The New Year has always been a time for reflection and a fresh start – a chance to begin new habits and embark on a journey of self-betterment. One common area of focus is health, and by extension, fitness. Gyms know this, and it is often when their most important yearly campaigns begin.

This article is especially relevant if you’re about to start training or are in the process of choosing a gym. Many gym policies are marketed as customer-friendly, and taken at face value, they often are. In the right situation, for the right person, they can be genuinely helpful. However, the same policies can work against progress when they remove structure, urgency, or feedback. This article looks at a few common gym policies – not to label them as good or bad, but to examine when they help, when they don’t, and why that distinction matters if your goal is long-term improvement rather than short-term convenience.

Cheap Monthly Membership

Why it works for you:

Price is the most obvious lure. A cheap monthly membership makes signing up feel like a good deal. Many of these gyms are open 24/7, offering maximum flexibility and working well for people with irregular schedules. There’s no need to book sessions or coordinate with anyone, and you’re free to train independently.

Some people genuinely enjoy this level of autonomy. Not everyone wants structured coaching or a formal plan, and for those who prefer to figure things out on their own, this model can be a reasonable fit.

Why it works for the gym:

This model relies less on attendance and more on volume. As long as enough members stay subscribed, the gym remains profitable – even if many of them rarely train.

In practice, the model works best when people pay consistently but attend inconsistently. This isn’t to suggest that gyms want people not to come, but high attendance increases operating costs: more crowding, more wear and tear, and greater staffing requirements. Lower attendance keeps costs predictable while revenue remains stable.

Staffing needs are also lower, as there is less reliance on qualified coaches being present on the floor at all times. Personal training often becomes an add-on rather than the core service. In this setup, clients typically pay for both a gym membership and personal training, creating an additional revenue stream without changing the underlying model.

Why it works against you:

When dealing with a monthly fixed cost, most people intuitively try to minimise waste. However, because the financial cost is low, inconsistency often carries little immediate consequence. Missing sessions doesn’t feel particularly painful, and periodic absence from the gym may not register as a loss. Attending a few times a month can already feel sufficient, even if it falls short of what’s needed for meaningful progress.

Packages Without Expiry

Why it works for you:

It’s extremely flexible. You don’t feel rushed to finish your sessions, and it feels financially safe—you won’t “waste” your money if life gets busy or if you have multiple holidays planned. When you’re ready again, the sessions will still be there.

This structure also removes emotional pressure. There’s no fear of “failing” a commitment or feeling judged for inconsistency. You can always come back—once you’re ready, or once you feel like it.

Why it works for the gym:

From a business perspective, no-expiry packages shift the focus from utilisation to sales. Revenue is collected upfront, while delivery is spread over an undefined time horizon. This allows for over-capacity sign-ups without being overly constrained by how often existing clients attend.

In this model, client progress is not essential to the business functioning. As long as packages are sold, attendance becomes less critical. Follow-ups are less urgent, and long gaps between sessions are easier to accommodate operationally.

Trainer incentives can vary. Some coaches care deeply about consistency and progress, especially if coaching quality is a personal priority. Others may be more sales-driven, or simply busy enough that long breaks between sessions do not materially affect their workload. Over time, the system no longer requires consistent attendance to remain viable.

Why it works against you:

The missing variables are consistency and frequency. Without a deadline, it becomes very easy to postpone training—just one more week, when work is lighter, when you’re less tired, or when motivation comes back.

Being busy, slightly fatigued, or simply not feeling like it are normal parts of life. Without structure and discipline, these small absences accumulate. Training becomes occasional rather than habitual.

Making yourself sweaty and exhausted once in a while only produces temporary fatigue and breathlessness. If the goal is skill improvement or increased physical capacity, training needs to be built consistently from workout to workout.

For strength training specifically, twice per week is a healthy minimum effective dose for long-term progress. Training once per week is usually insufficient. A useful analogy is this: you wouldn’t expect to get better at playing the piano if you only practised once a week.

Unlimited Classes

Why it works for you:

Unlimited access can reverse the usual psychology. Instead of tolerating missed sessions, some people feel motivated to attend as many classes as possible to “get their money’s worth.” This naturally encourages more frequent attendance, which is generally better than being inactive.

This structure works particularly well for practice-heavy, skill-based activities. Brazilian Jiu-jitsu (BJJ) is a good example – you improve by accumulating hours of exposure, repetition, and experience. In these cases, attending more often directly contributes to better performance.

Compared to a regular gym, you also receive some level of instruction during each class.

Why it works for the gym:

From an operational standpoint, unlimited classes are predictable and easy to manage. Class timetables are fixed, staffing can be rostered in advance, and the number of instructors does not need to scale with the number of members.

The gym can limit the number of participants per class. If demand exceeds capacity, clients simply book another session. This allows the gym to control class size, manage space, and cap workload without changing the underlying structure.

Because revenue is not directly tied to attendance, the gym can operate smoothly whether classes are half-full or fully booked. This makes planning simpler, costs more predictable, and growth easier to manage without proportionally increasing the coaching staff.

Why it works against you:

While exercising more is generally positive, exercise is not the same as training. Training implies structure, progression, and continuity—where each session builds on the previous one to create a specific adaptation.

In many unlimited-class formats, sessions are designed as a standalone. You can attend any class on any day without reference to what you did before or what you will do next. This keeps scheduling flexible, but it also means there is often no clear progression from session to session.

For people motivated to attend as often as possible, this can create another problem: more sessions are not always better. Without planned progression and adequate recovery, piling on volume may hinder rather than accelerate adaptation.

This approach works well for skill accumulation, where repetition and exposure are the primary drivers of improvement. However, it is far less effective for developing physical attributes such as strength, muscle mass, or aerobic capacity, which depend on appropriate loading, recovery, and progressive overload.

For strength-focused classes using this structure, the limitations become more apparent. Due to class size, programming is typically generic. It’s unrealistic to expect a single program to make 30 individuals with different backgrounds, abilities, and limitations stronger at the same time.

As a result, training is often diluted into higher-repetition, lower-load work while still being labelled as “strength.” This strategy lowers risk and stress for the gym, but it also limits the stimulus needed for meaningful strength adaptation. Unsurprisingly, strength gains tend to be modest at best.

Why We Chose to Do the Opposite

The policies discussed above exist because they work – both for businesses and, at least initially, for clients. We chose a different approach, not because these models are inherently wrong, but because they often prioritise convenience over progress.

Our pricing is not cheap. It reflects the level of coaching provided and the small coach-to-client ratio we maintain. Importantly, this pricing structure also holds us accountable. When training costs more, clients are rightfully more demanding about results. If progress stalls or expectations aren’t met, there is far less reason to continue paying a premium.

Sessions are limited rather than unlimited. In strength training, more is not always better. Progress depends on the stress–recovery–adaptation cycle. Training too frequently can interfere with recovery just as much as training too infrequently can stall progress. A defined number of sessions helps ensure that training volume and frequency remain appropriate.

Sessions also have an expiry – not to pressure clients unnecessarily, but to support consistency. At the same time, this policy places responsibility on us as coaches to understand our clients’ lives. Holidays, competitions, work demands, and participation in other sports all matter. Expiry works when it’s paired with communication and planning, not rigidity.

Ultimately, these policies aren’t designed to be “customer-friendly” in the superficial sense. They’re designed to make progress real – by holding both the client and the gym accountable, even when that comes at the expense of convenience.