Annual Report

[Sir Why You Little 37,034]

Winning is the crux of success. The MFC will not have the same problems Port or Nought will have,neither of whom will ever be sutainably strong.

The MFC has a large supporter base but at this moment a large % of them are dormant.

Winning regularly is the only way to bring them back.

[old dee 23,787]

Winning is the crux of success. The MFC will not have the same problems Port or Nought will have,neither of whom will ever be sutainably strong.

The MFC has a large supporter base but at this moment a large % of them are dormant.

Winning regularly is the only way to bring them back.

Yep

where is that "like" button gone!

[jimcor 212]

I agree with this Bob but I have been a member for more years than I care to remember......I have no interest in politics, either in government or footy clubs, therefore I don't vote in the footy club elections as I don't know the applicants or their policies.....I have to trust that other members do and will elect the right onesI just love the footy and the games and the club, whatever the results......

I hate it when we lose. Results to me are everything.....and should be. I do not like being embarrassed by our team's performances and don't like getting sympathy from other teams' supporters. Putting in 100% and falling just short is a fail. Just winning is a pass. A pass is not good enough. Weekend after weekend has been spoilt for me.....it needs to stop. On this board, I always try to be even-handed in my comments but there should be no more need for excuses. For the last two years an untried senior coach was given virtually every tool to get the job done and he failed miserably. We now have a proven senior coach with almost total control over what happens on the paddock so no more excuses. Coaches, players and administration now need to demonstrate that they are worth the huge sums of money they are paid.....substantially by the membership.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,209]

Winning is the crux of success. The MFC will not have the same problems Port or Nought will have,neither of whom will ever be sutainably strong.

The MFC has a large supporter base but at this moment a large % of them are dormant.

Winning regularly is the only way to bring them back.

Do we? In those Roy Morgan polls we are consistently down the bottom (second last, pretty much equal last with North from memory at around 200K supporters). My guess would be that a large proportion of our supporter base is ageing with a lot of the younger generation having either left to follow other clubs or have no interest in footy. Another guess would be that many of the "supporters" we claim are actually MCC members who nominate Melbourne as their "footy" team but who really have little interest in football.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Do we? In those Roy Morgan polls we are consistently down the bottom (second last, pretty much equal last with North from memory at around 200K supporters). My guess would be that a large proportion of our supporter base is ageing with a lot of the younger generation having either left to follow other clubs or have no interest in footy. Another guess would be that many of the "supporters" we claim are actually MCC members who nominate Melbourne as their "footy" team but who really have little interest in football.

Agree. I am not sure where the poster gets his fantasy from that we have a large supporter base.

Over the last seven years age and natural attrition would have accounted for a number of old time supporters. We certainly would not have attracted significant new younger supporters unless there student masochists and/or they were forced to support MFC by masochistic parents.

Its telling when established AFL clubs increased their membership numbers by over 10% on average over the past 2 years, MFCs membership numbers went down 10%.

And FWIW, I thought MFC converted a high % of supporters to members relative to other clubs.

And we are one of the smaller supporter groups.

And it will take a decade of "winning" to create a sustainable and significant turnaround in supporter numbers.

[Whispering_Jack 30,036]

About six years ago, the official figures showed we had one of the smallest supporter bases. On our form since then I doubt we would have improved our position.

[Sir Why You Little 37,034]

Do we? In those Roy Morgan polls we are consistently down the bottom (second last, pretty much equal last with North from memory at around 200K supporters). My guess would be that a large proportion of our supporter base is ageing with a lot of the younger generation having either left to follow other clubs or have no interest in footy. Another guess would be that many of the "supporters" we claim are actually MCC members who nominate Melbourne as their "footy" team but who really have little interest in football.

i wouldn't trust Roy Morgan polling for a start. I used to do phone polling in the 80's when i was studying.

Figures were guessed and fudged regularly.

We have supporters out there who have walked away.

Winning games will get quite a few back.

Betcha.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,209]

i wouldn't trust Roy Morgan polling for a start. I used to do phone polling in the 80's when i was studying.

Figures were guessed and fudged regularly.

We have supporters out there who have walked away.

Winning games will get quite a few back.

Betcha.

Not very scientific analysis there. Even when we were travelling well we would struggle to get more than 35K supporters to a game. The new "minimum" for memberships seems to be 50K with the "big" clubs breaking 70K. I struggle to see how we will ever get anywhere near that at least in the next couple of decades. If we can sustain a membership base of 40K it will be a great achievement for where we are but will put us in the B-Division of Vic clubs alongside North, Dogs & Saints with all that that entails.

[Sir Why You Little 37,034]

Not very scientific analysis there. Even when we were travelling well we would struggle to get more than 35K supporters to a game. The new "minimum" for memberships seems to be 50K with the "big" clubs breaking 70K. I struggle to see how we will ever get anywhere near that at least in the next couple of decades. If we can sustain a membership base of 40K it will be a great achievement for where we are but will put us in the B-Division of Vic clubs alongside North, Dogs & Saints with all that that entails.

Never said it would happen overnight. Damage has been done. But wins will tell the story.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Never said it would happen overnight. Damage has been done. But wins will tell the story.

Sadly not your story.

Got a laugh when you bag Roy Morgan research when you make a statement that MFC has a large supporter but can't back it.

Fine form for the New Year.

[daisycutter 29,613]

we used to have a large supporter but he went with his spawn to gws

[Sir Why You Little 37,034]

Sadly not your story.

Got a laugh when you bag Roy Morgan research when you make a statement that MFC has a large supporter but can't back it.

Fine form for the New Year.

feel free to believe the figures gatherered by a polling firm. You can do what you wish.

I worked for one.

I don't.

[FarNorthernD 5,861]

feel free to believe the figures gatherered by a polling firm. You can do what you wish.

I worked for one.

I don't.

I used to know a girl who worked a summer holiday at a fish finger factory. She never ate one again.

[Sir Why You Little 37,034]

I used to know a girl who worked a summer holiday at a fish finger factory. She never ate one again.

smart girl!!

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

feel free to believe the figures gatherered by a polling firm. You can do what you wish.

I worked for one.

I don't.

Well I would not believe the figures coming from the research agency you worked for.

But it was not Roy Morgan.

You still havent provided a valid source for stating MFC has a large supporter base.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,209]

feel free to believe the figures gatherered by a polling firm. You can do what you wish.

I worked for one.

I don't.

The Roy Morgan polls are one aspect - they are multiple polls I should also add, not just one and the figures are consistent. The other aspects are memberships & attendance figures not just recently but even when we were travelling well earlier in the decade.

If our supporter base is large enough why are trying to make inroads out Casey way?

[george_on_the_outer 7,590]

Here is the link to the Morgan poll in 2011:

http://www.roymorganonlinestore.com/News/1424---Swans,-Magpies-and-Lions-have-most-supporte.aspx

There is no doubt at all that Australia wide, we have one of the lowest "supporter" bases, with consistent numbers around 200K over a 10 year period.

However, figures for some other teams simply don't make sense:

e.g Brisbane with 1.4M in 2004, but 820k in 2011. or Sydney with 1.7M in 2006, but just over 1M in 2011? Supporters simply don't disappear. They may die off slowly, but a drop of this number indicates the sampling is flawed.

Likewise Port with 300K supporters? Only if you sample in Elisabeth in S.A.

And therein lies the problem. If you sample in Brisbane, Geelong or Fremantle or Port you will get a skewed result. How does Morgan then translate that Australia wide?.... They don't say.

Yet while the sample is flawed, it does show an increase in "supporters" ( however Morgan discover that) post a Premiership for every successful side.

[Sir Why You Little 37,034]

Here is the link to the Morgan poll in 2011:

http://www.roymorganonlinestore.com/News/1424---Swans,-Magpies-and-Lions-have-most-supporte.aspx

There is no doubt at all that Australia wide, we have one of the lowest "supporter" bases, with consistent numbers around 200K over a 10 year period.

However, figures for some other teams simply don't make sense:

e.g Brisbane with 1.4M in 2004, but 820k in 2011. or Sydney with 1.7M in 2006, but just over 1M in 2011? Supporters simply don't disappear. They may die off slowly, but a drop of this number indicates the sampling is flawed.

Likewise Port with 300K supporters? Only if you sample in Elisabeth in S.A.

And therein lies the problem. If you sample in Brisbane, Geelong or Fremantle or Port you will get a skewed result. How does Morgan then translate that Australia wide?.... They don't say.

Yet while the sample is flawed, it does show an increase in "supporters" ( however Morgan discover that) post a Premiership for every successful side.

Exactly. Its the way it is sampled. What street or council do they target?

What time of day do they target??

It is a very loose number i assure you. Like TV ratings. It is a number used by advertising agencies, very important but far from accurate.

But i am sure there are a chosen few who shall disagree.

I really don't care but i certainly take little notice of those Roy Morgan figures above.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,209]

Exactly. Its the way it is sampled. What street or council do they target?

What time of day do they target??

It is a very loose number i assure you. Like TV ratings. It is a number used by advertising agencies, very important but far from accurate.

But i am sure there are a chosen few who shall disagree.

I really don't care but i certainly take little notice of those Roy Morgan figures above.

It's not a concrete figure but is an indicator. If it had no basis in reality at all then the figures wouldn't be consistent over a number of polls. If we had 50K members and regular crowds of 60K+ I might disgaree with the figures but when taking those things into account it seems a pretty good indicator.

Also on the Sydney/Brisbane figures you'd assume many people who live in Sydney/NSW would nominate the Swans as their team even if they have no real interest in footy. I'd probably say Melbourne Storm if I was asked about RL but have only ever watched 2-3 of their games on TV and can't see myself ever going to a game let alone buy a membership or merchandise.

[Sir Why You Little 37,034]

It's not a concrete figure but is an indicator. If it had no basis in reality at all then the figures wouldn't be consistent over a number of polls. If we had 50K members and regular crowds of 60K+ I might disgaree with the figures but when taking those things into account it seems a pretty good indicator.

Also on the Sydney/Brisbane figures you'd assume many people who live in Sydney/NSW would nominate the Swans as their team even if they have no real interest in footy. I'd probably say Melbourne Storm if I was asked about RL but have only ever watched 2-3 of their games on TV and can't see myself ever going to a game let alone buy a membership or merchandise.

Agree 100% It is a loose indicator and that is how it should be read.

The only way you could come close to getting a "real" indicator would be to ask the population what sporting teams they follow on the Census forms.

[Machsy 2,858]

Look at Geelong.

A vast percentage of residents don't barrack for the club.

They do get supporters from their area, but also from all over the country, based on an attractive and successful gamestyle, played consistently over a number of years.

If we're going to grow our supporter base, we need to do the same.

It's something we definitely haven't done in a number of decades.