DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
ComeAllWithin (Harlequins Rugby)
HTML https://comeallwithin.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: ComeAllWithin Board
*****************************************************
#Post#: 132332--------------------------------------------------
Re: PWR: A New World Record
DIR By: poorfour
Date: January 3, 2025, 2:09 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Yes, women watch much less sport than men today, whether women’s
or men’s. As championes points out, research repeatedly finds
that they don’t watch men’s sports because they “aren’t for us.”
But the reason they don’t watch women’s sport is much more
related to lack of access. The few sports where women’s
participation gets fairly similar coverage to men’s (basically
tennis, the Olympics and athletics) get good viewing figures,
and when women’s sport does get a platform (as with women’s
soccer), it also draws an audience.
What percentage of sports broadcasting is women’s sports? I can
turn on my tv at any hour of the day or night and find a men’s
soccer match to watch, and now all the men’s Premiership matches
are broadcast. But this weekend, paid sports channels will show
8 men’s matches and 1 women’s match.
The question is not whether the market and viewer are there
today, but whether they will come (and stay) if the product is
put out there. Nobody can say can say for certain, but the RFU,
WR and the backers of 8 Prem clubs and Ealing think it’s a good
enough bet to commit to it.
And since you mention Google, a pop quiz: what were Google’s
revenues in its first two years? What was Google’s revenue model
for its first two years?
The answers are “zero” and “it didn’t have one”. AdWords has
been tremendously successful, but Google had been invested in,
and burnt through a lot of cash, offering free search to the
market until it came up with AdWords - which wasn’t part of the
original business plan (I can remember the FT questioning how
Google would make money and expressing pleasant surprise when
they found a way to do so).
Sometime you have to invest ahead of the market to create one.
But you are arguing, essentially, that Google should never have
been funded because no-one was using search in 1997.
#Post#: 132334--------------------------------------------------
Re: PWR: A New World Record
DIR By: deadlyfrom5yardsout
Date: January 3, 2025, 3:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://www.world.rugby/organisation/about-us/womens
#Post#: 132335--------------------------------------------------
Re: PWR: A New World Record
DIR By: dr_miles
Date: January 3, 2025, 3:33 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: RodneyRegis link ---
>
> 1 and 2 are flawed arguments. Plenty of women watch plenty of
sports. Tennis, gymnastics, seems to me they are far more
interested in individual sports. They don't watch rugby because
they don't like rugby, not because they don't like men's sport.
>
> Just because rugby hasn't been 'exposed' doesn't mean that no
women's sports have.
>
> Far more women go and watch sport in general than did a
generation ago. That's because people tend to do things as a
family which men used to do with their male friends while their
wives stayed home and looked after the children. Times have
changed - but not enough to make women's rugby particularly
popular.
>
--- End Quote ---
This is a flawed response. The poster said that relatively few
women watch men's sports.
You then go on to list the sports that are on tv as the ones
that people watch, which is self evident. The one's that haven't
been on tv have not been watched. Now that there is more
exposure there is increasing engagement - as with the women's
football.
30 years ago I worked with a woman who was an international
footballer and Arsenal captain. One day her picture was on the
back page of the Times showing her lifting the FA Cup. Several
people from our office said that they didn't know that she even
played. Women's football was ridiculed and we were told that
there would never be a market for it. 30 years later on, women
players are professional, well paid and regularly on tv. Some
are household names.
I am not saying that this will happen with women's rugby, but
there is evidently increasing interest and support for it.
Bigger crowds for standalone games, extra tv coverage for
tournaments, and the women's world cup will be another step
forward. I know of a young woman who has gone to college as part
of a player pathway for Quins - that's the future of the game.
The stadiums and organisational infrastructure already exist.
Clubs are now just making use of it for women as well as men.
This article on the bbc seems timely for this discussion:
HTML https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/articles/cx2ydkxdndwo
#Post#: 132338--------------------------------------------------
Re: PWR: A New World Record
DIR By: QuincyJones
Date: January 3, 2025, 4:46 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: poorfour link ---
>
> Yes, women watch much less sport than men today, whether
women’s or men’s. As championes points out, research repeatedly
finds that they don’t watch men’s sports because they “aren’t
for us.”
>
> But the reason they don’t watch women’s sport is much more
related to lack of access. The few sports where women’s
participation gets fairly similar coverage to men’s (basically
tennis, the Olympics and athletics) get good viewing figures,
and when women’s sport does get a platform (as with women’s
soccer), it also draws an audience.
>
> What percentage of sports broadcasting is women’s sports? I
can turn on my tv at any hour of the day or night and find a
men’s soccer match to watch, and now all the men’s Premiership
matches are broadcast. But this weekend, paid sports channels
will show 8 men’s matches and 1 women’s match.
>
> The question is not whether the market and viewer are there
today, but whether they will come (and stay) if the product is
put out there. Nobody can say can say for certain, but the RFU,
WR and the backers of 8 Prem clubs and Ealing think it’s a good
enough bet to commit to it.
>
> And since you mention Google, a pop quiz: what were Google’s
revenues in its first two years? What was Google’s revenue model
for its first two years?
>
> The answers are “zero” and “it didn’t have one”. AdWords has
been tremendously successful, but Google had been invested in,
and burnt through a lot of cash, offering free search to the
market until it came up with AdWords - which wasn’t part of the
original business plan (I can remember the FT questioning how
Google would make money and expressing pleasant surprise when
they found a way to do so).
>
> Sometime you have to invest ahead of the market to create one.
But you are arguing, essentially, that Google should never have
been funded because no-one was using search in 1997.
>
--- End Quote ---
I'm not arguing anything of the sort about Google, that's a
strange assertion. The two aren't remotely comparable.
Yes, you can turn on your TV at any hour and find men's sport
but you already know why this is. The best case viewing figures
for women's rugby won't ever touch the men's, yet women's is
apparently where all the potential money is. It's just a bizarre
line of thought.
We'll see...!
#Post#: 132376--------------------------------------------------
Re: PWR: A New World Record
DIR By: RodneyRegis
Date: January 3, 2025, 2:33 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Yes. It's a mystery why sky aren't tapping into all that
girly-cash and putting on more women's football this weekend.
#Post#: 132381--------------------------------------------------
Re: PWR: A New World Record
DIR By: dr_miles
Date: January 3, 2025, 2:43 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: RodneyRegis link ---
>
> Yes. It's a mystery why sky aren't tapping into all that
girly-cash and putting on more women's football this weekend.
>
--- End Quote ---
Not really. There are no women’s football games on this weekend.
#Post#: 132403--------------------------------------------------
Re: PWR: A New World Record
DIR By: championes
Date: January 3, 2025, 3:43 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: QuincyJones link ---
>
> I'm not arguing anything of the sort about Google, that's a
strange assertion. The two aren't remotely comparable.
>
> Yes, you can turn on your TV at any hour and find men's sport
but you already know why this is. The best case viewing figures
for women's rugby won't ever touch the men's, yet women's is
apparently where all the potential money is. It's just a bizarre
line of thought.
>
> We'll see...!
>
--- End Quote ---
It’s not a line of thought. It’s a huge line of investment by
global sports firms.
No one is saying that any of these sports will have viewing
figures like men’s football (rugby is frankly irrelevant in any
conversation about successful professional sport sadly).
But as with any form of business growth, as I tried to say
above, to sell more things to people who already have your
things you have to spend far more money than you sell things to
people who don’t already max out their loyalty to your brand.
(Well traditionally it takes more cash to get a new customer
than retain an existing one but we’re talking about a saturated
market here and selling something to an audience (women) who
historically haven’t spent money on a product (men’s sport).
I’ll let all the weird arguments carry on around me, I’m just
putting forward some of the business rationale based on some
experience.
#Post#: 132429--------------------------------------------------
Re: PWR: A New World Record
DIR By: QuincyJones
Date: January 3, 2025, 5:26 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: championes link ---
>
> It’s not a line of thought. It’s a huge line of investment by
global sports firms.
>
> No one is saying that any of these sports will have viewing
figures like men’s football (rugby is frankly irrelevant in any
conversation about successful professional sport sadly).
>
> But as with any form of business growth, as I tried to say
above, to sell more things to people who already have your
things you have to spend far more money than you sell things to
people who don’t already max out their loyalty to your brand.
>
> (Well traditionally it takes more cash to get a new customer
than retain an existing one but we’re talking about a saturated
market here and selling something to an audience (women) who
historically haven’t spent money on a product (men’s sport).
>
> I’ll let all the weird arguments carry on around me, I’m just
putting forward some of the business rationale based on some
experience.
>
--- End Quote ---
Well sure, but they don't know it's going to work. So,
investment based on a line of thought.
Everything you say makes perfect sense. Though it still doesn't
answer at all, why or how, any of that results in women's rugby
being profitable and the saviour of the sport.
#Post#: 132432--------------------------------------------------
Re: PWR: A New World Record
DIR By: RodneyRegis
Date: January 3, 2025, 6:29 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: dr_miles link ---
>
> Not really. There are no women’s football games on this
weekend.
>
--- End Quote ---
Ha, ha...
Can someone let Burnley know before their coach leaves for
Forest on Sunday morning?
#Post#: 132434--------------------------------------------------
Re: PWR: A New World Record
DIR By: dr_miles
Date: January 4, 2025, 12:30 am
---------------------------------------------------------
A single 3rd round FA Cup replay?
The reason that Sky aren’t throwing money at it is that the BBC
have the broadcast rights to the FA Cup.
If you want to see a game then the BBC are showing one next
weekend. Until then you can go back to shouting at clouds.
*****************************************************
Page 6 of 6
DIR Previous Page