2019 Membership

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

manureid said:
They will probably filter out all the ones they know came from 'Bigfooty'.
Click to expand...

Don't worry, mate. I know plenty of supporters that have never used BigFooty that are just as annoyed as we are. Infact, a high percentage of the supporters I know are not forum tragics like us.

They'll be getting the message loud & clear, they just won't acknowledge that though. They'll say there was a little unrest but overwhelmingly the fans wanted what they intend to give us in any form they please.

That is how Koch operates.
 
tribey said:
I had no choice but to select the obvious for home games - completely unrealistic and will be written off as me and everyone else being deluded or uneducated on the realities of the situation.

But if you don’t select it at all the stats will be used as justification it’s not a battle worth fighting and enthusiasts are just an ageing vocal minority trapped in the past.

Also forced to choose silver for the clash - I prefer the white which wasn’t even listed, teal is a distant twelfth and the current home black isn’t a genuine option as a clash, let alone the “black and white stripes”.

Urgh.
Click to expand...

This post describes my experience and thought process word for word. It's blatant manipulation. But there's nothing we can do about it, which was exactly the club's goal in setting it up that way.
 
Schulzenfest said:
This post describes my experience and thought process word for word. It's blatant manipulation. But there's nothing we can do about it, which was exactly the club's goal in setting it up that way.
Click to expand...

I've got on twitter and called them out on it because just answering the survey isn't direct enough.

I know my tweet will simply be ignored as well but they need to be called out on this sort of s**t publicly as often as possible
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Steve Dore said:
It's come up a few times about AO Members nominating which team they support. I just logged in to send my ticket to an Essendon supporter for Friday night and this is from the Member Details screen.

View attachment 709592

View attachment 709591
Click to expand...


My question has always been, what happens when someone selects 'Hawthorn' in that preference?

Since the total number of AO Members get allocated to Port or Crows based on a ratio, how are the non-SA supporters dealt with?

I'd also be interested to know if there is a 'none' option and what the default setting is.


One last observation, 'Receive Info from Club of Support' is interesting wording.
I wonder if this is tied to the 'Member Pack' requirement for AFL to include it in official membership counts.
 
bomberclifford said:
My question has always been, what happens when someone selects 'Hawthorn' in that preference?

Since the total number of AO Members get allocated to Port or Crows based on a ratio, how are the non-SA supporters dealt with?

I'd also be interested to know if there is a 'none' option and what the default setting is.


One last observation, 'Receive Info from Club of Support' is interesting wording.
I wonder if this is tied to the 'Member Pack' requirement for AFL to include it in official membership counts.
Click to expand...
Yes, there's an option for every AFL club plus "Both Adelaide and Port Adelaide" and "None" so it is not cut and dried. Allocating members by their preference and then splitting the neutrals along the same percentage as the Camry Crows/Ports declared support would be fairer than the Olsen-Whicker Formula.

The receive info from the club has nothing to do with membership packs. Before they brought that in I used to receive marketing spam from both the Camry Crows and Ports.
 
Steve Dore said:
Yes, there's an option for every AFL club plus "Both Adelaide and Port Adelaide" and "None" so it is not cut and dried. Allocating members by their preference and then splitting the neutrals along the same percentage as the Camry Crows/Ports declared support would be fairer than the Olsen-Whicker Formula.

The receive info from the club has nothing to do with membership packs. Before they brought that in I used to receive marketing spam from both the Camry Crows and Ports.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that info.

If a neutral is someone who selects 'none' or 'any club other than Crows/Port', why would they need to be split according to the Crows / Port ratio?
Either they should all be allocated to both clubs or split 50/50.

They're technically a member of both clubs by nature of the ticket that they have, but the AFL doesn't like the two SA teams double dipping on membership numbers, so I get why they need to be split.

Why the assumption that they need to be allocated according to an unrelated ratio?
 
Last edited:
bomberclifford said:
Thanks for that info.

If a neutral is someone who selects 'none' or 'any club other than Crows/Port', why would they need to be split according to the Crows / Port ratio?
Either they should all be allocated to both clubs or split 50/50.

They're technically a member of both clubs by nature of the ticket that they have, but the AFL doesn't like the two SA teams double dipping on membership numbers, so I get why they need to be split.

Why the assumption that they need to be allocated according to an unrelated ratio?
Click to expand...
Why do they need to be allocated at all?

I'm saying that allocating neutrals based on the actual supporter split is fairer than the current system of allocating all members using the Olsen-Whicker Formula which is 70/30 or similar.

As I have posted a number of times previously, the SMA increased memberships by $100 some years back so that $50 could go to each of the clubs that play home games at AO so all members would be counted as members of both clubs. Despite this members are still split between the two clubs.

I think we agree that AOFMs are effectively members of both SA based AFL clubs for the purpose of membership counts.
 
Steve Dore said:
I'm saying that allocating neutrals based on the actual supporter split is fairer than the current system of allocating all members using the Olsen-Whicker Formula which is 70/30 or similar.
Click to expand...

I thought the 70/30 split was the support split?


Steve Dore said:
As I have posted a number of times previously, the SMA increased memberships by $100 some years back so that $50 could go to each of the clubs that play home games at AO so all members would be counted as members of both clubs. Despite this members are still split between the two clubs.
Click to expand...

From what I've heard, this is what the AFL put a stop to. They didn't like the fact that they were double counted.
 
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.


710605
 
RussellEbertHandball said:
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
Click to expand...
wow that shocked me, thought they were on 15k or something. What's Gold Coast on?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

HinkleysHeroes
Resource 2024 Membership - 55,704 as at April 5th
9 10 11 12 13
Replies
321
Views
22K
Stryke
Stryke
gbear
  • Poll
Resource 2023 Membership - Audited Figure 64,041 - New Club Record
45 46 47 48 49
Replies
1K
Views
71K
TeeKray
TeeKray

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top