One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: one-eyed on December 15, 2017, 03:32:28 AM
-
Jeff Kennett at last night's Hawthorn AGM claimed they would reach 100,000 members within 5 years.
Oh and also 20 premierships all up by 2050 :chuck.
HAWTHORN plans to win seven more premierships by 2050, at a rate of one flag every 4.7 years.
President Jeff Kennett has tonight unveiled the club’s plan towards 2050, and plans were bold.
Kennett said the first stage of the strategy is titled “Dare to be Different” and that the Hawks are determined to win two premierships and amass 100,000 members within the next five years.
It also wants to extend its deal with Tasmania and obtain an AFL Women’s licence in that time.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/teams/hawthorn/hawthorn-president-jeff-kennett-says-the-club-plans-to-win-seven-more-premierships-by-2050/news-story/43b039c81f1c2b7f460ea3c057a694c6
-
We're at 66k already wouldn't be surprised if we break 80k. Gosh if we play well we could break 100k this year.
-
Essendon is aiming for 70k this year.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-12-15/target-70000-bombers-aiming-big
-
Remember how we were ridiculed for daring to present an ambitious plan on what we wanted to achieve!
-
Remember how we were ridiculed for daring to present an ambitious plan on what we wanted to achieve!
Sure do it gave the negative nancies ammo for years.
Funny how they aren't around now.
Must have crawled back under their rocks.
-
Essendon is aiming for 70k this year.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-12-15/target-70000-bombers-aiming-big
70k for the first 4 weeks and then 25k after they microwave their memberships
-
Hawks are cooking up something to ensure they are number 1 in 2018. Someone on BF says they're at 64k as of several days ago which i find astonishingly ridiculous if true
-
Jeff Kennett at last night's Hawthorn AGM claimed they would reach 100,000 members within 5 years.
Oh and also 20 premierships all up by 2050 :chuck.
At least he has stuffing balls unlike Peggy "pillars" Sue and the rest of the numpties that are too scared to set achievable goals, or tell us what they are
-
One year at a time......
-
Jeff Kennett at last night's Hawthorn AGM claimed they would reach 100,000 members within 5 years.
Oh and also 20 premierships all up by 2050 :chuck.
At least he has stuffing balls unlike Peggy "pillars" Sue and the rest of the numpties that are too scared to set achievable goals, or tell us what they are
A year or so later than planned but in fairness the Club did deliver on the 3-0-75 plan and more importantly a flag :thumbsup.
-
Hawks are cooking up something to ensure they are number 1 in 2018. Someone on BF says they're at 64k as of several days ago which i find astonishingly ridiculous if true
That 64k was made up lol. They’re about 60k
-
Sorry but I think these goals are crap if you are a good side. They're aimed for sides down the bottom of the ladder.
A good teams goals are simple. You aim to win every battle within every game and thus win most games which leads to regular finals and thus a chance to win the flag. If you can achieve that with relative frequency, your memberships will automatically go through the roof and you will be debt free with reasonable management of the money coming in.
As the wise man says, you focus on the process that will give you success and then success will come. You don't aim for success itself.
-
Sorry but I think these goals are crap if you are a good side. They're aimed for sides down the bottom of the ladder.
A good teams goals are simple. You aim to win every battle within every game and thus win most games which leads to regular finals and thus a chance to win the flag. If you can achieve that with relative frequency, your memberships will automatically go through the roof and you will be debt free with reasonable management of the money coming in.
As the wise man says, you focus on the process that will give you success and then success will come. You don't aim for success itself.
And then there's a vision of success which defines outcomes that inspire belief.
-
One year at a time......
Yeah stuff long term sustainable success, as long as we win now who cares how it affects us in the future...
-
One year at a time......
Yeah stuff long term sustainable success, as long as we win now who cares how it affects us in the future...
I would have thought if you keep winning year in, year out, you also get long term success..... ::)
-
Hawks are cooking up something to ensure they are number 1 in 2018. Someone on BF says they're at 64k as of several days ago which i find astonishingly ridiculous if true
That 64k was made up lol. They’re about 60k
even 60k is rubbish
-
Hawks are cooking up something to ensure they are number 1 in 2018. Someone on BF says they're at 64k as of several days ago which i find astonishingly ridiculous if true
That 64k was made up lol. They’re about 60k
even 60k is rubbish
The cowards are always the first to show off their numbers until we overtake them. Haven’t seen a thing yet from them. Same with Collingwood. As soon as the Hawks matched them about 3 years ago they waited until round 22 when they just squeezed past them to show their numbers
-
It's a Race?
Why??
-
It's a Race?
Why??
It's a wacky race
-
It's a Race?
Why??
It's a wacky race
But our version of Dastardly and Mutley have left
-
100000 members so what, you get to the GF and only 20K can get in, what a joke, they take your money and then deny you access to the GF unless you want to pay 2K
-
100000 members so what, you get to the GF and only 20K can get in, what a joke, they take your money and then deny you access to the GF unless you want to pay 2K
I agree with Mint, Its pretty disappointing when you've been a member for say 20 years straight and longer and you miss out to
people just because they have more money. A lot of us were there contributing when we were rubbish for a long time, but corporates
are more important it seems.
-
It is difficult for both sides. Often 1 corporate payment is more than 20 years of contributions. The club is thus in a difficult bind.
-
It's not the club's fault that the AFL only allocate 18k odd tickets to competing club members
Club does the best they can in a no win situation. A ballot is the fairest method available
FWIW the number of members who have guaranteed GF tickets (and yes i am one, 30+ year member & been a coterie member for over 10 yrs now) is not as high as what you may think.
-
It's called supply and demand gents
-
It's not the club's fault that the AFL only allocate 18k odd tickets to competing club members
Club does the best they can in a no win situation. A ballot is the fairest method available
FWIW the number of members who have guaranteed GF tickets (and yes i am one, 30+ year member & been a coterie member for over 10 yrs now) is not as high as what you may think.
I think it is pretty high, purely speculation on my behalf....But I didn't know many on the P2 Ballot that were successful
Be interesting to know the number of guarantees if you can figure it out
-
Whilst it might not be a race there is an advantage in having the highest membership when seeking major sponsors as well as considerations in the home and away draw.
We went past the bums on seats membership base several years ago. It will become increasingly harder for the rank and file to get GF and finals tickets unless you can pay the high $
Have a look at the big soccer clubs in Europe. They have well over 100,000 members and some like FC Barcelona have closed their membership.
These days in the internet world membership don't necessarily have to mean tickets to games. The club could build a media arm and membership entitles the member to view Richmond centric information. Similar to how the media outlets ate using paywalls to block content to non-paying readers
100,000 members each spending $1 a day on average brings in $36.5million.
-
Whilst it might not be a race there is an advantage in having the highest membership when seeking major sponsors as well as considerations in the home and away draw.
We went past the bums on seats membership base several years ago. It will become increasingly harder for the rank and file to get GF and finals tickets unless you can pay the high $
Have a look at the big soccer clubs in Europe. They have well over 100,000 members and some like FC Barcelona have closed their membership.
These days in the internet world membership don't necessarily have to mean tickets to games. The club could build a media arm and membership entitles the member to view Richmond centric information. Similar to how the media outlets ate using paywalls to block content to non-paying readers
100,000 members each spending $1 a day on average brings in $36.5million.
That is absolutely correct. From my perspective this is more than a peeing contest and on a personal level i dont give a crap - we all know we have a much much bigger supporter base. But it grinds my gears that the hawks have an MO to be the number 1 membership side year in year out so they can utilise and bargain this position of strength with sponsors, and to achieve this, a number of very well off supporters buy in bulk each year, so yes, they are real memberships bought and paid for, but theyre not real people, probably why their membership areas are never full even though they are number 1 supposedly ::)
I mean 60k already? after the season theyve had and are about to have, they are going to get around 80k+?? - comeon..
-
Whilst it might not be a race there is an advantage in having the highest membership when seeking major sponsors as well as considerations in the home and away draw.
We went past the bums on seats membership base several years ago. It will become increasingly harder for the rank and file to get GF and finals tickets unless you can pay the high $
Have a look at the big soccer clubs in Europe. They have well over 100,000 members and some like FC Barcelona have closed their membership.
These days in the internet world membership don't necessarily have to mean tickets to games. The club could build a media arm and membership entitles the member to view Richmond centric information. Similar to how the media outlets ate using paywalls to block content to non-paying readers
100,000 members each spending $1 a day on average brings in $36.5million.
That is absolutely correct. From my perspective this is more than a peeing contest and on a personal level i dont give a crap - we all know we have a much much bigger supporter base. But it grinds my gears that the hawks have an MO to be the number 1 membership side year in year out so they can utilise and bargain this position of strength with sponsors, and to achieve this, a number of very well off supporters buy in bulk each year, so yes, they are real memberships bought and paid for, but theyre not real people, probably why their membership areas are never full even though they are number 1 supposedly ::)
As well as their pets being members....... :snidegrin
-
If I was a major company looking to sponsor an AFL team, the last thing I'd probably look at is membership numbers.
Membership demographic and how this matched my product would be first and foremost.
Then I'd be looking at number of people attending games and the subsequent likelihood of media exposure (big games, especially Friday night).
Hawthorn can bulltwang about how many members they have all they want. Their crowd numbers suggest they do not have the membership they claim to have. Any team that accepts a lucrative deal to play in Tassie just to get the money isn't all it is cracked up to be, pure and simple. They can pretend it is about market penetration, but the Tassie deal pretty much keeps them afloat.
-
Whilst it might not be a race there is an advantage in having the highest membership when seeking major sponsors as well as considerations in the home and away draw.
We went past the bums on seats membership base several years ago. It will become increasingly harder for the rank and file to get GF and finals tickets unless you can pay the high $
Have a look at the big soccer clubs in Europe. They have well over 100,000 members and some like FC Barcelona have closed their membership.
These days in the internet world membership don't necessarily have to mean tickets to games. The club could build a media arm and membership entitles the member to view Richmond centric information. Similar to how the media outlets ate using paywalls to block content to non-paying readers
100,000 members each spending $1 a day on average brings in $36.5million.
That is absolutely correct. From my perspective this is more than a peeing contest and on a personal level i dont give a crap - we all know we have a much much bigger supporter base. But it grinds my gears that the hawks have an MO to be the number 1 membership side year in year out so they can utilise and bargain this position of strength with sponsors, and to achieve this, a number of very well off supporters buy in bulk each year, so yes, they are real memberships bought and paid for, but theyre not real people, probably why their membership areas are never full even though they are number 1 supposedly ::)
As well as their pets being members....... :snidegrin
They also have 10k in Tassie members so if we just look at it from A Victorian members perspective they are behind a few clubs
-
If I was a major company looking to sponsor an AFL team, the last thing I'd probably look at is membership numbers.
Membership demographic and how this matched my product would be first and foremost.
Then I'd be looking at number of people attending games and the subsequent likelihood of media exposure (big games, especially Friday night).
Most of that is true but you wouldn't traditionally link say Bang & Olufsen with Richmond. I think that sponsorship means that our
branding can go a bit upscale in time and that we can make inroads with brands usually associated with higher income earners.