Discussion in 'Business and Media' started by kenntomasch, Aug 6, 2002.
These are 2001 numbers. It'd be interesting to see the 2002 numbers.
If I am looking at these numbers, I come away with the following:
1) The NFL is worth what ESPN is paying it.
2) Baseball holds its own, compared to anyone else.
3) Why are we paying Hockey 600 million, when Soccer (getting nothing) gets better numbers, in worse time slots.
If I where soccer, I would take those numbers to the bank (speaking of USSF here). It would appear that no other sports (save little league-keep in mind the scandal that had EVERYONE watching it last year!) can draw US Soccer numbers on the duece.
Arguably, Soccer and Baseball are ESPN TOP two draws for Quarter 1 through Quarter 2.
These numbers are incredibly fascinating.
If the World Cup numbers exceed everything except the NFL in Prime Time during the Fall, when TV numbers are the highest, then SUM should take those numbers to the bank, and DEMAND NFL type revenues!
I am not talking Fantasy here. I am talking COLD HARD CASH.
This was very EYE opening
Are those just San Diego numbers or nationwide?
You can also see how everything falls off the radar when the NFL gets going.
Looked like more on TV.
They appear to be San Diego numbers only. There's a note at the bottom of each that says:
"Nielsen TV Data Sample: 369 Reporting HH"
That's right, 369 reporting households.
Stan's right, these numbers are well within the methodology's margin for error (luckily, the discussions of Nielsen's methodology were all lost in The Crash, thank God), but they're better than a sharp stick in the eye. And at least it gives us some numbers, which we didn't have before.
The news is publicity, and even if the numbers are pathetic, they show publicity. Any publicity is good publicity.
Just for comparison, from two Soccer America Confidentials I so geekily saved from last year:
2001 on ESPN = 0.256 rating (210,000
households) (as of Aug. 2 - no numbers showed up in SA Confidentialon ESPN after that)
2001 on ESPN2 = 0.214 (164,000
households) (this is from Oct. 2)
If those numbers are true....
Does it seem, then, that the ESPN2 ratings have been substantially affected by going head-to-head with WUSA?
That's gotta be it!
You're a glass is half-empty kind of guy, aren't you?
I think we should put you and soccer4ever (absolutely the most optimistic human being ever) in a locked room and see who walks out
Move San Jose NOW!
Thank God for small miracles.
I agree Kenn.
But other than the big rating for the Holiday Bowl, they seem like they might be pretty representative for the country as a whole.
The Time Warner San Diego site also provides a cool calendar that gives weekend ratings for their local cable system.
Check out their June 14th link. A 7.2 for World Cup Soccer on ESPN! (match played 11:15pm - 1:30 am on June 16th)
Why does one of them have to walk out?
As for San Diego ratings being representative of the nation as a whole, they might not be too far off. But I'd want to see a whole lot more data before I'd make that blanket statement.
Wasn't that June 16 game the USA/Mexico match?
One major thing to take into account with the San Diego numbers is that they're for a local cable system.
To estimate ESPN/ESPN2 national ratings from the San Diego cable ratings, we'd want to multiply them by a fudge factor of perhaps 0.4 or 0.5 since many households in the U.S. do not have cable or satellite TV, and ESPN2 is not on every cable system.
USA 2, Mexico 0. Seeing the two teams involved and their proximity to San Diego (or the fact that San Diego is in one of the countries involved), I'm not surprised by this number.
Actually the area that Time Warner Cable represents in San Diego is the area with low Hispanic population. The areas with 50%+ Hispanics are represented by Cox Cable and I am sure there were a lot of TVs watching soccer the against Mexico.
As I have posted on the other board, San Diego is a huge soccer town. Kids and Adults alike play and follow the game here. A successful soccer franchise is not an impossibility in SD.
Getting there, though.
CNN: 85.1 million HH as of December 2001
USA: 84.9 million HH as of October 2001
TNT: 84.8 million HH as of October 2001
TBS: 84.5 million HH as of October 2001
A&E: 84.5 million HH
ESPN: 82 million HH as of August 2001
CBNC: 81.5 million HH as of November 2001
VH1: 80 million HH
MTV: 79.2 million HH as of 3rd quarter 2001
ESPN2: 77.5 million HH as of August 2001
Comedy Central: 77 million HH
FSW: 12 million HH
As long as Yan Skwara isn't running it.
Check Freddy Adu's birth certificate. That's all I'm saying.
Who would have thought that PAX has a higher reach than ESPN2
well.. pax is essentially a part of nbc
that, and it can be viewed for free if you have some tin foil and a tv
San Diego consistently has high soccer viewing numbers and I think they (we), along with Houston, have the highest non-MLS city ESPN2/ESPN/ABC MLS numbers.
There is little doubt San Diego would make a great MLS city. All it needs is:
1. An I/O.
2. A new stadium somewhere in the middle of the city where there is no land.
3. Lots of Mexican or Mexican-American players.
4. See #s 1, 2 and 3 above.
Other than that, no problem, right?