Fight Club - Football Club Memberships

[Xman]

Brandz you can get the info from the storm membership website, in the top right corner.

Xman, not sure if you know much about the nrl but we do have clubs that have outright owners like tinkler and news limited and not owned by voting members. rightly or wrongly that is our system. So I guess all AFL clubs run at a loss too then because their owners (members) also contribute millions if your way of thinking is right.

Except owners come and go. Membership levels remain fairly constant and are surely a more stable way of supporting a club. Just look at the Goldcoasts NRL and A league teams

AFL clubs remain viable because of their popularity. This is the point, despite being mega successful, the storm certainly do not.

And further on the storm, you NRL fans bag the AFL for giving the swans a boost in salary cap to offset the higher cost of living for their players living in Sydney.

Yet we now learn that the Storm spend more on their football department than any other NRL team, and are funded by the previous owners of the NRL! What a rort!

[ParraEelsNRL]

Look at the bears.

[ParraEelsNRL]

Of the Brisbane variaty

[Stewie]

Fuck you lie a lot.

I have seen and posted articles here that state the storm have made profits you dope, yet you keep peddling this crap about the storm losing all this money.

If $65 million has been spent in Victoria you dumbarse, that's a good thing for RL considering 15 years ago, not a single fucking cent was spent.

Yep, $65 Million to get RL started and played in Victoria, money well spent, or as you people keep saying for your code, money invested in the future.

It must be fate that this article appeared today, sent by divine providence to prove you to be full of excrement.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/rugby-l ... 2d7mq.html

Former Melbourne director Gerry Ryan believes the Storm could be profitable within three years

There it is, clearly stated, in plain English, that the Storm do not currently make a profit.

That guy's delusional if he thinks the Storm will ever be profitable without the cash injections from their owners News Ltd.

[Storm2013]

Xman, there are benefits for private owners. Where most AFL clubs have to take loans out because as you said "the memberships remain fairly stable" they want to spend more money on their footy ops all storm would have to do is go to news ltd and asked them for more money. Quite simple and beneficial in that they don't have go into debt. Yes I had heard somewhere that storm spend the most on the footy ops as well. Good on them. Can't see a problem with that. I can't see how it is a rort. To me that's a pretty stable situation.

And stewie, do you honestly believe that! Because these threads and their contents could come back to bite you!!

[Stewie]

Xman, there are benefits for private owners. Where most AFL clubs have to take loans out because as you said "the memberships remain fairly stable" they want to spend more money on their footy ops all storm would have to do is go to news ltd and asked them for more money. Quite simple and beneficial in that they don't have go into debt. Yes I had heard somewhere that storm spend the most on the footy ops as well. Good on them. Can't see a problem with that. I can't see how it is a rort. To me that's a pretty stable situation.

And stewie, do you honestly believe that! Because these threads and their contents could come back to bite you!!

It's a rort because Melbourne is a tiny club when compared to the Brisbane Broncos, yet somehow the Storm can still spend the most on their football operations by a long margin. That's the inequity that private ownership creates and why the AFL does not allow it, but without private ownership the Storm would have been dead years ago as they can't survive off of their minuscule fan base.

[Xman]

Xman, there are benefits for private owners. Where most AFL clubs have to take loans out because as you said "the memberships remain fairly stable" they want to spend more money on their footy ops all storm would have to do is go to news ltd and asked them for more money. Quite simple and beneficial in that they don't have go into debt. Yes I had heard somewhere that storm spend the most on the footy ops as well. Good on them. Can't see a problem with that. I can't see how it is a rort. To me that's a pretty stable situation.

And stewie, do you honestly believe that! Because these threads and their contents could come back to bite you!!

Well all the NL fans on here bemoan the swans extra salary cap, which is only to counter the higher cost of living in Sydney.

Yet we now hear the storm, whose success has been truly astounding, have been given extra funds for their football department by none other than the code owners! theyve basically screwed over all NRL fans by assisting the team who has been by far the most dominant team of the last 15 years.

[Storm2013]

Stewie, yea storm are a smaller club than the bronc but tiny isn't a word I would use. But i guess it would be similar to port and Collingwood I guess. And you talk about the inequality in private ownership yet there is a greater discrepancy in what Collingwood spend compared to the others! Also storms fan base is growing and doing well.

Xman, swans get more because of living costs.... Lol oh know they will have to buy the 1 million dollar house instead of the 1.1 million while they drive there BMW or merc around. Storm are given extra funds to there club. Can you show me where it's states its for their football department. Don't assume!! Now part of the conditions that the nrl impose on private owners is that they have to help grow the game. Like tinkler had to promise to Newcastle and like news ltd do for Victoria. So given extra fund to try and make a imprint in vic doesn't seem so bad to me.

[Stewie]

Stewie, yea storm are a smaller club than the bronc but tiny isn't a word I would use. But i guess it would be similar to port and Collingwood I guess. And you talk about the inequality in private ownership yet there is a greater discrepancy in what Collingwood spend compared to the others! Also storms fan base is growing and doing well.

Xman, swans get more because of living costs.... Lol oh know they will have to buy the 1 million dollar house instead of the 1.1 million while they drive there BMW or merc around. Storm are given extra funds to there club. Can you show me where it's states its for their football department. Don't assume!! Now part of the conditions that the nrl impose on private owners is that they have to help grow the game. Like tinkler had to promise to Newcastle and like news ltd do for Victoria. So given extra fund to try and make a imprint in vic doesn't seem so bad to me.

Wow, so many things wrong in that post in so little words . Correction time.

I said the Storm were a tiny club in comparison with the Broncos, which is true.

Collingwood make their own money through a huge membership base, massive crowds and big sponsorships. No money whatsoever comes from private owners because they're a member owned club, unlike the Storm.

The Storm's average crowd went down by 2,000 in 2012 despite making the prelim in 2011 and winning the grand final in 2012. Their fan base is in fact shrinking!

[Xman]

Stewie, yea storm are a smaller club than the bronc but tiny isn't a word I would use. But i guess it would be similar to port and Collingwood I guess. And you talk about the inequality in private ownership yet there is a greater discrepancy in what Collingwood spend compared to the others! Also storms fan base is growing and doing well.

Xman, swans get more because of living costs.... Lol oh know they will have to buy the 1 million dollar house instead of the 1.1 million while they drive there BMW or merc around. Storm are given extra funds to there club. Can you show me where it's states its for their football department. Don't assume!! Now part of the conditions that the nrl impose on private owners is that they have to help grow the game. Like tinkler had to promise to Newcastle and like news ltd do for Victoria. So given extra fund to try and make a imprint in vic doesn't seem so bad to me.

The article yesterday which I posted yesterday stated the storm spend the most of any NRL team on their football department. And this was funded by the previous owners

That's dodgy as!

[QueenslandISAFL]

Update

NRL (2012 number's bolded)
Brisbane – 15,801 (25,366)
Canterbury Bulldogs - 10,000 (13,218)
Canberra – 4,000 (8,348) (Not up to date)
Cronulla Sharks – 5,800 (5,800)
GoldCoast – 3,000 (6,610) (Not up to date)
Manly - ????? (9,540)
Melbourne – 8,889 (12,736)
Newcastle – 12,102 (18,460)
New Zealand – 5,000 (10,800) (Not up to date)
North Queensland – 8,813 (10,212)
Parramatta Eels – 10,713 (10,999)
Penrith - ????? (11,169)
St George – 14,727 (20,313)
South Sydney – 19,261 (22,000)
Sydney - 4,829 (9,305) (Not up to date)
Wests Tigers – 5,556 (10,248)

[Drac]

The Storm's average crowd went down by 2,000 in 2012 despite making the prelim in 2011 and winning the grand final in 2012. Their fan base is in fact shrinking!

This highlights a common misconception among Rugby League fans. A lot of the nRL followers in my office (we have a good bit of cross-code banter) have argued that the salary cap scandal cost the Stom fans, and that they are now on their way to recovering lost ground. This isn't true. Crowds were on the wane before the cap scandal, and in fact rose in the year it happened. The scandal acted as a rallying call of sorts, but a few years later now attendance levels have been dropping back down to their pre-scandal levels. It's going to be a concern going forward that even a premiership can't lift attendance levels (as they did for the swans).

[Storm2013]

Stewie, yea storm are a smaller club than the bronc but tiny isn't a word I would use. But i guess it would be similar to port and Collingwood I guess. And you talk about the inequality in private ownership yet there is a greater discrepancy in what Collingwood spend compared to the others! Also storms fan base is growing and doing well.

Xman, swans get more because of living costs.... Lol oh know they will have to buy the 1 million dollar house instead of the 1.1 million while they drive there BMW or merc around. Storm are given extra funds to there club. Can you show me where it's states its for their football department. Don't assume!! Now part of the conditions that the nrl impose on private owners is that they have to help grow the game. Like tinkler had to promise to Newcastle and like news ltd do for Victoria. So given extra fund to try and make a imprint in vic doesn't seem so bad to me.

Wow, so many things wrong in that post in so little words . Correction time.

I said the Storm were a tiny club in comparison with the Broncos, which is true.

Collingwood make their own money through a huge membership base, massive crowds and big sponsorships. No money whatsoever comes from private owners because they're a member owned club, unlike the Storm.

The Storm's average crowd went down by 2,000 in 2012 despite making the prelim in 2011 and winning the grand final in 2012. Their fan base is in fact shrinking!

Like i said stewie that is like comparing (lions and collingwood) apples with bananas thats how silly your statement is. Storm are fully owned by news ltd and broncos aren't. broncos are a 1 city team atm in a rl state where storm battle against 9-10 AFL teams.

Collingwood make thier money from memberships, crowds and sponsors and for the storm all those same money spinners offset the money news ltd put in if any towards their footy department. So i guess its quite convenient you choose to use your owners money (members) but then in the same breathe disregard the news ltd money (owners). double standards much???

Whether you agree on the private ownership business structure or not you cannot admit that it is a bad thing. if im not mistaken WAFC is owned by a indian consortium AKA west cost and fremantle?? and then there are little clubs around the world called Arsenal, Chelsea, and NFL teams that all seem to do pretty well! just because in your little AFL world the majority of AFL clubs dont do it, doesnt mean its not a way profitable way of structuring a club.

Stewie, yea storm are a smaller club than the bronc but tiny isn't a word I would use. But i guess it would be similar to port and Collingwood I guess. And you talk about the inequality in private ownership yet there is a greater discrepancy in what Collingwood spend compared to the others! Also storms fan base is growing and doing well.

Xman, swans get more because of living costs.... Lol oh know they will have to buy the 1 million dollar house instead of the 1.1 million while they drive there BMW or merc around. Storm are given extra funds to there club. Can you show me where it's states its for their football department. Don't assume!! Now part of the conditions that the nrl impose on private owners is that they have to help grow the game. Like tinkler had to promise to Newcastle and like news ltd do for Victoria. So given extra fund to try and make a imprint in vic doesn't seem so bad to me.

The article yesterday which I posted yesterday stated the storm spend the most of any NRL team on their football department. And this was funded by the previous owners

That's dodgy as!

xman, i think your a bit confused. news ltd were PART owners with the nrl and as such had some say in the running of the game. it was a less then ideal way of running the nrl with news ltd having a say hence why it is no longer the case. as you say "dodgy" same could be said in Kurt tippettgate. Accountants audit all clubs as well as nrl/AFL and the storm more than anyone understands the process. They probably spend the most due to the fact that they dont have much in the way of actual club house assets. they are a football team first and foremost and spend their money on the team. still cant see a problem with that.

Lol Drac, agree those figures dont lie and meanwhile storm membership numbers are increasing. while im a bit of a computer illiterate could you also post the collingwood, suns, lions crowd figures over the past 5-10 years as well to give a even contest? cheers should be interesting read!

[ParraEelsNRL]

The Storm's average crowd went down by 2,000 in 2012 despite making the prelim in 2011 and winning the grand final in 2012. Their fan base is in fact shrinking!

This highlights a common misconception among Rugby League fans. A lot of the nRL followers in my office (we have a good bit of cross-code banter) have argued that the salary cap scandal cost the Stom fans, and that they are now on their way to recovering lost ground. This isn't true. Crowds were on the wane before the cap scandal, and in fact rose in the year it happened. The scandal acted as a rallying call of sorts, but a few years later now attendance levels have been dropping back down to their pre-scandal levels. It's going to be a concern going forward that even a premiership can't lift attendance levels (as they did for the swans).

Before they were caught, their first 3 home games in 2010 had given them an average over 22k (unheard of for them), then the shit hit the fan.

[Stewie]

Stewie, yea storm are a smaller club than the bronc but tiny isn't a word I would use. But i guess it would be similar to port and Collingwood I guess. And you talk about the inequality in private ownership yet there is a greater discrepancy in what Collingwood spend compared to the others! Also storms fan base is growing and doing well.

Xman, swans get more because of living costs.... Lol oh know they will have to buy the 1 million dollar house instead of the 1.1 million while they drive there BMW or merc around. Storm are given extra funds to there club. Can you show me where it's states its for their football department. Don't assume!! Now part of the conditions that the nrl impose on private owners is that they have to help grow the game. Like tinkler had to promise to Newcastle and like news ltd do for Victoria. So given extra fund to try and make a imprint in vic doesn't seem so bad to me.

Wow, so many things wrong in that post in so little words . Correction time.

I said the Storm were a tiny club in comparison with the Broncos, which is true.

Collingwood make their own money through a huge membership base, massive crowds and big sponsorships. No money whatsoever comes from private owners because they're a member owned club, unlike the Storm.

The Storm's average crowd went down by 2,000 in 2012 despite making the prelim in 2011 and winning the grand final in 2012. Their fan base is in fact shrinking!

Like i said stewie that is like comparing (lions and collingwood) apples with bananas thats how silly your statement is. Storm are fully owned by news ltd and broncos aren't. broncos are a 1 city team atm in a rl state where storm battle against 9-10 AFL teams.

Collingwood make thier money from memberships, crowds and sponsors and for the storm all those same money spinners offset the money news ltd put in if any towards their footy department. So i guess its quite convenient you choose to use your owners money (members) but then in the same breathe disregard the news ltd money (owners). double standards much???

Whether you agree on the private ownership business structure or not you cannot admit that it is a bad thing. if im not mistaken WAFC is owned by a indian consortium AKA west cost and fremantle?? and then there are little clubs around the world called Arsenal, Chelsea, and NFL teams that all seem to do pretty well! just because in your little AFL world the majority of AFL clubs dont do it, doesnt mean its not a way profitable way of structuring a club.

Stewie, yea storm are a smaller club than the bronc but tiny isn't a word I would use. But i guess it would be similar to port and Collingwood I guess. And you talk about the inequality in private ownership yet there is a greater discrepancy in what Collingwood spend compared to the others! Also storms fan base is growing and doing well.

As I've said the Storm are tiny compared to the Broncos but the Storm still manage to out spend the Broncos on their football department by million! Yes the Lions are tiny compared to Collingwood, but who spends more on their football department? Yep, Collingwood. If the nRL did not have a private ownership structure then they would not be able to spend more on their footy dept than Brisbane Broncos, that's the point. Private ownership for some clubs but not others creates a flawed league.