Swango1980
Well-known member
It makes sense that anything that is new will attract a greater percentage of younger fans. That does not highlight it being any better, it is just a fact that something is new. Older fans will have already grown up to know what they enjoy, and are therefore less likely to suddenly become a fan of something different. Younger fans are often new to the sport, and are going to be more open to the options available. They'll be none the wiser about what works well in one version over another. However, they'll be able to make that judgement better once they've had time to take things in.
If LIV had been about for decades, and suddenly the PGA Tour burst on the scene, I would expect the PGA to have a higher percentage of younger fans as well.
Stats can be dressed up to be hugely misleading. If LIV could prove that it had, for example, 500 million huge fans in the age group of under 35, whilst the PGA Tour only had 100 million fans in the same age group, then that would give them a stronger case. However, if they say that 40% of LIV fans are under 35, whilst the PGA only has 30% younger fans, it means nothing. All that might mean is that LIV has 4 fans, from a total of 10, that are under 35. Whilst the PGA might have 135 million golf fans under 35, out of a total of 450 million.
If LIV had been about for decades, and suddenly the PGA Tour burst on the scene, I would expect the PGA to have a higher percentage of younger fans as well.
Stats can be dressed up to be hugely misleading. If LIV could prove that it had, for example, 500 million huge fans in the age group of under 35, whilst the PGA Tour only had 100 million fans in the same age group, then that would give them a stronger case. However, if they say that 40% of LIV fans are under 35, whilst the PGA only has 30% younger fans, it means nothing. All that might mean is that LIV has 4 fans, from a total of 10, that are under 35. Whilst the PGA might have 135 million golf fans under 35, out of a total of 450 million.