The Crowd Thread

[Ry009]

Re: 21K at the MCG today??

These threads and posts from North supporters actually have nothing to do with Hawthorn. It could have been any club playing over the weekend that attracted a disappointing crowd. 40K under cover for two flag contenders yesterday afternoon, when Collingwood usually supplies at least 40K on its own? It happens, it's easy and it's dumb.

The sole point is that this (and other similarly low crowd figures) for other games receive little if no comment from the media, when the lazy sods file a note on our crowd every week before they even start thinking about talking about the game. Same for BF trolls. Like with the umpiring Saturday night, all we are looking for is consistency.

Bit of editing to make it easier for the struggling posters H2H.

 

[Collingwould]

Re: 21K at the MCG today??

I would think Pies and Doggies would be shitty about that - considering both games they play each other this year is at Etihad and to find out that there is onyl around 21K at the MCG - the same day they played. It is pretty crappy if only 15K members turned up out of 50K. However these days with 3 game memberships and interstate memebrships (with every team) who knows how many members are the true members and attend the games.

Saw some pretty crappy numbers at Rich v Saints. The Saints cheersquad looked about as big as Richmonds cheersquad and when they farewelled there player there was more Saints fans there cheering him off then there own.

Maybe overall bad numbers for the weekend?

add to that we had to play the "twilight" game, which many a footy fan won't embrace.

I'd say that if you swapped fixtures, you'd probably still get a similar crowd for Hawks/Port and docklands and an extra 20k at the G at 2pm for Pies/Dogs as Pies fans embrace the G.

 

[Surreal O Reilly]

Re: What's the story with Hawthorn?

Only 21,000 to an MCG home game.

Sell 4 of their games interstate already.

All this on the back of a flag only a few years ago.

Questions need to be asked about what is happening at Mulgrave.

We've already seen senior players and the coach coming to blows.

IMO the AFL needs to seize the moment and get them down to Tassie full time.

The game will be better for it.

At least we know Hawthorn has a lot of bandwagoners and floating fans who are picky about what games they go to. Hawthorn is one of those clubs that can play a sellout game at Etihad Stadium or draw 70,000-80,000 to the MCG for a big game.

We see this same thread started up every year for the mid winter Hawthorn vs Port game. It's typical North Melbourne supporter insecurity for you. So desperately clutching at straws and trying to convince the football world of their relevancy. It must horrible to be a North Melbourne supporter and know that your team has no hope of ever winning another premiership and the only purpose of their existence is to make up the numbers for the AFL's television contract. So fearful of their own club's future, but trying to present a brave face to the world. Scanning the crowd figures of other club's games so they can point and scream, "SEE! SEE! It's not just US! Hawthorn also drew a shit crowd on the weekend!"

This will not save you, my friend. In fact, I have half a mind to cancel my North melbourne membership which I bought out of sympathy.

PS. How is Daniel Wells going this year? I heard he played a good game a couple of months ago, but I noticed he only scored 38 Supercoach points this week. Any chance that he will play two good games in one whole season?

 

[Rooiginal]

Re: What's the story with Hawthorn?

This will not save you, my friend. In fact, I have half a mind to cancel my North melbourne membership which I bought out of sympathy.

Ha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The 1,000,000 Big Footy supporter who claims they have a North membership.

Tell you what champ give us some proof??

 

[FisherHawk]

Re: 21K at the MCG today??

Discussing crowd numbers is important.

Ohh it's very important. I'm happy enough where we sit considering yesterdays turnout and our ladder position. While we're discussing this, what's up with North at 2nd last?

Club Avg attendance 2010

Collingwood 58633
Carlton 51787
Essendon 50583
Geelong 44752
Hawthorn 43396
Richmond 38137
Western Bulldogs 35697
St Kilda 35357
Melbourne 34753
Fremantle 34006
West Coast 32386
Adelaide 30858
Brisbane 30564
Sydney 28114
North Melbourne 26687
Port Adelaide 25194

 

[RoyalBlue]

Re: 21K at the MCG today??

The Zebra and SweetLeftFoot have slowly slipped from good posters down to cantankerous old Trolls in the space of three seasons.

That's bullshit, they were never good posters.

 

[Charlotte]

Re: 21K at the MCG today??

add to that we had to play the "twilight" game, which many a footy fan won't embrace.

I'd say that if you swapped fixtures, you'd probably still get a similar crowd for Hawks/Port and docklands and an extra 20k at the G at 2pm for Pies/Dogs as Pies fans embrace the G.

Must admit I cannot stand the twilight games myself, but yeah I would have thought at ES you would have had over 21K, and surely more doggies fans would have gone to it if it had been at MCG coz lets face its the MCG and like us they don't get heaps of chances to play on it durning the home and away season.

 

[TimmehJC"]

Re: 21K at the MCG today??

The next few years will see an increasing and across the competition disconnection between membership numbers and attendance figures. The increasing reliance by all ( certainly most ) clubs on 3 and 5 game cut price "mini memberships" in raising revenue and membership numbers means that by definition many thousands of members of ALL clubs won't be attending inter staters and other less high profile games unless a team is going well.

The reason why there is a bigger disconnect in Hawks attendances is simply that they have been most aggressive and creative is boosting numbers of "mini memberships". As others follow suit and as membership numbers consequently soar we will see huge gaps between official membership totals and attendances at all clubs.

I think you missed what was said in my post completely, I quoted 43,000 Victorian memberships. That is 43,000 Victorian memberships with at least 11 games with a cost of $170 for an adult, as we don't offer 3 game memberships. We have a 5 game reginal membership for those who live more than 120km away from the CBD and we have a 4 game Tasmania membership which entitles you entry to the tassie games.

In no way have we been the "most aggressive". That has defninately been Collingwood with the 3 game Melbourne memebership. In fact your own club bought out a 3 game membership a few weeks into this season, then went about upgrading the old $80 non-ticketed memberships to the 3 game to quickly boost the numbers (and they did this after I paid for a full Tigs membership, I want $100 back)

The disconnect as you call it would have be caused by weather, junior football and the fact it was Port.

 

[TimmehJC"]

Re: 21K at the MCG today??

I would think Pies and Doggies would be shitty about that - considering both games they play each other this year is at Etihad and to find out that there is onyl around 21K at the MCG - the same day they played. It is pretty crappy if only 15K members turned up out of 50K. However these days with 3 game memberships and interstate memebrships (with every team) who knows how many members are the true members and attend the games.

Saw some pretty crappy numbers at Rich v Saints. The Saints cheersquad looked about as big as Richmonds cheersquad and when they farewelled there player there was more Saints fans there cheering him off then there own.

Maybe overall bad numbers for the weekend?

First off, of 21,000 at the G, 20,000 were hawthorn, we were just up in our reserved seat
As previously stated, we don't have 3 game memberships.
Now, why were we at the MCG and the clearly bigger game of Collingwood and doggies at Etihad, well that goes all the way back to St.Kilda abandoning their Tassie agreement. Due to contracts at the time between the AFL and Tassie (and St.Kilda) at least 4 games a year had to be played down there, with 2 being Hawthorn and 2 being St.Kilda. Saints abandoned the deal depite its finacial rewards due to their bad record down there. The AFL were stuck with having to find a team to play 2 extra home games down there. Hawks took on the contract, with the agreement that all home games in Victoria would be played at the MCG, not Etihad.

 

[sgbn77]

Re: 21K at the MCG today??

Would have been handy if we could have sold a ticket or two to the seagulls. Damn there were a lot of them.

 

[mollyfud]

Re: 21K at the MCG today??

The disconnect as you call it would have be caused by weather, junior football and the fact it was Port.

Junior footy on a Sunday is a great point. There aren't a lot of Hawks fans at my work but I know the other one often has to miss Sunday games as there kids play junior footy.

 

[blaisee]

Re: 21K at the MCG today??

the hawks could never draw a crowd, I dont know why people are suprised

The 53k membership number is absolute bullocks, I mean really, they have the worst membership/attendance figures in the afl, which confirms that the membership numbers are fudged big time.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

Re: 21K at the MCG today??

I challenge you to prove any of the above.

Could you also please explain the Collingwood 3 game membership pack?

You're aware that pretty much every team now has 3 game and 11 game memberships yeah? Its a way all clubs have boosted numbers.

Good read at the Age about this very topic. You'll find this section pertinent to your club:

Within football there are whispers about some clubs offering memberships to sponsors in contra deals that beef up membership figures artificially. Collingwood is the example given most frequently, with representatives of three clubs suggesting the Magpies had given away significant numbers of three-game memberships to Westpac staff as part of a new naming rights sponsorship for their Swan Street training base.
''It's pretty shameless the way they've done it,'' one club official said. ''I'd be surprised if they are the only ones but the scale of it is impressive.'' A top man from another club agreed: "It's not unusual. A lot of clubs are doing it and the benefits are obvious," he said. ''We don't run around like some clubs handing out a thousand memberships to sponsors here and there."
Collingwood admitted to The Age that memberships were included in the Westpac deal but would not say how many.
''We won't divulge confidential agreements with sponsors other than to say that Collingwood has always included memberships in its sponsorship and corporate packages,'' a spokesman said. The club emphatically denied that memberships were ''given away'' but admitted that some were part of contra deals.


full read here, all clubs do it... big differences between the counted audited memberships and the "bragging rights" memberships though



http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/the-truth-about-cats-and-dogs-20100514-v4od.html


Cheers

Paul D.

This isn't new. Clubs have been doing that for years. You can't tell me that's a surprise to you? Did you also know that each AFL coach has a membership to each of the other clubs?

I wasn't referring to 'standard practice' that's been going on for years.

I'm talking real fluffing of numbers. I've seen Hawthorn in the news as recently as a season or two ago, having membership drives where people were flaunting the fact that their pet/baby was now a member, and the practice was being encouraged.

Now don't get me wrong, it's actually more beneficial to the club comapred to the sponsorship deals, since the owner fo those pets is actually PAYING for the membership.

But there's more chance a Collingwood supporter from Westpac who was given a membership is actually going to GO to the football, as opposed to someone's poodle, who isn't even allowed in the stadium.

Not to mention that infants get in free.

 

[gaelictiogar]

Re: 21K at the MCG today??

I think you missed what was said in my post completely, I quoted 43,000 Victorian memberships. That is 43,000 Victorian memberships with at least 11 games with a cost of $170 for an adult, as we don't offer 3 game memberships. We have a 5 game reginal membership for those who live more than 120km away from the CBD and we have a 4 game Tasmania membership which entitles you entry to the tassie games.

In no way have we been the "most aggressive". That has defninately been Collingwood with the 3 game Melbourne memebership. In fact your own club bought out a 3 game membership a few weeks into this season, then went about upgrading the old $80 non-ticketed memberships to the 3 game to quickly boost the numbers (and they did this after I paid for a full Tigs membership, I want $100 back)

The disconnect as you call it would have be caused by weather, junior football and the fact it was Port.

By aggressive I meant in marketing and I wasn't insulting. Aggressive marketing is a plus.

Weather, junior football and Port are facts of life for everyone mate. The attendance was actually decent in the scheme of things. You got 21,000 because that is what you get VS Port when mid ladder. It is virtually identical to what you got when you last played them mid ladder at the G in 2003. the idea that a hawk side in 11th shoud be drawing 30,000 V Port is unsupported by any stats when they have not been top 4 or with the flag.

We don't actually disagree. I agree that Richmond have changed the Tiger Insider to a ticketed membership simply to boost audited numbers and would not be at all surprised if we hit 50,000 next year off yet another basement. Indeed its high time we startedplaying the media numbers game at richmond since people seem to look only at superficial numbers. I agree Collingwoods 3 games have boosted theirs as well.

My general point is that the membership headline numbers for virtually all clubs are becoming increasingly meaningless in terms of matchgoing support

 

[Lurkalot]

Re: 21K at the MCG today??

the hawks could never draw a crowd, I dont know why people are suprised

The 53k membership number is absolute bullocks, I mean really, they have the worst membership/attendance figures in the afl, which confirms that the membership numbers are fudged big time.

How would we go about fudging these membership no's given they are audited by the AFL?

What it proves is Hawthorn has the ability to turn supporters into members at a rate higher than other Victorian clubs.

I'm talking real fluffing of numbers. I've seen Hawthorn in the news as recently as a season or two ago, having membership drives where people were flaunting the fact that their pet/baby was now a member, and the practice was being encouraged.

Now don't get me wrong, it's actually more beneficial to the club comapred to the sponsorship deals, since the owner fo those pets is actually PAYING for the membership.

I call bullshit. Rhayader provides a Link to an article - you should try to do the same.

 

[Charlotte]

Re: 21K at the MCG today??

First off, of 21,000 at the G, 20,000 were hawthorn, we were just up in our reserved seat
As previously stated, we don't have 3 game memberships.
Now, why were we at the MCG and the clearly bigger game of Collingwood and doggies at Etihad, well that goes all the way back to St.Kilda abandoning their Tassie agreement. Due to contracts at the time between the AFL and Tassie (and St.Kilda) at least 4 games a year had to be played down there, with 2 being Hawthorn and 2 being St.Kilda. Saints abandoned the deal depite its finacial rewards due to their bad record down there. The AFL were stuck with having to find a team to play 2 extra home games down there. Hawks took on the contract, with the agreement that all home games in Victoria would be played at the MCG, not Etihad.

So you may not have 3 game membership - but you do have Tasmanian Membership and non match day memberships. (wonder how many members are non match day members?)

Perhaps the AFL need to look at that agreement and re-write it. Considering they would have made a lot more money out of the MCG had Collingwood v doggies been there.

 

[TimmehJC"]

Re: 21K at the MCG today??

By aggressive I meant in marketing and I wasn't insulting. Aggressive marketing is a plus.

Weather, junior football and Port are facts of life for everyone mate. The attendance was actually decent in the scheme of things. You got 21,000 because that is what you get VS Port when mid ladder. It is virtually identical to what you got when you last played them mid ladder at the G in 2003. the idea that a hawk side in 11th shoud be drawing 30,000 V Port is unsupported by any stats when they have not been top 4 or with the flag.

We don't actually disagree. I agree that Richmond have changed the Tiger Insider to a ticketed membership simply to boost audited numbers and would not be at all surprised if we hit 50,000 next year off yet another basement. Indeed its high time we startedplaying the media numbers game at richmond since people seem to look only at superficial numbers. I agree Collingwoods 3 games have boosted theirs as well.

My general point is that the membership headline numbers for virtually all clubs are becoming increasingly meaningless in terms of matchgoing support

Just trying to destroy the myth that the 53,000 comes from 3 game memberships. Tassie is factor, and I'll cop that.

 

[TimmehJC"]

Re: 21K at the MCG today??

So you may not have 3 game membership - but you do have Tasmanian Membership and non match day memberships. (wonder how many members are non match day members?)

Perhaps the AFL need to look at that agreement and re-write it. Considering they would have made a lot more money out of the MCG had Collingwood v doggies been there.

We do, we have about 10,000 Tassie, leaving 43,000 ticketed 11 game minimum Vic memberships.
Maybe the AFL should rewrite the agreement, and while they're at it schedule the Saints to 2 home games in Tassie.

 

[Arden]

Re: What's the story with Hawthorn?

We see this same thread started up every year for the mid winter Hawthorn vs Port game. It's typical North Melbourne supporter insecurity for you.

Poor Hawthorn. Apparently they are the only club that the AFL schedules to play during the middle of winter, while everyone plays their games on balmy, late sping afternoons.

 

[Charlotte]

Re: 21K at the MCG today??

We do, we have about 10,000 Tassie, leaving 43,000 ticketed 11 game minimum Vic memberships.
Maybe the AFL should rewrite the agreement, and while they're at it schedule the Saints to 2 home games in Tassie.

And in the remainf 43,000 memberships how many are
- Non-match day members
-interstate and regional members.

I know saints have some of these types of memberships but I am not trying to claim our membership base is the best.

And if saints don't want to or don't need to sell themselves then why should we play in tassie. I was saying that the AFL would have to look at the attendances for the two games on Sunday and go "perhaps Hawks don't need to play all their home games at MCG expecially those against interstate teams when only 21K turn up"

 

[Papa G]

Re: 21K at the MCG today??

Ohh it's very important. I'm happy enough where we sit considering yesterdays turnout and our ladder position. While we're discussing this, what's up with North at 2nd last?

Club Avg attendance 2010

Collingwood 58633
Carlton 51787
Essendon 50583
Geelong 44752
Hawthorn 43396
Richmond 38137
Western Bulldogs 35697
St Kilda 35357
Melbourne 34753
Fremantle 34006
West Coast 32386
Adelaide 30858
Brisbane 30564
Sydney 28114
North Melbourne 26687
Port Adelaide 25194

If anything, you dunderheads should be looking at this stat. It tells a lot. It shows that when the home side plays an interstate team, where there is minimal away team support, crowds are less. It's not bloody rocket science. Hawthorn probably got 5-7,000 less than they probaly would have expected for this game, but it's hardly a disaster.

 

[Rhayader]

Re: 21K at the MCG today??

You're aware that pretty much every team now has 3 game and 11 game memberships yeah? Its a way all clubs have boosted numbers.

This isn't new. Clubs have been doing that for years. You can't tell me that's a surprise to you? Did you also know that each AFL coach has a membership to each of the other clubs?

I wasn't referring to 'standard practice' that's been going on for years.

I'm talking real fluffing of numbers. I've seen Hawthorn in the news as recently as a season or two ago, having membership drives where people were flaunting the fact that their pet/baby was now a member, and the practice was being encouraged.

Now don't get me wrong, it's actually more beneficial to the club compared to the sponsorship deals, since the owner fo those pets is actually PAYING for the membership.

But there's more chance a Collingwood supporter from Westpac who was given a membership is actually going to GO to the football, as opposed to someone's poodle, who isn't even allowed in the stadium.

Not to mention that infants get in free.

Sorry, I didn't realise what you were saying was "new" (especially given, as I already said, all clubs are doing it now). You threw the stones, I was just reminding you about your glass house...

I think Hawks have a lot of interstate members. I'm a regional member - if I didn't live 4000km away from Melbourne, I'd be a full game member and go to every game. I know plenty of paid up Hawks members who don't live in Victoria and might attend one or two games a year - just goes to show how successful the club has been on a national scale.

I think you'll just have to get used to the idea that footy is no longer about a dozen suburbs in Melbourne. And while big crowds are a great thing to have each week, interstate/regional members are no less important in the scheme of things. With Tassie members ... good on the Hawks for seeing the market, offering a product and tailoring membership packages to suit it. It's no wonder we're so profitable of late.

I can't justify the expense of a full membership to attend zero games, so I buy the 5-game regional package for $100 or whatever it is and put the extra money into the club through other avenues (merchandise, raffles etc). If the money is coming in to the club and it's making a healthy profit, good on us. And if some of those things include silly membership packages for people with extra money to buy, but that don't count towards the audited numbers, who cares? Game day membership is just one part of the overall revenue stream.

Fact is, Hawks don't and won't have as many fans as Collingwood and will likely never attract the crowds that the Pies regularly do. Yet we have almost as many people who are prepared to dip into their pockets and contribute to the club - regardless of being able to attend games regularly and easily. TBH, the Pies should be talking about 100,000 paid members with their supporter base...

Cheers

Paul D.

 

[Hoser]

Re: 21K at the MCG today??

If anything, you dunderheads should be looking at this stat. It tells a lot. It shows that when the home side plays an interstate team, where there is minimal away team support, crowds are less. It's not bloody rocket science. Hawthorn probably got 5-7,000 less than they probaly would have expected for this game, but it's hardly a disaster.

You may as well have highlighted North as well. We have actually played most of our home games against interstate sides which kind of proves your specific point.

And you're right, it is hardly a disaster for Hawthorn at all.

If it was North on the other hand........................

well.............., I'm sure we all get the point of the thread by now.

 

[FisherHawk]

Re: 21K at the MCG today??

Only 9 Port Adelaide match attendances over past 5 seasons at the MCG excluding finals and It's fairly obvious that the crowds don't turn up to their games. From the 6 Melbourne clubs they have played there, the Hawks and Pies are the only 2 clubs to pull more than 30k against them.

2005 v Carlton 16371
2006 v Melbourne 24283
2007 v Melbourne 16266 v Richmond 22395
2008 v North Melbourne 22144
2009 v Hawthorn 33274 v Collingwood 34793 v Melbourne 15888
2010 v Hawthorn 21287

 

[Surreal O Reilly]

Re: What's the story with Hawthorn?

Poor Hawthorn. Apparently they are the only club that the AFL schedules to play during the middle of winter, while everyone plays their games on balmy, late sping afternoons.

No, you don't get it, mate. I couldn't care less about crowd figures. As long as my club can pay the bills without AFL handouts, it doesn't bother me what type of crowds we draw. Football fans who get caught up in all of that crap are barking up the wrong tree. I guess the attendances figures mean more to you Norf fans because you're all a bit paranoid and feeling under the pump.

I was simply stating the reality that Hawthorn vs Port on a rainy, freezing cold Sunday arvo is never going to be a big draw. There is no argument about this. Channel 7's free-to-air coverage looms as an attractive option when the weather is shit. It's not as though people have already made plans to go to the game with all their Port Adelaide mates.

It makes no sense for North fans to point the finger at their rivals. This will not help them to survive or prosper. They've drawn shit crowds for years and need to do better in this area.

At North Melbourne's AGM last January, your club president James Brayshaw acknowledged your crowds weren't good enough: "Bigger crowds would also result in a better draw (more Friday nights) and more free-to-air coverage. We need to acknowledge there’s a problem and fix it."

CEO, Eugene Arocca also said growth in match day attendances was a key challenge for 2010 and presented three ideas to improve in this area:

• Looking at investing a staff position in “fan development”
• Learning and Life Centre may contribute to growing the supporter-base
• Cited footage of GF week training session at Arden St in 1998 where 5-7,000 people attended – need to get those fans back

Sounds to me like you're all a bit paranoid and muddled. You criticise the media for pointing out your club's woes, but when your club chiefs say the exact same thing, you give them a standing ovation. It's kind of sad...