Platform Tennis in Secondary Markets
Why the sport fails 100% of the time & what to do about it.
- Identifying key tennis market factors that are unique to "primary" platform tennis markets.
- Copying formulas of primary markets won't yield proportionate results.
- Achieving a tenable market position based on explicit desires of players is .
- , unique attributes of the game & availability/cost of logical substitutes.
- Identifying
Platform Tennis: A $10 game played on a $90,000 court
Why the world’s greatest racket sport struggles with viability in secondary cities.
Positioning 101:
PT is simply a “substitute” for tennis – more specifically, winter tennis.
The price/availability of winter tennis is the only proven factor in determining viability of platform tennis in a given market.
Considering current PT court & ball prices – Primetime winter tennis court time needs to be at least $60 per hour or PT will not achieve a viable market position – total players & revenue/perceived member value enough to sustain the game.
In cold-weather cities where land is at a premium & indoor tennis is scarce and/or expensive – platform tennis finds a viable market positionas a less expensive winter racket sport.
In cities where either indoor
The average cost of playing tennis in the winter – be it indoors or out – is the primary factor in determining the maximum value (to the participant) the sport can achieve in any geographic market.
Assume 7:00pm weeknight tennis court rates are $80 and an average match is 1.5 hours or $120 for 4 players to play doubles – then indoor tennis is worth $30 per player per time.
At 50% the value of primetime indoor tennis, that leaves $15 per time as an achievable value for PT in a market. At this rate, a large enough group will play (join clubs) & value the game enough to justify $90,000 courts and $6 balls. – NYC Metro & Chicago.
In cities where prime indoor tennis court time is $40, the cost for a 1.5 hour tennis doubles match is
Actual cost vs. participant value summary:
Member value (with balls):
So, platform tennis courts are worth less than $10 per time per participant.
Assume 800 players locally (highest possible estimate) playing 30 times per year on average (again high) = 24,000 participation occurrences per year
So, $240,000 is the maximum value of the sport per year - to all members & players combined in Cincinnati.
Now,
Cincinnati has 37 courts at 14 facilities. With huts, land allocation, parking, decking and landscaping improvements - Cincinnati has a minimum of $9,000,000 worth of PT infrastructure. If financed over 30 years at 6%, this equals over $600,000/year.
Based on current staffing, maintenance & operating needs of the current clubs with courts - another $450,000 (minimum) is spent to operate.
—--
Cincinnati clubs spend at least $1,050,000 per year to have & operate PT facilities. The return is about $240,000 in perceived member value.
—--
Simply telling people how much things cost will have no effect on how much they “value” the game.
This opinion is mostly formed by comparing available substitutes:
That $10 per time value is fixed by external forces much greater than the sport will ever overcome on its own.
This is the number all proposed growth efforts must accept & work with. Any “wishful” thinking solutions assuming an inflated value will result in net participation losses over time.
Also consider:
Why the world’s greatest racket sport struggles with viability in secondary cities.
Positioning 101:
PT is simply a “substitute” for tennis – more specifically, winter tennis.
The price/availability of winter tennis is the only proven factor in determining viability of platform tennis in a given market.
Considering current PT court & ball prices – Primetime winter tennis court time needs to be at least $60 per hour or PT will not achieve a viable market position – total players & revenue/perceived member value enough to sustain the game.
In cold-weather cities where land is at a premium & indoor tennis is scarce and/or expensive – platform tennis finds a viable market positionas a less expensive winter racket sport.
In cities where either indoor
The average cost of playing tennis in the winter – be it indoors or out – is the primary factor in determining the maximum value (to the participant) the sport can achieve in any geographic market.
Assume 7:00pm weeknight tennis court rates are $80 and an average match is 1.5 hours or $120 for 4 players to play doubles – then indoor tennis is worth $30 per player per time.
At 50% the value of primetime indoor tennis, that leaves $15 per time as an achievable value for PT in a market. At this rate, a large enough group will play (join clubs) & value the game enough to justify $90,000 courts and $6 balls. – NYC Metro & Chicago.
In cities where prime indoor tennis court time is $40, the cost for a 1.5 hour tennis doubles match is
Actual cost vs. participant value summary:
Member value (with balls):
- $20 per time - 4.3%
- $15 per time - 31.3%
- $10 per time - 52.2%
- $5 per time - 12.2%
So, platform tennis courts are worth less than $10 per time per participant.
Assume 800 players locally (highest possible estimate) playing 30 times per year on average (again high) = 24,000 participation occurrences per year
So, $240,000 is the maximum value of the sport per year - to all members & players combined in Cincinnati.
Now,
Cincinnati has 37 courts at 14 facilities. With huts, land allocation, parking, decking and landscaping improvements - Cincinnati has a minimum of $9,000,000 worth of PT infrastructure. If financed over 30 years at 6%, this equals over $600,000/year.
Based on current staffing, maintenance & operating needs of the current clubs with courts - another $450,000 (minimum) is spent to operate.
—--
Cincinnati clubs spend at least $1,050,000 per year to have & operate PT facilities. The return is about $240,000 in perceived member value.
—--
Simply telling people how much things cost will have no effect on how much they “value” the game.
This opinion is mostly formed by comparing available substitutes:
- 180,000 sq ft gym membership for $30/mo unlimited use & max flexibility
- $5 per time indoor pickleball w/ reusable $1 ball
- $1 tennis ball & free outdoor summer play
- $7 racquetball add on memberships with $1 ball
That $10 per time value is fixed by external forces much greater than the sport will ever overcome on its own.
This is the number all proposed growth efforts must accept & work with. Any “wishful” thinking solutions assuming an inflated value will result in net participation losses over time.
Also consider:
- 86% of players prefer playing matches to drills
- Competitive compatibility is far and away the most important feature in a league
- Social, gathering and “team” aspects are by far the least important