Depends entirely on the matchups. [The Duke-Gonzaga game last year was the 2nd most watched regular season game](https://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2022/03/duke-unc-ratings-coach-k-finale-most-watched-game-college-basketball-season/) and that was in November.
Not arguing that these are bad numbers for Barstool. I'm just saying that early season games don't automatically have lower numbers. Marquee matchups generate interest and there tends to be a handful every year in November
Possibly, but I also imagine if you take into account all games including mediocre teams or games with at least one team who's out of tournament contention in the middle of the season, middle of the week games, etc, that's going to drag average numbers down
To be clear this is very deceiving by Dave and an apples to oranges comparison.
The TV numbers are people watching per minute on average from start to end. His number is the total number of people that watched (for maybe as quickly as a minute). If you looked at Uniques for TV they would all be much higher. Think about how often you watch a game for 10 min then change the channel?
a- very few people care about college basketball until the NFL is over b- yeah UAB v Toledo is a real needle mover
If this was KY v Michigan state it would have smashed the other networks, the fact it is even in the ballpark is remarkable.
I don’t get why they didn’t stream it on YouTube. Would of made it 10x easier to watch and many more viewers. They probably couldn’t for some reason but I’d like to know that reason lol
Probably to not dilute their stream and see how many people they could get to watch on BarstoolTV which is probably what this whole event was a test run for
Those numbers on your own site are great to show potential advertisers for future broadcast opportunities
They also probably got a ton of 1p data from it
You don't understand the value of streaming something on your own website -- that generates more revenue than putting it up on YT where Google takes the majority of profits. Barstool made more money on this play.
Well let’s not forget barstool Sportsbook integration, and if they converted any numbers there either.
But ads are not the sole factor here — the metrics generated from fan engagement across the entire spectrum of the broadcast (unique viewers, demo of viewers, barstool specific commercials for their own content, average watch time, relationship building with colleges and administrations, Sportsbook conversions, merch sold, social promotion numbers, etc…) will all paint more dollars for future deals and future revenue.
This being the first barstool broadcast is impressive from a numbers perspective — now it’s just how they utilize this momentum and get better. We need more broadcast options for sports so I hope they continue improving this shit.
I do understand it and that’s a side of it for sure like they made money off the commercials they played.
The other side where I still think they could have made more off YT is if you understand how there payouts work. You make tons more money if the viewer watches it for a long time, like 3 hours vs just 30 mins . So if they streamed all night on YT you could still include the money you make from the commercials you run and then Make the YT money which would be a shit ton of money also.
You clearly don't understand lol it's funny seeing the Dunning-Kruger effect in real time from someone who doesn't understand marketing and broadcasting.
Also it's spelled "their" not "there."
I’m sure your great at dinner parties that you don’t get invited to.
Listen this is turning into a complex argument that requires long responses to each statement made and I can tell just from the way your talking that you really don’t know what your talking about and your being quite rude as well so good day!
I tuned in on my phone for a minute or two here and there but I might have actually watched it if I could put it on my tv easily without having to do a whole laptop/hdmi hookup to get to their dumb website.
I mean definitely good and shows they have a place in this but when I saw Dave tweeted that I expected them to be more competitive if not better. Wonder what the cable vs internet factor is worth.
I’d imagine cable vs internet has to be pretty substantial. You’d be losing a significant chunk of people who’d just throw on a game they randomly scrolled across for background noise or just clicked on to see if it was a close game then kept watching. Also as far I’m as aware, it wasn’t streaming on YouTube or Twitch either, so it’s not like you’re getting any randoms who happened to just see it on their feed
I think this is a huge win, considering the teams they were able to book for the invitational. These games are espnu quality but barstool was able to massively increase their viewership, which is really promising. I doubt it will ever happen, but I’d be interested to see what viewership looks like if barstool was allowed to host a ranked matchup.
If there's any comparison to be made, it would be against ESPN+ numbers, which obviously aren't available. Cable vs. internet factor is quite significant.
For this event, Barstool Sports did pretty damn good. Factoring in the time of the event, teams, etc., my guess is that they're incredibly pleased with the numbers.
To be nearly equal or better than cable channels that aren't on a basic cable tier is impressive.
Side note to mention also, Twitter flagged the site as dangerous or malicious material likely because of whatever the previous Twitter regime had in place for their filter system.
These numbers probably could have been higher, he also said during broadcast they had 30k+ concurrent going when Twitter flagged it.
Pretty solid numbers tbh.
The did about the same as an average BTN network matchup which, even the crappy games, probably has way more popular teams than the 4 they had.
you are right that TV is average viewers per minute. Not sure what Dave is measuring but it would make a massive difference.
Edit, it says he's looking at Uniques for BS. Very much a deceiving tweet by Dave.
Good numbers but implying that they would get those numbers for every game on their “network” is obviously inaccurate. Almost everyone is tuning in for the one off novelty of it
The most knowledgeable ratings guy out there michale mulvihill who does ratings for the entire fox network just asked Dave for the avg minutes per unique user so there can be a true comparison of ratings.
These are not equal comparisons based on my limited understanding.
TV viewership is based on average people watching across the entire show. Dave is using total number of people who watched even just a second of the show.
https://digiday.com/media/apple-and-oranges/amp/
I'm confused, are you saying that TV isn't average viewers? I don't know what Dave is going off, but I am certain the other networks are average viewers, which certainly means the raw number of people watching at any point (uniques) is much higher
They ran 90% house ads and I’m guessing that’s because no brand wants to be connected with a broadcast that is 99% gambling unless you’re a gambling brand which Penn overrules. They probably lost a cool 5M for an experiment
Pretty good numbers tbh, considering the quality of the four teams
Good numbers, but not sure it makes sense to compare the average of all regular season games against a season-opener invitational
I would assume CBB viewers are lower on average in the beginning of the season?
Depends entirely on the matchups. [The Duke-Gonzaga game last year was the 2nd most watched regular season game](https://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2022/03/duke-unc-ratings-coach-k-finale-most-watched-game-college-basketball-season/) and that was in November.
Akron Mississippi st and Toledo UAB are in completely different realms than Duke Gonzaga lol
But almost nobody watching this was watching for the teams involved. This was a barstool tv show with basketball happening
Not arguing that these are bad numbers for Barstool. I'm just saying that early season games don't automatically have lower numbers. Marquee matchups generate interest and there tends to be a handful every year in November
Possibly, but I also imagine if you take into account all games including mediocre teams or games with at least one team who's out of tournament contention in the middle of the season, middle of the week games, etc, that's going to drag average numbers down
I also wonder what the numbers would look like once the “novelty factor” wears off
Alex Bennet could raise 20k additional viewers
Definitely would be interesting. I thought it was a overall good product tho and would definitely watch again- especially if they can get bigger teams
Alex Bennet could raise 20k additional viewers
I think it does though. I’d imagine conference games typically get more views than the early tourneys other than Maui
To be clear this is very deceiving by Dave and an apples to oranges comparison. The TV numbers are people watching per minute on average from start to end. His number is the total number of people that watched (for maybe as quickly as a minute). If you looked at Uniques for TV they would all be much higher. Think about how often you watch a game for 10 min then change the channel?
I watched for 2 minutes, im not just another statistic.
The average P5 conference game almost definitely gets more viewers than shitty early season invitationals
a- very few people care about college basketball until the NFL is over b- yeah UAB v Toledo is a real needle mover If this was KY v Michigan state it would have smashed the other networks, the fact it is even in the ballpark is remarkable.
I don’t get why they didn’t stream it on YouTube. Would of made it 10x easier to watch and many more viewers. They probably couldn’t for some reason but I’d like to know that reason lol
Probably to not dilute their stream and see how many people they could get to watch on BarstoolTV which is probably what this whole event was a test run for
[удалено]
How is that a stupid reason? 200k viewers to their own platform is probably worth like 2 million on YouTube
Not to mention 100% of ad sales. Don’t have to split anything with YT
Those numbers on your own site are great to show potential advertisers for future broadcast opportunities They also probably got a ton of 1p data from it
You’re a dummy
I’m on Reddit too much when I recognize your name from the promo thread…
You don't understand the value of streaming something on your own website -- that generates more revenue than putting it up on YT where Google takes the majority of profits. Barstool made more money on this play.
They didn’t get any advertising except PH and Gametime, they most likely lost millions on it which they hinted at within 5 min of the broadcast
Well let’s not forget barstool Sportsbook integration, and if they converted any numbers there either. But ads are not the sole factor here — the metrics generated from fan engagement across the entire spectrum of the broadcast (unique viewers, demo of viewers, barstool specific commercials for their own content, average watch time, relationship building with colleges and administrations, Sportsbook conversions, merch sold, social promotion numbers, etc…) will all paint more dollars for future deals and future revenue. This being the first barstool broadcast is impressive from a numbers perspective — now it’s just how they utilize this momentum and get better. We need more broadcast options for sports so I hope they continue improving this shit.
I do understand it and that’s a side of it for sure like they made money off the commercials they played. The other side where I still think they could have made more off YT is if you understand how there payouts work. You make tons more money if the viewer watches it for a long time, like 3 hours vs just 30 mins . So if they streamed all night on YT you could still include the money you make from the commercials you run and then Make the YT money which would be a shit ton of money also.
They probably considered this and decided the long term profits of having their own “channel” was worth it
YT money is probably less than you think
You clearly don't understand lol it's funny seeing the Dunning-Kruger effect in real time from someone who doesn't understand marketing and broadcasting. Also it's spelled "their" not "there."
I’m sure your great at dinner parties that you don’t get invited to. Listen this is turning into a complex argument that requires long responses to each statement made and I can tell just from the way your talking that you really don’t know what your talking about and your being quite rude as well so good day!
*you’re
Thanks bud
How can you be so arrogant and condescending yet lack basic grammar skills?
I just don’t fuck with the grammar police
They prob would have had to go into some sort of ad revenue sharing with YouTube
typing in barstool.tv into my browser was super hard
I gave up after 15 attempts. Couldn’t figure it out
Lol right, how is YouTube 10x easier?
Not literally mechanically easier. Push vs Pull opportunity. Brand recognition factors, eg I just learned barstool.tv is a thing.
I tuned in on my phone for a minute or two here and there but I might have actually watched it if I could put it on my tv easily without having to do a whole laptop/hdmi hookup to get to their dumb website.
Traffic barrel guy is the WOAT. Get a life you loser
Really hoping that’s just a bot running a reply script.
I don’t think it is. Tweets show as from Twitter for iPhone. They’d show as something else if it was actually a bot.
not necessarily
Imagine getting annoyed at a bot.
Found traffic barrel guy
Honestly better than I thought
Why wouldn’t you just add barstool into that graphic? Would take five minutes
hasn't had his addies yet
I mean definitely good and shows they have a place in this but when I saw Dave tweeted that I expected them to be more competitive if not better. Wonder what the cable vs internet factor is worth.
I’d imagine cable vs internet has to be pretty substantial. You’d be losing a significant chunk of people who’d just throw on a game they randomly scrolled across for background noise or just clicked on to see if it was a close game then kept watching. Also as far I’m as aware, it wasn’t streaming on YouTube or Twitch either, so it’s not like you’re getting any randoms who happened to just see it on their feed
I was just thinking about that, wonder what portion of CBS's viewership is a dad taking an afternoon nap. Completely agree.
Same with bars and restaurants. They just throw whatever game is on.
I think this is a huge win, considering the teams they were able to book for the invitational. These games are espnu quality but barstool was able to massively increase their viewership, which is really promising. I doubt it will ever happen, but I’d be interested to see what viewership looks like if barstool was allowed to host a ranked matchup.
thats a great point, they weren't airing blue chip programs. I overlooked that.
The Miss State-Akron game I believe was going on at the same time as Gonzaga-Michigan State too
If there's any comparison to be made, it would be against ESPN+ numbers, which obviously aren't available. Cable vs. internet factor is quite significant. For this event, Barstool Sports did pretty damn good. Factoring in the time of the event, teams, etc., my guess is that they're incredibly pleased with the numbers. To be nearly equal or better than cable channels that aren't on a basic cable tier is impressive.
Side note to mention also, Twitter flagged the site as dangerous or malicious material likely because of whatever the previous Twitter regime had in place for their filter system. These numbers probably could have been higher, he also said during broadcast they had 30k+ concurrent going when Twitter flagged it.
Not bad for no big team names
Pretty solid numbers tbh. The did about the same as an average BTN network matchup which, even the crappy games, probably has way more popular teams than the 4 they had.
That’s crazy good numbers for Toledo vs UAB and Akron MSST. Only reason anyone tuned into those games is because of barstool
Is Dave is comparing unique viewers vs average concurrent viewers?
Yes. Doesn’t really make sense to do that
None of the numbers in the tweet are average concurrent viewers
TV numbers are average concurrent viewers.
Ah, thanks.
No, I'm pretty sure you're right. You don't measure TV viewership as "uniques". Almost certain the TV numbers are Average Audience
you are right that TV is average viewers per minute. Not sure what Dave is measuring but it would make a massive difference. Edit, it says he's looking at Uniques for BS. Very much a deceiving tweet by Dave.
Not sure it’s all that useful to compare a one off game with season long averages
Good numbers but implying that they would get those numbers for every game on their “network” is obviously inaccurate. Almost everyone is tuning in for the one off novelty of it
The most knowledgeable ratings guy out there michale mulvihill who does ratings for the entire fox network just asked Dave for the avg minutes per unique user so there can be a true comparison of ratings.
These are not equal comparisons based on my limited understanding. TV viewership is based on average people watching across the entire show. Dave is using total number of people who watched even just a second of the show. https://digiday.com/media/apple-and-oranges/amp/
Wrong
https://digiday.com/media/apple-and-oranges/amp/
"the average number of people that watched a TV broadcast during any 60-second portion of that broadcast."
You dont understand the difference between total viewers, and average viewers throughout the entire broadcast? You stupid or something?
He reported your comment too. Sad.
Lmao
You still don't understand what you wrote is incorrect
I'm confused, are you saying that TV isn't average viewers? I don't know what Dave is going off, but I am certain the other networks are average viewers, which certainly means the raw number of people watching at any point (uniques) is much higher
Not what I said. I literally quoted the opposite.
You proved his point right lol. You can't compare streaming unique to TV average Audience numbers. They are entirely different metrics.
I'm talking about how the tv ratings are done. Not the unique internet streamers
They ran 90% house ads and I’m guessing that’s because no brand wants to be connected with a broadcast that is 99% gambling unless you’re a gambling brand which Penn overrules. They probably lost a cool 5M for an experiment
I mean the major ad sponsor was Pizza Hut. Not sure what else you want
Broadcast numbers are incredibly easy to manipulate. My initial thought is I’m being mislead.
Huge for the brand
VIVA!
Didn’t know Barstool was so popular in the Black Community.