Lord of the Rings TV Series Purchased by Amazon

[Triceron]

There may be other metrics but they aren’t all equal and some are obviously more wide spread then others and it seems disingenuous to act like people aren’t talking about the most widely used one when saying it’s THE metric.

Like the thing I linked some days ago said Nelson is used by what 25 of the biggest streaming related businesses and is being used by Netflix to push ad data and it has been a stable of actual tv numbers for years. Unless there is some metric even more wide spread it defiantly seems to be THE metric of the industry even if it’s not the only one.

It isn't though.

Like I said, that would be like saying Netflix is THE streaming platform of the industry. It wouldn't be true no matter how you want to twist it. You can argue that Netflix is doing streaming better than any other platform. You could argue that Netflix has entered our daily parlance, with slang like 'Netflix and Chill'. But there is nothing that would make sense out of calling it THE streaming platform of the industry.

Same can be said here. Nielsen ratings are not universally exclusive to any point where you could call it THE metric of the industry.

Like the thing I linked some days ago said Nelson is used by what 25 of the biggest streaming related businesses and is being used by Netflix to push ad data and it has been a stable of actual tv numbers for years.

Yes.

One of many. That your article didn't talk about all the other methods doesn't mean Nielsen is default THE metric.

Nielsen is accurate, but also heavily relies on extrapolated information, and does not categorize their information in a cohesive way. Their streaming numbers do not include any TV viewership numbers; they're calculated and categorized separately. And to my knowledge, they don't have any graphs for total viewership across all platforms. This is where methods like google trend analytics may be more accurate, since they would not be differentiating who is watching on what platform; rather it gauges interest in the show overall.

And overall, Nielsen may have less relevance in today's market, considering it's built around providing data for the traditional Ad-based revenue systems that TV shows relied on. As this changes for newer platforms, and companies like Amazon are using Prime Video to promote their online Shopping platform, there will be less need to rely on metrics that are built around maximizing ad-based revenue.

Amazon doesn't really care about Nielsen ratings and 'Minutes Viewed', because their platform isn't making money off how much time people are spending watching their shows, rather they care about the 'first click' potential, and total viewership numbers, regardless of minutes watched.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

It isn't though. I work in the industry, and I can tell you for a fact it isn't THE metric of the industry.

You say that but list no other metric to rival it and other (I’d say more reliable) people in the industry have said it is the go to while also listing other ones in multiple post.

[Triceron]

You say that but list no other metric to rival it and other (I’d say more reliable) people in the industry have said it is the go to while also listing other ones in multiple post.

Amazon has their own internal metric.

https://www.parrotanalytics.com/insi...n-prime-video/

https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/amazon-s...aled-1.1027757

https://www.starkinsider.com/2018/03...-tv-shows.html

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Amazon has their own internal metric.

https://www.parrotanalytics.com/insi...n-prime-video/

Is Amazon the industry?

[Triceron]

Is Amazon the industry?

It's the one we are talking about if we're talking about Rings of Power.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

It's the one we are talking about if we're talking about Rings of Power.

No, it isn’t.

That goal post is firmly set and isn’t going any where.

[Triceron]

No, it isn’t.

That goal post is firmly set and isn’t going any where.

I was very clear with my first answer to you that there is no singular metric that is being used by the industry at large.

When I do mention things like Google Trends analytics, or Amazon's internal methods, you say it's not 'the industry'. Then what exactly are you asking for?

It seems to me the goal post is irrelevant considering Amazon isn't even on the same playing field. You're talking about the rules of scoring in basketball when Amazon is playing football. What you're asking for is 'What is the metric for scoring in sports', and there's no singular answer to that. Different sports score in different ways, not every one of them relies on the same metrics to define their own success.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

So question to you, what is the streaming platform of the industry?

*shrug* not a clue, would likely depend on market value and power to pick up in demand media.

I’d expect some one who works in the industry would know these things and would be able to list some near competitors even if you can’t about your own industry.

[Triceron]

*shrug* not a clue, would likely depend on market value and power to pick up in demand media.

I’d expect some one who works in the industry would know these things and would be able to list some near competitors even if you can’t about your own industry.

Because 'competititors' is not how it works.

We're talking about analytics, of which Nielsen ratings are merely one type of measurement. And they are a company of many different names themselves, who provide a wealth of different analytics data for more than just TV and streaming. It's little different than if I mentioned Google Trends, which is another set of analytics.

You are somehow thinking that metrics are tied to specific companies, rather than as systems of analytics.

Google Trends is something I already mentioned. Amazon's own internal system is another. You don't seem to understand what you're actually asking for, and don't recognize it when you have the answer in front of you.


I hope you understand my confusion here when you're asking for things that I've mentioned and answered many times already. Your questions aren't very clear when you think I'm moving goalposts, when I'm really intending to clarify answers that were already given.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Because 'competititors' is not how it works.

We're talking about analytics, of which Nielsen ratings are merely one type of measurement. And they are a company of many different names themselves, who provide a wealth of different analytics data for more than just TV and streaming. It's little different than if I mentioned Google Trends, which is another set of analytics.

You are somehow thinking that metrics are tied to specific companies, rather than as systems of analytics.

Google Trends is something I already mentioned. Amazon's own internal system is another. You don't seem to understand what you're actually asking for, and don't recognize it when you have the answer in front of you.

Competitors is of course how it works there are tons of metrics coming from within a given company and from many others and the industry chooses which ones are worth taking into account and are trust worthy they spend millions on this stuff, Pretty sure fencers laid this all out some days ago.

Nielsen is the go to because it is has settled it self as the most accurate and trust worthy and obviously for good reason if you who works in the industry can’t even list any other metrics beyond google trends like 5 post in.

[Triceron]

Nielsen is the good to because it is has settled it self as the most accurate and trust worthy and obviously for good reason if you who works in the industry can’t even lost any other metrics beyond google trends like 5 post in.

Yet the framework in discussion is Nielsen in relation to Rings of Power being defined as successful, when Amazon and Prime Video isn't building their shows and platform around the 'Minutes Watched' metrics that Nielsen ratings are analyzing.

This would be like saying how the World Cup does not use video-playback to judge their refereeing, and trying to apply that to other sports because 'the World Cup is the most widely watched sports event in the world'. That's not how this shit works. We can point at the fact that the World Cup is the most widely watched sports event in the world. We can point out that they do not use video-playback to aid in refereeing. But there is no reason to imply that this is a universal 'industry standard'. There is no standard.

The most reasonable answer is the importance of the metrics would depend on the particular company we're talking about. It would be dishonest to imply that any one given metric is a universal standard.

Just like if someone said Google Trends is THE metric for streaming in the industry, I would just as much argue the same damn thing. There is no one universal metric. It's merely a set of analytical data. Just like there is no ONE poll that is universally better than all other polls. The way we regard it all is merely as different sets of data coming from different sources.

I'm not disputing the accuracy of the metrics, I'm disputing the relevancy of the metrics as being universally and equally applicable across all streaming platforms.

lost any other metrics beyond google trends like 5 post in.

So in short, you don't actually know what you're asking for, but you're asking for it anyways.

[rhorle]

Could you point to any more wide spread metric to be THE metric of the industry?

They won't and will use some mental gymnastics for the reason why it should be ignored. This is just the latest tactic to de-legitimatize the success of Rings of Power. It has to be a failure in their minds so anything and everything will be used to say it is one. Nielsen is a respected viewership tracking company in the US. They have even negotiated with streaming companies so tracking can be expanded for their platforms. That is why we have a month delay for their "top 10" for example.

The goal posts just keep moving. Now Nielsen is the problem but it won't be the last.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Yet the framework in discussion is Nielsen in relation to Rings of Power being defined as successful, when Amazon and Prime Video isn't building their shows and platform around the 'Minutes Watched' metrics that Nielsen ratings are analyzing.

This would be like saying how the World Cup does not use video-playback to judge their refereeing, and trying to apply that to other sports because 'the World Cup is the most widely watched sports event in the world'. That's not how this shit works.

The frame work in discussion is this post by Fabinas.

The fact is that THIS IS THE METRIC USED by the industry.

You not accepting it, calling it nonsensical etc, has no bearing or influence to the fact above.

Talking about the metric uses by the industry, Amazon is not the industry, that goal post still isn’t moving.

- - - Updated - - -

They won't and will use some mental gymnastics for the reason why it should be ignored. This is just the latest tactic to de-legitimatize the success of Rings of Power. It has to be a failure in their minds so anything and everything will be used to say it is one. Nielsen is a respected viewership tracking company in the US. They have even negotiated with streaming companies so tracking can be expanded for their platforms. That is why we have a month delay for their "top 10" for example.

The goal posts just keep moving. Now Nielsen is the problem but it won't be the last.

Your completely on the money.

[Triceron]

Talking about the metric uses by the industry, Amazon is not the industry, that goal post still isn’t moving.

The answer is that no single metric is universally applicable in equal measure of importance. That answer still hasn't changed.

You can keep that goalpost where it is. Asking for other competitors doesn't change the answer I've provided.


Otherwise, do you believe House of the Dragon underperformed because it didn't make any of the Nielsen ratings lists? We know for a fact that it's omitted from lists because of various factors that the Nielsen ratings aren't counting. The metrics are not universally and equally applicable.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

The answer is that none exists.

That answer doesn't change either.

Well to quote you.

Or you're just being dishonest.

[Triceron]

Well to quote you.

You can quote it but the answer is still true, lol.

No single metric is universal or equal in the industry. @Fencers can jump in to clarify that as well if he wishes to, if that's who you will believe.

I'm not disputing Nielsen ratings as being inaccurate, I'm presenting the simple fact that its metrics are very specific to Streaming and not Total Viewership, which fudges all the numbers of the things we're actually talking about. If we're going to talk about performance and comparisons of various shows, then there's no reason to merely rely on Nielsen ratings as a defacto 'metric of the industry'.

I'm honestly baffled by how this is lost to you guys, who think there is only one defacto method ofanalytics just because it happens to be reliable and widespread.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

You can quote it but the answer is still true, lol.

No single metric is universal or equal in the industry. @Fencers can jump in to clarify that as well if he wishes to, if that's who you will believe.

And to quote my self.

There may be other metrics but they aren’t all equal and some are obviously more wide spread then others and it seems disingenuous to act like people aren’t talking about the most widely used one when saying it’s THE metric.

[Triceron]

And to quote my self.

There may be other metrics but they aren’t all equal and some are obviously more wide spread then others and it seems disingenuous to act like people aren’t talking about the most widely used one when saying it’s THE metric.

Which is only applicable to the US, and not the world.

WHereas something like Google Trends is actually applicable world-wide.

Like I said, I don't think you actually understand what you're actually trying to defend. Nielsen ratings are very accurate, very reliable, and very trust-worthy. It's also very specific to analyzing minutes watched in the US. Everything we're regarding in terms of Nielsen is very specific to the metrics it's calculating. There is no reason to tout it as a 'Metric of the industry' any more than trying to argue that because Imperial measurement is widely used in the US, it's the 'Metric of the industry'.

The answer is there is no singular metric for the industry, and that it all depends on what companies we're talking about.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Like I said, I don't think you actually understand what you're actually trying to defend.

Every one understands it perfectly well you just don’t have any thing of value to add which is why I can just quote my earlier post as you re cover things we already went over and why you have tried to move the goal post numerous times.

[Triceron]

Every one understands it perfectly well you just don’t have any thing of value to add which is why I can just quote my earlier post as you re cover things we already went over and why you have tried to move the goal post numerous times.

Everyone understands it to be A metric that the industry uses. Not everyone agrees it to be THE metric that the industry uses. That's a big difference.

Otherwise people wouldn't bother refuting what Fabinas said, considering it would have been perfectly fine if he said it was a popular and widespread, reliable metric that the industry uses.

There is no goalpost moving, you just don't recognize there to be a big difference in the statement. That's your choice to recognize as there being little-to-no difference. Not my problem if you don't recognize the differences in something you have little understanding in.