1. Were the capacities of the existing facilities constrained, and if so, where?
According to the case study, membership has been increasing since the opening of the club. It is stated that the growth brought complaints from members of overcrowding and unavailability of equipments. This clearly shows that the capacities of existing facilities are indeed constrained. This means that there are more members but less equipments or space for them to exercise. Complaints were mainly focused on the Nautilus, cardiovascular, and aerobics fitness area. Based on the case study, the aerobic room accommodates 35 members per class but during peak hours when the facilities are constrained the most, 80 members per hour would check in to use the facilities. There are only 24 pieces of Nautilus equipments and 29 pieces of cardiovascular equipment (a total of 53 pieces of equipment) which is definitely not enough to fulfill the needs of 80 members who check in per hour.
2. If capacity expansion was necessary, should the existing facility be expanded?
According to the case study, this facility also has recreational facilities such as racquetball court, tennis court, and a large outdoor swimming pool. If we compare the usage of recreational facilities with the fitness facilities, it is safe to say that members use the latter more. This is proven in the case study which states that 30% of the members do aerobics, 40% use the cardiovascular equipment, 25% use the Nautilus equipment and 20% use the free weights. On the contrary, only 15% use the racquetball courts and 10% use the tennis court. The ratio of this is 115:25, assuming that 115 members use the fitness facilities as compared to 25 members who use the recreational facilities. Therefore, it is necessary for Fitness Plus to expand their facilities. In order to do this, they can either rent or lease more equipment in order to fulfill the needs and demands of the members. Since in this case, even the space is...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document