2019 Membership

[TeeKray]

The Giants will be a great success story one day.

 

[ROBBBO]

The Giants have cracked 30,000 members. They aren't afraid to give the public some breakdown of how that is made up. Plus their membership department understands the value of a goal kicking KPF.


View attachment 710605

Yeh when we last played them in Canberra I was shocked as to how many of the locals had jumped on board. They well outnumbered us that night and most were decked out in GWS attire.
They have done a good job. So much so Rugby League media up there often highlight on tv graphics the membership comparisons of their clubs compared to the 2 AFL clubs (which is an eye opener) and doom and gloom of how trends are slowly changing.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Yeh when we last played them in Canberra I was shocked as to how many of the locals had jumped on board. They well outnumbered us that night and most were decked out in GWS attire.
They have done a good job. So much so Rugby League media up there often highlight on tv graphics the membership comparisons of their clubs compared to the 2 AFL clubs (which is an eye opener) and doom and gloom of how trends are slowly changing.

Being a member was not a big deal for Rugby League clubs and their supporters, prior to their expansion in the 1980's and then in the 1990's super league war period, survival was seen as more important, but being a member of the licensed club with pokies was more important and clubs via their licensed club, was what clubs banked on to survive, off the grants paid across to the football club.

Then RL clubs and NRL adminstrators woke up about 10-15 years ago when they saw the AFL clubs all start to push for 40,000 members as well as in 2008 the centenary year of the NSWRL comp, to realize that having members helped the club and not just depend on a big annual grant every year from their licensed club.

Before the crows came in ( by the 3rd year had 40,000 members thanks to the SANFL memberships counting and a fee being paid from the SANFL to the crows), most V/AFL clubs had membership numbers equal to what NRL clubs had back in 2010.

AFL got to 500k in 2004 and in 2008 both Essendon and Collingwood had 40k for the first time in the same year (Collingwood had 40k in 2003 and 2004), then 2009 Hawks get to 52k ( crows had 50k in 2006+07) and Collingwood get to 57k in 2010 and Hawks had 53k, and the "space race" type activity was on to get to 60k, then 70k, then 80k and now 100k.

NRL membership totals vs AFL years and similar totals

2010 142 859 vs 1990 AFL = 129,165 14 teams, crows come in 1991 25,087 total 165,938 15 teams
2013 228,384 vs 1994 AFL = 217,474 15 teams, crows 40k WCE 24k, Coll 20k only teams over 20k.
2015 267,465 vs 1996 AFL = 287,925 16 teams Fitzroy's last year
2016 301,809 vs 1997 AFL = 382,345 16 teams Port first year start with 35,809
2017 316,482
2018 332,996
2019 320,584 at start of July

NRL 2013-2019 numbers

2019 NRL Club Membership Tracker » League Unlimited

leagueunlimited.com

AFL numbers 1985-2014

Membership.html

web.archive.org

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

The Giants will be a great success story one day.

Yep.

I got it wrong in the early part of this decade when I said, after start up expenditure the annual subsidy for the GC had to be subsidised $6m~$10m / year for 10 years by the AFL and the GWS subsidised $6m~$10m / year for 20 years, based on my experience of footy culture, having lived in both cities and spent time going to watch and talk to people in the local leagues. Its going to end up the other way round.

I thought the fact lots of southerns having moved to the GC would be a big benefit compared to western Sydney having very little footy culture would be a big advantage.

But the GC were a bit lazy depending on those southerns, most who wont give up their support for their existing team, where as the GWS have gone and won the hearts and minds of neutrals, newbies to the game and have done a great job targeting ACT, southern NSW as well as their western Sydney heartland.

Its impressive to also think they have got 12% of their members from outside NSW+ACT.

They also have the advantage of a lot of ASX 200 and big international companies have their Oz HQ's in their backyard and have successfully tapped into these corporates. By their 3rd or 4th year in the comp, their corporate support was mid table when Wookie produced his annual breakdown of AFL clubs' financials. GC miss out on this. The biggest employer and business on the GC is the City Council.

But GWS were smart in targeting experienced players, not just all kids + Ablett and a couple of others like GC, and a tried coach like Sheedy+ Williams vs McKenna, some experienced AFL administrators form day 1, unlike the GC, plus moving away from the idea of being based in no mans land in Blacktown, and moving to Sydney Olympic Park, using all the existing facilities their built for the Olympics, whilst they were building their own specific facility after a few years. The GC had substandard facilities until the Commonwealth Games ones were built and they have had full use of them post Comm Games as well some access to some of them in 2017 before the Comm Games.

I moved to Sydney in May 1992 and the first game I went to at the SCG a few days later and watched the Swans play, was their first of 26 losses in a row and they won only 1 of that first 35 that I lived there. The Swans model shows that a club can dig itself out of a bloody deep hole, but it means putting the right administrators in place, good footy people in the coaching area, get some solid all Oz stadard players to the club, then start recruiting the star kids as well as the good ordinary footballer types, but most importantly, hanging on to them for 150-200 games.

 

[David Puddy]

With everything remaining equal, how far down does it look like we will end up in terms of members compared to last year?

Enough to sack Ken?

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

With everything remaining equal, how far down does it look like we will end up in terms of members compared to last year?

Enough to sack Ken?

We will stay around 11th after AFL audit. St Kilda were 12th last year about 6k behind us and our 3k drop wont be matched by a 3k pick up by them to see us go below them. Neither will Melbourne, North, Bulldogs, GWS, Brisbane or GC

 

[David Puddy]

We will stay around 11th after AFL audit. St Kilda were 12th last year about 6k behind us and our 3k drop wont be matched by a 3k pick up by them to see us go below them. Neither will Melbourne, North, Bulldogs, GWS, Brisbane or GC

What about just in terms of PAFC? How many are we going to lose from last year in terms of membership numbers only?

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

What about just in terms of PAFC? How many are we going to lose from last year in terms of membership numbers only?

3k, as I posted.

 

[gbear]

Watch our membership number significantly decline next season if Ken remains.

 

[Capital Power]

Watch our membership number significantly decline next season if Ken remains.

Nah. Just need some more captains.

 

[raptalia]

As we no longer get to vote for the Board, Memberships are the only thing we have to protest with. Next year will probably come down to how many people have had a gut full of what they see as incompetent management and decide to make a stand.

About the only thing that may boost numbers next year is the 150 year celebration but many long standing Members like me probably do not see what we are celebrating as the 2020 corporate model is nothing like the Club we grew up supporting.

I wonder how long it will be before the PAFC becomes the PAF&CC . The Port Adelaide Football and Community Club - I would not put anything past those running the Club these days.

 

[Capital Power]

As we no longer get to vote for the Board, Memberships are the only thing we have to protest with. Next year will probably come down to how many people have had a gut full of what they see as incompetent management and decide to make a stand.

About the only thing that may boost numbers next year is the 150 year celebration but many long standing Members like me probably do not see what we are celebrating as the 2020 corporate model is nothing like the Club we grew up supporting.

I wonder how long it will be before the PAFC becomes the PAF&CC . The Port Adelaide Football and Community Club - I would not put anything past those running the Club these days.

I cant imagine not renewing but I find myself spending far less on merch than I used to, so there's knock-on effects. This year I've pretty much only bought stuff for the grandchildren.

 

[Steve Dore]

I cant imagine not renewing but I find myself spending far less on merch than I used to, so there's knock-on effects. This year I've pretty much only bought stuff for the grandchildren.

This would be the first season in maybe ten years that I haven't bought any merch. I'm in the Premiership Fund, which given our number of wins hasn't cost me much, but I am going to pull out of that next season unless Hinkley is gone and I'll let the club know why.

 

[GranFormaggi]

This would be the first season in maybe ten years that I haven't bought any merch. I'm in the Premiership Fund, which given our number of wins hasn't cost me much, but I am going to pull out of that next season unless Hinkley is gone and I'll let the club know why.

They need to re-brand Premiership Fund to "Payout Ken Fund". They'd make a mint.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

As we no longer get to vote for the Board, Memberships are the only thing we have to protest with. Next year will probably come down to how many people have had a gut full of what they see as incompetent management and decide to make a stand.

About the only thing that may boost numbers next year is the 150 year celebration but many long standing Members like me probably do not see what we are celebrating as the 2020 corporate model is nothing like the Club we grew up supporting.

I wonder how long it will be before the PAFC becomes the PAF&CC . The Port Adelaide Football and Community Club - I would not put anything past those running the Club these days.

What was the election between Gavin and George, in February, then?

We have gone from 5 to 4 member elected directors under the SANFL to 2 under the AFL.

 

[raptalia]

What was the election between Gavin and George, in February, then?

We have gone from 5 to 4 member elected directors under the SANFL to 2 under the AFL.

That is one Director from a Board of ten which is pure tokenism. Gavin Wanganeen is the Member elected Board Member who is the other? As I recall the Chairman and all other Board members other than Gavin have been appointed by some mysterious process known only to the AFL and the PAFC Board. Electing one Board Member is never going to influence Board decisions, to do that you need a majority.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

That is one Director from a Board of ten which is pure tokenism. Gavin Wanganeen is the Member elected Board Member who is the other? As I recall the Chairman and all other Board members other than Gavin have been appointed by some mysterious process known only to the AFL and the PAFC Board. Electing one Board Member is never going to influence Board decisions, to do that you need a majority.

Didn't you vote in the February 2018 election for the other one?

 

[raptalia]

Didn't you vote in the February 2018 election for the other one?

The only candidate I have ever voted for is George Fiacchi. Who was the Member elected Board Member in 2018?

No hang on I recall voting was it Trevor Theile and he won that one.

Oops- I should be corporately correct and say Director.


The thing about the PAFC Board is when you visit the Club website and dial up the Board you never actually see any areas of responsibility assigned to individual Directors. You see a list of chest beating achievements but little else. In the case of two Directors you do not even see that. From this you can only deduce there are no portfolios and that the Directors simply discuss and vote on all agenda items. I assume that the Club has working committees and sub committees into which the Directors have input but it is also probably fair to assume that decisions are left up to the Club's full time administrators and their recommendations are discussed and approved by the Board. It would be good to know which Director sits on which committee if that is indeed the case. That way we would know who to blame when things go wrong.

 

[bomberclifford]

That way we would know who to blame when things go wrong.

That's why they don't publicise that info.

They would definitely each have an area of focus, but I'm not sure that's required to be published on the website.

 

[Rexie J]

While on the topic of committees and sub committees, does anyone know if any of the three (or four?) advisory groups set up when koch became President are still active.

The brother of a friend was a member of one group but that hasn't met for a considerable time.

Maybe just seemed a good idea at the time and have quietly disappeared.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

While on the topic of committees and sub committees, does anyone know if any of the three (or four?) advisory groups set up when koch became President are still active.

The brother of a friend was a member of one group but that hasn't met for a considerable time.

Maybe just seemed a good idea at the time and have quietly disappeared.

My mate the Airport Economist is on the Sydney one. I know he still talks to Koch. They had a meeting last year because he told me he was having one in a few days, when we spoke at the time. I think it was just after the China game. Next time I talk to him I will ask him when they last met.

 

[Rexie J]

Appreciated

Irregular meetings is possibly quite appropriate rather than being seen as a pseudo Board.

 

[StickyMick]

Apologies first and foremost if this is a Port Adelaide thread only but a mate and I have been keeping tabs on the coaching and board situation on here for a bit and are trying to get our head around what you guys and girls mean when you say your board is 'AFL appointed' and that memberships used to allow for board voting power. Just purely out of intrigue did port's processes to appointing a board used to be unique only to port in that members had all the election rights to who sat on the board? Was just chasing a bit of history on it because as I said, the whole situation as an outsider is pretty interesting and we were wondering what's changed and when did it change. Thanks

 

[El_Scorcho]

Apologies first and foremost if this is a Port Adelaide thread only but a mate and I have been keeping tabs on the coaching and board situation on here for a bit and are trying to get our head around what you guys and girls mean when you say your board is 'AFL appointed' and that memberships used to allow for board voting power. Just purely out of intrigue did port's processes to appointing a board used to be unique only to port in that members had all the election rights to who sat on the board? Was just chasing a bit of history on it because as I said, the whole situation as an outsider is pretty interesting and we were wondering what's changed and when did it change. Thanks

So basically originally when we entered the AFL, due to a lack of foresight by the AFL, the SANFL controlled our licence. They were and are blood sucking leeches that almost killed the club, banking our profits during the good years so that we couldn't survive the down years. We also had an abhorrent stadium deal. During that time the SANFL appointed our board.

About a decade ago, a complicated deal meant that the AFL bought our licence back from the SANFL. A much better deal for us because we're actually solvent now and don't just exist as a cash cow to prop up the SANFL. Same deal for the Crows. Under the new deal (because Port owe the AFL a lot of money for buying out the licence), Port Adelaide members appoint 2 board members, and the rest (6 or 8, I can't recall) are appointed by the AFL. These are usually Port Adelaide people, but they're still not answerable to the members.

Our issue is that we can't simply spill our board like Victorian clubs can to force the issue. There is no real pressure on the likes of Koch because he's AFL appointed and as such as long as we're doing okay financially, he'll keep his job. We can't threaten to vote him out at the next AGM to keep him honest. The AFL don't need us to be successful onfield, just off of it.

 

[StickyMick]

So basically originally when we entered the AFL, due to a lack of foresight by the AFL, the SANFL controlled our licence. They were and are blood sucking leeches that almost killed the club, banking our profits during the good years so that we couldn't survive the down years. We also had an abhorrent stadium deal. During that time the SANFL appointed our board.

About a decade ago, a complicated deal meant that the AFL bought our licence back from the SANFL. A much better deal for us because we're actually solvent now and don't just exist as a cash cow to prop up the SANFL. Same deal for the Crows. Under the new deal (because Port owe the AFL a lot of money for buying out the licence), Port Adelaide members appoint 2 board members, and the rest (6 or 8, I can't recall) are appointed by the AFL. These are usually Port Adelaide people, but they're still not answerable to the members.

Our issue is that we can't simply spill our board like Victorian clubs can to force the issue. There is no real pressure on the likes of Koch because he's AFL appointed and as such as long as we're doing okay financially, he'll keep his job. We can't threaten to vote him out at the next AGM to keep him honest. The AFL don't need us to be successful onfield, just off of it.

Yeah thanks heaps for that. Fills in a lot of blanks for me and puts to bed a lot of follow of questions I had. From what I understand you can only do your bidding as member through the memberships you buy (or don't buy in the case you want a change at the top). Here's hoping that you get Ken moved on. As a paying member you don't need a coach that puts himself before the club.