World Cup ratings are astounding

Lulu - you're not alone! I know plenty of folks here in central Texas who watched the World Cup, as did I after returning from Germany where I saw six matches. It was heaven. World Cup in HD was stunningly beautiful, especially when synched with audio from Univision.

I couldn't figure out of Initiative has any links with FIFA whose owvn iewing numbers are inflated because they count as viewers anyone who saw highlight shows, viewed highlights online and other questionable definitions of viewers. If these numbers are in no way related to FIFA's they're rather impressive. Hell, they're impressive regardless. Anyhoo, next time around we'll probably all be using Slingboxes to watch the World Cup on Euro TV just to avoid ESPN's talking heads.

I'm in Texas - and know not one single other person here who watched the World Cup - what a lonely life. (Also, George Bush is from here; it's not pretty being a Texan.) Anyway, I managed to watch every match I wanted to watch by using my DVR, not listening to radio during the day during work hours, and then rushing home every day to watch. It was easy and fun and I'm sad I have to wait another 4 years to do it again.

Captain Obvious made some pretty awesome comments in the way they over-simplify the fact that the core audience for soccer is still Europe (more than 300 million people, half of which male). As the games were played from 15.00, 18.00 and 21.00, only the first ones were subject to lower ratings, which didn't matter since they were least interesting games (sorry for the countries involved but you want to see the bigger teams, and I'm from Belgium - we didn't even qualify!!!).

Then you have africa who is roughly in the same time zone. Latin America and Asia could still catch some games.
It would be interesting to compare with the audience from 4 years ago (Japan/south Korea).
But I live in Europe, watched a hell lot of World Cup and Did not miss a single work day, so think a little before diving head first into stereotypes...

@xbxtv

1. I'm assuming that CET is Central European Time. If so, that's fine for this World Cup. What about the next one? And the one after that? This is the WORLD Cup, so people all over the world will be watching. If the games are on in the early evening locally, they are on at 3:00 a.m. in another part of the world at 2:00 p.m. in another part. People are going to have to miss work to catch the games live.
2. Delayed broadcast is not an option in this day and age. You can't avoid all human, radio, blog, television and newspaper contact and still get along in the world. You'll find out the score before the broadcast comes.

So... what does the worldwide audience have to do with networks needing to get Americans interested in soccer? It's not as though the World Cup was a ratings king in the U.S. Is it really so surprising that the biggest tournament for world's number one sport drew the largest worldwide viewing audience?

I'd like to see a numbers comparo of the Super Bowl in the US ratings versus the overall US ratings for the cup. Not to mention the Super Bowl is one game and the Cup is a month long - do we compare single episode ratings to entire seasons' ratings for regular TV shows?

I love soccer, always have. But for some reasons Americans are too stupid to enjoy watching it on television, and apparently some people are too stupid to realize that it's the biggest sport in the world.

The next shocking news bit of the day: America isn't the only place in the world with television sets! Shock, horror!

@ Captain Obvious

Obviously you overlooked the fact that most of the matches took place in the late afternoon or evening CET. So no one in Europe or Africa had to take off a whole month! And for the Americans interested in the World Cup: delayed broadcast is the keyword.

The way I see it, Americans are too busy, you know, going to work and all, to be able to take off a whole month to watch a sporting event. Something about world markets, capitalism, and not getting siestas from noon to four or 45 paid holidays a year. Not that I would protest if my company gave me 45 holidays or let me take a nap in the conference room every day, but I do think they would find someone else if I asked for those things.