2015 Membership Thread

[AlbertonBloke]

Absolutely spot on. Great post.

Firstly PAFC were forced to make the new Magpies team when the original PAFC was entering the AFL, and were also forced to move to Ethelton by the SANFL as they would be too strong training with the AFL squad and using their facilities. These were the conditions we had to adhere by or miss out on joining the AFL and be stuck dominating a slowly dying SANFL. PAFC Est 1870

 

[NikkiNoo]

Forced eh? My father was a born and bred Magpies man and he calls the power a corporate entity. The Power are not the Magpies to him or to anyone in my family. Those Magpies no longer exist, now there is only an AFL reserves team.

 

[AlbertonBloke]

Well I am a born and bred PAFC man going back 4 generations and live a drop punt from Alberton Oval. I don't know who your father is and don't care. I have been going to the same club and same oval since before I could walk and when the AFL bid came along we all knew what sacrifices would be made to ensure the PAFC history carries on. Yes we were forced to make a new magpies team in the SANFL and yes we were forced to train at Ethelton while the Power upgraded Alberton and trained there. We could have said no and rotted away in the SANFL instead and watched Norwood/Sturt join instead but why would anyone do that? We lost the battle with the VFL in the 80's, S.A can't compete with a city with 3 times our entire population and money. PAFC should have got the first AFL licence and Norwood the second, I hate Norwood but I respect them for their history and culture, they weren't made in a courtroom out of panic and spite

 

[hey shorty]

Why are we being inundated by teal wearing flogs ?? Is it because of a rubbish article written by the head cheerleader or is it because they're excited by this new thing called the internet ?

Your opinions, well most of them, arent needed or wanted

 

[AlbertonBloke]

And if you say you are "The team for all South Australians" be it. Don't alienate half the football public and represent the old SANFL stooges and Chardy set. "The franchise for some South Australian customers"

Mod Comment: Just to be clear any port poster without a good rep on this board trying to label our club as a franchise is going to cop a warning. It's deliberately provocative, and not banter.

 

[Tex200]

Why are we being inundated by teal wearing flogs ?? Is it because of a rubbish article written by the head cheerleader or is it because they're excited by this new thing called the internet ?

Your opinions, well most of them, arent needed or wanted

It's hilarious. They are so caught up in the BS that is the INXS song that they try and rewrite history.

The new admin realised they actually had little or no history, so they took over the magpies and in the process purchased some history and got a reserves side.

When it suited them they were happy to sell the Magpies down the Port river

 

[Archie87]

And if you say you are "The team for all South Australians" be it. Don't alienate half the football public and represent the old SANFL stooges and Chardy set. "The franchise for some South Australian customers"

Go away, Troll. We simply DGAF.

It's a slogan. It's what all clubs do. We'll keep banging on about being the "Pride of South Australia" for as long as the PAPs continue trying to pass off the likes of Victorians Ken Hinkley, Travis Boak; Ryder the Druggie, AFC premiership player Tyson Edwards as being "Port Adelaide"... yeah they're definitely dinky-dye "1870" types there mate (until someone else starts paying them that is!).

 

[Pdub]

Yes we were forced to make a new magpies team in the SANFL

New team with the same name, same players, same jumper, same admin, same sponsors, same support staff, same bank accounts, same ABN. as opposed to the power who were apparently the same magpies but had a different name, different jumper, different players, different admin, different owners, different support staff, different bank accounts, different ABN.

 

[Rusty Crow]

New team with the same name, same players, same jumper, same admin, same sponsors, same support staff, same bank accounts, same ABN. as opposed to the power who were apparently the same magpies but had a different name, different jumper, different players, different admin, different owners, different support staff, different bank accounts, different ABN.

Est 1996.

 

[Papa G]

I

So if you had the same prices as us, would you have the same no of members as you do now? It's 11 game memberships that count not all these other memberships. If you can't generate the $, that is what the bottom line is all about - I believe PAFC have the lowest membership cost - well that makes it easier to sell it to someone on welfare!

You guys are doing really well considering. Well done.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

You were in the AFL first with all the advantages that entails and the Corporate sweetheart of Toyota. You would not have been able to achieve anywhere near the corporate and membership success if you hd come in second, like port has. You still have no heart and soul or tradition. Can't but that.

Mod Comment: Not good enough. Happy to have the advantages etc debated - but you can't come on here claiming our club has no heart and soul or tradition.

If the Crows came in 2nd after Port, we would still have more members as the vast majority of Crows' supporters grew up hating Port & would never have followed them! I would have kept following Carlton than follow Port.

2 premierships > 1 premiership.
119 points is great tradition & great heart & soul shown that day - disgracing our great state.

Time to toddle of to your own board as really are offering less than Rooch with your rubbish posting.

 

[FR0GGY]

If we keep getting this many port posters on our board, their mods may have to consider tarps.

 

[Allefgib]

Note to Port supporters - we've had a few of your mob making comments over the line of what we will tolerate.
Tread more carefully than you typically would thanks.

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

Crows Fan Logic "Everyone picks on us"

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/the-media-shakes-head.959673/page-780#post-37082158

fun game isn't it.

 

[1970crow]

I'm not sure what started the discussion, but I thought it was widely accepted that when Port took on the sub-license they didn't want to continue in the sanfl. But the sanfl required it, so they wrote it into the agreement and also the move away from Alberton. Is any of that factually incorrect? What is the real story if this alberton bloke has gotten it wrong, although I understand the issue with the use of the word 'franchise', it's obviously purposefully incendiary.

 

[Draft Bored]

Anyone know the cheapest membership ticket that still counts towards the tally? I thought I might get my 4 month old daughter one.

 

[Rusty Crow]

Anyone know the cheapest membership ticket that still counts towards the tally? I thought I might get my 4 month old daughter one.

http://19thman.com.au/memberships?view=class&class_id=68

Junior Bronze $30

"Status as an Adelaide Football Club member, with 100% of your membership subscription going to the Club"

 

[Hinkstuff]

Anyone know the cheapest membership ticket that still counts towards the tally? I thought I might get my 4 month old daughter one.

According to Rucci the AFL changed how they define a member.

The AFL has redefined a member who will be counted in the official audit in July-August as anyone who “spends $50 or more” on a club membership package.

Source = More accurate measure for Adelaide Crows, Port Adelaide Power memberships

I would suggest avoid reading the rest of the article.

 

[Malibu#27]

I'm not sure what started the discussion, but I thought it was widely accepted that when Port took on the sub-license they didn't want to continue in the sanfl. But the sanfl required it, so they wrote it into the agreement and also the move away from Alberton. Is any of that factually incorrect? What is the real story if this alberton bloke has gotten it wrong, although I understand the issue with the use of the word 'franchise', it's obviously purposefully incendiary.

I'm not sure how it matters these days (general comment - not directed at you) but my recollection is port was going to move lock stock and barrel into the afl......ie no sanfl presence at all, magpies to go - in fact initially (1990 bid) they thought they would be able to wear prison bars.

In the bid for 2007 The sanfl rejected this worried about the financial impact on sanfl of the losing their biggest club, hence indicated port had to keep a team in the sanfl which port were happy to do. However the SANFL then proceeded to stick a heap of conditions on the side and force them to be separate entities with no interaction - no sharing of staff, facilities etc.

Hence the notion port wanted out of sanfl is correct at a point in time but the notion they disowned the magpies is a distortion of the truth.

 

[Pdub]

Anyone know the cheapest membership ticket that still counts towards the tally? I thought I might get my 4 month old daughter one.

http://19thman.com.au/memberships?view=class&class_id=68

Junior Bronze $30

"Status as an Adelaide Football Club member, with 100% of your membership subscription going to the Club"

Only memberships over $50 are counted in the tally, so I would say this one http://19thman.com.au/memberships?view=class&class_id=10
gives him tickets to every game as well.

 

[Vooligan]

Finally got my membership pack.... Yellow!

I'll still wear it, I think it'll look great if everyone wears their hat to round one. I'm happy the club has finally tried something new.

 

[footy4ever]

Nice to see Rucc has done it again!

His latest article on the Crapvertiser site. To be printed tomorrow, basically rubbishes the club as a whole but focuses on how we are no longer the no.1 in our state in relation to membership numbers.

Astounding, especially considering when his colleagues in Melbourne yesterday published an article about league wide members numbers (ours is at 57,103, 4th in the AFL, 2500 in front of our neighbour's).

I cannot believe that his editors have let him publish something that is completely incorrect!

I also added a comment twice, with the correct figures, & they took it down straight away

Don't want to get facts in the way of a biased and slanderous article though.

Rooch has done it again. On 5AA moments ago, this muppet denied completely that he said that Port's membership figures were higher than the Crows….Roochi! Listen up! Which part of,

"that explains why membership/customer count it is no longer No. 1 in SA",

doesn't say that??

And I notice the article in question has been pulled from news.com.au. Such a snake in the grass.

Rooch, you incomparable lying flog.

 

[Mattrox]

This is exactly WHY we need to at least read what the ferret head writes. He can't get called out on the fibs he peddles if we don't keep abreast of him.

 

[AFC3000]

Rooch has done it again. On 5AA moments ago, this muppet denied completely that he said that Port's membership figures were higher than the Crows….Roochi! Listen up! Which part of,

"that explains why membership/customer count it is no longer No. 1 in SA",

doesn't say that??

And I notice the article in question has been pulled from news.com.au. Such a snake in the grass.

Rooch, you incomparable lying flog.

Tuesday:



Wednesday:

 

[Red mist]

Tuesday:

View attachment 111971

Wednesday:

View attachment 111972

Thursday: