That's an interesting take on the figures and a perfectly reasonable stab by yourself at explaining away the very awkward discrepancy between the RFL's quoted figure of 353k for the Wigan/Hudds game and BARB's figure of 243k for the same fixture.

But how does the same rationale explain away the RFL's quoted figure of 62k for the Worcs/Leics RU game on BT Sport 1 with BARB's figure of 75k? Surely if the RFL were engaging in a like-for-like viewing comparison, they'd be comparing the peak viewing figure of the SL game on SS1 with the peak viewing figure of the RU game on BT Sport 1?

In other words, if the 75k BARB figure for the Union game on BT Sport 1 is only the average (in the same way 243k was for the SL game on Sky Sports 1) from the start of the program until the end, then surely the average figure during the game itself was also higher and the peak figure even higher than that?

For instance...
The 353k figure is 45% higher than 243k figure.
The 299k figure is 23% higher than 243k figure.

applying the same incremental percentage increases to the RU figures...
75k x 23% "The opening fixture of the 2014 First Utility Super League season smashed all box office records by recording the biggest television audience for a Round 1 fixture in the competition’s 19-year history"[/i...

... the viewing figure for the opening Widnes/Wakey fixture of the 2012 season was 251k according to BARB which is higher than their 243k viewing figure for the Wigan/Hudds opener in 2014. Would it's peak viewing figure also be higher than 353k?

Despite WE's glee, the viewing figures are
Still fantastic!

Although as another poster said, all 3 figures could be correct!

To blatently ie about another sports viewing figures and indeed their own could land the RFL in hot water. So
I'm pretty certain they are correct.

why are you compairing the RFL'S 353 and BARBS 243???

if anything you should be compairing the RFL'S 299 figure with BARBS 243.

Have you heard of or do you understand the FRAGMENTATION of the media? In 1970 there was probably 1 programme on against it......

Oh no, really?

Now that you mention it I seem to recall something like that being mentioned on previous attendance/viewers threads but it was dismissed by CERTAIN posters as RFL loving excuse making.

Unless it was me, I fail to see the relevance of the above post.

How can we even be sure the BARB are accurate anyway? From what I've read in various articles etc they are out by 3-5% on a regular basis. I would personally take Sky's figure as they will be able to track a lot more accurately the amount of viewers watching there channel.

On top of these figures I doubt they take into account pubs and bars that have the games on as you cannot accurately predict the amount of people in each establishment. I am also interested in the figure, is this individual households that had the program on, because you cannot accurately represent the number of people in a household watching a channel. You've also got recorded copies watched later, plus people who stream illegally

If you took everything into account the real number would most likely be a lot larger than the figures presented.

...AND FINALLY...from someone I know who works for Sky in their IT department; the BARB cannot track things such as live tv through games consoles accurately and the Sky Go app etc. Therefore I would take anything presented here with a pinch of salt and more importantly I would choose to just ignore "William Eve".

Because 353k is the headline figure which the RFL used to compare (in percentage terms) the opening round of SL's viewing figures with Rugby Union and BDO darts.

Because BARB are the official source for TV viewing figures which drive advertising revenue rates commercial TV companies can earn.


BARB is partly owned and financed by Sky... duh!

Sky can tell what is being watched with a fair bit of accuracy. They can also get a good idea of the make up those watching, How many are watching, what they regularly watch, what platform they are watching through. They have 2 companies set up which not only takes and processes huge amounts of information about their viewers and their viewing habits and how that translates into advertising opportunities and predicted advertising opportunities.

They will, pretty soon, if not now in some cases, be targeting certain advertisements to certain members of the households, at certain times, so you will get a different advert to me, who will get a different advert to an old man in Manchester, who will get a different advert to Willy Eve who will get adverts targeted at middle aged internet trolls.

I can assure you that nobody from Sky is walking in to an advertising sales pitch asking if people want to buy air-time based on BARB figures.

You are aware that if your Sky box is connected to the phone system then it sends/receives data on a regular basis.

Official BARB viewing figures now being questioned and taken to task as being inaccurate by the RFL Moonie Massive because they don't tally with the alleged record box-office breaking viewing figures as claimed by the RFL.

Extremely questionable viewing figures by the RFL now ascribed to Sky themselves whose figures must be far more accurate and realistic than anyone else's.

Huge WOW!

You couldn't make this crap up!

Well... you could if you were a member of the unquestioningly loyal RFL Moonie Massive on this forum I suppose

The internet age has brought up a generation of users who EXPECT to be able to get everything "free". Most are dumb enough to believe that it actually IS free. Others believe it is their right to download video, films, music etc free and "do not believe" in having to pay for stuff.