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.

Its the recovery time after the game thats the problem with Darwin, its virtually impossible to win the following week.

Interesting about the 2 games in 2015 and beyond.

the long term strategy is to play finals and win a premiership

when this is achieved our membership will rise from all quarters

our short term strategy is to make as much money as possible so we can compete with the big boys

playing in darwin for $700K/game seems to be a smart part of the strategy

Its the recovery time after the game thats the problem with Darwin, its virtually impossible to win the following week.

i know. I have lived in the kimberleys many years ago...that is another concern.

I get the impression we are up there because no one else wanted it.

the long term strategy is to play finals and win a premiershipwhen this is achieved our membership will rise from all quartersour short term strategy is to make as much money as possible so we can compete with the big boysplaying in darwin for $700K/game seems to be a smart part of the strategy

I hope this is as simple and understandable for others as it was for me.

Its the recovery time after the game thats the problem with Darwin, its virtually impossible to win the following week.

Jack viney doesn't need to recover after Darwin. Darwin needs to recover after Jack Viney. Sorry couldn't help myself.

Its the recovery time after the game thats the problem with Darwin, its virtually impossible to win the following week.

Last game prior to the bye would be very helpful here or a Friday night game leading onto a following Sunday game at the least. I notice that Brisbane travel to Adelaide the following week after playing us in Darwin so it is up to both the clubs (whoever they are) to make a case to the AFL.

Hopefully we can mitigate the effects ever so slightly though with our depth. If we can remain close to injury free, then it isn't unreasonable that we could rotate 4 or 5 players seamlessly if they don't come up. In previous years we haven't had the personnel to cover resting players but we've filled holes in recent times. Player management will become more prominent I think as our list improves.

In terms of on the field I don't mind Darwin if we can make it our stronghold. Pre seasons up there will help. If a Darwin game nearly guarantees a win because of our experience up there then it's all good. As crap as we were last year I was shocked we lost to port up there.

look i am all for new new openings and i backed the move to Darwin, but we should have got 160 members at the first game.

To be at that level now after 3-4 seasons is a very bad look.

Another Question for the AGM.

"We should have got 160 members at the first game."

Why?

"We should have got 160 members at the first game."

Why?

You would assume that after the first game was played and Darwin residents were informed that the MFC in Darwin is a long term strategy people would sign up for some sort of Darwin based membership (If there is one). 160 members after all this time is god awful and stinks of no effort to engage in a Darwin membership drive.

"We should have got 160 members at the first game."

Why?

because it is a very small number in terms of AFL Football.

FCS lift your game people, look up instead of down.

We have to get more popular otherwise the club will die ok.

As the oldest club in the world we should have at least double the membership we have.

To gain 160 members in 4 years is a sad joke, and i hate saying that.

because it is a very small number in terms of AFL Football.

FCS lift your game people, look up instead of down.

We have to get more popular otherwise the club will die ok.

As the oldest club in the world we should have at least double the membership we have.

To gain 160 members in 4 years is a sad joke, and i hate saying that.

Your wasting your time, do you think the Tigers would be there if they gained 160 in 4 yrs, Darwins to far away, they would have been better off in Canberra.

You would assume that after the first game was played and Darwin residents were informed that the MFC in Darwin is a long term strategy people would sign up for some sort of Darwin based membership (If there is one). 160 members after all this time is god awful and stinks of no effort to engage in a Darwin membership drive.

Really?

Cos Port, Richmond and the Bulldogs were all saying the same thing and trying to do the same.

We have won out, and now that we have maintained our claim on Darwin, we will build on our relationship with the city, establish it as ours in the eyes of the locals, and the memberships should follow.

But like I have said, they won't be the aim at this stage.

How many signatures from the China Experiment?

Really?

Cos Port, Richmond and the Bulldogs were all saying the same thing and trying to do the same.

We have won out, and now that we have maintained our claim on Darwin, we will build on our relationship with the city, establish it as ours in the eyes of the locals, and the memberships should follow.

But like I have said, they won't be the aim at this stage.

Have we won out or have other teams given up on Darwin? I'm happy to play in Darwin for the money we receive but I would have thought we would have established ourselves deeper into the community by now and it would have correlated in more then 160 members. I am just wondering if we are even attempting to have a membership base up there. We may just be up there for the money from the NT government.

Have we won out or have other teams given up on Darwin? I'm happy to play in Darwin for the money we receive but I would have thought we would have established ourselves deeper into the community by now and it would have correlated in more then 160 members. I am just wondering if we are even attempting to have a membership base up there. We may just be up there for the money from the NT government.

But have they given up because it is a dead market, or because we have a stronger hold on it?

Honestly, I don't see how anyone can expect us to convert a large amount of memberships, when we have been competing with other teams in the market.

Until the end of last season, they were still fighting for a share.

It's only now that we've just had a preseason camp there, and have solidified our relationship with the NT govt, and don't appear to have any direct competitors, that we can expect to make some inroads in that department.

Yet STILL, I don't see membership conversion as a current KPI for our push into Darwin.

That comes later, as a byproduct of the work we are doing now.

But have they given up because it is a dead market, or because we have a stronger hold on it?

Honestly, I don't see how anyone can expect us to convert a large amount of memberships, when we have been competing with other teams in the market.

Until the end of last season, they were still fighting for a share.

It's only now that we've just had a preseason camp there, and have solidified our relationship with the NT govt, and don't appear to have any direct competitors, that we can expect to make some inroads in that department.

Yet STILL, I don't see membership conversion as a current KPI for our push into Darwin.

That comes later, as a byproduct of the work we are doing now.

Spot on Jose.

We are in total agreement

i know. I have lived in the kimberleys many years ago...that is another concern.

I get the impression we are up there because no one else wanted it.

Is it impolite to ask why someone would have a long sojourn up North?

The usual answers are Tax Exile,Ex Con, Current Con or "just for a bit of a break".

But have they given up because it is a dead market, or because we have a stronger hold on it?

Honestly, I don't see how anyone can expect us to convert a large amount of memberships, when we have been competing with other teams in the market.

Until the end of last season, they were still fighting for a share.

It's only now that we've just had a preseason camp there, and have solidified our relationship with the NT govt, and don't appear to have any direct competitors, that we can expect to make some inroads in that department.

Yet STILL, I don't see membership conversion as a current KPI for our push into Darwin.

That comes later, as a byproduct of the work we are doing now.

I can't see how teams would believe we have a stronger hold on Darwin when we only have 160 members up there. Yes I agree that us up there alone and doing pre seasons will help and maybe you are right that it all really starts in terms of members now. I think we would both agree that a lot of time will be needed. As of the now the cash incentive is good enough for me.

Is it impolite to ask why someone would have a long sojourn up North?

The usual answers are Tax Exile,Ex Con, Current Con or "just for a bit of a break".

find oneself?

I can't see how teams would believe we have a stronger hold on Darwin when we only have 160 members up there. Yes I agree that us up there alone and doing pre seasons will help and maybe you are right that it all really starts in terms of members now. I think we would both agree that a lot of time will be needed. As of the now the cash incentive is good enough for me.

Because it's not about if the members..?

At this stage, of course.

Edited February 3, 201312 yr by José Mourinho

Its the recovery time after the game thats the problem with Darwin, its virtually impossible to win the following week.

I don't know how often this gets thrown up and there is no basis for the statement.

First we have not exactly had a great team in the time we have been playing games in Darwin The Dees have found it hard to win two games in a row playing anywhere.

Second Good teams win no matter where they play.

The WCE and Brisbane travel every other week.

When they have had good sides they win numerous games on the trott in any city.

When they have poor teams guess what they lose regularly.

Brisbane managed to win after travel and in and out of humid condtions in QLD.

"its virtually impossible to win the following week". What a load of rubbish!

I don't know how often this gets thrown up and there is no basis for the statement.

First we have not exactly had a great team in the time we have been playing games in Darwin The Dees have found it hard to win two games in a row playing anywhere.

Second Good teams win no matter where they play.

The WCE and Brisbane travel every other week.

When they have had good sides they win numerous games on the trott in any city.

When they have poor teams guess what they lose regularly.

Brisbane managed to win after travel and in and out of humid condtions in QLD.

"its virtually impossible to win the following week". What a load of rubbish!

have you been to the Top End O.D.?

Not Queensland...The Top End.

have you been to the Top End O.D.?

Not Queensland...The Top End.

Three times in the June - August period.

18 - 28 degrees and bugger all humidity.

Games are at night ( around 24 -5 )when the weather is no worse on players than games in Perth in March or April

It just a weak excuse.

Its the recovery time after the game thats the problem with Darwin, its virtually impossible to win the following week.

It doesn't always happen, but in 2010 both of Port and the Bulldogs won the following week after playing at TIO stadium.