Members Forum Meeting 3/4/03

[Koalalill]

We had our second meeting last Thursday (3/4/03). As you can imagine after the events and newspaper articles of the last week there was plenty to talk about. Things that have been posted on this board in the last couple of days (in particular the views on Culture on the "Positives" and "Greg Miller Article" and threads) were the very things discussed on Thursday night.

The main part of this second meeting was a presentation by the RFC's Communication Manager Paul Maley. The presentation was "A Brand Presentation". In simple terms (and non marketing terms) the "Richmond Brand" means how the Club sells itself to the outside world, being the business world (sponsors), the community in general and most importantly it MEMBERS and SUPPORTERS.

As part of the Club's research Paul Maley interviewed many former greats of the Club as well as long term servants and many supporters. The results of this research has been used to develop the core values and culture that the CLub wants to operate on. The presentation highlighted some great people of our Club. For example, Jack Dyer - epitomises the RFC Club - no-one disputes this. He represents the "Figthing Fury spirit better than anyone. Others included Tom Hafey, Graeme Richmond, Francis Bourke and Paul Broderick.

One of the things that came out of the presentation to me is the Club is committed to making the Richmond Football Club something we can all be proud and want to be part of.

In short the Club realises it has alot of work to do to win back its fans. The research showed that people want to feel that they belong. Communications need to be improved. They are aware that people contact the Club and don't get replies. They are working on it (as I think Hustar can attest). Paul Maley said that Club knows that they need to stop saying what they are going to do and start showing what they are doing. They need to stop promising and start delivering. Paul also said as part of his presentation that all the people mentioned above had one thing in common:

Each of the above "created a culture by their own actions"

To end the presentation we were shown a 4 minute video. This video is currently an "in-house" video and can (this a decree by the AFL). This video highlights the core vlaues that were spoken about and the type of organisation the RFC wants be especially to its Members & Supporters. We all agreed that the contents of the Video would be a far greater tool to attract people to memberships rather than the current ad campaign. Can I say that the video was fantastic. I would love everyone to be able to see it. One person said it made "the hairs on the back of thier neck stand up". Sounds like a footy cliche but I know what they meant. Personally it made proud. It was inspirational to say the least.

There is alot of work to do but the Club is committed to changing its current culture to enable it to become the Club it once was and it should be.

 

[Koalalill]

Things we discussed:

Greg Miller's Interview: Paul Maley said that Greg Miller was generally surprised with the amount of emails the Club received after 1 loss. Paul added that Greg had said that in his 10+ yrs at the Kangas he would have been lucky to receive 100 emails or faxes in total. It was also said that Greg still has a fair bit to learn about the Culture of The Tigers especially considering our lack of success over the last 20 yrs. The interview was not meant to insult those of us who have signed up but was meant to challenge those who haven't.

The bottom line is our numbers are down considerable on this time last year (4500) this equates to approxmiately $450,000. This is money the Club can ill-afford to loose. As Paul pointed out 10 clubs out of 16 lost between them $10 million. Yes Richmond made a profit but compare it to the $million profits of the Dons & Pies and we lag along way behind.

Greg's interview was a challenge to people to sign up.

The TV Ads: now I haven't seen them - heard alot about them but aint seen 'em. But they are for this year only
and wont be around next year.

The AFL Telstra sites: the Club is limited by what they can do regarding the RFC site due to the contract between the AFL & Telstra. A question was raised as to why the Club didn't go out and do what Essendon did and remain as an independant site. It is simple a case of economics. The Club receives a guaranteed figure from the Telstra deal - it was felt that the Club wasn't in
a position to invest their own $ and then generate a profit equal to or greater than the guaranteed fee.

Tiger TV being moved off Channel 31 to Foxtel: simply another case of economics.

Another relatively brief report. Any questions comments please feel free to post.

Oh...

Briefly on a query from the last thread regarding membership. For all you overseas and interstate tiger fans there I have an email address for you so you can to sign up and to a new area of the CLub. It has been set up to cater for you guys in particular. But guess what I have misplaced it. I'll have it for you shortly.

 

[mightytiges]

Thanks for that report KL. Top stuff .

It's curious that the club (presumably the marketing department) can make a great in-house video yet go public with those terrible embarrassing ads. It would have been better to have no ads at all. I remember the great one we use to have of the tiger jumping up and grabbing the footy then roaring with the footy tucked firmly in its grasp. Even though we had a bottom side it got everyone including opposition supporters talking about Richmond.

I still don't see the economics of moving Tiger TV to FOXTEL unless FOXTEL has agreed to sponsor (i.e. pay for) the whole show lock,stock and barrel and so costs the club nothing. Free to air tv would access more tiger fans anyhow and channel 31 is run by RMIT students so it wouldn't cost much to make a 1/2 hour show.

I can only see one way of making up those 4500 lost memberships at this stage - win some games of footy with a positive proactive style of play. Make people want to come and see us play footy.

 

[Rosy]

Thanks for the report KL. Very interesting to read what goes on behind the scenes at the club, we're spoilt having our own personal reporter.

It's a good start that the club acknowledges they have been a tad remiss in the communcation with supporter dept.
It's better to admit there has been a problem and to try and rectify it, than have their head in the sand and be in denial like they might have tended to do previously.

It's a pity we can't all see the video clips by the sound of it. I'd imagine that kind of thing would get more Tigers inspired to stick by the club than Greg's article.
(Just my personal opinion of course.)

Free to air tv would access more tiger fans anyhow and channel 31 is run by RMIT students so it wouldn't cost much to make a 1/2 hour show.

I was questioned when I commented about this before, but I can't see how channel 31 could possibly access "more tiger fans."

To my way of thinking channel 31 is a very limited "free to air" station.
It is only available in the Melbourne area where the majority of people wouldn't be Tiger fans, and a lot would have limited interest in that kind of football show.

If it was a national free to air station I'd think differently.
Foxtel is not only Australia wide, but is also subscribed to by people because they have an interest in football, so I'd think it would access more fans than Ch31.
Am I seeing this wrong somehow?

 

[mightytiges]

Free to air tv would access more tiger fans anyhow and channel 31 is run by RMIT students so it wouldn't cost much to make a 1/2 hour show.

I was questioned when I commented about this before, but I can't see how channel 31 could possibly access "more tiger fans."

To my way of thinking channel 31 is a very limited "free to air" station.
It is only available in the Melbourne area where the majority of people wouldn't be Tiger fans, and a lot would have limited interest in that kind of football show.

If it was a national free to air station I'd think differently.
Foxtel is not only Australia wide, but is also subscribed to by people because they have an interest in football, so I'd think it would access more fans than Ch31.
Am I seeing this wrong somehow?

It could six of one and half a dozen of the other, rosy. One could argue the vast majority of tiger fans live in Melbourne and presumably most or at least alot of people don't have pay tv (although I don't know the percentage that do so I could be wrong). To me it's a financial decision - it's easier to attract footy sponsors for shows on FOXTEL than on Ch 31 as you're targetting strict footy fans from all clubs plus neutrals not just tiger fanatics. Whether it accesses less or more tiger fans is debatable.

 

[Koalalill]

I still don't see the economics of moving Tiger TV to FOXTEL unless FOXTEL has agreed to sponsor (i.e. pay for) the whole show lock,stock and barrel and so costs the club nothing. Free to air tv would access more tiger fans anyhow and channel 31 is run by RMIT students so it wouldn't cost much to make a 1/2 hour show.

The economics of Tiger TV are that the Club couldn't get a sponsor for Tiger TV on Channel 31. Which meant they would have had to pay for the making of it themselves like they did last season. That is money they don't have a the moment. The Club doesn't have to pay for the production of the program on Foxtel. Those costs are covered by Richmonds share of the TV rights deal (the non-cash component of the deal).

The importance in Tiger TV (my opinion) on Channel 31 had more to do with the fact it was the only TV show that any Club had that wasn't on Pay TV. Also, there are people who don't have Pay TV because they can't afford it. Tiger TV on Channel 31 gave them an avenue to get "closer" to the Club. The results of the supporter survey from last year showed that Tiger TV was considered extremely important to tiger Fans as a form of connectio to the Club.

Similarly, the TV ads form part of the non-cash component of the TV rights deal. The $$$ available for the ads are set amount. They don't cost the Club. My understanding after Thursday night (and I didn't quite hear this bit because some people were talking while Paul was talking) is that the Ad Agency used devised the the campaign, not the Club and wanting to get 2 real live Fans in the ads rather than actors that is what they came up with.

Having only seen the Ads for the first time last night - I must say they are worse than what I imagined.

 

[Koalalill]

It's curious that the club (presumably the marketing department) can make a great in-house video yet go public with those terrible embarrassing ads.

The in house video has been made by the Communications Dept. rather than the Marketing Dept. But the irony to me is that the marketing dept. (who I think OK'd the TV ads) are going to be using the "in house video" as a tool to sell sponsorships.

Speaking of sponsor (and yes it is one of my personal areas of interest). Part of the research regarding the RFC Brand showed that we are thought of very highly in the Corporate World because of our sponsorship with the TAC. Companies say that one of the reasons the Club is considered a good product to become involved with is because we have had the same major sponsor for the last 14 years and that shows that we work hard with our sponsors. Also, that RFC is number 1 when it comes to football followers knowing who our sponsor is. AFL research shows the vast majority of people can name Richmond's mahorsponsor but not other teams (eg Brisbane or St Kilda).

 

[gustiger12]

Good reading KL.

Maybe the club should be looking at a short similar type of Video to distribute to those member that haven't yet signed.

We all know the ones that make the hair on the back of your neck stand up. Along with a few of those "special" moments from Bruce and Co. (Read my footnote)

I know there would be some costs involved in this, but we need to do something to get these people back on board.

 

[gustiger12]

One other thing KL is those UGLY new Members T-Shirts.

Surely they can come up with something more appealing than the current ones advertised on the Website.

I don't know what others think, but I certainly wouldn't buy one.

With our support base merchandise should represent a large portion of our profits, but we need to improve on the appeal of some of our stuff.

 

[Koalalill]

One other thing KL is those UGLY new Members T-Shirts.

Surely they can come up with something more appealing than the current ones advertised on the Website.

I don't know what others think, but I certainly wouldn't buy one.

With our support base merchandise should represent a large portion of our profits, but we need to improve on the appeal of some of our stuff.

Could not agree with you more Gustiger. Probably expalins why they aren't selling ;D I wouldn't buy one either. I actually saw someone in one of them yesterday - not a good look. I think it's the yellow sleeves

Personally, I would have given them away as part of the membership renewal process instead of the pins. I know they aren't the greatest to look at but would have been something different to those blooming pins.