Skip to main content

He Was Already Going to Spend That Money — Why This Is the Wrong Way to Think About Loyalty Programs

One of the most common objections we hear from indoor golf facility owners goes something like this:
​
“If two people walk in the door, you can’t tell me one of them is worth 200% more than the other. And if a guy was already going to be a regular, why would I give him cash back? I’m just giving away money.”
​
On the surface, that feels logical.
But it’s also the reason many operators leave significant long-term revenue on the table.
​
Let’s break this down — not emotionally, not hypothetically — but structurally.
​
​
​The Core Mistake: Viewing Loyalty at the Transaction Level
​
This objection assumes loyalty programs are about discounting a single visit.
​
They’re not.
​
Loyalty programs are about changing behavior over time.
​
When you look at loyalty through a single transaction — “this guy was already going to spend $100, so why give him $5 back?” — you’re asking the wrong question.
​
The correct question is:
​
​What does this customer do over 6, 12, or 24 months because loyalty exists?
​
That’s where the difference comes from.
​
​
​Why “Two Identical Customers” Don’t Exist in the Real World
​
The argument that “two walk-ins are worth the same” assumes all customers behave identically over time.
​
They don’t.
​
Here’s what loyalty programs actually change:
​
• Visit frequency – How often someone comes back
• Session length – 1 hour vs 2 hours
• Group size – Solo vs bringing friends
• Off-peak utilization – Filling dead hours
• Churn resistance – Who stops coming when life gets busy
​
A loyalty member doesn’t spend more because they’re inherently different.
They spend more because the system nudges them to choose you more often.
​
That’s the entire point.
​
​
​“He Was Already Going to Be a Regular” Is an Assumption, Not a Fact
​
This is the most dangerous part of the objection.
​
Owners assume:
​
“This guy was already loyal.”
​
But loyalty isn’t a personality trait.
It’s a behavior that must be reinforced.
​
Without a loyalty program:
• Life happens
• Schedules change
• Another sim opens
• Golf season shifts
• Habits fade
​
A loyalty program doesn’t reward someone for who they are —
it rewards them for continuing the habit.
​
And habits decay without reinforcement.
​
​
​The $5 Back Isn’t a Cost — It’s a Retention Tool
​
Let’s be very clear:
​
Giving $5 back on $100 is not a discount.
It’s store credit that must be spent with you.
​
That $5:
• Pulls forward the next visit
• Increases the chance of add-ons
• Keeps your facility top-of-mind
• Reduces churn without requiring staff intervention
​
You’re not losing $5.
You’re buying the next decision.
​
That’s a very different thing.
​
​
​Why the 200%+ Spend Gap Exists (And Why It’s Real)
​
When we see loyalty members spend significantly more than non-members across facilities using Birrdi, it’s not because they magically have more money.
​
It’s because:
• They come back more often
• They book longer sessions
• They bring people
• They don’t disappear quietly
​
No single visit explains the gap.
​Time does.
​
This is why looking at loyalty month-by-month instead of visit-by-visit is critical.
​
​
​The Emotional Trap: “I’m Giving Away Money”
​
This objection is emotional, not financial.
​
It feels like giving something up.
But in reality, you’re trading a small, controlled incentive for:
​
• Predictability
• Repeat behavior
• Lower marketing dependence
• Higher lifetime value
​
Every successful loyalty system — gyms, airlines, coffee, retail — works this way for a reason.
​
If loyalty “gave money away,” it wouldn’t exist.
​
​
​The Bottom Line
​
The belief that loyalty programs “reward people who were already going to come anyway” assumes the future is fixed.
​
It’s not.
​
Loyalty doesn’t reward past behavior.
It shapes future behavior.
​
And owners who evaluate loyalty at the transaction level will always underestimate its value — because loyalty only reveals itself over time.
​
Not in one visit.
Not in one customer.
But across hundreds of decisions that quietly compound.

Did this answer your question?