Port Magpies

[Wedgie]

lol @ the old I disagree so its an 'urban myth' call.
Sorry Hondo, I forgot that you knew better than me what I and others thought and did.
Can you PM me when I need a dump too so I can head off to the shitter in time?
Cheers.

[Hondo]

Wedgie,

You've got the attendance stats. If you think I am wrong make your case.

[Booney]

Guys, cmon, aren't you blokes meant to be doing this sort of thing on The Roost?

[gossipgirl]

Hondo you are exactly right. Its quite funny how the trolls try to argue with no intelligence or facts at all

[Booney]

Hondo you are exactly right. Its quite funny how the trolls try to argue with no intelligence or facts at all

Yeah, dang trolls!

[Wedgie]

Wedgie,

You've got the attendance stats. If you think I am wrong make your case.

Ummm, the attendance stat actually backs up my argument in that crowds were higher when they appealed to the broader community even moreso than in a premiership year.
I don't think you are wrong as I KNOW exactly why I and many others went to Power games in the early years and why I and many others stopped going. I won't presume to know why you do things or tell you the reason you have done things is an urban myth as that would be rude, pretentious and ignorant of me if I did.

[Hondo]

Oh dear

I don't think Wedgie's a troll and I think he's misunderstood me.

For the record, my "urban legend" is that there's a direct link between the club linking back to 1870 and it's attendance figures over the years. I don't see evidence of that in the figures. I see a more obvious link to their on-field performances over the years. But, it's not a major study I've done so challenge me on it.

I am not talking about whether people felt the Power were a Crows Mark II or not and went to games because of that. Only they know how they felt and what they did.

I am sure there were neutrals among the 35000 average in 1997. There's probably lots of reasons why they were there then and not now. 1998 saw 4000 less on average than 1997. And it's been around that mark since except for the last 2 years.

[Wedgie]

Your figures prove that more people went when they had a broader community appeal, your figures also show that in years they made the GF they got less crowds than when they did appeal to the broader community.
Your figures show your argument is the one which is an 'urban myth' and its pretty damn obvious.

[Booney]

Anywho, back to the Magpies...

[Hondo]

Your figures prove that more people went when they had a broader community appeal, your figures also show that in years they made the GF they got less crowds than when they did appeal to the broader community.
Your figures show your argument is the one which is an 'urban myth' and its pretty damn obvious.

Your basing this all on 1997's figures? Is that the only year they had "broader community appeal"? They may well have had broader community appeal in 1997 - because of the reasons you went + opposition to the Crows factor, curiosity factor, new team, easier seating ... lots of things.

So where did they all go in 1998?

Why did more people go in 2005 then 1998?

I think your arguement would stack up better if the 1997 average held for longer.

[Psyber]

I think you could dismiss the first years figures on the basis that as well as core Port supporters there would have been an additional surge.
This was likely to be derived from simple curiousity, and from some speculating about whether, having missed out on Crows membership, they could follow the second team.
This tricky bit was getting the extras to stay interested...

[Wedgie]

Hondo, I disagree, I think the fact crowds were eroded at the same time their appeal to the broader community eroded (even with GF appearances) shows pretty damn conclusively what happened.
If you have any further queries PM me, as Booney said its time to get back on the Magpies plight.

[Macca19]

This is an urban legend that doesn't stack up IMO.

Correct.

The figures still show that their best support was in 1997, even better than the years they finished minor premiers. They finished top in 2002 and still had over 5000 less people at their games. There must be a reason besides win/loss ratios.

Sure, but its got nothing to do with Port being anti-history in 1997 and slowly moving towards pro-history now. It never happened that way. Its revitionalist to claim this as fact.

[Hondo]

Now I've got to get back on topic and go to PM mode? Are you struggling with the debate

Mate, I am stirring - we'll agree to disagree

Now, about those Magpies ....

[Macca19]

There must be a reason besides win/loss ratios.

Live telecasts against the gate, cost of tickets, global financial crisis is a good start ...

absolute rubbish.

Agree, the financial crisis has nothing to do with it at all. The other reasons are valid though.

As ive said numerous times though, look at Adelaides crowds. They had a peak average of 46k in 1993 when the ground barely fit that many people and theyve slowly gone down since then, despite a reasonable hike in capacity at the ground. Their crowds have decreased for the past 4 years, have gone from 44k average in 03 to 38k this year, despite having a super young exciting list, making the finals yearly and winning stacks of games.

There are legit reasons behind both SA clubs decrease in crowds since 97 (as a starting point for arguments sake). Ive written this before but back then you had one channel playing football, which would be minimum 2 hour delay - sometimes longer - no foxtel, no live against the gate on FTA, cheaper tickets and a stadium thats not incredibly dated. Consider in the same time frame that in Victoria, they bulldozed Waverley (same design as FP), built uber-modern Docklands and have pretty much torn down the whole of the MCG and started again....in the same time Footy Park has got bucket seats (welcome to the 1980s) and a video scoreboard (again, welcome to the 80s).

The stadium reason/excuse would effect a minimal amount of people, but most certainly live against the gate on Fox and sometimes FTA certainly has an effect. How many Port home games were played in wet weather this year? Just about every home game Port had was played in the wet. I reckon about 3 games were predicted with hail/storms. Is it soft to stay at home because of rain....probably, but many families would.

Despite the fact that the AFL have increased their overall attendance yearly for a long time now, the SA crowds have gone the other direction.

[Macca19]

Your figures prove that more people went when they had a broader community appeal,

Define 'broader community appeal' and why exactly Port had broader community appeal in 1997 as opposed to 04-05-06-07 when John James heavily pushed the pro-Power/Teal, anti-Port history marketing campaigns?

[Wedgie]

Now I've got to get back on topic and go to PM mode? Are you struggling with the debate

Mate, I am stirring - we'll agree to disagree

Now, about those Magpies ....

Struggling? You provide figures that back up my argument and I'm struggling?
I asked you politely to carry on by PM but you're welcome to continue you discussion in the AFL Forum as with most subjects on here I'm trying to keep or get them on topic, its a site policy.
If you're trying to 'stir' as you admitted or 'troll' as a lot of us call it take it elsewhere as this too is against site policy.

Onto the Maggies, I think they should serve Coopers as a way to get more support, I personally will join as a member of any club that moves from Japanese owned swill to a beautiful South Aussie drop! I lay down the challenge!

[PhilH]

THIS ON THE SANFL WEB SITE

SANFL TO EXTEND SUPPORT TO PORT ADELAIDE MAGPIES FOOTBALL CLUB

The SANFL Commission will extend financial support to the Port Adelaide Magpies Football Club for the 2010 season by way of an immediate advance of a portion of the 2010 SANFL Grants due to the Club during 2010.

Executive Commissioner, Leigh Whicker, said the Port Magpies had approached the SANFL Commission last month to seek support.

The SANFL responded immediately and worked with the Port Magpies to review its operations.

“The SANFL Commission has satisfied itself that the Port Magpies Board, management and staff are diligent and are doing all that they can to effectively and efficiently manage and run their Club,” said Mr Whicker.

“The Port Magpies has our complete confidence and total support. We accept and agree with the Club’s conclusion that its situation is unique among our nine clubs and that its current operating model is unsustainable.

“We will now support the Port Magpies as it works through its options to develop a new operating model for 2011 and subsequent seasons.”

[Booney]

Nice, very nice.

[Macca19]

Great news!