If Melbourne had supporters???

[Hawkk]

Would they need AFL life support?

Before you return salvo with Hawthorn's Tasmanian agreement consider this;

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/Default.aspx?tabid=10382

In 2008 MELBOURNEfc will celebrate its 150th Birthday. There are over 220,000 people in Australia who barrack for MELBOURNEfc and we want every one of them to be part of our celebrations by joining the Red and Blue Army.
2008 is the year for every person who barracks for the oldest sporting Club in the world to show their true colours. 2008 is the year to be a part of it.

Joining the Red and Blue Army is free and every member will receive:
- Welcome letter from the Club

- Exclusive Email updates throughout the Club’s 150th year containing Club news, special invitations and 150th Anniversary updates

Members of the Red and Blue Army will not receive advertising material from the Club and you can opt out at any time.



http://hawthornfc.com.au/Season2007/News/NewsArticle/tabid/4742/Default.aspx?newsId=47947

“The major challenge ahead of the Club is to target significant growth in its membership base. We have fantastic support around Australia – and now it’s time for those supporters to become members. Really, our destiny is in our own hands.” said Cook.

“I will be focusing on continuing to offer members better value for their membership with some great initiatives that will bring the Hawthorn business and supporter communities closer together. We are a club that has over 350,000 supporters and we currently have only around 10 percent of them as members. We need to close that gap.”

350k+ > 220k?

Funnily enough the only clubs that recieve significant funding by the AFL are the clubs that have the smallest support and membership bases.

The question I ask is why the clubs that contribute the least amount of revenue to the leagues revenue streams should demand to recieve the most revenue from the AFL. In a truely equitable league, clubs like Melbourne would have been long gone years ago...am I wrong?

I understand Carlton argument for recieving additional revenue - given how much revenue they bring into the league from their massive support base, but what do gypsy clubs like Melbourne contribute to the league?

 

[GAMBLER]

Exactly.

I'd be interesting to see what the clubs in the lower bracket add to the league in regards to revenue.

No club has a devine right to exist in the AFL

 

[FOOOOTY]

Pathetic troll.

In a truely equitable league. Hawthorn would never exist to begin with.

 

[FOOOOTY]

Lets see, Melbourne 220k supporters 28k club members, 22k MCC members

Hawthorn 350k supporters... 32k club members? 2k MCC members?

I guess this means that Hawks fans aren't passionate and do not care about their club.

Should a club that can't get passionate fans be allowed in the league?

 

[Ricardo]

Lets see, Melbourne 220k supporters 28k club members, 22k MCC members

I guess this means that Hawks fans aren't passionate and do not care about their club.

50,000 members and you barely scrape together 20k vs an interstate side, who's more passionate again?

 

[FOOOOTY]

50,000 members and you barely scrape together 20k vs an interstate side, who's more passionate again?

You know i live in Geelong. I know exactly about the 'passion' here for their football team. Such amazing passion... when theyre winning.

Biggest bandwagon supporters in the league.

 

[FOOOOTY]

50,000 members and you barely scrape together 20k vs an interstate side, who's more passionate again?

When we play a final vs Adelaide we pull 60k+

Hawks got what.. 35k?

 

[carmi99]

Would they need AFL life support?

Before you return salvo with Hawthorn's Tasmanian agreement consider this;

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/Default.aspx?tabid=10382


Members of the Red and Blue Army will not receive advertising material from the Club and you can opt out at any time.



http://hawthornfc.com.au/Season2007/News/NewsArticle/tabid/4742/Default.aspx?newsId=47947



350k+ > 220k?

Funnily enough the only clubs that recieve significant funding by the AFL are the clubs that have the smallest support and membership bases.

The question I ask is why the clubs that contribute the least amount of revenue to the leagues revenue streams should demand to recieve the most revenue from the AFL. In a truely equitable league, clubs like Melbourne would have been long gone years ago...am I wrong?

I understand Carlton argument for recieving additional revenue - given how much revenue they bring into the league from their massive support base, but what do gypsy clubs like Melbourne contribute to the league?

What a lame troll. Obviously you didn't like the other thread on Kennett so you come back with this. Grow up mate.

 

[On the bench]

Hows all these Hawthorn turds,they have had one good season in the last five years & all of a sudden they are the next big thing,they only won a final on the last kick of the day & lost to a side who got beaten by both Grand Finalists by around the 100 point mark!

 

[Bring-Back-Powell]

Remind me who the Kangas beat in the Semi finals after their supporters claimed their team to be the best thing since sliced bread.

PS - We are the oldest and greatest football club in the world. We ain't going nowhere.

 

[budf23]

If Melbourne had members what could they complain to the MCC about?

 

[Bring-Back-Powell]

These bitter Hawks fans still can't get over the fact that if the Dees-Hawks merger went ahead in 1996, it would've been more of a take-over from Melbourne and the heritage and history of Hawthron would all be forgotten by now.

eg- "A Melbourne guernsey with a valcro Hawk" - Don Scott

 

[Dixie Flatline]

These bitter Hawks fans still can't get over the fact that if the Dees-Hawks merger went ahead in 1996, it would've been more of a take-over from Melbourne and the heritage and history of Hawthron would all be forgotten by now.

eg- "A Melbourne guernsey with a valcro Hawk" - Don Scott

Yet we're not the club that voted ourselves out of existence.

 

[Hawkk]

Why did this thread get moved...this is a serious question.

Why should the clubs that contribute the least to the AFL's revenue streams recieve the most back from the AFL?

 

[Brock Machine]

what do gypsy clubs like Melbourne

Funny, you were admitted late to the VFL, have Tasmania on your jumper, play 4 home games interstate, have sold Glenferrie and train in Waverly.

I've also lost count of the number of home grounds you guys have had.

Thanks for the laugh.

 

[Dixie Flatline]

Remind me who the Kangas beat in the Semi finals after their supporters claimed their team to be the best thing since sliced bread.

PS - We are the oldest and greatest football club in the world. We ain't going nowhere.

No premierships since 1963 really establishes the Demons as the bestest ever club.

 

[Bring-Back-Powell]

Yet we're not the club that voted ourselves out of existence.

The 54% smart MFC members knew that it was a take-over all along. MFC would get all the money, players and draft concessions while allowing for the small concession of a valcro Hawk on our red and blue jumper.

Without Scott and Dicker, the Hawthorn footy club would be nothing today.

 

[budf23]

What actually is the go with these "Melbourne supporters" who are MCC members? I'm a MCC member and still buy a Hawthorn membership every year, are these people "supposed" to be societies elite?

 

[Hawkamania!]

Lets see, Melbourne 220k supporters 28k club members, 22k MCC members

Hawthorn 350k supporters... 32k club members? 2k MCC members?

I guess this means that Hawks fans aren't passionate and do not care about their club.

Should a club that can't get passionate fans be allowed in the league?

If your ramblings have some truth, 78.5% of Melbourne members are mcc members and 6.25% of Hawthorn members are mcc members.

So, interpreting your data, without the cricket sect, you guys are nothing.

 

[Skeppersap]

Yet we're not the club that voted ourselves out of existence.

Hahahahhahahaha

It was basically a takeover bid, yet 30% of hawthorn suuporters still voted to merge.

The whole merger incident is a lot worse for Hawthorn than it is for Melbourne. It may be the worst effort by a clubs supporters in the history of the AFL!

 

[Hawkk]

Why do Melbourne have such an embarassingly low support base?

 

[Skeppersap]

Why do Melbourne have such an embarassingly low support base?

Why did Hawthorn have such an embarassingly low crowd at their first final in 6 years, only 2 months ago, when apparently they are a GREAT club?

 

[Hawkk]

The same reason why Essendon drew a disappointing 37k to their only final at the TD or Hawthorn and Geelong drew 44k to the TD?

Using your logic, Geelong only hvae 8k more supporters then Adelaide in Melbourne?

 

[Skeppersap]

The same reason why Essendon drew a disappointing 37k to their only final at the TD or Hawthorn and Geelong drew 44k to the TD?

Using your logic, Geelong only hvae 8k more supporters then Adelaide in Melbourne?

????? What are you talking about? How is that my logic.

About 2 hours ago I thought you were intelligent. Now i know you are virtually braindead. You are comparing crowds from 7 years ago to crowds now. How about we compare crowds this year, have a look at finals crowds in the last 2-3 years, NOT 7 YEARS AGO!

I may as well start referring to Hawthorns crowds in 1954, they are just as relevant.

The simple fact is that your crowd turnout was a disgrace, and truely shows Hawthorn supporters for what they are.

Its funny how 2 days ago you were gloating about Hawthorns profit etc and how it makes Hawthorn a great club where as Geelong are only a good club. Well, since then 2 other clubs presidents have come out and talked about how Hawthorn are being disingenuous with their financial reporting, and that they should look at their own concessions before attacking other clubs. You have gone strangely quiet on that issue!

 

[Bring-Back-Powell]

Why did this thread get moved...this is a serious question.

?

Because it stunk of troll...