Most watched event of 2005: Champions League Final?

Discussion in 'UEFA and Europe' started by Pingudo, Feb 12, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Coniga

    Coniga New Member

    Mar 28, 2006
    I am sure CL-final have more viewers than Superbowl...

    You underestimate CL, its not something for "the hardcore fans", its a big event that the whole continent cares about. Sure, its not like World Cup, but not far away.
     
  2. marakana10

    marakana10 New Member

    May 9, 2005
    really... i would think worldwide there would be more viewers for the CL final than the superbowl...

    plus you can't forget viewers who rely on sites such as www.********.com to watch the game....
     
  3. leg_breaker

    leg_breaker Member

    Dec 23, 2005
    I don't know, most people support teams who aren't in the CL and probably never will be, so have little to no interest in it, and probably haven't heard of most of the teams. On the other hand most American football fans follow an NFL team and know who all the rest are.

    And the CL final is on a Wednesday night which isn't going to get as many people watching as a Sunday night.
     
  4. PantsB

    PantsB New Member

    Jul 14, 2006
    Its funny how people just make up numbers as if they had any validity.

    18.23% of Germany watched, and exactly 23% of France....

    American Football has one tournament (not counting college) that means anything. The equivalent of a qualifying round (the 'wild card round') gets ratings over 20 million. The SuperBowl is essentially a national holiday ("SuperBowl Sunday"). Only Pingudo did any research to back up his gut reaction, but even he miscited (using peak instead of average, easy mistake). Those estimates were double what the cited numbers actually were (26 million was the average viewership of Italy, Germany, France, Spain and England).

    Outside of North America almost no one cares about the NFL. That doesn't mean that a ridiculous number of people don't watch it in the United States. Much of it certainly is not a following of the sport but a cultural celebration (a 30 sec commercial cost 2.4 million US$ last year so many people watch). The United States (and Canada where American football is the #2 sport after hockey) is the world's biggest television market because of its size and the ubiquity of televisions. That will undoubtably change but for now that means an event that totally dominates the US TV market is going to be very strong globally. Its not big enough to overcome the World Cup or the Euros or the Olympics, but it is strong enough to beat the Champions League every year for the last few decades.
     
  5. AlbertCamus

    AlbertCamus Member+

    Colorado Rapids
    Sep 2, 2005
    Colorado, USA
    Club:
    Colorado Rapids
    I heard up to 50 percent of statistics are just made up.:)
     
  6. saosebastiao

    saosebastiao New Member

    May 22, 2005
    Thousands of people gather to watch the superbowl, even though none of them actually watch the superbowl.

    You can show up at any random superbowl party and out of 30 people there, 2 people actually watch football on a regular basis.

    So yes...I can believe that the Superbowl had more "viewers".
     
  7. Pingudo

    Pingudo New Member

    Nov 18, 2003
    Santa Cruz
    Club:
    FC Barcelona
    With the Champions league final being played on a Saturday this year, I expect US tv viewership to easily exceed 2.5 million people for the first time ever. Worldwide, it can top the 200 million viewers mark.

    As always Initiative will misrepresent worldwide tv viewership for the Champions league final as it did last year:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/europe/8490351.stm

    Why are the World Cup and Champions league numbers from Initiative not accurate and always so low? Here's why:

    In a lot of countries Initiative gets numbers from the big cities ONLY. For instance, in China, Initiative will report numbers from Beijing, Shanghai and some other city. In Brazil it's only Rio and Sao Paulo, and so on for a lot of other countries. So the numbers they're reporting from... say China, are only for those 3 cities. They don't extrapolate these numbers to cover the entire country.

    Sure, extrapolating those numbers for the entire country of China would be a bit inaccurate. Why? Because tv ratings are not homogeneous across the country. The ratings from the rest of the country are lower than the ratings from those 3 cities. But only reporting ratings from those 3 cities as if it were the ratings for the entire country is disingenuous, because they assume the ratings for the rest of the country is zero!

    As an example, imagine if we ONLY took into account numbers from New York City, LA, and Chicago when reporting final tv ratings for the Super Bowl. We would claim that only 10 million viewers in the entire United States watched the Super Bowl!!! And that's just ridiculous.
     
  8. Cirdan

    Cirdan Member

    Sep 12, 2007
    Jena (Germany)
    According to Initiatives own estimates, they cover about 90% of the tv households worldwide. They believe that the majority of Chinese tv consumers are in those cities they cover.

    I'm not too sure if I believe them about that, though... I mean, I'm pretty sure Shanghai will have more tvs per head than a backwater town or even other large cities that are not worldwide centers of commerce, but still, there's a lot of households in Asia and Africa that are not covered, I have a hard time believing that they make up for less than 10% of the world wide tv audience (though those that they don't cover are probably not really interesting to sponsors, and initiative reports are really mostly for them). Also, as far as I know, they don't include bars or public viewing and certainly not private partys, they definitely underestimate viewership quite a bit. But I still think that in most cases, their numbers are probably closer to the truth than the inflated numbers you might get from FIFA, UEFA or the NFL. Also, they measure all events by the same criteria. So all in all, I'd say it's the best measuring stick we've got.
     
  9. 96Squig

    96Squig Member

    Feb 4, 2004
    Hanover
    Club:
    Hannover 96
    Nat'l Team:
    Netherlands
    I'm actually sure there's more to do in Shanghai on a Saturday nifght than most other places in China. I don't think the ratings in backwater towns of, say, half a million people will be so bad, as long as they got TVs.
     
  10. Pingudo

    Pingudo New Member

    Nov 18, 2003
    Santa Cruz
    Club:
    FC Barcelona
    Well with its massive 1.3 billion people, China is by far the largest television market in the world with close to 400 million tv households, follow by India (120m) and the US (115m). Also, China is the third largest economy in the world (after the European Union and the US) and has a lot of large and important industrialized cities. Anyways, the 3 biggest Chinese cities:

    Shanghai 17 million
    Beijing 13
    Guangzhou 12

    total 42 million people, and only accounts for about 3% of the total Chinese population of 1.3 billion. Other important cities that even if included would still account for less than 10% of the population:

    Shenzhen 9 million
    Tianjin 8.2
    Chongqing 7.5
    Dongguan 7
    Nanjing 6.8
    Wuhan 6.6
    Hangzhou 6.3
    Shenyang 5.1
    Harbin 5
    Chengdu 5

    It's the same for other countries. You can't just go to Lima or Lagos and use the tv ratings from those cities and pretend they're the tv ratings for the entire countries of Peru and Nigeria, and assume there are no tv households in other cities. Sure you can ignore small countries like say Uruguay, but when you ignore big cities in populous countries like China, India, Brazil, or Indonesia, it makes a big difference.
     

Share This Page