I don't know. Does masters swimming really need more exposure? The team I train with already has five or six swimmers per lane at workouts during the peak season. We have a short course Nationals meet that usually brings in 1500-2000 swimmers. Much more and the meet timeline would be horrendous. It seems to me USMS is doing just fine with the current marketing.
Connie,
Wasn't the pool you train at once a privately owned pool by the Mission Viejo Community? When they couldn't pay the bills it was bought by the city and rented to the teams that train there. So, by the definition of a business should charge what it needs to in order to stay in business, your club failed.
Imagine how much more difficult it is to build and keep open facilities in areas where you can't swim outside all year. Swimming becomes a much more expensive sport to afford in colder areas.
That being said, I do agree with Connie that we need to grow our sport. By growth, we will have greater demand for facilities. The more tax payers that want swimming will have a greater chance of opening new facilities and keeping older ones open.
Impressive topic slide for a thread that started with a discussion of relay swimmers.
Originally posted by dorothyrde
We did not roll over, we fought hard, we worked the media, we worked the lap swimmers, we did everything we did, were at every park district meeting, but the almight dollar of a water park won out. We had the U of I coach talk to them about how to market a competition pool so it would make money, everything, but water park was on their minds and water park is what we will have.
Ideally we all want what Santa Clarita (CA) recently built: a 50 m x 25 yd pool, a 25 m diving well, and the pool with water slides. Beautiful facility. Great management, too. And they're having 3 meets a year (one each course). Something for everyone.
Wasn't the pool you train at once a privately owned pool by the Mission Viejo Community? When they couldn't pay the bills it was bought by the city and rented to the teams that train there. So, by the definition of a business should charge what it needs to in order to stay in business, your club failed.
Not really. The privately owned company that was operating the pool, who was also a land developer and a major land owner went out of business in the early 90's, when a lot of land development stopped. Compared to the rest of their business, the pool was a small potato, and not really central to the suces of their business.
I'm in land development here, companies the size of Mission Viejo Company oftebn build a facility like our pool with a leftover piece of land as a tax write-off rathet then as an investment.
It was turned over to the city when the mission Viejo company closed doors, but not as city operated and city subsidized facility, the facility is self supporting AFAIK, as a non-profit organization, and run by the board of director which is comprised of swimmers.
It is not a city operated facility.
I haven't looked at the recent fiscal paerwork from the facility. I remember the talks from last year that our yearly budget is about 2 milion a year. If you figure about 800 kids at $125 to $180/month and very active fundraising and sponsor seeking, 2 or so milion a year sounds about right. Plus each family on the kids team has 'mandatory' volunteering and fundraising hours, or they get charged another 500 bucks.
I have no idea why kids pay 120-150 a month to come to one workout a day, while Masters only pay $55 a month to have access to 25 workouts a week, as few or as many as they want, and no mandatory volunteering. Only $45 if they don't want a choice of workouts, and only $25 a moth if they're one of the 'swim-parents'.
Well, hell, why not just give it for free to masters and then wonder why pools are closing or not welcoming Masters groups.
In our example, out of 2 mil a year revenues at the pool, Masters group contributes barely 100K a year because Masters "Aren't used to paying more"... Then everyone wonders why they don't get a priority when it comes to lanes and pool time, and why the group is seen as a necessary evil. They want all this stuff, and want it without paying the going price for it.
Last I saw, the bills to maintain the facility were around 20,000 K a month (electricity, water, pool supplies etc...)
Events like Nationals, and many of the kids meets are fundraiser events that also keep those facilities afloat.
Whether the taxes or more directly from your pocket, the money to operate those facilities will have to come out of our pockets one way or another.
Believe me, I trust privatre businesses a lot more to keep things at reasonable operating costs then I trust government to keep something at reasonable operating cost. When oyu have to pat $8.00 for a nail, just how much more expensive do you think the pool costs are?
I'd rather spend the extra money on good coaching staff, then on some government administrator to sit and make arbitrary decision where the remainder of the tax dollar goes, after he;s done spending most of it.
Imagine how much more difficult it is to build and keep open facilities in areas where you can't swim outside all year. Swimming becomes a much more expensive sport to afford in colder areas.
Just my point! It's not going to be any more affordable for the pool operators to keep facilities open if people are more and more used to not paying for what they get.
Let me ask you this, how come 24 hour fitness and some other gyms can afford to have many pool facilities WITHOUT teams in them... Perhaps they have membership base and appropriate fees to support the facilities???
Bottom line is It CAN be done !!!
As for colsder areas, well Ice hockey is much more expensive in Arizona then it is in Alaska, but facilities find a way to operate, and Ice hockey won;t become the most popular sport In Arizona... Sometimes we have to adjust to the realities of life rather than call on the all mighty goverment to level the field for us.
That being said, I do agree with Connie that we need to grow our sport. By growth, we will have greater demand for facilities. The more tax payers that want swimming will have a greater chance of opening new facilities and keeping older ones open.
Impressive topic slide for a thread that started with a discussion of relay swimmers.
Leave it up to me to stir the pot :P
Originally posted by knelson
You're entitled to your opinion, but mine is that the amount of pool space currently available is barely adequate. The WKCAC in Federal Way is a great facility to have in the area, but keep in mind it's 20 miles south of downtown Seattle. That doesn't make it real convenient as a workout facility for those of us living north of downtown Seattle. The only other long course pool is an outdoor pool that's only open in the summer.
I split my time between Oregon and Washington. Maybe you're choosing the wrong pool because the last several times I've gone specifically for lap swimming in Seattle, my lane was empty. Yes the KCAC isn't in the best location, but think of all the people who have no access to a world-class center like that.
It's not the only long course pool. I prefer to be grateful that when in town there's plenty of room. At one club you get a lane to yourself for as long as you like, but if someone comes along you only get 30 minutes. All things considered that's not a bad deal.
I strongly encourage people to take advantage of cheap or free trial club memberships. I estimate that 4 months of my training this year will be in clubs - free - not waiting for lap times.
Originally posted by Conniekat8
Well, if you see no value to what the team offers, you may as well.
Why should you be paying only $55 to have access to 25 rather cushy workouts a week, when some 10-year old's parents have to pay $120 for the same thing, and have to volunteer or pay another $500? To swim in the same lane with another 15 kids.
I think what you *should* be ashamed of is that your own coach struggles to make a living so your fees wouldn't go up to what the kids pay. While he has to pay the same higher fees and do his own volunteering for the team on top of working there so his own kids can swim.
A very accurate picture of age group swimming and the parents who support it!
OK Connie, you've lost me. If you don't want the government to be involved in running public pools, then why do you want USMS to accept government money? (And by the way, I've been involved with USMS since the late 80s, and this is the first I've heard about any possibility of USMS receiving government operating funds! I'm not sure your source is correct.)
As someone who works for a quasi-government agency, I happen to believe it's our mission to help our fellow citizens, and not to make it easier for private business to make a profit.
Guess that makes me a flaming liberal and/or bleeding heart!
Originally posted by Conniekat8
Bleeding heart... Then I'm afraid we won't agree on much...
*sigh* Bleeding hearts are for debutants and beauty pageants and similar fairytales :p
Today I am ashamed to be a nadadore. :(
And based on other comments Connie's made I guess she thinks her team mates are all just a bunch of cheap complainers getting a free ride at $45 - $55 when we can go down the street and pay the same or less at UCI and NOVA.
Or heck, screw it all and get a family membership to the city of mission viejo recreational facilities and pools for $42 per month complete with fitness classes and an impressive weight rooms.
The more I read Connie's posts the better that last option sounds.
Originally posted by dorothyrde
So Connie, curious, how much should a pool charge a team for time. Currently neither age group team in C-U can even afford to use the U of I pools because they charge 50.00 an hour and the teams simply cannot afford that. That severely restricts where the teams can swim. (remember, Midwest prices are considerably less than West Coast).
And 500.00 fundraising fee, Wow! We debated if 100.00 was too much for our parents!
If you want exact numbers, they would depend on your local economy and the costs associated to run that specific pool, along with cost of staff to run it.
There's no single magic number for all of them.
Originally posted by Mswimming
Today I am ashamed to be a nadadore. :(
And based on other comments Connie's made I guess she thinks her team mates are all just a bunch of cheap complainers getting a free ride at $45 - $55 when we can go down the street and pay the same or less at UCI and NOVA.
Or heck, screw it all and get a family membership to the city of mission viejo recreational facilities and pools for $42 per month complete with fitness classes and an impressive weight rooms.
The more I read Connie's posts the better that last option sounds.
Well, if you see no value to what the team offers, you may as well.
Why should you be paying only $55 to have access to 25 rather cushy workouts a week, when some 10-year old's parents have to pay $120 for the same thing, and have to volunteer or pay another $500? To swim in the same lane with another 15 kids.
I think what you *should* be ashamed of is that your own coach struggles to make a living so your fees wouldn't go up to what the kids pay. While he has to pay the same higher fees and do his own volunteering for the team on top of working there so his own kids can swim.
