Game1 Pricing Considerations - Q1 2026¶
Source: PDF uploaded by Shane (2026-02-12), confidential discussion document.
Target Customer Types¶
- Pay-to-Play Academies/Clubs (primary)
- Per player, per season pricing
-
Dues cover registration and league fees
-
Trainings/Clinics/Camps (secondary)
- Private sessions, small group, full team training
-
Per player per session, or per session with player-count tiers
-
Tryouts and Showcases (secondary)
-
Per player per event, or per team per event
-
Free Academies/Clubs
- Club covers all expenses, no parent fees
Club-Level Pricing Options¶
- Fixed Club Fee - flat fee per club or per team per season
- Escalating Club Fee - base fee up to a team count, incremental beyond
- Freemium - free/at-cost initial assessment, incremental fees per player based on tiers
- Test Fee - per player or team, per testing session
Options can be combined (e.g., test fee + platform fee).
Parent/Player Enrollment Options¶
- Requirement - access mandatory, included in program
- Opt-Out - full access by default, can opt out
- Opt-In - parents/players choose to join
Club Cost Recovery Options¶
- Dues Increase - embed cost into program fees (best for required enrollment)
- Explicit Dues Increase - call out Game1 expense, default on unless opt-out
- Shared Participation - market to parents, flat fee or rev share for opt-ins
Some clubs may absorb cost as strategic investment in coaching/player acquisition.
Freemium Model Analysis¶
Why it could work: - Basic assessment at low marginal cost - Advanced features (tracking, personalized plans, development pathways) sold at profit - Lower CAC, lower cost of sales, lower churn - Comparable to Duolingo, Spotify, AllTrails, Wahoo models
Why it might not work: - Lack of direct network effects (free users don't add much marginal value) - Customers may get conditioned to free access
Key insight: If core value = performance test itself, freemium is value-destructive. If value = incremental data insights, tracking, and personalization, freemium is viable.