Jump to content

Featured Replies

 

Seriously how are some of those clubs recording such massive jumps in memberships? Would love to see a breakdown of membership type.

Also, how the frog does St Kilda have more members than us???

Edit: how many games does a full membership get you into? All home only?

Edited by —coach—

 

Does that include the Saints $1 memberships? Is it the AFLs final figures or just those reported by the clubs?

Edited by Dr. Gonzo

The Richmond increase is ridiculous. From April to now they increased by a further 10%. I believe one game memberships were sold. Do they count?


The Bulldogs have paid dearly for their Premiership Hangover.  Down 9.2%!

Hard to see how Carlton and St Kilda have increased by 11.3% and 10.1% respectively. 

This article gives a breakdown of memberships http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-08-02/thanks-a-million-new-membership-benchmark

Of the 1,008,494 claimed members 456,633 are Full Club members.  Would love to see a breadown of those by Club. 

Our increase of just 4.8% means we are falling further and further behind most other clubs?

While it will undoubtedly help I don't think growing membership will be as simple as winning more games or even just one premiership. 

Edited by Lucifer's Hero

The full breakdown is:

 

I would guess the one-game memberships are in the 'Reduced-Access' figures.  I recall reading that Collingwood has a huge i/state and o/s memberships and would be in that category.  Ditto the StKilda $1 memberships.

It is the above figures by club, that Ch7 use to determine the premium time slots so the 500,000+ Non-Full Member figures are really important as they are the ones who stay at home and watch on TV.  And really important for Clubs as that is where the potential for conversion to Full members lies.

Edited by Lucifers Hero

25k members for GWS. AFL must still be handing out free memberships to anyone that walks within proximity to Shitless Stadium.

 

It would be interesting to understand the difference in marketing approach and membership package composition between the MFC and its VIC peers to pick apart the big uplift the likes of STK etc have had.

Having a quick look at some of the for-like memberships, the MFC inclusions - for the armchair/digital as a quick example - equivalents are lesser but for more money. Price and inclusions are obviously not the only factor, of course, but they could be a factor.

Does anyone have any insight into the difference in marketing approach? The SKFC, Carlton, EFC and Geelong increases are substantial. SKFC and Carlton especially so.

Edited by -â“‹-

I can think of a few things that might have caused our membership to not increase as much as might be expected. 

Unique items to 2017/2018 and in no particular order of significance:

  • the way we missed the finals going down without a whimper in rnd 23.
  • the 'get your finals tickets' campaign fiasco before we made finals.
  • the lack of communication plan from the club for those possibilities
  • the loss of our much loved #4. 
  • restructuring the membership options to 'force' new members into 'packages' eg for reserved seats and GF guarantee.  
  • price increases, especially in the lower categories and of the GF guarantee. 
  • Home MCG games vs not very exciting opponents = questionable value of membership.
  • Time slots of Home games.

Those things won't stop the loyal, die hard demons on this site from buying memberships but there would be more easily disillusioned supporters out there who would react to one or more of the above.

Interestingly, we had massive record attendances at our games in 2017 but for some reason only a very small %'age were converted to memberships. 

As I noted in another thread I'm rapt with the 25% increase in members since the Jackson/Roos era started.  But we cannot continually go backwards relative to other clubs who are also vying for sponsors and broadcast airtime/slots. 

It will be interesting to see what initiatives Pert comes with.  Growing membership will be his biggest challenge and hopefully his major KPI. 

 

Edited by Lucifer's Hero


So St Kilda have one of their worst seasons in recent decades and leapfrog us? Doesn't make sense. 

Carlton have 56K members and probably 8K of them will turn up on Sunday,

24 minutes ago, Clint Bizkit said:

This is from St Kilda's website just now:

1851156152_ScreenShot2018-08-02at9_27_32am.png.78aa915100a0dec687b9df4213376b2e.png

I'm guessing the AFL then adds the AFL members, Auskick members etc. to the memberships sold/reported by each club to reach the AFL wide total of 1,008,494.

Which begs the question why the figure the AFL reports for mfc is the same as that on our website...something isn't adding up...

Edited by Lucifer's Hero


A thought for Gold Coast. 

What will their number look like next year if they lose Lynch             ( highly likely) and May ( possibility)?

Edited by Dee Zephyr

The number of members is the sizzle. The sausage is the amount of revenue brought in by memberships.

Better metrics are total revenue and revenue per member.

Another stat that fails to tell the real story ;)


2 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

The Bulldogs have paid dearly for their Premiership Hangover.  Down 9.2%!

Hard to see how Carlton and St Kilda have increased by 11.3% and 10.1% respectively. ? [...]

 

Yeah, that drop is shattering for the Bulldogs. I know they invested a lot of resources - financial and otherwise - into membership marketing post-2016, in an attempt to capitalise on the flag. I wouldn't be surprised if their numbers dropped again next year.

RE: Carlton and Saints, have a look at what happens to the figures in 2019.

Edited by Rogue

3 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

The full breakdown is:

image.png.6aaa8d8055c3260214e68b322234e3d5.png

I would guess the one-game memberships are in the 'Reduced-Access' figures.  I recall reading that Collingwood has a huge i/state and o/s memberships and would be in that category.  Ditto the StKilda $1 memberships.

It is the above figures by club, that Ch7 use to determine the premium time slots so the 500,000+ Non-Full Member figures are really important as they are the ones who stay at home and watch on TV.  And really important for Clubs as that is where the potential for conversion to Full members lies.

The perfect recipe to destroy smaller clubs... and then the competition.    More short-sighted visual media execs.

 

.

I've been saying for years these numbers are a load of crap, and this data further supports it.

Either report in actual dollars received from memberships or in 11 game equivalents (ie 3.67 x 3 game m/ships = 1 x 11 game m/ship), or just don't bother.

I'm sure a club like St Kilda is boasting about increased member numbers, whereas their membership revenue would be significantly reduced and their crowd numbers are well down on last year.

 
Just now, poita said:

I've been saying for years these numbers are a load of crap, and this data further supports it.

Either report in actual dollars received from memberships or in 11 game equivalents (ie 3.67 x 3 game m/ships = 1 x 11 game m/ship), or just don't bother.

I'm sure a club like St Kilda is boasting about increased member numbers, whereas their membership revenue would be significantly reduced and their crowd numbers are well down on last year.

Ditto all crap Whorethorn,Pies, Ess = pet memberships/ 3 game memberships love to see the real figures for 11 game memberships.

36 minutes ago, Win4theAges said:

Ditto all crap Whorethorn,Pies, Ess = pet memberships/ 3 game memberships love to see the real figures for 11 game memberships.

You think interstate/international/armchair members should be excluded? They are not insubstantial given the $.

If you had 2000 (of 45,000 or so) paying $80 for a digital membership, it is 160k of membership revenue less the cost of a lanyard, membership card and posting it out to them.

Same logic for interstate/international (with a higher membership fee than non access).


Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

Featured Content

  • NON-MFC: Round 15

    As the Demons head into their Bye Round, it's time to turn our attention to the other matches being played. Which teams are you tipping this week? And which results would be most favourable for the Demons if we can manage to turn our season around? Follow all the non-Melbourne games here and join the conversation as the ladder continues to take shape.

      • Haha
    • 36 replies
  • REPORT: Port Adelaide

    Of course, it’s not the backline, you might argue and you would probably be right. It’s the boot studder (do they still have them?), the midfield, the recruiting staff, the forward line, the kicking coach, the Board, the interchange bench, the supporters, the folk at Casey, the head coach and the club psychologist  It’s all of them and all of us for having expectations that were sufficiently high to have believed three weeks ago that a restoration of the Melbourne team to a position where we might still be in contention for a finals berth when the time for the midseason bye arrived. Now let’s look at what happened over the period of time since Melbourne overwhelmed the Sydney Swans at the MCG in late May when it kicked 8.2 to 5.3 in the final quarter (and that was after scoring 3.8 to two straight goals in the second term). 

    • 2 replies
  • CASEY: Essendon

    Casey’s unbeaten run was extended for at least another fortnight after the Demons overran a persistent Essendon line up by 29 points at ETU Stadium in Port Melbourne last night. After conceding the first goal of the evening, Casey went on a scoring spree from about ten minutes in, with five unanswered majors with its fleet of midsized runners headed by the much improved Paddy Cross who kicked two in quick succession and livewire Ricky Mentha who also kicked an early goal. Leading the charge was recruit of the year, Riley Bonner while Bailey Laurie continued his impressive vein of form. With Tom Campbell missing from the lineup, Will Verrall stepped up to the plate demonstrating his improvement under the veteran ruckman’s tutelage. The Demons were looking comfortable for much of the second quarter and held a 25-point lead until the Bombers struck back with two goals in the shadows of half time. On the other side of the main break their revival continued with first three goals of the half. Harry Sharp, who had been quiet scrambled in the Demons’ first score of the third term to bring the margin back to a single point at the 17 minute mark and the game became an arm-wrestle for the remainder of the quarter and into the final moments of the last.

    • 0 replies
  • PREGAME: Gold Coast

    The Demons have the Bye next week but then are on the road once again when they come up against the Gold Coast Suns on the Gold Coast in what could be a last ditch effort to salvage their season. Who comes in and who comes out?

      • Haha
    • 110 replies
  • PODCAST: Port Adelaide

    The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 16th June @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we dissect the Dees disappointing loss to the Power.
    Your questions and comments are a huge part of our podcast so please post anything you want to ask or say below and we'll give you a shout out on the show.
    Listen LIVE: https://demonland.com/

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 32 replies
  • POSTGAME: Port Adelaide

    The Demons simply did not take their opportunities when they presented themselves and ultimately when down by 25 points effectively ending their finals chances. Goal kicking practice during the Bye?

      • Like
    • 252 replies