Membership ladder

[Charlie]

Originally posted by lizz
I'd suggest that the request to play a first home game in round 2 is linked to the very restricted access the Swans have to the SCG before the season starts. Seems entirely reasonable to me.

The ANZAC arrangement is a joint initiative with Melbourne and seems entirely reasonable that supporting this would be a high priority.

Home games at Telstra against the likes of Essendon and Collingwood seems entirely reasonable given the financial contribution these fixtures should make and the still parlous financial condition of the Swans.

The Swans clearly have a committment to their Melbourne supporters (as evidenced by getting Morwood on board) and have talked about discontinuing the arrangement with the Bulldogs from next year.

But their primary goal surely has to be to do everything to ensure the financial stability and growth of support in its home city.

First one: If the SCG isn't ready, easily fixed by playing at Stadium Australia. This one MAY make sense, but as the number one request? Please.

Second one: Ok, but does it need to be one of the two priority requests? Is it THAT important? It only got 24,000 people last year. If both Melbourne and Sydney agree to put it at number 3, the game will happen. No doubt about it. Bloody waste of a priority request.

Third one: This is confusing, I'd have thought that was the ONLY one more important than Melbourne matches, as it is the ONLY one that is going to affect our revenue to an equal or greater degree.

Fourth one: 9 games at the SCG? Uh... seeing as how our deal is 3 at Stadium Australia, where exactly are they going to play? If they're that paranoid that the AFL is going to bump them to North Sydney Oval, put it as the last request. The AFL certainly has no reason whatsoever not to grant it.

[Damien]

Originally posted by Charlie
You give me a number where I can talk to someone in power - an MBH or a board member or SOMEONE who can do something, and I'll do it right now.

By the way, I believe that the requests ARE in order, as the first two requests are guaranteed, then the rest are given priority according to their place on the list. I may be wrong on this, but that's how I understand the request system works.

I totally agree with Melbourne fans getting more games, but do you really think the Swans will prioritise away game requests over home game requests in any case?

[liz]

Originally posted by Charlie

Fact: the Swans have the lowest membership of all clubs.

Not according to the league table of membership that opened this thread.

Originally posted by Charlie

I don't see why other clubs wanting to play a home game AGAINST them prevents us from playing AWAY games against Collingwood??? Or, for that matter, against Carlton, Essendon, Geelong, Hawthorn, the Kangaroos, Melbourne, Richmond and St Kilda??

Because all those clubs would rather play THEIR home games against other Melbourne clubs because there is a larger base of opposition supporters to come along to the game. Even if the Swans had 15,000 paid up members, it would be less than every Melbourne club's membership.

Every time this subject comes up you seem to think that we Sydneysiders are contemptuous of your wishes. Simply not true. We don't take it for granted that we are able to watch the team play 12 or so times a year and are sympathetic to your plight. Unfortunately, trying to argue your case based on numbers isn't going to work because they just don't add up.

[Charlie]

Originally posted by lizz
Not according to the league table of membership that opened this thread.

Sorry, would have thought this to be obvious, but it should read "interstate clubs".

How don't the numbers I posted add up??

[Charlie]

Originally posted by Damien
I totally agree with Melbourne fans getting more games, but do you really think the Swans will prioritise away game requests over home game requests in any case?

If it increases the chances of doubling or even tripling Melbourne memberships, why the hell wouldn't they? Looking at the other requests, a couple of them are rather trivial.

[monopoly19]

Originally posted by Charlie

Pisses me off to see how much people here take seeing their club for granted.

But why wouldn't we when it is a Sydney team ? We all know you're annoyed, but as someone said earlier in the thread, you've got to accept that as a Melbourne supporter, you are not the club's top priority. Truth be told, I'd say that playing the Bulldogs in Sydney and the 'Roos in Canberra would do more for the Swans supporter base than an extra game in Melbourne. With Melbourne you're pretty much preaching to the converted.

It may be selfish, but I'd rather see have the Bulldogs game in Sydney any day over Melbourne, 'cause it means I get to see my team play one more time.

No-one's suggesting that the Melbourne supporter base isn't significant and important, but I think there's a limit to how much you can do for them when you're team is based in another state. I don't begrudge the Melbourne supporters what they have, but if you're asking for the club to make 6 games in Melbourne one of their top 2 priorites, then I think you'll be waiting a while. The fact is that there are more important things to them (whether you agree or not).

[Charlie]

Originally posted by monopoly19
But why wouldn't we when it is a Sydney team ? We all know you're annoyed, but as someone said earlier in the thread, you've got to accept that as a Melbourne supporter, you are not the club's top priority. Truth be told, I'd say that playing the Bulldogs in Sydney and the 'Roos in Canberra would do more for the Swans supporter base than an extra game in Melbourne. With Melbourne you're pretty much preaching to the converted.

Converted? Yes, that's the point! We don't have to attract the fans here! We just have to convince them to sign up, so their money goes to Sydney and not to the clubs we play against! Is that so hard for you to understand?

What good does it for the Sydney Football Club to play in Canberra?? Please explain that. I can see the reason for having the Bulldogs game, and I'm not arguing against that game. I support that game. I am not so selfish to put the club's interests behind my own.

It may be selfish, but I'd rather see have the Bulldogs game in Sydney any day over Melbourne, 'cause it means I get to see my team play one more time.

As I said, I'm not arguing against the Dogs game being in Sydney... but considering the reason you gave, you saw the need to insert the word may????

No-one's suggesting that the Melbourne supporter base isn't significant and important, but I think there's a limit to how much you can do for them when you're team is based in another state. I don't begrudge the Melbourne supporters what they have, but if you're asking for the club to make 6 games in Melbourne one of their top 2 priorites, then I think you'll be waiting a while. The fact is that there are more important things to them (whether you agree or not).

Sydney-based fans who post in these arguments are wonderful at double-speak. The shower the Melbourne supporters who only want fair access to live matches with platitudes and 'we see where you're coming from, but...' THEN turn around and argue against giving the Melbourne supporters ANYTHING. I seriously think you people don't have a ****ing clue about the potential benefits to the club of actively pursuing the Melbourne market.

[TheHood]

I thoroughly believe that we owe our Melbourne supporters as many games as practical.

How can we make so much of asking our Vic supporters to sign up as members yet give them such a poultry showing per annum.

I am based in Sydney and make a single migration to Melbourne each year to see the boys play and aside from Round 6, there isn't a good time to get down there till August.

How about we swap one of our Subi games for one in Melbourne?

[stellation]

Originally posted by Charlie
I seriously think you people don't have a ****ing clue about the potential benefits to the club of actively pursuing the Melbourne market.

And, devil's advocate speaking here, perhaps people in Melbourne are not aware of the potential market to the AFL in New South Wales?

To highlight- that was the devil's advocate speaking

[Damien]

Charlie, stop attacking the Sydney based supporters for gods sakes. It doesn't help your argument.

WE go and support our club at every home match, I am not sure what you expect from us. You risk people losing sympathy for your and melbourne based fans plight.

The AFL and the club are the only two organisations that can change this.

[Charlie]

Originally posted by TheHood
I thoroughly believe that we owe our Melbourne supporters as many games as practical.

How can we make so much of asking our Vic supporters to sign up as members yet give them such a poultry showing per annum.

I am based in Sydney and make a single migration to Melbourne each year to see the boys play and aside from Round 6, there isn't a good time to get down there till August.

How about we swap one of our Subi games for one in Melbourne?

Best post I've seen on this thread thus far.

Your second sentence sums up ENTIRELY why I started on this topic in this thread. The arrival of the supposed heavyweight Morwood came with a new "Target 10,000" campaign to more than double Melbourne members. Great.

But what have they actually done to attract all these members? Thrown in a cap!!!

Fact is, no matter how often Morwood is portrayed as 'showing how much the Swans care about Melbourne supporters' he has done NOTHING significant as yet. It is just another throwaway argument.

[monopoly19]

Originally posted by Charlie
Converted? Yes, that's the point! We don't have to attract the fans here! We just have to convince them to sign up, so their money goes to Sydney and not to the clubs we play against! Is that so hard for you to understand?

What good does it for the Sydney Football Club to play in Canberra?? Please explain that. I can see the reason for having the Bulldogs game, and I'm not arguing against that game. I support that game. I am not so selfish to put the club's interests behind my own.

As I said, I'm not arguing against the Dogs game being in Sydney... but considering the reason you gave, you saw the need to insert the word may????

Sydney-based fans who post in these arguments are wonderful at double-speak. The shower the Melbourne supporters who only want fair access to live matches with platitudes and 'we see where you're coming from, but...' THEN turn around and argue against giving the Melbourne supporters ANYTHING. I seriously think you people don't have a ****ing clue about the potential benefits to the club of actively pursuing the Melbourne market.

I never said I know where you're coming from, because I don't. You've made it pretty obvious that you're p*ssed off, but having never supported an interstate football team I don't know how it feels, and it isn't much of an issue for me.

You say we argue against giving the Melbourne supporters anything, and to that, I would like to say WTF? I'm arguing against giving the Melbourne supporters a game at the expense of one of the other requests that the club has given to the AFL. The reality is, you are asking the club to take the chance that 15 000 people or whatever your number was will become members because of an extra game in Melbourne. Not only a gamble, but one that you're expecting to take precedent over their other requests. You say that you're not so selfish as to put your interests over the clubs, but that's exactly what you are doing. If your suggestion is such a fantastic one for the club, why have they not adopted it yet? If it will bring in more money/supporters than the current situation, do you really think they are naive/stupid/ignorant enough not to have implemented it?

If you were not based in Melbourne, would you still argue so vehemently, oh selfless one?

[Charlie]

Originally posted by Damien
Charlie, stop attacking the Sydney based supporters for gods sakes. It doesn't help your argument.

WE go and support our club at every home match, I am not sure what you expect from us. You risk people losing sympathy for your and melbourne based fans plight.

The AFL and the club are the only two organisations that can change this.

Yeah, forgive me for getting irate when I post on here, and get nothing more than partronising 'we understands' from my fellow Swans fans. I can't help but post when people begin bemoaning the fact that they 'only' get 12 games.

All I expect of Sydney fans is support for my case. What I argue for DOES NOT DEPRIVE Sydney fans of ANY MATCHES. I do not understand why I cop all this opposition. What possible harm could come to the club from playing seven games in Melbourne?

Do people think I'm trying to take the club out of Sydney? Because I'm NOT. I'm a realist, I know that South Melbourne moved for a reason. But while the club's Melbourne supporter base wasn't big enough as a HOME base, as an AWAY base it is a unique untapped resource no other club - except to a slightly lesser extent Brisbane - has.

[stellation]

I know it is a much maligned issue, but just go and look at Collingwood's schedule for this year and count the interstate trips (I make 3 for the rest of the regular season, nicely spaced apart)... I know it has been said before, but it is just so wrong, wrong, wrong....


collingwood's schedule

[Charlie]

Originally posted by monopoly19
I never said I know where you're coming from, because I don't. You've made it pretty obvious that you're p*ssed off, but having never supported an interstate football team I don't know how it feels, and it isn't much of an issue for me.

I realise that, but you like so many others here are preferring to argue against my case. Why? How does it hurt the club's operations in Sydney?

You say we argue against giving the Melbourne supporters anything, and to that, I would like to say WTF? I'm arguing against giving the Melbourne supporters a game at the expense of one of the other requests that the club has given to the AFL.

How is it at the expense of another requested game? Is the Kangaroos game in Canberra a request? NO. Are you suggesting that it is so fundamentally crucial that the club play its first home game in round 2, and that we play Melbourne on a Saturday night as opposed to a Sunday? Are you suggesting that this could have a massive effect on revenue?

The reality is, you are asking the club to take the chance that 15 000 people or whatever your number was will become members because of an extra game in Melbourne. Not only a gamble, but one that you're expecting to take precedent over their other requests.

Yes. But you are the one that stated that the Kangaroos game is more in the interests of the club. Before we talk about gambles (and what, precisely are we gambling?), explain THAT to me.

You say that you're not so selfish as to put your interests over the clubs, but that's exactly what you are doing. If your suggestion is such a fantastic one for the club, why have they not adopted it yet? If it will bring in more money/supporters than the current situation, do you really think they are naive/stupid/ignorant enough not to have implemented it?

Point 1: This is the problem. People here refuse to recognise that in this instance, my interests are in line with those of the club! If the club requested seven games in Melbourne, the "Target 10,000" campaign might just have a chance of succeeding!
Point 2: I hope they are not stupid enough to ignore it - and the 15,000 number, which by the way is NOT my number but Tony Morwood's, suggests they are aware of the potential. They are simply not doing enough to exploit the resource they have.

If you were not based in Melbourne, would you still argue so vehemently, oh selfless one?

Probably not, but I can promise you this. If it was Robbieando posting in this thread, and I was based in Sydney, I would at least be able to see his point!