Maybe you should ask Kevin whether he's upset about a thread attracting 12,000 hits in the space of a month.

An article on the GWS thread said there were around 3,000 Canberra based members (which would all be 3 game memberships for games at Manuka).

Around one-third of last year's membership base was also from Canberra, so that ratio looks about right.

You do have the power Imno, just sayin.....

Edited by girtXc: 9/2/2013 12:53:29 PM

Total membership revenue=$22,500

Here are the latest group of members from Western Sydney



Blacktown



Canberra

Is this figure correct, Mister Football?

Which figure? the membership revenue of $22,500? doesn't look too accurate, hard to believe the club would only be earning $2.50 per membership.

Even pet and baby memberships are worth much more than that.

GWS memberships now at 9,287

http://membership.gwsgiants.com.au/

we have an AFL thread for you to post AFL membership numbers, if you are going to post them in this thread then please put them in the context of the discussion and not just randomly posting numbers as you see fit,

Perhaps posting GWS membership figures on a weekly basis would be reasonable in this thread.

In fairness, the last update was four days ago.

four days you say?



Edited by Joffa: 11/2/2013 12:48:30 PM

Are you saying that girtXc is lying and making up figures to suit his xenophobic agenda?

It's not in my nature to accuse people of lying.

I would like people to be able to discuss things in a civil manner.

We can all get along.

I appeal to everyone's basic humanity.

Reported

Champ, have you ever heard the story of the boy who cried wolf? If you report notorganic every time he calls you a name you don't like the mods just won't give a fuck.

And as for the GWS membership figure, exactly how many of those were given away?

That's unclear.

How can you be sure that any were given away?

I would agree that major sponsors receive a number of memberships to use during the season - but what's wrong with that? they are paid for

There's always memberships given away for corporate partnerships, etc. There will be some given away that they're counting into the figures. They'd also have given some away to get things up off the ground. I mean, you're more likely to sign up for a club that has 5,000 reported members than 500.

There are corporate packages that include, say, a corporate box for 5 to 30 people, with admission thrown in to cover the amount of people - but is there anything wrong with counting these?

Some here may not appreciate that GWS has a fantastic set up for members and corporate partners at the showgrounds - one of the very best in the league.

Also every AFL club (and progressive clubs like Melbourne Victory) have a base of paid up supporters the minute their membership packages are released because they are signed up to automatically renew in perpetuity via monthly eft deductions.

Edited by Mister Football: 11/2/2013 08:18:36 PM

In membership sales? When they're clearly NOT membership sales? Do I really need to explain that to you?

You have to appreciate that there are many corporate packages which are a mixture of sponsorship/membership, i.e. they are basically premium membership packages.

So yes, there might be a question mark about, say, Skoda, receiving 100 memberships to hand out as part of being the club's major sponsor (full paid for), but there would be no question mark about Tom the Plumber getting a family membership package at a premium price just so his name is displayed in the monthly newsletter or whatever it is.

Honestly, some on 442 have severe hang ups about memberships - it's all money in the bank!!

unless they're given away, in which case they're not.

Thats the problem with the AFL's hang up on memberships, every year the definition of memberships gets looser so there will be an increase.

Since, in AFL, the memberships don't necessarily give you anything in return for your money, what is stopping a club from creating a $0.01 "happy dog" membership. One person could 100,000 memberships "to hand out as the please" to boost the clubs numbers.

At least its all money in the bank.

It's the same with any other sport/league. "country" memberships, "quarterly" memberships, "gold" memberships, "interstate" memberships, "Pet" memberships, "childrens" memberships...there needs to be a standardised definition of 'membership' and these short-term memberships and token bullshit need to stop counting.

I don't really see the big issue. All of those Memberships put money into the club. They're not "Season Tickets", they're Memberships. The aim is to help the club not financially, not just buy a ticket. I have no problem with them all counting to the one total.

It as issue when someone seeks to use these membership figures as proof of one thing or another.

The issue is that the clubs having different kinds of memberships makes the figures incomparable and subsequently meaningless.

Bingo

Well not really, because it's not like the clubs try and claim those numbers are only full memberships. It's a known fact that it's made up of different types of memberships, and no club tries to claim otherwise.

I think the way AFL clubs are able to sell these extra memberships and generate extra revenue are a lesson for all A-League clubs on how to maximise revenue streams.

Yeah, but when you've got two clubs claiming 20,000 memberships and one of those has 9,000 full memberships and the other one only has 2,000 that's a bit misleading...

But neither clubs are claiming 20,000 FULL memberships, so it's not misleading at all. All memberships count the same as each other, because they're all a financial backing of the club. That's the point I was making earlier.