×




24 Hour Fitness (B): Ownership Changes, 2005-2016 Negotiation Strategy / MBA Resources

Introduction to Negotiation Strategy

Negotiation Strategy solution for 24 Hour Fitness (B): Ownership Changes, 2005-2016 case study


At Oak Spring University, we provide corporate level professional Negotiation Strategy and other business case study solution. 24 Hour Fitness (B): Ownership Changes, 2005-2016 case study is a Harvard Business School (HBR) case study written by John R. Wells, Gabriel Ellsworth. The 24 Hour Fitness (B): Ownership Changes, 2005-2016 (referred as “Fitness Hour” from here on) case study provides evaluation & decision scenario in field of Strategy & Execution. It also touches upon business topics such as - negotiation strategy, negotiation framework, Business history, Business models, Competition, Customers, Demographics, Entrepreneurial finance, Financial analysis, Financial management, Growth strategy, Health, Internet, IT, Labor, Leading teams, Operations management, Organizational structure, Performance measurement, Pricing, Talent management, Workspaces.

Negotiation strategy solution for case study 24 Hour Fitness (B): Ownership Changes, 2005-2016 ” provides a comprehensive framework to analyse all issues at hand and reach a unambiguous negotiated agreement. At Oak Spring University, we provide comprehensive negotiation strategies that have proven their worth both in the academic sphere and corporate world.


BATNA in Negotiation Strategy


Three questions every negotiator should ask before entering into a negotiation process-

What’s my BATNA (Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement) – my walkaway option if the deal fails?

What are my most important interests, in ranked order?

What is the other side’s BATNA, and what are his interests?



12 Hrs

$59.99
per Page
  • 100% Plagiarism Free
  • On Time Delivery | 27x7
  • PayPal Secure
  • 300 Words / Page
  • Buy Now

24 Hrs

$49.99
per Page
  • 100% Plagiarism Free
  • On Time Delivery | 27x7
  • PayPal Secure
  • 300 Words / Page
  • Buy Now

48 Hrs

$39.99
per Page
  • 100% Plagiarism Free
  • On Time Delivery | 27x7
  • PayPal Secure
  • 300 Words / Page
  • Buy Now




Case Description of 24 Hour Fitness (B): Ownership Changes, 2005-2016 Case Study


In 2016, 24 Hour Fitness was the number-two fitness chain in the United States, generating revenues of $1.4 billion from 441 clubs serving 3.8 million members. Based in San Ramon, California, 24 Hour Fitness operated clubs in 13 states. Having grown rapidly to become the largest club operator by 2004, the company was sold to a private equity group in 2005 for $1.6 billion. The growth continued until the original founder, Mark Mastrov, left in 2008. Since then, growth had stagnated, and the company lost its leadership position to LA Fitness in 2012. Throughout, 24 Hour Fitness had retained its traditional positioning, offering several club types to satisfy a wide range of customers concentrated in a particular area at affordable prices averaging $39 per month. However, this positioning was increasingly coming under pressure. Small studios offering focused facilities at as little as $10 per month were growing, while LA Fitness provided full-line gyms for an average of $33 per month. Premium clubs also continued to flourish, while the competition from not-for-profits such as university and employee gyms continued unabated. In 2016, the new CEO announced a new strategy to counter these challenges: rebranding 24 Hour as a lifestyle and media company. He declared, "We know we can do great things. We're very excited about the platform that we have to build on." Perhaps this strategy would help restore the company's fortunes.


Case Authors : John R. Wells, Gabriel Ellsworth

Topic : Strategy & Execution

Related Areas : Business history, Business models, Competition, Customers, Demographics, Entrepreneurial finance, Financial analysis, Financial management, Growth strategy, Health, Internet, IT, Labor, Leading teams, Operations management, Organizational structure, Performance measurement, Pricing, Talent management, Workspaces




Seven Elemental Tools of Negotiation that can be used in 24 Hour Fitness (B): Ownership Changes, 2005-2016 solution


1. Satisfies everyone’s core interests (yours and theirs)


By interests, we do not mean the preconceived demands or positions that you or the other party may have, but rather the underlying needs, aims, fears, and concerns that shape what you want. Negotiation is more than getting what you want. It is not winning at all cost. Number of times Win-Win is better option that outright winning or getting what you want.





2. Is the best of many options

Options are the solutions you generate that could meet your and your counterpart’s interests . Often people come to negotiations with very fixed ideas and things they want to achieve. This strategy leaves unexplored options which might be even better than the one that one party wanted to achieve. So always try to provide as many options as possible during the negotiation process. The best outcome should be out of many options rather than few options.


3. Meets legitimate, fair standards

When soft bargainers meet hard bargainers there is always the danger of soft bargainers ceding more than what is necessary. To avoid this scenario you should always focus on legitimate standards or expectations. Standards are often external and objective measures to assess the fairness such as rules and regulations, financial values & resources , market prices etc. If the negotiated agreement is going beyond the industry norms or established standards of fairness then it is prudent to get out of the negotiation.


4. Is better than your alternatives or BATNA

Every negotiators going into the negotiations should always work out the “what if” scenario. The negotiating parties in the “24 Hour Fitness (B): Ownership Changes, 2005-2016” has three to four plausible scenarios. The negotiating protagonist needs to have clear idea of – what will happen if the negotiations fail. To put it in the negotiating literature – BATNA - Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement. If the negotiated agreement is not better than BATNA then there is no point in accepting the negotiated solution.


5. Is comprised of clear, realistic commitments

One of the biggest problems in implementing the negotiated agreements in corporate world is – the ambiguity in the negotiated agreement. Sometimes the negotiated agreements are not realistic or various parties interpret the outcomes based on their understanding of the situation. It is critical to do negotiations as water tight as possible so that there is less scope for ambiguity.


6. Is the result of effective communication?

Many negotiators make the mistake of focusing only on the substance of the negotiation (interests, options, standards, and so on). How you communicate about that substance, however, can make all the difference. The language you use and the way that you build understanding, jointly solve problems, and together determine the process of the negotiation with your counterpart make your negotiation more efficient, yield clear agreements that each party understands, and help you build better relationships.


7. Managing relationship with counterparty

Another critical factor in the success of your negotiation is how you manage your relationship with your counterpart. According to “John R. Wells, Gabriel Ellsworth”, the protagonist may want to establish a new connection or repair a damaged one; in any case, you want to build a strong working relationship built on mutual respect, well-established trust, and a side-by-side problem- solving approach.




Different types of negotiators – what is your style of negotiation

According to Harvard Business Review , there are three types of negotiators – Hard Bargainers, Soft Bargainers, and Principled Bargainers.

Hard Bargainers – These people see negotiations as an activity that they need to win. They are less focused less on the real objectives of the negotiations but more on winning. In the “24 Hour Fitness (B): Ownership Changes, 2005-2016 ”, do you think a hard bargaining strategy will deliver desired results? Hard bargainers are easy to negotiate with as they often have a very predictable strategy

Soft Bargainers – These people are focused on relationship rather than hard outcomes of the negotiations. It doesn’t mean they are pushovers. These negotiators often scribe to long term relationship rather than immediate bargain.

Principled Bargainers – As explained in the seven elemental tools of negotiations above, these negotiators are more concern about the standards and norms of fairness. They often have inclusive approach to negotiations and like to work on numerous solutions that can improve the BATNA of both parties.

Open lines of communication between parties in the case study “24 Hour Fitness (B): Ownership Changes, 2005-2016” can make for an effective negotiation strategy and will make it easier to negotiate with this party the next time as well.





NPV Analysis of 24 Hour Fitness (B): Ownership Changes, 2005-2016



References & Further Readings

John R. Wells, Gabriel Ellsworth (2018), "24 Hour Fitness (B): Ownership Changes, 2005-2016 Harvard Business Review Case Study. Published by HBR Publications.


Delisi Food A SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix

Consumer/Non-Cyclical , Food Processing


Rockrose Energy SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix

Energy , Oil & Gas - Integrated


JNBY Design SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix

Consumer Cyclical , Apparel/Accessories


Narayana Hrudayalaya SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix

Healthcare , Healthcare Facilities


Kelt Exploration SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix

Energy , Oil & Gas - Integrated


Hanan Mor SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix

Capital Goods , Construction Services


Hologic SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix

Healthcare , Medical Equipment & Supplies


Pia Corp SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix

Services , Business Services


China All Access SWOT Analysis / TOWS Matrix

Technology , Computer Networks