2017 NRL Club Membership

[taipan]

exactly.
not sure what Perth Red's angle is on this one.
If it is crowd numbers then yeah Monday night footy would take a thousand out ( at least ) every week.
plus well supported teams who aren't performing as well will have a big drop in crowds.
Teams like the Dragons who peaked in 2010 had huge support and were playing more games at home.
They were packing OKI out on Sunday arvo's.
I went to games back then and recently and the joint seems almost empty now compared to 2009 -2010
Maybe the same for the tigers....even souths 2-3-4 years ago.

Classic case in point.In April 2015,the Sharks played Souths on a Monday night, with a friggin cyclone
swirling around. The crowd 3,978, most in the stands or in the clubhouse.
On a sunday arvo in recent times, when the Sharks have played souths, the crowd got close to 19,000.

On a fine Monday night between the the two sides 13,000 would be a fair figure.

Monday nights are crowd stuffers, and until such time as the NRL controls scheduling off the teams from 2018, crowd numbers will remain fairly static.And Thursday nights and 6pm fridays are not going to help.

Also playing games in some outlying areas can affect averages.

When big drawing clubs like Eels/Dragons/Dogs/Souths are struggling , crowd numbers take a hit.

It's a combo of many things. PLus if there is little cover when it rains, that is also a deterrent, especially for families.

 

[franklin2323]

Classic case in point.In April 2015,the Sharks played Souths on a Monday night, with a friggin cyclone
swirling around. The crowd 3,978, most in the stands or in the clubhouse.
On a sunday arvo in recent times, when the Sharks have played souths, the crowd got close to 19,000.

On a fine Monday night between the the two sides 13,000 would be a fair figure.

Monday nights are crowd stuffers, and until such time as the NRL controls scheduling off the teams from 2018, crowd numbers will remain fairly static.And Thursday nights and 6pm fridays are not going to help.

Also playing games in some outlying areas can affect averages.

When big drawing clubs like Eels/Dragons/Dogs/Souths are struggling , crowd numbers take a hit.

It's a combo of many things. PLus if there is little cover when it rains, that is also a deterrent, especially for families.

I don't think much will change when the NRL take over scheduling timeslot wise just maybe who plays on what day. Then you have the no curtain raiser, Bad weather, Better TV coverage etc to keep people away

 

[T-Boon]

One of the reasons that our crowds haven't grown in the last 10 years is that defense has gradually began dominating on the field.
It happens to be the same period of time that the wrestle has taken over. The wrestle bores everybody to death. In the past 10 years point scoring per game has dropped by an average of 6 points. Thats one try per game or 192 tries per year.
Tries per game should be going up not down.

 

[taipan]

I don't think much will change when the NRL take over scheduling timeslot wise just maybe who plays on what day. Then you have the no curtain raiser, Bad weather, Better TV coverage etc to keep people away

Who plays on what day , isn a better proposal than what we have now.

You have a better chance of ,maximising the higher drawing clubs at a better time ,whereas now the Tv stations dictate.
e.g. Sharks playing Dragons on a Sunday or saturday is going to draw a far bigger crowd than a 6pm Friday night or Thursday night.
The difference is the NRL will have the decision to the teams and the day they play. If they can't max crowds better this way, there give it to me.
The Tv stations hav e to accede to the NRL's allocation.

 

[taipan]

I don't think much will change when the NRL take over scheduling timeslot wise just maybe who plays on what day. Then you have the no curtain raiser, Bad weather, Better TV coverage etc to keep people away

Who plays on what day , isn a better proposal than what we have now.

duplicate****

 

[taipan]

One of the reasons that our crowds haven't grown in the last 10 years is that defense has gradually began dominating on the field.
It happens to be the same period of time that the wrestle has taken over. The wrestle bores everybody to death. In the past 10 years point scoring per game has dropped by an average of 6 points. Thats one try per game or 192 tries per year.
Tries per game should be going up not down.

If the clubs play the attack like the Raiders have been doing (ad lib), there would be no such problem.

 

[2012....Sharks Year]

One of the reasons that our crowds haven't grown in the last 10 years is that defense has gradually began dominating on the field.
It happens to be the same period of time that the wrestle has taken over. The wrestle bores everybody to death. In the past 10 years point scoring per game has dropped by an average of 6 points. Thats one try per game or 192 tries per year.
Tries per game should be going up not down.

Nah.....got more to do with the way the game is designed for the t.v networks imo. At the end of the day t.v rights generate the vast majority of the Nrl's and hence the games' income. Yes open football is more appealing to watch but t.v ratings generate the income rather than bums on seats.

 

[T-Boon]

Yes open football is more appealing to watch but t.v ratings generate the income rather than bums on seats.

I think if more teams played like Canberra or Penrith then TV ratings would increase and crowds would increase.

 

[franklin2323]

Who plays on what day , isn a better proposal than what we have now.

You have a better chance of ,maximising the higher drawing clubs at a better time ,whereas now the Tv stations dictate.
e.g. Sharks playing Dragons on a Sunday or saturday is going to draw a far bigger crowd than a 6pm Friday night or Thursday night.
The difference is the NRL will have the decision to the teams and the day they play. If they can't max crowds better this way, there give it to me.
The Tv stations hav e to accede to the NRL's allocation.

Sharks v Dragons game in your example would pull a much better crowd. The teams playing on 6pm Fri or Thurs would drop those games crowd.

 

[Raiderdave]

You have the memory of a goldfish.

View attachment 10878

& you have the intelligence of a gold fish
thats the response to the original post about the NRL crowds not growing favourably in comparsion to other codes between 1993 & 2016
like I said
I didn't make this comparison i merely proved it was rubbish
Id suggest you try & keep up as you often fall way off the pace regularly : )

 

[taipan]

Sharks v Dragons game in your example would pull a much better crowd. The teams playing on 6pm Fri or Thurs would drop those games crowd.

If for example the Warriors played at 8pm Friday night live, that would help.A decent crowd for them ,and no need for people in Sydney attending at 6 pm.I realise they wouldn't do that all the time.

Melbourne may prefer 6pm.

I just think ATM the TV stations have us well and truly screwed.If the NRL can arrange more local derbies at time friendly hours , that IMO would more than offset the poor crowds at 6pm Fridays and Thursday nights.
And maybe just maybe Brisbane would have a couple of 6pm ones.
ATM the TV stations have their pet NRL clubs : Broncos being one.

Of course the bigger drawing clubs have to be performers not has beens.Parra v Penrith at the new stadium in 2019,should be chockers on a Sunday arvo.

Monday nights were a nightmare for crowds.And I read somewhere can't remember exactly, if Friday 6pm is a crowd disaster there would be a review.

 

[Perth Red]

I think the discrepancy between membership and crowd numbers may have a lot to do with fans not knowing if they can actually get to games, I'd be interested to know how many games full members manage to get to a season given the huge variety of KO days and times. I guess if younthinkmyounwill only make 6 games you aren't going to get a full membership.
That's why it would be interesting to see a split between full memberships and others, is suspect others may be higher than full in many clubs.

Take panthers for example, in season 15 they took more in gate takings than in memberships.

 

[carcharias]

Go to every home game I'm in town.

The only time I don't is if I'm away at a wedding or some shit.

The time slot doesn't matter to me.

 

[taipan]

I think the discrepancy between membership and crowd numbers may have a lot to do with fans not knowing if they can actually get to games, I'd be interested to know how many games full members manage to get to a season given the huge variety of KO days and times. I guess if younthinkmyounwill only make 6 games you aren't going to get a full membership.
That's why it would be interesting to see a split between full memberships and others, is suspect others may be higher than full in many clubs.

Take panthers for example, in season 15 they took more in gate takings than in memberships.

I'd suggest most fans with season tickets are sensible enough to know there will be the odd couple of their club's games on crappy nights.Else they wouldn't go to the expense and just buy a 4 game pack.
I attend every game, except of course when I'm on holidays, whether it be Monday night,Friday night or the Saturday/Sunday games.
When I attend, the stand is filled with the same old faces week after week.Regardless of the day or time.
Then from a monetary point of view, there are those understandably not prepared to commit to membership,eg the Panthers situation.
I also reckon the Raiders membership would do better with more cover, from the Arctic conditions they get there.It's almost animal cruelty.

People do go on the basis they can afford it this week, or the weather is ordinary I'll go another time.

I do believe if there was better infrastructure with plenty of cover and the prices were decent, membership increases would be far greater.
That's why I believe the Eel's membership will jump in 2019.

I just cannot understand why Brisbane's membership is not 40,000 already.

 

[Perth Red]

Sharks are about 50-50. In 2015 season memberships brought in $1.3mill, gate takings $1.2mill. I suspect most of the full memberships at sharks are to guarantee a seat under cover given the limited availability, probably around 4000-5000 full members going off that revenue figure?

 

[Arnold]

The majority of full members are not under cover.

 

[carcharias]

Sharks are about 50-50. In 2015 season memberships brought in $1.3mill, gate takings $1.2mill. I suspect most of the full memberships at sharks are to guarantee a seat under cover given the limited availability, probably around 4000-5000 full members going off that revenue figure?

I usually have a seat filler on games I can't go.
That's because I'm like a movie star out there.

 

[carcharias]

The majority of full members are not under cover.

Don't try and tell him
He knows everything
He went once and had a sook about lining up for a cup of coffee.

 

[taipan]

I don't think much will change when the NRL take over scheduling timeslot wise just maybe who plays on what day. Then you have the no curtain raiser, Bad weather, Better TV coverage etc to keep people away

If the NRL and Iceberg have any gonads , they should tell the stations "this is the schedule as per our contract."
And not do the Gallop, " we'll bend over backwards to assist News media."
Bad weather is out of anyone's control.

Give people better cover from the weather and organise cheaper ticketing, and you'll get them along.

 

[taipan]

Don't try and tell him
He knows everything
He went once and had a sook about lining up for a cup of coffee.

He obviously thinks the P. Burns stand has cover, and the concourse seating around the ground also.
I'm bloody sure some Aussie kid in a Shark's jumper nicked his Tonka toy when he was young, and he is determined to strike back .Even if it means bending the truth.