PDA

View Full Version : Cincinnati Reds Television Market



The Voice of IH
06-21-2012, 12:27 AM
Chris Welsh brought this up last week but I haven't had the time to ask about it.

During a television broadcast, Welsh said that the Reds T.V. ratings have reached (I believe) second or third highest. This obviously took me by surprise. Did anyone else catch this?

I may have misheard him, but he was definitely saying that FSO's ratings have been high, and that will most likely lead to a higher TV contract. Which of course makes sense after all the recent long term contracts over the past two seasons.

So I was wondering if anyone knew a way to check those ratings. I have searched the Nielsen but could not find anything myself.

Thanks for the help guys and gals.

reds1869
06-21-2012, 12:31 AM
Cincinnati.com had a short piece about that today. According to FSN Ohio the Reds are averaging a 9.54 rating in June which puts them in the top 3.

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/tv/2012/06/20/reds-tv-ratings-hot-too/

The Voice of IH
06-21-2012, 12:36 AM
Cincinnati.com had a short piece about that today. According to FSN Ohio the Reds are averaging a 9.54 rating in June which puts them in the top 3.

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/tv/2012/06/20/reds-tv-ratings-hot-too/

There it is, I thought I heard it right. Thanks!

Along with that news comes news that the Reds have sold out Saturday and nearly have already sold out Friday as well.

I feel really good for Bob Castellini and Friends. It goes to show you that big risk still can equal big rewards. If the Reds can have more of the previous two series and less than the most recent one the fans will come and support.

dougdirt
06-21-2012, 02:30 AM
Of course a 9.3 in Cincinnati is nothing compared to total viewers for say a 2.0 in the really large cities. We should get a much better deal than we have, but due to our market size, even if we have the best 'ratings' in the game, it won't matter because our share is small because of the size of our city.

redsmetz
06-21-2012, 08:42 AM
Of course a 9.3 in Cincinnati is nothing compared to total viewers for say a 2.0 in the really large cities. We should get a much better deal than we have, but due to our market size, even if we have the best 'ratings' in the game, it won't matter because our share is small because of the size of our city.

I don't know how the market is determined nor what markets are in that FSO data. For instance, do Reds games broadcast down in Lexington or Louisville, up in Indy? I don't know the answer to that. But looking at the market sizes on Neilsen, if you combine our markets (and again, I don't know how those are ascertained), we add up to a decent size market.

I do recall that when San Diego entered into their 20 year one billion dollar deal, it was noted somewhere that we easily outperform San Diego. Just looking at the Nielsen households for Cincy & Dayton (I assume Dayton is part of that FSO data), that's a total market of 1.39M households (there might be some overlap in the areas between the 2 cities), but at a 9.54 share average, that's 132,568 households tuned in. For San Diego to match that number, they'd need to have a 12.6 share, which of course, they don't. Now San Diego's market worth itself may be more lucrative, perhaps having more disposable income, etc., making it a more attractive advertising area. I'm just looking at raw numbers. Keep in mind, though, that Cincinnati & Dayton combined exceed the San Diego market size. And that's all it is since it's locked below L.A. and the border with Mexico.

Perhaps my examination of this is off, but I like our chances of a considerably better deal and that our 9.54 share is considerable and will help with getting that better deal.

http://www.nielsen.com/content/dam/corporate/us/en/public%20factsheets/tv/nielsen-2012-local-DMA-TV-penetration.pdf

Hoosier Red
06-21-2012, 09:42 AM
Many Reds games are broadcast here in Indy on Fox Sports Indiana. My guess is that FS Ohio simply resells the broadcast to Fox Sports Indiana or Fox Sports South(The Reds seem to be on there with a mix of Cardinals and Braves.) Or any other distributor that wants the rights for a different market. Obviously, if FS Ohio pays more in rights, it would want more for the broadcast rights from other markets.

mattfeet
06-21-2012, 10:00 AM
When I was in school down in TN, we got almost all the Reds games on FS South. The Braves are always on TBS, so Cncinnati is the next closest team unless you're way over in Memphis.

Matt

oneupper
06-21-2012, 10:08 AM
When I was in school down in TN, we got almost all the Reds games on FS South. The Braves are always on TBS, so Cncinnati is the next closest team unless you're way over in Memphis.

Matt

Not anymore matt.

redsmetz
06-21-2012, 12:10 PM
Many Reds games are broadcast here in Indy on Fox Sports Indiana. My guess is that FS Ohio simply resells the broadcast to Fox Sports Indiana or Fox Sports South(The Reds seem to be on there with a mix of Cardinals and Braves.) Or any other distributor that wants the rights for a different market. Obviously, if FS Ohio pays more in rights, it would want more for the broadcast rights from other markets.

I suspect it's fairly fluid, all being part of Fox Sports. Just a quick read of the Wikipedia entry for Fox Sports Networks, it seems there's loads of overlaps that's not entirely clear. I like to read the "Talk" section a Wikipedia article to see where disputes are, etc. Those discussions show some disagreement, but the sense I get is that there's no question of the overlap. Interestingly, the article itself notes that Fox Sports Ohio broadcasts of the Reds games are carried in parts of Tennessee and North Carolina, for example, and it notes that FSO's area includes parts of other states. Again, though, I don't know if that data is figured in their 9.54 market share number.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_Sports_Net

Vottomatic
06-21-2012, 12:54 PM
I've had some criticisms of management, but they've done a good job of positioning for a better TV contract.

1. Continuity of players = familiarty for fans
2. Fan favorite players like BP, Bruce, and Votto signed
3. Contending every year
4. Improved farm system = diehard knowledgeable fans love to keep up on it
5. Organization is fan and family friendly = increasing interest

I watch more games than ever on FSOH.

An improved TV contract will really help this franchise.

The Voice of IH
06-21-2012, 03:09 PM
I have noticed that during the games, the logo on top says "FS Reds". When I am in Akron, we get Fox Sports Ohio, but not the Reds game. (usually poker is on during that time :bang:).

Perhaps the games that are on other Fox Sports channels (and other channels in general) are also accumulated with FS Reds.

I worked for Fox Sports Ohio's website as a Mid-American Conference beat writer, and I have nothing bad to say about them at all. The guys on that site are great people.

Anyway, I always figured that if you combine half of Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana ,some of Tennessee, and then even some of WV, Reds country is pretty large. I understand it is hit and miss in the states listed, but no reason the market can not be above average IMO.

kaldaniels
06-21-2012, 03:12 PM
I figure 18 fox sports Ohio girls ads per game. Think how much more FSOH could make if they dropped those promos and ran ads.

Plus Plus
06-21-2012, 03:12 PM
Of course a 9.3 in Cincinnati is nothing compared to total viewers for say a 2.0 in the really large cities. We should get a much better deal than we have, but due to our market size, even if we have the best 'ratings' in the game, it won't matter because our share is small because of the size of our city.

Reds games are broadcast in Indianapolis, Dayton, and Columbus as well, so that should increase our market size by quite a bit.

dougdirt
06-21-2012, 03:20 PM
Reds games are broadcast in Indianapolis, Dayton, and Columbus as well, so that should increase our market size by quite a bit.

I imagine that other teams are broadcasts in other markets as well, expanding their 'market' as well.

redsmetz
06-21-2012, 03:28 PM
I imagine that other teams are broadcasts in other markets as well, expanding their 'market' as well.

I'm sure this is right, Doug, but that's why I used the Padres new contract as a point of measure. I don't expect a $1 Billion deal, but I think our saturation is better than there's - a fairly unique baseball market that's fairly locked in given it's geographic situation. I don't know where else the Pads have to expand there market, some east, but there ain't much out there, as they say. Now I don't know if their agreement also included Spanish language broadcasts (or whether there are one's for TV), but that could impact it too, although I can't say that with any certitude.

Plus Plus
06-21-2012, 03:30 PM
I imagine that other teams are broadcasts in other markets as well, expanding their 'market' as well.

Indianapolis is the 12th biggest city in America. Columbus is 15th. While I understand your point, I think that the Reds' TV market is not as small as you are describing it to be.

Chip R
06-21-2012, 03:39 PM
I've had some criticisms of management, but they've done a good job of positioning for a better TV contract.

1. Continuity of players = familiarty for fans
2. Fan favorite players like BP, Bruce, and Votto signed
3. Contending every year
4. Improved farm system = diehard knowledgeable fans love to keep up on it
5. Organization is fan and family friendly = increasing interest

I watch more games than ever on FSOH.

An improved TV contract will really help this franchise.

The Reds are fortunate that the rising tide in TV contracts for MLB teams are going to lift their respective boat. However, if it raises their boat, it's going to raise all the other boats as well.

It used to be that the Yankees and Red Sox - and to a lesser extent the Mets - had all this TV money and the other teams had bad to modest deals. Now those 3 teams plus the Rangers, Dodgers, Angels, Padres are flush in TV money. So by the time the Reds get a new TV deal, those teams, plus God knows how many others, are going to have their big TV deals too.

Revering4Blue
06-21-2012, 10:10 PM
Indianapolis is the 12th biggest city in America. Columbus is 15th. While I understand your point, I think that the Reds' TV market is not as small as you are describing it to be.

City size isn't that relevant.

TV Market size is.

Indy ranks 25. Columbus is 32. Both ahead Of Cincinnati at 34.

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2008/09/10/nielsen-local-television-market-universe-estimates/5037/

So, yes, the Reds' TV market is not as small as some may think. But the corporate infrastructure is larger in, say, St. Louis.

FWIW, you can now pick up Fox Sports in Northern Indiana, too

Brutus
06-21-2012, 10:47 PM
As of the 2012 Nielsen estimates, Cincinnati has dropped below Milwaukee as the smallest TV market of all the 29 Major League Baseball teams. It's at around 900,000 homes in the defined Nielsen market. Most markets have well over 1.2 million homes. So it definitely is pretty small, relatively speaking.

Even in terms of Census and Combined Statistical Areas, I believe only Kansas City and Milwaukee are smaller.

WVRedsFan
06-21-2012, 10:48 PM
After having the Reds on their network (headed by WLW-T) back in the day, the move to FSO (Sports chanel Cincinnati) left WV out of the loop for Reds broadcasts. When Directv came along in 1993, I subscribed and a few years later, got the sports package that gave me FSO. Unfortunately, you had to buy Extra Innings to get the games, so I did. When MLB decided that the Reds could claim WV as their market along with the Pirates, we now get all the games without subscribing to Extra Innings. Most everyone watches and WV, once a great market for the Reds is now a great market for the Reds again. Has to help ratings.

Reds/Flyers Fan
06-21-2012, 11:10 PM
As of the 2012 Nielsen estimates, Cincinnati has dropped below Milwaukee as the smallest TV market of all the 29 Major League Baseball teams. It's at around 900,000 homes in the defined Nielsen market. Most markets have well over 1.2 million homes. So it definitely is pretty small, relatively speaking.

Even in terms of Census and Combined Statistical Areas, I believe only Kansas City and Milwaukee are smaller.

Isn't that because Dayton is its own TV market and siphons off many of the households that would go to Cincinnati if there were no Dayton stations? Look at Cleveland/Akron: Since Akron isn't its own TV market, Cleveland gets those households. Here, the Dayton TV market is overlapping/encroaching on Cincinnati's territory and claiming households that are only 30-some miles from GABP, including Springboro, Franklin, possibly even Lebanon.

My parents' home just south of Centerville is about 38 miles from downtown Cincinnati but is in the Dayton TV market. Homes that are 38 miles from Denver, St. Louis, Tampa, etc., have no other closer TV markets to claim them and are therefore counted as a part of Denver, STL, Tampa. Seems like Cincinnati is unique in that it is so near another TV market and its numbers negatively reflect that.

But clearly Cincinnati and Dayton are singular market in almost every way anymore.

mattfeet
06-21-2012, 11:43 PM
Not anymore matt.

Welp, they were up until 2009 at least! :lol:

Brutus
06-22-2012, 12:38 AM
Isn't that because Dayton is its own TV market and siphons off many of the households that would go to Cincinnati if there were no Dayton stations? Look at Cleveland/Akron: Since Akron isn't its own TV market, Cleveland gets those households. Here, the Dayton TV market is overlapping/encroaching on Cincinnati's territory and claiming households that are only 30-some miles from GABP, including Springboro, Franklin, possibly even Lebanon.

My parents' home just south of Centerville is about 38 miles from downtown Cincinnati but is in the Dayton TV market. Homes that are 38 miles from Denver, St. Louis, Tampa, etc., have no other closer TV markets to claim them and are therefore counted as a part of Denver, STL, Tampa. Seems like Cincinnati is unique in that it is so near another TV market and its numbers negatively reflect that.

But clearly Cincinnati and Dayton are singular market in almost every way anymore.

Even if you include Dayton, the market would be smaller than 23 other MLB teams. But that's cheating because Dayton is its own market just as there are other cities that have large metro populations including in a separate TV market just as Dayton is different than Cincinnati.

Television and media contracts, locally, are negotiated by individual markets. That's the reason the Cincinnati market is important. When the Reds negotiate with FS Ohio, or whomever, their deal is going to call for different rates by different markets. If you've ever looked at a channel lineup of a cable operator, you'll see the lineup varies from market-to-market.

The point here is that while the Reds are on in the Dayton market, the Columbus market, etc., their home market is the one that defines the majority of the deal. There's no question that many MLB teams are on in multiple markets, but if you want to use that explanation, then the Reds are still going to wind up one of the smallest because other teams would be larger too. The Reds, no matter how you slice it, are on locally in fewer homes than most teams.

Yachtzee
06-22-2012, 01:36 AM
Even if you include Dayton, the market would be smaller than 23 other MLB teams. But that's cheating because Dayton is its own market just as there are other cities that have large metro populations including in a separate TV market just as Dayton is different than Cincinnati.

Television and media contracts, locally, are negotiated by individual markets. That's the reason the Cincinnati market is important. When the Reds negotiate with FS Ohio, or whomever, their deal is going to call for different rates by different markets. If you've ever looked at a channel lineup of a cable operator, you'll see the lineup varies from market-to-market.

The point here is that while the Reds are on in the Dayton market, the Columbus market, etc., their home market is the one that defines the majority of the deal. There's no question that many MLB teams are on in multiple markets, but if you want to use that explanation, then the Reds are still going to wind up one of the smallest because other teams would be larger too. The Reds, no matter how you slice it, are on locally in fewer homes than most teams.

Not necessarily true. For example, the Cleveland market includes Akron and Canton, with Canton being slightly further away from Cleveland than Dayton is to Cincinnati. You could expand the Cincinnati market to include Dayton and see a boost there, but Cleveland already has most of the sizable nearby cities included in its market area. They can't claim Youngstown, as Youngstown is actually closer to Pittsburgh, and in fact most sports fans there are more likely Steelers/Pirates/Penguins fans than fans of the Cleveland sports teams. Toledo belongs to Detroit. Columbus? Cincinnati is closer and has a long term affinity toward the Reds, despite Cleveland making Columbus their AAA affiliate and there isn't a whole lot going on between the two cities. Really, Cleveland's market area, when it comes to baseball, is pretty hemmed in.

I think Cincinnati is fairly unique among MLB markets in that it has a number of other sizable tv markets within a 100 mile radius, markets which have no major league team of their own and also boast a sizable following for the Reds. You can't expand Cleveland's market to 100 miles and get the same effect because your 100 mile radius brings in Detroit and the suburbs of Pittsburgh. And when it comes to ad sales, I don't think FSO limits themselves to selling ads in the home market. The broadcast sponsors are typically businesses with retail outlets from Columbus to Louisville.

FlightRick
06-22-2012, 01:46 AM
Just to be clear, even the concept of "market size" doesn't fully address the importance of the latest Reds' ratings update.

I'm not going to promise 100% that this is right, but my understanding of those ratings numbers are that they represent the percentage of Cinci TV Market Housesholds watching Reds' baseball on FSO. But they don't represent the TOTAL number of households watching Reds' basbell on FSO (and other FSN affiliates) in the rest of the country.

Interest in the Reds may be lower outside of Metro Cinci, so ratings (percentage of HH watching a particular show) in the Dayton DMA or the Indy DMA or the Louisville DMA or the Columbus DMA may be lower than the 9% that FSO draws in Cinci... but those eyeballs still count towards total Reds viewership and the contract they'll be able to negotiate in the next year or two. Do a 5.0 rating in Dayton, a 4.0 in Louisville, 3.0 in Indy and Columbus, and that sounds less impressive on a relative basis... but in terms of absolute numbers, those viewers are additive.

If I'm mistaken, and the 9.0 rating isn't just for Cinci, but for the entirety of FSO's penetration, regardless of geographic location, that'd be damned impressive. Gaudy even. But I'm pretty sure it doesn't work like that (at least not for the numbers as reported in this case; it SHOULD be possible to get data for Reds' total regional viewership, as a percentage of FSN's total penetration, rather than just limited to the Cinci DMA, however).

Those will be the numbers that matter come Contract Time. Total Viewers Everywhere > Total Viewers in Cincinnati Proper.


Rick

CaiGuy
06-22-2012, 08:08 AM
Wondering how regions compare I did this search and posted it in a similar thread.

100 Mile Radius:

Chicago (3 teams)
Total population in radius = 12,631,290
Total number of businesses in radius = 516,310

Cincinnati
Total population in radius = 7,366,782
Total number of businesses in radius = 301,70

Atlanta
Total population in radius = 6,714,980
Total number of businesses in radius = 272,843

Houston
Total population in radius = 5,593,304
Total number of businesses in radius = 239,428

St. Louis
Total population in radius = 3,864,669
Total number of businesses in radius = 160,470

That's just a few examples but it shows that the reds are in the middle of a populated and unique market.



j

redsmetz
06-22-2012, 09:42 AM
I think it's important that the club has been working for a long time to recapture much of the market given up under the Schott ownership era. I think this began towards the end of Lindner's reign, but it's something that the current ownership group has been diligent about. The radio network has continued to expand and it's in now in eight states, although four of those states have a sole affiliate (one being a station in Pensacola - good to see). I also don't see the affiliate they had down in Mississippi across from Memphis. But the main four states have good geographic coverage, although I have no idea of the signal strength of some of these stations. But in Ohio, surprisingly it goes all the way up to Canton. Likewise, some of those showing in the northwest corner on the map linked below, are a big misplaced from where the cities actually are (Lima, Fostoria), but I think that's simply a way of getting everyone in the picture, if you will.

Now none of this directly impacts the TV contracts, but it builds up the club and it's presence in these areas. The team has been reaching out with the expanded winter tours and at RedsFest where they have the booth that the affiliate stations staff throughout the event getting the opportunity to put live interviews with the players, current and upcoming and management. That is a good thing and ultimately it can translate into more people tuning in to the TV broadcasts.

http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/cin/downloads/y2012/RadioAffiliateMap_Feb-2012_7x6_FINAL.pdf

oregonred
06-22-2012, 01:37 PM
The number 1 goal of the franchise should be to secure a massive TV deal that reflects the uniqueness of the Reds market as CaiGuy notes above.

From one of my posts on the San Diego TV thread a couple months back. The Reds market is nearly 3X San Diego and that's before even adding the Reds fair share of the surprisingly large Columbus and Indianapolis markets (both of these two MSA regions also growing quite a bit faster than the US average).
http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=94638&highlight=san+diego

The Nielson DMA numbers confirm that the Reds have a massive area of coverage for a new regional network and need to start printing the money for a $100M a year annual TV deal...

Consider that adding the DMA's of Dayton, Cincinnati, Louisville, Lexington and Huntington/Charleston WV alone gives you ~3.1M households. Indy and Columbus add another 2M households (both are bigger DMA's then Cinci which unfortunately gets crunched below smaller MSA areas by the extremely close by Dayton and Lexington TV markets blocking the local reach)

Smaller afterthought 3rd tier markets with large Reds followings like Ft Wayne (270K), Tri Cities TN (330K), Bowling Green (90K), Wheeling (130K) even start to matter in cumulative sums. Easily a 6M DMA, with unquestioned professional sports supremacy for the Reds in much of this region (NFL doesn't count as a national TV only league).

The #3 DMA market of Chicago has 3.47M households while Philadelphia is #4 at 2.99M. #2 is LA at 5.57M. San Diego only has 1.08M DMA households (fewer than Indianapolis if you'll believe that since the LA area covers Orange and Riverside) with virtually no other DMA markets that can actually increase the cumulative total.

Also poplulation projections to 2030 show both the Indianapolis and Columbus adding ~400-500K residents, the Cincy area adding ~400K and Louisville adding ~250K. Poor Dayton stays virtually flat. While San Diego adds ~400K residents. Contrary to popular national myth the Reds primary area is growing nicely and not anything close to the Rust Belt perception more appropriate for Northern Ohio, Detroit and Western PA/NY. Future population projections for the Indians territory look bleak (-250K residents). So bleak, that the Indians franchise may need to be moved in the next generation..

oregonred
06-22-2012, 01:37 PM
Interesting link to 2030 population projections referenced above. Start adding team #3 and #4 into Texas from somewhere and I want to own a team that absolutely has to be placed in hyper growth North Carolina - Charlotte. And easy to see why I was happy to have Houston move out of the NL Central...

http://www.demographia.com/db-msaproj2030.pdf[/url]

Brutus
06-22-2012, 01:46 PM
Not necessarily true. For example, the Cleveland market includes Akron and Canton, with Canton being slightly further away from Cleveland than Dayton is to Cincinnati. You could expand the Cincinnati market to include Dayton and see a boost there, but Cleveland already has most of the sizable nearby cities included in its market area. They can't claim Youngstown, as Youngstown is actually closer to Pittsburgh, and in fact most sports fans there are more likely Steelers/Pirates/Penguins fans than fans of the Cleveland sports teams. Toledo belongs to Detroit. Columbus? Cincinnati is closer and has a long term affinity toward the Reds, despite Cleveland making Columbus their AAA affiliate and there isn't a whole lot going on between the two cities. Really, Cleveland's market area, when it comes to baseball, is pretty hemmed in.

I think Cincinnati is fairly unique among MLB markets in that it has a number of other sizable tv markets within a 100 mile radius, markets which have no major league team of their own and also boast a sizable following for the Reds. You can't expand Cleveland's market to 100 miles and get the same effect because your 100 mile radius brings in Detroit and the suburbs of Pittsburgh. And when it comes to ad sales, I don't think FSO limits themselves to selling ads in the home market. The broadcast sponsors are typically businesses with retail outlets from Columbus to Louisville.

The point is Nielsen drew the boundaries the way they did for whatever reason they had to do so, and that's how television operators generally do business. For people to subjectively argue what markets should be included and what shouldn't is a fruitless, and a largely irrelevant debate as that's not really how it works anyhow.

Reds1
06-22-2012, 03:21 PM
For what it's worth I live in Evansville, IN which is i believe the 2nd or third largest city in Indiana behind Indy and maybe Ft. Wayne. I have always been in the Reds market listening to wlw for 30 yeares and getting all the games on tv. The Reds are 2nd to the Cardinals in this area - boo, but they are very well liked and many travel. Another 300,000+ folks in this area. Again, I know now major, but it's a pretty nice amount to add to the total. I think signing Votto adds star power that even ESPN and MLB pick up on and Brandon has been so colorful the past several years. These are all things that add to the Reds awareness.

FlightRick
06-22-2012, 04:12 PM
The point is Nielsen drew the boundaries the way they did for whatever reason they had to do so, and that's how television operators generally do business. For people to subjectively argue what markets should be included and what shouldn't is a fruitless, and a largely irrelevant debate as that's not really how it works anyhow.

What am I missing that makes this subjective? Isn't FSO's penetration/coverage pretty much a matter of record? That the Reds are on every night here in Dayton is not a matter of opinion; it's objective fact. Others in Columbus, Lexington, Louisville would probably be able to tell you the same. Maybe Indy, or West Virginia, too. I dunno, but my guess is FSN has a concrete, objective number for their total penetration/coverage.

I mean, in the end, I don't expect out-of-Cinci markets to have the same ratings as in-Cinci... but they still count. And understand that a 3.0 cable rating is pretty much a monster hit, almost certain to land you in the weekly top 10 cable shows. You don't have to draw a 9.0 in other markets to be massively successful. Further (and this is me making a subjective guess), one can envision the Reds' drawing a primarily male audience, ages 18-44, which is highly craved by advertisers.

Ergo, even if out-of-Cinci viewership is incremental, we still know (objectively) which markets are covered by FSN and (objectively) that those markets can contribute mightily to ad revenue even if FSN ratings are one-sixth of what they are in Cinci. FSN won't be able to charge all advertisers based on that 9.0 figure, but you have to remember that advertisers would have to pay a premium to get an ad placed on a show that rates a 3.0 in Dayton, so even that marginal increase in eyeballs is still attractive to advertisers buying run-of-network time. Hell, even a 1.5 rating is a very successful cable program, so the bar here is pretty low for out-of-Cinci markets being profitable ones for FSN.

The price of local ad time may vary wildly based on individual DMA ratings for FSN, but that's, what?, 15% or 20% of total ad inventory. And I think FSN has to split those revenues with the local cable companies that push the ads to the appropriate ZIP Codes, further limiting that as a revenue stream.

But I guess that's digressing into the fruitless guesswork... per my usual. Digressing is what I do best. Mostly, I just wanted to point out my disagreement with the use of the word "subjective," when it doesn't quite apply. The exact numbers may be "unknown to us" (because I/we are too lazy, or too poorly connected, to get them), but that doesn't mean that the expanse of the Reds' TV coverage (as opposed to the Cincinnati TV Market) is a matter of opinion...


Rick

redsmetz
06-22-2012, 04:25 PM
Just curious because I don't know the logistics of how cable broadcasts are distributed, but how hard is it for FSO to make Reds games available to other, more distant cable providers? Let's say in three or four years as more players have moved through Pensacola up to the big club, if a cable provider decides they would like to carry Reds games for Blue Wahoo fans to see their favorite former players, how hard is that to do? Do geographic agreements with ATL or Tampa Bay perhaps preclude? Or is this open to whatever folks negotiate and a matter of just flipping a switch?

Reds Fanatic
06-22-2012, 04:32 PM
Today's update from FSN is the Reds now have the top average TV rating of all the MLB teams.


As of Thursday, June 21, the Reds telecasts on FOX Sports Ohio in the Cincinnati DMA have the highest regular season average rating in MLB with an 8.56 household rating.

oregonred
06-22-2012, 04:47 PM
Today's update from FSN is the Reds now have the top average TV rating of all the MLB teams.

Would be interesting to see the FSO ratings for the Dayton and Lexington markets which combined are as big as Cincy's DMA -- would be hard for anyone to argue isn't 100% exclusively Reds country.

From some links a while back the Reds were doing quite well back in 2010 in Indianapolis (when available), Louisville and Columbus. "

"From June 2010: Columbus can take some credit for the Reds' ratings. After 76 games, an average of 22,775 households in Columbus tuned into a Reds broadcast, nearly 40 percent of all households that watched the team this season."

A decade ago the Mariners signed a big TV deal and they benefitted in a big way from solid TV ratings and eyeballs in the Portland market 200 miles to the south, Spokane 300 miles+ east and even the reach into Idaho, Montana, southern BC and Alaska.

Brutus
06-22-2012, 04:49 PM
What am I missing that makes this subjective? Isn't FSO's penetration/coverage pretty much a matter of record? That the Reds are on every night here in Dayton is not a matter of opinion; it's objective fact. Others in Columbus, Lexington, Louisville would probably be able to tell you the same. Maybe Indy, or West Virginia, too. I dunno, but my guess is FSN has a concrete, objective number for their total penetration/coverage.

I mean, in the end, I don't expect out-of-Cinci markets to have the same ratings as in-Cinci... but they still count. And understand that a 3.0 cable rating is pretty much a monster hit, almost certain to land you in the weekly top 10 cable shows. You don't have to draw a 9.0 in other markets to be massively successful. Further (and this is me making a subjective guess), one can envision the Reds' drawing a primarily male audience, ages 18-44, which is highly craved by advertisers.

Ergo, even if out-of-Cinci viewership is incremental, we still know (objectively) which markets are covered by FSN and (objectively) that those markets can contribute mightily to ad revenue even if FSN ratings are one-sixth of what they are in Cinci. FSN won't be able to charge all advertisers based on that 9.0 figure, but you have to remember that advertisers would have to pay a premium to get an ad placed on a show that rates a 3.0 in Dayton, so even that marginal increase in eyeballs is still attractive to advertisers buying run-of-network time. Hell, even a 1.5 rating is a very successful cable program, so the bar here is pretty low for out-of-Cinci markets being profitable ones for FSN.

The price of local ad time may vary wildly based on individual DMA ratings for FSN, but that's, what?, 15% or 20% of total ad inventory. And I think FSN has to split those revenues with the local cable companies that push the ads to the appropriate ZIP Codes, further limiting that as a revenue stream.

But I guess that's digressing into the fruitless guesswork... per my usual. Digressing is what I do best. Mostly, I just wanted to point out my disagreement with the use of the word "subjective," when it doesn't quite apply. The exact numbers may be "unknown to us" (because I/we are too lazy, or too poorly connected, to get them), but that doesn't mean that the expanse of the Reds' TV coverage (as opposed to the Cincinnati TV Market) is a matter of opinion...


Rick

Show me a Major League club that has local TV coverage that doesn't bleed into other markets. I'm not even disputing the FS Ohio coverage extends outside of the Cincinnati DMA. But comparing them to other clubs is highly subjective if we start that debate.

So if we're going to argue that the Reds coverage extends beyond the borders of the designated market area, then we have to acknowledge that so does the coverage of probably every other baseball team in MLB. A

Then it becomes a subjective debate because the number of eyeballs exposed to each team individually is not a number that is available outside of people in the industry itself. So it does become subjective because the point was whether Cincinnati was a small market. Pointing out that coverage extends to multiple markets isn't the point to begin with. It's whether that coverage is larger than the coverage of other clubs.

I don't have access to FSN's numbers, nor their exact methodology, but I have a good hunch from my experience and education that they're paying most of the money to the Reds' organization based on the size of the home market, as that's where a majority of the viewers are coming from.

OesterPoster
06-22-2012, 05:08 PM
Interesting article posted by Jeff Passan today in regards to MLB's insane blackout rules.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/mlb%E2%80%99s-blackout-problem-keeps-sport-in-dark-ages.html


On the first page of a complaint filed May 9 in Manhattan, two words aim squarely for Major League Baseball's jaw and deliver a swift blow: "Illegal cartel."

Garber et al v. MLB is a class-action antitrust suit looking to do what no amount of complaining from baseball fans could: destroy the blackout rules. Four fans – Fernanda Garber, Marc Lerner, Derek Rasmussen and Robert Silver – are suing MLB, MLB Advanced Media (which runs the MLB.tv service), DirecTV, nine teams and eight stations that broadcast games. They claim baseball "colluded" by packaging its out-of-market games together via the Extra Innings and MLB.tv offerings and that the league and its partners "exploit their illegal monopoly by charging supra-competitive prices."

The basis of the argument is simple: By dividing up territories and setting fixed prices, MLB is in violation of the Sherman Act. If baseball is indeed breaking antitrust laws, its entire business model goes kaboom. And so while lawsuits stream into 245 Park Avenue frequently, this is one, according to a number of sources, the league is taking very seriously.

redsmetz
06-22-2012, 05:20 PM
Show me a Major League club that has local TV coverage that doesn't bleed into other markets. I'm not even disputing the FS Ohio coverage extends outside of the Cincinnati DMA. But comparing them to other clubs is highly subjective if we start that debate.

So if we're going to argue that the Reds coverage extends beyond the borders of the designated market area, then we have to acknowledge that so does the coverage of probably every other baseball team in MLB. A

Then it becomes a subjective debate because the number of eyeballs exposed to each team individually is not a number that is available outside of people in the industry itself. So it does become subjective because the point was whether Cincinnati was a small market. Pointing out that coverage extends to multiple markets isn't the point to begin with. It's whether that coverage is larger than the coverage of other clubs.

I don't have access to FSN's numbers, nor their exact methodology, but I have a good hunch from my experience and education that they're paying most of the money to the Reds' organization based on the size of the home market, as that's where a majority of the viewers are coming from.

But how do we know that? I'm not sure I can say that with any certainty. I know I've long argued that the Reds shouldn't be a small market team given the wide ranging market area we can (and did) draw from. And again, I think we're restoring that. I guess you acknowledge this, but how do we know that FSN isn't look at the wider demographics of the entire market that is broadcasting the Reds. That's a known market, which cable systems and where are carrying the broadcasts. Surely in this day and age, the value of the market shares throughout the broadcast receiving area can be generally known and you would think that would factor into the negotiations that will be coming up in the years to come.

oregonred
06-22-2012, 05:27 PM
Show me a Major League club that has local TV coverage that doesn't bleed into other markets. I'm not even disputing the FS Ohio coverage extends outside of the Cincinnati DMA. But comparing them to other clubs is highly subjective if we start that debate.

So if we're going to argue that the Reds coverage extends beyond the borders of the designated market area, then we have to acknowledge that so does the coverage of probably every other baseball team in MLB. A

Then it becomes a subjective debate because the number of eyeballs exposed to each team individually is not a number that is available outside of people in the industry itself. So it does become subjective because the point was whether Cincinnati was a small market. Pointing out that coverage extends to multiple markets isn't the point to begin with. It's whether that coverage is larger than the coverage of other clubs.

I don't have access to FSN's numbers, nor their exact methodology, but I have a good hunch from my experience and education that they're paying most of the money to the Reds' organization based on the size of the home market, as that's where a majority of the viewers are coming from.

You are both right. Cincinnati is unique in that it has a very large overall market within 100 miles in all directions but yet a small local market within 30 miles of downtown. Ohio is unique with 8-10 TV markets vs. MLB states like Colorado, Arizona, Michigan, Minnesota, Washington, Illinois with a single large metro area making up 50-80% of the entire state's population). Florida is a lot like Ohio and very fragmented.

Dayton (100% Reds), Indy (Cubs/Reds), Columbus (Reds/Indians), Lexington (100% Reds), Huntington/Charleston (should be 100% Reds) and Louisville (100% Reds) all squeeze the Cincinnati TV market in every direction which is why the Cincinnati DMA itself so small.

Indianapolis and Columbus have grown nicely into major league sized regions on their own the past 20 years. Kentucky is a growing "southern" state with no pro sports (except UK basketball) competition and essentially Reds country other than extreme western Ky.

San Diego has virtually no extension beyond San Diego county. Mid size city, but extremely small overall TV market. The Reds should be dwarfing their TV contract.

Seattle has very limited extension in the 50-150 mile mid-range area outside metro Seattle. Then Seattle hits wide open markets in Portland (175mi), Spokane (350mi) and Boise (500mi)

Marlins - Big local market but virtually zero extension outside of the Miami-FLL-WPB MSA.

Cleveland, Pittsburgh and Milwaukee are all small and virtually locked into their local MSA and state in Milwaukee's case (Although Twins/Cubs have to impact that). Easy to see why Columbus is critical for the Indians. One of the Pirates/Indians will need to be moved in the next 20 years.

Atlanta - Huge local MSA, lots of extenstion into Tennessee, Birmingham and the Carolinas. A team in Charlotte will impact the Braves at some point.

White Sox - Half the Chicago market (best case) with no extension. A team that will need to be moved in the next 20 years.

Red Sox/Braves - NESN and SportsSouth (Atlanta) is a perfect example that the Reds should follow to extend the local TV reach to 2-3X the local market. Although the Braves are actually quite hosed and locked into a horrible TV deal over the next 20 years just as sports TV revenue is exploding.

The Reds should start their own network (with the Blue Jackets and Pacers) if Fox Sports won't play ball on a massive TV deal.

redsmetz
06-22-2012, 05:37 PM
I have to say, this has been one of the more interesting discussions around here and I appreciate all the intricacies of this business added by folks giving us plenty of food for thought.

oregonred
06-22-2012, 06:47 PM
The Orioles are a perfect example of a team with virtually no extended market and by all definitions a small TV market limited to Baltimore and the 5.7M state of Maryland. And now having to fight it out with 2M+ residents in the Maryland DC suburbs. Philly to the North and the Nationals to the South.

The MLB blackout rules are insane. The state of Iowa is blocked from six teams all claiming local coverage (Cubs, White Sox, Cards, Royals, Twins and Brewers). They get killed on Fox Saturdays and mlb.com. Even though largely only the Cubs and Cardinals have any significant TV blackout area in the state. I believe the Reds Southern TV area blackout extends down into Nashville and Knoxville.

When I lived in the SW Florida area, they had zero blackouts. Not even the Marlins/Rays. Las Vegas is claimed as local blackout by six teams...

Brutus
06-22-2012, 07:01 PM
But how do we know that? I'm not sure I can say that with any certainty. I know I've long argued that the Reds shouldn't be a small market team given the wide ranging market area we can (and did) draw from. And again, I think we're restoring that. I guess you acknowledge this, but how do we know that FSN isn't look at the wider demographics of the entire market that is broadcasting the Reds. That's a known market, which cable systems and where are carrying the broadcasts. Surely in this day and age, the value of the market shares throughout the broadcast receiving area can be generally known and you would think that would factor into the negotiations that will be coming up in the years to come.

Oh, no question they're paying on the entire picture. I definitely don't deny that they're paying also because of Indianapolis, Columbus & Dayton, etc. All I'm saying is that the designated home market is generally the biggest factor in how much a network is going to pay for rights fees. More people are going to watch in a home market than out. Are more people watching inside the Cincinnati DMA than outside that DMA as a whole? My hunch is that there are, though I'll acknowledge I don't have numbers available to support that.

oregonred
06-22-2012, 07:12 PM
Oh, no question they're paying on the entire picture. I definitely don't deny that they're paying also because of Indianapolis, Columbus & Dayton, etc. All I'm saying is that the designated home market is generally the biggest factor in how much a network is going to pay for rights fees. More people are going to watch in a home market than out. Are more people watching inside the Cincinnati DMA than outside that DMA as a whole? My hunch is that there are, though I'll acknowledge I don't have numbers available to support that.

I think the answer is almost certainly no. Dayton and Lexington DMAs combined are bigger than Cincinnati's and I would bet the Reds ratings in those areas are easily 50% of the local Cincy market. I would bet Dayton is more like 70-75%. The Reds are pulling in 25-30K homes alone in Columbus. Indy looks like 10-15K a game based on a 2010 link below. Apparently the 2M+ households in Louisville, Lexington, WV and Dayton DMAs don't actually exist since an internet search on Reds TV ratings seems to pull up nothing to reference. Here's a Sept 10 blurb on the Indy ratings.

http://www.ibj.com/local-fox-sports-tv-ratings-of-reds-games-soar/PARAMS/article/22560

The good news is the current Reds ownership gets it and appears to be building up the Reds rightful regional powerhouse. How Schott and Lindner could have missed the forest through the local market trees is incredulous.

Brutus
06-22-2012, 11:21 PM
I think the answer is almost certainly no. Dayton and Lexington DMAs combined are bigger than Cincinnati's and I would bet the Reds ratings in those areas are easily 50% of the local Cincy market. I would bet Dayton is more like 70-75%. The Reds are pulling in 25-30K homes alone in Columbus. Indy looks like 10-15K a game based on a 2010 link below. Apparently the 2M+ households in Louisville, Lexington, WV and Dayton DMAs don't actually exist since an internet search on Reds TV ratings seems to pull up nothing to reference. Here's a Sept 10 blurb on the Indy ratings.

http://www.ibj.com/local-fox-sports-tv-ratings-of-reds-games-soar/PARAMS/article/22560

The good news is the current Reds ownership gets it and appears to be building up the Reds rightful regional powerhouse. How Schott and Lindner could have missed the forest through the local market trees is incredulous.

Well, I'm not so sure. The Reds have an 8.56 rating this year in the Cincinnati DMA, so we're talking about 77,000 homes.

I'm not sure where you got the number for Columbus, but assuming it's 20,000, that's about 30,0000 homes between Columbus and Indianapolis. Is it possible that Dayton and Lexington combined are 47,000 homes on average? Sure. But I really doubt it.

Whereas in Dayton, FS Ohio is on most expanded basic cable packages, that's not the case in Lexington. FS Ohio would only be on as part of a premium or sports package.

As an FYI, the reason you aren't able to find info on the Dayton, Lexington markets, etc., is because they're not "metered," so data isn't really released publicly. The top 56 markets are metered, so data is often reported, but that isn't the case with those markets. That's why you won't find much, if anything, on in-market ratings for those DMAs.

Yachtzee
06-23-2012, 02:00 AM
Well, I'm not so sure. The Reds have an 8.56 rating this year in the Cincinnati DMA, so we're talking about 77,000 homes.

I'm not sure where you got the number for Columbus, but assuming it's 20,000, that's about 30,0000 homes between Columbus and Indianapolis. Is it possible that Dayton and Lexington combined are 47,000 homes on average? Sure. But I really doubt it.

Whereas in Dayton, FS Ohio is on most expanded basic cable packages, that's not the case in Lexington. FS Ohio would only be on as part of a premium or sports package.

As an FYI, the reason you aren't able to find info on the Dayton, Lexington markets, etc., is because they're not "metered," so data isn't really released publicly. The top 56 markets are metered, so data is often reported, but that isn't the case with those markets. That's why you won't find much, if anything, on in-market ratings for those DMAs.

I don't think cable carriers base things solely on the local DMAs, and as noted elsewhere in this thread, Reds games are shown on local Fox Sports networks throughout the black out area, which means Reds games are more than likely on basic cable in Lexington on it's Fox Sports network, even if it isn't branded "Fox Sports Ohio." The Fox Sports Networks often rebrand their different feeds. For example, up here in Akron, both feeds of Fox Sports Ohio have been available, one (the Northern Ohio feed) on basic and the other (often branded as Fox Sports Cincinnati) as part of the regional sports package. Both show the same stuff for the most part, with the exception that the Northern feed shows poker or horse racing when the Reds are on because we're not in the Reds TV territory (and when they had a free preview of the sports tier, I still couldn't watch Reds games on the Cincinnati feed, just showing a standard "The program is not available in your area" disclaimer. I know that when both the Indians and Reds were on Fox Sports Ohio, both teams were available on basic cable in areas where their territories overlapped, with one being on the main channel and the other being made available on an alternate basic cable channel. Fox Sports Indiana looks like it's actually an Indiana feed of Fox Sports Midwest, which is the Cardinals TV network, yet FS Indiana broadcasts Reds games to most of the state, which is in the Reds territory but not the Cards territory. I suspect Kentucky has FS Ohio, FS Midwest, and FS Tennessee (a spin-off feed of FS South) available depending upon which part of the state you're in, and they show the Reds, Cards, and/or Braves on basic cable depending upon which area you live in. According to the Regional Fox Sports Net Wikipedia page, FS Ohio broadcasts games in Nashville, TN and Western NC.

The reality of the matter is that, with the way local baseball contracts are going, it looks like regional sports networks are ponying up based on the number of potential viewers in the team's territory rather than just the local DMA. It's probably because baseball is a reliable draw for their channel and also to avoid having more teams follow the lead of teams like the Yankees, Indians, Twins, Orioles, et. al. in launching their own cable sports networks. That second part is important, because I doubt the regional FSNs would get the same ratings for World Series of Poker reruns that they do for baseball, even if it's the Reds in Nashville, TN.

CrackerJack
06-23-2012, 02:21 AM
I have Insight Cable and had no audio for the last 2-3 innings tonight, and the entire game was jumbled before that. Glad I didn't miss much, but cmon.

Fox Sports is a joke, how many home games this year have had these problems? The Reds need to step-up and get a real TV contract. I don't keep up with such things, but Fox Sports Ohio is absolutely awful, just terrible and cheap.

How did their issues not affect others? I'm seriously tired of paying $ for this crap - it has gone on and on this year for several games, it's 2012 and these are home games, please address the issues.

Yachtzee
06-24-2012, 12:22 AM
I have Insight Cable and had no audio for the last 2-3 innings tonight, and the entire game was jumbled before that. Glad I didn't miss much, but cmon.

Fox Sports is a joke, how many home games this year have had these problems? The Reds need to step-up and get a real TV contract. I don't keep up with such things, but Fox Sports Ohio is absolutely awful, just terrible and cheap.

How did their issues not affect others? I'm seriously tired of paying $ for this crap - it has gone on and on this year for several games, it's 2012 and these are home games, please address the issues.

That could be an issue with your service provider rather than Fox Sports.

CrackerJack
06-24-2012, 12:56 AM
That could be an issue with your service provider rather than Fox Sports.

I'm pretty sure it's Fox Sports, as they've announced their difficulties during broadcasts multiple times this year already.

Jim Day also creeps me out.