The Aggregator Dilemma: Growth Driver or Brand Killer

Are Aggregators Saving the Fitness Industry or Exploiting It?

All for one and one for all - Late Stage Market Development

In Europe, aggregators are on the rise. One of Europe's leading aggregators was recently acquired by the largest aggregator in the world, strengthening its role as the dominant pass model across the continent.

And in Germany, the largest ERP system in the market, has just announced a deep integration with a Group Fitness Aggregator from the US, allowing operators to manage aggregator bookings directly from within their management software. The market is consolidating into fewer and bigger players that dominate the landscape and determine everything. Typical late stage market development.

The message is clear: aggregators are being framed as allies. They promise seamless check-ins, real-time bookings, and access to vast new pools of consumers. For gyms and studios, this translates to incremental revenue, better occupancy, and “no upfront risk.” For aggregators, it means embedding themselves deeper into the operational DNA of Europe’s fitness sector.

On the surface, this looks like a win-win. But in the United States, a very different story is unfolding.

When Studios Push Back - The Spark of a Revolution Against Third-Party Platforms

Across the Atlantic, boutique fitness operators are openly resisting the aggregator model. In New York, Gym Loyalty Month called on consumers to book classes directly with studios rather than through apps. In Los Angeles, the movement is spreading with Boutique Fitness Loyalty Month, complete with community events and campaigns designed to steer clients away from third-party platforms. The argument is simple: every direct booking supports local trainers and keeps studios alive, while aggregator bookings erode value, cut margins, and hand power to the platforms.

The reason is straightforward: pricing power. The tone is increasingly sharp. As James McMillian of Tone House put it, a class that normally sells for $35 might drop to $10–12 through a third-party app, with the trainer’s work devalued in the process. Rachel Hirsch of Empowered Yoga, one of the LA campaign organizers, went even further: “As third-party platforms evolved, they’ve taken more and more from studios, while many of us are left with less and less.” In some cases, studios report receiving nothing at all for no-shows, even when clients paid. The platforms set the terms, while the studios absorb the consequences.

As one studio owner in New York put it: “Loyalty isn’t charity; it’s survival.”

Two continents, two narratives: resistance in the US, adoption in Europe.

Aggregators: Bridge Builders or Power Brokers?

So which is it? Are aggregators Bridge Builders or Power Brokers? Are they saving the industry or exploiting it?

At their best, these platforms address a long-standing problem: penetration. Despite decades of growth, only a fraction of the population in mature markets holds a gym membership. Aggregators lower the barrier to entry, bring in new demographics, and fill empty spots that would otherwise generate zero revenue. For younger studios or during off-peak hours, this exposure can be a lifeline.

But at their worst, aggregators risk turning operators into commodity suppliers. By controlling pricing, access, and marketing narratives, they shift bargaining power away from the gyms. The app owns the client relationship, not the studio. Over time, brand value and loyalty erode, while platforms consolidate their role as gatekeepers.

This is the American fear, now turning into organized resistance. As one LA organizer put it: “Every time you book direct, you’re casting a vote for your studio to stay open, for your teachers to keep teaching, and for your community to grow stronger.”

The European Blind Spot

The different approaches are telling.

• Market maturity: In the US, the boutique sector is saturated. Protecting brand value is critical. In Europe, many operators still view aggregators as essential traffic drivers.

  
  

• Consumer behavior: Europeans are cost-conscious and love variety. Roaming across gyms through passes has become normalized.

  
  

• Industry mindset: European operators embrace tech partnerships as growth tools, while US boutique owners emphasize independence and brand protection.

  
  

But Europe should pay attention to what’s happening in New York and LA. When the most brand-driven, trend-setting studios revolt, it usually signals a deeper structural problem. The question is whether Europe will eventually face the same pushback once the downsides become more visible or if the upsides will prevail.

Where Do We Go From Here?

Aggregators themselves are not inherently good or bad. The real issue is strategy.

• For boutique studios, overreliance on aggregators may bring short-term traffic but undermines long-term brand equity.

  
  

• For chains, aggregators can serve as a useful top-of-funnel tool, but should never replace direct memberships as the core model.

  
  

• For tech platforms and ERPs, partnerships with aggregators can create value, but operators must retain control over pricing, client data, and brand experience.

  
  

• And for the aggregators themselves, the lesson is equally important: long-term growth will not come from squeezing margins, but from building trust-based partnerships. To win the market, they must position themselves as enablers, helping gyms attract new clients, fill capacity, and ultimately convert visitors into loyal members. Without that, they risk being seen not as partners, but as parasites.

  
  

The truth is that aggregators are neither saviors nor villains by default. They are tools. The studios and gyms that win will be those that use them strategically, filling gaps without surrendering their core business model.

The Takeaway

The battle lines are clear. In the US, boutique operators are revolting, declaring that loyalty means survival. In Europe, the integration of aggregators into core systems shows how deeply entrenched they’ve become.

Europe is leaning in, while the US is pushing back. One sees aggregators as partners, the other as threats. Both perspectives hold truth.

The future balance will come down to a single question:

Who controls the relationship with the client?

Because in the end, fitness is not about apps or algorithms. It’s about people, relationships, and communities. And whoever owns that connection owns the future of the industry.