Don't take it so personally (unless you feel you should <_< ).

I'm not taking it personally. I do however feel that this simply reinforces a negative stereotype of our Club that's not helpful.

I'm not refering to most Demonland supporters, but to the thousands of people who didn't renew their membership from last year. The thousands more who stay at home every single week instead of coming to cheer on the side. The thousands more still who claim to be Melbourne supporters but have never given the club a cent of their money or a minute of their time.

Every team has these.

Rogue - totally agree with you and your comments about Jaded.

Is Jaded Caroline Wilson?

The interviews of Neita is on Ch 9's web site.

Every team has these.

Really? How many teams have 10,000 members who haven't signed on from last season?

How many teams play half-empty stadiums?

Which other club is currently struggling to string together 25,000 members?

We don't have the supporter base of Collingwood or Carlton, which makes every single supporter we do have invaluable. That so many of them don't do their fair share for the team is really sad.

Thankfully this doesn't apply to Demonland members, who are all passionate supporters and in most cases, club members.

What annoys me more than anything is supporters who complain about our form, or what is happening at board level, and yet they wouldn't bother turning up to games when we're 0-5, or buying a membership if they don't think they can use it to get a finals ticket.

I don't see why any of us should accept it as the norm, because it isn't. Accepting it and doing nothing about it is going to contribute to the ongoing stereotype of the typical MFC supporter, trying to change it won't.

Go read Redlegs' excellent thread about what we can all do to help this club survive. Sadly, if we rely on our current supporter base, we won't make it much further in this competition. I think we can all agree that that would be a tragedy.

Put aside the '[censored] weak' mantra for a second...

As you state, we don't have the supporter base of a Collingwood or a Carlton. If we accept that our supporter base is smaller than many other Clubs, if all else is equal then it stands to reason that we will always have less members than many other Clubs.

We also have a super-sized stadium, which means a membership isn't a requirement if you want to go to the footy. I'm unsure if this is much of a pull for any AFL Club - I heard it was the case with Adelaide supporters and AAMI - but it certainly is in other sports/scenes (ie. NBA).

Some quick research indicates that, in recent history, we've been around the mark of several other AFL teams when it comes to memberships. In 2005, we were ~= to Sydney and the Kangaroos, and ~3,000 more than the Western Bulldogs. In 2006, we finished ~= with the Kangaroos (~2,000 behind WB and Brisbane). In 2007, our membership figures exceeded that of North and Brisbane by 6,000, leaving us ~= with Sydney and WB (~2,000 behind Geelong, Richmond, and St. Kilda).

Right now, we're ahead of Brisbane by ~2,000 members, and ~= with the WB (~2,000 behind Sydney). While we were also ahead of the Roos in 07, they've recorded an astounding 38.4% increase in members, on the back of the relocation threat. While this is a great effort, it may be a dead cat bounce - I'd wager on a decline in '09.

[nb: Apparently, AAMI stadium members were/are included in both Port and Adel m/ship figures, and equated to a 11,000+ boost in 2006. If correct, it explains why Port's membership looked healthy (~28,000), and yet they couldn't draw crowds.]

Furthermore, most sporting Clubs in Australia would die for the membership figures and crowd numbers that we have. While MFC's supporter base and membership numbers may not be very impressive when compared to AFL juggernauts, having over 20,000 paid-up and passionate members of a sporting Club is not something that should be sneezed at, and I think this is something that's often over-looked.

Sure, we need to strive to improve our member attraction and rentention rates (like we need to strive to improve all facets of the MFC). However, it'd ridiculous to repeat the media mantra that the MFC is a Club without soul and support. Our membership figures, while relatively poor for an AFL side, are around the same mark as other Clubs in the comp, and relative to other sporting Clubs in Australia, our membership figures are strong.

Sure, we need to strive to improve our member attraction and rentention rates (like we need to strive to improve all facets of the MFC). However, it'd ridiculous to repeat the media mantra that the MFC is a Club without soul and support. Our membership figures, while relatively poor for an AFL side, are around the same mark as other Clubs in the comp, and relative to other sporting Clubs in Australia, our membership figures are strong.

I NEVER EVER said we were without soul and support.

And your comparison between Melbourne other sporting clubs in Australia is simply irrelevant. We are competing within the AFL market, and the facts are, that within the AFL market our brand is weak, our support is small and our position in this competition is far from guaranteed.

Yes, we will always have a smaller supporter base and membership numbers, but it stands to reason that if we can get close to 30,000 members in 2007 on the back of 3 successive finals campaigns (albeit unsuccessful ones), that our membership should continue to rise or at the very least steady. That if fluctuates so dramatically, is just another sign that a lot of our supporters just cannot be relied upon.

As for Sydney and Brisbane, they, unlike us, have the full support of the AFL. They can have 10,000 members a year and they will not go out of business. We have to battle with 10 other Victorian clubs and not many people at AFL house will care if we go under. They will not support us forever.

I NEVER EVER said we were without soul and support.

Sure, but you trotted out the stereotype of '[censored] weak' MFC supporters that made you cry when BT on MMM banged on about it.

And your comparison between Melbourne other sporting clubs in Australia is simply irrelevant. We are competing within the AFL market, and the facts are, that within the AFL market our brand is weak, our support is small and our position in this competition is far from guaranteed.

It's far from irrelevant when there's a common perception pedalled in the media - and at times, on this site - that MFC supporters are '[censored] weak' when it comes to caring about the Club, attending games, and buying memberships. If we're to be judged as '[censored] weak', the label should be applied to the majority of the sporting Clubs in the land.

Yes, we will always have a smaller supporter base and membership numbers, but it stands to reason that if we can get close to 30,000 members in 2007 on the back of 3 successive finals campaigns (albeit unsuccessful ones), that our membership should continue to rise or at the very least steady. That if fluctuates so dramatically, is just another sign that a lot of our supporters just cannot be relied upon.

How does it 'stand to reason' that if we can set a record m/ship 'on the back of 3 successive finals campaigns', that our membership would continue to rise, or keep at this record mark, after a diastrous 2007?

You can use the fact that we won't set another record this year as a mark that Melbourne supporters are '[censored] weak', but if you do, this should be applied to all other Clubs in the same boat.

Take a look at membership figures of other Clubs to dispel the myth that there's something unique about a correlation between MFC membership #s and recent form. For a 2008 example, take the WB and their 8,000-odd 2007 members that haven't re-signed.

For a 2008 example, take the WB and their 8,000-odd 2007 members that haven't re-signed.

No wonder the WB are struggling.

They are not the benchmark, nor should they be.

And I don't give a stuff about other sporting clubs and other supporter groups, I care only about what the MFC has.

We obviously disagree that we have a problem with our supporter base, and that's fine. You choose to look at what we have, I choose to look at what we don't have and what we should have.

SOME (read: SOME) of our supporter base is weak and unreliable. This might be the case for other clubs too, in fact I'm sure it is, but other clubs are not in the same horrible position that we are in with memberships, attendances and profits.

No wonder the WB are struggling.

They are not the benchmark, nor should they be.

I never said they were. You asked which other clubs were struggling to secure 25,000 members, and which Club had 10,000 members yet to re-sign from last year (btw, where did you get that figure from), implying that we were somehow unique in that respect. We're not.

We obviously disagree that we have a problem with our supporter base, and that's fine. You choose to look at what we have, I choose to look at what we don't have and what we should have.