Crowds - The thread of Australian whining

Marquee
3.7K
·
5.8K
·
over 17 years

There must be something in it that says this dosnt apply to the Phoenix as their findings dont seem to be backed up by our attendances. So there has to be more to it than just winning.

Marquee
970
·
6.5K
·
over 11 years

ballane wrote:

There must be something in it that says this dosnt apply to the Phoenix as their findings dont seem to be backed up by our attendances. So there has to be more to it than just winning.

As ACFC know all too well!

Legend
1.8K
·
22K
·
over 15 years

2ndBest wrote:

I'd back data analysis over people's gut feeling any day.

You know what they say about assuming.

Not sure I'd agree with you 100% there 2B.  Experienced observers can probably integrate a whole lot of factors that data analysis may not always capture.

Marquee
3.7K
·
5.8K
·
over 17 years

Is it a case of people answering a question the way the way those collecting the data want rather than as to what they would actually do. I sure dont have any scientific evidence to back it up but winning has at times seemed to have buggar all affect on our crouds. 

Tegal
·
Head Sleuth
3K
·
19K
·
about 17 years

ballane wrote:

There must be something in it that says this dosnt apply to the Phoenix as their findings dont seem to be backed up by our attendances. So there has to be more to it than just winning.

I looked into it a little last year. Crouds start fairly strong (novelty factor after a long offseason?), drop a bit then are mostly steady until the final third of the season, where if the team is winning, crouds come. 

Overall, Winning matters a lot. But it doesn't show up all year. 

Listen here Fudgeface
3.7K
·
15K
·
over 14 years

My pick is that the company has a whole lot more specific data than what they've revealed in the article, which the Nix will be able to use to use the limited resources (i.e. marketing budget) available to them to the best effect. They wouldn't be able to reveal all of their findings from the commercially sensitive data in the article, they've just put one simple example in so people can understand what they are doing. 

Certainly no need to angst over it.

Appiah without the pace
6.7K
·
19K
·
almost 17 years

Reminds me of comments on Stuff articles where people say they simply don't believe published research.

Tegal
·
Head Sleuth
3K
·
19K
·
about 17 years

2ndBest wrote:

Reminds me of comments on Stuff articles where people say they simply don't believe published research.

What does Jenny McCarthy think?

Legend
1.8K
·
22K
·
over 15 years

Tegal wrote:

ballane wrote:

There must be something in it that says this dosnt apply to the Phoenix as their findings dont seem to be backed up by our attendances. So there has to be more to it than just winning.

I looked into it a little last year. Crouds start fairly strong (novelty factor after a long offseason?), drop a bit then are mostly steady until the final third of the season, where if the team is winning, crouds come. 

Overall, Winning matters a lot. But it doesn't show up all year. 

The results would also be in the form of close association between croud numbers and winning rather than a hard-wired certainty - if the team wins then crouds will increase by 50% every time.  

So Tegal's last comment is spot on (well done young man - have an achieved with merit).

Marquee
5.3K
·
9.5K
·
almost 13 years

The problem I have with data analysis is that it can be heavily reliant on how the data is gathered and/or defined. Basically attendance is affected by a large number of complex factors - competing events, long weekends, ticket deals, the weather, media coverage, time since previous home game, day and time of the match, results, etc. Some of these factors can be quantified easily, some can't. The environment in which all this occurs (both in terms of the A League, the state of the club, and the Wellington market) has changed significantly over the years too. The number of home games in a season isn't a huge sample size either. Basically what I'm saying is that the system you're trying to extract meaningful data from is inherently complex and potentially full of statistical noise. I know data analysts have ways of accounting for this to some extent, but I think it's worth thinking about the limits of a study like this. Or maybe I've just got an arts graduate's native distrust of numbers...

Tegal
·
Head Sleuth
3K
·
19K
·
about 17 years

Part of the analysis is always to take into account and mention the limitations of the study. But you are right, it is always worth keeping in mind. 

Marquee
5.3K
·
9.5K
·
almost 13 years

Yeah, it's probably more of an issue about how these things get presented by the media than for their commercial uses to be fair

Legend
1.8K
·
22K
·
over 15 years

It's "big data" which I take to be metadata.  So hopefully a lot of the noise is accounted for.

Opinion Privileges revoked
4.9K
·
9.9K
·
over 14 years

Tegal wrote:

2ndBest wrote:

Reminds me of comments on Stuff articles where people say they simply don't believe published research.

What does Measles Magoo think?

Thinking? Thinking gives you autism, everyone knows that (and sleep gives you cancer).

Marquee
690
·
7.3K
·
almost 15 years

I wonder how having the Hurricanes play the same weekend we are effects the croud, some people may only be able to afford one event a week, therefore one event misses out.  Whereas if they were on alternating weeks croud numbers may be higher for both sports.   I wish these clashes could be avoided, but seems we have fudge all say.

Marquee
620
·
6.3K
·
about 17 years

or double headed it.

Marquee
3.3K
·
5.1K
·
about 13 years

I wonder how having the Hurricanes play the same weekend we are effects the croud, some people may only be able to afford one event a week, therefore one event misses out.  Whereas if they were on alternating weeks croud numbers may be higher for both sports.   I wish these clashes could be avoided, but seems we have fudge all say.

Wasn't there a deal sometime (maybe last season) where you got double tickets to both Nixs and Hurricanes game? Or am I thinking of something else the Nix did a combined pass for.

Appiah without the pace
6.7K
·
19K
·
almost 17 years

highest average croud at Westpac Stadium since our inaugural season.

Tegal
·
Head Sleuth
3K
·
19K
·
about 17 years

phoenix out. 

Marquee
620
·
6.3K
·
about 17 years

Doubt we will get 15K to knockout next week..doesn't seem to have the same team buzz as before.  Would be surprised if we even match last nites tbh.

Marquee
5.3K
·
9.5K
·
almost 13 years

Boro4eva wrote:

Doubt we will get 15K to knockout next week..doesn't seem to have the same team buzz as before.  Would be surprised if we even match last nites tbh.

Don't underestimate the lure of finals football to the unwashed masses....
Marquee
2.1K
·
6.4K
·
over 14 years

Boro4eva wrote:

Doubt we will get 15K to knockout next week..doesn't seem to have the same team buzz as before.  Would be surprised if we even match last nites tbh.

Don't underestimate the lure of finals football to the unwashed masses....

can't see it. Did you see how many kids were there last night?
LG
Legend
5.8K
·
24K
·
almost 17 years

The zone was the fullest I have seen it this season.

Phoenix Academy
23
·
230
·
over 12 years

Hurricanes vs Crusaders will pull a bigger croud/croud on Saturday night unfortunately....

Heaven knows I'm miserable now
280
·
5.2K
·
almost 16 years

7000 next week I reckon.

Marquee
1.2K
·
8.2K
·
almost 17 years

Lonegunmen wrote:

The zone was the fullest I have seen it this season.

Might be to do with it being by far the biggest croud this season?
Legend
3.6K
·
15K
·
about 17 years

What was the official croud last night?

WeeNix
80
·
650
·
almost 16 years

paulm wrote:

What was the official croud last night?

~13,400

Marquee
620
·
6.3K
·
about 17 years

This wont help...

Hyundai A-League 2015 Elimination Final

Wellington Phoenix v Melbourne City

Sunday 3 May, 2015

Westpac Stadium

Kick Off: 7.00pm (NZST)

Gates Open: 5.30pm (NZST)

Tickets start from $35 for adults and $10 for kids (plus fees). Click here at 9am (NZST) Tuesday 28 April to purchase your tickets.

Marquee
3.7K
·
5.8K
·
over 17 years

They just dont get it do they.

LG
Legend
5.8K
·
24K
·
almost 17 years

Nope, they don't. 

Marquee
5.3K
·
9.5K
·
almost 13 years

FFA get the revenue from the finals games anyway, so their sharkty scheduling is only shooting themselves in the foot

Surge
·
Can I have some lungs please miss
1.1K
·
7.5K
·
almost 17 years

The Domeinator on the wireless saying he hopes/expects 30k... I'm generally optimistic with things - but not THAT optimistic!

Marquee
690
·
7.3K
·
almost 15 years

SurgeQld wrote:

The Domeinator on the wireless saying he hopes/expects 30k... I'm generally optimistic with things - but not THAT optimistic!

Just heard that on the radio myself.  The toilet seat is in town doing a tour.   I'm not even sure if we'll break 10k for this one.

Marquee
5.3K
·
9.5K
·
almost 13 years

I predict 16,783

LG
Legend
5.8K
·
24K
·
almost 17 years

I would say around 14k at the game, it is finals time. The KO time sucks. If it had been a 3pm KO I would have suggested 20k, 5pm 16k, but 7 pm?

Legend
3.6K
·
15K
·
about 17 years

FFA get the revenue from the finals games anyway, so their sharkty scheduling is only shooting themselves in the foot

Hasn't that changed now? Don't we get it?

Appiah without the pace
6.7K
·
19K
·
almost 17 years

Nope. Hasn't changed.

Marquee
5.3K
·
9.5K
·
almost 13 years

Unless the FFA have deliberately given us a shark kickoff time so we get a poor croud so they can say "look, they don't even get good crouds for knockout games" so they can justify not giving us a license extension

Tegal
·
Head Sleuth
3K
·
19K
·
about 17 years

based on observation (rather than any stats) this round of playoffs is generally poorly attended throughout the league. 

You’ll need an account to join the conversation!

Sign in Sign up