According to the data, less than 65,438+0% people frequented gyms in China, while nearly 20% people frequented gyms in developed countries such as the United States and Japan. The big gap shows that China consumers' habit of using gyms is not very mature. One of the main reasons for this phenomenon is that more than 90% consumers who have applied for annual gym cards in China can't insist on going to the gym for a long time, and often give up after only a few visits.
In order to solve the pain points of consumers, a brand-new internet fitness platform "Action 1" adopts a brand-new payment model for fitness services-contract model. To put it simply, you can refund the deposit by exercising for half an hour every day. Can this model really keep users exercising?
Let's take a concrete look at how the "action 1" mode works.
In the contract mode, consumers can choose the contract fitness cycle provided by the platform by paying attention to the official account of "Action 1" WeChat. At present, there are four choices: week, month, season and year. Suppose the user chooses one of the monthly contracts, then he needs to pay a deposit of 1 0,000 yuan first. In the next month, the platform will refund the deposit 1 1,000 yuan for every time he completes fitness as required (the fitness time is not less than 30 minutes). If he completes 10 times a month, he can get all the deposit back.
From the introduction of the above rules, it is not difficult to see that in fact, for users with fixed fitness habits, the requirements of these tasks are not high, and it is not difficult to exercise for free. For users who want to cultivate fitness habits, this model is also very attractive. After all, they can "earn back" 100 yuan as long as they exercise for half an hour. "Action 1" just captures this kind of user psychology and puts forward the "contract mode", so that 20% users who can't exercise can pay for 80% users.
Then, compared with other payment modes in the field of Internet fitness, can this "contract mode" really solve the pain point that users can't stick to fitness? Let's analyze it carefully.
In fact, this "contract mode" of Action 1 is a replica of American Gym-pact reverse pricing mode (originated from Gym-pact Fitness Company), which is very similar to the "run or roll" mode of another domestic product. Here, I briefly introduce the model of this product. (see the picture below)
It can be seen that both products adopt the "contract mode", but the difference is that going to the gym itself is a cost-consuming behavior, more like a positive incentive to return fitness funds, which can encourage users to stick to fitness to get back the principal. The behavior of running is zero cost, and the qualification of not deducting money and not taking money is more like a negative incentive, which constrains users to keep exercising and prevent themselves from being "fined". Either way, compared with the previous payment modes such as annual card, monthly card and supplementary card in the fitness industry, this reverse price lever mode can play a very good role in stimulating user behavior.
Of course, this model is also easily suspected: if the contractor can come to the gym as scheduled, wouldn't the platform be wiped out? For example, the emergence of "Action 1" products, its profitability is also controversial.
In my opinion, the answer is no, this reverse pricing model can really make some "idle" (less than the number of tasks) people become "free" "users", and its profit is based on the prediction of the scale of these people, which determines the profit risk of this model. As long as the pricing of services can be well controlled, the "contract model" still has room for profit. But at the same time, personally, I think it is difficult to support the operation of the platform if we only rely on this model. It is more like a marketing diversion method of the platform, which can become a basic profit model, but the main profit in the future will be expanded by providing value-added services such as private education.