A plan to deliver 65+ memberships at Sale and move Altrincham — and a way to measure whether it worked. Built on the data provided, assumptions flagged as assumptions.
The reach data answers one question well and leaves three unanswered. Being clear which is which is what stops us spending £1,000 on a guess.
Footfall or online sign-ups? This audience may see a post and walk in to join — so online-only tracking misses most conversions. I treat Facebook spend as a hypothesis to test, not a proven bet, and measure the walk-in route too.
The brief deliberately paired an established site with a brand-new one "to see how it affects your strategy." Here's how it does.
Established Trafford Leisure brand, one of Trafford's largest centres, existing member base and regular 65+ footfall. confirmed
The job: convert people who already know us. Barrier is prompting, not explaining — lead with in-centre, staff and the lapsed list.
Reopened Aug 2025 after a multi-million refurbishment — new equipment, spa, new brand. News value, low 65+ familiarity. confirmed
The job: announce a facility people haven't seen. Barrier is awareness — more paid reach, more explaining, a "come and look" invite.
Targets are 50 and 100 — but is the bigger number the harder one? Double the target from a brand a 70-year-old doesn't recognise yet — or is a shiny new facility an easier sell? I'd want that view; it changes where the contingency goes.
Each group has a different barrier, message and route in — and the instructor reels reveal an ability pathway that maps straight onto them.
Attending individual classes — Alison's cardiac group, Liam's Tue/Thu sessions, Jackie's yoga. A hot group already inside who pay per class but haven't taken membership. Cheapest conversion available.
Stopped after injury, illness, a break or bereavement. Restarting feels like a cost — exactly what "no joining fee, cancel anytime" answers. Reached by email.
Largest, hardest group. Barrier is intimidation, not price. Task is awareness & reassurance before conversion — tasters, reels, trusted partners.
Worried about a parent. On Facebook, comfortable with QR codes, often influence or fund the join. No current asset speaks to them. assumption
Nicola sets it out on camera: fully seated → chair-supported → standing → low-impact dance → aqua & water mobility → tailored programme. That progression is the reassurance the never-been group needs — a genuine entry point wherever their ability sits. Right now it's buried in a video nobody's pushing.
The twelve assets say "£32, any time, low impact." The reels and the 65+ page reveal something far richer — and none of it is on the creative.
Rehab, falls prevention & restricted-mobility sessions · a "get started" induction — "just speak to our team on your first visit" · a £384 annual option · a bookable Falls Prevention Programme in the app.
The assets sell a gym membership. The real product is expert-led, medically-aware, genuinely accessible — named specialists, decades of experience. Surfacing what already exists costs nothing and speaks straight to the fear that keeps the biggest audience away. The induction that answers "what if I walk in and don't know what to do" already exists — it's just never been advertised.
The standard membership page says move access needs a "Move Well" membership, but the 65+ assets say "access all centres including move." Either the tier is an exception or the claim needs checking — so we don't over-promise.
The 65+ page lists move Urmston, Sale and Stretford — but not move Altrincham. That has to be fixed before we drive 100 memberships there. Small job, real blocker.
The brief describes the tone as "step-by-step, tutorial-like." The existing assets are a good start — but stop before answering the questions that actually keep people from joining.
Six posts = opener + five benefits. Post them in order, not rotated. But it stops at "here are the benefits" — never reaching the part that removes the fear:
All three build from footage that already exists — the reels and app tutorials. A one-page "Your first visit" A5 leaflet covers the same ground. No artwork redesign.
All the channels the brief lists — including the print and in-centre ones the data ignored. Same offer; what changes is the lead channel and the first line.
| Area | Sale · 50 | move Altrincham · 100 |
|---|---|---|
| Lead channel | In-centre & staff; paid supports | Paid social & PR; in-centre supports |
| Partnerships | Rehab/referral network, community groups confirm | Community groups, sheltered housing confirm |
| Paid social | Facebook, tight radius, 65+ | Facebook, wider radius, 65+ & 45–60 |
| Organic | Sequence + reels, local FB groups | Same + new-facility & spa reveal |
| Segment base; lapsed 65+ & 60–64 | Segment base; awareness for new site | |
| Website | No 65+ prominence on the site — static, minimal, imagery skews young. Build a proper 65+ landing page; add move Altrincham to the centre list. fix first | |
| PR | Member story, Messenger titles | New-facility hook; Council press office |
| In-centre | Signs, briefed staff, named contact — convert the class attendees already inside | Same + guided walk-round of new kit & spa |
| Print & outdoor | Flyers, posters, vinyl & pull-up banners exist but weren't measured. Put a code on each and distribute beyond the centres. unmeasured last time | |
| Outreach | Tasters & short talks at partner groups | Open-day sessions — see what's changed |
Not an abstract "week 1, 2, 3." Structured around the real inventory — there's more than enough here to run eight weeks without making anything new.
| Phase | Lead content | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| Wk −1 · Setup | Tracking, promo codes, landing page · staff briefed · print out · Altrincham added to 65+ page | Nothing launches until measurable |
| Wk 1–2 · Announce | Opener + benefit posts in sequence · PR · new-facility reveal · banners up | Awareness, offer stated |
| Wk 3–4 · Reassure | Instructor reels lead · "Your first visit" · first tasters · wk-4 review | Convert the nervous group |
| Wk 5–6 · Enable | App-tutorial videos · "how to book / who to ask for" · referral push | Remove practical barriers |
| Wk 7–8 · Close | Offer-ends urgency · final partner push · onboarding | Convert undecided, protect retention |
Planned up from where members come from, not down from a budget — kept separate per site. Planning assumptions, tested at week 4. assumptions
| In-centre & staff | 18 |
| Community & referral | 14 |
| Facebook paid | 8 |
| Email to lapsed | 7 |
| Member referral | 3 |
| Target | 50 |
| In-centre & staff | 28 |
| Community & partnerships | 26 |
| Facebook paid | 30 |
| Email to members | 10 |
| Member referral | 6 |
| Target | 100 |
£32 repays acquisition in week one; retained a year = £384. A further £500 ≈ 30 more members (~£11,520/yr) — but I'd earn that at the wk-4 review with real numbers, not ask up front.
How I'd measure whether it worked — the part last year's campaign couldn't answer, because it counted views and nothing else.
Last campaign recorded 26,321 views and zero conversions. Without these six things before day one, this campaign ends knowing as little as we do now — and all six are free.
Every link tagged by channel, campaign & site.
One per channel & partner — the only way to measure print & outreach.
"How did you hear?" mandatory — captures word-of-mouth & walk-in.
New 65+ joins by site & date, plus cancellations.
Normal monthly 65+ joins before launch — proves the uplift.
Phone & reception, not just online forms.
The source field and enquiry log capture walk-in conversions online tracking misses. Without them we'd measure clicks and call it a failure — while people quietly join at reception. The baseline matters most: without it we can report 150 members but not prove we caused them.
Not a flat list — a funnel showing where people drop off, reported separately per site so a combined number can't hide a struggling one.
Cost per retained member, per site — the metric closest to revenue.
Views. Useful to diagnose reach, never to judge success — the trap last year fell into.
The same report rarely serves a centre manager and a board. Each output is pitched at who reads it.
Centre managers & Marketing Manager. Joins vs target per site, running cost per join, enquiries, taster bookings, traffic-light status.
Marketing Manager & SLT. Full funnel with drop-off, channel & partner attribution, spend pacing, first retention cohort.
Senior leadership & Board. Target vs actual per site, cost per member & per retained member, annualised revenue, what to repeat or cut.
They convert most of the memberships, so they should watch the number move. Ownership follows visibility.
The brief says approach matters more than software — a shared sheet is fine; the discipline is the point.
Because the sites run different campaigns, one can succeed while the other doesn't — the report should say so plainly rather than averaging them.
50 memberships at or below £6.00 each, vs the pre-launch baseline.
100 memberships at or below £5.50 each, vs the pre-launch baseline.
Did each site hit target, at what cost, against baseline so we show we caused it.
Still members at 3 months? Target >75%. Quick churn costs more than it earns.
Can we say which channel, partner & message worked? If not, next time's a guess.
If Altrincham delivers 80 memberships at £5.00 with 85% retention, is that a failure? I'd argue not — and I'd want it agreed in advance, so a good campaign isn't judged on the wrong number afterwards.
A pivot is a plan, not a panic. The fix depends entirely on which stage is failing. Reviewed at week 2 and week 4, per site.
| Symptom | Likely cause | Action |
|---|---|---|
| Reach low | Channel, targeting, delivery | Widen radius, shift to print & partners, check ads deliver |
| Reach fine, enquiries low | Message isn't landing | Change lead benefit — test "any time" vs price |
| Enquiries fine, joins low | Barrier at point of joining | The QR/app route — add phone & walk-in, re-brief reception |
| One site behind | Site-specific | Release contingency to the converting site |
| Joins fine, retention low | Weak onboarding | Buddy pairing, follow-up calls |
| All stages low | Offer, timing or audience | Escalate at wk 4 — don't spend the back half on a losing plan |
If either site is below 40% of target at week 4, we stop and change something — a decision, not an argument, because it was agreed before launch.
Every recommendation comes from something the data either proved or couldn't prove — none of it is generic best practice.
UTMs, promo codes, source field, baseline. Biggest improvement available, costs nothing.
Budget follows channels that produced members, not views.
Why did one post drive 73% of reach? If repeatable, it's a format.
Cardiac rehab, falls prevention, named specialists — barely used.
Phone number & plain URL on every 65+ asset. Applies beyond this campaign.
A member kept is cheaper than one found. Onboarding continues after launch.
Both sites hit target for £1,000, worth £57,600 a year if they stay — and for the first time we can say which channels delivered them.