I went to the Demon shop and asked about new jumpers. The guy said they should be available just before Xmas, they're just finalising sponsorships.

Great. Thanks for that J-Riv.

Considering we had -ve equity at the end of 2009 to think it will be hovering just over $6mill at the end of 2010/2011 is a pretty damn good result (not withstanding the fact that there could be future revaluations downwards of the Bentley club venture where applicable). This acquisition is a gain and would make up part of Other Comprehensive Income on the P & L.

I'm quite interested to see where our operating revenue is at, if "our business" constitutes operating revenue then $40 mill is quite an improvement and explains how we can cover our bigger budget,

I am sure that there is an accountant or two out there who can explain it fully. Yes, it is a balance sheet item, but it will show up on one side and must be matched by something on the other side. This will result in an extra-ordinary item that will produce an inflated profit. If you could do the same deal year after year, it would not be extra-ordinary. Melbourne have always been pretty good about these sorts of things and are usually up front with the underlying profit/loss without extra-ordinary items.

Not an accountant but I remember when we acquired it we took 2 million of it's debt while the value of it was 5 million. The 3 mill that is left over would be considered a gain and contributes to the profit

Not an accountant but I remember when we acquired it we took 2 million of it's debt while the value of it was 5 million. The 3 mill that is left over would be considered a gain and contributes to the profit

The net value is $6mill.

$9mill as a gross asset and $3mill in assumed liabilities.

What if the Bentleigh has a whole pile of unpaid bills stuffed in a draw like we did when we were at the junction .Then we're really screwed.

We are a poor club, and hopefully it's moving in the right direction with good asset foundations and membership growth.

The Pies are targeting 100,000 members

The Tigers are targeting 75,000 members

The Demons are targeting 40,000 members

So we've got a fair bit of work to do in terms of further membership growth and the growth corridor of the greater Casey region, our club's marketing as well as performing well on the football field will hopefully address membership numbers and revenue streams.

The whole membership thing is interesting because it really means jack [censored] aside from being an indication of install base, which is important.

Collingwood is targeting 100,000 members, but what % of that go to over 70% of matches? Would be an interesting statistic.

I think Melbourne probably has one of if not the highest % of supporters:member ratio. Our support numbers are low, but I don't necessarily see that as a bad thing. It's really just about expanding the brand as much as possible within what you've got, expanding team spirit, getting as high a % of your members to the games as possible, and ultimately being successful on the field.

Naked truth is that we will never be as big as Collingwood. It's too late not in this media climate. But we have potential as a "boutique" club with its home at the MCG. We need to embrace that as much as possible, and I think we already are.

Shouldn't that be "Dees in the Blue"? We are either in the Blue or in the Red - we are Melbourne

At least get your facts right. Tigers are targeting 50K members - and are currently at under 4000. Last year, Richmond only had 3000+ more members than us in any case. As for Collingwood ... dog memberships, 3 match memberships etc. etc., but sure, they're the MU and Barcelona of the AFL. With 71K members last year, you'd imagine they'll eventually get to 100K - but it won't be for a year or three.

Collingwood is quite openly limited in the number of members they can have, 70K is getting to big in terms of numbers, depends how many are 3-5 game memberships ect

The MCG only has room for 100K people and it cant just be filled by Collingwood fans. Obviously not everyone will come to every game, i think Essendon are making the majority of there memberships allocated seating for similar reasons.

Maybe ending up like WC and Freo with a huge membership and resale of tickets, still needs to be 30-40K available to most games against VIC teams imo for atmosphere

I liked this bit from CS - "Our business has gone from $25 million to $40 million in a few years and we are looking OK for finishing in the black this year.'

We are spending a lot more - which we had to do - but we aren't going into debt.

I wonder if any of this is due to financial support from our mystery philanthropist members - as hinted in other threads on Demonland.

Collingwood is quite openly limited in the number of members they can have, 70K is getting to big in terms of numbers, depends how many are 3-5 game memberships ect

The MCG only has room for 100K people and it cant just be filled by Collingwood fans. Obviously not everyone will come to every game, i think Essendon are making the majority of there memberships allocated seating for similar reasons.

Maybe ending up like WC and Freo with a huge membership and resale of tickets, still needs to be 30-40K available to most games against VIC teams imo for atmosphere

What would happen is you take the MCG capacity (100K) minus MCC reserve (22K?) minus AFL members reserve (22K?) and the Pies can be left with the rest as ticketed members for their home games. There is no obligation to leave seats open for opposition/away fans and they will make more money off fully ticketed memberships (like Freo/WCE). Essendon are limited in their memberships due to playing at Docklands which has a capacity of 50K.

As mentioned some of those 70K members are 3 game members (and pet members?) The best way to look at it then in terms of who benefits most from their memberships is revenue from memberships. And I'd say Collingwood are still a long way in front.

The Pies made $3.8 million profit this year. The Hawks have made ~$15 million profit since about 2007. The Pies had a turnover of $75 million this year (compared to our $40 million.) This is what we are up against and why we need to continue to improve and implement strategies to increase our revenue through memberships, sponsorships, merchandise, functions etc and whatever other means we can (winning some prizemoney wouldn't hurt either).

in both of the 2010 and 2011 seasons we ranked 8th for attendances (avg, home and away) and 11th for memberships... bear in mind its 17 sides in 2011. The leauge avg. membership last year was 38,257, ours was 36,937. It's also worth noting it is pretty tight between 3rd and 11th, with an extra 3300 members we'd be 8th, and with an extra 8000 we'd be 3rd... and this is on the back of 6 pretty damn awful seasons in a row. so I don't get why we have this reputation as having poor support when the numbers clearly don't indicate it.

At least get your facts right. Tigers are targeting 50K members - and are currently at under 4000. Last year, Richmond only had 3000+ more members than us in any case. As for Collingwood ... dog memberships, 3 match memberships etc. etc., but sure, they're the MU and Barcelona of the AFL. With 71K members last year, you'd imagine they'll eventually get to 100K - but it won't be for a year or three.

I have my facts right. All 3 clubs have openly expressed these targets. Pert, Gale and Jimmy and Schwab are my references. The tigers have the 75K/3 finals in 5 years, the Pies have their 100 thousand target, Pert has recently expressed this numerous times and hinted it could be done earlier than expected. And of course the demons are targeting 40,000. These are the targets that have been set.

I have my facts right. All 3 clubs have openly expressed these targets. Pert, Gale and Jimmy and Schwab are my references. The tigers have the 75K/3 finals in 5 years, the Pies have their 100 thousand target, Pert has recently expressed this numerous times and hinted it could be done earlier than expected. And of course the demons are targeting 40,000. These are the targets that have been set.

You're comparing apples to oranges. The target this season for Richmond is 50 000. It's on their membership page. The 40K for us that you mentioned is also for this season.

The implication in your post is that we're way behind Richmond for membership, or even for targeted membership. Which is simply not the case. Richmond might end up being around 10% ahead of us this year, same as last year. Nothing like the nearly 50% that your post suggests.

You're comparing apples to oranges. The target this season for Richmond is 50 000. It's on their membership page. The 40K for us that you mentioned is also for this season.

The implication in your post is that we're way behind Richmond for membership, or even for targeted membership. Which is simply not the case. Richmond might end up being around 10% ahead of us this year, same as last year. Nothing like the nearly 50% that your post suggests.

The implication is nothing of the sort and not my intention, only your interpretation binga. It's just list of the current targets that have been mentioned in the press. It didn't refer that they were all targets for 2012. They are simply the current targets being promoted and to work towards.

It matters very little. If I wanted to highlight the goals for 2012 I would have. Fwiw, Pert has not given any forecast target as such for next year except to say he thinks they will have 100,000 members in two years time. Gale has promoted the 75K/3 finals in 5 years time target. And Melbourne last year season announced the "target 40,000". That's all bing.

Edited November 21, 201113 yr by H_T
correction

What would happen is you take the MCG capacity (100K) minus MCC reserve (22K?) minus AFL members reserve (22K?) and the Pies can be left with the rest as ticketed members for their home games. There is no obligation to leave seats open for opposition/away fans and they will make more money off fully ticketed memberships (like Freo/WCE). Essendon are limited in their memberships due to playing at Docklands which has a capacity of 50K.

As mentioned some of those 70K members are 3 game members (and pet members?) The best way to look at it then in terms of who benefits most from their memberships is revenue from memberships. And I'd say Collingwood are still a long way in front.

The Pies made $3.8 million profit this year. The Hawks have made ~$15 million profit since about 2007. The Pies had a turnover of $75 million this year (compared to our $40 million.) This is what we are up against and why we need to continue to improve and implement strategies to increase our revenue through memberships, sponsorships, merchandise, functions etc and whatever other means we can (winning some prizemoney wouldn't hurt either).

Yeah what you say makes alot of sense.

I just dont believe that Collingwood will be allowed to play games where you either have to be a Collingwood, AFL, MCC member to see them.

The AFL will surely make available some tickets if not 10K or so?

Or as mentioned reticket games when people dont activate ther membership for that week??

Also in 5 years time you wont be gauranteed finals and success as was marketed this year ect when Collingwood were outright favorites for the flag ect

They will still be huge but i dont think they will get 100K members or close to it unless they are super successful (in flag contention)

Sure Collingwood will get 100,000 members, as i hope one day the MFC can do the same. No reason why it can't be done with clever hard work.

Imagine an MCG Lockout with just an opposition cheer squad representing an MFC oponent. It's what Geelong do now.

We must aim high. We are only a poor club if we continue to think we are that.

Interesting to hear last week Pert say that the CFC will be looking at packages for non-game day members, they have that many. ie. Supporters who wish to be members but cannot attend - like those who are overseas, etc. He had no hesitation in saying they will achieve the feat of 100,000 members and he thought it will happen sooner than later.

Interesting to hear last week Pert say that the CFC will be looking at packages for non-game day members, they have that many. ie. Supporters who wish to be members but cannot attend - like those who are overseas, etc. He had no hesitation in saying they will achieve the feat of 100,000 members and he thought it will happen sooner than later.

Of course it will happen. Watching your team on TV will be just as important to clubs as going to the game. A membership will be like a share portfolio.

We are only a poor club if we continue to think we are that.

We are a poor club for as long as our books suggest as much

We are a poor club for as long as our books suggest as much

is that the actual case now and going forward? Not to say we still have much work still ahead of the club

is that the actual case now and going forward? Not to say we still have much work still ahead of the club

comparitivley id still put us in the lower half of clubs.

comparitivley id still put us in the lower half of clubs.

Fair call but i still consider the building blocks put together over the past 3-4 years are very strong. That of course depends on success on the park sustained.

understand where you are coming from but i dont agree with the general philosophy that by changing the mindset of supporters our club will become more succesful

understand where you are coming from but i dont agree with the general philosophy that by changing the mindset of supporters our club will become more succesful

Nor do i....i think the changes are actually coming from within the club.

$25 Mill was going through our club not long ago...now it is around $40 Mill...that is certainly a positive, as long as it is growing.

Interesting thread here, will be good to see the full data set:

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=892065