There was a post earlier from kendo saying his group had a 100 quid kitty and 7 guests generating an extra 21 which was not bad for 3 hours work.
I work in hospitality. Breaking it down with the known facts, which is the 7 guests, the £100 kitty and the £21 guest signing fee, no idea how many members, so 7 people with the 100 quid kitty and 21 pounds of signing in fees for 3 hours works out at 121/7/3 which is roughly 5.76 per head down per hour. Which in hospitality terms is pish. And that's not factoring in the members who are also in the kitty bringing the average spend down.
I understand though the membership fees are paying the building costs, so essentially for me whoever is in charge needs to decide what's more important. A busy facility or one with a guarantee of paying off the cost.
7 guests signed in on the basis of 2 max per member would be 11 people in the group. They spent £121. The capacity is 232 so if the club was full with groups like that it would be roughly 21 groups of 11 people generating £2.5k gross revenue. Is that enough to sustain it. I would say probably not. BUT the membership fees are paying off the costs so it's a double edge sword.
I put thpoint across during the early days that I didn't think it was the right way to go about it but I can see why the option was chosen.
How long at current membership rates will it take for it to be paid in full, and how soon after it is paid will the entry be looked at to make it less complicated as per the post above?