Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

bumblebeeandboy

Been Bugging Me- Cheap Gym Membership

Recommended Posts

I would love to join our local gym (local authority one at the leisure centre), i'm no gym bunny but unlimited swimming lovely, various classes, use the brand new gym equipment etc (just had full refurb it looks great). However it will cost nearly £50pm just for me and there is no way i can afford (or justify) that. Hubby works but on a pay cut and no bonus and i run my own small business while looking after our small preschool kids. We live within our means etc, STR, rented nice practical house as cheaply as possible but money is still tight and we're cautious what we spend it on and look for good value.

Then i hear all these Mums talking at the school about it only costing them £20pm to use the gym and i thought there was a special offer and i could justify £20 (costs me £3.60 a time just for swimming). However they said no special offer but if you're on income support it's only £20. Well i know everyone has to (or should) take regular exercise but surely if you're on income support, money should be even tighter than it is for working people. If i was on income support and i wanted to exercise i'd go for a run in the park (as i have to now) not be spending it on gym membership. I just find reductions like this very frustrating, gym membership is a luxury item not an essential so why should there be such massive reductions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would love to join our local gym (local authority one at the leisure centre), i'm no gym bunny but unlimited swimming lovely, various classes, use the brand new gym equipment etc (just had full refurb it looks great). However it will cost nearly £50pm just for me and there is no way i can afford (or justify) that. Hubby works but on a pay cut and no bonus and i run my own small business while looking after our small preschool kids. We live within our means etc, STR, rented nice practical house as cheaply as possible but money is still tight and we're cautious what we spend it on and look for good value.

Then i hear all these Mums talking at the school about it only costing them £20pm to use the gym and i thought there was a special offer and i could justify £20 (costs me £3.60 a time just for swimming). However they said no special offer but if you're on income support it's only £20. Well i know everyone has to (or should) take regular exercise but surely if you're on income support, money should be even tighter than it is for working people. If i was on income support and i wanted to exercise i'd go for a run in the park (as i have to now) not be spending it on gym membership. I just find reductions like this very frustrating, gym membership is a luxury item not an essential so why should there be such massive reductions?

haggle. 50 per month isnt fixed. They turn a profit on the dolites paying 20per month, so plenty of room to negotiate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Steve Cook

I would love to join our local gym (local authority one at the leisure centre), i'm no gym bunny but unlimited swimming lovely, various classes, use the brand new gym equipment etc (just had full refurb it looks great). However it will cost nearly £50pm just for me and there is no way i can afford (or justify) that. Hubby works but on a pay cut and no bonus and i run my own small business while looking after our small preschool kids. We live within our means etc, STR, rented nice practical house as cheaply as possible but money is still tight and we're cautious what we spend it on and look for good value.

Then i hear all these Mums talking at the school about it only costing them £20pm to use the gym and i thought there was a special offer and i could justify £20 (costs me £3.60 a time just for swimming). However they said no special offer but if you're on income support it's only £20. Well i know everyone has to (or should) take regular exercise but surely if you're on income support, money should be even tighter than it is for working people. If i was on income support and i wanted to exercise i'd go for a run in the park (as i have to now) not be spending it on gym membership. I just find reductions like this very frustrating, gym membership is a luxury item not an essential so why should there be such massive reductions?

Is this a position of principle on your part, or would you change your view if you were unemployed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would love to join our local gym (local authority one at the leisure centre), i'm no gym bunny but unlimited swimming lovely, various classes, use the brand new gym equipment etc (just had full refurb it looks great). However it will cost nearly £50pm just for me and there is no way i can afford (or justify) that. Hubby works but on a pay cut and no bonus and i run my own small business while looking after our small preschool kids. We live within our means etc, STR, rented nice practical house as cheaply as possible but money is still tight and we're cautious what we spend it on and look for good value.

Then i hear all these Mums talking at the school about it only costing them £20pm to use the gym and i thought there was a special offer and i could justify £20 (costs me £3.60 a time just for swimming). However they said no special offer but if you're on income support it's only £20. Well i know everyone has to (or should) take regular exercise but surely if you're on income support, money should be even tighter than it is for working people. If i was on income support and i wanted to exercise i'd go for a run in the park (as i have to now) not be spending it on gym membership. I just find reductions like this very frustrating, gym membership is a luxury item not an essential so why should there be such massive reductions?

Can you hear that?

It's the sound of my heart bleeding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this a position of principle on your part, or would you change your view if you were unemployed?

We have been in a position of unemployment (hubby made redundant twice in last 2 years) and no we cut back on everything non essential and this definitely wouldn't be on my list of essentials. I just find this another example of those at the bottom having a more comfortable life than those that work hard. Equally these mum's with this membership complain that they are struggling to buy food, school uniforms etc. I find it very frustrating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To earn £50, the worker also has to have a salary of close to £100 after taxes are taken into account (assumuing higher rate taxpayer)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most local authority gyms will do you a deal. I use my local one and membership is £35 per month and that gives you gym, swim and all the classes. I pay a year up front and because that works out £5 cheaper per month and two months free because I pay annually. Works out at £25 pm......

Stop worrying about others and do what`s best for you. Exercise for the poor is a good thing. They get to have a wash, sober up and quite a few of them actually make me look quite slim.

We have asked the local authority to issue them with Orange boiler suits to identify them clearly because many have been wearing knock off or fake designer sports wear and quite frankly.. That is not fair and is taking the piss!! They should also ensure they have proper hygiene controls before they get in the water in case any skin starts to peel off or something..

Still waiting for a response!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have been in a position of unemployment (hubby made redundant twice in last 2 years) and no we cut back on everything non essential and this definitely wouldn't be on my list of essentials. I just find this another example of those at the bottom having a more comfortable life than those that work hard. Equally these mum's with this membership complain that they are struggling to buy food, school uniforms etc. I find it very frustrating.

I think you're a troll on a wind up. It's all far too perfect.

If you're not you really need to find something else to worry about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then i hear all these Mums talking at the school about it only costing them £20pm to use the gym and i thought there was a special offer and i could justify £20 (costs me £3.60 a time just for swimming). However they said no special offer but if you're on income support it's only £20. Well i know everyone has to (or should) take regular exercise but surely if you're on income support, money should be even tighter than it is for working people. If i was on income support and i wanted to exercise i'd go for a run in the park (as i have to now) not be spending it on gym membership. I just find reductions like this very frustrating, gym membership is a luxury item not an essential so why should there be such massive reductions?

If you are on income support and can afford to spend £20 pm of it on gym membership, you are being paid too much income support! I'd not support it since I am paying - through various taxes - for income support and whilst I entirely support the idea of those who are unable to work being supported in essentials by society, I would regard my funding their non-essentials as unacceptable. Clearly gym membership is a non-essential since one can participate in exercise through a range of free activities.

I sympathize with you entirely - yet another disincentive for people to get out and work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would love to join our local gym (local authority one at the leisure centre), i'm no gym bunny but unlimited swimming lovely, various classes, use the brand new gym equipment etc (just had full refurb it looks great). However it will cost nearly £50pm just for me and there is no way i can afford (or justify) that. Hubby works but on a pay cut and no bonus and i run my own small business while looking after our small preschool kids. We live within our means etc, STR, rented nice practical house as cheaply as possible but money is still tight and we're cautious what we spend it on and look for good value.

Then i hear all these Mums talking at the school about it only costing them £20pm to use the gym and i thought there was a special offer and i could justify £20 (costs me £3.60 a time just for swimming). However they said no special offer but if you're on income support it's only £20. Well i know everyone has to (or should) take regular exercise but surely if you're on income support, money should be even tighter than it is for working people. If i was on income support and i wanted to exercise i'd go for a run in the park (as i have to now) not be spending it on gym membership. I just find reductions like this very frustrating, gym membership is a luxury item not an essential so why should there be such massive reductions?

There are gyms and there are gyms. Poncy ones that have spas etc with loads of women in spandex that hardly do any work and insist that there personal trainer is "essential" and they spend a lot of time in the coffee lounge. These are expensive.

Then there's your hard core gym. I go to a hard core one. It's cheap, sweaty and has no pretty pictures on the walls, tellys or airconditioning. But it does have excellent fixed weight machines that you would not get in a poncy gym, and all the aerobic machines that are well maintained. It costs 90 quid for 6 months.

I guess the problem is that the pool is normally associated with a higher class of gym, so that's probably whats causing you the problem. If you get into running/rowing/cycling and the weights and just pop down the local baths for a swim or two now and again you'll probably find it much cheaper. Plus you'll get arms like Mr. T.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

gym membership is a luxury item not an essential so why should there be such massive reductions?

But this is a local authority facility, not a Ballantyne special? Why shouldn't the unemployed have access to Government facilities that will improve their health?

I suspect that £20, as a percentage of benefits, is a far greater commitment than you appear to be prepared to make to improve your general good health.

You should be full of admiration for the sacrifice these people are making, and ashamed that you aren't prepared to make this (smaller) commitment.

So there!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest theboltonfury

There are gyms and there are gyms. Poncy ones that have spas etc with loads of women in spandex that hardly do any work and insist that there personal trainer is "essential" and they spend a lot of time in the coffee lounge. These are expensive.

Then there's your hard core gym. I go to a hard core one. It's cheap, sweaty and has no pretty pictures on the walls, tellys or airconditioning. But it does have excellent fixed weight machines that you would not get in a poncy gym, and all the aerobic machines that are well maintained. It costs 90 quid for 6 months.

I guess the problem is that the pool is normally associated with a higher class of gym, so that's probably whats causing you the problem. If you get into running/rowing/cycling and the weights and just pop down the local baths for a swim or two now and again you'll probably find it much cheaper. Plus you'll get arms like Mr. T.

I go to a spit and sawdust gym. The sort that Rocky would have trained in the build up to Rocky IV. It costs me £240 for a year. and is excellent. You get to know people in there and there are no egos. Primarilly because most people there are in good shape and strong as ******.

Even these days you can stroll in a Total Fitness, tell them you're not paying what they ask, they can screw their admin fee or joing fee and tell them what your budget is. There is extreme downward pressure on gym prices at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest theboltonfury

But this is a local authority facility, not a Ballantyne special? Why shouldn't the unemployed have access to Government facilities that will improve their health?

I suspect that £20, as a percentage of benefits, is a far greater commitment than you appear to be prepared to make to improve your general good health.

You should be full of admiration for the sacrifice these people are making, and ashamed that you aren't prepared to make this (smaller) commitment.

So there!

Benefits are meant to be there to tide people over until they find work. Not be used to get gym memberships. If they want excercise, tell then to jog down to the job centre or use the million or so acres of public land that they can run in.

What next? Starbucks vouchers? Nandos vouchers? Wouldn't want those on benefits missing out on filter coffee would we.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Skinty

Benefits are meant to be there to tide people over until they find work. Not be used to get gym memberships. If they want excercise, tell then to jog down to the job centre or use the million or so acres of public land that they can run in.

Being practical about it though. If you regularly exercise you are more likely to also look for work. Benefit scroungers aren't likely to be going to the gym. Jogging on concrete ruins your joints and the million or so acres of public land requires transport to get to. Most people live in a city or built up areas and so do not have access to anything but a gym.

Also, the doley's are more likely to be using the gym during the quiet times when they don't have to queue for machines. This means the gym is maximising the use of its assets and is probably helping to keep down the cost of the normal membership.

Personally I hate gyms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Benefits are meant to be there to tide people over until they find work. Not be used to get gym memberships. If they want excercise, tell then to jog down to the job centre or use the million or so acres of public land that they can run in.

What next? Starbucks vouchers? Nandos vouchers? Wouldn't want those on benefits missing out on filter coffee would we.

You sir, are being flippant! (As was I, to a certain extent) However, denying resources that promote good health and exercise is surely a bad thing?

Denying the disadvantaged a cup of half-caff mocha is hardly in the same league! I'm dissappointed you didn't plump for the "What next? 50" plasma tellys for all?" Daily Mail option tbh. :D

btw, the op mentioned mothers on benefit, not really short-term claimants in that case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exercise is also excellent in beating depression http://www.mentalhealth.org.uk/campaigns/exercise/how-exercise-can-beat-depression/#why. If more long term unemployed took it up, I think that it could seriously benefit them..

I agree. Local authorities gyms/leisure centres should be much cheaper, and for everyone. As they improve health, they should even save NHS costs. But I think they should be cheaper for everybody, working people too, and not only for people on benefits. That is the current unfairness.

We are a working couple, renting privately, and like the OP we also find our local gym too expensive, as we have to save for a deposit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest theboltonfury

You sir, are being flippant! (As was I, to a certain extent) However, denying resources that promote good health and exercise is surely a bad thing?

Denying the disadvantaged a cup of half-caff mocha is hardly in the same league! I'm dissappointed you didn't plump for the "What next? 50" plasma tellys for all?" Daily Mail option tbh. :D

btw, the op mentioned mothers on benefit, not really short-term claimants in that case.

Flippant! I resemble that comment! :lol:

Those on bens already have better tellys that most anyway. It's kind of like one of the rules. If they don't work, then they'll need a good telly!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You sir, are being flippant! (As was I, to a certain extent) However, denying resources that promote good health and exercise is surely a bad thing?

Those same resources are already denied to people working for low incomes... why should those who are working for low incomes, but still being taxed, subsidise benefit claimants? There are plenty of keep-fit alternatives that do not involve gym membership so 'excercise' per se is not being denied to the benefit claimants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would love to join our local gym (local authority one at the leisure centre), i'm no gym bunny but unlimited swimming lovely, various classes, use the brand new gym equipment etc (just had full refurb it looks great). However it will cost nearly £50pm just for me and there is no way i can afford (or justify) that. Hubby works but on a pay cut and no bonus and i run my own small business while looking after our small preschool kids. We live within our means etc, STR, rented nice practical house as cheaply as possible but money is still tight and we're cautious what we spend it on and look for good value.

Then i hear all these Mums talking at the school about it only costing them £20pm to use the gym and i thought there was a special offer and i could justify £20 (costs me £3.60 a time just for swimming). However they said no special offer but if you're on income support it's only £20. Well i know everyone has to (or should) take regular exercise but surely if you're on income support, money should be even tighter than it is for working people. If i was on income support and i wanted to exercise i'd go for a run in the park (as i have to now) not be spending it on gym membership. I just find reductions like this very frustrating, gym membership is a luxury item not an essential so why should there be such massive reductions?

I'm going to get very blunt here.

Have a good look at these Mums, are the majority of them overweight? I suspect they will be, they certainly are in my local authority gym. Sadly, most of them 'believe' they will get slim by joining the gym and using all those fancy machines. The cold hard truth of it is that that won't happen. Why? Well basically they most likely won't keep it up and quite frankly sitting on a cycling machine for hours on end peddling away breathing in conditioned air is boring.. although I suppose the drivel that's show on the gym TVs might keep their tiny minds amused.

If they WERE serious about losing weight they WOULDN'T join a gym but would REGULARLY do aerobic exercise such as cycling, running or swimming. Oh and guess what, running doesn't take any form or membership at all.

You just get out there and DO IT !

I chuckle to myself when I'm doing my REGULAR circuit training sessions, I look up into the gym and see these overweight mums trying in vain to lose weight by pounding on the running machine. I just shake my head.. they should be downstairs doing the circuits to lose that flab. So I suspect most of these Mums subconsciously know that they are not going to lose any flab by going to these gyms and the REAL motivation for them is that they can just gab amongst one-another and shovel a load of chocolate (bought at the vending machine in the gym foyer !) down their gullets at the end of it.

So if it's costing to subsidise these 'wanna-be' slim-Mums then it should be chucked out. If they were REALLY motivated to get slim they wouldn't need to join a gym. They just get out and go running or cycling, but no, we have to subsidise their bloody gabbing sessions at the gym.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So if it's costing to subsidise these 'wanna-be' slim-Mums then it should be chucked out. If they were REALLY motivated to get slim they wouldn't need to join a gym. They just get out and go running or cycling, but no, we have to subsidise their bloody gabbing sessions at the gym.

Totally agree. Just another example of further pandering to the lazy.

If I were the OP I would be pissed off too.

In my pool I have to put up with one less day a week that I can swim - simply due to the fact the birds want the pool to themselves for a night ?! It is a complete piss take. As I have said before, if I could be arsed I would take the local council to court on sex discrimination charges. I would win. End of story. There would be no case. You pay the same amount but get to use it less because of your sex. I imagine it would last all of 3.7 seconds in court. In fact I don't even think it would get that far. They would know they wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

Maybe if I am out of work for a while in the future it can give me something to do. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Totally agree. Just another example of further pandering to the lazy.

If I were the OP I would be pissed off too.

In my pool I have to put up with one less day a week that I can swim - simply due to the fact the birds want the pool to themselves for a night ?! It is a complete piss take. As I have said before, if I could be arsed I would take the local council to court on sex discrimination charges. I would win. End of story. There would be no case. You pay the same amount but get to use it less because of your sex. I imagine it would last all of 3.7 seconds in court. In fact I don't even think it would get that far. They would know they wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

Oh you have that too in your pool? I have it here too and was going to write and complain. Sex discrimination grounds again. In fact you've just motivated me to do it !

Maybe if I am out of work for a while in the future it can give me something to do. :)

didn't happen when I was out of work. Unemployed.. got Nowt. Had to pay. Friggin joke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Totally agree. Just another example of further pandering to the lazy.

If I were the OP I would be pissed off too.

In my pool I have to put up with one less day a week that I can swim - simply due to the fact the birds want the pool to themselves for a night ?! It is a complete piss take. As I have said before, if I could be arsed I would take the local council to court on sex discrimination charges. I would win. End of story. There would be no case. You pay the same amount but get to use it less because of your sex. I imagine it would last all of 3.7 seconds in court. In fact I don't even think it would get that far. They would know they wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

You should do it. The fact that one local authority does this means that others see the model and it become increasingly accepted. Segregation is not acceptable in our society and should not be condoned - (that goes for Golf Clubs too BTW - however at least they have the decency to offer different membership according to gender and associated use). It is entirely apt that you make a stand on this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to get very blunt here.

So I suspect most of these Mums subconsciously know that they are not going to lose any flab by going to these gyms and the REAL motivation for them is that they can just gab amongst one-another and shovel a load of chocolate (bought at the vending machine in the gym foyer !) down their gullets at the end of it.

So if it's costing to subsidise these 'wanna-be' slim-Mums then it should be chucked out. If they were REALLY motivated to get slim they wouldn't need to join a gym. They just get out and go running or cycling, but no, we have to subsidise their bloody gabbing sessions at the gym.

Agreed, cardio just doesn't work, and certainly not at the intensity I see these "mums" working at. Also I suspect it makes them ravenously hungry, and added to compensatory eating "Oh I've done one length of the baths, now I'll have a mars bar."

In my old gym they got the women to do hours of tedious cardio, I never saw them achieve anything. By default they put the pensioners on vibrator machines! :lol:

It might be of no help to the OP, but would "off peak" membership help. This usually saves a bit, but is no good if you are working normal office hours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 189 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.