NRL on Facebook

[adamkungl]

And note previously where I mentioned there being 4 grades in terms of NRL club support (Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta) that the facebook numbers are accurately reflecting that -

Broncos on top.
Storm & Titans I had as Betas but noted that they could become Alphas.
Then your big 5 Sydney clubs all within close proximity fluctuating between the top two levels.
Then your Gammas - teams that fluctuate with success between Beta & Gamma because of regional factors or geography - Sea Eagles, Roosters, Knights, Cowboys, Warriors
Then the bottom three Delta cellar dwellers - Sharks, Raiders, Panthers - Panthers being the one team that could pull themselves up but have failed in that department

This is just one tool to gauge whether or not teams are fulfilling realistically achievable measures of crowd and membership support.

Titans have big facebook numbers but I find it hard to believe they actually have more fans, even casual fans, than most Sydney clubs. I certainly wouldnt have them as a 'beta'

 

[Von]

Sorry Doc, but I have to agree with Adam.

There is no way Titans are 'Alpha'.
They may have a lot of casual fans from people living on the coast, but fair dinkum fans is questionable.

It is like the Storm have many many thousands of Melbournians "supporting" them on FB and the like, but a vast majority of them would be lucky to name 3 players. Same thing occurs in Sydney with "fans" of the Swans.

 

[docbrown]

uhh.... ?

I remember looking at the Warriors pages previously and there were about two around the 10,000 mark. Now the official page is 40,000+ so they've put the word out and attracted at least 20,000 new people.

As for the Roosters (which is why I assume you went uhh) they had an established facebook presence like other clubs of a similar category but in the same amount of time they only posted a 20% gain (the lowest) and had the 2nd lowest total gain in volume. The average across all the clubs is over 50% which puts the Roosters at the bottom of the heap.

Titans have big facebook numbers but I find it hard to believe they actually have more fans, even casual fans, than most Sydney clubs. I certainly wouldnt have them as a 'beta'

Sorry Doc, but I have to agree with Adam.

There is no way Titans are 'Alpha'.
They may have a lot of casual fans from people living on the coast, but fair dinkum fans is questionable.

It is like the Storm have many many thousands of Melbournians "supporting" them on FB and the like, but a vast majority of them would be lucky to name 3 players. Same thing occurs in Sydney with "fans" of the Swans.

I didn't have Titans as Alphas, I had them as Betas but with work they could become Alphas.

Like I said, this is a survey poll. People aren't forced to nominate an affiliation, they have to want to choose it. So on a standardised basis the environment for a fan choosing the Titans is similar to one choosing say the Bulldogs or any of the other big five.

So why do the Titans have more facebook fans than the five? Well the big five have their traditional bases, plus Sydney wide support plus NSW country support & even support in Queensland. But that support is also in competition with 11 other New South Wales/ACT sides.

Compare this to the Titans. They have their home base on the Gold Coast (on par with Newcastle) plus they only have to compete with two other "local" teams in Queensland, Queenslanders tend more to support multiple QLD teams and plus they also get to extend their reach down into Northern NSW.

Why isn't this reflected in crowd and memberships? My guess would be cost, stadium location, competition with other entertainment and the overall diaspora of the Titans fanbase.

The Titans should be trying to encourage fans to travel to games similar to what the Cowboys do. Get enough people do it a few times a year and their average will lift. That's why I've suggest Titans should take trials anywhere in South Queensland & Northern NSW to further promote their brand.

 

[adamkungl]

Ah, your comment was on the growth, not the overall number.

 

[Von]

All good doc.

No surprise to see the 2 biggest % increases were the 2 Grand Finalists.

 

[Usain Bolt]

Facebook is for geniuss

 

[docbrown]

Ah, your comment was on the growth, not the overall number.

Oh yeah, sorry should have clarified that. Roosters comment was about minimal growth.

Raiders, Panthers, Sharks and Cowboys are on both lack of growth and overall poor existing numbers.

 

[MsStorm]

.

It is like the Storm have many many thousands of Melbournians "supporting" them on FB and the like, but a vast majority of them would be lucky to name 3 players..

That's just rubbish about the Storm and fans only been able to name 3 players, they are popular Australia-wide and some from overseas, not just in Melbourne.

Join Facebook and you'll get to see a different picture.

 

[Timmah]

uhh.... ?

Ah, your comment was on the growth, not the overall number.

That, and relevance to the other Sydney clubs. Given the number of fans the "big Sydney 5" (CBY, PAR, WST, SOU and STG) have compared to the Roosters (and Manly and Cronulla for that matter), your mob is doing pissweak IMO.

 

[docbrown]

That, and relevance to the other Sydney clubs. Given the number of fans the "big Sydney 5" (CBY, PAR, WST, SOU and STG) have compared to the Roosters (and Manly and Cronulla for that matter), your mob is doing pissweak IMO.

There's definitely a gap in support between the Big 5 and the other 4 (Panthers, Sharks, Manly, Roosters).

Overlooking short term factors, unless those 4 clubs start getting proactive with their marketing and memberships you can expect to see the gap widen.

On a side note I like the fact that the Big 5 is part of the rugby league lexicon now. Wouldn't mind seeing their clashes promoted like that.

 

[CC_Roosters]

There's definitely a gap in support between the Big 5 and the other 4 (Panthers, Sharks, Manly, Roosters).

Overlooking short term factors, unless those 4 clubs start getting proactive with their marketing and memberships you can expect to see the gap widen.

On a side note I like the fact that the Big 5 is part of the rugby league lexicon now. Wouldn't mind seeing their clashes promoted like that.

Roosters have more members than the Tigers last year. Therefore we have more fans and are the bigger club. :sarcasm:

From what i have seen Manly have a sizeable regional fanbase but sadly doesn't convert into high memberships and attendance. Central Coast and the Hunter is crawling with them

 

[docbrown]

Roosters have more members than the Tigers last year. Therefore we have more fans and are the bigger club. :sarcasm:

From what i have seen Manly have a sizeable regional fanbase but sadly doesn't convert into high memberships and attendance. Central Coast and the Hunter is crawling with them

Some of the Big 5 aren't meeting the membership numbers that they're capable of - yet. That stuff is still early days. It builds over time and competitive tension, marketing and on field success affects it.

I have no doubt that there is a divide when it comes to Sydney football clubs. I just don't want to see a scenario where there's permanently the haves and the have nots.

 

[adamkungl]

lol big 5 is the biggest myth...

 

[Timmah]

Interesting that a fan of the "small 4" thinks the "big 5" are a myth...

 

[adamkungl]

Canterbury are the only ones significantly better than any other Sydney club.

Parra, loL@Souffs, Saints have bigger memberships than Easts but crowds pretty similar, fluctuating in successful periods. Tigers have consistently better crowds than most of the others but have a membership base smaller than Easts.

Myth. Roosters put 2 decent years together on field for once and you'll see... oh. f**k.

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

Canterbury are the only ones significantly better than any other Sydney club.

Parra, loL@Souffs, Saints have bigger memberships than Easts but crowds pretty similar, fluctuating in successful periods. Tigers have consistently better crowds than most of the others but have a membership base smaller than Easts.

Myth. Roosters put 2 decent years together on field for once and you'll see... oh. f**k.

And TV ratings? Facebook followers?

 

[adamkungl]

Well if anyone's keen to compile TV ratings of individual teams for the last 10 years be my guest....but we seem to get on TV reasonably often. Remember the uproar when we had 4 of the first 5 games in 2010 :lol:

 

[Henson Park Hornets]

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Samantha-Armytage-Boob-Appreciation-Society/221839937842306

 

[docbrown]

Well if anyone's keen to compile TV ratings of individual teams for the last 10 years be my guest....but we seem to get on TV reasonably often. Remember the uproar when we had 4 of the first 5 games in 2010 :lol:

There are other factors affecting that though. For example Nine will almost always grab the best Qld game - preferably the Broncos. Then pick a game that can shift to either slot.

If Fox picks the best of the rest then that 3rd choice for 9 can be a dud. Not saying that's the case here though. The other issue is the expectation of on field performance.

That said 4 out of 5 games on TV in a row is rather stupid.

As for popularity for match up, there was a lot of hope last year for a Melbourne-Tigers grand final. It would have performed better than Manly-Warriors.

 

[docbrown]

Nrl: 400,082