- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Two small market NBA teams deliver massive ratings
Posted on 6/8/12 at 8:52 pm to raw dog
Posted on 6/8/12 at 8:52 pm to raw dog
quote:
San Antonio isn't exactly a small market. Top 5 largest cities in the country.
1 -- It's not a top-5 city.
2 -- It being a top-10 city in terms of population (city limits and not metro area) has little do with market size, as it's the 36th-ranked TV market, behind cities like Cincinnati, Salt Lake City, Columbus, Milwaukee, New Haven, Sacramento and Raleigh-Durham.
1
Posted on 6/8/12 at 9:28 pm to raw dog
quote:
San Antonio isn't exactly a small market. Top 5 largest cities in the country.
Did you mean in their state?
Posted on 6/8/12 at 9:44 pm to mattz1122
quote:
as little do with market size, as it's the 36th-ranked TV market, behind cities like Cincinnati, Salt Lake City, Columbus, Milwaukee, New Haven, Sacramento and Raleigh-Durham.
Which tells you how retarded of a benchmark that is. Sure, more people watch TV in New Haven, CN than San Antonio. This defies common sense and the definition of a "media market" as defined by Nielsen et al is simply non-logical in terms of measuring an actual TV audience for a given population center. SA is not a small market.
Posted on 6/8/12 at 9:56 pm to kfizzle85
quote:
SA is not a small market.
It is.
If they had a NFL team, it would be a small market team, if they had a baseball team they would be below the Reds. There is a reason that all they have is an NBA team.
Posted on 6/8/12 at 9:58 pm to kfizzle85
Well, sure. Certainly you know more than the researchers at Nielsen whose livelihoods depends on the accuracy of these rankings. If you've ever been to San Antonio, you'd realize 1) it has a fairly large amount off immigrants/poor people who likely don't have cable and 2) its metro area isn't that big -- it isn't close to being the sprawling metro area like Houston or DFW. Television markets encompass more than just the city itself, which is why New Haven is ranked higher than San Antonio (though I will concede that Austin, distinctive from SA and not exactly Spurs crazy, is counted separately).
If you think SA dictated these rating because it's a "big market," then you are completely mistaken. Just look at past series involving the Spurs.
If you think SA dictated these rating because it's a "big market," then you are completely mistaken. Just look at past series involving the Spurs.
This post was edited on 6/8/12 at 10:07 pm
Posted on 6/8/12 at 10:10 pm to mattz1122
quote:
Well, sure. Certainly you know more than the researchers at Nielsen whose livelihoods depends on the accuracy of these rankings. If you've ever been to San Antonio, you'd realize 1) it has a fairly large amount off immigrants/poor people who likely don't have cable and 2) its metro area isn't that big -- it isn't close to being the sprawling metro area like Houston or DFW. Television markets encompass more than just the city itself, which is why New Haven is ranked higher than San Antonio (though I will concede that Austin, though distinctive from SA and not exactly Spurs crazy, is counted separately).
If you think SA dictated these rating because it's a "big market," then you are completely mistaken. Just look at past series involving the Spurs.
I never implied I knew more than "the researchers at Nielsen etc," all you have to do is look at how they define what a media market is. Some cities get lumped together, other cities don't. Its not an apples to apples comparison. And yes, I have been to SA. I'm not saying its a "large market," that's definitely reserved for like 6 places, but the constant implication that SA is a tiny arse city (a la small market) is inaccurate, IMO.
This post was edited on 6/8/12 at 10:12 pm
Posted on 6/8/12 at 10:15 pm to kfizzle85
The mistake you're making is confusing market size with city size (within the city limits). All you need to do is look at past playoffs ratings involving the Spurs versus ratings involving mid-market teams or even a couple of "large market" teams such as Dallas.
This post was edited on 6/8/12 at 10:16 pm
Posted on 6/8/12 at 11:17 pm to Starchild
San Antonio is not that small of a market and they have won a 100 NBA championships.
Thunder is really Seattle's team they put together with Durant and Westbrook. Seattle Sonic fans have to be even more pissed.
Not buying the small market stuff.
Thunder is really Seattle's team they put together with Durant and Westbrook. Seattle Sonic fans have to be even more pissed.
Not buying the small market stuff.
Posted on 6/8/12 at 11:21 pm to ctiger69
If the New York Yankees move to Austin and won the world series in two years would it be a huge deal? Would we be talking about small markets?
Posted on 6/8/12 at 11:22 pm to ctiger69
Posted on 6/8/12 at 11:26 pm to mattz1122
Let's ponder that question a little longer, shall we? Hmmmmmmmmmmm.
Posted on 6/8/12 at 11:28 pm to ctiger69
I'm not remotely sure what that means. Are you suggesting that OKC is carrying the Seattle market (which isn't very big anyway)?
This post was edited on 6/8/12 at 11:29 pm
Posted on 6/9/12 at 6:59 am to raw dog
interesting what's considered "massive" ratings now
under 10 mil in a country over 300 mil?
under 10 mil in a country over 300 mil?
Posted on 6/9/12 at 8:52 am to gthog61
What's amazing to me is that people assume that it was only OKC that delivered the huge ratings.
People are smarter than Stern gives them credit. They realized the Spurs and Thunder were playing the highest for of basketball that we've seen two teams play in a very very long time.
The gameplay is what drew most of the ratings, not the markets.
People are smarter than Stern gives them credit. They realized the Spurs and Thunder were playing the highest for of basketball that we've seen two teams play in a very very long time.
The gameplay is what drew most of the ratings, not the markets.
Posted on 6/9/12 at 9:52 am to gthog61
You probably don't know how ratings work (especially cable ratings).
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News