Multi Location gyms acting like one big gym, good or bad?

[King]

ACE is not a franchise. Happy and JR are the only owners.

Ok. So they own all 6 locations? ( you don't have to answer this, but it helps me understand the difference between premiere and Ace kinda thing )

 

[ACEDAD]

Ok. So they own all 6 locations? ( you don't have to answer this, but it helps me understand the difference between premiere and Ace kinda thing )

There are currently only 5 locations. Columbus is no longer open.

If by location, you mean the ACE entity, then yes. The actual physical location, not all. I know the Birmingham location is rented from the hospital. The TN locations are rented from Premier. I don't know about the other two.


Premier (as I understand it) has both corporate owned locations and franchised (locally owned) locations.

 

[King]

Your insight will be worth more then because you can see it from all angles. What constitutes a gym. The actual location or the program as a whole? Premiere is more loosely associated than ACE, but are they less a program?

 

[CheerKatie08]

As of right now, I don't see anyone buying out other gyms left and right. I'll worry about this when this turns more into a "monopoly" type issue if that and athletes are being shared cross-country

 

[King]

I don't see it as a monopoly issue so much as I'm seeing more and more gym successfully have multiple locations. I'm curious what, if at all, that should mean.

 

[indiglow]

I personally don't have a problem with multi-location gyms using athletes from each location to form their teams. For me, as long as the athletes were active all stars at one of their locations, they should be allowed to use them on any team at any location. HOWEVER, I am not a fan of crossovers used in excess. So, if we could make the rule to be the same as NCA (5 crossovers per gym) and multi locations were all considered one gym, then I am good with that. BUT, I don't think we can say multi location gyms can combine their athletes for competitions, but then also say my location in such-in-such city is a small gym and they are going to compete in the small gym division. Does that make sense? So either we have ONE gym with multiple locations or we have separate gyms that cannot use each other's athletes. Am I making any sense??

First off I think they should get rid of the small gym division and then this thread would not be an issue...

If there was a tracking tool / ID card for athletes......I know another thread :)

Ok so here is my thought process:
1. Location A has 70 competiitive kids, 3 teams with 20 kids on each made entirely from location A, 10 kids on large mini 5 on combo team
2. Location B has 120 competitive kids, 5 teams with 20 kids on each made entirely from location B, 20 kids on large mini 5 on combo team
So in this scenario, I would think it would be ok if location A registered their 3 teams in the small gym division since those 3 teams only had 70 kids to put the three teams together with. But not the combo team.

But again, just get rid of the small gym division and add a medium size team and that would be great! Small team up to 12 kids. Medium team 13-20 kids. Large team 21-30 kids Think about...even with this there would be LESS divisions doing it this way and more opportunities for the small gyms to fill teams.

 

[hopskipandjump]

First off I think they should get rid of the small gym division and then this thread would not be an issue...

If there was a tracking tool / ID card for athletes......I know another thread :)

Ok so here is my thought process:
1. Location A has 70 competiitive kids, 3 teams with 20 kids on each made entirely from location A, 10 kids on large mini 5 on combo team
2. Location B has 120 competitive kids, 5 teams with 20 kids on each made entirely from location B, 20 kids on large mini 5 on combo team
So in this scenario, I would think it would be ok if location A registered their 3 teams in the small gym division since those 3 teams only had 70 kids to put the three teams together with. But not the combo team.

But again, just get rid of the small gym division and add a medium size team and that would be great! Small team up to 12 kids. Medium team 13-20 kids. Large team 21-30 kids Think about...even with this there would be LESS divisions doing it this way and more opportunities for the small gyms to fill teams.

We are a small gym. I don't care what division I am in. Small, large, you have good teams in both. Seriously - I just want to beat the best.

 

[CDRCoach17]

If you use crossovers gym to gym IMHO then you would have to use large gym status. That is the tradeoff for the smaller gyms being a part of of the T and S family. If you dont use crossovers gym to gym then you could use small gym status for each gym. However that seems to defeat the purpose of most of the gyms of that type of model. You want them to cross to the main gym or the more prestigious teams, wherever they are located. That is why the gym was bought/merged/partnered with.

Kind of hard to say one gym one family but then split when it comes to competition and say sike not really. Just my opinion.

You took the words right out of my mouth. I think using kids from mulit locations isn't a bad idea, however I have a problem with registering one of your gyms in the small gym category. You are under one gym name, then you should have to compete under large gym status.

 

[CheerKatie08]

I don't see it as a monopoly issue so much as I'm seeing more and more gym successfully have multiple locations. I'm curious what, if at all, that should mean.

Oh I was just saying that I don't have a problem with these multi location gyms because it's not a monopoly issue at all. Just a few smart gym owners out there making good business decisions. Our sport is growing and we're needing more gyms to accomodate. I like a lot of McDonalds, I'll only start to complain when there's less Burger Kings out there

 

[cheer mom ltd]

the best perk for gyms with numerous lacations/owners are the discounts and numbers they get to use at comps. It is cheaper per athlete if they get a discount, and the comps can't help but notice the number of athletes attending. Then comes the question of if these super large programs are getting "special" attention to keep them happy and attending the comp. I know of times there have been threats by gym owners to stop attending inless favoring one rival gym stops... or unless "favoring" their gym begins! (I doubt it is ever worder quite so bluntly but the meaning is clear) lol Seems the gym owners are perfectly happy to have their program "favored" but pitch a fit if it seems the "favor" is going to another, equally large or larger, program! It's tough because business is business but it really puts the smaller gyms at a dis advantage! IMO

 

[Mom Jeans]

I had never thought of this topic until it started, but after reading it, I think there definately needs to be a rule, but again how can it be inforced? If a franchise model is allowed to cross compete, then how do you define a franchise? If you try to accomodate too many scenarios then you might as well not have a rule, because the relationships can be diff in every situation. I don't think wearing the same uniform is enough to say that they are the same program.

 

[Aw.Work.]

Well i feel if your counting ACE as multi gym location and not a franchise thats what ECE would be, Cassie, Colleen, Cheryl, and Linda own East Celebrity Elite. But not the physical location of the CT gym.

 

[ACEDAD]

Well i feel if your counting ACE as multi gym location and not a franchise

Mostly ACE wouldn't be counted as a franchise since it's not.

 

[Aw.Work.]

no thats what im saying. i feel like ECE is kinda in the same boat as ACE, so if they arent then i dont think we would be either (:

 

[PghxCheer2]

It's sort of like other pro sports teams I guess. In Baseball you have the Major League team and then different levels of Minor League affiliates. The Major League team is welcome to pull from any one of those Minor League teams at any given time then send them back once they're done using them on the better team.