n i k o Posted February 5, 2015 Report Share Posted February 5, 2015 (edited) Lol at victory supporters laughing at the two game memberships. Little do they remember in their first few years the thousands of tickets they gave away just to get people to come to games. Edited February 5, 2015 by n i k o Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony999 Posted February 5, 2015 Report Share Posted February 5, 2015 Lol at victory supporters laughing at the two game memberships. Little do they remember in their first few years the thousands of tickets they gave away just to get people to come to games. Did you remind them of that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jw1739 Posted February 5, 2015 Report Share Posted February 5, 2015 Two Game Flexi Memberships on sale: http://www.melbournecityfc.com.au/article/melbourne-city-fc-launch-flexi-membership/1kvrsm967vgdi191hkbkck32m0? 10,869 today, up 11 from yesterday...interesting... My feeling is that these sorts of "memberships" are not really "memberships" at all and that they distort comparisons from season to season. Next we'll have a "one-game membership"... So for the record books and for future calculation of statistics such as membership growth I reckon that this season's membership was 10,863, which was what it was yesterday evening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SF33 Posted February 5, 2015 Report Share Posted February 5, 2015 Two Game Flexi Memberships on sale: http://www.melbournecityfc.com.au/article/melbourne-city-fc-launch-flexi-membership/1kvrsm967vgdi191hkbkck32m0? 10,869 today, up 11 from yesterday...interesting... My feeling is that these sorts of "memberships" are not really "memberships" at all and that they distort comparisons from season to season. Next we'll have a "one-game membership"... So for the record books and for future calculation of statistics such as membership growth I reckon that this season's membership was 10,863, which was what it was yesterday evening. I have this same discussion countless times with people regarding the validity of AFL membership tallies. Really, they're what you want to make of them. If it makes us look better to prospective sponsors and the like and gives them the opportunity to communicate with a cross-section of us (unless we opt out), good luck to them. If you're making a financial contribution to the club, specifically to become a member and receive a package, you're a member, as far as I'm concerned. I'm sure every club does something similar to pump its numbers up, so I really think it's neither here nor there. The issues that it creates with a comparison between seasons is a valid point to raise. It would be nice if we had the membership revenue information to facilitate that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thrillhouse Posted February 5, 2015 Report Share Posted February 5, 2015 Enquired before the break about how much a membership would cost with about 6 home games to go, they wanted to charge the full amount even with most of the season already done. Ridiculous that they would do that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jw1739 Posted February 5, 2015 Report Share Posted February 5, 2015 Enquired before the break about how much a membership would cost with about 6 home games to go, they wanted to charge the full amount even with most of the season already done. Ridiculous that they would do that Wouldn't it be simpler to take a pro-rata approach, plus the fixed charges that cover the card etc.? As you say, the full amount for 6 matches is ridiculous. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red or Dead Posted February 5, 2015 Report Share Posted February 5, 2015 I think a membership needs to be a minimum of 3 games to be classified as a membership...I agree that a 2 game membership from the remaining 5 home games is a little silly. Can someone buy two memberships and so go to 4 of the 5 games? It'd cost them 2 x $35 = $70 which equates to $17.50 per game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AaronAV11 Posted February 5, 2015 Report Share Posted February 5, 2015 They should have a minimum amount of money that has to be paid to consider it a membership, like how the AFL is $50 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jw1739 Posted February 5, 2015 Report Share Posted February 5, 2015 (edited) I think a membership needs to be a minimum of 3 games to be classified as a membership...I agree that a 2 game membership from the remaining 5 home games is a little silly. Can someone buy two memberships and so go to 4 of the 5 games? It'd cost them 2 x $35 = $70 which equates to $17.50 per game. You buy them under two different names. Perfectly possible. Referring back to my post above about 10,863, I was suggesting that when we on this forum compare memberships from season to season that's the appropriate number to use for this season. The club can "make the numbers look good" if it wants to, but personally I'd rather compare apples with apples as far as is possible to do so. Edited February 5, 2015 by jw1739 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fidrildid6 Posted February 5, 2015 Report Share Posted February 5, 2015 I think a membership needs to be a minimum of 3 games to be classified as a membership...I agree that a 2 game membership from the remaining 5 home games is a little silly. Can someone buy two memberships and so go to 4 of the 5 games? It'd cost them 2 x $35 = $70 which equates to $17.50 per game. You buy them under two different names. Perfectly possible. Referring back to my post above about 10,863, I was suggesting that when we on this forum compare memberships from season to season that's the appropriate number to use for this season. The club can "make the numbers look good" if it wants to, but personally I'd rather compare apples with apples as far as is possible to do so. You have to show photo ID to pick it up though? Otherwise get it sent out for $10 and then it's hardly worth the trouble Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red or Dead Posted February 5, 2015 Report Share Posted February 5, 2015 I think a membership needs to be a minimum of 3 games to be classified as a membership...I agree that a 2 game membership from the remaining 5 home games is a little silly. Can someone buy two memberships and so go to 4 of the 5 games? It'd cost them 2 x $35 = $70 which equates to $17.50 per game. You buy them under two different names. Perfectly possible. Referring back to my post above about 10,863, I was suggesting that when we on this forum compare memberships from season to season that's the appropriate number to use for this season. The club can "make the numbers look good" if it wants to, but personally I'd rather compare apples with apples as far as is possible to do so. You have to show photo ID to pick it up though? Otherwise get it sent out for $10 and then it's hardly worth the trouble For the second '2-game membership' just sign up your wife/daughter/son/brother/sister/dad/mum etc. Or you could just pay $10 and get it delivered Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted February 5, 2015 Report Share Posted February 5, 2015 I tried to get a membership at the last game of the first season. I thought I would become a foundation member after using a social club membership for a number of games that season. Having Scottish blood, I also thought I would get a cheaper entry price for the game. I was quite excited as I walked up to the membership tent, only to be told that I would have to pay the full season price. Needless to say, I have been a member from Heart's second season. I walked away from the tent that day a little deflated but somewhat more the wiser. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InMyHeart Posted February 5, 2015 Report Share Posted February 5, 2015 I think this first season of CFG has been a lot about building up on the core membership base to have a starting point to work on every year so that in futures seasons the marketing pitch can be focused on bringing in the fence sitters. These 2 game memberships are an indication of this IMO.. Trying to get everyone who attends game onto our system Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melburnian Posted February 11, 2015 Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 11k members. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
japiedog Posted February 11, 2015 Report Share Posted February 11, 2015 it would be good if most of them showed up to home matches 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stewmac Posted February 12, 2015 Report Share Posted February 12, 2015 it would be good if most of them showed up to home matches half of them are fair weather supporters , if we are playing shite what incentive is it for them to come & watch us ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
japiedog Posted February 12, 2015 Report Share Posted February 12, 2015 it would be good if most of them showed up to home matches half of them are fair weather supporters , if we are playing shite what incentive is it for them to come & watch us ? och aye,, I've paid my membership, so I want to get my money's worth ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shahanga Posted February 12, 2015 Report Share Posted February 12, 2015 it would be good if most of them showed up to home matches 2 of them are my daughters who only go to Derbies or when dragged along by their parents. Suspect this kind of thing is fairly common Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Jovan Posted February 12, 2015 Popular Post Report Share Posted February 12, 2015 Yep I got 2. Wife and Daughter. Total 1 game each in 4 seasons. Not much different to Germano really. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jw1739 Posted February 12, 2015 Report Share Posted February 12, 2015 (edited) I thought Munn said a couple of seasons ago that on average 40% of the members show up to any given match? I know from the Premium A members around me that there are plenty of empty seats at each match, but I've checked with the membership section (with a view to changing seats) and they are all reserved. IMO it's not a question of members doing the right thing by showing up. They've already done the right thing by committing to a whole season. The onus is on the club to provide some decent bloody football and some decent results for once, to give the said members value for the money that they have outlaid. I'm pretty sure now that after five seasons I won't have had the opportunity to see a single home final, and that is not f***ing good enough for a Melbourne-based club. The club simply has not repaid the faith members have put in it. Just doesn't put the effort in that is required. "Oh, what a pity, It's all too easy At Melbourne City." Edited February 12, 2015 by jw1739 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markn Posted February 12, 2015 Report Share Posted February 12, 2015 People turn up when you win. Look how many we got for our first home game against Newcastle. Give us quality on the pitch and people will come. Give us a marque that people actually know - and they will come. So while New York can attract Villa and Lampard - We get a 'Championship League' (aka 2nd Division) Captain that nobody knows. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenSeater Posted February 12, 2015 Report Share Posted February 12, 2015 People turn up when you win. Look how many we got for our first home game against Newcastle. Give us quality on the pitch and people will come. Give us a marque that people actually know - and they will come. So while New York can attract Villa and Lampard - We get a 'Championship League' (aka 2nd Division) Captain that nobody knows. If you're reffering to Koren, he was also a Premier League captain for a number of years. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markn Posted February 12, 2015 Report Share Posted February 12, 2015 If you're reffering to Koren, he was also a Premier League captain for a number of years. Of HULL Tigers or City or whatever they are called now. I know that that you know that - but how many people ACTUALLY know that? ANd i mean how many people who dont follow city or victory actually know who he is. To be honest when he first signed i had to wiki search him to even know who he is. This is not the type of player we need as a marque. We need a seat filler. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thrillhouse Posted February 12, 2015 Report Share Posted February 12, 2015 If you're reffering to Koren, he was also a Premier League captain for a number of years. Of HULL Tigers or City or whatever they are called now. I know that that you know that - but how many people ACTUALLY know that? ANd i mean how many people who dont follow city or victory actually know who he is. To be honest when he first signed i had to wiki search him to even know who he is. This is not the type of player we need as a marque. We need a seat filler. we need players like orlando that can win games on his own, if the player is good enough then people will come to watch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Embee Posted February 12, 2015 Report Share Posted February 12, 2015 (edited) If you're reffering to Koren, he was also a Premier League captain for a number of years. Of HULL Tigers or City or whatever they are called now. I know that that you know that - but how many people ACTUALLY know that? ANd i mean how many people who dont follow city or victory actually know who he is. To be honest when he first signed i had to wiki search him to even know who he is. This is not the type of player we need as a marque. We need a seat filler. That's precisely the OPPOSITE of what we need. That kind of attitude is systemic of the issues we had with player recruitment in the Heart days. Quality should always be the target when seeking out a marquee player, not reputation. If the side is playing good football over a sustained period then membership numbers and attendance figures will rise. The gloss of having a player with a large reputation will only do so much off the field (if Villa was still here and we were still churning out the kind of performances we have so far this season, do you really believe the attendances would be so much different?) and may not even do enough for us on the filed. Koren's played about 5 games for us so far, almost every single one of them in a position that he's barely played in his career. The guy's a quality footballer, and if he is able to contribute to a more succesful team in the next 18 months or so then that's more important than how many people know him or not. Edited February 12, 2015 by King Malta 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markn Posted February 12, 2015 Report Share Posted February 12, 2015 we need players like orlando that can win games on his own, if the player is good enough then people will come to watch Memberships increase when the club invests in name marques. Our membership increased on the back of Villa and Duff. I doubt Koren would have contributed to even 15% of the overall membership increases from season prior. A marque should at least increase the overall membership by 30-40%, and attendances by the same figure. This season our attendances have been much the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markn Posted February 12, 2015 Report Share Posted February 12, 2015 King Malta its important to understand our current position in the market. We receive little no no media. We have poor attendances. The questions should be- Why don't we have a quality recognisable marque player? Why did New York get Villa and Lampard while we only got Koren? Why did LA Galaxy get Gerard? Big names create a big buz. We dont have time to let players settle to show off their skills. Koren is a clear example of how his investment has been a huge failure (thus far). Koren currently has shown little quality to attract people to come and watch him - nor does he have the reputation to attract interest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thisphantomfortress Posted February 12, 2015 Report Share Posted February 12, 2015 King Malta its important to understand our current position in the market. We receive little no no media. We have poor attendances. The questions should be- Why don't we have a quality recognisable marque player? Why did New York get Villa and Lampard while we only got Koren? Why did LA Galaxy get Gerard? Big names create a big buz. We dont have time to let players settle to show off their skills. Koren is a clear example of how his investment has been a huge failure (thus far). Koren currently has shown little quality to attract people to come and watch him - nor does he have the reputation to attract interest. The two aren't mutually exclusive but quality has to come before a name. I would rather see a quality marquee winning us games than seeing a washed up overweight big name player. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Embee Posted February 12, 2015 Report Share Posted February 12, 2015 King Malta its important to understand our current position in the market. We receive little no no media. We have poor attendances. The questions should be- Why don't we have a quality recognisable marque player? Why did New York get Villa and Lampard while we only got Koren? Why did LA Galaxy get Gerard? Big names create a big buz. We dont have time to let players settle to show off their skills. Koren is a clear example of how his investment has been a huge failure (thus far). Koren currently has shown little quality to attract people to come and watch him - nor does he have the reputation to attract interest. I'm not sure if you're actually seriously asking why Galaxy got Gerrard or NYCFC got Lampard and Villa. Ignoring, for a minute, that we're clearly currently on the bottom rung of the CFG ladder, the MLS is currently a more attractive prospect for many aging World Class players. Whilst the MLS is more advanced and there's more money on offer, I'd say the lure of living in New York or Los Angeles probably trumps the lure of Melbourne for some of these athletes. On Koren, calling him a huge failure when he's played around 5 games (scoring a hattrick in one of them) is hilarious. And I'd love to see you actually prove that people are not coming to watch him. Obviously it'd be nice to have a well known player who is also of top quality in our squad but given the choice between reputation and ability, I'll take ability every day. Winning some silverware will attract larger crowds over a longer time span than having a well known name here for a year. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jw1739 Posted February 12, 2015 Report Share Posted February 12, 2015 IMO there is a genuine disappointment around our marquee/name/visa players to date. Many have been injured for significant periods of time and I would agree that none have been really outstanding on the field of play. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenSeater Posted February 12, 2015 Report Share Posted February 12, 2015 King Malta its important to understand our current position in the market. We receive little no no media. We have poor attendances. The questions should be- Why don't we have a quality recognisable marque player? Why did New York get Villa and Lampard while we only got Koren? Why did LA Galaxy get Gerard? Big names create a big buz. We dont have time to let players settle to show off their skills. Koren is a clear example of how his investment has been a huge failure (thus far). Koren currently has shown little quality to attract people to come and watch him - nor does he have the reputation to attract interest. I'd much rather a lesser known marquee that becomes a Thomas Broich type and dominates the league than an over the hill Steven Gerrard or uninterested David Villa. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewConvert Posted February 12, 2015 Report Share Posted February 12, 2015 Just to note that Berisha and Broich were unknown when they arrived in Oz but now anyone with a passing knowledge of the game knows who they are. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Melburnian Posted February 12, 2015 Popular Post Report Share Posted February 12, 2015 Win. Just fucking win. I don't care with who, just win and entertain us. Get people into the club who know how and what it takes to win. In all aspects. Do that and people will turn up and want to bring people with them. 12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n i k o Posted February 12, 2015 Report Share Posted February 12, 2015 (edited) King Malta its important to understand our current position in the market. We receive little no no media. We have poor attendances. The questions should be- Why don't we have a quality recognisable marque player? Why did New York get Villa and Lampard while we only got Koren? Why did LA Galaxy get Gerard? Big names create a big buz. We dont have time to let players settle to show off their skills. Koren is a clear example of how his investment has been a huge failure (thus far). Koren currently has shown little quality to attract people to come and watch him - nor does he have the reputation to attract interest.Problem is eventually the gloss is lost on a player like that after some time becasue who really wants to pay to watch a losing team. No, the answer is simple, win matches and they will come. The clubs lucky they have us muppets to keep paying the bills for them, cause we really get very little in return yet here we still are. If only more people were willing to pay their money to watch failure. Unfortunately they won't, world class player or not. Edited February 12, 2015 by n i k o 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red or Dead Posted February 12, 2015 Report Share Posted February 12, 2015 So markn what you're saying is that you'd rather have a bigger crowd turn up every week as opposed to winning games!? In other words, you put 'atmosphere' ahead of 'success'! Mate, we've felt that disappointing/angry feeling far too many times for far too long, I couldn't care less if we played our games out of LaTrobe training grounds in front of 1,500 fans if it meant I got to see my team win and leave the ground actually happy! Which did you prefer: leaving AAMI Park after coming from behind to beat WSW in front of a lowly 7,500 fans or leaving Etihad Stadium last week after a miserable 3-0 loss in front of a massive 40,000? I know which one I'd choose 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jovan Posted February 12, 2015 Report Share Posted February 12, 2015 As an extension to this. I prefer a good style over the result. Yes winning is a massive factor in my gameday enjoyment but I would be just as satisfied with an attractive attacking highly skilled low error rate performance. Interested in others thoughts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jovan Posted February 12, 2015 Report Share Posted February 12, 2015 Add to that couldn't give a toss of who else is or not there. Bit selfish but that's just me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n i k o Posted February 12, 2015 Report Share Posted February 12, 2015 As an extension to this. I prefer a good style over the result. Yes winning is a massive factor in my gameday enjoyment but I would be just as satisfied with an attractive attacking highly skilled low error rate performance. Interested in others thoughts. Thing is Jovan playing a good style is nice but to sacrifice the results because of it is a recipe for failure for a professional club. At the same time we dont have to play a boring brand of football to get those results either. It's about finding the right balance. I too enjoy to watch what I beleive is entertaining football, but it must be geared towards getting winning results. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jw1739 Posted February 12, 2015 Report Share Posted February 12, 2015 But surely it's not A, or B, or C, or D, etc? IMO these things are not mutually exclusive. But really, does it matter at this stage? What we do know is that whatever models we have used and are using to sign and re-sign players, and the way we train and ultimately perform on the park are not working to deliver either good results or a large following. So as far as I am concerned we need some changes in the club. Simply repeating the same things over and over again won't produce different outcomes. I don't know what the hell we are waiting for. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n i k o Posted February 12, 2015 Report Share Posted February 12, 2015 But surely it's not A, or B, or C, or D, etc? IMO these things are not mutually exclusive. But really, does it matter at this stage? What we do know is that whatever models we have used and are using to sign and re-sign players, and the way we train and ultimately perform on the park are not working to deliver either good results or a large following. So as far as I am concerned we need some changes in the club. Simply repeating the same things over and over again won't produce different outcomes. I don't know what the hell we are waiting for. I agree. And the proof is there, 5 seasons of it. As a collection, this club has not achieved what it should have by this time in the aleague. Yes we have smaller issues surrounding the club that we have analysed to death, but the collective big picture needs to change. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.