Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 37 to 48 of 93

Thread: AFL Round 10 weekly discussion thread

  1. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by Bloods05 View Post
    How so?
    Melbounre hasnt had a start-up team from scratch since, like, forever.

    I always laugh at the melbourne journo's who have criticised gold coast, GWS, Freo and even swans and lions in the early days about how the club has stuffed something up (like medical department). These clubs have had to fill every role of a foot club from scratch. When you are hiring that many people in a short period, there is always going to be a few dud hires, or processes not setup correctly. Over time you refine and correct these. Established clubs have been doing this for years. It will take a long time for new clubs to get to that level.

    You see this in business all the time.

    Take Tesla motors. Startup. New Market. Great product. But up against the encumbants and their years of refinement is finding out how hard it is to be profitable without refinement at every level.
    Similar to Giants. Startup. New Market. Great List. ....

    The Melbourne media cant see past their own market, to even try to understand another environment

  2. #38
    Senior Player
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Inner West
    Posts
    2,401
    Barry is right, Bloods05. If anyone is ever in any doubt about how much GWS, and the Swans are up against it, take a look
    at the two main papers here, the SMH & the Daily Telegraph. Every day the AFL stories are buried seven or eight pages back
    from the back cover, and combined they'll take up about 3/4 of a page max. It's a miracle both teams are supported as much
    as they are.

  3. #39
    barry, I think you, and many others, are generous to call the media stupid where I perceive cynicism. I think it's not that they don't know better, it's that they don't care. They only care about what sells and attracts views. They operate in an industry devoid of morality.

  4. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by KTigers View Post
    Barry is right, Bloods05. If anyone is ever in any doubt about how much GWS, and the Swans are up against it, take a look
    at the two main papers here, the SMH & the Daily Telegraph. Every day the AFL stories are buried seven or eight pages back
    from the back cover, and combined they'll take up about 3/4 of a page max. It's a miracle both teams are supported as much
    as they are.
    I am well aware that the Sydney (and Queensland) teams are up against it. My point was that comparing membership figures from decades ago with contemporary ones is invalid, because AFL club membership numbers are vastly higher across the board than they were back then. Back in the early 90s, when the Swans' membership was hovering around 9000-10,000, the average membership for Melbourne clubs was around twice that. The current level of GWS membership is about 20% of the average. They have a very long way to go. They are in a tough market, sure, but their biggest problem is and will always be that they have not grown out of any groundswell of local support, as all of the Melbourne clubs did, without exception. Identity may be a nebulous thing, but we know two things about it: (1) it matters to people; and (2) it can't be imposed from above.

  5. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by barry View Post
    Melbounre hasnt had a start-up team from scratch since, like, forever.

    I always laugh at the melbourne journo's who have criticised gold coast, GWS, Freo and even swans and lions in the early days about how the club has stuffed something up (like medical department). These clubs have had to fill every role of a foot club from scratch. When you are hiring that many people in a short period, there is always going to be a few dud hires, or processes not setup correctly. Over time you refine and correct these. Established clubs have been doing this for years. It will take a long time for new clubs to get to that level.

    You see this in business all the time.

    Take Tesla motors. Startup. New Market. Great product. But up against the encumbants and their years of refinement is finding out how hard it is to be profitable without refinement at every level.
    Similar to Giants. Startup. New Market. Great List. ....

    The Melbourne media cant see past their own market, to even try to understand another environment
    Generalisations of this kind about "the Melbourne media" are pointless. There is good media and bad media everywhere.

    Comparing footy clubs with businesses annoys the hell out of me. There are deep and significant differences which make comparisons of this kind inconsequential.

  6. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by Bloods05 View Post
    I am well aware that the Sydney (and Queensland) teams are up against it. My point was that comparing membership figures from decades ago with contemporary ones is invalid, because AFL club membership numbers are vastly higher across the board than they were back then.

    You fail to equate the point I made above to membership.

    Membership is just another aspect of a footy club.

    It may be that in the early days of a new club, Membership is de-prioritised against all the other setup challenges.
    It is also a fact that its a lot easier to go from 25,000 members to 50,000 members than it is to go from 0 to 50,000 members. They are an organic growth thing. At 25,000 members you have 25,000 people out there selling the membership experience by word of mouth. At 0 you have zero.
    Finally, the fact that all start-up teams have grown at roughly the same rate of membership through all era's means its a general trend in the industry.

  7. #43
    Senior Player
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Inner West
    Posts
    2,401
    Quote Originally Posted by Bloods05 View Post
    I am well aware that the Sydney (and Queensland) teams are up against it. My point was that comparing membership figures from decades ago with contemporary ones is invalid, because AFL club membership numbers are vastly higher across the board than they were back then. Back in the early 90s, when the Swans' membership was hovering around 9000-10,000, the average membership for Melbourne clubs was around twice that. The current level of GWS membership is about 20% of the average. They have a very long way to go. They are in a tough market, sure, but their biggest problem is and will always be that they have not grown out of any groundswell of local support, as all of the Melbourne clubs did, without exception. Identity may be a nebulous thing, but we know two things about it: (1) it matters to people; and (2) it can't be imposed from above.
    If the average club membership is in the 60-70K range, and GWS are at 25K, then that's probably closer to 40% of the other teams
    average membership. I go to their games, and I think they bust their ass trying to get the local community "out there" involved.
    Every game there, there is some sort of community AFL activation (to use marketing jargon). Some of it is a bit hokey, but they
    do try. They do have a women's team. We don't. Anyway, I imagine it's almighty slog for them trying to get local people involved.
    I agree with your point re membership numbers for clubs being a lot higher than they used to be. Back in the day to be a member
    you had to pay for eleven home games. These days you've only got to go to a few games or buy a scarf to be counted
    as a member. As for footy clubs being businesses ; in some respects they are, but in a lot of respects they are not. Not sure there
    would be many footy clubs left if they had to exist in the environment most businesses do. The home-and-away season would
    likely consist of one game a week with Collingwood playing West Coast every weekend, and both teams would be owned by
    overseas hedge funds. So it's good that the clubs are not in a regular business environment, it is meant to be a game after all.
    Last edited by KTigers; 24th May 2019 at 12:21 PM.

  8. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by Bloods05 View Post
    Generalisations of this kind about "the Melbourne media" are pointless. There is good media and bad media everywhere.
    I only make that point because your opinions seems to be influenced by the melbourne AFL media, and you are from melbourne so you have a melbourne-centric view.

  9. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by Bloods05 View Post
    Back in the early 90s, when the Swans' membership was hovering around 9000-10,000, the average membership for Melbourne clubs was around twice that. The current level of GWS membership is about 20% of the average. They have a very long way to go. They are in a tough market, sure, but their biggest problem is and will always be that they have not grown out of any groundswell of local support, as all of the Melbourne clubs did, without exception.
    I don't live in Sydney, but from outside GWS seem to be doing very well in their market, certainly on a far more positive curve than the Swans had in the early days. GWS have made the finals 3 out of their first 7 years, and wooden spoon twice. Sydney made the finals twice in their first 13 years, and wooden spoon 3 times. GWS average around 16,000 members pa to date; Sydney averaged around 3,000 members for the first 13 years of its existence. In those days, Sydney's home crowds averaged around 13,000, or 50% of the league average. GWS averages around 12,000, but a smaller 33% of the league average.

    At various times, Port Adelaide and Fremantle have been written off as basket cases in much easier AFL markets, and Brisbane have never really been taken seriously even though they featured the best AFL team of all time not that very long ago.

    I certainly won't be crying any tears for GWS; they're doing okay.

  10. #46
    Quote Originally Posted by barry View Post
    I only make that point because your opinions seems to be influenced by the melbourne AFL media, and you are from melbourne so you have a melbourne-centric view.
    1. I am not from Melbourne. Not for a long time.

    2. I read very little football media coverage. Most of it, wherever it comes from, is moronic. With a couple of honourable exceptions, there is almost no genuine journalism practised by the football media. It is uninformed boosterism for the most part, aimed at the lowest common denominator, and beholden to the AFL and its associated business interests such as Fox Footy. My views, such as they are, are formed without much media input.

    I just don't like artificial teams. They need to have a foundation in the community they seek to represent, not be imposed on that community by corporate interests. I am happy for there to be a second Sydney team, but only if it grows out of a local groundswell. That would take a lot longer than the current model, but so be it.

  11. #47
    HS article by Robbo suggesting Brad Scott won't see out the year at North Melbourne as frustration have reached boiling point within the club. Heard Tom Browne say similar on radio this morning.

  12. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by KSAS View Post
    HS article by Robbo suggesting Brad Scott won't see out the year at North Melbourne as frustration have reached boiling point within the club. Heard Tom Browne say similar on radio this morning.
    He’s gorn!!!

    - - - Updated - - -

    Earlier this year someone suggested a hypothetical Scott / Longmire coaching swap. Phase 1 is underway

Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 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