Fight Club - Football Club Memberships

[piesman2011]

Brandy

I still think the ratings are closer then what you think Dave.

2011 ratings for NRL were 134m and an extra 12m for NZ as dave has said with links to back it up,

Now FTA ratings for 2011 to 2012 season were up 1.3% and fox ratings for 2011 to 2012 were up 16%.

Now if you do the maths on these facts you will come to a easy conclusion that the NRL is miles ahead of the AFL on tele.

I really cant see how hard this is to understand Brands?????

Furthermore the NRL is up 6%+ on FTA and up 14% on Fox in the 2013 season................the gap is growing larger every year Brands, hope this clears things up for you mate.

So you dont want to use the Australian results the only results that have been published in 2012 with AFL winning both the systems they mentioned. Ok thats fine because it doesnt fit the way you see your game,with a number 2 next to it. I get that. However what I dont get are the half truths you keep sprouting with no real reason to back them up.

The ratings for RL was 134 million + NZ figures of 12 million in 2011 according to the SMH, but this was in 2011 and just one way of tallying the results, while other results showed different numbers. But I get you using those results because it shows your sport winning. So thats fine if you are talking about 2011. What I dont get is you using the SMH results for 2011 and comparing them to the Australian results for 2012 where the Australian results for both 2011 and 2012 were much smaller for both sports.

There many different ways off adding up the ratings. No doubt the AFL has 27 hours a week roughly with similar ratings to the NRL, which has 16 hours of content. 11 hours difference in favour of the AFL for viewing,which is a dominant difference. No doubt also the AFL as up in the ratings in 2012 and according to the Australian about 8.5 % in fox and FTA compared to the NRL being up about 0.37% for everything in 2012. Which was a big increase for the AFL compared to pretty much nothing for the NRL. You also make some big leaps of faith by assuming that the Australian newspaper doesnt include SOO etc, but that it does use the AFL preseason, but there is no record on what was used. They may have just used another tally system compared to the SMH and this is backed up by the Australian talking about another tally system in the report.

Some other factors to consider are that the Australian only had the AFL on 113 in 2011 while the SMH had the AFL on 122. The Australian had the AFL at 123 in 2012 so shoud you then increase the 2011 SMH AFL results by 8.5% for their 2012 results? If you are going to use the SMH 2011 results to work out RL and AFL numbers at least learn how to use statistics properly.
What about Tbox, phone and tablet results. If you were one of the 1 million + down loads for the phone app then you would probabaly watch 10 -20 games + a year on your phone if you did this. This would be 24 million if you watched just one game a week on an smart phone. You would have to say that it is at least another 10 million viewers for the AFL for the phones at least? What about at the game viewers. But now we are just starting to speculate.

However what we do know is that anyone who is saying NRL 134 and AFL 123 million is pretty clueless and they should be laughed at. At least when AFL supporters say they won they have some real results to back up their claim.

The sad thing is that I have yet to see one valid response to this information I have presented time after time by any RL supporter all I get from them is 134 million to 123 million like that means anything.

[piesman2011]

double post

[Raiderdave]

Brandy

I still think the ratings are closer then what you think Dave.

2011 ratings for NRL were 134m and an extra 12m for NZ as dave has said with links to back it up,

Now FTA ratings for 2011 to 2012 season were up 1.3% and fox ratings for 2011 to 2012 were up 16%.

Now if you do the maths on these facts you will come to a easy conclusion that the NRL is miles ahead of the AFL on tele.

I really cant see how hard this is to understand Brands?????

Furthermore the NRL is up 6%+ on FTA and up 14% on Fox in the 2013 season................the gap is growing larger every year Brands, hope this clears things up for you mate.

So you dont want to use the Australian results the only results that have been published in 2012 with AFL winning both the systems they mentioned. Ok thats fine because it doesnt fit the way you see your game,with a number 2 next to it. I get that. However what I dont get are the half truths you keep sprouting with no real reason to back them up.

The ratings for RL was 134 million + NZ figures of 12 million in 2011 according to the SMH, but this was in 2011 and just one way of tallying the results, while other results showed different numbers. But I get you using those results because it shows your sport winning. So thats fine if you are talking about 2011. What I dont get is you using the SMH results for 2011 and comparing them to the Australian results for 2012 where the Australian results for both 2011 and 2012 were much smaller for both sports.

There many different ways off adding up the ratings. No doubt the AFL has 27 hours a week roughly with similar ratings to the NRL, which has 16 hours of content. 11 hours difference in favour of the AFL for viewing,which is a dominant difference. No doubt also the AFL as up in the ratings in 2012 and according to the Australian about 8.5 % in fox and FTA compared to the NRL being up about 0.37% for everything in 2012. Which was a big increase for the AFL compared to pretty much nothing for the NRL. You also make some big leaps of faith by assuming that the Australian newspaper doesnt include SOO etc, but that it does use the AFL preseason, but there is no record on what was used. They may have just used another tally system compared to the SMH and this is backed up by the Australian talking about another tally system in the report.

Some other factors to consider are that the Australian only had the AFL on 113 in 2011 while the SMH had the AFL on 122. The Australian had the AFL at 123 in 2012 so shoud you then increase the 2011 SMH AFL results by 8.5% for their 2012 results? If you are going to use the SMH 2011 results to work out RL and AFL numbers at least learn how to use statistics properly.
What about Tbox, phone and tablet results. If you were one of the 1 million + down loads for the phone app then you would probabaly watch 10 -20 games + a year on your phone if you did this. This would be 24 million if you watched just one game a week on an smart phone. You would have to say that it is at least another 10 million viewers for the AFL for the phones at least? What about at the game viewers. But now we are just starting to speculate.

However what we do know is that anyone who is saying NRL 134 and AFL 123 million is pretty clueless and they should be laughed at. At least when AFL supporters say they won they have some real results to back up their claim.

The sad thing is that I have yet to see one valid response to this information I have presented time after time by any RL supporter all I get from them is 134 million to 123 million like that means anything.

but but but

but but



but but but

your sport came 2nd
build a bridge champ

build a bridge

[piesman2011]

Brandy
2011 ratings for NRL were 134m and an extra 12m for NZ as dave has said with links to back it up,

Now FTA ratings for 2011 to 2012 season were up 1.3% and fox ratings for 2011 to 2012 were up 16%.

Now if you do the maths on these facts you will come to a easy conclusion that the NRL is miles ahead of the AFL on tele.

I really cant see how hard this is to understand Brands?????

Furthermore the NRL is up 6%+ on FTA and up 14% on Fox in the 2013 season................the gap is growing larger every year Brands, hope this clears things up for you mate.

So you dont want to use the Australian results the only results that have been published in 2012 with AFL winning both the systems they mentioned. Ok thats fine because it doesnt fit the way you see your game,with a number 2 next to it. I get that. However what I dont get are the half truths you keep sprouting with no real reason to back them up.

The ratings for RL was 134 million + NZ figures of 12 million in 2011 according to the SMH, but this was in 2011 and just one way of tallying the results, while other results showed different numbers. But I get you using those results because it shows your sport winning. So thats fine if you are talking about 2011. What I dont get is you using the SMH results for 2011 and comparing them to the Australian results for 2012 where the Australian results for both 2011 and 2012 were much smaller for both sports.

There many different ways off adding up the ratings. No doubt the AFL has 27 hours a week roughly with similar ratings to the NRL, which has 16 hours of content. 11 hours difference in favour of the AFL for viewing,which is a dominant difference. No doubt also the AFL as up in the ratings in 2012 and according to the Australian about 8.5 % in fox and FTA compared to the NRL being up about 0.37% for everything in 2012. Which was a big increase for the AFL compared to pretty much nothing for the NRL. You also make some big leaps of faith by assuming that the Australian newspaper doesnt include SOO etc, but that it does use the AFL preseason, but there is no record on what was used. They may have just used another tally system compared to the SMH and this is backed up by the Australian talking about another tally system in the report.

Some other factors to consider are that the Australian only had the AFL on 113 in 2011 while the SMH had the AFL on 122. The Australian had the AFL at 123 in 2012 so shoud you then increase the 2011 SMH AFL results by 8.5% for their 2012 results? If you are going to use the SMH 2011 results to work out RL and AFL numbers at least learn how to use statistics properly.
What about Tbox, phone and tablet results. If you were one of the 1 million + down loads for the phone app then you would probabaly watch 10 -20 games + a year on your phone if you did this. This would be 24 million if you watched just one game a week on an smart phone. You would have to say that it is at least another 10 million viewers for the AFL for the phones at least? What about at the game viewers. But now we are just starting to speculate.

However what we do know is that anyone who is saying NRL 134 and AFL 123 million is pretty clueless and they should be laughed at. At least when AFL supporters say they won they have some real results to back up their claim.

The sad thing is that I have yet to see one valid response to this information I have presented time after time by any RL supporter all I get from them is 134 million to 123 million like that means anything.

but but but

but but



but but but

your sport came 2nd
build a bridge champ

build a bridge

See what I mean.

[Stewie]

So you dont want to use the Australian results the only results that have been published in 2012 with AFL winning both the systems they mentioned. Ok thats fine because it doesnt fit the way you see your game,with a number 2 next to it. I get that. However what I dont get are the half truths you keep sprouting with no real reason to back them up.

The ratings for RL was 134 million + NZ figures of 12 million in 2011 according to the SMH, but this was in 2011 and just one way of tallying the results, while other results showed different numbers. But I get you using those results because it shows your sport winning. So thats fine if you are talking about 2011. What I dont get is you using the SMH results for 2011 and comparing them to the Australian results for 2012 where the Australian results for both 2011 and 2012 were much smaller for both sports.

There many different ways off adding up the ratings. No doubt the AFL has 27 hours a week roughly with similar ratings to the NRL, which has 16 hours of content. 11 hours difference in favour of the AFL for viewing,which is a dominant difference. No doubt also the AFL as up in the ratings in 2012 and according to the Australian about 8.5 % in fox and FTA compared to the NRL being up about 0.37% for everything in 2012. Which was a big increase for the AFL compared to pretty much nothing for the NRL. You also make some big leaps of faith by assuming that the Australian newspaper doesnt include SOO etc, but that it does use the AFL preseason, but there is no record on what was used. They may have just used another tally system compared to the SMH and this is backed up by the Australian talking about another tally system in the report.

Some other factors to consider are that the Australian only had the AFL on 113 in 2011 while the SMH had the AFL on 122. The Australian had the AFL at 123 in 2012 so shoud you then increase the 2011 SMH AFL results by 8.5% for their 2012 results? If you are going to use the SMH 2011 results to work out RL and AFL numbers at least learn how to use statistics properly.
What about Tbox, phone and tablet results. If you were one of the 1 million + down loads for the phone app then you would probabaly watch 10 -20 games + a year on your phone if you did this. This would be 24 million if you watched just one game a week on an smart phone. You would have to say that it is at least another 10 million viewers for the AFL for the phones at least? What about at the game viewers. But now we are just starting to speculate.

However what we do know is that anyone who is saying NRL 134 and AFL 123 million is pretty clueless and they should be laughed at. At least when AFL supporters say they won they have some real results to back up their claim.

The sad thing is that I have yet to see one valid response to this information I have presented time after time by any RL supporter all I get from them is 134 million to 123 million like that means anything.

but but but

but but



but but but

your sport came 2nd
build a bridge champ

build a bridge

See what I mean.

Raiderdave's not intelligent enough to come up with an actual response.

[eelofwest]

NRL 2013 (2012)
Brisbane – 25,023 (25,366)
Canterbury Bulldogs – 16,368 (13,218) 2 months since last update
Canberra – 8,221 (8,348) 3 months since last update
Cronulla Sharks – 9,400 (6,878)
GoldCoast – 8.064 (6,610) 2 months since last update
Manly – 10,219 (9,540)
Melbourne – 14,117 (14,762)
Newcastle – 16,161 (18,460) 2 weeks since last update
New Zealand – 8,607 (10,800) 3 months since last update
North Queensland – 10,610 (10,212)
Parramatta Eels – 15,557 (10,999) 2 weeks since last update
Penrith – 5,875 (5,686) 3 months since last update
St George – 19,340 (20,313)
South Sydney – 25,609 (22,000)
Sydney – 13,113 (10,256)
Wests Tigers – 10,885 (10,248) 2 momths since last update

Total = 218,169 (204k)

[Stewie]

Port Adelaide - 2012, May 10th - 36,943

Port Adelaide - 2013, May 8th - 39,765 (+2822)

[Stewie]

Port Adelaide Football Club has lifted corporate sponsorship by $500,000, increased its membership by 10 per cent to add $1 million to its coffers, merchandise sales by 30 per cent and home crowds by 54 per cent.

Now to get a fair stadium deal next year hopefully (Crows as well) and we'll be back on track in no time. =D>

[Raiderdave]

Port Adelaide Football Club has lifted corporate sponsorship by $500,000, increased its membership by 10 per cent to add $1 million to its coffers, merchandise sales by 30 per cent and home crowds by 54 per cent.

Now to get a fair stadium deal next year hopefully (Crows as well) and we'll be back on track in no time. =D>

hmmmmmm
1.5 Million up

only 3.9 Million & 1 dollar to go to post a profit

[Stewie]

Port Adelaide Football Club has lifted corporate sponsorship by $500,000, increased its membership by 10 per cent to add $1 million to its coffers, merchandise sales by 30 per cent and home crowds by 54 per cent.

Now to get a fair stadium deal next year hopefully (Crows as well) and we'll be back on track in no time. =D>

hmmmmmm
1.5 Million up

only 3.9 Million & 1 dollar to go to post a profit

The $1.5m doesn't include extra $ generated through merchandise sales and home crowds. The club has almost sold out 1600 Heritage guernseys at $260 each or $1500 framed. That's at least $416k right there.

Also, the News Ltd figure was wrong as stated in an official email all members received from the club. The News Ltd figure took away AFL equalisation funds which all clubs bar 3 receive. So I guess it should have been one of those "scanning... News Ltd " moments for you, but your double standards got the better of you there.

The real loss in 2012 sas $4.3m. With millions extra in the kitty this year and a better stadium deal next year, we should be in the green at the end of 2014. =D>

[Raiderdave]

Port Adelaide Football Club has lifted corporate sponsorship by $500,000, increased its membership by 10 per cent to add $1 million to its coffers, merchandise sales by 30 per cent and home crowds by 54 per cent.

Now to get a fair stadium deal next year hopefully (Crows as well) and we'll be back on track in no time. =D>

hmmmmmm
1.5 Million up

only 3.9 Million & 1 dollar to go to post a profit

shit
my maths failed me here didn't it
( thats what you get for hanging around with fumblers )

its ..... 4.9 Million down the shitter still

[Raiderdave]

Port Adelaide Football Club has lifted corporate sponsorship by $500,000, increased its membership by 10 per cent to add $1 million to its coffers, merchandise sales by 30 per cent and home crowds by 54 per cent.

Now to get a fair stadium deal next year hopefully (Crows as well) and we'll be back on track in no time. =D>

hmmmmmm
1.5 Million up

only 3.9 Million & 1 dollar to go to post a profit

The real loss in 2012 sas $4.3m.

sure it was cockhead
sure


POWER FAILURE
Friday, December 7, Alberton.

Port's nightmare season went from bad to worse when its operating deficit was revealed as being a whopping $6.3 million before grants.An The Advertiser investigation found the $4.1 million trading deficit the club initially reported did not include the AFL grant of $1 million for the transition to Adelaide Oval.

Then there was the previously unreported $1.2 million which is understood to have come from the AFL as the club struggled to pay bills.

[Stewie]

The $1.5m doesn't include extra $ generated through merchandise sales and home crowds. The club has almost sold out 1600 Heritage guernseys at $260 each or $1500 framed. That's at least $416k right there.

Also, the News Ltd figure was wrong as stated in an official email all members received from the club. The News Ltd figure took away AFL equalisation funds which all clubs bar 3 receive. So I guess it should have been one of those "scanning... News Ltd " moments for you, but your double standards got the better of you there.

The real loss in 2012 sas $4.3m. With millions extra in the kitty this year and a better stadium deal next year, we should be in the green at the end of 2014.

[Stewie]

Here's the email from the club you fucking thick dick head.

Dear members and supporters,

With so much positive action happening at your club, it’s a pity that today we are being forced to confront another damaging, destructive article in The Advertiser, relating to our financial position.

Let me give you the facts: Last week we reported a loss of $2.1m. Included in that loss was an SANFL grant of $2m, making the consolidated loss $4.1m. This figure is endorsed by our auditors and the AFL.

The Advertiser “revealed” today that the loss is actually $6.3m, as a result of a “$1.2m emergency payment” that was made by the AFL to help us meet short term financial requirements. This statement is wrong.

There was also no $1.2m emergency bail-out. Money flows between the AFL, SANFL and its clubs virtually every day. There was nothing extraordinary this year.

So let’s talk about the gap between our actual result ($4.1m loss excluding SANFL grants) and the $6.3m number being reported by The Advertiser.

The AFL provides a Future Fund for ALL of its clubs, with a strategic view to creating 18 competitive teams and building the most even and strongest competition possible.

It does this in acknowledgment of a number of inequities, including that the competition is structured to maximise attendances and TV audiences. That’s why Collingwood rarely plays outside the MCG and the Friday Night blockbusters on TV almost invariably involve the top clubs. It’s also why the ANZAC Day clash is reserved for Collingwood and Essendon.

We accept these policies because it’s good for the competition commercially.

To compensate for these inequities, the AFL provides additional investment monies to the clubs who are less likely to be directly involved in these promotions.

In 2012, ALL clubs received $500k from the AFL Future Fund.

13 clubs received further AFL Future Funds on top of the $500k, Port Adelaide included.

8 clubs receive the same amount or more than Port Adelaide.

In our case, we received an additional $1.6m, which we must spend in areas agreed by the AFL. In our case this was our football program and Membership, Corporate and Media Departments in 2012.

Far from being hidden, or sinister in any way, this is a legitimate line of revenue from the AFL to their clubs.

It is reported by every other club exactly the same way we have reported it.

Our loss is $2.1m and we receive an agreed $2m grant from the SANFL. End of story.

We’re not happy with it, but we are getting things done to fix it.

The continual desire for faceless/nameless members of the SANFL community to attack Port Adelaide’s credibility is destructive, short-sighted and ill informed. It must stop.

The decision by The Advertiser, despite a comprehensive personal briefing from us, and full disclosure of all relevant documents, to run an unsourced article like today’s is also disappointing.

Rest assured, no club in Australia has done more to turn around its fortunes than Port Adelaide over the past few years.

We continue fight against forces that wish to operate in the shadows, but clearly do not have the health of football in this state at heart. But we are winning!

I know you can see it and feel it. So can I.

Stay strong true believers.

KT

Why wasn't this one of your scanning... News Limited moments Dave? It would have saved you from being wrong again.

Now piss off you waste of flesh.

Fucking minda

[214Four]

NRL 2013 (2012)
Brisbane – 25,023 (25,366)
Canterbury Bulldogs – 16,368 (13,218) 2 months since last update
Canberra – 8,221 (8,348) 3 months since last update
Cronulla Sharks – 9,400 (6,878)
GoldCoast – 8.064 (6,610) 2 months since last update
Manly – 10,219 (9,540)
Melbourne – 14,117 (14,762)
Newcastle – 16,161 (18,460) 2 weeks since last update
New Zealand – 8,607 (10,800) 3 months since last update
North Queensland – 10,610 (10,212)
Parramatta Eels – 15,557 (10,999) 2 wyeeks since last update
Penrith – 5,875 (5,686) 3 months since last update
St George – 19,340 (20,313)
South Sydney – 25,609 (22,000)
Sydney – 13,113 (10,256)
Wests Tigers – 10,885 (10,248) 2 momths since last update

Total = 218,169 (204k)

good to see NRL memberships improving year by year. The last 2 or so years i have really noticed the RL community changing more and more to a NRL club membership culture, slowly but surely we (League fans) will embrace membership aand see its significance and importance for NRL clubs and being a member of your fav team just something you do as a NRL supporter.

Congrads on south sydney on reaching 25K! Gee it sounds good on TV when you hear their fans signing and chanting as one.

2013 Membership Totals (as of 30/4/2013)
Collingwood - 73,629 (Target - 75,000)
Hawthorn - 60,250 (Target - 65,000)
West Coast - 57,333
Richmond - 56,039 (Target - 60,000)
Essendon - 51,528 (Target - 50,000)
Adelaide - 45,000+ (Target - 50,000)
Carlton - 43,827 (Target - 50,000)
Fremantle - 40,000+
Port Adel. - 39,005
Geelong - 38,602
Sydney - 33,172 (Target - 37,000)
North Melb - 32,127 (Target - 40,000)
St. Kilda - 31,811a
Melbourne - 30,723 (Target - 40,000)
Western B - 26,853
Brisbane - 21,608
GWS - 11,941
Gold Coast - 11,807

I do not understand that afew of my fellow RL supporters in here can somehow see problems with these membership numbers. I understand this is the 'fight club' but i still have to give credit where it is due, very good all round figures.

Congrads to swans, but i must admit i was surprised when i saw GWS's membership numbers so far for 2013, I didnt think they would see a rise, i did expect a drop in numbers due to interest in them here in western sydney (both in media and in the community) has dropped significantly from 2012 (and keep in mnd it wasnt that much to
start with). Id like to see their membership figures broken down into demographics/location. I still do not think they have see an anrease in western sydney.

I do not have the same opinion as RAIDERDAVE regarding fans buying club memberships for a club and not going to any games or memverships from fans interstate etc, these people still pay money that goes to the club which can only be a good thing, right?

I actualky think NRL clubs should offer membership options for fans who do not intend to go to a game for numerious reasons, this cld actualky be really possitive for NRL membership numbers.

Just think of the general Sydney sports fans (in particular) and their unwillingness to attend sporting events compared to fans from other parts of Aust and the massive TV audience NRL gets, i remember awhe ago reading the figures for fans of the different sydney NRL clubs and obviously with its huge population the number of supporters these clubs have is massive. And with an option of being a member would suit alot of the fans who do not attend games often but still want to contribute