Of course, it may be seen as a consumer discretionary item that is easy to cut. At the same time, it remains a low cost item (15 $ on average per week for their customers) which remains reasonable for what it can bring in term of health benefit. In the long term, I imagine that it will benefit from a link with insurance premiums (as I expect insurance premiums to be reduced for people who can prove that they regularly exercise).
I don't think this is the correct way to think about this. Per their prospectus...
So, in 2019, 4.3% of members left every month. That's up over 50% a year. While cost of living/inflation etc may not be the causal reason for members cancelling their subscription, it doesn't seem unrealistic that it is a causal reason for people to not sign up for a gym membership and when the tide is running out at that speed the lack of new signups will blow a hole in member numbers. Because of high fixed cost base and low margin nature of this business a bump up in utilisation will flatter the P&L and it works in reverse too.
I wouldn't be hanging out waiting for the government to start allowing health insurers to change premiums based on health and lifestyle factors. The system is built around taking pressure off Medicare, not lowering premiums for punters.
(20min delay)