Did they reschedule the men's final? When I checked the night before or in the morning, I thought it was for later in the afternoon, i.e. 3pm cst. Would have given enough time to catch most of the 12pm football games and then switch over. But by the time we realized that the finals had an earlier start, we were only switching over during commercial breaks.
Abysmal 2024 US Open Ratings
- Thread starter placebo
- Start date
jm1980
Talk Tennis Guru
RSJfan
Hall of Fame
2pm start was announced by the USTA back in February when they emailed out material about the 2024 event. It has also been on the website for months under the tab Schedule>Event. I think they also sent it to people that agreed to receive texts.
You didn’t really miss much.
Open Stance
Professional
College football is much more interesting and engaging to watch. The fans and players have more passion. It's not nearly as homogenized and sterile as the NFL.
In any sport, it's always much more interesting if you have a favorite team or player to root for. Hockey is a good example. I am a huge Detroit Red Wings fan and watch all their games but I have a very difficult time watching a hockey game without the Wings playing even though they've been pretty bad in recent years. Personally I would rather watch paint dry than watch a soccer match. It's such a slow game and there's nothing more exciting than the insurmountable 1-Nil lead. It might be a different story if there was a team I could root for.
Open Stance
Professional
Many Directv customers couldn't watch on ABC either. I wonder if the 2 PM ET time start had any impact as well.
RSJfan
Hall of Fame
Sinner has no aura. I couldn’t put my finger on why this kid is so boring until you prompted me. No aura! Someone please get him an aura fast.
Jack the Hack
Hall of Fame
Looking at the views counted so far, there are over 55k for the full men's final in less than one day since it's been posted on YouTube, which I suppose isn't bad considering that most people already know the result. Additionally, since most people opt for highlights on that platform, there were 1.4 million views for the Sinner-Draper semifinal highlights and 1.5 million for the Fritz-Tiafoe semifinal in 3 days.
Outside of that, ESPN obviously gave the US Open a decent amount of exposure on Sportscenter, and I noticed Sinner and Sabalenka made appearances on all of the daytime talk shows this week. Seems like the typical amount of coverage.
My gripe about the men's finals on television was that it had been moved to ABC without a lot of fanfare. The women's final was on ESPN the day before. On Sunday, I went to my Mom's house to watch it with her. However, she has Sling, which doesn't include the local ABC affiliate. Therefore, after searching for a way to watch it for 15 minutes, we gave up and drove over to my place to watch the match (I have Comcast). I wondered how many others had a hard time finding the broadcast, especially given the start time?
Better_Call_Raul
Hall of Fame
The Djoker is the main attraction as evidenced by this year's final viewership dropping a whooping 40%. Wow.
And no it cannot be blamed on Sinner. It is all on Fritz. The great players raise their level in the Final. Others like Fritz have a first serve percentage of 38% in the first set. Inexcusable.
Fritz will never win a Major. Not with Sinner, Alcaraz and others in the way. Mark that down. Fritz will always be relegated to a SF appearance at best.
RSJfan
Hall of Fame
I am glad to see you haven’t abandoned your fav Egg. I’m sure the boring final match was not an issue for you because you must have been so excited when they cut to show your fav Taylor, Taylor Swift.
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
USO has become an event in itself. Not for the tennis, but the event. Wimbledon is similar (French not far behind), in that the tennis is becoming secondary.Substantially the same exact post every year. Thank you for taking up the task this year.
There is no relationship whatsoever between USO broadcast numbers and attendance — I wish there was because the USO is too crowded. (Though the USTA recently entered into a lucrative long-term broadcast contract. The value of broadcast rights is not solely a numbers issue; demographics is very important.)
The attendance numbers are very real — which you would appreciate if you went — and the financial results are all audited and disclosed. Don’t dump your USTA bonds in a panic like my fav Dr Raul did during the no spectators 2020 event. The USO is a money making machine. This year they sold about $13 million of Honey Deuce cocktails alone.
At the U.S. Open, a Quest for $100 Chicken Nuggets
The tennis tournament is known for upscale offerings, but a new box of six “golden” nuggets drew a covetous crowd, and plenty of attention online.www.nytimes.com
2024 will beat these numbers:
U.S. Open Cash Spigot Flows as USTA Turns to Investments
Revenues, ticket sales, viewership and attendance for the Slam are all at record highs. The USTA is using the excess cash to re-focus on investments.www.sportico.com
With the crowds becoming more and more rich, the prices will naturally go up. This will oust the true tennis fans that want to see the action. When this happens, you get people walking during points, leaving or showing up late for sessions, and less energetic crowds.
So attendance records should not be the defining factor for the TENNIS tournament in itself being quality, tennis fandom growth, nor for its entertainment value.
That is where the TV numbers come in to play. Who is tuning in? If the numbers are up, in this environment, then the above is in good hands. Decreasing viewership also does not mean failure, as TV is becoming increasingly competitive with all the choices, along with the fact that many people do not have access to the matches.
TSN, ESPN, and other providers are making it increasingly difficult to afford or, in some instances, impossible (Direct TV).
When tournaments stop raising their prize money massively every year I will say there is a problem.
All I see is more guys and girls getting bigger prize money checks, far outpacing inflation. I see this in other sports when people argue about ratings. NBA ratings have been going down but the just signed a mammoth tv deal worth like 76 billion dollars for 11 years. The last deal they signed was 24 billion for 9 years. And their ratings are going down. So people who put stock in this stuff dont know what they are talking about.
All I see is more guys and girls getting bigger prize money checks, far outpacing inflation. I see this in other sports when people argue about ratings. NBA ratings have been going down but the just signed a mammoth tv deal worth like 76 billion dollars for 11 years. The last deal they signed was 24 billion for 9 years. And their ratings are going down. So people who put stock in this stuff dont know what they are talking about.
Lleytonstation
Talk Tennis Guru
Viewership is more fractured than ever due to competition.
Yet, as you said, the money increasing massively. Does not matter the sport. There is not a single sport that is dying. Every player, team, and league is increasing worth and profit.
GabeT
G.O.A.T.
Yea I dont know about all sports but I see people with agendas claim baseball or some other sport is "dying". It's all such nonsense. Tennis is fine. As is any other major sports. People love sports, and more so than ever in this day and age TV networks love sports.
What really matters, more than ratings, is tennis participation in the USA. Are sales of tennis products strong? Are more people of all ages playing tennis in the USA?
In the past, tennis participation increased when there were U.S. slam champions. This year, the USA had 2 finalists but it did not translate into ratings. I suspect the issue is that Ms. Pegula and Mr. Fritz are not currently sufficiently known to US audiences. But, if they and their peers continue making progress in the slams and major WTA & ATP tournaments, then the resulting name recognition will result in improved TV ratings. Bear in mind that in the USA, Tennis Channel and T2 are subscription services for which many people have to pay extra (and often don't). This limits the tennis audience all year long. The entirety of the tournament was broadcast on ESPN except for the men's final on ABC-TV. With no prior promotion of the US Open on ABC-TV, it is unrealistic for viewers to suddenly tune in in large numbers.
The sports that get high ratings appeal to average people but this year in particular, the USTA moved the U.S. Open up to the level of a spectacle with celebrities in the audience and views of people in the good seats living the high life including spending $100 for 6 chicken nuggets with caviar or black truffles. I suspect that that may increase tournament profits but results in less mass appeal to the general public who are average folk. What was supposed to be a tournament more accessible to the general public when it moved to Flushing Meadow has morphed into a tournament with country club prices, food and attire.
In the past, tennis participation increased when there were U.S. slam champions. This year, the USA had 2 finalists but it did not translate into ratings. I suspect the issue is that Ms. Pegula and Mr. Fritz are not currently sufficiently known to US audiences. But, if they and their peers continue making progress in the slams and major WTA & ATP tournaments, then the resulting name recognition will result in improved TV ratings. Bear in mind that in the USA, Tennis Channel and T2 are subscription services for which many people have to pay extra (and often don't). This limits the tennis audience all year long. The entirety of the tournament was broadcast on ESPN except for the men's final on ABC-TV. With no prior promotion of the US Open on ABC-TV, it is unrealistic for viewers to suddenly tune in in large numbers.
The sports that get high ratings appeal to average people but this year in particular, the USTA moved the U.S. Open up to the level of a spectacle with celebrities in the audience and views of people in the good seats living the high life including spending $100 for 6 chicken nuggets with caviar or black truffles. I suspect that that may increase tournament profits but results in less mass appeal to the general public who are average folk. What was supposed to be a tournament more accessible to the general public when it moved to Flushing Meadow has morphed into a tournament with country club prices, food and attire.
It's a brutally difficult spot on the sporting calendar to generate ratings, with the women's final going up against multiple college football games, and the men's final going up against week 1 of the NFL. That is kind of suicidal. I assume it was less of a problem in the past, due to the NFL being something that many people would only watch within their local / regional media market, before it then became more easily possible follow and watch many different matches on the same day. NFL regular reason games attract higher ratings than NBA finals games, so clearly it rules supreme.
And the Fritz-Tiafoe SF going up against the historic Eagles-Packers game was also a tough task ratings wise.
Clearly the run of Gauff last year, who has been a big name since 2019, was going to provide a ratings boost.
Tennis is certainly not a dying sport, but as an individual sport, its popularity is more fragile compared to that of mainstream team sports. In different countries its popularity is heavily contingent on players from that same country being able to win the big prizes plus a small handful of global superstars.
I read that the men's final got an 18% market share in Italy, which was nice going in this multi-entertainment world. The Raducanu-Fernandez final in 2021 attracted peak viewing figures of 9.2 million in the UK - brilliant figures although of course making the match free to air on Channel 4 was a huge contributor there.
And the Fritz-Tiafoe SF going up against the historic Eagles-Packers game was also a tough task ratings wise.
Clearly the run of Gauff last year, who has been a big name since 2019, was going to provide a ratings boost.
Tennis is certainly not a dying sport, but as an individual sport, its popularity is more fragile compared to that of mainstream team sports. In different countries its popularity is heavily contingent on players from that same country being able to win the big prizes plus a small handful of global superstars.
I read that the men's final got an 18% market share in Italy, which was nice going in this multi-entertainment world. The Raducanu-Fernandez final in 2021 attracted peak viewing figures of 9.2 million in the UK - brilliant figures although of course making the match free to air on Channel 4 was a huge contributor there.
