News 2015 Membership! Numbers announced (so far)

[billy fragos]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-02-14/the-membership-race

(Check website for numbers)

We were the only club not to provide numbers but specified we were above 50K, assuming we are above port adelaide (53K) we sit someone between 3/4 on the current membership race and should be on the way to 60,000 members.

Thoughts?

 

[rocket18]

Whilst it is some what of a circle jerk by the clubs "my number is greater than your number" I can't see why we can't tell them the number when asked.

No need for press releases and having a counter on our website but surely once or twice during the off season they can provide the up to date number when asked.

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

Whilst it is some what of a circle jerk by the clubs "my number is greater than your number" I can't see why we can't tell them the number when asked.

No need for press releases and having a counter on our website but surely once or twice during the off season they can provide the up to date number when asked.

Who cares how many members we actually have. The best indicator comes on home games; how many actually turn up.

If we have 55,000 members but only 45,000 turn up - who really cares about the 55,000 number. Collingwood had 80,000 members last year but only averaged 49,900 to home games, second to us. Thats the key number.

 

[Wright Away]

Whilst it is some what of a circle jerk by the clubs "my number is greater than your number" I can't see why we can't tell them the number when asked.

No need for press releases and having a counter on our website but surely once or twice during the off season they can provide the up to date number when asked.

We are waiting for Port to announce theirs first so we can then announce ours after and steal their thunder.

If we announce early even if our numbers are higher Port would probably create memberships for their mascots (cockroaches) that infest the kitchens at their club. Oh who am I kidding they already give memberships to cockroaches, i.e the entirety of their existing membership base.

 

[mattymac]

Thoughts?

Membership numbers are meaningless without knowing the breakdown in full season vs 3 game members.

 

[Mattrox]

Membership numbers are meaningless without knowing the breakdown in full season vs 3 game members.

Kochie seems to think that of theirs about 30k are 11 game members. That's what folks across the river are saying.

 

[mattymac]

Kochie seems to think that of theirs about 30k are 11 game members. That's what folks across the river are saying.

Yeah exactly, so we have 20k more 11 game members and can't really expand much more due to the capacity of AO unless we divert non-renewals to 3 game memberships which is a false economy and only really useful to pad out the numbers. Meanwhile port will no doubt reach 60k to great fanfare despite the fact they are 50-50 full vs part time members.

Its like the difference between string bikinis and push up bras. One tells the true story and one keeps up appearances from the outside.

 

[Mattrox]

Yeah exactly, so we have 20k more 11 game members and can't really expand much more due to the capacity of AO unless we divert non-renewals to 3 game memberships which is a false economy and only really useful to pad out the numbers. Meanwhile port will no doubt reach 60k to great fanfare despite the fact they are 50-50 full vs part time members.

Its like the difference between string bikinis and push up bras. One tells the true story and one keeps up appearances from the outside.

I wish you could post a visual aid to go along with that lesson, alas Chief would ban you.

 

[Big Gazoongas]

Who cares how many members we actually have. The best indicator comes on home games; how many actually turn up.

If we have 55,000 members but only 45,000 turn up - who really cares about the 55,000 number. Collingwood had 80,000 members last year but only averaged 49,900 to home games, second to us. Thats the key number.

I do agree with you regarding the game day numbers, but it also helps to get extra dollars through the door via membership sales as well

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

I do agree with you regarding the game day numbers, but it also helps to get extra dollars through the door via membership sales as well

True but it's basically false advertising. Membership count should only consist of 11 game ticketed

 

[1970crow]

True but it's basically false advertising. Membership count should only consist of 11 game ticketed

Not sure why so secretive though. We know raw membership numbers are largely meaningless but if the afl is going to ask and publish the figures, why not just give them an answer. Doubt it would take more than a minute to look up the number. I personally couldn't give a rats, I'd have more interest in seeing how the struggling Melb clubs are tracking.

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

Not sure why so secretive though. We know raw membership numbers are largely meaningless but if the afl is going to ask and publish the figures, why not just give them an answer. Doubt it would take more than a minute to look up the number. I personally couldn't give a rats, I'd have more interest in seeing how the struggling Melb clubs are tracking.

From day 1, the club has never given that number out. They don't need to and they are not hiding anything.

 

[Mattrox]

Not sure why so secretive though. We know raw membership numbers are largely meaningless but if the afl is going to ask and publish the figures, why not just give them an answer. Doubt it would take more than a minute to look up the number. I personally couldn't give a rats, I'd have more interest in seeing how the struggling Melb clubs are tracking.

I think the club is staying away from the pissing contest that Port fans (Mainly Rooch) get caught up with. The official AFL numbers come out eventually anyway.

We don't need to glorify our numbers because we have a strong membership base. It's the weaker clubs and those with poor membership numbers that whip into a frenzy with players maning the phones and the footy show tv hype. We are beyond that.

 

[andrew webster]

I agree the club should disclose numbers. I'm not sure why that is not something that they can do.

 

[little graham]

How did we go last year in the ave home crowd ranking?

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

How did we go last year in the ave home crowd ranking?

number 1

 

[Elite Crow]

I agree the club should disclose numbers. I'm not sure why that is not something that they can do.

Hasn't your source given you the numbers?

 

[Schulzycrow]

As Alex has said, the whole membership tallies are very rubbery. They include, children, babies, overseas, interstate, non game memberships, 3 game, pets etc. Full 11 game memberships should be what the tallies are set on. Great that you can support your club, but to say...look at us we have 60, 000 members where only half are actually 11 game members is just PR and big noting.

 

[robboaustralia]

As Alex has said, the whole membership tallies are very rubbery. They include, children, babies, overseas, interstate, non game memberships, 3 game, pets etc. Full 11 game memberships should be what the tallies are set on. Great that you can support your club, but to say...look at us we have 60, 000 members where only half are actually 11 game members is just PR and big noting.

 

[Doombs]

First of all, I hope this thread doesn't last long. I am struggling with the spelling error in the title

As Alex has said, the whole membership tallies are very rubbery. They include, children, babies, overseas, interstate, non game memberships, 3 game, pets etc. Full 11 game memberships should be what the tallies are set on. Great that you can support your club, but to say...look at us we have 60, 000 members where only half are actually 11 game members is just PR and big noting.

I agree with you, and it's easy for us to say as Crows fans. But struggling Victorian clubs, GC and GWS would have frighteningly few 11-game membership holders. Their figures could be embarrassing

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Title fixed!

 

[AFC3000]

I think the club is staying away from the pissing contest that Port fans (Mainly Rooch) get caught up with. The official AFL numbers come out eventually anyway.

We don't need to glorify our numbers because we have a strong membership base. It's the weaker clubs and those with poor membership numbers that whip into a frenzy with players maning the phones and the footy show tv hype. We are beyond that.

You might be right about the Port thing actually. Last year our numbers only pushed them "let's beat the Crows" as they bought pet memberships and kids memberships for family friends and distant cousins children, "I bought 5 more memberships for friends kids birthdays #neverevergiveup". And they are so cheap they can afford to.

I've never seen a Crows supporter on here talk like that. We get our memberships, and I think a membership should probably be a personal thing anyway. We see Ports numbers and aren't driven to buy the neighbours cat a membership we just go straight to "but how many of them are 11 game members?"

So maybe we are avoiding the race because We don't benefit from it, they do.

 

[Tex Danger]

We have disclosed membership numbers in the past and I'm sure this year will be no different.

We were delayed to get started on processing renewals compared to other clubs (apart from port) because of the transport levy etc having to be finalised before being able to set up packages, etc. We know port will scream their numbers at every chance because rightly so they are stoked at their recent increases.

With our maxed out 11 game situation there is less rom to move so publishing numbers before we have had time to advance the applications beyond renewals an into accepting the replacements wouldn't give a good reflection on where we are at.

Im sure we will release numbers once we have got through the job of processing all the memberships to the point all 11 game memberships have been filled from the waiting list.

 

[1970crow]

As Alex has said, the whole membership tallies are very rubbery. They include, children, babies, overseas, interstate, non game memberships, 3 game, pets etc. Full 11 game memberships should be what the tallies are set on. Great that you can support your club, but to say...look at us we have 60, 000 members where only half are actually 11 game members is just PR and big noting.

It's PR and big noting if your out there actively pushing your number around. But aren't we talking about the afl asking all the clubs what there present number is, regardless of category and publishing the numbers. I can't understand why we feel the need to withhold the info. We know the real numbers come out later in the year, but what's so important that it needs to be kept in-house.

 

[Mattrox]

What's so important about getting drawn into the dick measuring contest.

"LQQK we just grew another quarter inch"


....... and ????????