Toronto Sports Media October Radio Ratings

BY TSM

Once again I provide the same caveat, the people meter system sucks. It sucks for everyone equally. I’m told that in some cases the ratings are based upon readings from less than 10 people! Yes, that’s correct, ratings are being recorded in a demographic by less than 10 people in certain demographics. Remember how this works, people are selected and paid to wear beepers (remember those) that record the audio around them. The beepers record what they listen to in minute increments. There are only so many beepers in the GTA. Of the total beepers in Toronto, only a small fraction are males and an even smaller # of those males fit within the two age demographics. An even smaller number of beepers ever listen to either 590 or 1050. That’s the base from which the ratings come.

So if there are less than 10 people in the meter pool of a certain demographic, it’s hardly representative of anything. I am told that even the larger pool is not much higher. One person put it at less than 50!

In other words take with a huge grain of salt. The only way to gauge success is to look at both stations ad cards. Anyone have those?

In any event here you go. Analysis to follow:

octseptsummerspringmay
Brady & Lang     
25-546.76.96.86.96.5
18-344.96.2 10.2 
Mike Richards     
25-541.71.31.3 1
18-346.65.5   
Jeff Blair     
25-544.73.85.16.25.6
18-3442.9 11.2 
Dan Patrick     
25-542.21.80.9  
18-344.34.5   
Hockey Central     
25-545.45.44.56.25.5
18-344.65.6 11.2 
Noon TSN     
25-54See Hayes0.70.8  
18-34See Hayes1.7   
Eric Smith     
25-545.54.73.34.73.4
18-343.64 7.1 
Bryan Hayes     
25-541.30.92.1  
18-343.22.4   
McCown     
25-5410.89.68.99.310.2
18-342.42.8 7.8 
Cybulski     
25-542.22.82.7  
18-343.63.9  
About the Author
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
17 Comments
Oldest
Newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
(Another) Andrew
(Another) Andrew
November 9, 2011 2:55 pm

Yes, that’s correct, ratings are being recorded in a demographic by less than 10 people in certain demographics.

So why does the industry accept this situation? Even if radio stations believed they are getting higher numbers than they warrant surely the advertisers would want more accuracy with the numbers.

Alex
Alex
November 9, 2011 3:34 pm

I wish we had numbers for things like the pts week by week ratings, so we could see if people really do less listen less when damion is on.

mike (in boston)
mike (in boston)
November 9, 2011 4:16 pm

it defies credulity to think that advertisers are making multi-million dollar deals on the basis of the listening habits of a sample size of 10 or even 50 people.

mario
mario
November 9, 2011 5:01 pm

It is going to be a long haul for TSN to make any significant in road into the Fan numbers….looks like TSN is going to suffle the chairs around or bring in new people trhey cannot be happy even though it is early..having said that good for TSN making them both better in the long run..

Shelby
Shelby
November 9, 2011 5:27 pm

it defies credulity to think that advertisers are making multi-million dollar deals on the basis of the listening habits of a sample size of 10 or even 50 people.

This ^

What a joke this ratings system isn’t even remotely accurate as to what the masses are really listening to and is not even worth the paper it’s reported on.

The radio industry needs to get their act together.

Shelby
Shelby
November 9, 2011 5:30 pm

It is going to be a long haul for TSN to make any significant in road into the Fan numbers….

Based off of what? The listening preferences of 10-50 people? LMFAO

Paul
Paul
November 9, 2011 5:37 pm

My university stats courses some 30+ years ago taught me the value of statistics well, but the outcomes must be valid. With a sample size of 10, or even as small as 50, the chances of the results being accurate and representative of a demographic are extremely small. Thus if station execs and their advertisers are basing major decisions on these numbers, well they are friggin’ nuts!

robinaurora
robinaurora
November 9, 2011 9:09 pm

I maintain TSN will eventually overtake Fan 590. “Its a marathon, not a sprint”.Assuming they have deep pockets and some patience, anything Rogers does is eventually shown to be inferior.

In saying that, TSN made a bonehead decision bringing in Mike Richards. He belongs in a much smaller market. They need to spruce that morning drive slot up. Brady and Lainge are winning by default with an inferior program (I have friends that just won’t listen to sports radio now in the AM. I am approaching that point too.

James
James
November 9, 2011 10:23 pm

Robin, I think it’s pretty obvious that your opinion and everyone else’s in no way represent the truth or reality.

Saying one station is clearly better is purely subjective. For instance personally I prefer 590 in every single time slot and most by a long long shot, the exception being Dan Patrick which isn’t even a true TSN property.

And clearly the majority based on ratings (however dubious) and the comentary on this site agree with me.

So personally I think it unlikely 1050 comes close to dethroning the champ, at the very least until bobcat retires.

In regards to ratings, I find both tv and radio ratings ridiculous to say the least.

I am shocked that in the current day with all our techology that media producers don’t have some way of precisely tracking how many are listening/watching at any given time. For example with Internet streaming they can tell exactly how many use the service, for how long, etc.

This has always perplexed me, but I suppose that in some period of time as media shifts even more online, and for example tv become completely integrated to the web this will become reality.

Until then I guess insanely small groups of people will represent th collective interests of society and determine what we have the option of watching and listening to.

(in a related note, I suspect under current ratings systems there are huge segments of the population that go completely unrepresented. For example those in smaller cities and towns, young people, etc. Does anyone actually know someone who is used in ratings studies? I sure don’t, and I’d bet that many people I know would never be eligible for such selection)

One last thing…I suppose that if true tracking of media consumption wer introduced people would feel Big Bro was watching them. As if everything they do on th net isn’t tracked, and evrything on a computer recorded permanently, and as if the CIA actually cares or has the manpower to look in on every average Joe)

Brian K
Brian K
November 10, 2011 10:59 am

I assume the age groups are 18-34 and 35-54, not 25-54.

Mike S
Mike S
November 10, 2011 12:14 pm

Blair’s October number makes more sense than his September number (which seemed too low) and his Jan/Feb numbers (which seemed way too high)………….I agree with everyone who said that it’s hard to believe the current rating system is not more sophisticated than it is

Mike V
Mike V
November 10, 2011 12:41 pm

Are your sources sure it’s only 50 radio PPMs in Toronto?

I remember reading a story back when they came out for TVs that said there were about 4,400 households in Canada that had them, which would translate to roughly 900 homes in the GTA.

Doesn’t make sense for there to be so few in use for radio.

James
James
November 10, 2011 12:56 pm

Well far less people listen to radio. Then a fraction of that is sports radio, and a fraction of that is males, and further fractionalize that into two age demographics.

James
James
November 10, 2011 12:57 pm

By the way, last night I heard brunt mention the very small groups used for radio ratings…who wants to bet he read it here?

Chef Mike in Burlington
November 11, 2011 6:05 pm

I was talking to my buddy in TV programming at CTV about rating numbers, and he told me that the numbers quoted here for numbers of radio “raters” used are actually double the numbers quoted here, but even if he is correct, that’s still shockingly few to me, barely 200 across the entire GTA.

According to him, there are other signifcant “measurement metrics” that actually give better indications of real listnership, but he didn’t elaborate, he’s in TV, not radio, but I have no reason to doubt him…seems amazing how few actually decide isn’t it????

P.J. Davis
P.J. Davis
November 11, 2011 6:53 pm

I know a people meter family and the monitoring is unbelievable – one Friday night they went to bed at 9:30 and left the kids up watching TV; they rec’d a call Saturday morning asking if this was the case. The people meter is 10 times better than the “diaries” or surveys because people lie about what they watch or listen to. The only concern is the number (or lack there ) of people carrying meters – the reason being Canadian media is extraordinarily cheap

Steve
Steve
February 29, 2012 8:46 am

The single most accurate measurment of radio ratings has been around for years – its how Howard Stern he went to #1 in L.A. in one day – guy stands on an overpass and points a sound amplifier dish & points it at slow moving traffic – hears what they’re listening to.

As important as ratings are at determning advertising revenue, not sure why Toronto broadcasters don’t demand that this be done – or just do it themselves.

17
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x
https://torontosportsmedia.com/2011/11/09/toronto-sports-media-october-radio-ratings/
torontosportsmedia.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2022-27
192559
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:FTFIYISP4RDAG3TPUT5A4UIPHZN44OCU
<urn:uuid:c5dda858-58d2-459b-bdd4-b42b7b673201>
2022-07-06T01:35:02Z
104.21.27.52
text/html
sha1:NS7M7W34KANHFRMTUG25J6JIQHQJFHRT
<urn:uuid:fd1f45b1-8bc6-4b32-834f-02fb3b47a68a>
https://torontosportsmedia.com/2011/11/09/toronto-sports-media-october-radio-ratings/
response
<urn:uuid:992a6dbb-bf0b-4fbe-9e8b-c25d2ea0dca8>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2022-27
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for June/July 2022
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-140
software: Apache Nutch 1.18 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.3-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: https://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/