There are plenty of under used municipal and school pools across the country that could be bought or managed by an outside organization, just for the promise of occasional public access. USMS is not loaded with money, but has lots of knowledge and experienced people who could pull off a stunt like this. One club in Indiana has done just this thing by taking over a county pool that was in peril of closing because it could not afford to operate it. As far as I know, the agreement is still in force and the USMS club is still paying for operations by its own management and programming.
San Diego has three public pools but cannot afford to keep them all open at once, so they have one or two open and close the other one (or two) on a rotating basis. Not a good way to keep programs filled.
My concern is that there will be inequity this year. Some states will open pools before others. How can we have a national championship if some people canâ€t swim up until the day of the event. How do we establish top ten rankings when a lot of people arenâ€t included because of no opportunity to swim? Way more questions then answers.
I don't like saying no to something without data, but around here, pools are money losing things. The places taht keep them running are municipalities, the big D1 school, or gyms. And those almost all have other things going on besides just the pools. Even the stand alone pool a couple of hours away has a water park attached to it.
If there are outdoor pools that aren't covered, then maybe. But even still, it is about $400,000 to buy a bubble or a tent for one. WIth teh roughly 2 dozen masters swimmers we have around here, I can't see that happening.
To the naysayers: Try to look at the big picture, not just your own. The USMS board and much of its national committee membership have hundreds of years of combined experience and are not likely to agree to an obviously losing prospect. I am also supposing that the program would start small, with one or two likely locations that have enough masters swimmers, divers, synchro, and water polo as well as age group support for most or all the sports. Two workouts per day will not pay the bills, but a selection of programs thoughtfully employed, and well reasoned management, will.
Orca: USMS has money which is currently invested in conservative vehicles, waiting for an opportunity like this. The last number I remember is about $3-5 million. After the covid lunacy it may be down, but will rebound.
67King: bubble? Are you kidding? Boulder, CO has an outdoor pool that is open everyday and you can see pictures of people walking through snow to go to workout. Ask Eney Jones, she coaches there.
67King: bubble? Are you kidding? Boulder, CO has an outdoor pool that is open everyday and you can see pictures of people walking through snow to go to workout. Ask Eney Jones, she coaches there.
I would bet that indoor pools open every day outnumber outdoor pools open every day 10,000:1, at least anywhere north of I-20. Shoot, there are three 50M pools all next to each other in Knoxville. 2 indoor, 1 outdoor. The outdoor pool is not open most of the year, the other 2 are (well......were anyway) every day.
I'll just add that even in the event that a school district, city or county were to grant a not for profit organization something like a $1/year lease, it's no guarantee that you won't lose money on the endeavor.
I was involved as a board member on a swim team where we took over a 2 year old, 8 lane indoor pool, and even with not having to pay for the rent of the facility, we lost money routinely and often relied upon the generosity of our head coach and her family. This took place over 10 years ago now so my memory of details isn't super sharp, but things like utility bills, insurance, employees and maintenance can be truly cumbersome. To be fair, our swim team was relatively small (~120 kids) and there was no masters team to speak of. A few meets were hosted, one of them a masters meet that I ran, but none were large enough to generate significant revenue...if any. A larger pool in a more swimming heavy area might have a slightly different result, but for us it resulted in a lot of red ink.
Paul and Laura Smith would probably have some valuable insight into this subject.
Are you suggesting that USMS spend their 'rainy day fund' to subsidize the operation and maintenance of swimming pools in order to create greater pool availability for members? This sounds like the prelude to a sizable increase in dues. I'm not against your proposal, per se, it just seems like there are a lot of questions to be answered. Also of note, most members do not participate in USMS national events, nor would most members use one, two or three pools that USMS was operating. This might result in some acrimony from membership were dues to be increased in order to support such a venture.
The title of the thread is misleading, I am sorry for that and cannot change it. The intention is for USMS to possibly manage OR buy existing pools that are underused. It is possible to get a facility for free, if you agree to certain terms. My proposal is based on the idea that USMS will not be foolish enough to agree to just anything or buy a pool in a flood zone, Cartel war zone or on top of a skyscraper.
Dues should not be affected at all, because operating money should be provided for by program money at the facility. If it only breaks even, we have won a huge victory in keeping one more pool open.
I fully realize that until we operate or own all municipal pools across the country (if one is to dream, one should dream BIG), many members not in proximate driving distance would not have th opportunity to use the pool(s). One of a large number of opportunities would be to install new clubs and new members, neither of which are flooding our rolls in the last 5 years.
I wholeheartedly agree that there are private organizations that could likely do a much better job of running pools than many public parks & rec departments. But, to do that, you need volume of usage - lots of swim lessons, probably a large USAS team, lap swimming lanes, water aerobics, etc. A USMS team is a nice addition to that volume ...
However, even in a great case, I don't imagine you're turning over a huge profit, so I suspect it's a pretty poor investment. If pools were a great investment (beyond hyper-focused and small facilities that only do swim lessons), you'd have private companies popping up around the country to make the business case to municipalities to run their pools. I don't think that's happening in many places because, as much as I love swimming, pools are a community investment in health and not a profit-making venture.
I'd love to be proven wrong.
Your hypothesis is correct, pools need a lot of programs to make money. There are 24 hours in a day and I am always wondering why cities cannot see that there are plenty of money making opportunities after 9 pm and before 5 am.
Not looking for huge profit, break even is good enough for a 501(c)3 corporation. Some profit will of course be welcome, but first we need to try.
The BoD has spoken informally about this subject a few times over the years, but nobody wants to be the leader and possible goat if it does not work. In 2006, we (USMS) spent over $125,000 hosting FINA worlds. That was the final tally, after we had fronted over $200,000. I believe we can do better when we are our own bosses.
Pools are a huge investment initially, but the continuing costs are only fractional and mostly based on programming. The more programs you have, the more money you have to use. USMS would be buying or managing existing facilities, so construction costs would mostly be moot.
t swim up until the day of the event. How do we establish top ten rankings when a lot of people arenâ€
