AEW Rampage 10/15: Bryan Danielson vs Minoro Suzuki

**BigCrippyZ** · 10-19-2021, 04:57 PM

Anyone who says that is a moron who's never talked to anyone in charge of a network in their life. There's a competitor that theoretically might replace Nielsen at some point because they theoretically might get more accurate ratings measurements, but Nielsen is actually also looking to purchase them.

I've explained this countless times, and your only response has been nonsensical bullshit that you're making up. I literally negotiate these kinds deals for a living for advertisers, and I regularly see the actual numbers and talk with TV execs when I'm negotiating deals with broadcasters for clients, whether I'm representing advertisers or TV production companies.

Especially when you're talking about cable, the 18-49 demo rating is the primary factor advertisers use to determine how much they're willing to pay to advertise during a certain time slot and network. Having high 18-49 viewership can be the difference between an advertiser paying $100k v. $200k or more for a 30 second spot.

The reason for that is multiple, but ultimately it comes down to $ and statistics. A 20-40 year old will typically have more (or at least be more likely to spend much more of their) disposable income on goods/services than someone who is 55+. Statistically, because people ages 55+ are both (1) retired or close to retirement, and (2) usually have adult children in the 18-49 age group who have their own purchasing power, most of them save or invest into their retirement instead of spending their excess disposable income, even though they might actually have more.

Those spending stats are still holding true and have been for decades now. I don't know anyone who actually works in the industry and knows what the hell they're talking about who would say that people under 60 are now spending more disposable income than people ages 18-45. You might have outliers in the occasional quarter as has historically always occured, but t's not happening on anything remotely close to a widespread scale consistently or across the board.

10-19-2021, 04:57 PM	#11
BigCrippyZ Posts: 3,033	Anyone who says that is a moron who's never talked to anyone in charge of a network in their life. There's a competitor that theoretically might replace Nielsen at some point because they theoretically might get more accurate ratings measurements, but Nielsen is actually also looking to purchase them. I've explained this countless times, and your only response has been nonsensical bullshit that you're making up. I literally negotiate these kinds deals for a living for advertisers, and I regularly see the actual numbers and talk with TV execs when I'm negotiating deals with broadcasters for clients, whether I'm representing advertisers or TV production companies. Especially when you're talking about cable, the 18-49 demo rating is the primary factor advertisers use to determine how much they're willing to pay to advertise during a certain time slot and network. Having high 18-49 viewership can be the difference between an advertiser paying $100k v. $200k or more for a 30 second spot. The reason for that is multiple, but ultimately it comes down to $ and statistics. A 20-40 year old will typically have more (or at least be more likely to spend much more of their) disposable income on goods/services than someone who is 55+. Statistically, because people ages 55+ are both (1) retired or close to retirement, and (2) usually have adult children in the 18-49 age group who have their own purchasing power, most of them save or invest into their retirement instead of spending their excess disposable income, even though they might actually have more. Those spending stats are still holding true and have been for decades now. I don't know anyone who actually works in the industry and knows what the hell they're talking about who would say that people under 60 are now spending more disposable income than people ages 18-45. You might have outliers in the occasional quarter as has historically always occured, but t's not happening on anything remotely close to a widespread scale consistently or across the board.