I too think that this type of narrative has a detrimental impact on the club. I think the example a previous poster gave is a good one, where someone considering adopting North as a team reads something like this and chooses another club.
The same scenario exists with sponsor potentially thinking about joining. Why choose to sponsor North, when they could sponsor a St Kilda or Dogs or any of the other smaller clubs which can give them the same exposure without the negative connotations.
These types of things have far ranging implications. I don't know about pandering to Wilson like we did with Damo (although that did seem to work). However we certainly need to do much more to grow the Melbourne based membership. The more members, the more interest in sponsors and free to air TV coverage.
The work the club has done on the finances is great, but we are getting left behind in the membership stakes and we need to do more there. Selling cheap 4 game memberships in Tassie is not enough.
The same scenario exists with sponsor potentially thinking about joining. Why choose to sponsor North, when they could sponsor a St Kilda or Dogs or any of the other smaller clubs which can give them the same exposure without the negative connotations.
These types of things have far ranging implications. I don't know about pandering to Wilson like we did with Damo (although that did seem to work). However we certainly need to do much more to grow the Melbourne based membership. The more members, the more interest in sponsors and free to air TV coverage.
The work the club has done on the finances is great, but we are getting left behind in the membership stakes and we need to do more there. Selling cheap 4 game memberships in Tassie is not enough.