Gross payback versus real payback

Equipment payback calculations that ignore rent and staffing produce impressively short numbers and are useless for decisions. The machine is rarely the constraint; the room and the teacher are.

Calculate both. Gross payback tells you whether adding a machine to an existing room is worthwhile. Real payback tells you whether opening the room was.

The marginal machine is the good investment

Adding a seventh reformer to a six-machine room costs one machine and no additional rent, and if your classes are turning people away it fills immediately. That marginal station pays back in months.

Adding a seventh machine to a room averaging 50% fill adds cost and no revenue. The question is never "does a reformer pay for itself" — it is "is this room capacity-constrained".

Revenue per station at different fill rates
Fill rateSpaces sold/monthRevenue at $28
50%12$336
65%15.6$437
80%19.2$538
95%22.8$638

Longevity changes the maths entirely

A studio machine that lasts twelve years costs $375 a year at $4,500. One that needs replacing at year four costs $1,125 a year, plus the disruption of replacing it.

This is the strongest financial argument for buying serviceable, studio-rated equipment: over a decade, the cheaper machine is usually the more expensive one.

What to measure monthly

Revenue per station and fill rate by time slot. Together they tell you whether to add machines, add classes, or change the timetable — three different problems that look identical from the top-line revenue figure.