Use the proven technique of offering opportunities in invest (franchises, tho I hate that American speak), let any one and everyone assemble their case, grounds, squads, finances, etc in reply to a very specific “Tender/Bid” document and see what comes of it.

For example, Syd Uni will go it alone and their bid will succeed, simply because they are very well run, resourced and structured, and that is from me, a Randwick supporter.

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

“Why Cumulative Audiences Don’t Add Up

Some months before or after any major international sporting event, the media reports on the latest cumulative audience TV data issued by the international federation of that sport. “Our event / sport is bigger than yours!” they cry, as if comparing bicycles in the playground. And not only that, but it’s an even bigger bicycle than last time! The casual and increasingly cynical fan will raise a quizzical eyebrow at the peculiarities of the sports marketing world where the viewing audience for an event can be depicted (as in the case of the 2002 FIFA World Cup), five times greater than the entire population of the globe, with or without a television. Indeed those of us within the industry who ought to know better have historically not questioned the origins or true value of this data and yet it has been used extensively as a means of measuring appeal and success, and selling TV contracts and sponsorship packages.

In the old days – in other words before interactivity and internet were perceived as the be-all and end-all – analysing coverage in this way suited sponsors of big events who were looking for global exposure generated from board advertising, via television, and who would measure the benefit of this on an advertising rate-card equivalent basis. With growing TV penetration around the world in the last two decades or so, TV audiences for major events generally increased on a year-by-year basis lending strength to the sales process and a semblance of validity to some extraordinary price hikes.

The cumulative audience approach has largely gone unchallenged, but within an industry that is seeking to become more accountable and less generalist, we detect a will for change. Fragmentation of the TV audience and greater sophistication towards its measurement has left major rights holders struggling to prove an increase in popularity and event exposure through traditional means. Some, but not all events now add in news and magazine coverage to TV coverage making like-for- like comparisons impossible. Indeed we would question whether this possibility were ever the case. How valid is it to compare, say, the Olympic Games and track and field events which might be transmitted for many hours at a time, to a live soccer match which is over in ninety minutes? How can “global” data be considered accurate when most developing markets can’t measure their population let alone the number of TV sets and potential audiences?

Indeed, in the new interactive multi-wired world, where brand equity, leverage and positioning are all, few sponsors are buying into global events solely for the media exposure derived from boards at events. Fewer still target a mass populace (the usual audience measurement) instead aiming for a specific sector of that population.

What is the way forward? There is no doubting the importance of reach as an indication of event popularity and success, but other media should to be included. We need an integrated cross platform approach that applies the meaning of “broadcast” in its broadest sense – from TV to web-cast to WAP and equivalent protocols to press and radio. There will be an increasing role for customised research as sponsors endeavour to determine the true reach of their message to a defined audience segment.

The IOC have recently taken strides to address this in the way their own TV audiences are researched and depicted. Conscious that previous data took no account of the length of time people watched a programme, the IOC has developed an approach they describe as Total Viewer Hours. This is determined by taking the duration of the programme and multiplying by the programme audience, and the sum of these hours defines the total number of hours watched by all viewers.

The IOC believe this is a more robust means of providing comparison between events whose broadcasts are of different durations. As Michael Payne of the IOC said recently “It is far more important to understand the true unduplicated audience number – the true global reach – and the average viewing hours per market – the popularity – than some global cumulative audience that actually tells you very little.”

But in the future, will size always matter? Will bigger always be best? As we move towards a greater homogenisation between TV set and computer, and computer and telephone, arguably the greatest opportunity for TV rights sellers and sponsors alike will not be in the ability of events to reach a mass global audience but in the ability of those events to address the consumer as an individual. Perhaps the need lies less in the development of global macro research tools but more in effective micro measurement, that determines the power of major events to effect individual behavioural consumer change.

Sally Hancock
Chief Executive
Redmandarin”

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

As a personal anecdote, I watched the 1991 RWC free-to-air in Japan. It may have been a fluke and meaningless, but it suggests to me that even as an amateur game Union was more international in spread and appeal than many (or even most) other sports.

And I was interested in your point on pay TV in the Americas…at $100 bucks a pop in the US, pay TV had a viable business case - must be a pretty health demand.

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

Claims made in the sporting press aren’t as ruthlessly scrutinized as those made in the financial section. Most sports do this from time to time. Australian Rules (AFL) is notorious for overstating its playing numbers amongst other things.

With regard to the union WC you will find that most of the American countries (both north & south) could only access the tournament live via subscription TV. This cost as more than $100 a pop in the US.

I have an extract of Initiative’s 2003 report somewhere & post an extract in the next couple of days. The viewing audience for the 2003 union WC final was 23 million - but outside the top 5 rated countries (Australia, NZ, South Africa, England & France) just 2 million watched.

So it would seem the increase in the audience for the 2007 final could mainly be attributed to the final being played at a northern hemisphere venue & having England again in the final.

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

W Warambeal,
To be honest, I am surprised that they’ve pitched the numbers so low. Almost strange that 119 international broadcasters bothered to show up during the event - guess not a one of them knows their business or market.

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

Thanks mate……….TBH I believed all the union stuff about the billion people third only behind Football WC & Olympics.

Great post …………and as I always say let facts be your friend.

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

Your and your ilk’s disdain is palpable.

Which will make the death of Union in this country just that little bit sweeter….

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

here is the reference to the 33 million for the union WC final:

“…Sometimes event organizers cite the potential worldwide viewership - that is, adding up the total number of households that can tune in. Because of the spread of digital television systems offering hundreds of channels, that total is growing all the time.

Yet only a handful of elite competitions truly attract global audiences. The final match of one of the biggest international sporting events last year, the Rugby World Cup, drew only 33 million viewers globally, according to Initiative.

While that was enough for fourth place, it was less than half the audience for the No. 2 and No. 3 events, the Brazilian Grand Prix and the Champions League final.

By comparison, the final match of the 2006 World Cup in Germany, for instance, drew an average live audience of 260 million; the final of the Euro 2004 soccer tournament attracted 161 million viewers.

For multinational marketers, the question of which sporting events to sponsor has grown in importance, amid concern about the declining effectiveness of traditional advertising. Sponsorship - gaining the right to display a logo in a stadium, for example - can create widespread exposure for a brand hoping to reach new audiences, and spending on this form of marketing is growing faster than outlays on traditional advertising.

Meanwhile, live viewing of sporting events helps advertisers get around the problem of ad-skipping technology like digital video recorders, because viewers cannot fast-forward through commercials.

The actual number of people watching sporting events live is growing slowly, if at all, according to the Initiative numbers, which are compiled from official audience measurement agencies in 54 countries, representing more than 90 percent of worldwide ad spending…”
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/01/04/business/tvsport07.php

Interesting last sentence - it seems to imply internationalism or global competitions might not be as profitable in the future as a lot of people seem to imply. Perhaps these international events should be the icing on the cake not the cake itself - take note union.

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

Blame the Internet.

The less I knew about Rugby Union and it’s supporters, the more I liked it. Pretentious wankers seems to cover it in a nutshell.

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

Seriously, the attitudes of people like you are what’s killing Rugby Union. You’re like Nero playing the fiddle whilst Rome burned. What platform?

The RWC ratings were awful in Australia, the ARC was closed down and even Bledisloe ratings have hit the skids and Super 14 has had a damp squib start.

But international Union is going gangbusters…. lol

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

Thanks for that. Moving right along…

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

What ARC?

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

That being said I don’t believe that the game will die here.

Some more evidence to support my previous post:

Rugby and handball knock football off Euro Viewing perch from:
http://www.sportbusiness.com/news/163942/rugby-and-handball-knock-football-off-euro-viewing-perch

Some selected quotes for those who dont want to read the whole thing:
“Out of the big five markets, matches from the rugby union’s World Cup were the most watched events in France and the UK. ”

“France’s semi-final against England drew 18.3 million viewers, the biggest sports audience in any of the 17 countries surveyed.”

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

Stop trolling.. It’s so boring and makes you look pathetic. Why comment if you dislike the game? The figures are probably crap, but why would you care? Make constructive comments or keep to yourself — the topic is related to the ARC, not the RWC, not League vs. Union, not Catholic vs. Protestant. It’s just sport maties… chill out!

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

So what.

Of that 90 how many play in countries where Union isn’t an amateur pastime?

5, 6 maybe?

Namibia put 100 past Madagascar in the RWC 2003 qualifiers, their reward, a spot in the RWC finals.

Australia put 31 past American Samoa in the 2002 Soccer World Cup qualifiers, their reward, a home and away series against Soccer powerhouse, Uruguay.

Note the subtle difference. That couldn’t happen in Union which is why the term “global sport” is a joke when it comes to Rugby Union.

BTW, we know the state of Rugby League’s international game, we’re not deluded into thinking it’s a global game by marketing gurus masquerading as Administrators.

For example, does anyone here actually think that the RWC had 4 billion+ viewers?

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

Very interesting do you have a link for your source.

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

Global game hahahaha

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

S14 is about to die too, look at the crowds and TV ratings, hell, the Storm crowds look better than a heap of the games played this year.

Hahahahaha, die Nazi supporters.

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

Global game my foot.

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown:

The rose coloured glasses just never come off do they?

It’s not conjecture, it’s not guesswork, Rugby Union is in deep poo in Australia. Its financial structure was all but ruined by the heavy drop of the US$, it’s ploughed money into the ARC and paying overs for superior athletes from Rugby League. Money it scarcely has and money it may not have 12 months from now.

Oh and Scuub, congratulations on mentioning the one-off match that will surely save the ARU’s bacon…. lol

Add a note on why the comment is inappropriate, and click the button below to confirm

Enter the text shown: