One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: tiogar on March 04, 2009, 12:48:19 AM
-
I managed to get myself thrown off BF for having the cheek to actually support some of my assertions about club popularity with actual real figures. I think I hurt the Hawks feelings and they were whingeing to the mods but then children will be children.
However you know that when we claim to be hugely popular and point to home attendances in the 1970s we are often told "Oh it was the MCG" as if we never drew at Punt road.
Read this. Attendance stats date from 1921 and we stayed inn Punt Rd 'til 1964. 44 seasons.
Richmond 19 finals outdrew Collingwood with 29 finals 24 times to 20.
Richmond with 19 finals outdrew Essendon with 24 finals 28 times to 16.
Richmond Number One 13 times ( one shared with Carlton)
Collingwood number one 10 times.
Essendon number one 4 times.
Interesting?
-
Interesting?
No
-
I managed to get myself thrown off BF for having the cheek to actually support some of my assertions about club popularity with actual real figures. I think I hurt the Hawks feelings and they were whingeing to the mods but then children will be children.
However you know that when we claim to be hugely popular and point to home attendances in the 1970s we are often told "Oh it was the MCG" as if we never drew at Punt road.
Read this. Attendance stats date from 1921 and we stayed inn Punt Rd 'til 1964. 44 seasons.
Richmond 19 finals outdrew Collingwood with 29 finals 24 times to 20.
Richmond with 19 finals outdrew Essendon with 24 finals 28 times to 16.
Richmond Number One 13 times ( one shared with Carlton)
Collingwood number one 10 times.
Essendon number one 4 times.
Interesting?
about as interesting as watching paint dry pal
-
I managed to get myself thrown off BF for having the cheek to actually support some of my assertions about club popularity with actual real figures. I think I hurt the Hawks feelings and they were whingeing to the mods but then children will be children.
However you know that when we claim to be hugely popular and point to home attendances in the 1970s we are often told "Oh it was the MCG" as if we never drew at Punt road.
Read this. Attendance stats date from 1921 and we stayed inn Punt Rd 'til 1964. 44 seasons.
Richmond 19 finals outdrew Collingwood with 29 finals 24 times to 20.
Richmond with 19 finals outdrew Essendon with 24 finals 28 times to 16.
Richmond Number One 13 times ( one shared with Carlton)
Collingwood number one 10 times.
Essendon number one 4 times.
Interesting?
about as interesting as watching paint dry pal
Daniel
Is this a first?
We actually agee on something related to football.
:help
-
I managed to get myself thrown off BF for having the cheek to actually support some of my assertions about club popularity with actual real figures. I think I hurt the Hawks feelings and they were whingeing to the mods but then children will be children.
However you know that when we claim to be hugely popular and point to home attendances in the 1970s we are often told "Oh it was the MCG" as if we never drew at Punt road.
Read this. Attendance stats date from 1921 and we stayed inn Punt Rd 'til 1964. 44 seasons.
Richmond 19 finals outdrew Collingwood with 29 finals 24 times to 20.
Richmond with 19 finals outdrew Essendon with 24 finals 28 times to 16.
Richmond Number One 13 times ( one shared with Carlton)
Collingwood number one 10 times.
Essendon number one 4 times.
Interesting?
about as interesting as watching paint dry pal
Daniel
Is this a first?
We actually agee on something related to football.
:help
very true mate.
im having an off day hope you will excuse me
-
I managed to get myself thrown off BF for having the cheek to actually support some of my assertions about club popularity with actual real figures. I think I hurt the Hawks feelings and they were whingeing to the mods but then children will be children.
However you know that when we claim to be hugely popular and point to home attendances in the 1970s we are often told "Oh it was the MCG" as if we never drew at Punt road.
Read this. Attendance stats date from 1921 and we stayed inn Punt Rd 'til 1964. 44 seasons.
Richmond 19 finals outdrew Collingwood with 29 finals 24 times to 20.
Richmond with 19 finals outdrew Essendon with 24 finals 28 times to 16.
Richmond Number One 13 times ( one shared with Carlton)
Collingwood number one 10 times.
Essendon number one 4 times.
Interesting?
about as interesting as watching paint dry pal
Daniel
Is this a first?
We actually agee on something related to football.
:help
very true mate.
im having an off day hope you will excuse me
No worries, just don't make a habit of it.
:lol
-
Your preaching to the converted here with those stats tiogar ;).
A more interesting stat is in that thread you got thrown out of on BF is Essendon fans admitting their club include non-ticketed figures in their published membership tally. So after 20 years of finals under Sheeds they have fewer members now than Richmond who as we sadly know have done sweet all since 1982. Play finals and get some onfield success and we won't have to resort to stats to try and prove to the unwashed we are still a big club. The sea of Y&B in the stands will be in their faces to see each and every week.
:gotigers
-
Your preaching to the converted here with those stats tiogar ;).
A more interesting stat is in that thread you got thrown out of on BF is Essendon fans admitting their club include non-ticketed figures in their published membership tally. So after 20 years of finals under Sheeds they have fewer members now than Richmond who as we sadly know have done sweet all since 1982. Play finals and get some onfield success and we won't have to resort to stats to try and prove to the unwashed we are still a big club. The sea of Y&B in the stands will be in their faces to see each and every week.
:gotigers
This has been explained b4 but WTF is this ticketed and non ticketed business.
Is that like AFL members or 11 game holder memberships or something?
Please explain?
-
(http://www.mynighttimehealth.com/images/snore.jpg)
-
Your preaching to the converted here with those stats tiogar ;).
A more interesting stat is in that thread you got thrown out of on BF is Essendon fans admitting their club include non-ticketed figures in their published membership tally. So after 20 years of finals under Sheeds they have fewer members now than Richmond who as we sadly know have done sweet all since 1982. Play finals and get some onfield success and we won't have to resort to stats to try and prove to the unwashed we are still a big club. The sea of Y&B in the stands will be in their faces to see each and every week.
:gotigers
This has been explained b4 but WTF is this ticketed and non ticketed business.
Is that like AFL members or 11 game holder memberships or something?
Please explain?
Daniel the reality is that memberships are now a political football. Non-ticketed is like our insider deal. Literally members who are non ticketed and pay $76 to be club members but perhaps are only interested in turning upV the Blues adn Pies or perhaps are out of town or whatever. We have about 10,000 of them. We also have basically 3 ticketeds. the 17,11 and 5 game interstate packages. Of which we will have about 35,000 this year making a 2009 total of about 45,000 paid up members but only 35,000 recognised by the AFL.
So what you ask? It actually matters a lot. Other clubs realise that membership figuresa re iconic and attract good publicity and sponsorship. So the Hawks have 1 and 4 game memberships in Tassie, the Pies 3 game memberships which are actually cheaper than our uncounted memberships etc etc. Basically anything to lower non ticketed cheap memberships and pretend they are sellling 11 and 17 game packages and thus and crucially attract money. In fact as I type Richmond have more members than Essendon or Collingwood but we have failed to benefit from that in attracting good publicity because we don't play the sily game of inflating membership figures with 1 3 and 4 game packages.
People may say Oh boring as watching paint dry but in reality - as Essendon under Sheeds understood - people don't look behind the big headline and they think we are smaller and thus less interesting to advertisers, sponsors etc than Essendon etc. This costs us money.
The reason I quoted those stats is to show that Richmond are actually all things being equal the biggest club in the game - I could give you a raft of stats to prove it - and should be benefitting hugely from that position but we allow a false impression be created that we are some kind of little add on to a Big 3...a big 3 that we regularly, indeed usually, outdrew decade after decade. This impression has cost us millions inadvertising over the years.
How
-
This membership ladder is all a farce anyway. What club boards care about is total membership revenue and total number of people signed up. The rest of it is just meaningless comparing apples with oranges as all clubs membership structures are different anyway.
-
comparing apples with oranges
with peanuts in the case of the Ainters ;D
-
Daniel the reality is that memberships are now a political football. Non-ticketed is like our insider deal. Literally members who are non ticketed and pay $76 to be club members but perhaps are only interested in turning upV the Blues adn Pies or perhaps are out of town or whatever. We have about 10,000 of them. We also have basically 3 ticketeds. the 17,11 and 5 game interstate packages. Of which we will have about 35,000 this year making a 2009 total of about 45,000 paid up members but only 35,000 recognised by the AFL.
So what you ask? It actually matters a lot. Other clubs realise that membership figuresa re iconic and attract good publicity and sponsorship. So the Hawks have 1 and 4 game memberships in Tassie, the Pies 3 game memberships which are actually cheaper than our uncounted memberships etc etc. Basically anything to lower non ticketed cheap memberships and pretend they are sellling 11 and 17 game packages and thus and crucially attract money. In fact as I type Richmond have more members than Essendon or Collingwood but we have failed to benefit from that in attracting good publicity because we don't play the sily game of inflating membership figures with 1 3 and 4 game packages.
People may say Oh boring as watching paint dry but in reality - as Essendon under Sheeds understood - people don't look behind the big headline and they think we are smaller and thus less interesting to advertisers, sponsors etc than Essendon etc. This costs us money.
The reason I quoted those stats is to show that Richmond are actually all things being equal the biggest club in the game - I could give you a raft of stats to prove it - and should be benefitting hugely from that position but we allow a false impression be created that we are some kind of little add on to a Big 3...a big 3 that we regularly, indeed usually, outdrew decade after decade. This impression has cost us millions inadvertising over the years.
Great Post! :clapping
I just can not understand why we don't package our memberships up the same way the other clubs do so we can be compared correctly and legitimately. Just rediculous and a slight on the club.
I would love to hear some more stats to prove we are the biggest club so throw them at me! Anything that shows we better than the Pies, Bombers and Blues is most welcome. :santa
Stripes
-
Daniel the reality is that memberships are now a political football. Non-ticketed is like our insider deal. Literally members who are non ticketed and pay $76 to be club members but perhaps are only interested in turning upV the Blues adn Pies or perhaps are out of town or whatever. We have about 10,000 of them. We also have basically 3 ticketeds. the 17,11 and 5 game interstate packages. Of which we will have about 35,000 this year making a 2009 total of about 45,000 paid up members but only 35,000 recognised by the AFL.
So what you ask? It actually matters a lot. Other clubs realise that membership figuresa re iconic and attract good publicity and sponsorship. So the Hawks have 1 and 4 game memberships in Tassie, the Pies 3 game memberships which are actually cheaper than our uncounted memberships etc etc. Basically anything to lower non ticketed cheap memberships and pretend they are sellling 11 and 17 game packages and thus and crucially attract money. In fact as I type Richmond have more members than Essendon or Collingwood but we have failed to benefit from that in attracting good publicity because we don't play the sily game of inflating membership figures with 1 3 and 4 game packages.
People may say Oh boring as watching paint dry but in reality - as Essendon under Sheeds understood - people don't look behind the big headline and they think we are smaller and thus less interesting to advertisers, sponsors etc than Essendon etc. This costs us money.
The reason I quoted those stats is to show that Richmond are actually all things being equal the biggest club in the game - I could give you a raft of stats to prove it - and should be benefitting hugely from that position but we allow a false impression be created that we are some kind of little add on to a Big 3...a big 3 that we regularly, indeed usually, outdrew decade after decade. This impression has cost us millions inadvertising over the years.
Great Post! :clapping
I just can not understand why we don't package our memberships up the same way the other clubs do so we can be compared correctly and legitimately. Just rediculous and a slight on the club.
I would love to hear some more stats to prove we are the biggest club so throw them at me! Anything that shows we better than the Pies, Bombers and Blues is most welcome. :santa
Stripes
Agree also Stripes but to be honest - I just love the fact we are better than those scumbag clubs, no ifs buts or maybes, we're just better! :gotigers