Thats why there going to thrive and were withering, Tassies 45 mins away, Darwins on the other side of planet, this club has no idea.

I hardly think Nth Melb are thriving.....I think they are below us on the membership ladder....

I hardly think Nth Melb are thriving.....I think they are below us on the membership ladder....

What club would you say has a better future?

What club would you say has a better future?

In the next ten years it's going to be hard for all Vic clubs......I believe that once we start to win a few game we will leave behind clubs like Nth and the Bulldogs.....I think that once the tanking crap is over and we have a steady year this club could be great again......Wins equal members....In 87,88 and a few years after we filled Waverley Park and the 'G' so we have supporters ....we just have to convert them into members....It can be done.

We were talking about members, were we not?

And I didn't know you loved to see 3-5 home games sold interstate...

And I believe with 2 games played up in Darwin in a few years time it will mean over $1m annually.

If we could have the same deal the Hawks had had i wouldnt hesitate to do that, but only in Tassie, its to late for that we [censored] around in Brisbane, Canberra and Darwin, now the Kangas have beaten us to the punch, who wouldnt want to sell 4 games a season to end up like the Hawks, playing finals every single season, 11 games at the MCG a season isnt working, no one turns up, who the hells going to fly to Darwin to watch a game of footy, its to expensive.

In the next ten years it's going to be hard for all Vic clubs......I believe that once we start to win a few game we will leave behind clubs like Nth and the Bulldogs.....I think that once the tanking crap is over and we have a steady year this club could be great again......Wins equal members....In 87,88 and a few years after we filled Waverley Park and the 'G' so we have supporters ....we just have to convert them into members....It can be done.

We have the supporters, there just dormant.

What is an NT member paying for?

An overpriced ticket to one game?

Get real people. Tassie members have 3 or 4 games at least to go to for NM and Haw and they are The Spirit away from Melbourne.

If you think we will ever get close to those numbers of members up there you are kidding yourself.

What are the majority of interstate members paying for? Given our recent history we should be doing better than 160 in the NT. As a revenue stream it is irrelevant but wrt member footprint it suggests we need to work on our packages a bit better.

The 5 gamer is probably a bad investment for a top ender if they are looking at a membership purely in value terms, no question. But do we offer a 3 gamer like some other clubs or have a targeted membership for top enders? If we want to grow in the top end beyond Government revenue then we need to capture the hearts of footy supporters and get an alignment even if it is a token membership.

Some clubs like the crows have tailored non ticketed memberships just for those supporters who can't get to games but want to support or feel part of the club, they are obviously cheaper but it is about getting names on the books, every bit counts.

Edit: ok, checked the site and armchair membership is one option although a tailored Darwin 3 gamer might also be an option, perhaps more viable when we play two games up there down the track - with a third game anywhere in the country QLD might be popular.

Those armchairs probably don't count in the 160 figure but 3 gamers I think would. We need to build on both of those IMO.

Edited February 3, 201312 yr by 1858

who the hells going to fly to Darwin to watch a game of footy, its to expensive.

I don't think we're playing in Darwin to attract Victorian supporters...

I don't think we're playing in Darwin to attract Victorian supporters...

Probably not, but they dont seem to be attracting Top End supporters, 160 members is a paltry number, 3800 for the kangas in Tassie is a terrific result.

so what are the long term benefits of being up there if there is only a potential of +-1000 members to tap into apart from an NT Government pay out?

Fighting for such a small market share seems a little strange.

To attract supporters. Not as good as a member but supporters do count some where.

Training in the heat.

Understanding the aboriginal.

TBH I haven't got a clue all I know is that there aren't that many Territorians who have a membership of any AFL club; for the reasons mtntioned.

To attract supporters. Not as good as a member but supporters do count some where.

Training in the heat.

Understanding the aboriginal.

TBH I haven't got a clue all I know is that there aren't that many Territorians who have a membership of any AFL club; for the reasons mtntioned.

then we are wasting our time...again. Whilst other clubs grow.

We just never get the marketing right. We take the leftovers too often.

For those with any reasonable intelligence, comparing the Tassie and NT markets is obviously a folly.

How about you compare our membership numbers in the NT, with those of Richmond, the Bulldogs and Port, who have all been trying to crack that market in recent years..?

I bet some of you don't even know what you're complaining about - the decision to focus on developing the NT as a secondary base, or our membership conversion rate in the NT.

For those with any reasonable intelligence, comparing the Tassie and NT markets is obviously a folly.

How about you compare our membership numbers in the NT, with those of Richmond, the Bulldogs and Port, who have all been trying to crack that market in recent years..?

I bet some of you don't even know what you're complaining about - the decision to focus on developing the NT as a secondary base, or our membership conversion rate in the NT.

could it be that Richmond Port & the bulldogs have realized it is a dead end market.

Jose you can't seriously be happy with a total of 160 members so far after 4 years.

I am content with it.

I don't see membership conversion in the NT being a KPI at this stage.

I am content with it.

I don't see membership conversion in the NT being a KPI at this stage.

fair enough.

I just do not see membership conversion in the NT.

And it is membership we do need..not in 5-10 years we need to increase it now.

Otherwise this old beast will never rise.

If the club is content with this strategy i am fascinated and a little shocked tbh.

Jose i am not disagreeing with what you say above.

But 160 members in 4 years is not good, that is what should be signed up in one game at a VFL level.

We are dealing with other clubs who have 50-75,000 members.

The strategy is not working is my point.

That is a cold hard fact if the membership figure is correct.

Maybe the strategy is 2 games by $700k = $1.4m per year plus some extra members as we go along.

Anyone else know where we can get $1.4m each year for 2 H & A games?

Maybe the strategy is 2 games by $700k = $1.4m per year plus some extra members as we go along.

Anyone else know where we can get $1.4m each year for 2 H & A games?

sure i get that. But it is not a long term strategy.

For crowds of 6.000 i am still working out how the NT Government can part with $700,000

There must be a reason but a tax write off is all i can see at this point.

fair enough.

I just do not see membership conversion in the NT.

And it is membership we do need..not in 5-10 years we need to increase it now.

Otherwise this old beast will never rise.

If the club is content with this strategy i am fascinated and a little shocked tbh.

I'm sure I've heard the same 5 years ago.

And what makes you think our push into the NT is all about increasing membership?

I think it'll be an eventual added bonus.

HG seems to have his finger on the NT pulse. I have always enjoyed his reports and comments.,

If he can continue to display his passion I am sure that the numbers will grow.

A reason to support is what is needed, success on the field and time spent there 2X games would hardlty do it but training and clinics will add to the presence

.

I repeat that we must "own the G" the history and tradition of being the first club will resonate.

Darwin is a great entry point for Asian recognition which can fit with Chinese involvement.

sure i get that. But it is not a long term strategy.

For crowds of 6.000 i am still working out how the NT Government can part with $700,000

There must be a reason but a tax write off is all i can see at this point.

In a recent article the NT Chief Minister made particular reference to the NT tourism industry and how MFC is a good advertising platform not only on game day but via social media, particularly off season training. Kakadu got a fair plug last December.

When you consider there is no test cricket and that the V8s are the only other real big showcase in Darwin they have to throw some money at something.

The community investment by the club looks set to grow as well.

sure i get that. But it is not a long term strategy.

For crowds of 6.000 i am still working out how the NT Government can part with $700,000

There must be a reason but a tax write off is all i can see at this point.

Why not?

If they continue to pay it, it's a great long term strategy.

I think you show a shallow understanding of why the NT govt wants it, and the potential benefits for us as a club and the NT itself.

Why not?

If they continue to pay it, it's a great long term strategy.

I think you show a shallow understanding of why the NT govt wants it, and the potential benefits for us as a club and the NT itself.

shallow i don't think so.

Alarm bells are ringing in the distance.

Could be the question i ask at next weeks AGM because i do not consider 160 members in 4 years even if you do.

In a recent article the NT Chief Minister made particular reference to the NT tourism industry and how MFC is a good advertising platform not only on game day but via social media, particularly off season training. Kakadu got a fair plug last December.

When you consider there is no test cricket and that the V8s are the only other real big showcase in Darwin they have to throw some money at something.

The community investment by the club looks set to grow as well.

ok. Then let the club tell the members exactly what is unfolding.

Because 160 members in 4 years doesn't look good at all.

ok. Then let the club tell the members exactly what is unfolding.

Because 160 members in 4 years doesn't look good at all.

But the money is nice...

ok. Then let the club tell the members exactly what is unfolding.

Because 160 members in 4 years doesn't look good at all.

Look, I'm as equally underwhelmed with that figure as you. As a natural bi-product of our involvement up the top-end I thought it would be a bit higher than that but it isn't a hanging offence. I doubt the figure reflects in any way shape or form how viable/successful the whole venture has been to the club.

Only the club knows internally whether the NT membership has a meaningful target associated with it although I doubt it would be a KPI as others have said.

I was surprised more than anything when I saw the figure but In the scheme of things it is more something to work on than worry about I guess.

With better performances and perhaps tailored packages down the track for top-enders, we could perhaps aim for the lofty heights of 500 in the next couple of years (which the club would be stoked with) but we don't know how important it is to the club to focus our efforts in that way. It may just see memberships as a bonus on top of the other revenue schemes in place.

Look, I'm as equally underwhelmed with that figure as you. As a natural bi-product of our involvement up the top-end I thought it would be a bit higher than that but it isn't a hanging offence. I doubt the figure reflects in any way shape or form how viable/successful the whole venture has been to the club.

Only the club knows internally whether the NT membership has a meaningful target associated with it although I doubt it would be a KPI as others have said.

I was surprised more than anything when I saw the figure but In the scheme of things it is more something to work on than worry about I guess.

With better performances and perhaps tailored packages down the track for top-enders, we could perhaps aim for the lofty heights of 500 in the next couple of years (which the club would be stoked with) but we don't know how important it is to the club to focus our efforts in that way. It may just see memberships as a bonus on top of the other revenue schemes in place.

i agree entirely. But i do hope that the club is not Happy with that figure (i mean it = 40 per year!!) & plans to be far more innovative i n the coming years.

This is the AFL we are talking here.