Sale Leisure Centre & move Altrincham
This audience may see a post and walk in to join, so online-only tracking misses most conversions. I'd 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. The 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. The barrier is awareness. More paid reach, more explaining, a "come and look" invite.
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 and 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 and water mobility, then a 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 and 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 price and access. The real product is expert-led, medically-aware and genuinely accessible, with named specialists and 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 65+ assets say "access all centres including move." But the live complete-memberships page says a standard fitness membership only includes Sale and Stretford, and that move Altrincham and move Urmston need a separate "Move Well" membership. So either the 65+ tier includes move access as an exception, or the asset claim is wrong. This must be confirmed before we advertise it, or we over-promise.
move Altrincham only reopened in Aug 2025, and the main site still frames fitness membership around Sale, Stretford and Urmston. Before we drive 100 memberships there, I'd check the 65+ join journey actually works for Altrincham and that Altrincham is surfaced everywhere the offer is sold.
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" and never reaches 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.
How I'd plan and run the campaign across both sites, using the assets that already exist and the channels the data points to.
Every channel the brief lists, with the choice behind it. Facebook leads the paid spend because the data shows it reaches this audience and Instagram doesn't. Where the two sites work the same way they share a row; where the job differs, they split.
| Area | Sale · 50 | move Altrincham · 100 |
|---|---|---|
| Lead channel | In-centre and staff, paid supports | Paid social and PR, in-centre supports |
| Paid social | Facebook, tight radius, 65+ | Facebook, wider radius, 65+ and 45–60 |
| Organic | Benefit sequence and reels, local FB groups | Benefit sequence and reels, plus new-facility and spa reveal |
| Segment base, lapsed 65+ and 60–64 | Segment base, awareness for the new site | |
| PR | Member story, Messenger titles | New-facility hook, Council press office |
| Outreach | Tasters and short talks at partner groups | Open-day sessions, see what's changed |
| Partnerships | Rehab and referral network, community groups, sheltered housing. Same approach at both sites. confirm local partners | |
| In-centre | Signs, briefed staff, a named contact, and a guided walk-round of the facilities. Applies to both sites: at Sale it converts the class attendees already inside; at Altrincham it shows off the new kit and spa. | |
| Website | No 65+ prominence on the site. Static, minimal, imagery skews young. Build a proper 65+ landing page and make sure Altrincham is surfaced wherever the offer is sold. fix first | |
| Print & outdoor | Flyers, posters, vinyl and pull-up banners exist but weren't measured. Put a code on each and distribute beyond the centres. unmeasured last time | |
No new artwork needed. This is what's already available, and what each piece is for in the campaign.
The social posts run in sequence, not rotated, so they build like the tutorial the brief asked for. The instructor reels lead, because that's the content that carried 65+ reach last time and it's barely been used. The app tutorials answer the practical "how do I actually join" step the current assets skip.
A single one-page "Your first visit" piece, built from footage that already exists, covering where to go, who greets you, and who to ask for by name. It's the reassurance step the twelve assets stop just short of. No redesign, just a new use of what's there.
Built so nothing launches until it can be measured, and so the mid-point review can still change the second half. Same phases both sites; the emphasis differs because the jobs differ.
| Phase | What goes live | Why, and the site difference |
|---|---|---|
| Wk −1 Setup | Tracking, UTM links and promo codes built · "how did you hear" added at join · baseline 65+ join rate recorded · staff briefed · landing page and print ready · Altrincham join journey checked | Nothing launches until it's measurable. This is the step last year skipped. |
| Wk 1–2 Announce | Opener + benefit posts begin in sequence · paid Facebook live · banners and posters up · PR out | Sale leans on in-centre and email to the warm base; Altrincham leans on paid reach and the new-facility reveal. |
| Wk 3–4 Reassure | Instructor reels lead · "Your first visit" content · first tasters and open sessions · week-4 review | Converts the nervous, never-been group. The review decides where the held £150 goes. |
| Wk 5–6 Enable | App-tutorial videos · "how to book, who to ask for" · referral and partner push · second wave of best-performing posts | Removes the practical barriers. Spend shifts behind whatever week 4 showed converting. |
| Wk 7–8 Close | Offer-ends urgency · final partner and outreach push · onboarding of new joiners | Converts the undecided and protects early retention, which is what the ROI depends on. |
The brief asks for high-level allocation. There's no conversion data to forecast members per channel, so this is weighted by the job each site has to do, then corrected once real numbers arrive at week 4.
The smaller share. Sale is an established brand with existing 65+ footfall, so the cheapest conversions are people already inside the building. That's staff, in-centre and email doing the work, which cost little. Paid is a top-up, not the engine.
The larger share. Double the target (100) and an awareness job: a new brand a 65+ audience doesn't recognise yet. Awareness has to be bought, so more goes to paid reach and to a new-facility reveal. Spending more here is where the data points.
Not committed up front. The whole plan says we don't know what works until we've measured, so a slice stays back and moves behind whatever the mid-point review shows converting, at either site.
Within each site the priority is paid Facebook (the only channel the data shows reaching this audience), then print and in-centre (assets that already exist but were never measured), then tasters and outreach. Exact per-line figures I'd set once week-2 delivery data is in, not guess now.
£32/month repays acquisition almost immediately; a member retained a year is worth £384. Both targets retained annualise to roughly £57,600. The brief invites more budget on valid ROI, and I'd make that case at week 4 with real numbers, not ask for it up front.
This is broader than the 65+ push, but it feeds it. The centres hold specialist equipment, spaces and treatments that are genuine USPs, and they sit almost unused as content.
Film the specialist kit, the spaces and the treatments as long-form educational content on YouTube, a channel Trafford Leisure hasn't optimised. Each piece is then cut into short reels optimised per platform: TikTok, Instagram, Facebook. It is informational and educational about what the centres actually offer, and it sells the location itself.
Specialist gym equipment, the pool and studios, rehab and treatment spaces, the refurbished Altrincham facilities. Real features, explained by the people who run them.
Brand awareness, organic search traffic, and content that also runs as paid social. One shoot feeds YouTube, every short-form platform, and the website.
The same footage supplies the instructor and "your first visit" content this campaign needs, and it shows the specialist offer that the current assets undersell.
Presented as an opportunity, not a line item in the £1,000. It's a standing content engine the centres could build once and use across everything.
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. All six are free.
Every link tagged by channel, campaign & site.
One per channel and partner, the only way to measure print and outreach.
"How did you hear?" mandatory, captures word-of-mouth and 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, but 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, so 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 and 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.