Prediction Club Official Membership Target for 2016 is 65,000.. Could we EVER make 70,000?

[RussellEbertHandball]

Industry average member churn rate was 14%. I'd say Port's is probably less than 10% and most of that would be non access and GA members. I know reserved seating churn rate between 2014 and 2015 was around 5%.

 

[tribey]

I know reserved seating churn rate between 2014 and 2015 was around 5%.

You'd hope the bulk of that figure were deaths and disappearances.

If any bob up in future years with the whole "I was a tinsnips member an irrelevant time ago, I bad want grand final ticket now. me sick" as we saw at the business end of 2014, I'll go hee.

 

[1954]

How on earth do Richmond do it?

I remember reading somewhere ( I think it was the Herald/Sun in the late 90's ) that it is believed the tiggers have the largest fan base in Melbourne, and therefore the biggest in the game.

Apparently bigger than that of wobblewood, the blue baggers, and the bummers, the other clubs who were often described as the big four of the VFL.

One can only wonder how many tigger fans would come out of the woodwork if the club ever has the ultimate success again!

 

[OneGreatClub]

I remember reading somewhere ( I think it was the Herald/Sun in the late 90's ) that it is believed the tiggers have the largest fan base in Melbourne, and therefore the biggest in the game.

Apparently bigger than that of wobblewood, the blue baggers, and the bummers, the other clubs who were often described as the big four of the VFL.

One can only wonder how many tigger fans would come out of the woodwork if the club ever has the ultimate success again!

Who wouldn't want to dress their toddler in a tiger cub outfit, massive appeal to the mums.

 

[NoddyHolder]

Oh and GAGF with 67% of AO membership numbers being recorded as Crows. I thought that s**t was meant to be fixed for this years figures?

Conveniently round figure of 8000 for the crers. Just give prot powah what's left over and work out the % after.

 

[Andre]

You'd hope the bulk of that figure were deaths and disappearances.

If any bob up in future years with the whole "I was a tinsnips member an irrelevant time ago, I bad want grand final ticket now. me sick" as we saw at the business end of 2014, I'll go hee.

And it happened in 2004 and 2007. Yeah, why should the tickets go to those who put their hard earned into the club, when clearly watching a few games on TV when doing well is just as important

At least if they'd said 'I had no money for tickets after buying Jaxxan and Krylea hampers from Chrisco, and smokes for both my kids dads' they'd get some sympathy for honesty.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

What would be a reasonable assumption? 45/55? I also thought it was meant to be fixed this year.

Until they make every member ie forced to fill out a section, like the AFL members, were you tick a box that says one of the following 5 options
1. I am a Port supporter
2. I am a Crows supporter
3. I support both SA clubs
4. I support a non SA club
5. I don't support any club

and any non ticked box is followed up with a phone call to find out why that occured and then filled out by the SMA staff calling that member, then we are never going to know the true position.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Conveniently round figure of 8000 for the crers. Just give prot powah what's left over and work out the % after.

I don't know what you mean but 8,000 was my approximation because that is supposed to be the number of AO Footy Members. In 2014 they had 8,206 probably allowing for late applications in the first year and in 2015 there were 8,009. There has been a waiting list since 2014 season started so I suspect the actually number like 2015 is close to 8,000 but not dead on the spot. The percentage split of 67/33 I have no idea how they came about but in the 2014 and 2015 AFL audited figures they used 65/35 in both years.

Edit, the club in its 2014 and 2015 website articles on final audited membership numbers, had the number of AO Footy members for that year in it, but it didn't quote that number in the 2016 article.

 

[NoddyHolder]

I don't know what you mean but 8,000 was my approximation because that is supposed to be the number of AO Footy Members. In 2014 they had 8,206 probably allowing for late applications in the first year and in 2015 there were 8,009. There has been a waiting list since 2014 season started so I suspect the actually number like 2015 is close to 8,000 but not dead on the spot. The percentage split of 67/33 I have no idea how they came about but in the 2014 and 2015 AFL audited figures they used 65/35 in both years.

ok, my mistake. Was being a cynic and read the 8000 as their number.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

You'd hope the bulk of that figure were deaths and disappearances.

If any bob up in future years with the whole "I was a tinsnips member an irrelevant time ago, I bad want grand final ticket now. me sick" as we saw at the business end of 2014, I'll go hee.

We had about 30,000 reserved seat members in 2014 - remember we sell a lot of 11 game GA memberships and other non reserved seats, so a 5% churn rate on that is 1,500. If you look at death and immigration / migration rates then its pretty hard to get a churn rate of less than 4%.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

2014 Club statement
http://www.portadelaidefc.com.au/news/2014-08-22/statement-record-membership-growth
...However, with changes to the stadium revenue model at the Adelaide Oval in 2014, the AFL has instead split the Adelaide Oval 22-game membership figure between the two clubs on a 35/65 basis against Port Adelaide, despite stadium members having access to all 22 minor round games at the Oval.

This change in auditing system resulted in an allocation of 2,928 Adelaide Oval members to Port Adelaide and 5,278 to the Crows. The 35/65 distribution split was based on SANFL ‘club of support’ research which had the split at 30/70.....
http://www.portadelaidefc.com.au/news/2014-08-22/statement-record-membership-growth
2,928/(2,928+5,278) = 35.68%

2015 Club statement
http://www.portadelaidefc.com.au/news/2015-08-26/port-adelaide-rises-into-afl-membership-top-six
....Port’s increase is made more significant considering the new system used by the AFL to allocate Adelaide Oval stadium football members.

Introduced in line with the new revenue sharing model at the Oval in 2014, this system distributes stadium members on a 36/64 basis based on historical SANFL data. That means just 2,883 of the 22-game Adelaide Oval memberships go to Port Adelaide, while 5,126 are handed to the Adelaide Crows.
http://www.portadelaidefc.com.au/news/2015-08-26/port-adelaide-rises-into-afl-membership-top-six
2,883/(2,883+5,126) = 35.99%

2016 Club statement
http://www.portadelaidefc.com.au/news/2016-08-25/port-ranked-8th-for-membership-figure
....The Power’s overall membership figure of 60,214 was scaled down by the AFL as part of its annual audit to include only memberships which cost $50 or more, had a person’s name attached to it and resulted in the distribution of a membership pack.

The rules are applied across all 18 clubs to ensure parity in final membership figures. Pet memberships, SANFL memberships and 67% of Adelaide Oval stadium members were excluded as part of the audit.
http://www.portadelaidefc.com.au/news/2016-08-25/port-ranked-8th-for-membership-figure

 

[El Zorro]

I don't see why Adelaide oval members need to be split. If I, as a Port supporter, for whatever reason buy a crows membership my membership will be counted as a crows membership. I don't see why, if AO members buy 11 Port home games (+ 11 Crows home games) they can not be counted as members of both clubs. If crows supporters don't want to be counted as port member, easy, buy a crows membership instead of an AO one.

 

[Janus]

2014 Club statement
http://www.portadelaidefc.com.au/news/2014-08-22/statement-record-membership-growth
...However, with changes to the stadium revenue model at the Adelaide Oval in 2014, the AFL has instead split the Adelaide Oval 22-game membership figure between the two clubs on a 35/65 basis against Port Adelaide, despite stadium members having access to all 22 minor round games at the Oval.

This change in auditing system resulted in an allocation of 2,928 Adelaide Oval members to Port Adelaide and 5,278 to the Crows. The 35/65 distribution split was based on SANFL ‘club of support’ research which had the split at 30/70.....
http://www.portadelaidefc.com.au/news/2014-08-22/statement-record-membership-growth
2,928/(2,928+5,278) = 35.68%

2015 Club statement
http://www.portadelaidefc.com.au/news/2015-08-26/port-adelaide-rises-into-afl-membership-top-six
....Port’s increase is made more significant considering the new system used by the AFL to allocate Adelaide Oval stadium football members.

Introduced in line with the new revenue sharing model at the Oval in 2014, this system distributes stadium members on a 36/64 basis based on historical SANFL data. That means just 2,883 of the 22-game Adelaide Oval memberships go to Port Adelaide, while 5,126 are handed to the Adelaide Crows.
http://www.portadelaidefc.com.au/news/2015-08-26/port-adelaide-rises-into-afl-membership-top-six
2,883/(2,883+5,126) = 35.99%

2016 Club statement
http://www.portadelaidefc.com.au/news/2016-08-25/port-ranked-8th-for-membership-figure
....The Power’s overall membership figure of 60,214 was scaled down by the AFL as part of its annual audit to include only memberships which cost $50 or more, had a person’s name attached to it and resulted in the distribution of a membership pack.

The rules are applied across all 18 clubs to ensure parity in final membership figures. Pet memberships, SANFL memberships and 67% of Adelaide Oval stadium members were excluded as part of the audit.
http://www.portadelaidefc.com.au/news/2016-08-25/port-ranked-8th-for-membership-figure

So what you're telling us is that the SMA membership ratio is fluid in accordance with how much leeway Adelaide has over Port in being the 'biggest' club in the state.

2014 - Yeah, we can afford to give them a 65/35 split...

2015 - We better make it a bit more reflective of what it actually is if they've got 50k members - let's drop it down to 64/36...

2016 - *! They overtook the Crows in the AFL Audit! Back up! Back up! 67/33! 67/33!

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

So what you're telling us is that the SMA membership ratio is fluid in accordance with how much leeway Adelaide has over Port in being the 'biggest' club in the state.

2014 - Yeah, we can afford to give them a 65/35 split...

2015 - We better make it a bit more reflective of what it actually is if they've got 50k members - let's drop it down to 64/36...

2016 - ****! They overtook the Crows in the AFL Audit! Back up! Back up! 67/33! 67/33!

I'd say 2014 and 2015 was a rounding down to 35% and then a rounding up to 36, the difference is 0.31% by the numbers counted, but FIIK why it has become 33% this year.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

I don't see why Adelaide oval members need to be split. If I, as a Port supporter, for whatever reason buy a crows membership my membership will be counted as a crows membership. I don't see why, if AO members buy 11 Port home games (+ 11 Crows home games) they can not be counted as members of both clubs. If crows supporters don't want to be counted as port member, easy, buy a crows membership instead of an AO one.

It goes back to $$$. Who is getting the $$$.

To buy an AFL Membership you are asked to tick a box for which club you support, then the AFL transferspart of the membership fee to that club, you get counted in that clubs total and you get membership stuff and membership rights.

When Port came in, both the crows and port got $$$ from the SANFL in the 22 game membership and the figure the AFL Membership Club Support was distributed to the clubs was distributed to the 2 SA clubs. I know in 2013 that figure was $138. I haven't kept up once we moved to AO because that amount wasn't distributed to the clubs anymore.

Reading closely the 2014 and 2015 statement it appears that the clubs get different amounts from the increased AO Footy membership fee. In 2014 the SANFL kept 100% of the fee but when the adult membership fee went from $550 to $650 it was reported the clubs would split the $50. KT in 2014 statement said " However, with changes to the stadium revenue model at the Adelaide Oval in 2014, the AFL has instead split the Adelaide Oval 22-game membership figure between the two clubs on a 35/65 basis against Port Adelaide,"

 

[Garibaldi Red]

http://www.portadelaidefc.com.au/news/2016-08-25/port-ranked-8th-for-membership-figure
The Power’s overall membership figure of 60,214 was scaled down by the AFL as part of its annual audit to include only memberships which cost $50 or more, had a person’s name attached to it and resulted in the distribution of a membership pack. The rules are applied across all 18 clubs to ensure parity in final membership figures.

Pet memberships, SANFL memberships and 67% of Adelaide Oval stadium members were excluded as part of the audit.
http://www.portadelaidefc.com.au/news/2016-08-25/port-ranked-8th-for-membership-figure

So
60,214
-8,000 AO Footy Members
--------
53,214

You're 1,000 out there REH

Not sure why the SMA numbers need to be split anyway. As part of the membership fee $50 goes to each club irrespective of which club you select

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

You're 1,000 out there REH

Not sure why the SMA numbers need to be split anyway. As part of the membership fee $50 goes to each club irrespective of which club you select

Cheers that means we only have
1,109 other non counted members not 2,109 as I wrote before the edit.

As I posted above, KT's statement suggests that maybe that the 2 clubs don't get $50 each for adults and lesser amounts for concessions or juniors, despite all reports I heard that all increases above 2014 fees for all categories were to be split by the 2 clubs.

 

[tribey]

Not sure why the SMA numbers need to be split anyway. As part of the membership fee $50 goes to each club irrespective of which club you select

And you get access to both teams' home games.

To the letter of the AFL's definition of an audited member (person, $50+, address, game access), either split them 50/50 or count them all.

 

[Andre]

I've said before, if they can't/won't just ask SMA members to all tick a preferred box, then go by attendance. 8000 SMA Members x 20 matches (exclude showdowns as can't tell who they are going for). Otherwise it's total SMA at 10 Port games / total SMA at 20 games should be our percentage. Sure it's not fool proof, the team performing better and/or getting better teams/timeslots gets an advantage, but it's s**t loads better then an arbitrary 'Crows still 2/3 of the state'.

 

[Forzaport]

And you get access to both teams' home games.

To the letter of the AFL's definition of an audited member (person, $50+, address, game access), either split them 50/50 or count them all.

This becomes all the more important when there's limited seating at AO and both clubs' audited figures are separated by a smaller number than the split differential.

 

[Garibaldi Red]

Cheers that means we only have
1,109 other non counted members not 2,109 as I wrote before the edit.

As I posted above, KT's statement suggests that maybe that the 2 clubs don't get $50 each for adults and lesser amounts for concessions or juniors, despite all reports I heard that all increases above 2014 fees for all categories were to be split by the 2 clubs.

The email from the AOSMA on why memberships went up by $100 stated that each club would receive $50. Not sure why/how that changed without notification

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

The email from the AOSMA on why memberships went up by $100 stated that each club would receive $50. Not sure why/how that changed without notification

If that's correctand still the case then good, but go and re read KT's statements in 2014 and 2015 as to why they went the 65/35 split and he mentions the revenue sharing review.

Why mention the revenue sharing model as the driver for the split if the dollars didn't go 50/50??

 

[Garibaldi Red]

If that's correctand still the case then good, but go and re read KT's statements in 2014 and 2015 as to why they went the 65/35 split and he mentions the revenue sharing review.

Why mention the revenue sharing model as the driver for the split if the dollars didn't go 50/50??

I am not disputing what you have written, just stating what the AOSMA said.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

I am not disputing what you have written, just stating what the AOSMA said.

Yeah and I'm confused as to why KT said what he did.

 

[bomberclifford]

And you get access to both teams' home games.

To the letter of the AFL's definition of an audited member (person, $50+, address, game access), either split them 50/50 or count them all.

... and what about those that are Hawthorn/Essendon/Collingwood supporters who live in Adelaide and buy an AO membership to attend football?

Why do they automatically get assigned to Crows because "they're not Port"?

It's so stupidly biased it's not funny.