Viewing figures for The Open are out .... Shocking!

[Stegsie]

I thought this was very interesting - quite a bit to digest here and discuss I think.

Figures plunge by 75% in first year of Sky Sports coverage. Very interesting stats here - https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/jul/18/open-sky-sports-bbc-troon

Interesting to see that BBC Highlights still got more viewing figures than the Sky Live event. I can't see Sky sticking with this if that's the case ....

 

[Deleted member 1418]

Think you can only really compare the viewing figures against the other golf events that are on Sky. Always going to be lower than when the BBC had the Open. Sky has invested significantly in the Open therefore cannot see them dropping it before their contract is up.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

Sky figures are always massively down on the BBC as they do not have the reach. The question for Sky is what the advertisers think. Does golf reach the correct people? Sky paid a fortune for F1 as it reaches lots of the correct aged men with money to spend. Viewing figures don't matter as long as the ones that do watch are the right ones. The same will apply to golf.

 

[Pin-seeker]

Wow just the thread we needed 🙄

 

[chrisd]

From the days a top boxing match used to attract 15m viewers on terrestrial tv to now when maybe .5m people will pay to view, I assumed that it would return the sport to ITV eventually but the income from a hugely smaller audience, all paying, must be better I guess

 

[rksquire]

It's also interesting that the actual crowds were significantly lower than anticipated, with partially empty grandstands throughout. Pretty sure Sky can't be blamed for that!

However, the actual viewing figures for Sky can only really be compared with BBC in a very simplistic manner, completely ignoring all other factors. The 'reach' of a subscription based service vs a 'free to air' service is always going to be considerably lower, and if reach was a primary objective for the R&A, they should never have sold the rights to Sky.

But ultimately I'm not very surprised by the figures - I think they're about right, arguably slightly better when compared to our no. 1 sport, football: Sky's (2015, before BT) Champions League games for the early qualifiers and griup stages avergae just below 800,000 compared to ITVs just below 5million. Are we concerned about footballs reach? The figures get even worse if we take BTs Champions League figures - <250k watched BT, 1.3m watched ITVs highlights).

I strongly believe what attracts people is the participants - McIlroys Open victory attracted more viewers than Zach Js, on the same channel. These are comparable figures. What was the difference? The interesting thing this year is the live crowds swelled when McIlroy (fro example, a big and popular name) teed off on Friday, but dipped when his star fell. If this weeks Top 2 / Big 3 / Fab 4 / Fantastic 5 (delete as appropriate) fell to mount a challenge, interest drops. For example on BT who free to aired both European Finals this year - Champs Lge Final, the pinnacle of the game, 1.8m; the Europa Final (many peoples tin cup /pointless trophy), 5m. The difference was the participants. I don't think Sky will be concerned yet.

 

[Robobum]

Wow just the thread we needed &#128580;

Haha. Exactly.

Someone's going to be on this like a tramp on chips - yet another unreadable thread

 

[williamalex1]

I thought this was very interesting - quite a bit to digest here and discuss I think.

Figures plunge by 75% in first year of Sky Sports coverage. Very interesting stats here - https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/jul/18/open-sky-sports-bbc-troon

Interesting to see that BBC Highlights still got more viewing figures than the Sky Live event. I can't see Sky sticking with this if that's the case ....

They can't know how many viewed using other devices like Android boxes , lap tops , fire sticks etc.

 

[Val]

Anyone surprised given the amount of sky sports subscriptions there is in comparison to tv licence holders?

 

[Doon frae Troon]

It's also interesting that the actual crowds were significantly lower than anticipated, with partially empty grandstands throughout. Pretty sure Sky can't be blamed for that!

However, the actual viewing figures for Sky can only really be compared with BBC in a very simplistic manner, completely ignoring all other factors. The 'reach' of a subscription based service vs a 'free to air' service is always going to be considerably lower, and if reach was a primary objective for the R&A, they should never have sold the rights to Sky.

But ultimately I'm not very surprised by the figures - I think they're about right, arguably slightly better when compared to our no. 1 sport, football: Sky's (2015, before BT) Champions League games for the early qualifiers and griup stages avergae just below 800,000 compared to ITVs just below 5million. Are we concerned about footballs reach? The figures get even worse if we take BTs Champions League figures - <250k watched BT, 1.3m watched ITVs highlights).

I strongly believe what attracts people is the participants - McIlroys Open victory attracted more viewers than Zach Js, on the same channel. These are comparable figures. What was the difference? The interesting thing this year is the live crowds swelled when McIlroy (fro example, a big and popular name) teed off on Friday, but dipped when his star fell. If this weeks Top 2 / Big 3 / Fab 4 / Fantastic 5 (delete as appropriate) fell to mount a challenge, interest drops. For example on BT who free to aired both European Finals this year - Champs Lge Final, the pinnacle of the game, 1.8m; the Europa Final (many peoples tin cup /pointless trophy), 5m. The difference was the participants. I don't think Sky will be concerned yet.

R&A expected 170,000 live spectators
Actual 173,300.

My daughter was talking to one of the Troon officials on Tuesday practice and they were quite concerned that they would be nowhere close to 170k, given the weather forecast.

Actual live TV figures........nobody knows or will know.

 

[351DRIVER]

I watched it online...
So add 1 to that number..

 

[Papas1982]

Quick Google shows approx 26.7 households in uk. 95% having a tv license.
So 18% of people watched the golf last year who had the chance.

Apparently there are anywhere between 5-6m sky sports viewers.
So anywhere from 18% to 22% who had the chance watched it (and that's only tv viewers). I'd imagine sky are more than happy with that as they have adverts to subsidise their costs as well as subscribers.

 

[Fish]

Wow just the thread we needed &#63044;

Haha. Exactly.

Someone's going to be on this like a tramp on chips - yet another unreadable thread

:rofl: :rofl:

 

[TheDiablo]

Quick Google shows approx 26.7 households in uk. 95% having a tv license.
So 18% of people watched the golf last year who had the chance.

Apparently there are anywhere between 5-6m sky sports viewers.
So anywhere from 18% to 22% who had the chance watched it (and that's only tv viewers). I'd imagine sky are more than happy with that as they have adverts to subsidise their costs as well as subscribers.

And that's assuming 1 viewer per household! In reality it's more than double that, pulling that 18% figure on BBC well below 10%.

 

[rksquire]

R&A expected 170,000 live spectators
Actual 173,300.

My daughter was talking to one of the Troon officials on Tuesday practice and they were quite concerned that they would be nowhere close to 170k, given the weather forecast.

Actual live TV figures........nobody knows or will know.

Can't disagree with you although this: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/go...on-bad-weather-blame-not-80-entrance-fee.html would suggest the 170k R&A figure came after they knew attendance. The reality is there was capacity for more, but it was more the point viewing figures are down, as were attendance figures but I bet overall revenue (ticket & tv monies) are up!

 

[Dando]

And that's assuming 1 viewer per household! In reality it's more than double that, pulling that 18% figure on BBC well below 10%.

i was watching the golf in the living room (with a rather splendid portion of cold shoulder) while my OH was watching it in the bedroom.

 

[Hosel Fade]

Honestly I'd be far more upset with the ticket pricing than with the sky issue.

80 quid on the door for any of the tournament days, 60 quid in advance is still bloody steep. They can try and hide that behind juniors go free (with paying adult) as much as they want.

How many people are priced out at that level? Sky could be had for a tenner for the week

 

[Dan2501]

1.1m watched it live, 1.5m watched the highlights, and I imagine large numbers watched online via NOW TV / Sky Go or other means, I'd say those numbers are pretty good. Obviously they're not going to match the BBC peak numbers, but they're healthy numbers.

 

[Doon frae Troon]

Honestly I'd be far more upset with the ticket pricing than with the sky issue.

80 quid on the door for any of the tournament days, 60 quid in advance is still bloody steep. They can try and hide that behind juniors go free (with paying adult) as much as they want.

How many people are priced out at that level? Sky could be had for a tenner for the week

The R&A were very nervous about the attendance figures with the extra prices.
The 'kids go free' aspect has to be applauded and price wise seemed to balance out.
I spoke to quite a few 'families' [2x2] who seemed to think it good value.
Football should follow that example.

I think my daughter payed £120 for a weekly ticket that was used every day by four family members, always with a junior in tow.
Less than £10 a head for 7 days golf.

 

[Papas1982]

And that's assuming 1 viewer per household! In reality it's more than double that, pulling that 18% figure on BBC well below 10%.

Same could be said for sky. Was doing it on a customer basis. On household only needs one license. Unless student property.