AFL and club website rankings 2015

[dave10]

http://www.footyindustry.com/?page_id=1830

Under the 'digital' menu option it lists the 'Alexa' rankings of AFL websites. Not surprising that Essenfon are comfortably #1 and have always been a leader in the website and digital area. Hawthorn #2. Interesting to see the Bulldogs #3 (former Essendon digital marketer and fan engagement manager has been at the Digs a few years and obviously making an impact) and Collingwood ranked quite low in relative terms.

The rankings cover a 3 month tracking period so maybe influenced by finals to an extent (Bulldogs and Hawks). Though against this assumption is Essendon which had a terrible year. Having said this, Essendons website day in, day out was ranked #1 more often than not over many years.

AFL clubs generate much greater traffic than their NRL counterparts.

 

[Jaeger]

I presume this is based on clicks?

Would have thought Collingwood would be higher on the list. WBD is a big surprise.

 

[dave10]

I presume this is based on clicks?

Would have thought Collingwood would be higher on the list. WBD is a big surprise.

Yes I think so.. Bulldogs are pretty good in this area however still surprised to see them as high as they are.

 

[bombersfan4000]

http://www.footyindustry.com/?page_id=1830

Under the 'digital' menu option it lists the 'Alexa' rankings of AFL websites. Not surprising that Essenfon are comfortably #1 and have always been a leader in the website and digital area. Hawthorn #2. Interesting to see the Bulldogs #3 (former Essendon digital marketer and fan engagement manager has been at the Digs a few years and obviously making an impact) and Collingwood ranked quite low in relative terms.

The rankings cover a 3 month tracking period so maybe influenced by finals to an extent (Bulldogs and Hawks). Though against this assumption is Essendon which had a terrible year. Having said this, Essendons website day in, day out was ranked #1 more often than not over many years.

AFL clubs generate much greater traffic than their NRL counterparts.

the AFL clubs generate more web traffic than the NRL clubs because they are far more popular

 

[bombersfan4000]

I presume this is based on clicks?

Would have thought Collingwood would be higher on the list. WBD is a big surprise.

a lot of the collingwood popularity has to do with the Eddie Maguire factor

 

[gopies1981]

a lot of the collingwood popularity has to do with the Eddie Maguire factor

Collingwood have always been a massive club way before Eddie Maguire

 

[Hawkk]

a lot of the collingwood popularity has to do with the Eddie Maguire factor

...and yet Collingwood has been the largest drawing club for the majority of the post WWII VFL/AFL history

Go figure

 

[Ichabod Noodle]

http://www.footyindustry.com/?page_id=1830

Under the 'digital' menu option it lists the 'Alexa' rankings of AFL websites. Not surprising that Essenfon are comfortably #1 and have always been a leader in the website and digital area. Hawthorn #2. Interesting to see the Bulldogs #3 (former Essendon digital marketer and fan engagement manager has been at the Digs a few years and obviously making an impact) and Collingwood ranked quite low in relative terms.

The rankings cover a 3 month tracking period so maybe influenced by finals to an extent (Bulldogs and Hawks). Though against this assumption is Essendon which had a terrible year. Having said this, Essendons website day in, day out was ranked #1 more often than not over many years.

AFL clubs generate much greater traffic than their NRL counterparts.

those rankings in that chart don't make much sense. Brisbane (AFL) ranks below Melbourne Victory in Australia but above them in the global rankings?

Manly rank 8 spots lower than Melbourne City in Australia but are ahead globally?

Richmond and Collingwood both jump places on the second list.

Does not compute

 

[The_Wookie]

those rankings in that chart don't make much sense. Brisbane (AFL) ranks below Melbourne Victory in Australia but above them in the global rankings?

Manly rank 8 spots lower than Melbourne City in Australia but are ahead globally?

Richmond and Collingwood both jump places on the second list.

Does not compute

Take it up with Alexa. it means some clubs are less popular in australia than overseas.

 

[bombersfan4000]

...and yet Collingwood has been the largest drawing club for the majority of the post WWII VFL/AFL history

Go figure

It really burns your piss doesn't it hawkk, how essendon can't even win a game cheating and yet they are still such a large & financially successfully & stable club

 

[The_Wookie]

It really burns your piss doesn't it hawkk, how essendon can't even win a game cheating and yet they are still such a large & financially successfully & stable club

nowhere near as much as it burns you that Hawthorn are successul and stable though

 

[Rob]

It really burns your piss doesn't it hawkk, how essendon can't even win a game cheating and yet they are still such a large & financially successfully & stable club

I hardly think anyone is jealous of Essendon. Especially not Hawthorn supporters.

 

[Gigantor]

Take it up with Alexa. it means some clubs are less popular in australia than overseas.

I agree with my comrade, it doesn't make sense, and your explanation doesn't really make any sense either.

 

[Marley10]

It really burns your piss doesn't it hawkk, how essendon can't even win a game cheating and yet they are still such a large & financially successfully & stable club

To be honest, Essendon don't have much going for them at the moment.

Hawthorn have overtaken Essendon in memberships, revenue, profit, sponsorship and now attendance. Hawthorn is much more of an attractive brand than Essendon at the moment. They have a winning culture, easily the most successful in the last 55 years. Yes all those can be overturned quite easily with success, but will we have that success?

I don't think any Hawthorn fan will be jealous of Essendon. What could they be jealous of? It's like saying Essendon fans are jealous of Carlton, a club that is worse off than us.

 

[jatz14]

those rankings in that chart don't make much sense. Brisbane (AFL) ranks below Melbourne Victory in Australia but above them in the global rankings?

Manly rank 8 spots lower than Melbourne City in Australia but are ahead globally?

Richmond and Collingwood both jump places on the second list.

Does not compute

In a way, it does make sense. If you have an interest in footy, and there are non Australian's who do, then who are you going to follow? If you have an interest in soccer, and you are not Australian, are you going to have any interest in Melbourne Victory. Where does MVFC sit in the global rankings of soccer clubs. In the global ranking of footy clubs, Brisbane sit pretty high, top 16 at least.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

 

[Gigantor]

In a way, it does make sense. If you have an interest in footy, and there are non Australian's who do, then who are you going to follow? If you have an interest in soccer, and you are not Australian, are you going to have any interest in Melbourne Victory. Where does MVFC sit in the global rankings of soccer clubs. In the global ranking of footy clubs, Brisbane sit pretty high, top 16 at least.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

No, I still agree with my comrade.

What the list does is take out the Australian sites from all sites - they all have access to the same global audience - so whatever the order is amongst the Australian sites, those Australian sites should remain in the same order in the global rankings (obviously the actual positions will change with the inclusion of all sites, but the order amongst the Australian cohort will be the same).

 

[The_Wookie]

No, I still agree with my comrade.

What the list does is take out the Australian sites from all sites - they all have access to the same global audience - so whatever the order is amongst the Australian sites, those Australian sites should remain in the same order in the global rankings (obviously the actual positions will change with the inclusion of all sites, but the order amongst the Australian cohort will be the same).

This is what you've failed to understand.

• The AU list ranks the site according to Australian visitors to Australian websites only.
  (The rank by country is calculated using a combination of average daily visitors to this site and pageviews on this site from users from that country over the past month. The site with the highest combination of visitors and pageviews is ranked #1 in that country)
  
  
• The Global list ranks the site according to global visitors to the Australian websites.
  (The rank is calculated using a combination of average daily visitors to this site and pageviews on this site over the past 3 months. The site with the highest combination of visitors and pageviews is ranked #1)
  

So a site popular within Australia may be less so overseas. The global order can be different to the Australian order.

 

[Gigantor]

This is what you've failed to understand.

• The AU list ranks the site according to Australian visitors to Australian websites only.
  (The rank by country is calculated using a combination of average daily visitors to this site and pageviews on this site from users from that country over the past month. The site with the highest combination of visitors and pageviews is ranked #1 in that country)
  
  
• The Global list ranks the site according to global visitors to the Australian websites.
  (The rank is calculated using a combination of average daily visitors to this site and pageviews on this site over the past 3 months. The site with the highest combination of visitors and pageviews is ranked #1)

So a site popular within Australia may be less so overseas. The global order can be different to the Australian order.

Let us accept what you are saying, that the left column is Australian visits only, and the right column is global visits (presumably including Australian visits).

It still doesn't make sense.

The New Zealand Warriors get a very high ranking just including Australian visits, but with the global numbers (which would include, presumably, visits from its own country, it plummets down the rankings). Doesn't make sense.

Or that Sydney FC would beat the Melbourne Storm in the Australian rankings, but that the Melbourne Storm would then leap frog Sydney FC in the global rankings.

Even the bulldogs maintaining its position globally is a bit dubious.

 

[The_Wookie]

Let us accept what you are saying, that the left column is Australian visits only, and the right column is global visits (presumably including Australian visits).

It still doesn't make sense.

The New Zealand Warriors get a very high ranking just including Australian visits, but with the global numbers (which would include, presumably, visits from its own country, it plummets down the rankings). Doesn't make sense.

Or that Sydney FC would beat the Melbourne Storm in the Australian rankings, but that the Melbourne Storm would then leap frog Sydney FC in the global rankings.

Even the bulldogs maintaining its position globally is a bit dubious.

Make your own website ratings firm then. Alexa arent exactly newcomers at this.

 

[Gigantor]

Re-reading the Footy Industry blurb, and there is no clear indication given that the left column is only measuring Australian visits (as opposed to all visits to Australian sites).

 

[Gigantor]

Make your own website ratings firm then. Alexa arent exactly newcomers at this.

Clearly, there is something a bit odd about how the rankings are falling out.

It's, you know, a discussion point.

It's a forum.

We discuss things.

 

[Rob]

Let us accept what you are saying, that the left column is Australian visits only, and the right column is global visits (presumably including Australian visits).

It still doesn't make sense.

The New Zealand Warriors get a very high ranking just including Australian visits, but with the global numbers (which would include, presumably, visits from its own country, it plummets down the rankings). Doesn't make sense.

Or that Sydney FC would beat the Melbourne Storm in the Australian rankings, but that the Melbourne Storm would then leap frog Sydney FC in the global rankings.

Even the bulldogs maintaining its position globally is a bit dubious.

Your point about the Warriors makes sense. But i'm not sure about the rest. There's no reason why any A-League team would get significant hits internationally.
At least AFL and NRL clubs would have Aussie expats taking a big interest. I doubt many Aussies are going to follow an A-League team and no internationals will - at least not any more than AFL fans would follow a C grade amateurs team.

 

[The_Wookie]

Re-reading the Footy Industry blurb, and there is no clear indication given that the left column is only measuring Australian visits (as opposed to all visits to Australian sites).

Thats my error on my site. Which ive since clarified here.

 

[The_Wookie]

and updated today

 

[Hawkk]

It really burns your piss doesn't it hawkk, how essendon can't even win a game cheating and yet they are still such a large & financially successfully & stable club

Hi Brisbane13 you really have melted down something chronic here