Final Membership Totals 2013

[walhawk]

The only thing that really matters to clubs, in terms of membership, is revenue.

Membership numbers are just a gimmick, mainly to attract sponsors. Not sure why so much importance, among the general public, placed on membership numbers.

I would prefer to see membership revenue figures. Anyone know when and where these are available for the whole league, or is it an individual club thing.

You have just answered your own question.
High membership numbers produce more sponsorship $$$.
So, revenue from memberships is not the only thing that really matters, as more members (database for sponsors) = more overall revenue for the club, regardless of the costs of that membership.

 

[walhawk]

Some clubs release them as part of their annual report. There is usually a tally floating around on bigfooty somewhere.

Short term I agree revenue is the most important figure, but those numbers are very important for long term growth. I was under the impression Hawthorn had a lot of junior memberships, which right now brings down their ave revenue per member. In ten years time they will be full paying adults some on the higher membership tiers.

It's much easier to sell an expensive membership to an existing member than not.

I think we have around 50% more junior members than the next closest club.
So, our $ per membership is very low, but that is of no concern.
Since 1997 we have concentrated on building up numbers, and in that time we have been the most profitable club. That is not coincidence.
Build up membership numbers and the rest follows.
Off field stability = on field success.

 

[Inspector Malceski]

High membership numbers produce more sponsorship $$$.
So, revenue from memberships is not the only thing that really matters, as more members (database for sponsors) = more overall revenue for the club, regardless of the costs of that membership.

Humm why hasn't clubs offered $10 memberships to inflate their numbers to get more sponsorships?

 

[Hawkk]

Collingwood 78,427
Hawthorn 63,353
Richmond 60,321
West Coast 58,501
Essendon 56,173
Carlton 50,564
Adelaide 46,4051
Fremantle 43,880
Geelong 42,884
Port Adelaide 39,838
Sydney Swans 36,358
North Melbourne 34,607
Melbourne 33,177
St Kilda 32,707
Western Bulldogs 30,209
Brisbane 24,130
GWS Giants 12,681
Gold Coast 12,502


I have heard that Fremantle are only behind Collingwood & West Coast, in terms of revenue from memberships.

So does memberships cost less in Melbourne than Perth because of the capacity of the MCG, as some teams have 20k+ more members but have less revenue from membership than Freo?

Wouldn't surprise me. West Coast and Fremantle have the whole scarcity of resources in their favour. Supply is never going to be an issue for the MCG clubs

 

[Hawkk]

Humm why hasn't clubs offered $10 memberships to inflate their numbers to get more sponsorships?

Size and volume of membership is secondary to demographic. Each and every club has a pretty reasonable grasp of its member demographic and use this information as a means to appeal to prospective sponsors.

As a point of reference the Swans have one of the lower memberships in the league but charge one of the highest premiums for sponsorship. For Citibank, QBE and co. the Swans membership provides a gateway to the most commercially appealing market in the country.

 

[Hawkk]

Some clubs release them as part of their annual report. There is usually a tally floating around on bigfooty somewhere.

Short term I agree revenue is the most important figure, but those numbers are very important for long term growth. I was under the impression Hawthorn had a lot of junior memberships, which right now brings down their ave revenue per member. In ten years time they will be full paying adults some on the higher membership tiers.

It's much easier to sell an expensive membership to an existing member than not.

Just on this, our revenue/member is somewhat affected by 8,700 or so Tasmanian members purchasing 4 game memberships and 25,000 or so members with an MCG reserve seat purchasing 7 game memberships. If you look on the Hawthorn membership page the Legends, Kennedy, Gold and most Silver membership is sold out in advance of the season (with a waiting list now in play for Legends, Kennedy and Gold membership). The club even sells (capped) Gold and Silver Interstate memberships to non-Victorian members charged at the same price as the equivalent 7 game Gold and Silver membership (its all about the GF access). Ultimately our revenue/per member would be comparatively lower than any club in the competition given we split our home games between 2 separate markets.

Evidently we'll never truly know the revenue per club (as most clubs have a different definition of membership/marketing revenue) but I’d like to see the AFL force the clubs to release the split of members across definitive membership categories.

An example of this could be 11 game memberships (or 7/4 in the case of Hawthorn), Priority 1 and 2 access to Grand Finals, Interstate membership, 3 game membership and the like.

 

[TheFVK]

Geelong is better then the above

How? The numbers are what they are.

 

[Rainfall]

How? The numbers are what they are.

9/18 at least we're half


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free

 

[TheFVK]

9/18 at least we're half


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free

I don't see your point.

The AFL would be creaming themselves over the percentage increases for the two Sydney clubs.

 

[finders]

Membership increasing, attendances decreasing. Who would have thunk it?

Overall AFL attendances Increased in 2013 so a win win situation.

 

[Sunny_]

GWS has more members than Gold Coast, surprising.

Is it?

GWS has a population of 2 million people.

GC has a population of about 600,000.

Much easier to drum up that amount of members from a larger population pool. This doesn't take into consideration the members GWS would gain from Canberra too.

 

[FreoGirl]

Sydney is the alarming one for me........ Had a belt at the whole town for 30 years, 2 flags in the last 10 years, plenty of old Bloods fans in Vic... and I know they increased 6K this year, but IMO with a grab in 2 states they should be well over 40K ... and probably nudging 50K

I would think their 9.8% is SAFE with numbers like that

agree...just makes it more annoying that the NSW teams still get so many perks

 

[Tiger2709]

Gary March said on SEN a few weeks ago that we had over 64,000 memebers. Not sure if it counts but worth noting.

Yes but we stopped counting after a certain date and tied the memberships into next years I think so the figure above is the official one and the extra memberships we sold will be added to next year?

 

[Tiger2709]

Collingwood 78,427
Hawthorn 63,353
Richmond 60,321
West Coast 58,501
Essendon 56,173
Carlton 50,564
Adelaide 46,4051
Fremantle 43,880
Geelong 42,884
Port Adelaide 39,838
Sydney Swans 36,358
North Melbourne 34,607
Melbourne 33,177
St Kilda 32,707
Western Bulldogs 30,209
Brisbane 24,130
GWS Giants 12,681
Gold Coast 12,502


I have heard that Fremantle are only behind Collingwood & West Coast, in terms of revenue from memberships.

So does memberships cost less in Melbourne than Perth because of the capacity of the MCG, as some teams have 20k+ more members but have less revenue from membership than Freo?

Not sure but it does cost more to get a ticket at the gate here than it does in Melbourne so that is quite possible.

 

[Rainfall]

I don't see your point.

The AFL would be creaming themselves over the percentage increases for the two Sydney clubs.

The AFL secretly go for the two Sydney clubs. Perth is the 11th most expensive city yet the Sydney based teams get COLA? Sydney's 12th.

 

[Underarm]

Not sure but it does cost more to get a ticket at the gate here than it does in Melbourne so that is quite possible.

costs $20 for an adult ticket walk up price.

Memberships are maybe $150ish for 11 game GA membership? bit of a guess, but it would be much less than a Fremantle membership.

 

[pazza]

I wonder how much Essendon's news today will impact on membership figures next year...fair to say that Bomba was a popular choice leading into today amongst supporters and members.

 

[cammo78]

Would be far more interested in seeing membership revenue.

These numbers are relatively meaningless as they are not a like for like comparison between all clubs.

 

[The Blue Baggers]

These figures probably only include memberships greater than 5 games I would imagine and purchased before 30 June 2013.
I stand to be corrected however.

you'll be corrected.... official membership nos now count non access... two years ago the afl refused to count them but in self interest to inflate membership growth they are now counted.

without wanting to have a go as of 12 mths ago carlton had more access members than either richmond or essendon ...

geelong is probably the truest membership of the nos

even collingwood has resorted to game playing to inflate nos.

 

[kranky al]

And what's wrong with that? What if circumstances only allow you to attend one game a year and you want to still support your club? 1 or 3 game memberships should not be discounted, they are still real people putting money into there footy club.

Perhaps if nine one game memberships were worth 1 full membership

And three three gamers were worth one full

Then we could get an idea.

 

[Barry_Badrinath]

you'll be corrected.... official membership nos now count non access... two years ago the afl refused to count them but in self interest to inflate membership growth they are now counted.

without wanting to have a go as of 12 mths ago carlton had more access members than either richmond or essendon ...

geelong is probably the truest membership of the nos

even collingwood has resorted to game playing to inflate nos.

12 months ago Richmond were a bottom 10 side. The giant has awoken.

 

[TheFVK]

Geelong is better then the above

How? The numbers are what they are.

9/18 at least we're half


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free

I don't see your point.

The AFL would be creaming themselves over the percentage increases for the two Sydney clubs.

The AFL secretly go for the two Sydney clubs. Perth is the 11th most expensive city yet the Sydney based teams get COLA? Sydney's 12th.

I still haven't figured out what we are conversing about

 

[Tazmania]

Had a chat to the COO of Richmond, Michael Stahl yesterday and asked him about the composition of Richmonds 60000 members.

3 game members 7500
Non game members 3500
49000 11 game members

Pets not counted he had a laugh when I asked him that.

Really top bloke too very sympathetic when he found I was a freo member. Thought freo were going to smash hawthorn.

Says everyone at the club right down to the boot studder, was gutted to go out in the first week of finals after so long. Still all feeling bad about it.