2015 Membership Discussion

[BlueandGold]

NRL MEMBERS 2015


Broncos 16,006
Bulldogs 12,488
Cowboys 9,466
Dragons 10,233
Eels 11,878
Knights 10,000
Panthers 5,955
Rabbitohs 26,821
Raiders ?
Roosters 8,559
Sea Eagles 7,100
Sharks ?
Titans 3,255
Warriors ?
Tigers 5,500
Storm 11,071

24/12/14 Member Total = 138,332


NRL Members 2014

Broncos-14,350
Bulldogs-10,398
Cowboys-7,174
Dragons-5,905
Eels-10,380
Knights-12,638
Panthers-5,000
Rabbitohs-20,105
Raiders-3,443
Roosters-8,584
Sea Eagles-6,590
Sharks-4,337
Storm-9,121
Titans-4,112
Warriors-4,979
Wests Tigers-4,158

30/12/13 Member Total 131,274

http://forums.leagueunlimited.com/showthread.php?t=425992&page=34

[FONT=&quot]




[/FONT]

 

[Perth Red]

Some good increases there. I am guessing the bringing in of role over memberships year to year is probably a factor in these early increases?

 

[Rabbits20]

Compared to this stage last year the Tigers have improved by about 1,400.

Good to see.

 

[juro]

Wests are up to 5589 according to their website.

 

[Rabbits20]

Souths Membership at 28,005

 

[Noise]

Eels reached 13000

 

[Lambretta]

I was about to say that pretty much the entire increase is by Souths, but the Raiders, Sharks and Warriors numbers aren't included, so we should be up by close to 20,000 in total

Not bad, but we should be further ahead than this by now

I would like to see us up by 40,000 in total, but maybe I am expecting too much

 

[Lambretta]

Some good increases there. I am guessing the bringing in of roll over memberships year to year is probably a factor in these early increases?

Yes, I rolled over my membership and would imagine many others did too

 

[Eddie Lab]

NRL MEMBERS 2015
Broncos 16,006*
Bulldogs 12,959
Cowboys 9,466*
Dragons 10,782
Eels 13,479
Knights 10,000*
Panthers 6,384
Rabbitohs 28,471
Raiders N/A
Roosters 8,559*
Sea Eagles 7,502
Sharks N/A
Storm 11,294
Titans 3,255*
Warriors N/A
Tigers 5,589

15/01/2015 Member Total = 143,746
*teams that haven't updated numbers in over a month with some going back to November.

NRL Members 2014
Rabbitohs 22,066
Broncos 14,750
Knights 12,933
Eels 11,025
Bulldogs 10,708
Dragons 10,486
Storm 9,460
Roosters 9,084
Cowboys 8,269
Sea Eagles 6,590
Panthers 6,000
Warriors 4,979
Tigers 4,457
Sharks 4,337
Titans 4,112
Raiders 3,443

15/01/14 Member Total = 142,699
LINK

 

[taipan]

If the Broncos are not up to 20,000 by now ,they need a shaft up the rearend.One team town a a rl city,realistically should have 35-40,000 members.
As Lambretta noted,we should be up about 40,000 by now, if we want to be on the money ball.I'd like to see 160-170,000 at this stage.
Cannot fathom why numbers are not all on the board now,surely the maketing people of the clubs have all sobered up since New Year?

 

[Eddie Lab]

If the Broncos are not up to 20,000 by now ,they need a shaft up the rearend.One team town a a rl city,realistically should have 35-40,000 members.
As Lambretta noted,we should be up about 40,000 by now, if we want to be on the money ball.I'd like to see 160-170,000 at this stage.
Cannot fathom why numbers are not all on the board now,surely the maketing people of the clubs have all sobered up since New Year?

as far as the bronco's go I wouldn't be surprised if they are holding back some figures. they did it last year when the NRL had the membership race.

can't say it's not disappointing. We were at 144,276 on the 23/01/13 and 157,913 on the 23/01/14. some of these marketing teams need to get a wriggle on and update some figures out.

 

[IIFrankoII]

WTF is taking the Raiders, Warriors and Sharks so long? I know they supposedly delayed membership sign ups due to the late draw but surely they have some stats by now?

I hope the Rabbitohs can start to convert their excellent member numbers into attendance. Would be good if there was a super RL club in Sydney that could average 25-30k instead of hovering around 20k.

Thanks for compiling all the numbers Eddie Lab. Do you happen to have the finishing totals for 2014? Would be interesting seeing how much each team has to go to pass last year's totals.

 

[Perth Red]

Still shows the amateur approach to membership generally, some of the numbers are embarrassing really. If you took out non or part ticketed memberships some clubs would have very few full members. Yes there is a bit of an increase but it is coming from a handful of clubs. either some clubs really don't have many supporters or some clubs are really sht run in terms of engaging g supporters.

 

[elbusto]

Still shows the amateur approach to membership generally, some of the numbers are embarrassing really. If you took out non or part ticketed memberships some clubs would have very few full members. Yes there is a bit of an increase but it is coming from a handful of clubs. either some clubs really don't have many supporters or some clubs are really sht run in terms of engaging g supporters.

Started from a low base and it is improving each year. Looks positive to me mate.

 

[Eddie Lab]

WTF is taking the Raiders, Warriors and Sharks so long? I know they supposedly delayed membership sign ups due to the late draw but surely they have some stats by now?

I hope the Rabbitohs can start to convert their excellent member numbers into attendance. Would be good if there was a super RL club in Sydney that could average 25-30k instead of hovering around 20k.

Thanks for compiling all the numbers Eddie Lab. Do you happen to have the finishing totals for 2014? Would be interesting seeing how much each team has to go to pass last year's totals.

my total is 250,301. NRL got something higher but they have access to better numbers then us. I sent a request for better numbers at the end of the regular season in 2013 but not one team responded. didn't see the point in trying again last year.

I'll post updated pictures of the spreadsheet tomorrow afternoon. there is an upwards trend but I don't think 3/4 of the teams really take this great potential very seriously. ARLC wants 400k members by the end of 2017? not happening unless changes are made.

 

[pHyR3]

well it seems poor reporting and the possibility of another membership race has resulted in almost no growth in the past 3-4 weeks.

 

[Noname36]

Still shows the amateur approach to membership generally, some of the numbers are embarrassing really. If you took out non or part ticketed memberships some clubs would have very few full members..

This is exactly why I never pay serious attention to any membership races. There's a few clubs (e.g. Souths) who have a massive chunk of their membership tally tied up in non-ticketed memberships, memberships for pets, etc. where at the same time a lot of other clubs don't even count non-ticketed members in their tally. Now I have no issue with non-ticketed members being counted given there's some fans that live too far away to attend games but still want to support the team - but in these tallies I'd like to see a breakdown in terms of what sort of memberships each tally is made up of. I think it would go a long way to explaining attendance, etc.

There's also the fact that cheaper, non-ticketed memberships are a hell of a lot easier to sell than asking people to fork out a few hundred dollars a year for a full ticketed membership. Now I do think Souths deserve a lot of credit here for their marketing but at the same time we need to remember that a massive chunk of those numbers aren't ticketed memberships which is reflected in their poor crowd attendances.

 

[yobbo84]

This is exactly why I never pay serious attention to any membership races. There's a few clubs (e.g. Souths) who have a massive chunk of their membership tally tied up in non-ticketed memberships, memberships for pets, etc. where at the same time a lot of other clubs don't even count non-ticketed members in their tally. Now I have no issue with non-ticketed members being counted given there's some fans that live too far away to attend games but still want to support the team - but in these tallies I'd like to see a breakdown in terms of what sort of memberships each tally is made up of. I think it would go a long way to explaining attendance, etc.

There's also the fact that cheaper, non-ticketed memberships are a hell of a lot easier to sell than asking people to fork out a few hundred dollars a year for a full ticketed membership. Now I do think Souths deserve a lot of credit here for their marketing but at the same time we need to remember that a massive chunk of those numbers aren't ticketed memberships which is reflected in their poor crowd attendances.

:lol:

 

[Galeforce]

This is exactly why I never pay serious attention to any membership races. There's a few clubs (e.g. Souths) who have a massive chunk of their membership tally tied up in non-ticketed memberships, memberships for pets, etc. where at the same time a lot of other clubs don't even count non-ticketed members in their tally. Now I have no issue with non-ticketed members being counted given there's some fans that live too far away to attend games but still want to support the team - but in these tallies I'd like to see a breakdown in terms of what sort of memberships each tally is made up of. I think it would go a long way to explaining attendance, etc.



There's also the fact that cheaper, non-ticketed memberships are a hell of a lot easier to sell than asking people to fork out a few hundred dollars a year for a full ticketed membership. Now I do think Souths deserve a lot of credit here for their marketing but at the same time we need to remember that a massive chunk of those numbers aren't ticketed memberships which is reflected in their poor crowd attendances.

Wow ,
you are most likely a troll , as there are so many stupid and incorrect statements in your feeble note.

anyway

1) Memberships is just that .....members . You appear fixated that membership must be ticketed members.

2) What about GOLD stadium members who also decide to be Souths members? Apart from the large interstate, overseas contingent

3) Maybe for the upteenth time , Souths Membership numbers DO NOT include PET membership.

4) Which clubs only report Ticketed Members now? I would like to see that since you seem so sure

5) Souths move 2 home games to Cairns and Perth each year . How do you count those attendances versus their membership ?

6) how do you count the increased crowds at Souths away games , where many local members attend
e.g. Titans for starters

7) Souths have one of the highest average attendances last year. Not bad for a team that has many thursday, friday and a couple of monday nights games.These nights are not crowd favourites however have significant TV audience pulls which is why the media want Souths.

Expect you are a troll , if not , think before you dribble

 

[Perth Red]

Last year Broncos memberships only a third were full season. If you look at someone like Souths and it is same it explains crowd sizes to memberships much easier. Whats more confusing is clubs with crowds much bigger than memberships. Why wouldn't you want to save money by getting a membership if your going to games?