RLWC - TV viewing figures

[Dave T]

7 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

That's as big as the men got against Greece. Fantastic. We really need to integrate women and wheelchair in our core offer to broadcasters, I hope IMG understand this.

I'd love to have seen what we could have pulled in for an evening game for the men's team, particularly on BBC One. As has been pointed out, Sat afternoon is a good slot for sports, but it ain't a prime time TV slot. 

Something to consider for future. 

I think an England final appearance at 4pm on Saturday on BBC One could do really good numbers, particularly if we play well. 

[gingerjon]

21 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

We really need to integrate women and wheelchair in our core offer to broadcasters

Other way round, to my eye.

We really need to appreciate that women and wheelchair rugby league have a value of their own, and package them to broadcasters accordingly.

[Damien]

1 hour ago, gingerjon said:

Other way round, to my eye.

We really need to appreciate that women and wheelchair rugby league have a value of their own, and package them to broadcasters accordingly.

I was going to post this. Bundling rights in together is very lazy and just the old RL pile it high, sell it cheap mentality.

[Dave T]

1 hour ago, gingerjon said:

Other way round, to my eye.

We really need to appreciate that women and wheelchair rugby league have a value of their own, and package them to broadcasters accordingly.

Yep, agreed. If a broadcaster wants to create a bundle by buying two packages, great, but we have a tendency to put things together too easily. 

[Toby Chopra]

I get what you guys are saying, and if it was just giving it away for free out of laziness, then I'd agree. And you're right, wd have form for that. 

But I look at it more that England rugby league is our strongest brand, with multiple ways now to access that, and we would be selling that unifield brand - in volume. I really wouldn't want that split across multiple broadcasters, we want one to come on board and champion it, be the home for England rugby league in all its formats. 

Rarher than saying, we can offer 3 matches every other year, we can offer a much larger multi year package with dozens of games - so we'd definitely get more for it done properly. (Again, IMG anyone?) 

I believe England cricket sell the womens rights along with the men, to add value with extra games, not as a freebie. Yes, they have Sky and BBC, but where we are now I don't want any of our internationals on Sky - i want BBC or Channel 4 to take on the whole package and run with it. 

At this stage of the development of womens sport, i think it would work well. 

[Dave T]

6 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

I get what you guys are saying, and if it was just giving it away for free out of laziness, then I'd agree. And you're right, wd have form for that. 

But I look at it more that England rugby league is our strongest brand, with multiple ways now to access that, and we would be selling that unifield brand - in volume. I really wouldn't want that split across multiple broadcasters, we want one to come on board and champion it, be the home for England rugby league in all its formats. 

Rarher than saying, we can offer 3 matches every other year, we can offer a much larger multi year package with dozens of games - so we'd definitely get more for it done properly. (Again, IMG anyone?) 

I believe England cricket sell the womens rights along with the men, to add value with extra games, not as a freebie. Yes, they have Sky and BBC, but where we are now I don't want any of our internationals on Sky - i want BBC or Channel 4 to take on the whole package and run with it. 

At this stage of the development of womens sport, i think it would work well. 

All that works though even if it is split into two/three packages. 

The benefit is that you may get more competition for Wheelchair RL from the likes of Channel 4, and Women's RL more from a channel with a focus on womens sport. 

The risk is that some remain unsold if there is no interest. 

Edited November 10, 2022 by Dave T

[Tommygilf]

4 hours ago, Toby Chopra said:

That's as big as the men got against Greece. Fantastic. We really need to integrate women and wheelchair in our core offer to broadcasters, I hope IMG understand this.

 

4 hours ago, gingerjon said:

Other way round, to my eye.

We really need to appreciate that women and wheelchair rugby league have a value of their own, and package them to broadcasters accordingly.

I don't think these are incompatible positions. For example I would absolutely expect having a successful and well funded Women's and Wheelchair setup to be a major plus with IMG Grading, and for IMG to be seeing how those two sports can be monetised and built upon most effectively.

[Tommygilf]

9 minutes ago, Dave T said:

All that works though even if it is split into two/three packages. 

The benefit is that you may get more competition for Wheelchair RL from the likes of Channel 4, and Women's RL more from a channel with a focus on womens sport. 

The risk is that some remain unsold if there is no interest. 

I think we need to have a major reminder of what happened to the Championship (and League 1) when they split from Super League's TV deal.

Nobody doubts the entertainment and quality is there, but is the audience large enough currently? The lower division now has a weekly game (on a Monday night) with admittedly great presentation, but on an extremely niche channel with essentially a zero cash deal.

I'd add a caveat by saying womens and wheelchair RL have the advantage of being elite level sports, with large club involvement, and being definite growth areas for the sport. Low hanging fruit so to speak.

I'd still expect existing RL broadcasters to be the one's interested in any TV Rights nevertheless.

[Dave T]

14 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

I think we need to have a major reminder of what happened to the Championship (and League 1) when they split from Super League's TV deal.

Nobody doubts the entertainment and quality is there, but is the audience large enough currently? The lower division now has a weekly game (on a Monday night) with admittedly great presentation, but on an extremely niche channel with essentially a zero cash deal.

I'd add a caveat by saying womens and wheelchair RL have the advantage of being elite level sports, with large club involvement, and being definite growth areas for the sport. Low hanging fruit so to speak.

I'd still expect existing RL broadcasters to be the one's interested in any TV Rights nevertheless.

I think the big difference here is that it is one governing body, rather than two, meaning that if that is the direction of travel, things can be combined. 

[Tommygilf]

4 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I think the big difference here is that it is one governing body, rather than two, meaning that if that is the direction of travel, things can be combined. 

Agreed, I think there just to be some perspective and making sure we are walking before we try running.

[gingerjon]

For the semi final ... 1.4m average and 2.4m peak.

https://www.totalrl.com/tv-viewing-figures-for-englands-heartbreaking-world-cup-loss-to-samoa-revealed/

[Toby Chopra]

49 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

For the semi final ... 1.4m average and 2.4m peak.

https://www.totalrl.com/tv-viewing-figures-for-englands-heartbreaking-world-cup-loss-to-samoa-revealed/

Pretty much bang on what we got for the semi-final in 2013. The Aus-NZ final that year got 1.5m, so hopefully we can match that too. Although we're all gutted, I'll definitely still be watching, and cheering on Samoa. (I've given my match ticket away though.)    

Disappointing that we haven't made any breakthroughs on viewing figures - I'd hoped the flip side of the lower attendances would be higher TV, but it was not to be. Perhaps some new audiences have been tapped in women/wheelchair. We'll see.

In the end, we've shown we can activate our regular terrestrial audience of 1-2.5 mln people a week for top level internationals.  If we could offer a broadcaster that consistently - a 3 match series every autumn getting those numbers - then it would be a media property that would attract bids. But alas, we can't a offer any predictabilty on that, so the value of the games decline.        

[unapologetic pedant]

53 minutes ago, Toby Chopra said:

Although we're all gutted, I'll definitely still be watching, and cheering on Samoa. (I've given my match ticket away though.)    

Disappointing that we haven't made any breakthroughs on viewing figures        

Rugby League "fan" gives away ticket for RLWC final because England will not be there. We won`t be making breakthroughs of any sort if this is typical. 

Everybody saw how good the Kiwis are the other night. A team full of fantastic, exciting players. Yet next year it will be "Oh no! not New Zealand again".

How long before it`s "Oh no! not Samoa again". Or Tonga. Or PNG. Or France. Or anybody but the Kangaroos. Our idea of international RL seems to begin and end with England v Australia.

Then we blame the NRL. If only those Aussies weren`t so insular.

[JohnM]

1 hour ago, Toby Chopra said:

Pretty much bang on what we got for the semi-final in 2013. The Aus-NZ final that year got 1.5m, so hopefully we can match that too. Although we're all gutted, I'll definitely still be watching, and cheering on Samoa. (I've given my match ticket away though.)    

Disappointing that we haven't made any breakthroughs on viewing figures - I'd hoped the flip side of the lower attendances would be higher TV, but it was not to be. Perhaps some new audiences have been tapped in women/wheelchair. We'll see.

In the end, we've shown we can activate our regular terrestrial audience of 1-2.5 mln people a week for top level internationals.  If we could offer a broadcaster that consistently - a 3 match series every autumn getting those numbers - then it would be a media property that would attract bids. But alas, we can't a offer any predictabilty on that, so the value of the games decline.        

In general, TV viewing figures have fallen quite significantly across the board in the 9 years since 2013. Maybe maintaining the 2013 figures is pretty good against that background.

[gingerjon]

40 minutes ago, JohnM said:

In general, TV viewing figures have fallen quite significantly across the board in the 9 years since 2013. Maybe maintaining the 2013 figures is pretty good against that background.

Take your point but sport has, by and large, bucked that trend as it is, to quote Sky, only live once.

I do think we've done well not to go backwards given how tough the years since 2013 have been for the visibility of rugby league.

It shows what a great game we have.

[JohnM]

5 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Take your point but sport has, by and large, bucked that trend as it is, to quote Sky, only live once.

I do think we've done well not to go backwards given how tough the years since 2013 have been for the visibility of rugby league.

It shows what a great game we have.

Yes. It was bloody exciting, a roller coaster ride on Saturday sitting no more than about 50 feet from the sideline/tryline. You could feel the ground shake. You had an appreciation of how fast, how hard it all is and how even 1 inch can make the difference between failure and success.

[Toby Chopra]

54 minutes ago, JohnM said:

In general, TV viewing figures have fallen quite significantly across the board in the 9 years since 2013. Maybe maintaining the 2013 figures is pretty good against that background.

Yes, as I say, it's not a terrible outcome that we've maintained our audience, although live sport does tend to have been the one exception to falling TV numbers in the cord cutting era, especially on FTA. 

We have a fan base - and it's definitely wider than just the club-based heartlands - so we've got something to work with. It's just the age-old question of how to widen it further. I had thought the RLWC would do that, but judging by the TV numbers, it seems not.

However, it's not a cause for crisis, just got to keep working hard, and see what IMG come up with.  

 

 

Edited November 14, 2022 by Toby Chopra

[The Rocket]

20 hours ago, Toby Chopra said:

For the semi final ... 1.4m average and 2.4m peak.

Just don`t get how that thrilling game could peak at 2.4m and average 1.4m. Does that mean ~1m turned off when England fell 10 points behind, a team they had walloped 3 weeks earlier and had to be odds-on to make a comeback. Or surely people weren`t just bored. Just don`t get it.

To be perfectly frank though, considering some on here were saying anything less than 4m for a final involving England, 1.4m for a semi is pretty disappointing.

[Hull Kingston Bronco]

21 hours ago, Toby Chopra said:

 

Disappointing that we haven't made any breakthroughs on viewing figures - I'd hoped the flip side of the lower attendances would be higher TV, but it was not to be. Perhaps some new audiences have been tapped in women/wheelchair. We'll see.

 

A lot less people watch “linear” terrestrial TV now, so I think holding the same raw numbers actually means we’ve increased share of available audience quite a lot 

[HawkMan]

11 minutes ago, The Rocket said:

Just don`t get how that thrilling game could peak at 2.4m and average 1.4m. Does that mean ~1m turned off when England fell 10 points behind, a team they had walloped 3 weeks earlier and had to be odds-on to make a comeback. Or surely people weren`t just bored. Just don`t get it.

To be perfectly frank though, considering some on here were saying anything less than 4m for a final involving England, 1.4m for a semi is pretty disappointing.

Yes, I wondered about that 1m drop off too, however we don't know when the peak of 2.4m was. The game overran due to golden point, and therefore the soccer results show Final Score was delayed,  so did the extra 1m tune in expecting to see that, and just stayed for the end of the game.

[gingerjon]

16 minutes ago, The Rocket said:

Just don`t get how that thrilling game could peak at 2.4m and average 1.4m. Does that mean ~1m turned off when England fell 10 points behind, a team they had walloped 3 weeks earlier and had to be odds-on to make a comeback. Or surely people weren`t just bored. Just don`t get it.

To be perfectly frank though, considering some on here were saying anything less than 4m for a final involving England, 1.4m for a semi is pretty disappointing.

Other way round, more than likely.

Peak viewing tends to be when the match is at its most competitive and/or heading to a conclusion.

[Yakstorm]

There can also be multiple peaks, ie. There could have been over 2m at the start and other points of the game as well.

The average is across the entire broadcast, often includes pre, post & halftime, which can pull down the average, especially in the modern era.

It would be interesting to understand what the match reach was.

[Toby Chopra]

2 hours ago, The Rocket said:

Just don`t get how that thrilling game could peak at 2.4m and average 1.4m. Does that mean ~1m turned off when England fell 10 points behind, a team they had walloped 3 weeks earlier and had to be odds-on to make a comeback. Or surely people weren`t just bored. Just don`t get it.

To be perfectly frank though, considering some on here were saying anything less than 4m for a final involving England, 1.4m for a semi is pretty disappointing.

I think the average includes the pre-game and post-game segments too, so I'd imagine there was close to 2m watching throughout the game itself. 

[stookie]

5 hours ago, Yakstorm said:

There can also be multiple peaks, ie. There could have been over 2m at the start and other points of the game as well.

The average is across the entire broadcast, often includes pre, post & halftime, which can pull down the average, especially in the modern era.

It would be interesting to understand what the match reach was.

Huh - that's interesting. The big sport broadcasts in Aus, certainly NRL grand final / state of origin / AFL GF etc have separate "programs" for pre-match and post-match, to make average and peak ratings of the game itself so much higher. Could it be that way as the BBC isn't so ratings driven? Or is this just common to sports broadcasts in the UK?

[gingerjon]

2 minutes ago, stookie said:

Huh - that's interesting. The big sport broadcasts in Aus, certainly NRL grand final / state of origin / AFL GF etc have separate "programs" for pre-match and post-match, to make average and peak ratings of the game itself so much higher. Could it be that way as the BBC isn't so ratings driven? Or is this just common to sports broadcasts in the UK?

Pretty much common like this in the UK now. For example, Monday Night Football on Sky (Premier League) runs from 7pm to 10.30pm with the match in the middle from 8pm to 10pm. But no break down within that in terms of programming.