人工岩場之經營

imported_Anonymous · 2003-07-19, 01:28

目前台灣人工岩場興建使用多屬政府機構、學校為主，而民間企業出資興建岩場對外營業幾乎少之又少，並且多以附屬業務的型態經營，姑且不論岩場設置之地點、規模、材質為何，本人近幾個月來觀察攀岩者的心態及消費習性有了下列一些感想，希望諸位大德可以提供一些意見及觀點並指正：

1.人工攀岩場的消費人口
目前攀岩人口多以各大專院校之學生居多，而實際在社會工作仍以攀岩為休閒運動的人口則大量減少
其原因不外乎沒有時間、找不到岩場等畢竟攀岩不像打保齡球、高爾夫球或其他運動那樣方便，所以攀岩運動的人口並無法很快速的增加，且目前學生使用學校岩場多係免費使用，誰又願意常常花錢去爬別的岩場。

2.人工岩場的訂價策略
我曾經詢問到我們岩場攀岩的社會人士，他們從下午5.6點用到晚上10點，這樣子使用應該收費多少才合理？我得到的答案確實讓我訝異 50-100元，如果這樣合理的話那岩場確實是經營不下去的，或許\有人會說那大不了就去天然岩場爬都不用付錢，那人工岩場幾乎沒有存在的必要性了，試想保齡球一局多少錢，那你攀岩的話又想要付多少錢呢？難怪攀岩場祇能開給小朋友使用而已。

3.攀岩者的素質
以目前攀岩者的知識水平幾乎95%以上〈甚至更高〉是大專院校以上的學歷，不管已出社會或是否在學，對於使用者付費的觀念我感覺有些薄弱，在學校理所當然的有岩牆可以爬，那外面有免費的天然岩場，去人工岩場自然較無法體會岩場經營者之難處，難怪在岩場旁邊賣涼水比攀岩場好賺。

4.岩場之經營成本
攀岩場並非一蓋\好就全部ok了，民營岩場沒有政府的雄厚財力，一切衡量都必須考慮成本與效益，岩場的管理、主體的維護，攀登器材的更替實實在在都需要花錢，這些錢是否都該由使用者來負擔呢？

各位是否能夠為人工岩場尋找一條出路，讓攀岩者有更多更好的岩場使用，而不是只望著某個岩場興起又看著某個岩場沒落而已。

(註:稍稍修改了一下,將段行加進去/kevin)

[ 這篇文章修改由: kevin 在 2003-07-15 19:52 ]

imported_Anonymous · 2003-07-19, 01:28

其實這樣的問題我也不只一次的想過了...
畢竟國人在對於休閒運動上的需求跟老外是因國情而異的...
在國外,不管到哪間岩場,一到傍晚,攀岩人就會將整個岩館給塞得滿滿的,且不論老幼婦孺,不論是龐克或是上班族,感覺上就是很熱絡...
相較於國內的岩館,就如同上面所述,大多是大專院校的學生,自然在經營岩管的收入來源上便有了限制...
老實說,我很想將國外開岩館的那股風氣給帶進來...
但就現實面來看,確實很困難...
即使是多元化的經營,難度也很高...
不過,我很高興能看到這樣的議題能夠提出來討論...
當然,說了半天我並沒有提出任何具體的想法來...
因為這仍只是我的夢想...
我很希望能開一家媲美y17的岩館...

天氣這麼熱...在室內爬岩...還有好聽的音樂可聽...
那是天堂!!!

milk · 2003-07-19, 01:28

看到以上兩篇精采的見解,真是感同身受,因為這條路我也真正的走過.但卻讓我想到目前台灣的教改－－有理想,但卻不顧現實.教改失敗,受害的是幾十萬的學生,甚至使未來的國力衰退,所以我非常看不起那些只以自己的想法(其實只是學國外的皮毛)進行改革的學者專家.
至於經營攀岩的人,也是有理想,但同樣不顧現實,卻勇往直前.這種人我反而深感佩服.因為他們的付出,使攀岩在台灣產生了希望,就算失敗,受害的也只有經營者,明知如此還去做,是真正的勇者.
不過,現實面是很重要的,如果能做好市場調查(相信攀岩界一定有這方面的專業人材),找到足夠的資金,再推出上班族可以接受的經營方式,再慢慢去修正(不要忘了可能要先虧幾年).台北好幾家登山用品店,也是經過這個摸式,才變成現在的規模.岩場的做法,也不可能一步登天.到底要如何做,才能在y17及眾多收費低廉的室外岩場中,打開一條路來,就只能抬頭問天了.

imported_Anonymous · 2003-07-19, 01:28

對於這個話題我有一些不太一樣的意見和看法:

1. 關於人工岩場的消費人口

實際在社會工作仍以攀岩為休閒運動的人口大量減少 , 我並不認為是因為沒有時間. 其實想想, 許\多上班族下班後都有時間去KTV或健身房了, 怎麼會沒有時間來岩場呢?我認為主要原因是這項運動的推廣度不夠, 所以大部分人都認為是一項極艱難的運動, 並不會想去輕易嘗試, 除非有人指引.以我而言, 我也是攀岩新手,雖然當不成高手, 但我認為這是一項很好的運動. 所以我陸陸續續帶了約十來的朋友到Y17去攀岩過, 有超過一半的朋友也認同這項運動, 甚至有人馬上去買了攀岩鞋等裝備的. 所以攀岩不像打保齡球、高爾夫球或其他運動那樣方便，是因為像Y17這樣較適合初學者的舒適岩館粉少, 如果一開始就帶朋友去戶外人工岩場餵蚊子, 我想陣亡機率也很高,所以攀岩運動的人口並無法很快速的增加，我想與岩館的興建與設施也有很大關係。

2.人工岩場的訂價策略

至於收費方面, 我認為其實以Y17的收價, 晚上時段150元左右, 我倒是覺得頗合理, 如果你又常去, 買個100張套票, 平均一次才105元, 其實我問過的朋友, 大部分的人都覺得可以接受，因為以其他運動的收費來看, 這項運動的收費其實算低廉了,而且他們也寧願付錢來吹冷氣及聽音樂，而不願到戶外去餵蚊子或熱的半死, 所以我想以一般台北上班族的心態及休閒模式來看, 只要他們能認識及接收這項運動，我覺得這樣的消費絕對是可被接受的.

比照保齡球及撞球興起的模式來看, 我們一來只能寄望國內有攀岩好手能在國外享譽, 進而帶起這股風潮, 二來就有靠媒體的多加報導讓大家更認識這項運動, 三來當然要希望國內有更多企業能贊助或投資岩館的興建, 如果沒有好的場所是吸引不到客源的, 因為我得承認大部分的人都很注重門面及名氣的, 所以只要講到Y17, 大部分的人都知道, 就像SOGO百貨會有一堆人去擠, 但是隔幾百公尺的明曜百貨就.........

以上是我個人的小小意見了 [img]images/forum/smilies/icon_wink.gif[/img] [img]images/forum/smilies/icon_wink.gif[/img] [img]images/forum/smilies/icon_wink.gif[/img]
Joyce

Fairness · 2003-07-19, 01:28

我不認為社會人士中攀岩人口減少
不信可以去登山用品店問問攀岩用品的銷售情形
我也不覺的攀岩人口以學生居多
目前台灣攀岩人口主要分兩類
選手型與體驗型
前者以學生居多主要集散地為室內岩場或各校岩場
後者多為各社會登山溯溪團體
平常晚上在新店或中和戶外人工岩場假日則各有活動
戶外岩場常常是掛滿一條條繩子
對社會團體的人來說可能團體聚會更勝於攀岩
帶給他們樂趣的是團體活動而非攀岩

我一些朋友不去Y-17的理由是以前去都槓龜(人太多)
幾次落空之後寧願去餵蚊子
但可以爬的很過癮
雖然有時人也很多但最少也可以爬的幾趟

岩場經營管理者可能無法體會那種手癢心癢的感覺
也無法體會滿懷希望興趣卻失望離去的心情
商業岩館經營也不能像學校選修課程
要求顧客去配合岩場時間

最近在戶外人工岩場發現以先鋒攀登為主要攀爬方式的人增加了
這是一件令人欣喜的事
因為前兩年的風潮只是五分鐘熱度
很多人只是去玩玩上攀體驗就以為自己在攀岩
現在留存下來的才是主力
這一群人才是市場的潛在客戶

當然仍有很多攀爬者目的只是在摸到頂端鐵環
這些人通常是沒有動作美感的
攀爬的人死命抓牢任何一個他可以抓住的點
確保的人死命的拉緊繩子把攀爬者拖上頂端
但攀岩不是只有\"登頂\"而已
樂趣在於如何把動作做的美美的、有技巧性的
享受肢體所展現攀爬技巧的美感
如同在岩壁上舞動一般
教改最大的問題在於--\"只有一個答案是正確的\"
於是永遠在找尋一個最好的評比方法
多元的社會有多元的答案
力量會消逝但技巧永遠存在
這樣才能長久攀下去

語氣可能多有得罪之處,請大家多多包涵
[img]images/forum/smilies/

[/img] [img]images/forum/smilies/

[/img]

imported_Anonymous · 2003-07-19, 01:28

其實真正的問題在於大家都喜歡想而以,沒有人真的會去做,關於這點就只因在台灣的人口結構中,喜歡建構夢想的白癡比例過低(相對於歐美某些區)........所以大家都只是腦筋運動運動罷了
台灣人喜歡穩定及可預測的未來,就算你一個人有辦法發瘋的追求非社會認同性之夢想,那也只有到你成功\出頭後人家才會為你鼓鼓掌,當你還沒出頭前你所面對的將是.......... : [img]images/forum/smilies/icon_frown.gif[/img] : [img]images/forum/smilies/icon_frown.gif[/img] : [img]images/forum/smilies/icon_frown.gif[/img]
我們最喜歡做的諸事之一,就是澆熄他人的夢想,教人要腳踏實地認真做個平凡人,喔!對不起,這是我們在對方滿十歲後才會這樣.我們喜歡教小孩子要勇於追求夢想,要創造自己的生活,要有抱負與理想,要有企圖心,天下無難事,只怕有心人..................
這股民族性,創造了台灣的穩定與經濟,這種民族特質,使我們的優秀人才都得先到國外變成天才,才能回國一展所才.
所以說在台灣要經濟與建構出一座有生有色的人工岩場,其最大的問題在於,我們都只有一副好口才.
不知諸位覺得我這一口分析說的如何,我也是個台灣人,所以自認這口頭分析也應該稱的上有國際水準啦!

Ta-Chi · 2003-07-19, 01:28

I appreciate most of the above, especially Joyce and Fairness\' opinions. Now, let me say about mine and hope it would complement:

First, let me say that we don\'t want to deal with a chicken/egg question, that is, questions trying to solve the puzzle of \"which is more important than the other\" or \"which should exist first in order to have others\" and the like. To find answers of this kind is difficult, if not impossible. So, let us separate chicken from eggs.

Say, the \"chicken\" question is the profibility of gyms. In this regard, the above discussions have almost all indicated to the \"right ways\" gyms should do: to choose a good location, to have a good facility, to design a package for new entrants to enjoy sport climbing, and so on.

But I do have a slightly different opinion here: those come-and-go, half-harted \"customer-climbers\" are important, not unimportant as Fairness so described. For profitability purposes, I would imagine that those half-harted customers are more likely to become the main financial resources for any gym. Because of them, there can be a steady flow of come-and-play-just-for-fun people and thereby a gym can be sustained. I would even argue that whoever interested in a gym business should deliberately target on these people and draw them to your gym. Forget about hardcore climbers; they are usually not rich, picky, and sometimes too philisophical to deal with.

Turn to the \"egg\" questions, which include the questions as how we would increase the popularity of sport climbing and promote climbing as a sport, and a whole array of other, perhaps ethical issues such as \"what to promote\" and \"to what extent\" -- those that the above refers to as \"cultural issues.\"

I do not agree with the notion that anything related to climbing has to do with culture. For \"culture\" is human-made, not fixed, and this exactly the point -- we, either as a collectivity of a climbing community or as individual climber, can create a culture (or, more precisely, cultures) if we want to.

There are many ways to achieve this, and I believe that there are many people already engaging in this \"business\" -- for example, when you are coaching, you are not just coaching climbing; you are coaching a climbing culture: its philosophy and its utility; its history and knowledge; its relationship to one\'s life and its meaning, and so on. The question is \"number\" -- we want the number of potential climbers to be large -- but not \"culture.\"

To address this question of \"number,\" the best way, in my opinion, is to get ourselves to contact with as many people as we can, and that is it -- to act rather than to think, as the last anonymous writer has correctly pointed out. There is simply no other way around. Forget about using gyms to promote sport climbing -- their existence is for profitability and they are rightfully so.

Finally, then, is this question: what would happen when \"chicken\" meets \"eggs?\" In other words, what would be happening if there are gyms targetting on profitability while a whole bunch of climbers endeavoring to promote climbing? Well, isn\'t this exactly what we wants? If not -- if this is not happening -- it is only because we are not trying hard enough.

It seems to be a happy ending -- frankly, I am optimistic of it. The only barrier that I would envision is, however, that we, as climbers, tend to wish that the future would look like what we like it to be. In other words, we, as climbers, are likely to try to \"control\" Taiwan\'s future climbing environment. This is not a good idea. Milk uses an analogy of the educational reform as a failure to which I cannot agree no more. Its failure, in my opinions, is exactly because those so-called reformers are treating educational reform as a laboratory experiment and think that they can \"control\" it. They cannot. The same is true that, we, as climbers, cannot \"control\" Taiwan\'s future climbing trends. I am suggesting that we simply do \"your\" best, let different treads (and purposes) of climbing to develop, and hope that eventually some \"chicken\" will meet with \"eggs.\" Time will tell us what the future of Taiwan\'s climbing would be. [img]images/forum/smilies/icon_wink.gif[/img]

2003-07-19, 01:28	#1
imported_Anonymous 攀岩癌症患者註冊日期: 2004-02 文章: 551	人工岩場之經營目前台灣人工岩場興建使用多屬政府機構、學校為主，而民間企業出資興建岩場對外營業幾乎少之又少，並且多以附屬業務的型態經營，姑且不論岩場設置之地點、規模、材質為何，本人近幾個月來觀察攀岩者的心態及消費習性有了下列一些感想，希望諸位大德可以提供一些意見及觀點並指正： 1.人工攀岩場的消費人口目前攀岩人口多以各大專院校之學生居多，而實際在社會工作仍以攀岩為休閒運動的人口則大量減少其原因不外乎沒有時間、找不到岩場等畢竟攀岩不像打保齡球、高爾夫球或其他運動那樣方便，所以攀岩運動的人口並無法很快速的增加，且目前學生使用學校岩場多係免費使用，誰又願意常常花錢去爬別的岩場。 2.人工岩場的訂價策略我曾經詢問到我們岩場攀岩的社會人士，他們從下午5.6點用到晚上10點，這樣子使用應該收費多少才合理？我得到的答案確實讓我訝異 50-100元，如果這樣合理的話那岩場確實是經營不下去的，或許\有人會說那大不了就去天然岩場爬都不用付錢，那人工岩場幾乎沒有存在的必要性了，試想保齡球一局多少錢，那你攀岩的話又想要付多少錢呢？難怪攀岩場祇能開給小朋友使用而已。 3.攀岩者的素質以目前攀岩者的知識水平幾乎95%以上〈甚至更高〉是大專院校以上的學歷，不管已出社會或是否在學，對於使用者付費的觀念我感覺有些薄弱，在學校理所當然的有岩牆可以爬，那外面有免費的天然岩場，去人工岩場自然較無法體會岩場經營者之難處，難怪在岩場旁邊賣涼水比攀岩場好賺。 4.岩場之經營成本攀岩場並非一蓋\好就全部ok了，民營岩場沒有政府的雄厚財力，一切衡量都必須考慮成本與效益，岩場的管理、主體的維護，攀登器材的更替實實在在都需要花錢，這些錢是否都該由使用者來負擔呢？各位是否能夠為人工岩場尋找一條出路，讓攀岩者有更多更好的岩場使用，而不是只望著某個岩場興起又看著某個岩場沒落而已。 (註:稍稍修改了一下,將段行加進去/kevin) [ 這篇文章修改由: kevin 在 2003-07-15 19:52 ]

2003-07-19, 01:28	#2
imported_Anonymous 攀岩癌症患者註冊日期: 2004-02 文章: 551	人工岩場之經營其實這樣的問題我也不只一次的想過了... 畢竟國人在對於休閒運動上的需求跟老外是因國情而異的... 在國外,不管到哪間岩場,一到傍晚,攀岩人就會將整個岩館給塞得滿滿的,且不論老幼婦孺,不論是龐克或是上班族,感覺上就是很熱絡... 相較於國內的岩館,就如同上面所述,大多是大專院校的學生,自然在經營岩管的收入來源上便有了限制... 老實說,我很想將國外開岩館的那股風氣給帶進來... 但就現實面來看,確實很困難... 即使是多元化的經營,難度也很高... 不過,我很高興能看到這樣的議題能夠提出來討論... 當然,說了半天我並沒有提出任何具體的想法來... 因為這仍只是我的夢想... 我很希望能開一家媲美y17的岩館... 天氣這麼熱...在室內爬岩...還有好聽的音樂可聽... 那是天堂!!!

2003-07-19, 01:28	#3
milk 版主註冊日期: 2003-05 文章: 190	人工岩場之經營看到以上兩篇精采的見解,真是感同身受,因為這條路我也真正的走過.但卻讓我想到目前台灣的教改－－有理想,但卻不顧現實.教改失敗,受害的是幾十萬的學生,甚至使未來的國力衰退,所以我非常看不起那些只以自己的想法(其實只是學國外的皮毛)進行改革的學者專家. 至於經營攀岩的人,也是有理想,但同樣不顧現實,卻勇往直前.這種人我反而深感佩服.因為他們的付出,使攀岩在台灣產生了希望,就算失敗,受害的也只有經營者,明知如此還去做,是真正的勇者. 不過,現實面是很重要的,如果能做好市場調查(相信攀岩界一定有這方面的專業人材),找到足夠的資金,再推出上班族可以接受的經營方式,再慢慢去修正(不要忘了可能要先虧幾年).台北好幾家登山用品店,也是經過這個摸式,才變成現在的規模.岩場的做法,也不可能一步登天.到底要如何做,才能在y17及眾多收費低廉的室外岩場中,打開一條路來,就只能抬頭問天了.

2003-07-19, 01:28	#4
imported_Anonymous 攀岩癌症患者註冊日期: 2004-02 文章: 551	人工岩場之經營對於這個話題我有一些不太一樣的意見和看法: 1. 關於人工岩場的消費人口實際在社會工作仍以攀岩為休閒運動的人口大量減少 , 我並不認為是因為沒有時間. 其實想想, 許\多上班族下班後都有時間去KTV或健身房了, 怎麼會沒有時間來岩場呢?我認為主要原因是這項運動的推廣度不夠, 所以大部分人都認為是一項極艱難的運動, 並不會想去輕易嘗試, 除非有人指引.以我而言, 我也是攀岩新手,雖然當不成高手, 但我認為這是一項很好的運動. 所以我陸陸續續帶了約十來的朋友到Y17去攀岩過, 有超過一半的朋友也認同這項運動, 甚至有人馬上去買了攀岩鞋等裝備的. 所以攀岩不像打保齡球、高爾夫球或其他運動那樣方便，是因為像Y17這樣較適合初學者的舒適岩館粉少, 如果一開始就帶朋友去戶外人工岩場餵蚊子, 我想陣亡機率也很高,所以攀岩運動的人口並無法很快速的增加，我想與岩館的興建與設施也有很大關係。 2.人工岩場的訂價策略至於收費方面, 我認為其實以Y17的收價, 晚上時段150元左右, 我倒是覺得頗合理, 如果你又常去, 買個100張套票, 平均一次才105元, 其實我問過的朋友, 大部分的人都覺得可以接受，因為以其他運動的收費來看, 這項運動的收費其實算低廉了,而且他們也寧願付錢來吹冷氣及聽音樂，而不願到戶外去餵蚊子或熱的半死, 所以我想以一般台北上班族的心態及休閒模式來看, 只要他們能認識及接收這項運動，我覺得這樣的消費絕對是可被接受的. 比照保齡球及撞球興起的模式來看, 我們一來只能寄望國內有攀岩好手能在國外享譽, 進而帶起這股風潮, 二來就有靠媒體的多加報導讓大家更認識這項運動, 三來當然要希望國內有更多企業能贊助或投資岩館的興建, 如果沒有好的場所是吸引不到客源的, 因為我得承認大部分的人都很注重門面及名氣的, 所以只要講到Y17, 大部分的人都知道, 就像SOGO百貨會有一堆人去擠, 但是隔幾百公尺的明曜百貨就......... 以上是我個人的小小意見了 [img]images/forum/smilies/icon_wink.gif[/img] [img]images/forum/smilies/icon_wink.gif[/img] [img]images/forum/smilies/icon_wink.gif[/img] Joyce

2003-07-19, 01:28	#5
Fairness 週末攀言者註冊日期: 2003-03 文章: 49	人工岩場之經營我不認為社會人士中攀岩人口減少不信可以去登山用品店問問攀岩用品的銷售情形我也不覺的攀岩人口以學生居多目前台灣攀岩人口主要分兩類選手型與體驗型前者以學生居多主要集散地為室內岩場或各校岩場後者多為各社會登山溯溪團體平常晚上在新店或中和戶外人工岩場假日則各有活動戶外岩場常常是掛滿一條條繩子對社會團體的人來說可能團體聚會更勝於攀岩帶給他們樂趣的是團體活動而非攀岩我一些朋友不去Y-17的理由是以前去都槓龜(人太多) 幾次落空之後寧願去餵蚊子但可以爬的很過癮雖然有時人也很多但最少也可以爬的幾趟岩場經營管理者可能無法體會那種手癢心癢的感覺也無法體會滿懷希望興趣卻失望離去的心情商業岩館經營也不能像學校選修課程要求顧客去配合岩場時間最近在戶外人工岩場發現以先鋒攀登為主要攀爬方式的人增加了這是一件令人欣喜的事因為前兩年的風潮只是五分鐘熱度很多人只是去玩玩上攀體驗就以為自己在攀岩現在留存下來的才是主力這一群人才是市場的潛在客戶當然仍有很多攀爬者目的只是在摸到頂端鐵環這些人通常是沒有動作美感的攀爬的人死命抓牢任何一個他可以抓住的點確保的人死命的拉緊繩子把攀爬者拖上頂端但攀岩不是只有\"登頂\"而已樂趣在於如何把動作做的美美的、有技巧性的享受肢體所展現攀爬技巧的美感如同在岩壁上舞動一般教改最大的問題在於--\"只有一個答案是正確的\" 於是永遠在找尋一個最好的評比方法多元的社會有多元的答案力量會消逝但技巧永遠存在這樣才能長久攀下去語氣可能多有得罪之處,請大家多多包涵 [img]images/forum/smilies/[/img] [img]images/forum/smilies/[/img] [img]images/forum/smilies/[/img]

2003-07-19, 01:28	#6
imported_Anonymous 攀岩癌症患者註冊日期: 2004-02 文章: 551	人工岩場之經營其實真正的問題在於大家都喜歡想而以,沒有人真的會去做,關於這點就只因在台灣的人口結構中,喜歡建構夢想的白癡比例過低(相對於歐美某些區)........所以大家都只是腦筋運動運動罷了台灣人喜歡穩定及可預測的未來,就算你一個人有辦法發瘋的追求非社會認同性之夢想,那也只有到你成功\出頭後人家才會為你鼓鼓掌,當你還沒出頭前你所面對的將是.......... : [img]images/forum/smilies/icon_frown.gif[/img] : [img]images/forum/smilies/icon_frown.gif[/img] : [img]images/forum/smilies/icon_frown.gif[/img] 我們最喜歡做的諸事之一,就是澆熄他人的夢想,教人要腳踏實地認真做個平凡人,喔!對不起,這是我們在對方滿十歲後才會這樣.我們喜歡教小孩子要勇於追求夢想,要創造自己的生活,要有抱負與理想,要有企圖心,天下無難事,只怕有心人.................. 這股民族性,創造了台灣的穩定與經濟,這種民族特質,使我們的優秀人才都得先到國外變成天才,才能回國一展所才. 所以說在台灣要經濟與建構出一座有生有色的人工岩場,其最大的問題在於,我們都只有一副好口才. 不知諸位覺得我這一口分析說的如何,我也是個台灣人,所以自認這口頭分析也應該稱的上有國際水準啦!

2003-07-19, 01:28	#7
Ta-Chi 輕度攀岩者註冊日期: 2003-05 文章: 77	人工岩場之經營 I appreciate most of the above, especially Joyce and Fairness\' opinions. Now, let me say about mine and hope it would complement: First, let me say that we don\'t want to deal with a chicken/egg question, that is, questions trying to solve the puzzle of \"which is more important than the other\" or \"which should exist first in order to have others\" and the like. To find answers of this kind is difficult, if not impossible. So, let us separate chicken from eggs. Say, the \"chicken\" question is the profibility of gyms. In this regard, the above discussions have almost all indicated to the \"right ways\" gyms should do: to choose a good location, to have a good facility, to design a package for new entrants to enjoy sport climbing, and so on. But I do have a slightly different opinion here: those come-and-go, half-harted \"customer-climbers\" are important, not unimportant as Fairness so described. For profitability purposes, I would imagine that those half-harted customers are more likely to become the main financial resources for any gym. Because of them, there can be a steady flow of come-and-play-just-for-fun people and thereby a gym can be sustained. I would even argue that whoever interested in a gym business should deliberately target on these people and draw them to your gym. Forget about hardcore climbers; they are usually not rich, picky, and sometimes too philisophical to deal with. Turn to the \"egg\" questions, which include the questions as how we would increase the popularity of sport climbing and promote climbing as a sport, and a whole array of other, perhaps ethical issues such as \"what to promote\" and \"to what extent\" -- those that the above refers to as \"cultural issues.\" I do not agree with the notion that anything related to climbing has to do with culture. For \"culture\" is human-made, not fixed, and this exactly the point -- we, either as a collectivity of a climbing community or as individual climber, can create a culture (or, more precisely, cultures) if we want to. There are many ways to achieve this, and I believe that there are many people already engaging in this \"business\" -- for example, when you are coaching, you are not just coaching climbing; you are coaching a climbing culture: its philosophy and its utility; its history and knowledge; its relationship to one\'s life and its meaning, and so on. The question is \"number\" -- we want the number of potential climbers to be large -- but not \"culture.\" To address this question of \"number,\" the best way, in my opinion, is to get ourselves to contact with as many people as we can, and that is it -- to act rather than to think, as the last anonymous writer has correctly pointed out. There is simply no other way around. Forget about using gyms to promote sport climbing -- their existence is for profitability and they are rightfully so. Finally, then, is this question: what would happen when \"chicken\" meets \"eggs?\" In other words, what would be happening if there are gyms targetting on profitability while a whole bunch of climbers endeavoring to promote climbing? Well, isn\'t this exactly what we wants? If not -- if this is not happening -- it is only because we are not trying hard enough. It seems to be a happy ending -- frankly, I am optimistic of it. The only barrier that I would envision is, however, that we, as climbers, tend to wish that the future would look like what we like it to be. In other words, we, as climbers, are likely to try to \"control\" Taiwan\'s future climbing environment. This is not a good idea. Milk uses an analogy of the educational reform as a failure to which I cannot agree no more. Its failure, in my opinions, is exactly because those so-called reformers are treating educational reform as a laboratory experiment and think that they can \"control\" it. They cannot. The same is true that, we, as climbers, cannot \"control\" Taiwan\'s future climbing trends. I am suggesting that we simply do \"your\" best, let different treads (and purposes) of climbing to develop, and hope that eventually some \"chicken\" will meet with \"eggs.\" Time will tell us what the future of Taiwan\'s climbing would be. [img]images/forum/smilies/icon_wink.gif[/img]