Members buy the Eagles

[USAEagle]

Can someone please tell me why the Eagles' management calls us "members"? We are not members, we are season ticket holders. If we were members, we would have elections, and votes and a say in things, for instance, should we change the jumpers? What are there, about 35,000 of us? how much is the AFL License? 1.5 million? that works out to about the cost of a years' membership per person. Let's pool that money and get control of this club away from the WAFC and into the members' hands where it belongs.. I can't say much for Freo, but they are trying, with the MOB and all.

All of the Melbourne clubs are member run. Why does our team have to be a government department? I have only been a member for two years, but I can see that the "Club" only really wants our money. Does anyone else feel this way? I love the Eagles, and always will, but it is opretty impersonal once you get behind the scenes in the front office.

 

[Geonet]

USAEagle, I don't mind if we're owned by the WAFC provided Fremantle is not! Or vice versa. One of the two clubs should be completelly independent. Because if you are a member or ticket holder as you say, you aren't sure your money is being applied in the club you support. The WAFC gets part of the money and since they also own the Dockers, who knows if part of the money goes to freo coffers to help them buy a million dollar player. Think about it !

 

[GoEagles]

7-0 in the voting. I think it is clear that we as members want a better and bigger say at the footy club!

 

[eagleskickass]

9-0 now, i reckonthe members SHOUDl do something like the Freo Mob, just don't see it happening i'm afraid

 

[Frodo]

The problem is that the AFL has every club by the short and haries.

If WCE was able to be run as a corporate identity in a free market we would make $millions but who would risk their capital when there is so much control affecting profitability.

For example, in UK even 3rd division soccer teams with gates of 1-200 people sell their own match programme with heaps of local sponsorship that raises a lot of money and has great local content. The AFL does not allow this. Everyone has to sell the AFL footy rag on match day which is expensive and rubbish. We also now have to have a crappy Telstra website.

 

[daddy_4_eyes]

Definately yes! The WAFC's primary objective is to ensure their own survival. The eagles best interests are a distant second. For these reasons I believe the people who really care about the club, the members, should have a big say on the management of their club.

As I write this, the poll reads:
Yes = 13
No = 0
Don't know = 0

Bloody conclusive if you ask me.

 

[Mr Eagle]

But who will prop up Freo if we go and look after our own interests???


Calm down, Kuepper, I can see the words Indian Pacific in my mind's eye even before you think them (Mr Eagle holds up a sign saying That Was A Joke)

 

[Voice of Reason]

Originally posted by Frodo
The problem is that the AFL has every club by the short and haries.

If WCE was able to be run as a corporate identity in a free market we would make $millions but who would risk their capital when there is so much control affecting profitability.

For example, in UK even 3rd division soccer teams with gates of 1-200 people sell their own match programme with heaps of local sponsorship that raises a lot of money and has great local content. The AFL does not allow this. Everyone has to sell the AFL footy rag on match day which is expensive and rubbish. We also now have to have a crappy Telstra website.

Exactly. I voted yes of course - the options on the poll virtually force you to - but the issues are more complex.

I'm not a George GrilledFriedDockerFishonToast who is gullible enough to believe that you introduce democracy in football and everything is rosy in the garden.

 

[Mead]

I can't help but think that 17-0 is a pretty damning implication of the state of wafc

 

[iceman]

18 - 0 and counting

 

[GoEagles]

20-0 now.

'The tribe has spoken'