Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 13 to 24 of 111

Thread: 2017 Membership count

  1. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Joel Ridge View Post
    Great post again Mug

    Below is a recent article on AFL in Sydney Private Schools:

    No Cookies | Daily Telegraph

    The breaking of AFL into the Private School System is also aiding the Swans. Kids and parents from Private Schools like spending their time in trendy upmarket areas. Moore Park which is near Paddington, Darlinghurst and Surry Hills offers the Private School Community an entertainment experience for them to desire. They can go out to these trendy areas after being entertained by a Swans SCG game. The private school influence will grow the Swans membership base. I can't see may people in the Private School Community going to Spotless Stadium.

    Has there ever been a point where the SCG capacity does not cater for all the Swans members who wanted to attend on a particular match. Average home crowds seem to be around the low 30,000 while some home and away matches push towards 40,000. This is still short of the SCG capacity of 46,000.
    Fans not being able to get any ticket for a match, i.e a complete sell out, has been rare but if there increased membership numbers have a flowon to bums on seats at the SCG, as they should, then we may start to see some more regular sellouts.

    I think a capacity of 46,000 is more than adequate for the medium to long term. If the SCG Trust were able to get their hands on some of that land behind the Bill O'Reilly then I could see a new stand there as having the potential to push capacity past 50,000 and there's not many teams in the world that average over that in a long season format (most NFL teams do but they only play 7 home matches a year).

    The problem will be, of course, that when the construction is on the capacity will be reduced for 2-3 seasons and the d-heads at the SCG Trust always plan the construction to minimise the cricket season even though we are the major tenant. The same knobs that accepted a cricket pavilion design for the latest redevelopment that is totally impractical when the winter weather arrives. I was totally 100% behind to move to have all our games moved back to the SCG but if wee do have to deal with a 35,000 seat stadium for two seasons then we may well wish we still had ANZ as a fallback.

    I think the next priority for a stater government handout will be the Brewongle, though I think that is a major renovation and not a complete re-build. It is looking tired but I'd do the BOR first and get the capacity up before taking one of the biggest stands out of action.

  2. #14

    2017 Membership count

    The 46000 capacity includes the SCG Trust members area. Many of these members rarely go to the Swans games as they are mainly cricket fans. So the capacity as far as people who are not Trust members would be well below the 46000 number. Accordingly if our membership numbers do continue to grow then obtaining a walk up ticket on game day may become difficult especially against big drawing teams like Collingwood. Joining up as a Swans member will become critical in ensuring admittance. It could even one day end up like the WCE situation where there was a waiting list for membership to ensure admittance to the ground. For WCE supporters this will change with the new stadium currently being built.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  3. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Aprilbr View Post
    The 46000 capacity includes the SCG Trust members area. Many of these members rarely go to the Swans games as they are mainly cricket fans. So the capacity as far as people who are not Trust members would be well below the 46000 number. Accordingly if our membership numbers do continue to grow then obtaining a walk up ticket on game day may become difficult especially against big drawing teams like Collingwood. Joining up as a Swans member will become critical in ensuring admittance. It could even one day end up like the WCE situation where there was a waiting list for membership to ensure admittance to the ground. For WCE supporters this will change with the new stadium currently being built.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    The only area in the SCG that is exclusively for members is the members stand which has quite a small capacity.

    Both the Ladies Stand and the M.A Noble Stand, which are members only for the cricket, allow Swans Members in there. It is managed of course but those two areas are pretty well full to the brim on match day. Just guessing but I'd say it's about 50-50 SCG members and non members. But if SCG members did happen to start showing up en masse to games it would create an issue as it would force the SCG Trust to squeeze out the Swans members to allow the SCG members to use the facility.

    I can well see a membership waiting list, possibly where they have 3, 6 and 12 game memberships and you work your way up the lists, I guess that would be one way to ensure people don't miss out completely, by having a lot of 3 match memberships. I do think it is important to also have some tickets on general sale for newcomers, tourists and the casual fans but clearly they will be also squeezed if the ST numbers increase. All in all a good problem to have I guess

  4. #16
    Do people feel that the intruduction of GWS has helped the Swans streamline their targeted areas and helped with the membership drive?

    Before GWS, the Swans represented all parts of Sydney and parts of regional NSW.

    Now despite Sheedy saying that the boundary of Swans support ends at the Eastern end of the Anzac Bridge, the Swans are effectively the AFL club of Sydneys East, Northern Beaches, North Shore, Inner West, Southern parts of Sydney and parts of regional NSW.

    The Swans can focus all their attention on junior clubs in their Academy zones and this had led to efficiencies. No need for a Swan to waste 3 hours in a car to visit a junior club in Penrith.

    GWS have the mayor part of the West of Sydney, but it is all low yield west of Homebush. The best part now is that the Swans need not put any effort in a region of such low return on investment.

    Does the AFL cap the price of membership? With the the Swans surging membership and being the AFL club of all of Sydneys big money areas, is it time to significantly raise the cost of Swans membership?

  5. #17
    QUOTE: Now despite Sheedy saying that the boundary of Swans support ends at the Eastern end of the Anzac Bridge, the Swans are effectively the AFL club of Sydneys East, Northern Beaches, North Shore, Inner West, Southern parts of Sydney and parts of regional NSW.

    Does the AFL cap the price of membership? With the the Swans surging membership and being the AFL club of all of Sydneys big money areas, is it time to significantly raise the cost of Swans membership? QUOTE.

    What would that achieve? Disinfranchise those 'Western Suburbs' members (I am one who has been a member for 14 years), turn others off if prices were too high, drive former members to support the Giants.

    I don't think raising prices would solve anything.

  6. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Joel Ridge View Post
    Do people feel that the intruduction of GWS has helped the Swans streamline their targeted areas and helped with the membership drive?

    Before GWS, the Swans represented all parts of Sydney and parts of regional NSW.

    Now despite Sheedy saying that the boundary of Swans support ends at the Eastern end of the Anzac Bridge, the Swans are effectively the AFL club of Sydneys East, Northern Beaches, North Shore, Inner West, Southern parts of Sydney and parts of regional NSW.

    The Swans can focus all their attention on junior clubs in their Academy zones and this had led to efficiencies. No need for a Swan to waste 3 hours in a car to visit a junior club in Penrith.

    GWS have the mayor part of the West of Sydney, but it is all low yield west of Homebush. The best part now is that the Swans need not put any effort in a region of such low return on investment.

    Does the AFL cap the price of membership? With the the Swans surging membership and being the AFL club of all of Sydneys big money areas, is it time to significantly raise the cost of Swans membership?
    I think the Swans still have a wide footprint in Sydney with many fans from the west and I would not think too many of them have rolled over and joined the plastic franchise at Olympic Park.

    I guess new fans to the sport from that area will gravitate to GWS and I'm sure that many fans of other teams have made GWS their "Sydney team". The challenge for GWS is to build a robust supporter base that will stick with them through the hard times, not just a bunch consumers who take up the AFL sponsored GWS Meal Deals on offer.

    I agree with you that the introduction of GWS may have helped the Swans sharpen their focus but I think the main growth at grassroots has been Academy driven and that the "Buddy effect" is real and significant.

    With respect this isn't an economic game of supply and demand so I disagree with your idea re using our current success to gouge ticket prices. Within reason we should aim to always make tickets affordable for all our supporters regardless of their financial situation. Must say that comment from you reminded me of a former poster (M@@@) who used to post on here but sure that is just a co-incidence

  7. #19
    Travelling Swannie!! mcs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    7,800
    Quote Originally Posted by Mug Punter View Post
    Fans not being able to get any ticket for a match, i.e a complete sell out, has been rare but if there increased membership numbers have a flowon to bums on seats at the SCG, as they should, then we may start to see some more regular sellouts.

    I think a capacity of 46,000 is more than adequate for the medium to long term. If the SCG Trust were able to get their hands on some of that land behind the Bill O'Reilly then I could see a new stand there as having the potential to push capacity past 50,000 and there's not many teams in the world that average over that in a long season format (most NFL teams do but they only play 7 home matches a year).

    The problem will be, of course, that when the construction is on the capacity will be reduced for 2-3 seasons and the d-heads at the SCG Trust always plan the construction to minimise the cricket season even though we are the major tenant. The same knobs that accepted a cricket pavilion design for the latest redevelopment that is totally impractical when the winter weather arrives. I was totally 100% behind to move to have all our games moved back to the SCG but if wee do have to deal with a 35,000 seat stadium for two seasons then we may well wish we still had ANZ as a fallback.

    I think the next priority for a stater government handout will be the Brewongle, though I think that is a major renovation and not a complete re-build. It is looking tired but I'd do the BOR first and get the capacity up before taking one of the biggest stands out of action.
    That new stand is so poor in terms of winter weather for footy, with the open back in particular a ridiculous design. What is frustrating is that the same effect can easily be achieved without needing the open back to the stand - lots of major soccer grounds in particular are built with flaps that 'open' in the back of stands/exposed areas - that are of course closed during games, but then opened to allow in wind and breeze through (and could be left open in Summer of course). It had such potential to be a superb new facility, but it really is a let down in my book.
    "You get the feeling that like Monty Python's Black Knight, the Swans would regard amputation as merely a flesh wound."

  8. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by mcs View Post
    That new stand is so poor in terms of winter weather for footy, with the open back in particular a ridiculous design. What is frustrating is that the same effect can easily be achieved without needing the open back to the stand - lots of major soccer grounds in particular are built with flaps that 'open' in the back of stands/exposed areas - that are of course closed during games, but then opened to allow in wind and breeze through (and could be left open in Summer of course). It had such potential to be a superb new facility, but it really is a let down in my book.
    Because the old farts at the SCG Trust designed it soley for cricket which is by definition a dry weather sport.

    I agree it is a profoundly impractical design

  9. #21
    Travelling Swannie!! mcs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    7,800
    Quote Originally Posted by Mug Punter View Post
    I think the Swans still have a wide footprint in Sydney with many fans from the west and I would not think too many of them have rolled over and joined the plastic franchise at Olympic Park.

    I guess new fans to the sport from that area will gravitate to GWS and I'm sure that many fans of other teams have made GWS their "Sydney team". The challenge for GWS is to build a robust supporter base that will stick with them through the hard times, not just a bunch consumers who take up the AFL sponsored GWS Meal Deals on offer.

    I agree with you that the introduction of GWS may have helped the Swans sharpen their focus but I think the main growth at grassroots has been Academy driven and that the "Buddy effect" is real and significant.

    With respect this isn't an economic game of supply and demand so I disagree with your idea re using our current success to gouge ticket prices. Within reason we should aim to always make tickets affordable for all our supporters regardless of their financial situation. Must say that comment from you reminded me of a former poster (M@@@) who used to post on here but sure that is just a co-incidence
    I'd like to think it is a co-incidence Mug, but its not the first post I've seen that has reminded me of that.

    We shouldn't be looking to gouge fans just on the basis of supply and demand, for despite our very strong membership numbers, we should take heed of how quickly the market can change in Sydney if performances aren't up to recent levels on a consistent basis. All that will do is marginalise fans that don't come from the group with plenty of disposable income - and that is something I feel we should never, ever do. A great part of AFL footy more generally is its not a 'private school' game like Rugby, or broadly a working class game like League. It has great appeal across a wide part of society - something every club should look to maintain.

    We need to continue the process to turn 'casual fans' into 'rusted on fans', which ultimately is how we the club can ensure consistently higher attendances (alongside increased membership levels) into the future, even in the periods that will come in which we might not necessarily be a premiership challenger each and every year.
    "You get the feeling that like Monty Python's Black Knight, the Swans would regard amputation as merely a flesh wound."

  10. #22
    51,116

  11. #23
    At this rate of growth, 60000 members seems achievable this year!


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  12. #24
    51,669. Great to see they're keeping up to date unlike last year.

    The rate is encouraging.

Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO