4 ms·

This article talks about the last world cup final: http://www.espnfc.com/fifa-world-cup/story/1950567/world-cup-final-most-watched-soccer-game-in-us-history-mo

by sswezey 11y ago

This article talks about the last world cup final: http://www.espnfc.com/fifa-world-cup/story/1950567/world-cup-final-most-watched-soccer-game-in-us-history-more-than-26-million-viewers http://www.espnfc.com/fifa-world-cup/story/1950567/world-cup... The US had 43.8 million people watching the final (in English and Spanish). Germany (who was in the final) had 34.65 million people watching. Even if Argentina had ever single person in their country watching, they'd only have 42.6 million people watching (wiki estimate). Granted Brazil almost definitely has higher viewership, but the US is definitely one of the largest.

thrillgore 11y ago
Because ESPN, being the broadcast partner at the time wouldn't fudge the numbers. Riiiiight.
akfanta 11y ago
I don't get the point, those are hardly the only countries watch world cup. For a event like world cup final, it's the single most important match in 4 years. It won't just attract fans from the countries that are in the final. For example, the 2006 world cup attracted 4 billion viewers from China, and their team was not even playing.[1] [1] http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/fifafacts/ffprojects/ip-401_06e_tv_2658.pdf http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/fifafacts/ffprojects/ip-401_...
- cbr 11y ago
  > 4 billion viewers from China Something suspicious about that...
  - akfanta 11y ago
    How so? When you count viewership, of course they will combine number of viewers from each match, considering most of the viewers will tune in for just a few matches. This is common sense, I don't think there is anything suspicious about that.
    - akfanta 11y ago
      Seriously? Down-voted for explaining my point? This place is as pathetic as reddit.
      - TomGullen 11y ago
        4 billion viewers is a lot different to 4 billion views
  - cc438 11y ago
    Think of it more like 4 billion "views". If 1 person watches 6 matches they count as 6 "viewers" for those statistics. It makes sense if you're trying to track retainment for an event that's broken up into several instances.

by sswezey 11y ago

thrillgore 11y ago

Because ESPN, being the broadcast partner at the time wouldn't fudge the numbers. Riiiiight.

akfanta 11y ago

I don't get the point, those are hardly the only countries watch world cup. For a event like world cup final, it's the single most important match in 4 years. It won't just attract fans from the countries that are in the final. For example, the 2006 world cup attracted 4 billion viewers from China, and their team was not even playing.[1] [1] http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/fifafacts/ffprojects/ip-401_06e_tv_2658.pdf http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/fifafacts/ffprojects/ip-401_...

cbr 11y ago
> 4 billion viewers from China Something suspicious about that...
- akfanta 11y ago
  How so? When you count viewership, of course they will combine number of viewers from each match, considering most of the viewers will tune in for just a few matches. This is common sense, I don't think there is anything suspicious about that.
  - akfanta 11y ago
    Seriously? Down-voted for explaining my point? This place is as pathetic as reddit.
    - TomGullen 11y ago
      4 billion viewers is a lot different to 4 billion views
- cc438 11y ago
  Think of it more like 4 billion "views". If 1 person watches 6 matches they count as 6 "viewers" for those statistics. It makes sense if you're trying to track retainment for an event that's broken up into several instances.