How accurate are "membership" numbers?

[Richo83]

It's important to realise that the June 30 cut off for membership, no longer applies from 2013. This gives clubs more flexibility in the way they construct membership packages. Expect weird and wonderful packages.

Somehow I don't think June memberships will do very well at Essendon. (sorry, couldn't resist, I kid and such)

 

[Byron_Clanger]

Not really accurate if clubs include freaking pets, what a joke that is

 

[Smokeyr67]

Not really accurate if clubs include freaking pets, what a joke that is

Pets have never been included. If they where, then my 2 GSD's could organise an extra 8 members per annum.

 

[Tas]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but non-profits can't declare a profit year after year after year because if they did, they wouldn't be a non-profit! The administration of such an entity has to ensure it's profitable enough to guarantee its survival, and then sink the profits into ventures that fit within its mission statement.

People talk about the bottom-line of football clubs all the time as though they're constantly on the brink of financial ruin. This is almost certainly a deliberate ploy by the clubs and the AFL to motivate their fans to dig into their pockets and pour more money in.

That is not correct. A non-profit entity is one that is not operating for the profit or gain of it's individual members, be the gains direct or indirect.

The difference between a non-profit organisation and a for-profit is that for a non-profit organisation any profit made goes back into the operation of the organisation to carry out it's purpose and is not distributed to any of it's members.

Most non-profit clubs strive to make a profit. Making profits and being able to create a reserve of funds means the non-profit entity will usually have a reserve of funds which will allow for increased capital expenditure or to have the funds if they fail to make a profit in future years without going into debt.

 

[D-N-R]

A 'membership' should be 11 games - half the H&A season. It should be all the games you have sold - 11, 3, 18 games per member, whatever - add them up and divide it by 11. What's stopping a club like west coast offering 'memberships' for a dollar? We'll send you a sticker. Then we can claim we have 150,000 members.

And what's the deal with Hawthorn's tassie 'members'? Are they asked which club they support or is everyone who buys a package of games counted as a Hawks member, as opposed to a Taswegian desperate to see some footy?

 

[Smokeyr67]

A 'membership' should be 11 games - half the H&A season. It should be all the games you have sold - 11, 3, 18 games per member, whatever - add them up and divide it by 11. What's stopping a club like west coast offering 'memberships' for a dollar? We'll send you a sticker. Then we can claim we have 150,000 members.

And what's the deal with Hawthorn's tassie 'members'? Are they asked which club they support or is everyone who buys a package of games counted as a Hawks member, as opposed to a Taswegian desperate to see some footy?

OK. so my being posted to Brisbane means I should pay for an 11 game Membership when I can only get to 1 game this year?

I'm all for supporting my club, but your just taking the piss!

I'm paying over $150 for my membership to see 1 freaking game, and I'm not worthy of being a Member?

Screw that, I'll pay my money and be counted.

 

[JeddaB]

OK. so my being posted to Brisbane means I should pay for an 11 game Membership when I can only get to 1 game this year?

I'm all for supporting my club, but your just taking the piss!

I'm paying over $150 for my membership to see 1 freaking game, and I'm not worthy of being a Member?

Screw that, I'll pay my money and be counted.

Ignore the insular attitude.
Your money. Your club. Your contribution.

 

[MarkT2]

My point was about FTE, I could have used average wage, but didn't.

The topic is 'how accurate' are membership numbers, if you want to compare dollars you'll find each clubs annual report to be reasonably accurate - no doubt, we can even compare depreciation, amortisation and interest.

In that case the membership numbers are 100% accurate unless membership means actually being a club (voting) member (my definition of member as opposed to discount entry ticket holder) in which case they are 100% inaccurate. FTE or any other comparrison mechanism does not change that at all.

 

[Falchoon]

In that case the membership numbers are 100% accurate unless membership means actually being a club (voting) member (my definition of member as opposed to discount entry ticket holder) in which case they are 100% inaccurate. FTE or any other comparrison mechanism does not change that at all.

nor was it intended to change that at all, much like FTE doesn't change the fact someone working an hour a week is employed.

 

[walhawk]

And what's the deal with Hawthorn's tassie 'members'? Are they asked which club they support or is everyone who buys a package of games counted as a Hawks member, as opposed to a Taswegian desperate to see some footy?

If they go to the Hawthorn website and buy a Hawthorn membership, then yes, they are a Hawthorn member.
Pretty straight forward.
There would be very few non Hawthorn (or any club) supporting members. Possibly none. The games in Tas do not sell out so unless you barrack for Hawthorn there would be no advantage in buying a membership as opposed to just going to games.
Are there any on here?

 

[walhawk]

I am always amused as to why people continue to question Hawthorn's huge membership numbers.
- We have been a 'flag threat' for seven years - access to GF tickets a major driver of memberships
- We have won more flags in the last 80 years than any other club - success is THE major driver of club support
- Our MCG crowds are comparable with the old Big 4
- Since Peters Hudson and Knights we have continually had the most exciting and high profile players (Matthews, Dipper, Platten, Derm, Dunstall, Crawford, Franklin, Rioli, Hodge - no other club goes close to matching this media profile/star power) - hence huge kids memberships
- Aside from 1995/96, we have been brilliantly run for 60 years. We have had the fewest coaches, captains, presidents in that time - stability is paramount
- Since 1997, we have been in the top three for Vic memberships every season - this has not happened overnight.

Granted, we do not have the raw number of adults who follow us that Collingwood, Essendon or Richmond do, but go to any Auskick centre or Footy Jumpers day at a Primary School in the Eastern or Sth Eastern suburbs (where 50% of Melbourne's population live), and Hawthorn jumpers are everywhere.

Based on the above, is it really a surprise that we have such strong membership numbers?

 

[McOrist]

But that's a false dichotomy, we're not talking about 3 game memberships versus no game memberships, we're talking about 3 game memberships versus 11.

You may be talking about 3 game vs 11 game memberships, but others have said they would/could not buy an 11 game membership for their own reasons and a 3 game pass suits their circumstances. So for many people it is a 3 game membership or zero.

But until they get the 11 game memberships, they generally pay less. Pretty much every club wants you to buy as many game memberships as possible, they help improve gate attendances and they cost more. And it's not about buying merchandise every week, it's about the likelyhood that you will buy some merchandise, which increased as you go to the footy more.

Again, you miss the point. A lot of people don't want or can't use 11 game memberships. Of course the clubs want people to buy the most expensive package, but they know if all they provide are 11 game tickets, many will totally opt out.

Sure, businesses are willing to provide all sorts of services for all sorts of costs. Doesn't mean they don't want you to buy the deluxe model though. And if you're buying it for the novelty, the problem is that you might not come back if you watch a year where your team struggles. Clubs don't just want lots of members, they want regular members. And as I said, I understand that some supporters are from interstate or work a lot, it's just that clubs generally hope you'll buy the more expensive products. Would a club rather you buy a hat or a jersey? Once you've figured that out, you'll most likely be able to figure out if they'd rather you buy a 3 game membership as opposed to a 11 game one.

Disagree on this point as well. Of course they 'want' regular members, but they know that supporters come in all shapes and sizes and attendance patterns and they need to provide membership packages that suits their needs. It could be that a supporter who cannot attend many games would be more likely to take up merchandise on-line than someone that has already shelled out big money for a 11 game membership.

I just don't see the problem you have in accepting the reality and validity of 3 game memberships.

 

[The Falcon Strike]

Forget membership numbers and look at membership revenue - though not perfect, it is a better way of assessing

 

[jko'neal]

Forget membership numbers and look at membership revenue - though not perfect, it is a better way of assessing

That could be the case if all memberships were the same price club by club, but that's simply not the case.

 

[The Falcon Strike]

That could be the case if all memberships were the same price club by club, but that's simply not the case.

No it isn't, but it does provide a greater reflection of how much a membership actually provides to a footy club.

 

[jko'neal]

No it isn't, but it does provide a greater reflection of how much a membership actually provides to a footy club.

Maybe, but in your clubs case they can charge what ever they like because no one is going to give up their seat and it looks great on the financial bottom line. IMO that's not right.

 

[Tas]

Forget membership numbers and look at membership revenue - though not perfect, it is a better way of assessing

Membership revenue is skewed if you have more members than the capacity of your stadium, the scenario where you can sell a lot of reserved seating, Geelong would have massive revenue vs membership numbers and that is only because GFC gouges the shit out of it's members.

 

[Richo83]

Again, you miss the point. A lot of people don't want or can't use 11 game memberships. Of course the clubs want people to buy the most expensive package, but they know if all they provide are 11 game tickets, many will totally opt out.

And given clubs want you to buy the expensive membership, it's why clubs and their supporters value them more, which is the whole reason why they're valued more. Bloody hell buddy!

 

[Oneiros]

As always, when talking about the accuracy of Membership Numbers, it depends on what you mean by 'membership' and what you mean by 'numbers' and what you mean by 'accuracy'.

Real 'meaning of is is' sort of deal.

 

[Chopperdave]

I think the important question should be who the hell cares! Why do so many people care about this ridiculous membership penis measuring that goes on here (insert reply about me being a Port supporter).

I know I couldn't care less if my club had 5 members or 500,000 as long as the players are passionate and successful.

 

[Collins-Langford-Ayres]

They are accurate.

The numbers just don't segment to show full memberships, international memberships, kids memberships, etc.

The numbers just don't segment to show people, pets and the 5,000 Swans memberships Demetriou purchases.

 

[Kram]

About as accurate as a plumber's estimate.

 

[MarkT2]

I think the important question should be who the hell cares! Why do so many people care about this ridiculous membership penis measuring that goes on here (insert reply about me being a Port supporter).

I know I couldn't care less if my club had 5 members or 500,000 as long as the players are passionate and successful.

Ask Fitzroy supporters if it matters.
Ask James Brayshaw if it matters.
For that mater, ask Koshy

 

[The Falcon Strike]

Membership revenue is skewed if you have more members than the capacity of your stadium, the scenario where you can sell a lot of reserved seating, Geelong would have massive revenue vs membership numbers and that is only because GFC gouges the shit out of it's members.

Its a good guide though as to how much of a team's revenue is funded from members. ie not reliant on outside means.

When you consider that many clubs have their hand out - perhaps they should just charge more for the memberships. If memberships would drop, then perhaps the membership isn't as committed.

 

[Riccardo11]

Pets have never been included. If they where, then my 2 GSD's could organise an extra 8 members per annum.

That's not true, there was some controversy a few years ago about a few teams boosting their low #s by including pet memberships in the overall total. From memory, the clubs in question were the Bulldogs and North (though I might be mistaken).