take into account the entire country and not just capital cities.

well surprise the OzTAM does not do it either, the program rankings are only for the 5 metropolitan regions. To get the regional data you need to collect the Regional tam for the east coast and diary survey from the rest of australia.

And please stop trying to educate me on media studies and studies at all, I study this and have analyzed many studies from many countries. In tv ratings there's a unwritten rule, the electronic meter study numbers are always too high phone and diary surveys are too low. The reception of sports is cross-medial and is not only covered by TV. Interest in sports and sports popularity is something completely different from simple TV ratings.

Leagues history and it's antiquated idea of a class struggle is what hinders it's progress. Soccer and Aussie Rules do not have this problem. Active participation numbers are crucial for sports' progression on any level.
Although you don't like but Union is catching up to League in participation:
organized participation in sports (ERASS survey, australians 15+ yo):
League:
2001: 126.000
2006: 161.000
gain of 35.000 (28%)

Union:
2001: 75.000
2006: 143.000
gain of 68.000 (91%)

Aussie rules:
2001: 272.000
2006: 347.000
gain of 75.000 (28%)

Soccer (outdoor):
2001: 377.000
2006: 447.000
gain of 70.000 (19%)

[Ben Zona]

Just a comment:

I dont know how tv ratings are generated in australia and I dont know shit about which sport is popular in AUS more than others,

BUT I can tell you (without going into details) that in the scientific community (not the economy) here, the process of gathering the data for tv ratings gets HIGHLY questioned.
I dont mean that the sampling of different households into a representative group is not done properly, but the device used to actually register when who is watching what program can make the results inaccurate simply because a human being (the guy whos watching tv) has to operate it, and way too often this isnt done correctly/accurately enough.

[Benji Snap]

Originally Posted by Kyryllo

Dude, just a moment ago you thought your set top box would record data about your TV and even pay Tv behavior and transfer it somewhere and linked me a site of an organization that ONLY collects program rankings for free to air tv and even in a completely different way as you thought. And now you are suddenly an expert in how to collect data on media reception? What was your complaint about sweeney again? Oh yes:


And please stop trying to educate me on media studies and studies at all, I study this and have analyzed many studies from many countries. In tv ratings there's a unwritten rule, the electronic meter study numbers are always too high phone and diary surveys are too low. The reception of sports is cross-medial and is not only covered by TV. Interest in sports and sports popularity is something completely different from simple TV ratings.

Leagues history and it's antiquated idea of a class struggle is what hinders it's progress. Soccer and Aussie Rules do not have this problem. Active participation numbers are crucial for sports' progression on any level.
Although you don't like but Union is catching up to League in participation:
organized participation in sports (ERASS survey, australians 15+ yo):
League:
2001: 126.000
2006: 161.000
gain of 35.000 (28%)

Union:
2001: 75.000
2006: 143.000
gain of 68.000 (91%)

Aussie rules:
2001: 272.000
2006: 347.000
gain of 75.000 (28%)

Soccer (outdoor):
2001: 377.000
2006: 447.000
gain of 70.000 (19%)

LOLOLOLOL

Union catching up? hahahahahah... the game has been on such a decline since 2003. Meanwhile the ARU is losing $20million dollars a year, they had to cut an entire competition last year due to a lack of interest, (they were actually PAYING tv networks to show their games) and there is so much junior talent that they constantly need to buy reserve grade RL players to prop up their Wallaby ranks.

and that TV ratings are so great because:


well surprise the OzTAM does not do it either, the program rankings are only for the 5 metropolitan regions. To get the regional data you need to collect the Regional tam for the east coast and diary survey from the rest of australia.

Wow, fascinating. Where did I say Oztam do regionals aswell? ofcourse they combine regional and metropolitan ratings together for national TV ratings.

http://www.thinktv.com.au//Media/Sta...7_Survey10.pdf

Highest rating NRL game 3,700,000 million viewers
Highest rating soccer game 110,000

According to you there is a 3.6 million margin of error as soccer is more popular right?

[Kyryllo]

Maybe I don't understand something, but I always thought a decline would be when numbers go down instead of up

And well you can lol all you want the participation numbers for union got higher in the latter years. According to the latest ERASS report in the year 2006 males over 15 yo in Queensland played: League-69.000; Union-80.000.

Information and Research :: Exercise, Recreation, and Sport Survey

[Benji Snap]

Originally Posted by Kyryllo

Maybe I don't understand something, but I always thought a decline would be when numbers go down instead of up

And well you can lol all you want the participation numbers for union got higher in the latter years. According to the latest ERASS report in the year 2006 males over 15 yo in Queensland played: League-69.000; Union-80.000.

Information and Research :: Exercise, Recreation, and Sport Survey

The ARL had RL participation numbers at 370,000 in 2006, not 170,000.
Every other key indicator for union has gone down since 2003. Sponserships, revenues, crowds, tv ratings etc. thats why it is in a state of decline. As for the "ERASS figures" anyone with half a brain knows that RL is by far the dominant sport in QLD. Anything that says union is bigger than RL in QLD of all places is not worth the paper its written on.

This has gone on long enough anyway and its ruining the thread.

[Kyryllo]

Originally Posted by Benji Snap

The ARL had RL participation numbers at 370,000 in 2006, not 170,000.
Every other key indicator for union has gone down since 2003. Sponserships, revenues, crowds, tv ratings etc. thats why it is in a state of decline. As for the "ERASS figures" anyone with half a brain knows that RL is by far the dominant sport in QLD. Anything that says union is bigger than RL in QLD of all places is not worth the paper its written on.

This has gone on long enough anyway and its ruining the thread.

I'll do it the same way you do now.


Ultimate Frisbee is the most popular sport in Australasia, source? I think it is the way so I pulled it straight from my ass, even five of my neighbors agree, other 4 of my neighbors don't but they are terrorists and their opinion is worthless anyway.

[Benji Snap]

Originally Posted by Kyryllo

I'll do it the same way you do now.


Ultimate Frisbee is the most popular sport in Australasia, source? I think it is the way so I pulled it straight from my ass, even five of my neighbors agree, other 4 of my neighbors don't but they are terrorists and their opinion is worthless anyway.

I didnt know Ultimate Frisbee was the most watched sport in Australia and gets national audiences of over 3.8million viewers.

[Frank Butcher]

One of the Rugby codes will go in Australia but which one.