Sport Management Review 21 (2018) 250–262

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Sport Management Review

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/smr

The effects of service convenience and perceived quality on

perceived value, satisfaction and loyalty in low-cost fitness
centers
Jerónimo García-Fernándeza,*, Pablo Gálvez-Ruízb, Jesús Fernández-Gaviraa,
Luisa Vélez-Colónc, Brenda Pittsd, Ainara Bernal-Garcíae
a
Department of Physical Education and Sports, Seville University, C/ Pirotecnia, s/n, 41013 Seville, Spain
b
International University of La Rioja, Av. Gran Vía Juan Carlos I, 41, 26002 Logroño, Spain
c
Department of Education, Interamerican University of Puerto Rico, Puerto Rico
d
Department of Kinesiology & Health, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, USA
e
San Isidoro University Centre, C/ Leonardo Da Vinci, 17, Seville, Spain

ARTICLEINFO ABSTRACT

Article history:
Received 4 July 2016 Due to its importance in fitness centers, a number of authors have explored and analyzed
Received in revised form 7 July 2017 loyalty. However, two characteristics not yet examined are service convenience in fitness
Accepted 7 July 2017 center chains and low-cost fitness centers (an emerging business model). In the present
Available online 21 July 2017 study, the authors sought to understand the relationship among perceived quality and
service convenience on perceived value, satisfaction, and client loyalty in low-cost fitness
Keywords: centers. Clients (N = 763; 381 women and 382 men) from three low-cost Spanish fitness
Perceived quality centers were surveyed, revealing a positive relationship among the variables studied.
Service convenience Findings demonstrate the importance of proper management of non-monetary sacrifices
Perceived value and perceived quality by the managers of these sport organizations, since client loyalty
Satisfaction
could depend on factors of these emerging sport models.
Loyalty
© 2017 Sport Management Association of Australia and New Zealand. Published by Elsevier
Fitness industry
Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Understanding factors that influence client loyalty is crucial for fitness centers (García-Fern&ndez, Bernal-García, Fern
&ndez-Gavira, & Vélez-Colón, 2014). Among the factors associated with behavior intentions and customer loyalty, perceived
value is particularly impactful (Lewis & Soureli, 2006; McDougall & Levesque, 2000). Zeithaml (1988) defined perceived
value as “the global evaluation of the consumer regarding the utility of the product based on the perception of what is
received in exchange for what is given” (p. 14). At the same time, leading authors on this topic agree in presenting the
construct of dynamic nature (Oliver, 1997), that may vary between people and situations (Holbrook, 1999), hence
demonstrating its multidimensional characteristics (Sweeney & Soutar, 2001). Furthermore, perceived value is a result of a
global valuation founded on what the client gives and receive in return (positive and negative function) (Oliver, 1999). The
positive dimension carries some benefits for the client, such as quality (Martín, Gremler, Washburn, & Cepeda, 2008), and the

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: jeronimo@us.es (J. García-Fernández), pablo.galvez@unir.net (P. Gálvez-Ruíz), jesusfgavira@us.es (J. Fernández-Gavira),
velezluisa@gmail.com (L. Vélez-Colón), drbrendapitts@gmail.com (B. Pitts), aynarabg@gmail.com (A. Bernal-García).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.smr.2017.07.003
1441-3523/© 2017 Sport Management Association of Australia and New Zealand. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 J. García-Fernández et al. / Sport Management Review 21 (2018) 250–262 251

negative function is related to monetary and non-monetary sacrifices. In the first case the price paid is considered easy to
imitate by another organization (Voss, Parasuraman, & Grewal, 1998). The second case considers other non-monetary efforts,
such as the effort to consume the service, inconveniences, and location or time, which may cause the client to have a negative
perception of value, referred to as service convenience (Berry, Seiders, & Grewal, 2002).
In the sport sector, authors measuring value have used unidimensional scales and its influence in satisfaction and
loyalty (e.g., Calabuig, Prado-Gascó, Crespo, Núñez-Pomar, & Añó, 2015; Nuviala, Grao-Cruces, Pérez-Turpin, & Nuviala,
2012). Specifically addressing the fitness industry, researchers have examined the loyalty chain in for-profit centers (e.g.,
Theodorakis, Howat, Ko, & Avourdiadou, 2014) and in not-for-profit fitness centers (e.g., Calabuig, Núñez-Pomar, Prado-
Gascó, & Añó, 2014; Murray & Howat, 2002). However, there is a gap in understanding with regard to the loyalty chain in
low-cost fitness centers, which is a trending business model experiencing growth in the United States, Europe, and
Australia (Bouchet, Hillairet, & Bodet, 2013; Europe Active, 2015a; Powers & Greenwell, 2016; Turk, 2016; Whytcross,
2014).
Likewise, researchers have investigated the positive components of value (Theodorakis et al., 2014) or negative
components, such as price (Calabuig et al., 2014), maintaining a dearth of knowledge with regard to the role of non-monetary
sacrifices or convenience of service on the perceived value (Berry et al., 2002). The low-cost enterprises are characterized by
a better standardization of the processes, thus diminishing the time it takes to actually produce a service (Porter, 1985),
consequently diminishing the time and effort to produce a service as perceived by the client. Furthermore, the client’s
perception of non-monetary sacrifices is diminished, thus improving the perceived value and by consequence the loyalty of
the client (Keaveney, 1995). Although Chang and Polonsky (2012) conclude that convenience of service could be a
determining factor in the behavior intention of the client of fitness centers, researchers have not analyzed these variables
with a comprehensive model.
Given the primacy of understanding customer loyalty in the health and fitness industry (Ferrand, Robinson, & Valette-
Florence, 2010), the objective of the present study was to analyze the existing relationship between the perceived quality and
service convenience on perceived value, satisfaction, and loyalty of clients of low-cost fitness centers. the purpose of the
present study offers two important contributions. In doing so, we make several contributions. First, we analyze a loyalty
model in a low-cost business that is experiencing growth worldwide, and results are potentially applicable to other
countries. The study of customer loyalty is also important for understanding sustainability and profitability. Furthermore,
researchers analyzing customer loyalty by way of the chain of value, satisfaction, and future intentions have examined
quality as a predecessor to value, without measures of the negative components of value, such as non-monetary sacrifices.
Therefore, in drawing from the perspective of the client, the influence of non-monetary sacrifices or service convenience on
value and by consequence their loyalty, is needed.

2. The low-cost model in the fitness industry

Porter (1985) stated that enterprises that base their strategies on differentiation or low-cost strategies have a competitive
advantage. Enterprises using the low-cost strategies emphasize cost reduction, hire highly qualified personnel, maximize the
economies of scales, use routine job duties, and produce standard products. With these characteristics, low-cost enterprises
utilize a centralized structure, creating highly specialized job functions and standardized operating procedures. At the same
time, these strategies should be supported in the current market by an appropriate control system, a clear organizational
structure, and an information management system (Jermias & Gani, 2004).
With regards to conceptualizing the low-cost model, there is not one form or a single definition, although there is
agreement in its basic characteristics. In general terms, low-cost enterprises offer low rates due to their broad knowledge and
mastery of their value chains, thereby achieving efficiency in their structures of cost by eliminating unnecessary elements. In
this way, they offer a more limited service and, in some cases, charge complementary services separately (Button, 2012).
With the intent to clarify the term and eliminate erroneous concepts of low-cost enterprises, Kachaner, Lindgardt, and
Michael (2011) affirm that low-cost does not signify a low margin; rather, it is a potentially profitable model. Hence, low-cost
is not low quality, but it implies better profits. And, low-cost is not cheap imitation, but represents innovation.
The first enterprises to utilize low-cost strategies were airlines, with Southwest Airlines being the first to implement the
model in 1971, followed in 1995 by European companies, such as Ryanair, EasyJet, and Air Berlin (Rey, Myro, & Galera, 2011).
In fact, the majority of published studies of low-cost enterprises have been set in the airline industry (Akamavi, Mohamed,
Pellmann, & Xu, 2015), although other researchers have examined the cruise line industry (e.g. Gross, 2009), automobiles
(e.g. Wang & Kimble, 2010), and hotels (e.g. Ruetz & Marvel, 2011).
Even after knowing the basic strategies of low-cost for competitive advantage (Porter, 1985), sport management
scholarship in this area is still lacking (Geurin & Burch, 2017), and particularly with regard to fitness centers. The research gap
is all the more salient due to the major growth in the fitness industry, as a result of low-cost fitness centers in the midst of a
global economic recession (Bouchet et al., 2013; Cancian, 2016; Europe Active, 2015a; International Health, Racquet &
Sportsclub Association, 2016; Kokolakakis, 2012; Powers & Greenwell, 2016; Whytcross, 2014). Interestingly, in Europe, the
fitness center enterprise with the most number of clients and franchises to date is a low-cost organization (Europe Active,
2015b). The growth of low-cost fitness centers could be due to a combination of economic circumstances, globalization
(Kokolakakis, 2012), and other factors, such as the sporadic attendance to legacy clubs, consumer sentiment towards legacy
clubs, changes in client needs, affordability, simplicity, and digital infra-structure (Algar, 2011).
252 J. García-Fernández et al. / Sport Management Review 21 (2018) 250–262

Characteristics that define this model are services without a monthly contract (Kokolakakis, Lera-López, & Castellanos,
2014), low prices, open 24 h a day (Bouchet et al., 2013), ability to operate the entire club with a single person, gym-only
proposition, heavy technology and web use, and a minimum of 50% lower than the average industry price point (Algar, 2011).
Furthermore, Les Mills, considered the principle enterprise in standardized training in the fitness industry worldwide and
present in more than 70 countries (Andreasson & Johansson, 2015; Parviainen, 2011), affirmed that low-cost fitness centers
are also characterized by a self-service operating philosophy (Les Mills, 2016). These characteristics have resulted in a greater
attraction in the number of clients (Smith, 2008), and a greater number of clients who, until then, had not been customers of
fitness centers (Bouchet et al., 2013).
This gain in market share and its consequential increase in clients are strongly related to the utilization of low-cost
strategies that emphasize sensibility to the client’s cost and offering the best price for value obtained (Porter, 1985).
Moreover, it is necessary to utilize low price tactics in low-cost organizations in a manner for which the competition might
copy the strategy of lowering prices (Lawton, 2003). By the same token, establishing strategies to lower prices can increase
the number of clients in the short term, but it does not guarantee their loyalty and, by consequence, a competitive advantage.
Even with low prices for the client, it is still difficult to achieve customer loyalty (Akamavi et al., 2015). Furthermore, core
components of low-cost enterprises are quality service and their comparison of the sacrifices perceived by clients. The
quality-sacrifice relationship for the client is a key element to compete in the low-cost segment (Forgas, Moliner, S&nchez, &
Palau, 2010). Considering low-cost enterprises have standard processes to reduce production time (Porter, 1985), the time
and effort perceived by clients are a minor factor. In effect, enterprises would be more competitive due to the reduction of
time in the production of services (Bitner, 2016).
Aware of the need for obtain competitive advantage, organizations must opt for action and analysis to promote loyalty
due to the high profit impact it offers (Reinartz & Kumar, 2003). Low-cost organizations should investigate the factors that
result in customer loyalty. Yet, there is no evidence indicating that the use of low-cost strategies, such as a reduced human
resource staff, no monthly contracts, or the simplicity of proposed services (Algar, 2011; Kokolakakis et al., 2014), would alter
the accepted measures of quality (Bamford & Xystouri, 2005), improve service convenience (Bitner, 2016) and, therefore,
satisfaction and ultimately loyalty.

3. Theoretical foundation and hypothesis development

3.1. The relationship between perceived quality and perceived value

According to Zeithaml (1988), perceived quality is “the judgement of the consumer on the excellence or superiority of a
product/service” (p. 3). Bitner and Hubbert (1994) define it as “global impression of the consumer on the relative superiority
or inferiority of an organization and its services” (p.7). Perceived value is a much broader concept, defined as “the global
evaluation of the consumer on the usefulness of a product based upon the perception of what is received and what is given”
(Zeithaml, 1988, p. 14).
The need to study perceived quality in sport services lies in the understanding that it is the step prior to loyalty (Baker &
Crompton, 2000), becoming the fundamental value of clients towards businesses and the success of a sport organization
(Papadimitriou & Karteroliotis, 2000). In fact, according to Reichheld (1996), organizations with high client percentage rates
have higher incidences of productivity and greater margins of benefits. In this sense, value is a more global characterization,
understood as a comparison of benefits and sacrifices, where the client perceives the quality of the product or service as a
benefit (Caruana, Money, & Berthon, 2000; Cronin, Brady, & Hult, 2000; Grewal, Monroe, & Krishnan, 1998; Oh, 2000).
Specific to sport organizations, researchers have focused on the relationship between both variables. Calabuig et al. (2015)
found a direct and positive relationship between quality and value from spectators of sporting events. Similarly, Howat and
Assaker (2013) came to the same conclusions when researching aquatic centers; Byon, Zhang, and Baker (2013) with
professional teams; and Nuviala et al. (2012) in sporting organizations in general. In the case of fitness centers, Theodorakis
et al. (2014) developed and obtained empirical data from a Greek sample supporting a direct relationship. Based upon this
collective evidence, we hypothesized:
Hypothesis 1. There is a direct and positive relationship between perceived quality and perceived value for clients of low-
cost fitness centers.

3.2. Service convenience and its relationship with perceived value

Berry (2016) argued that “time is a finite resource and effort a precious one” (p. 5). Perceived value has a negative function
on monetary (prices) and non-monetary sacrifices (Martín et al., 2008; Voss et al., 1998). With regards to non-monetary
sacrifices, the client’s personal circumstance or subjective factors could detract from the perceived value of the service.
Likewise, the client will not always want a low price, but value for the money spent, in which case non-monetary sacrifices
related to service could be more important for the consumer (Berry et al., 2002). Hence the term convenience of service
emerges. Service convenience represents the time and effort perceived by the client (sacrifice or psychological stress) related
to the purchase or the utilization of a service (Berry et al., 2002).
 J. García-Fernández et al. / Sport Management Review 21 (2018) 250–262 253

Conceptually, service convenience intends to minimize the sacrifice or psychological stress related to the purchase or
utilization of a service (Berry et al., 2002), which could be of different types. Seiders, Voss, Godfrey, and Grewal (2007)
identified five different types of service convenience: (a) the convenience of decision, related to the initial decision to
consume a service, the availability, and quality of the information with regards to the lender of service; (b) the convenience
of access, which address time and necessary effort to initiate the offering of services; (c) convenience implicated by the
time and effort necessary to experience what is offered by services; (d) the convenience of transactions related to the time
and effort while conducting the transaction; and (e) the convenience after the time and necessary effort to reengage
contact with an organization. Likewise, Zeithaml and Bitner (2000) indicated psychological sacrifices could play a part at
the moment of deciding services, when waiting, or when seeking to understand the services offered. In the case of fitness
centers, a similar situation could occur. For this reason, non-monetary sacrifices might include time it takes to go to the
facility from the place of employment or from the client’s home, the accessibility of the fitness center, public
transportation services, access of private parking, or the importance or need for physical activity. Many of the people who
abandon this type of activity indicate lack of time as a principle motive (Nuviala et al., 2013). For this reason, not only the
price (Calabuig et al., 2014) or perceived quality could detract value from the client’s perception of a product or service, but
other components as well.
Although few researchers have examined the relationship between sacrifices and perceived value (Nuviala et al., 2012)
researchers in other contexts have explored these dynamics. For example, Keaveney (1995) demonstrated that service
convenience influenced perceived value of clients of online services. Researchers have observed similar relationships in
examinations of students participating in educational trips (Gallarza & Gil, 2006), service clients (Martín et al., 2008),
restaurant goers (Chang, Chen, Hsu, & Kuo, 2010), hotel clients (Martín-Ruíz, Barroso-Castro, & Rosa-Díaz, 2012), and persons
who frequent shopping centers (Lloyd, Leslie, & Chan, 2014). In extrapolating these findings to the sport and fitness context,
we hypothesized:
Hypothesis 2. There is a direct and positive relationship between the service convenience and the perceived value by
clients of low-cost fitness centers.

3.3. Perceived value and satisfaction of clients of sport organizations

The concept of perceived value is connected to client satisfaction (Dorai & Varshney, 2012). According to Woodruff and
Gardial (1996), the nexus between value and satisfaction is directly due to the natural affinity between both concepts, as both
flow from evaluative judgements. While it is possible that satisfaction is an antecedent as well as a consequence of perceived
value, researchers have offered more support for perceived value positively and directly impacting client satisfaction (Cronin
et al., 2000).
A number of researchers in sport have examined the relationship between quality and satisfaction, including Nuviala et al.
(2012) and Bodet (2012). In addition, Calabuig et al. (2015) identified a direct and positive relationship between perceived
value and satisfaction at sporting events. In the fitness industry, although published works are scarce, Murray and Howat
(2002) and Theodorakis et al. (2014) conducted research in the Australian and Greek contexts, respectively. The authors
observed a direct and positive relationship between the perceived value and the satisfaction of the client. Therefore, we
hypothesized:
Hypothesis 3. There is a direct and positive relationship between perceived value and satisfaction of clients of low-cost
fitness centers.

3.4. Satisfaction and loyalty in fitness industry

Among the variables used to analyze a relationship with loyalty, satisfaction has emerged as a primary aspect where if a
client is satisfied, there would be more possibilities for the client to have a positive perception of the organization and
demonstrate loyalty to that entity. There is a strong relationship among these variables (Bernhardt, Donthu, & Kennett,
2000). Indeed, Trail, Anderson, and Fink (2005) recognized satisfaction to be a predictor of future behavior intentions. By
way of example, satisfaction intimately corresponds with attitude, which is prone to predict purchase intentions
(Anderson & Mittal, 2000; for examples in sport, see also Calabuig et al., 2015; Howat & Assaker, 2013; Kim et al., 2006). In
one of the few studies set in the fitness industry, Murray and Howat (2002) affirmed that satisfaction played an important
mediating role in the relationship between quality of service and behavior intentions, while satisfaction had a direct effect
on loyalty. Similarly, Alexandris, Zahariadis, Tsorbatzoudis, and Grouios (2004) considered the mediating role satisfaction
played on the relationship between perceived quality and loyalty. Later, Theodorakis et al. (2014) and Avourdiadou and
Theodorakis (2014) corroborated the direct relationship between satisfaction and behavior intentions. Given this
information, we hypothesized:
Hypothesis 4. There is a direct and positive relationship between satisfaction and loyalty in low-cost fitness center clients.
We offer an illustrative summary of the hypotheses in Fig. 1.
254 J. García-Fernández et al. / Sport Management Review 21 (2018) 250–262

Fig. 1. Model of the stated hypotheses.

4. Method

4.1. Sample and study context

According to the International Health, Racquet & Sportsclub Association (2015), Spain is considered third among
European countries with the largest number of fitness center participants, leading European countries in the growth of
participants in this type of sporting facility (European Commission, 2014). Likewise, within the fitness center business
models, Valcarce, López, and García (2016) pointed out the low-cost model to be especially significant to this increment, as it
reached 17.5% of the fitness clients in 2015 in Spain. Additionally, there were 235 low-cost fitness centers from 42 enterprises
in 2015, of which 61% were geographically located in the cities of Madrid, Barcelona, Valencia, and Seville (Valcarce et al.,
2016).
We utilized a quantitative design with a non-probabilistic sample of 763 clients from three low-cost fitness centers
(381 women and 382 men) located in Seville, the fourth largest city in number of residents in Spain. The size of the sample
was calculated with a 4.5% error for a 95% level of confidence. With regards to age, 14.9% (n = 114) were younger than 20 years,
68.1% (n = 519) were between the ages of 21 and 30, 15.6% (n = 119) were between 31 and 40 years of age, and 1.4% (n = 11)
were over 40 years old. With regards to academic achievement, 1.2% (n = 9) had elementary education, 5.5% (n = 42) had
middle school completion, 9.9% (n = 152) indicated high school education, 46.4% (n = 354) had college education, 21.4%
(n = 163) had professional preparation, and 5.6% (n = 43) were master or doctorate graduates. As it relates to occupation,
29.9% (n = 228) were students, 8% (n = 61) worked in public service, 29.5% (n = 225) were employed by private organizations,
6.9% (n = 53) were autonomous, 15.3% (n = 117) indicated to being unemployed, and the “others” category was chosen by
10.3% (n = 79). With respect to length of membership, 29.6% (n = 226) of the sample had been a member for fewer than
3 months, 20.2% (n = 154) had a membership length of 3–6 months, 13% (n = 99) had been members for 7–9 months, 10.6%
(n = 81) were between 10 and 12 months, and memberships of more than one year represented 26.6% (n = 203).

4.2. Measures

Participants responded to questionnaire items. To measure perceived quality of fitness centers, we used a 15-item
modified scale from Alexandris et al. (2004). Their instrument is based on work by Brady and Cronin (2001) and has been
utilized in a number of other studies in the sport business industry (e.g., Theodorakis, Kyriaki, & Karabaxoglou, 2015), and is
divided into three dimensions. The first dimension is physical environment and includes three sub-dimensions (design,
ambient conditions, and social) (five items). The second dimension, interaction quality, includes the sub-dimensions of
behavior, attitude, and expertise of employees (five items). The third dimension of outcome quality is the possible
consequences of service participation (five items). Reducing the number of items due to translation or context industry
practice adaptation has been practiced by other studies. Precisely, the scale proposed by Alexandris et al. (2004) has been
modified in different studies. In the case of Kyle, Theodorakis, Karageorgiou, and Lafazani (2010) the scale was reduced to
15 items using a sample of ski resort visitors. Avourdiadou, Laios, Kosta, and Theodorakis (2014) reduced the scale to 11
items, and Gonçalves, Biscaia, Correia, and Diniz (2014) reduced the scale to 10 items for a sample of users of sport centers.
Also Theodorakis et al. (2015) reduced the scale to 11 items in a sample of runners. For the current study, first, a panel of five
bilingual experts used collaborative “back-translation” techniques to translate the instrument into Spanish (Brislin, 1970;
Hambleton, 1994). Two of the five experts had more than eight years of experience in sport management, two had more than
10 years of experience in test translation, and were native Spanish-speaking with a high proficiency in English and not
involved in this area of research. After achieving consensus, a first draft of the translated items was achieved. In Spanish, the
items “employees are reliable” and “employees are trustful” have a similar meaning, as do the items “employees are
educated” and “employees are experts,” and “facilities have up-to-date equipment” and “the equipment of the fitness center
is in good condition.” Therefore, it was decided to eliminate the first items in each of these sets. Next, two individuals with
competence in both English and Spanish languages performed a back-translation of the Spanish items into English. The back-
translations were the same to the original items and only required minor editing to obtain a final Spanish scale. Once the
correct translation was obtained the next step was to determine the content validity. The validation group was composed of
five directors of low-cost fitness centers, two consultants specialized in the fitness center industry, ten users of these type of
sporting facilities, five fitness instructors, and eight Physical Activity and Sport Sciences students. After reading and affirming
the correct understanding of all the items by all, the directors and consultants recommended the elimination of three items.
 J. García-Fernández et al. / Sport Management Review 21 (2018) 250–262 255

The elimination was based upon three characteristics of low-cost fitness centers indicated by Algar (2011) and Bouchet et al.
(2013), which were the ability to operate the entire club with a single person, open 24 h a day, and gym-only proposition. For
this, and based upon the recommendation of managers and consultants, the items “employees respect members’ needs”,
“employees provide individualized attention” and “other customers do not affect the service negatively” were eliminated.
After all of the described steps, the scale used in this study was comprised of 15 items. The reliability analysis showed a
Cronbach alpha of 0.82 for physical environment, 0.92 for interaction quality and 0.94 for outcome quality.
Service convenience was measured with a scale composed of 15 items (e.g., “It was easy to contact this fitness center,”
“Forms of payment in this fitness center is comfortable,” “I had the opportunity to complete the registration form”) proposed
by Chang and Polonsky (2012) and utilized in the fitness sector. Similar to Berry et al. (2002),Chang and Polonsky (2012)
identified five dimensions in their scale. Decision (three items), access (three items), transaction (three items), benefit (three
items), and post-benefit (three items). The dimensions obtained an adequate value of reliability, being 0.70 for decision,
0.73 for access, 0.73 for transaction, 0.89 for benefit and 0.86 for post-benefit. In all cases, they were higher than 0.70 (Marôco
& Marques, 2006).
Perceived value was measured according to Zeithaml (1988) by means of four items (e.g., “The programs and services of
this fitness center has great value,” “The programs and services of this fitness center are worth what they cost”). This scale
has been adopted from other studies of management and sport marketing (e.g., Theodorakis et al., 2014). The perceived value
scale showed a reliability of 0.89.
Satisfaction was measured with four items (e.g., “I am satisfied with the programs and services in this fitness center,” “I
am satisfied with the decision to become a member of this fitness center”) based on Oliver (1997) and Cronin et al. (2000).
Likewise, researchers have used the scale used to measure satisfaction for sporting services (e.g., Avourdiadou &
Theodorakis, 2014). The reliability of this scale was 0.92.
Finally, to analyze loyalty, measures of behavior intentions were used by means of four items proposed by Zeithaml, Berry,
and Parasuraman (1996) (e.g., “I will make positive comments to a friend about the programs and services in this fitness
center,” “I would re-register in this fitness center if I ever had to cancel my membership”). Moreover, the other scales have
been used in studies related to sport management (e.g., Avourdiadou & Theodorakis, 2014; Calabuig et al., 2015; Theodorakis
et al., 2014). The reliability of this scale was 0.93. A nine-point Likert scale was used to measure every variable (1, completely
disagree; 9, completely agree).

4.3. Procedure

Seville is the third largest city in Spain and hosts the largest number of low-cost fitness centers. In 2015, there were
16 sporting facilities with the low-cost business model of which nine belong to four franchises. For the present study, two
low-cost fitness franchises were contacted. Of the two franchises that were invited, one agreed to participate with the three
centers owned. The objectives of the study were explained to each manager. At the end of the study, we provided a written
report of the results to each manager. After obtaining approval from the general manager of the franchise, a researcher
(surveyor) was stationed at the entrance of each center during the busiest days and times (Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday
from 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.) of the week for four weeks. Each surveyor had the premise of informing the participants of the
objectives of the study as well as the collection of data. The questionnaires took about 10–15 min to complete.

4.4. Data analysis

A structural equation model was tested in two steps (Anderson & Gerbing, 1988). First, a confirmatory factor analysis
(CFA) was conducted to assess the measurement model. The construct validity of the measurement model was determined
through an analysis in which the different latent variables correlated freely. We measured internal consistency of the
constructs through composite reliability (Hair, Black, Babin, Anderson, & Tatham, 2006). The convergent validity was
evaluated through the average variance extracted (AVE), and the discriminant validity was established when AVE values for
each construct exceeded the square of the correlations between them (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). The second step was a
structural model that analyzed the predicted hypothesized relationships among the variables for the present study.
The appropriateness of the data to both the measurement and structural models was examined using different indicators
(Tanaka, 1993). We examined chi-square relative to degrees of freedom (x2/df) (Jöreskog & Sörbom, 1993), the Comparative
Fit Index (CFI), Normed Fit Index (NFI), Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI), Incremental Fit Index (IFI), and the Root Mean Square Error
of Approximation (RMSEA) and its reliability interval. Chi-square by degrees of freedom values should be less than 3.0 (Kline,
2005), CFI, NFI, TLI and IFI indexes should surpass 0.90 (Worthington & Whittaker, 2006), and RMSEA values equal or be less
than 0.06 (Hu & Bentler, 1999). The different analyses were conducted with the statistical packages SPSS 20.0 and AMOS 20.0.

5. Results

To verify the validity of the construct, the factorial structure was evaluated with CFA, using maximum likelihood
estimation being sufficiently robust to meet the norm (Cuttance, 1987; Muthén & Kaplan, 1985). The goodness of fit indices
produced through the CFA indicated that the model showed a poor fit to the data: x2(765) = 3243.96 (p < 0.001); x2/df = 4.24;
RMSEA = 0.065 (90% CI = 0.063–0.068); CFI = 0.91; NFI = 0.88 IFI = 0.91; TLI = 0.90. The ratio of chi-square (x2) to its degrees of
256 J. García-Fernández et al. / Sport Management Review 21 (2018) 250–262

freedom was above the threshold of 3, CFI, IFI and TLI indexes were close to the cut-off point, the NFI index was slightly lower
than the recommended value, and RMSEA was higher than 0.06.
The size of the factor loading is a criteria used to evaluate the reliability of the indicator with the constructs it intends
to measure (Seidel & Back, 2009). For this reason, the items showed a factor loading (l) greater than the conservative
threshold of 0.60 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981; Hair et al., 2006). The items Q2 (FC facilities are spacious), V2 (The programs
and services of this FC deserve what they cost), S2 (I am happy with the programs and services of this FC), SC1 (I spent
minimal time finding the information to choose a FC), SC3 (It was easy to get the information I needed to decide which FC
to join), SC4 (It was easy to contact my FC), SC7 (This FC allows diversified methods of payment), SC11 (The services in this
FC were easy to use) and SC15 (This FC has a good channel to handle complaints and recommendations), showed factor
loadings that failed to exceed the cut-off point, and consequently were eliminated. The dimension “decision” was also
eliminated since the elimination of items SC1 and SC3 left it with only one item (SC2: This FC made it easy for me to find
suitable exercise programs). After the eliminations mentioned, all indexes were situated within the recommended v alues
thus supporting the model of measure as acceptable: x2 (416) = 1114.68 (p < 0.001); x2/df = 2.68; RMSEA = 0.047 (90%
CI = 0.044–0.050); CFI = 0.97; NFI = 0.95; IFI = 0.97; TLI = 0.96. In this case, all items showed adequate values providing
evidence of good fit.
As shown in Table 1, the composite reliability (CR) values were above the recommended 0.70 (Hair et al., 2006) and the
average variance extracted (AVE) was greater than the 0.50 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). All factor loadings were statistically
significant, situated between 8.83 and 16.33, thus indicating evidence of convergent validity. Lastly, discriminant validity of
the measures was accepted given the squared correlations between each construct and any others that were lower than the
AVE values for each construct (Fornell & Larcker, 1981).
The examination of the structural model included a test of the overall model fit as well as a test of the relationships
between the latent constructs. The global evaluation of the model demonstrated a satisfactory fit with all indexes to be within
acceptable range: x2 (452) = 1571.76 (p < 0.001); x2/df = 3.47; RMSEA = 0.05 (90% CI = 0.054–0.060); CFI = 0.95;
NFI = 0.93; IFI = 0.95; TLI = 0.94. The hypothesized model established that perceived quality as well as service convenience
were positive and significant predictors of perceived value. Likewise, value would precede satisfaction positively and
significantly with satisfaction, which would also be a positive and significant predictor of future behavior intentions.
Results from this model (Fig. 2) revealed that perceived quality as well as service convenience had a significant (p < 0.001)
and positive effect (b = 0.56 and b = 0.38, respectively) with perceived value, thus confirming hypothesis 1 and 2. The
correlation between these two predictors was also significant (r = 0.88; p < 0.001). The effect of perceived value was positive
and significant with regards to satisfaction (b = 0.90; p < 0.001), by which hypothesis 3 was also confirmed. Finally,
satisfaction showed a positive and significant effect over future behavior intentions ( b = 0.93; p < 0.001), supporting
hypothesis 4 (Table 2). According to these results, it can be established that the model was satisfactory.

Table 1
Descriptive statistics, composite reliability (CR), average variance extracted (AVE) and discriminant validity.

PE IQ OQ Ac Tr Be PB PV S FI
Variables M (SD) CR AVE 0.58 0.72 0.76 0.55 0.63 0.71 0.69 0.74 0.82 0.79

PE 7.83 (1.01) 0.80 0.58 –

IQ 8.24 (.97) 0.93 0.72 0.44 –
OQ 8.11 (1.07) 0.94 0.76 0.40 0.53 –
Ac 8.02 (1.27) 0.71 0.55 0.39 0.30 0.23 –
Tr 7.96 (1.31) 0.77 0.63 0.40 0.42 0.37 0.42 –
Be 7.84 (1.19) 0.83 0.71 0.54 0.52 0.47 0.43 0.57 –
PB 7.70 (1.26) 0.80 0.69 0.52 0.53 0.45 0.36 0.56 0.68 –
PV 7.72 (1.09) 0.89 0.74 0.46 0.49 0.47 0.38 0.49 0.69 0.62 –
S 8.10 (1.08) 0.93 0.82 0.47 0.51 0.47 0.42 0.43 0.53 0.52 0.71 –
FI 8.13 (1.12) 0.94 0.79 0.53 0.57 0.46 0.39 0.46 0.56 0.55 0.68 0.72 –

Note: M = Mean; SD = Standard deviation; PE = Physical environment; IQ = Interaction quality; OQ = Outcome quality; Ac = Access; Tr = Transaction;
Be = Benefit; PB = Post-Benefit; PV = Perceived value; S = Satisfaction; FI = Future intention.

Table 2
Summary of structural model results.

H Relationship Confirmed b Z-valor

H1 Perceived quality –> Perceived value YES 0.56*** 7.30
H2 Service convenience –> Perceived value YES 0.38*** 5.03
H3 Perceived value –> Satisfaction YES 0.90*** 24.82
H4 Satisfaction –> Future intentions YES 0.93*** 31.22

p < 0.001.
***
 J. García-Fernández et al. / Sport Management Review 21 (2018) 250–262 257

Fig. 2. Structural equation model demonstrates the relationship between perceived quality (Q), service convenience (SC), perceived value (V), satisfaction
(S), and future behavior intention (FI).

6. Discussion

In the present study, we examined the relationship among perceived quality, service convenience, perceived value,
satisfaction, and loyalty of low-cost fitness center clients. Currently, these new fitness center models are experiencing great
proliferation (Bouchet et al., 2013; Kokolakakis, 2012; Powers & Greenwell, 2016; Valcarce et al., 2016, Whytcross, 2014).
Perceived quality, service convenience, perceived value, and satisfaction are predictors of loyalty. Yet, it is not easily observed
how they are all related; a situation demonstrated in this study. For this reason, examination of factors that could result in
greater loyalty is an important topic that could also influence organizational effectiveness (Reichheld, 1996).
In support of our first hypothesis, we observed a direct and positive relationship between perceived quality and perceived
value in low-cost fitness center clients. The results are similar to those from Calabuig et al. (2015) and Nuviala et al. (2012) in
different sport contexts. Comprehensively, the findings of this study confirm the results of Theodorakis et al. (2014), whose
research was set in Greek fitness centers, suggesting that the perception of quality is decisive in the perception of value.
Along this line, we reaffirm the importance of quality of perceived value, even when evaluated in a business model with a
fundamental strategy of marketing at a low price.
We also examined the relationship between service convenience and perceived value in clients of these emerging sport
organizations. The service convenience is fundamentally determined by the time invested in getting to the facility, effort,
wait time, and orientation of product to the market. All these factors have demonstrated a direct relationship with perceived
value of service, as in the literature of marketing services (Chang et al., 2010; Lloyd et al., 2014; Martín et al., 2008; Martín-
Ruíz et al., 2012). While previous researchers have not examined these possibilities in the sport domain, our findings suggest
that, in effect, within sport models these subjective factors have a repercussion in the perception of value.
In addition, we verified the relationship between perceived value and the satisfaction already tested in the sport market
(Calabuig et al., 2015; Nuviala et al., 2012) and in the fitness sector (Murray & Howat, 2002; Theodorakis et al., 2014),
including in the model the subjective perception of the non-monetary sacrifices. The findings support the relationship of the
emerging business model, and help explain how perceived quality and service convenience could be influencing client
satisfaction. In particular, high levels of quality and low perception of time and effort in attending a fitness center results in
258 J. García-Fernández et al. / Sport Management Review 21 (2018) 250–262

high value and a high satisfaction. Therefore, these results support previous investigations where value plays an
indispensable role in satisfaction (Cronin et al., 2000).
Finally, we observed the existence of a direct and positive relationship among satisfaction of a low-cost fitness center and
the loyalty in clients of these sport organizations. This is an important factor to keep in mind, as it influences the future
intentions of the clients, not just in traditional fitness centers (Avoudiadou & Theodorakis, 2014; Theodorakis et al., 2014
Theodorakis et al., 2014) but also in business models where price is an important factor when deciding to purchase (Ferrand
et al., 2010). In light of these findings, we contribute to a model of loyalty in a low-cost sport organization, bringing to the
discussion the importance of quality and service convenience as influencing factors on value, followed by repercussion on
satisfaction and loyalty. As argued by Berry et al. (2002), quality is not the only influencer of loyalty; convenience can
subtract value from service, and consequently satisfaction can negatively impact loyalty (Seiders et al., 2007).

6.1. Managerial implications

Our work has several implications for the management of fitness organizations. As confirmed, behavior intentions are
determined by satisfaction, which is measured with quality and service convenience. For this reason, fitness centers should
focus on managing with processes that guarantee high quality standards and diminish the perception of time and effort in
implementing sport services. Organizations that offer fitness services should focus on client satisfaction since it has a direct
impact on their loyalty.
The results imply that a strategic objective of low-cost fitness centers should be to improve quality perception.
Furthermore, perception of quality stands out as having the strongest relationship with perceived value. These findings
suggest to managers of low-cost fitness centers the need to prioritize efforts in managing quality in an adequate manner. In
particular, interaction quality and physical environment have been factors in strong relationships with quality in general. For
this reason, and due to the growth of low-cost fitness centers (Bouchet et al., 2013; Europe Active, 2015a; Whytcross, 2014),
competition will not be based on low price alone (Lawton, 2003), but coupled with the efforts of managers to attain high
standards of quality in order to achieve competitive advantage.
It is interesting to observe that service convenience, although in the lowest form, influences value perceived. For a better
perception of time and effort invested by the client, managers should create processes that accelerate the method and speed
of payment, and the solution to problems. The two dimensions that obtained greater weight on service convenience were
benefit and post-benefit. This finding indicates the importance of the easiness of use of the services and the immediate
solution to possible problems. Similarly, the fitness chain McFit, the organization with the most low-cost fitness centers in
Europe (Europe Active, 2015b), manages all payments, customer relations, and suggestions-complaints by means of an
online platform. Likewise, new systems of client management by way of apps to offer customer service 24 h a day could be
implemented addressing speed in service, a characteristic of the low-cost model in the fitness industry (Berry, 2016). Thus,
low-cost fitness centers should not only compete on low prices but offer high quality standards with a high-speed provision
of service.
Likewise, perceived value, as a key factor of client satisfaction, has been demonstrated by other low-cost companies
(Forgas et al., 2010). For this reason, low-cost fitness centers should adequately manage the value for the price that influences
client satisfaction. This, as demonstrated in the present study, will ultimately influence customer loyalty. Therefore, low-cost
fitness center managers must adequately manage satisfaction factors for clients to have positive future intentions and
recommendation.

6.2. Limitations and future investigations

As in any investigation, our work has potential limitations, the first of which is the sample. The data were obtained from
clients of a low-cost fitness center franchise with three facilities in Seville, Spain, which could indicate that the data collected
is indicative of a certain sector. This calls for a larger sample including other cities and other countries in order to generalize
the results. On the other hand, it is understood that this study is cross-sectional; another limitation. To balance this
deficiency, a longitudinal study should be implemented in order to collect clients’ general perception over time, allowing for
a comparison of clients throughout time and allowing for a tighter measure of the relationships among the variables
analyzed. The analysis of perception according the length of the client’s membership is already addressed in investigations
published since the collection of the data for this study (Avourdiadou & Theodorakis, 2014).
In the same way, the utilization of a reduced version of the Alexandris et al. (2004) scale with its three dimensions
(physical environment, interaction quality and outcome quality) could imply lesser knowledge of client perception of quality.
For this reason, although different researchers have used scales of unidimensional quality (Calabuig et al., 2015; Theodorakis
et al., 2014) or multidimensional (Howat & Assaker, 2013; Nuviala et al., 2012) to analyze the relationship with the perceived
value, the use of a greater number of items and dimensions would result in more information regarding perceived quality.
For this reason, future researchers should test multidimensional scales for a greater understanding of perception of quality.
Among these dimensions and taking into account low-cost fitness center characteristics (Algar, 2011; Bouchet et al., 2013), it
would be interesting to include the factor program (Ko & Pastore, 2005; Lam et al., 2005) for the self-service operating
philosophy (Les Mills, 2016).
 J. García-Fernández et al. / Sport Management Review 21 (2018) 250–262 259

On the other hand, measuring loyalty by means of future behavior intentions is a limitation of the study. Although it is a
type of evaluation implemented in a number of studies, it is still a subjective measure of behavior and does not always
correspond in real behavior (Bodet, 2012). Future studies could enrich the findings of this study by means of objective loyalty
indicators such as the index of membership longevity, and attrition of fitness centers during a determined period of time.
Furthermore, the current tendency to group clients according to homogenous needs could be a future line of study. Different
characteristics such as membership longevity, gender, or the age of a client could facilitate the application of different
techniques of segmentation where behaviors characterizing certain groups could be observed in different populations. These
elements could be used to study future intentions and client loyalty.

7. Conclusions

In conclusion, we focused on the positive relationship among variables which influence client loyalty, specifically in low-
cost sport organizations. In support of our hypotheses, we observed a direct and positive relationship between perceived
quality and service convenience on perceived value. Furthermore, perceived value on satisfaction and consequently loyalty
in clients of low-cost fitness centers were confirmed. These findings have implications for sport and fitness club managers as
they seek to increase member loyalty and club effectiveness.

Appendix A. Survey items

Survey items

Perceived quality
Physical environment
FC facilities are attractive (Q1)
FC facilities are spacious (Q2)
FC facilities are clean (Q3)
The equipment of the FC is in good condition (Q4)
The FC environment (temperature, air) is good (Q5)

Interaction quality
Employees respond quickly to customer needs (Q6)
Employees work with enthusiasm (Q7)
Employees are educated (Q8)
Employees help customers feel comfortable (Q9)
Employees are experts (Q10)

Outcome quality
Physical activity programs help me increase my energy (Q11)
Physical activity programs help me improve my health (Q12)
Physical activity programs help me improve my fumes (Q13)
Physical activity programs help me improve my psychological well-being (Q14)
Physical activity programs help me improve my fitness (Q15)

Service convenience
Decision
I spent minimal time finding the information to choose a FC (SC1)
This FC made it easy for me to find suitable exercise programs (SC2)
It was easy to get the information I needed to decide which FC to join (SC3)

Access
It was easy to contact my FC (SC4)
It did not take much time to reach this FC (SC5)
I can easily figure out the location of this FC (SC6)

Transaction
This FC allows diversified methods of payment (SC7)
The method of payment provided by this FC is convenient (SC8)
I was able to complete my purchase quickly in this FC (SC9)

Benefit
I could easily obtain benefits from the services provided in this FC (SC10)
The services in this FC were easy to use (SC11)
The speed of providing services in this FC met my requirements (SC12)

Post-benefit
When I had a problem, this FC resolved my problem quickly (SC13)
This FC enabled me to arrange my next exercise programs/plans with minimal effort (SC14)
This FC has a good channel to handle complaints and recommendations (SC15)
 J. García-Fernández et al. / Sport Management Review 21 (2018) 250–262 261

Value
The programs and services of this FC have a great value (V1)
The programs and services of this FC deserve what they cost (V2)
What I get from this FC and what it costs, offers me value (V3)
In general, the value of the programs and services in this FC is high (V4)

Satisfaction
I am satisfied with the programs and services of this FC (S1)
I am happy with the programs and services of this FC (S2)
I am pleased to have taken the decisión to become a member of this FC (S3)
My decision to be a member of this FC was successful (S4)

Future intentions
I will make positive comments to a friend about the programs and services of this FC (FI1)
If you ask me, I will recommend this FC (FI2)
I will continue to participate in the programs and services of this FC (FI3)
I would sign up for this FC if I unsubscribed (FI4)

References

Akamavi, R. K., Mohamed, E., Pellmann, K., & Xu, Y. (2015). Key determinants of passenger loyalty in the low-cost airline business. Tourism Management, 46,
528–545.
Alexandris, K., Zahariadis, P., Tsorbatzoudis, C., & Grouios, G. (2004). An empirical investigation of the relationships among service quality, customer
satisfaction and psychological commitment in a health club context. European Sport Management Quarterly, 4, 36–52.
Algar, R. (2011). 2011 Global low-cost gym sector report: A strategic investigation into a disruptive new segment. Retrieved from http://www.precor.com/sites/
precor.com/files/global-low-cost-gym-sector-report.pdf.
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103
(3), 411–423.
Anderson, E. W., & Mittal, V. (2000). Strengthening the satisfaction-profit chain. Journal of Service Research, 3(2), 107–120.
Andreasson, J., & Johansson, T. (2015). The new fitness geography: The globalisation of Japanese gym and fitness culture. Leisure Studies1–12.
Avourdiadou, S., & Theodorakis, N. D. (2014). The development of loyalty among novice and experienced customers of sport and fitness centres. Sport
Management Review, 17(4), 419–431.
Avourdiadou, S., Laios, A., Kosta, G., & Theodorakis, N. (2014). The relationship of service quality dimensions with the overall satisfaction among participants
from different experience levels. Hellenic Journal of Sport & Recreation Management, 11(1), 1–13.
Baker, D. A., & Crompton, J. L. (2000). Quality, satisfaction and behavioral intentions. Annals of Tourism Research, 27(3), 785–804.
Bamford, D., & Xystouri, T. (2005). A case study of service failure and recovery within an international airline. Managing Service Quality, 15(3), 306–322.
Bernhardt, K. L., Donthu, N., & Kennett, P. A. (2000). A longitudinal analysis of satisfaction and profitability. Journal of Business Research, 47(2), 161–171.
Berry, L., Seiders, K., & Grewal, D. (2002). Understanding service convenience. Journal of Marketing, 66, 1–17.
Berry, L. (2016). Revisiting big ideas in services marketing 30 years later. Journal of Services Marketing, 30(1), 3–6.
Bitner, M. J., & Hubbert, A. R. (1994). Encounter satisfaction versus overall satisfaction versus quality: The consumer’s voice. In R. T. Rust, & R. L. Oliver (Eds.),
Service qua-lity: New directions in theory and practice (pp. 72–94). London: Sage Publications.
Bodet, G. (2012). Loyalty in sport participation services: An examination of the mediating role of psychological commitment. Journal of Sport Management,
26, 30–42.
Bouchet, P., Hillairet, D., & Bodet, G. (2013). Sport brands. New York: Routledge.
Brady, M. K., & Cronin, J. J. (2001). Some new thoughts on conceptualizing perceived service quality: A hierarchical approach. Journal of Marketing, 65, 34–49.
Brislin, R. W. (1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology, 1(13), 185–216.
Button, K. (2012). Low-cost airlines: A failed business model? Transportation Journal, 51(2), 197–219.
Byon, K. K., Zhang, J. J., & Baker, T. A. (2013). Impact of core and peripheral service quality on consumption behavior of professional team sport spectators as
mediated by perceived value. European Sport Management Quarterly, 13(2), 232–263.
Calabuig, F., Núñez-Pomar, J., Prado-Gascó, V., & Añó, V. (2014). Effect of price increases on future intentions of sport consumers. Journal of Business Research,
67, 729–733.
Calabuig, F., Prado-Gascó, V., Crespo, J., Núñez-Pomar, J., & Añó, V. (2015). Spectator emotions: Effects on quality, satisfaction, value, and future intentions.
Journal of Business Research, 68(7), 1445–1449.
Cancian, D. (2016). Britains gym sector flexes muscles as it looks to withstand posible recession. International Business time. Retrieved from http://www.ibtimes.
co.uk/britains-gym-sector-flexes-muscles-it-looks-withstand-possible-recession-1577649 (August).
Caruana, A., Money, A. H., & Berthon, R. (2000). Service quality and satisfaction – The moderating role of value. European Journal of Marketing, 34(11/12),
1338–1352.
Chang, Y., & Polonsky, M. (2012). The influence of multiple types of service convenience on behavioral intentions: The mediating role of consumer
satisfaction in a Taiwanese leisure setting. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31, 107–118.
Chang, K., Chen, M., Hsu, C., & Kuo, N. (2010). The effect of service convenience on post-purchasing behaviours. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 110(9),
1420–1443.
Cronin, J. J., Brady, M. K., & Hult, T. M. (2000). Assessing the effects of quality, value, and customer satisfaction on consumer behavioral intentions in service
environments. Journal of Retailing, 76(2), 193–218.
Cuttance, P. (1987). Issues and problems in the application of structural equation models. In P. Cuttance, & R. Ecob (Eds.), Structural modeling by example:
Applications in educational, sociological, and behavioral research (pp. 241–279). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dorai, S., & Varshney, S. (2012). A multistage behavioural and temporal analysis of CPV in RM. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 27(5), 403–411.
Europe Active (2015a). Gymtimidation: A phenomenon which holds back potential gym members. Retrieved from http://www.europeactive.eu/content/%E2%
80%98gymtimidation%E2%80%99-phenomenon-which-holds-back-potential-gym-members.
Europe Active (2015b). European health & fitness market: Report deloitte. Retrieved from https://fitness-challenges.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/pdf-
presentation-nathalie-smeeman.pdf.
European Commission (2014). Special eurobarometer 412. Sport and physical activity. Brussels: European Commission.
Ferrand, A., Robinson, L., & Valette-Florence, P. (2010). The intention-to-repurchase paradox: A case of the health and fitness industry. Journal of Sport
Management, 24, 83–105.
 260 J. García-Fernández et al. / Sport Management Review 21 (2018) 250–262

Forgas, S., Moliner, M. A., Sánchez, J., & Palau, R. (2010). Antecedents of airline passenger loyalty: Low-cost versus traditional airlines. Journal of Air Transport
Management, 16(4), 229–233.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18,
39–50.
Gallarza, M., & Gil, I. (2006). Value dimensions, perceived value, satisfaction and loyalty: An investigation of university students’ travel behaviour. Tourism
Management, 27(3), 437–452.
García-Fernández, J., Bernal-García, A., Fernández-Gavira, J., & Vélez-Colón, L. (2014). Analysis of existing literature on management and marketing of the
fitness centre industry. South African Journal for Research in Sport Physical Education and Recreation, 36(3), 75–91.
Geurin, A. N., & Burch, L. M. (2017). User-generated branding via social media: An examination of six running brands. Sport Management Review, 3, 273–284.
Gonçalves, C., Biscaia, R., Correia, A., & Diniz, A. (2014). An examination of intentions of recommending fitness centers by user members, Motriz. Journal of
Physical Education, 20(4), 384–391.
Grewal, D., Monroe, K. B., & Krishnan, R. (1998). The effects of price-comparison advertising on buyer’s perceptions of acquisition value, transaction value,
and behavioral intentions. Journal of Marketing, 62(2), 46–59.
Gross, S. (2009). Low-cost cruises: A business model analysis of easyCruise. Tourism in Marine Environments, 6(1), 11–24.
Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., Anderson, R., & Tatham, R. (2006). Multivariate data analysis, (6th ed.) New Yersey: Pearson Educational, Inc.
Hambleton, R. K. (1994). Guidelines for adapting educational and psychological tests: A progress report. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 10(3),
229–244.
Holbrook, M. B. (1999). Consumer value. A framework for analysis and research. Routledge: London.
Howat, G., & Assaker, G. (2013). The hierarchical effects of perceived quality on perceived value, satisfaction, and loyalty: Empirical results from public,
outdoor aquatic centres in Australia. Sport Management Review, 16(3), 268–284.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation
Modeling, 6(1), 1–55.
International Health, Racquet & Sportsclub Association (2015). The IHRSA global report 2014. Boston: IHRSA.
International Health, Racquet & Sportsclub Association (2016). Nine predictors for the health club industry in 2016. Retrieved from http://www.ihrsa.org/blog/
2016/1/6/9-predictions-for-the-health-club-industry-in-2016.html (January 6).
Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language. Chicago: Scientific Software.
Jermias, J., & Gani, L. (2004). Integrating business strategy, organizational configurations and management accounting systems with business unit
effectiveness: A fitness landscape approach. Management Accounting Research, 15, 179–200.
Kachaner, N., Lindgardt, Z., & Michael, D. (2011). Innovating low-cost business models. Strategy & Leadership, 39(2), 43–48.
Keaveney, S. (1995). Customer switching behavior in service industries: An exploratory study. Journal of Marketing, 59(2), 71–82.
Kim, H., Lavetter, D., & Lee, J. (2006). The influence of service quality factors on customer satisfaction and repurchase intention in the Korean professional
basketball league. International Journal of Applied Sports Sciences, 18(1), 39–58.
Kline, R. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling, (2nd ed.) New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Ko, Y. J., & Pastore, D. L. (2005). A Hierarchical model of service quality for the recreational sport industry. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 14, 84–97.
Kokolakakis, T., Lera-López, F., & Castellanos, P. (2014). Regional differences in sports participation: The case of local authorities in England. International
Journal of Sport Finance, 9(2), 149–171.
Kokolakakis, T. (2012). Low-cost fitness. Leisure Management, 2, 66–67.
Kyle, G., Theodorakis, N., Karageorgiou, A., & Lafazani, M. (2010). The effect of service quality on customer loyalty within the context of ski resorts. Journal of
Park and Recreation Administration, 28(1), 1–15.
Lam, E. T. C., Zhang, J. J., & Jensen, B. E. (2005). Service Quality Assessment Scale (SQAS): An instrument for evaluating service quality of health-fitness clubs.
Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science, 9(2), 79–111.
Lawton, T. C. (2003). Managing proactively in turbulent times: Insights from the low-fare airline business. Irish Journal of Management, 24(1), 173–193.
Les Mills (2016). The low-budget threat. Retrieved from https://lesmillslegacy.blob.core.windows.net/media/1014/les-mills-insight-series-low-budget-
gyms.pdf.
Lewis, B. R., & Soureli, M. (2006). The antecedents of consumer loyalty in retail banking. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 5(1), 15–31.
Lloyd, A. E., Leslie, C., & Chan, Y. (2014). Time buying and time saving: Effects on service convenience and the shopping experience at the mall. Journal of
Services Marketing, 28(1), 36–49.
Marôco, J., & Marques, T. (2006). Qual a fiabilidade do alfa de Cronbach? Questões antigas e soluções modernas?. Laborato´rio de Psicologı´a, 3(1), 65–90.
Martín, D., Gremler, D., Washburn, J. H., & Cepeda, G. (2008). Service value revisited: Specifying a higher-order, formative measure. Journal of Business
Research, 61(12), 1278–1291.
Martín-Ruíz, D., Barroso-Castro, C., & Rosa-Díaz, I. (2012). Creating customer value through service experiences: An empirical study in the hotel industry.
Tourism and Hospitality Management, 18(1), 37–53.
McDougall, G. H. G., & Levesque, T. (2000). Customer satisfaction with services: Putting perceived value into the equation. Journal of Services Marketing, 14(5),
392–410.
Murray, D., & Howat, G. (2002). The relationships among service quality, value, satisfaction, and future intentions of customers at an Australian sports and
leisure centre. Sport Management Review, 5, 25–43.
Muthén, B., & Kaplan, D. (1985). A comparison of some Methodologies for the factor analysis of non-normal Likert variables. British Journal of Mathematical
and Statistical Psychology, 38, 171–189.
Nuviala, A., Grao-Cruces, A., Pérez-Turpin, J. A., & Nuviala, R. (2012). Perceived service quality, perceived value and satisfaction in groups of users of sports
organizations in Spain. Kinesiology, 44(1), 94–103.
Nuviala, A., Grao-Cruces, A., Teva-Villén, R., Pérez-Turpin, J. A., Pérez-Ordás, R., & Tamayo-Fajardo, J. A. (2013). Duration of membership at sports centers and
reasons for quitting. Perceptual and Motor Skills: Exercise & Sport, 117(3), 733–741.
Oh, H. (2000). Diner’s perceptions of quality, value and satisfaction. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 41(3), 58–66.
Oliver, R. (1997). Satisfaction, a behavioral perspective on the consumer. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Oliver, R. L. (1999). Whence consumer loyalty? Journal of Marketing, 63, 33–44.
Papadimitriou, D. A., & Karteroliotis, K. (2000). The service quality expectations in private sport and fitness centers: A reexamination of the factor structure.
Sport Marketing Quarterly, 9(3), 157–164.
Parviainen, J. (2011). The standardization process of movement in the fitness industry: The experience design of Les Mills choreographies. European Journal
of Cultural Studies, 14(5), 526–541.
Porter, M. E. (1985). Competitive advantage. New York: Free Press.
Powers, D., & Greenwell, D. M. (2016). Branded fitness: Exercise and promotional culture. Journal of Consumer Culture, 16(1), 1–19.
Reichheld, F. (1996). The loyalty effect: The hidden force behind growth, profits, and lasting value. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Reinartz, W. J., & Kumar, V. (2003). The impact of customer relationship characteristics on profitable lifetime duration. Journal of Marketing, 67(1), 77–99.
Rey, B., Myro, R. L., & Galera, A. (2011). Effect of low-cost airlines on tourism in Spain. A dynamic panel data model. Journal of Air Transport Management, 17(3),
163–167.
Ruetz, D., & Marvel, M. (2011). Budget hotels: Low-cost concepts in the U.S., Europe and Asia. In R. Conrady, & M. Buck (Eds.), Trends and issues in global
tourism (pp. 99–124). Verlag Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.
Seidel, G., & Back, A. (2009). Success factor validation for global ERP programmes. Proceedings of the 17th European conference on information systems, ECIS, .
 J. García-Fernández et al. / Sport Management Review 21 (2018) 250–262 261

Seiders, K., Voss, G. B., Godfrey, A. L., & Grewal, D. (2007). SERVCON: Development and validation of a multidimensional service convenience scale. Journal of
the Academy of Marketing Science, 35(1), 144–156.
Smith, J. (2008). Fit for consumption: Sociology and the business of fitness. New York: Routledge.
Sweeney, J. C., & Soutar, G. N. (2001). Consumer perceived value: The development of a multiple item scale. Journal of Retailing, 77(2), 203–220.
Tanaka, J. S. (1993). Multifaceted conceptions of fit in structural models. In K. A. Bollen, & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 10–39).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Theodorakis, N. D., Howat, G., Ko, Y. J., & Avourdiadou, S. (2014). A comparison of service evaluation models in the context of sport and fitness centres in
Greece. Managing Leisure, 19(1), 18–35.
Theodorakis, N., Kyriaki, K., & Karabaxoglou, I. (2015). Effect of event service quality and satisfaction on happiness among runners of a recurring sport event.
Leisures Sciences, 37(1), 87–107.
Trail, G. T., Anderson, D. F., & Fink, J. S. (2005). Consumer satisfaction and identity theory: A model of sport spectator conative loyalty. Sport Marketing
Quarterly, 14(2), 98–111.
Turk, S. (2016). Gym, health and fitness clubs in the US. IbisWorld Report. Retrieved from http://www.ibisworld.com/industry/default.aspx?indid=165.
Valcarce, M., López, F., & García, J. (2016). 4th gyms low-cost report in Spain. Retrieved from http://www.valgo.es/tienda/product/140-4th-report-low-cost-
sport-facilities-in-spain-2016.
Voss, G., Parasuraman, A., & Grewal, D. (1998). The roles of price, performance and expectations in determining satisfaction in services exchanges. Journal of
Marketing, 62(4), 46–61.
Wang, H., & Kimble, C. (2010). Low-cost strategy through product architecture: Lessons from China. Journal of Business Strategy, 31(3), 12–20.
Whytcross, D. (2014). Gyms and fitness centres in Australia: Market research report. Melbourne: IBISWorld.
Woodruff, R. B., & Gardial, S. F. (1996). Know your customer: New approaches to understanding customer value and satisfaction. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
Worthington, R., & Whittaker, T. (2006). Scale development research. A content analysis and recommendations for best practices. The Counseling
Psychologist, 34(6), 806–838.
Zeithaml, V. A., & Bitner, M. J. (2000). Services marketing: Integrating customer focus across the firm, (2a. ed.) New York: McGraw-Hill.
Zeithaml, V. A., Berry, L. L., & Parasuraman, A. (1996). The behavioral consequences of service quality. Journal of Marketing, 60, 31–46.
Zeithaml, V. A. (1988). Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: A means-end model and synthesis of evidence. Journal of Marketing, 52, 2–22.