Not sure what you're trying to prove either leggy, be positive for once you miserable bastard. He's saying that per capita, this was a great crowd. Which it was. Mrsmiis isn't saying we are a better fan base than CCM or Victory, he's questioning the bullshark metrics criteria for crowd numbers
Yep, it's a good per capita crowd. And so what?
---
This is straightforward in a harsh cynical sense.
It's the large TV audiences that result in large TV licence dollars that fund the League (and hence it's ability to attract and keep decent players and provide improving quality of entertainment).
---
And it's just a fact that the large TV audiences are primarily coming from the large fan base clubs from the large Aussie cities.
---
I think the main part of our "job" as a club in the A League right now is to be good enough and competitive enough to provide entertaining, quality matches for the larger population A League clubs fans and wider audience to watch.
And that doesn't exclude us winning the thing from time to time.
But we sure as heck haven't been bringing much NZ based TV A League licence money to add real financial value. At least not to date.
---
It's all about the TV eyeballs. Not per capita numbers.
So yep a great turn out. A fun second half.
But those metrics are real. And they are not per capita.
---
Having said that, I'd emphasise that the big clubs know they need someone to play; and that, if games are competitive and entertaining, the more games (and hence teams) the better. So they know we are valuable beyond just the NZ TV eyeball numbers. If we are entertaining and competitive.
But we also know that they want us to bring in a wider 4 million NZ TV audience and through that a greater share of the TV funding based on numbers. And from our selfish perspective that's the way we could add more value to the League than a current CCM or a possible future third Melbourne or Sydney side. Plus our financial stability etc.
COYN.