- Feb 21, 2004
- 1,687
- 3,547
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
Part of the issue I have with your argument, even as I see where you're coming from, actually comes back to a point I seem to have to make every year in the membership thread.
There are two values that members give us: one, is the straight revenue of their membership - but really, that's tiny in comparison to the second value, which is; two, brand exposure.
You mentioned how much marketing cares about us having lots of members, irrespective of their size of membership. You're right, but your reason for that is a very small part of it. You seem to think they care because they trounce that to the PUBLIC, in order to get more members. Sure, they do, but who they REALLY want to sell that number to, is current and prospective SPONSORS. That's where it matters most.
Membership tells a sponsor how much weekly exposure their brand will get, on our jumpers, post-game coach's interview, etc. Finnis can spout the report that talks about us having a latent supporter-base as big as Richmond all he likes. While that helps, as does having 150,000 followers on social media, when he's trying to reel in a new sponsor, NOTHING compares to Members.
That's because sponsors don't just want people to SEE their product - they want people to SEE their product and BUY it. The problem with supporters and followers who aren't members, is they're a bit like tire-kickers for sponsors : they look, but don't commit to the sale. Members bought in - literally. As such, they are more likely than a mere follower to commit to buying the sponsor's product, too.
Sponsors don't give a stuff how many games those members go to, or how much they paid, really. They care that all of them paid money as an expression of commitment to the club. As such, those people are sure to watch every Saints game, with many of those games being on TV. That translates into clear brand exposure. And that is why Matt wants us at 50,000 ASAP, so he can use that exposure to get big sponsors. That's when the REALLY BIG MONEY comes in.
No argument with me on any of that...except to perhaps say that Id put actual Membeship revenue and brand exposure on a par.
We cant pay for Moorabbin with a wallet full of brand exposure ;-)