LogFAQs > #954275844

Zeus posted...

Which is a claim that largely relies on disingenuous arguments

Which part of the argument is disingenuous? And again you have maybe hundreds of tv shows competing vs hundreds of thousands of streams. Also where are you pulling this 2.4 million stat from?

"In 2020, the League of Legends World Championships peaked at almost 46 million concurrent viewers."

That's almost 20x what you mentioned and thats what should be compared with traditional sports viewership. That means league has gotten to almost half the viewership of the super bowl. Conversely, the world series had a record low 9.6 million views in 2020 being obliterated in viewership. Of course, the world cup still decimates everything so far at just over 1 billion concurrent viewers worldwide.

Streaming has not yet caught up to traditional tv in viewership but it's largely because of old people. The average 65+ watches more than 6 hours of tv per day. The average 12-17 doesn't even watch 1 hour average per day and the numbers rise through each age group. It's only a matter of time.

And the majority of this data and analysis comes from neilsen, aka the tv ratings people.

And if you really wanna see how traditional tv is dying, it's better to look at youtube with over 1 billion hours watched per day and more time watched in the 18-34 on youtube mobile alone than the same demographic watches tv.
Zeus posted...

More importantly, the reason that streaming has to rely on alternative metrics is because it can't compete on conventional metrics.

This makes no sense. If anything, total hours viewed is the simplest most direct metric. Average per person has a lot of caveats. Does it include people who don't own tvs? Is it considering multiple people per household using the same tv?

You can look at any metrics you want and see that cable tv is going down and quickly while streaming is going up even more quickly.

---

I'm ninja
(you can't see me)