Talking Footy

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

If casual attendees take up memberships, they still attend but are members. It all depends on the proportion of fans that are members

I'm sorry what cockbrain ?
increased memberships directly corrolate to larger attendances .. thats if the memberships are bona fide
if your membership increases as dramatically as the midgets are claiming theirs has

then it has to equal bigger home attendances
if it doesn't
or even worse .... crowds fall

then the claim is proven false & misleading .. & nothing but proof of the fact
that the vast majority of midgets members do not reside in Sydney

OK,

lets see. in 2005 the NRL had around 50K members and an average attendance of 16K

In 2012 they had quadrupled their memberships to over 200K.

SO did their attendance quarduple? Ah no, theyre actually less......

Nice one Dave! Either the NRL are fudging their membership numbers or Im dead right

Xman wrote:

OK,

lets see. in 2005 the NRL had around 50K members and an average attendance of 16K

In 2012 they had quadrupled their memberships to over 200K.

SO did their attendance quarduple? Ah no, theyre actually less......

Nice one Dave! Either the NRL are fudging their membership numbers or Im dead right

our attendances have held steady
the only code that has been able to manage that in tough times
thats a direct result of our increased memberships

the VFL's increased their Memberships by 180K since 2008
but even with 22 extra games....................have lost 400K attendees


my point is proven ... again

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

OK,

lets see. in 2005 the NRL had around 50K members and an average attendance of 16K

In 2012 they had quadrupled their memberships to over 200K.

SO did their attendance quarduple? Ah no, theyre actually less......

Nice one Dave! Either the NRL are fudging their membership numbers or Im dead right

our attendances have held steady
the only code that has been able to manage that in tough times
thats a direct result of our increased memberships

the VFL's increased their Memberships by 180K since 2008
but even with 22 extra games....................have lost 400K attendees


my point is proven ... again

But Dave, you said that crowds directly correlated with memberships.

NRL, fudging memberships! They increased memberships by 4 times yet dropped attendance!

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

OK,

lets see. in 2005 the NRL had around 50K members and an average attendance of 16K

In 2012 they had quadrupled their memberships to over 200K.

SO did their attendance quarduple? Ah no, theyre actually less......

Nice one Dave! Either the NRL are fudging their membership numbers or Im dead right

our attendances have held steady
the only code that has been able to manage that in tough times
thats a direct result of our increased memberships

the VFL's increased their Memberships by 180K since 2008
but even with 22 extra games....................have lost 400K attendees


my point is proven ... again

But Dave, you said that crowds directly correlated with memberships.

NRL, fudging memberships! They increased memberships by 4 times yet dropped attendance!

they do
as I've proven above
NRL attendances have not fallen .... 2012 was the 2nd highest average attendance ever
a fraction ... smidgeon behind 2005
16,423 in 2012
16,468 in 2005

steady as she goes
while all other codes crowds dissapear down the shitter

yep
theres no doubt about it
if you increase your memberships .... your crowds trend up as well , & they certainly don't fall


well
except it seems .... in the VFL
more members

less

a lot , lot ... less fans at games

Thanks for proving my point. Memberships do not directly relate to crowd size. Otherwise a 400% increase in NRL memberships would have resulted in a crowd increase, not a drop!

as for your "holding steady BS, is that whatbit takes to keep crowds steady, a 400% increase?

Xman wrote:

Memberships do not directly relate to crowd size.

as I have proven
they do for sports that have " real " memberships ... aka the NRL
no loss of average attendance, the only code that can claim this since 2005 ... off the back of strong membership growth =D> =D>

& for sports that have make believe memberships .. aka , the VFL
even having membership growth , did not stop a massive loss of average attendance

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Memberships do not directly relate to crowd size.

as I have proven
they do for sports that have " real " memberships ... aka the NRL
no loss of average attendance, the only code that can claim this since 2005 ... off the back of strong membership growth =D> =D>

& for sports that have make believe memberships .. aka , the VFL
even having membership growth , did not stop a massive loss of average attendance

No loss of attendance....in other words the increase of 400% did nothing....

Cheers! =D> =D>

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Memberships do not directly relate to crowd size.

as I have proven
they do for sports that have " real " memberships ... aka the NRL
no loss of average attendance, the only code that can claim this since 2005 ... off the back of strong membership growth =D> =D>

& for sports that have make believe memberships .. aka , the VFL
even having membership growth , did not stop a massive loss of average attendance

Why haven't the nRL's increased memberships resulted in increased crowds since 2005?

2013 Membership Totals (as of 1/3/2013)

Collingwood - 69,000+
West Coast - 54,801
Hawthorn - 50,621
Richmond - 45,118
Essendon - 43,732
Adelaide - 42,000+
Fremantle - 40,000+
Carlton - 36,912
Geelong - 32,056
Port Adel. - 29,726
Sydney - 28,000
St. Kilda - 27,123
North Melb - 24,356
Melbourne - 24,801
Western B - 20,923
Brisbane - 14,805
Greater WS - 10,386
Gold Coast - 9,316

Stewie wrote:

Why haven't the nRL's increased memberships resulted in increased crowds since 2005?

we're the only code that has not recorded a major drop in attendances in the last 8 years
our increased membership is the reason why .... they have kept our average attendances steady

the VFL has had a 25% increase as well
but a 15% drop in attendances

hmmmmm..... dodgey much ?

Raiderdave wrote:

Stewie wrote:

Why haven't the nRL's increased memberships resulted in increased crowds since 2005?

we're the only code that has not recorded a major drop in attendances in the last 8 years
our increased membership is the reason why .... they have kept our average attendances steady

the VFL has had a 25% increase as well
but a 15% drop in attendances

hmmmmm..... dodgey much ?

Compared to your 400% increase?

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Stewie wrote:

Why haven't the nRL's increased memberships resulted in increased crowds since 2005?

we're the only code that has not recorded a major drop in attendances in the last 8 years
our increased membership is the reason why .... they have kept our average attendances steady

the VFL has had a 25% increase as well
but a 15% drop in attendances

hmmmmm..... dodgey much ?

Compared to your 400% increase?

we haven't lost a fan

you've lost tonnes
wow
VFL exposed ..... again =D> =D> =D>

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

we're the only code that has not recorded a major drop in attendances in the last 8 years
our increased membership is the reason why .... they have kept our average attendances steady

the VFL has had a 25% increase as well
but a 15% drop in attendances

hmmmmm..... dodgey much ?

Compared to your 400% increase?

we haven't lost a fan

you've lost tonnes
wow
VFL exposed ..... again =D> =D> =D>

nor have we with a shift to live TV, 10M more

Xman your an idiot!!

As you have stated the nrl have increased there memberships by 400%. Pretty impressive in its self. What your not smart enough to understand is that the nrl have just started to get serious about memberships. The past 5 years the nrl supporters who go to the games have been taking up the memberships. Hence why the increase is minimal. 16k per game average with 16 teams is 256k and until the nrl reach that point the nrl won't grow crowds. But that time is now! It coincides with millions and millions of $$$$$ in tv money. The nrl have 4-5 teams the have already reached last years figures. Yet the AFL is yet to get 1 team. % growth is the real indicator and the AFL are struggling big time.

Nrl are growing rapidly!!

Storm2013 wrote:

Xman your an idiot!!

As you have stated the nrl have increased there memberships by 400%. Pretty impressive in its self. What your not smart enough to understand is that the nrl have just started to get serious about memberships. The past 5 years the nrl supporters who go to the games have been taking up the memberships. Hence why the increase is minimal. 16k per game average with 16 teams is 256k and until the nrl reach that point the nrl won't grow crowds. But that time is now! It coincides with millions and millions of $$$$$ in tv money. The nrl have 4-5 teams the have already reached last years figures. Yet the AFL is yet to get 1 team. % growth is the real indicator and the AFL are struggling big time.

Nrl are growing rapidly!!

Classic!
It's you're not your!

Read the thread and youll see Raiderdave claiming memberships are directly related to crowd size yet the NRLs crowds remained the same after a 400% increase in memberships. Yeah, really good logic that!

I totally agree with you and said exactly the same thing earlier. Occasional fans become financial members but the crowds stay the same size! Tell that to Raiderdave.