The AFL's goal is to maximise revenue, and hence profit and distribution to the clubs. If that means biasing Friday or Saturday nights with Collingwood, Essendon and Carlton matches, then that's what they'll do.

But the fixture isn't a draw, it's a scheme of arrangement, specifically with the purpose of gaining the most attendances and television exposure. While this maximises AFL revenue, but it also leads to two unfortunate consequences:

Well spoke ML.

The cost of having a decent sign on a V8 Supercar is $350,000 (I was told this was per race meeting, not per season, but find that hard to believe).

Ditto, the value to the league of having serious signage exposure money coming in for free to air TV matches.

TV marketing dollars are enormous and the AFL will ALWAYS bias TV games to the collingwoods of this world.

Those without that drawing power must be compensated or lets just cut the arguments and go straight to a 6 team comp.

That's the alternative.

yep..

and then the argument comes full circle again with the reality that the money from the AFL isnt so much a handout as an acknowledgement of the "oils aint oils' scenario

Many ppl wont ever be members. Not all see it as a prerequisite to enjoying a game. To be honest neither do I. My membership is not used to advantage and if was looking at it as bang for buck I wouldnt bother.. It doesnt equate to any real value for the few times i can get to a game. I buy one...hundreds in a similar boat wont. Do I scorn them? Of course not. Seems some would.

I have for a long time viewed the notion that a club sails or sinks in these modern times purely on the back of membership is a flawed business model and the sooner we ( as a club ) can distance ourselves from such archaic thinking the sooner we may actually be solvent without fear of demise.

Money from memberships ought to be the icing on the cake...not the cake

I have for a long time viewed the notion that a club sails or sinks in these modern times purely on the back of membership is a flawed business model and the sooner we ( as a club ) can distance ourselves from such archaic thinking the sooner we may actually be solvent without fear of demise.

Money from memberships ought to be the icing on the cake...not the cake

It's not the memberships, sure - but it's what X amount of members gets you.

Collingwood wouldn't be brokering the same sorts of sponsorship deals with the membership figures of a MFC.

Anyhow, a bit off track for this thread...

It would be great to have more memberships. But the direct financial difference between our "miniscule" 27,000 members and Collingwood's "massive" 40,000 is only $2 million, minus some extra expenditure to service them (member packs, cards etc.). It certainly doesn't account for the total difference in revenue between us and Collingwood, and would be about 8% of the cost of running the club.

Theoretically, you could make that up in a few additional good sponsorships. Where the difference lies is in the momentum those members bring, and the extra marketing opportunity for sponsors etc.

Unfortunetly, while the money gained from the memberships from Collingwood over us, might not be earth shattering when you consider the total revenue most clubs receive each day, it has far greater implications.

Why do Collingwood get the best draw? the most FTA? the most exposure for their sponsers? they have the members and average attendences, they also get the 50-60% of people saying they follow them because everybody else does even tho they don't follow football very closely, but whos answers are included on the Roy Morgan polls that the networks and the AFL place so much weight in these days, all these things result in Collingwood receiving more & bigger sponsership, more attractive to corporates & more attractive & noticable to the kid whos choosing they are going to follow for the rest of their life.

It adds up, thats why building our membership base from last in Victoria to at least middle of the road is so important for our clubs future, or its just going to have a ripple affect where we are only going to need more & more money from the AFL to compete with the Collingwoods, Carltons & Essondons.

It's not the memberships, sure - but it's what X amount of members gets you.

Collingwood wouldn't be brokering the same sorts of sponsorship deals with the membership figures of a MFC.

Anyhow, a bit off track for this thread...

Its actually a valid point....

There is another point which oftern goes unnoticed...maybe... just maybe the people at Collingwood are BETTER at this game...the game of notoreity, the game of brinkmanship, the game of refusing to cowtail to the AFL. They are bettter it seems at snaffling opportunites with up coming synegies.. i.e grabbing netball from under our noses etc.

There is something that distintly irks me about Melbourne , that is we seem to be waiting for history to envelope us instead of going ot and creating it!! I hope this changes. Things like the 150th.. MFC should be running this show..they ought to be stating what its all about and publicly rebuking the AFL for having the temerity of hijacking it !! Collingwood would.. eddie wouldnt put up with that sort of sh!t. Having a real stage presence and some guts about you creates a salable identity..and THATS what gets sponsors in.. they want to be asociated with soemthing !!

Its really time MFC stood up and told the world what its really about.. but it doesnt do it.. even when history DOES hand it to it on a plate!!

Paul !! get off the back foot and go forward on the front and kick this ball around a bit, and if no ball...kick something else !! This is the sort of X factor that gets people in..they want to be with the club that DOES things. unfortuantely in the greater footy world we are seen as soft !! I hate it !!