2012 Membership Tally

[gaelictiogar]

Pretty close to right but I'd think Essendon to still be in front of us.
Our marketing department has been somewhat bolstered in the last 6 months, so we'll see what that wrings out.

I'm very surprised for Richmonds Membership Revenue to have been higher than Carltons, if it was indeed the case.
On face value it looks as though our marriage with Etihad is hurting a lot.

Given the Hird factor yes Essendon really should have been higher or on a par. Minus the Hird factor I would expect the expectation surrounding Carlton to see them higher than Essendon.

If Carlton are able to establish themselves in the top4/6 over the next few years then they really should be able to up the ante.

 

[Tas]

We don't even have pet memberships. Try again.

Doesn't that force people to upgrade Mittens to a ticketed membership?

We have a pet membership but it isn't counted in the total. It just gives people some pet related products i think.

 

[Kramer1]

Interesting stats Wookie.

I an not, honestly not, bagging Carlton in saying there is a problem.

Taking into account expectation of success and ladder position over the past couple of years Carlton should not be 5th in membership revenue. A well functioning Carlton marketing machine in the circumstances should be 2nd to Collingwood. That is my point. In the circumstances Carlton are in I would expect both Richmond and Essendon to do likewise. Carlton shoud have had more membership income than Richmond ( basementing year on year ) and Hawthorn ( cheapest average memberships ) last year.

Not bagging in all honesty. I'm actually surprised we had higher income than you last year given onfield realities.

Not sure that the relationship between on-field performance and membership revenue is as strong as you think. We had consecutive years of record membership when we were bottoming out. Not to say on-field performance isn't a factor...but what happens behind the scenes is far more important IMO.

Looking at the Victorian clubs it is no coincidence that the clubs that have had their shit together off-field for the longest periods of time are at the top of the tree. Settled administrations who are able to work to multi year plans, and likely devoting significant resources to their direct marketing arms.

Forget the order (it's really only a few percentage points separating a number of clubs membership revenues), Carlton, Richmond & Essendon are in the same boat - huge latent supporter bases that are not yet reflected in membership takings. Others have shown it can be done...in reality Carlton are tracking a couple of years behind where we need to be.

 

[HARKER]

If Carlton are able to establish themselves in the top4/6 over the next few years then they really should be able to up the ante.

You'd think so.

I also suspect that we may well be talking to the boys at The MCG, for post 2014.
Not sure this Etihad deal is doing us too many favours right now.

 

[telsor]

We don't even have pet memberships. Try again.

But you clearly allow troll memberships.

 

[BrizzyBlue]

Blues total now 24,066. Not sure if that was at Friday or there are still more to count.

 

[BlueDW]

A compromised draw, 4 games at a 20k capicity stadium in Tasmania, and the AFL refusing to give us blockbusters would all play a part.

Are you saying that the Hawks made a decision to play games away from its heartland supporters in search of the almighty dollar?

Trolling can work 2 ways mate, personally if being part of the so called "BIG 4" means I get to see my club play less times a year then I am happy to accept that my club aren't a member of this auspicious club.

Go Blues.

 

[tigerfansince86]

Where's Hawthorns home ground, do they have one?

 

[The Smaller Warrior]

Port:

(9 January) 17,070

 

[Hornet]

Blues total now 24,066. Not sure if that was at Friday or there are still more to count.

FWIW... I paid and picked up my membership from the club today and I had to ask the guy at the membership department about our published figures.

He claimed that our figures are ticketed members only because that's what the AFL report around June. He also said that we sell 1000's of other forms of "memberships" and are waiting on AFL clarification before including them into our total.

Also - ahead of last years record at this stage and expecting 45-50k (ticketed) members this year.

 

[Hornberger]

As of 9/1

Club                Members
Collingwood          49,334 
West Coast           41,810
Hawthorn             41,674
Essendon             31,380  
Richmond             26,284
Carlton              24,066
Geelong              23,800
Melbourne            21,159
Western Bulldogs     18,703
Port Adelaide        17,700
North Melbourne      17,158
St Kilda             14,390
Sydney               13,257
Brisbane             11,202
Gold Coast            8,300
GWS                   3,749
Adelaide              1,250*
Fremantle               N/A

*New Members

 

[timdee]

Geelong as of 09/01: 26,917

 

[Matz]

As of 9/1

Club                Members
Collingwood          49,334 
West Coast           41,810
Hawthorn             41,674
Essendon             31,380  
Richmond             26,284
Carlton              24,066
Geelong              23,800
Melbourne            21,159
Western Bulldogs     18,703
Port Adelaide        17,700
North Melbourne      17,158
St Kilda             14,390
Sydney               13,257
Brisbane             11,202
Gold Coast            8,300
GWS                   3,749
Adelaide              1,250*
Fremantle               N/A

*New Members

Where did you get this info from?

 

[dave10]

Interesting stats Wookie.

I an not, honestly not, bagging Carlton in saying there is a problem.

Taking into account expectation of success and ladder position over the past couple of years Carlton should not be 5th in membership revenue. A well functioning Carlton marketing machine in the circumstances should be 2nd to Collingwood. That is my point. In the circumstances Carlton are in I would expect both Richmond and Essendon to do likewiise. Carlton shoud have had more membership income than Richmond ( basementing year on year ) and Hawthorn ( cheapest average memberships ) last year.

Not bagging in all honesty. I'm actually surprised we had higher income than you last year given onfield realities.

Call me a sceptic but something is not right with the figures we are referring to on the last page (page 34) regarding revenue generated from membership + gate receiptes. Not that they are not actually 'right' but we are not correctly comparing apples with apples.

To prove the point, Carlton revenue is $1.6M more than Essendon. Now Essendon sold 50,000 memberships as well as a record 19,000 annual reserved seats. It sold out the High Mark (high end membership) and all seats on level 2 at the Dome / MCG. I won't believe for one minute Carlton generate more from membership and gate receipts than Essendon. Same goes for Richmond. And to prove the point beyond question, Melbourne generate 9.7M from its 36,000 members Vs $10.3M for Essendon and its 50,000 members and 19,000 annual reserved seats. I suggest that for an apples with apples comparision I would believe Collingwood are a long way in front, next Essendon and Hawthorn on a similar footing with Carlton and Richmond a bit futher back. In this instance literally reading the financial notes to the accounts can be misleading.

 

[Abaddon]

FWIW... I paid and picked up my membership from the club today and I had to ask the guy at the membership department about our published figures.

He claimed that our figures are ticketed members only because that's what the AFL report around June. He also said that we sell 1000's of other forms of "memberships" and are waiting on AFL clarification before including them into our total.

Also - ahead of last years record at this stage and expecting 45-50k (ticketed) members this year.

In 2011 I know that Richmond and Essendon both tried to claim other forms of small fan donations as memberships to artificially inflate their membership figures however these did not withstand the AFLs audits and in fact Richmond in reality had barely 40,000 members in 2011. Essendon around 41,000. It left a lot of Richmond membership staff and unfortunately their fans red faced and embarrassed.

 

[Nick Lions]

Does anyone know what Gold Coast's membership figures, at this time last year, were like in comparison to GWS current figure?

 

[AstuteTiger]

In 2011 I know that Richmond and Essendon both tried to claim other forms of small fan donations as memberships to artificially inflate their membership figures however these did not withstand the AFLs audits and in fact Richmond in reality had barely 40,000 members in 2011. Essendon around 41,000. It left a lot of Richmond membership staff and unfortunately their fans red faced and embarrassed.

Its people like u that give bigfooty a bad name....first off we didnt try n pass anything off read the below paragraphs as this will put to bed ur embarrassing post above, u really should do some research b4 posting.....and lmfaoooooo no one at the membership dept or fans were red faced that is an utter lie and u r trolling and should b carded....

For the umpteenth time this is why some of the figures varied but there will b no such thing in 2012 due to the AFL's changing of counting memberships...

I posted during the year so ill reiterate for the tigers non ticketed/access, we had over 7,000 but they were "Baby Tiger & Tiger Cubs Club", real people but under 6 yrs old memberships and U6's get in for free anyway....to have it included in the ticketed figures we needed to pay $7 a barcode most clubs hawks, pies etc do this we didnt to save 50K, ive had lengthy discussions with our membership dept on this subject and also spoken to the AFL that if someone joining up is a "human being" they should b included "barcode or not" cause U6's get in for free anyway...I also stated as an example to further highlight my point that if both Collingwood and Richmond have 7,000 U6 kids members but collingwood pay the $7 for the barcode to appear on the membership card and richmomd dont its grossly unfair that our figure isnt recognized as match-day when in reality the person joining is a real person and has entry for free anyway as being U6....the AFL membership operator agreed with my sentiments and said they would look into this anomaly further which im sure they have by now....

Changes for 2012: For those who have been wondering about the different methods of counting memberships- the AFL have made some changes to how they are reported. Access and non-access membership numbers will now be rolled up into one consolidated membership which means that the number the clubs report will be identical to the number that the AFL report.

 

[The_Wookie]

Changes for 2012: For those who have been wondering about the different methods of counting memberships- the AFL have made some changes to how they are reported. Access and non-access membership numbers will now be rolled up into one consolidated membership which means that the number the clubs report will be identical to the number that the AFL report.

People keep saying this, but I havent seen anything from the AFL on it. If someone can supply a link that would be awesome.

 

[gaelictiogar]

Call me a sceptic but something is not right with the figures we are referring to on the last page (page 34) regarding revenue generated from membership + gate receiptes. Not that they are not actually 'right' but we are not correctly comparing apples with apples.

To prove the point, Carlton revenue is $1.6M more than Essendon. Now Essendon sold 50,000 memberships as well as a record 19,000 annual reserved seats. It sold out the High Mark (high end membership) and all seats on level 2 at the Dome / MCG. I won't believe for one minute Carlton generate more from membership and gate receipts than Essendon. Same goes for Richmond. And to prove the point beyond question, Melbourne generate 9.7M from its 36,000 members Vs $10.3M for Essendon and its 50,000 members and 19,000 annual reserved seats. I suggest that for an apples with apples comparision I would believe Collingwood are a long way in front, next Essendon and Hawthorn on a similar footing with Carlton and Richmond a bit futher back. In this instance literally reading the financial notes to the accounts can be misleading.

You are surprised at the figures Dave....frankly so am I. I am truthfully surprised at a basement Richmond outearning all but the GF duo but unless there is some suggestion of underhandedness or falsity somewhere the reality is that the figures are the figures whereas your suggestion is a hunch.

Collingwood have shown what a Big 4 club based at the G with a consistently top 4 team can achieve in terms of membership revenue. I'm hoping Richmond can follow suit. Both Carlton and Essendon are hampered by the Dome. That is the reality. With a top 4 team there is almost no limit on Essendon's growth potential ( your armchair fanbase is as big as Collingwoods ) but the Dome is no help.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

In 2011 I know that Richmond and Essendon both tried to claim other forms of small fan donations as memberships to artificially inflate their membership figures however these did not withstand the AFLs audits and in fact Richmond in reality had barely 40,000 members in 2011. Essendon around 41,000. It left a lot of Richmond membership staff and unfortunately their fans red faced and embarrassed.

Actually Richmond declared very early in the season it was changing the way it counted its members from the AFL measure, because it considered anyone who signed up a member of our club, regardless of whether they had match access or not.

Not sure how they can be embarrassed about something they said to the media themselves at the start of the season

 

[BLue_Bloys]

Actually Richmond declared very early in the season it was changing the way it counted its members from the AFL measure, because it considered anyone who signed up a member of our club, regardless of whether they had match access or not.

Not sure how they can be embarrassed about something they said to the media themselves at the start of the season

Do they have voting rights? Personally that's how I would measure membership numbers.

Official member or not, Richmond do very well revenue wise, good on them

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Do they have voting rights? Personally that's how I would measure membership numbers.

Official member or not, Richmond do very well revenue wise, good on them

Off a VERY rusty memory, I believe interstaters and the like do, I'm not sure about the kids.

Voting rights is a tough one though, because of the different voting structures between clubs. I understand some clubs restrict voting rights to social club members, and others have a different structure entirely (i.e. WCE)

In terms of the comparative measure, I think it comes down to what you want to measure. Raw memberships simply convey the number of supporters a club has, revenue reflects the financial benefit derived from them. Even this though is impacted by membership caps at Adelaide/WCE, interstate arrangements for Tassie Hawks supporters, and of course the clubs who dole out free memberships to corporate sponsors.

TBH its pretty much impossible to compare apples with apples because the club structures are so different.

 

[Haso]

As of 9/1

Brisbane             11,202

Lions membership is actually 11 737 as of 10/1, seen here:

http://membership.lions.com.au/

They have been a bit slack updating the main site.

 

[WWSD]

41,756. Up by 1,800 this time last year. Hello 60,000 members in 2012!

 

[BrizzyBlue]

Blues total now 24,066. Not sure if that was at Friday or there are still more to count.

That answers that question. Modest jump to 24, 411 as at today.