3 Community Sport Models

  1. The community volunteer parent based sport organizations:
    √  fulfills a community need for youth sports
    ×  struggles with high turnover
    × inefficient in growing new members 
    × set up to serves personal agendas
    × inconsistent in delivering programs
    × different  standards between communities
  2. The small private independent operators (i.e. hockey schools, skating instructors,  martial arts instructors, fitness trainers, swim classes etc.)
    √  more personalized
    √ better quality programs
    √ owner has stake in business
    × limited by personal time
    × lacking outside resources for support
    × no real strategy to find new customers
    × fragmented brands across communities
    × little if any equity build in their business
    × no succession plan
    × high probability of burn out
  3. The amateur or professional sport groups
    √ a collective group of independent owners/franchisees working together
    √ unified brands under larger brand governances
    √ mutual interest for growth of sport
    √ networked business community
    revenues and equity
    √ standardized operational systems
    √ share proven concepts
    √ invested in developing athletes
    √ deliver a consistent quality product
    √ typically produce sustainable growth
    × not always present in every community
    × relies on 3rd party orgs for athletes
    × players require special skills/ early development
    × revenues from fan based ticket sales
    × geared for older aged players