I Said US Padel Is Ass-Backward. Here's What Ensued

A few weeks ago, I took a flamethrower to the US padel scene after playing extensively across Europe & Latin America. Then I listened to what people had to say.

Bienvenidos a El Remate! If you’re new here, you can join our community of padel-addicted subscribers receiving my weekly newsletter on what’s hot in 🇺🇸 & 🌎 padel + occasional essays (like this one) by adding your email below.

---

As soon as I hit publish on “US Padel is Ass-Backward,” I thought, “Welp, this is either going to hit or I’m about to get 💩 flung at me.”

Turns out, both happened.

The responses spanned 150+ messages (private & public) across Reddit, LinkedIn, and Substack. Players, operators, investors, and everyone in between. Some people loved it. Others clapped back hard. Most fell somewhere in between.

And I’m so grateful for all this pushback because I learned a ton: operators with spreadsheets, players with receipts, and even some outside-the-box observations from outsiders.

So I wanted to write this follow-up to be transparent about what I got wrong, what I’m even more convinced of, and new ideas I developed after marinating in all this feedback over the last month or so.

(Just taking my own “mental liquidity” advice seriously.)

What I Got Wrong

1) I Completely Underestimated the Economics (they’re a quilombo total as my 🇦🇷 friends say)

I knew operating a padel facility in the US was more expensive than in Europe/LatAm, but I didn’t realize the gap was this wide.

Michael, an operator in Los Angeles, sent me numbers that made me wince:

“The overhead costs in big cities like Los Angeles and New York... rent (biggest cost), insurance, labor costs, facility operation costs. It is running somewhere between $140,000 to close to $750,000 per year in expenses on those alone.”

Mind you, this overhead is just to keep the lights on and doors open. It does not include court construction, programming, quality staff, etc.

One NYC-based racquet sports entrepreneur also called me out:

“The cost analysis dramatically underestimates reality. Citing the price of a court alone ignores the actual cost of launching a business in the United States: buildings, lease rates, zoning, permitting, foundations, architectural work, HVAC, fire suppression, staffing, insurance.”

He’s right, as these differences fundamentally change what’s economically viable.

One Reddit user had another great point: “Real estate and extreme weather (90+ degrees and snow/cold below 40) make the sport expensive. Not wellness/high-end luxury experience.”

Also, if you’re operating in places like Manhattan where space is sparce and costs are astronomical, you might genuinely have to add premium amenities and positioning just to make the economics work. When you can only fit 3 courts in your space and your rent is ~$40-50K/month, you have to target the demographic that can and will pay for that exclusive experience.

Thus, my revised take: The premium pricing isn’t solely about luxury positioning. Some of it (or maybe even most of it?) is operators simply trying to survive with cost structures that would make a Spanish facility owner shudder.

Meanwhile, another key dimension nobody talks about: Who’s actually building these courts varies dramatically by geography.

In Europe, padel development is often supported by government sports infrastructure funding. For example, Ireland recently allocated €230M in community sports grants, with multiple tennis clubs receiving €60-120k each to add padel courts. Germany also offers federal, state, and municipal sports facility funding. Italy has significant municipal investment in community sports.

In the US, it’s almost entirely private developers and real estate investors funding these projects. While some federal grants exist (Land & Water Conservation Fund, Urban Parks Recovery Program), they’re rare, competitive, and—most importantly— not specifically designed for padel. There’s minimal public subsidy compared to Europe.

This completely changes the economics. European operators can build more affordably with public support and focus on community access. US operators need to generate returns for private investors, which often means premium positioning and higher prices just to make the numbers work.

So how do we bridge this gap? A few preliminary ideas:

• Start lean and scale → Begin with 2-3 outdoor courts with open-air, pavilion-style metal roofing (lower capex) to keep rain out, prove demand, then expand

• Focus on programming over amenities → Drive revenue through leagues, lessons, tournaments, and corporate events

• Push for municipal partnerships → Even without European-style grants, US cities have parks & rec budgets. Pickleball, though cheaper to build, is still a great case study

The Space Optimization Dilemma

Alex, an operator opening three facilities in Chicago, described a challenge that crystallized this for me:

“I’m super concerned about space optimization. Every square foot of that building is prime real estate and has to generate revenue. Let’s say I only have room for 3 courts, but there’s still awkward space where I can’t fit a court. Whatever I put there has to generate profit.”

It’s a double-edged sword.

He could add a cold plunge, yoga studio, sauna - things that generate additional revenue. But those amenities drive up court prices, make the sport less accessible, shrink the potential market, and likely decrease occupancy rates by pushing the facility toward that “country club” positioning.

He could put in something like a juice bar, but is that really the best use of prime urban real estate? Is it profitable enough? It’s also capital intensive.

This is the bind many operators face: the space economics may almost force them toward premium positioning, even if they’d prefer to build something more accessible.

2) Affordable Isn’t Always Better

Another nuance that became clear is that accessible pricing alone doesn’t solve anything if the execution is bad.

Michael in LA (mentioned above) shared a concrete example:

“I know a facility in Los Angeles that has lower court rental costs and great capital to cover operation costs, but has high staff turnover, no programming, and no customer service. Therefore, no one to build a community - they can’t even hit 50% occupancy.”

Furthermore, a Miami player on Reddit mentioned a facility that actually closed and converted to sand courts after only a year, despite lowering rates to $20/player. The court structure is still there. Just... repurposed. That’s pretty grim.

And as padel demand surges in the US, we’re seeing the same quality and safety concerns hitting the UK market. Their Sports and Play Construction Association raised alarms about declining standards - courts with wobbling glass panels, structural issues, facilities built with impervious concrete that fill with water. One operator wasted £50,000 on a court they had to dig up and rebuild.

When operators rush to meet demand and cut corners on costs, they’re risking both customer experience and player safety.

What I Doubled Down on

Granted, I got some things wrong and oversimplified others. But here’s where I’m doubling down on my original thesis:

1) Player Frustration Is Widespread

Unsurprisingly, tons of players are experiencing exactly what I described.

Per one Reddit commenter: “Wiser words haven’t been spoken. Most padel clubs here in Miami are akin to wannabe country clubs.”

Per another: “It’s been annoying having to search high and low just to get access to WhatsApp groups. Having to follow every Instagram account and catch a story post... mostly bougie posts that doesn’t interest me.”

...And another: “There’s a place literally a block from me. I emailed them and asked if there was some sort of entry class or games for first time or lessons and they blew me off. This was months ago. Never used my padel or shoes. It felt so fucking elitist and I went to private school, race road bikes and play a lot of golf. So elitist by those standards is bad.”

I can’t help but chuckle when comparing these exasperations to comments from players in Europe:

• 🇪🇸: “My local where I play 4 times a week is €2 per person for 90 minutes. There’s no spa (why would it have one?), there are no famous people (who cares?). I just go to play.”

• 🇵🇹: “Off-peak price is €3 per person for 1.5 hours. The ceiling is high, there’s space between courts, surface is good, there’s a bar, 15 minutes from city center. No player needs more than this!”

• 🇮🇪: “Our family membership for the tennis club, which includes court times and padel, is €500 a year because the club is community run.”

Which leads me to:

2) High-Quality Matches > Exclusivity

Upon watching a vlog titled “Exclusive vs. Inclusive in Padel – Which direction is the U.S. market heading?,” one comment stood out:

“I prefer to be categorized by level of play, not my wallet. That kind of membership is for flaunting and segregation by status. That’s a thing in the USA. Here in Europe, most of us just like to play padel with and against anyone.”

While I certainly can’t speak for every player, my strong belief is that the vast majority (easily 90%) optimize for match quality over exclusivity. If the goal is to improve while being time- and cost-efficient, players will reliably choose better competition over better optics. In practice, that means playing with the best available partner or opponent. Point being, a more accessible club creates a larger, more active player pool, which raises the average level of play. That, in turn, leads to consistently higher-quality matches and dramatically stronger retention. It’s a self-reinforcing flywheel.

3) I Still Don’t Buy into the “Trickle Down” Theory

Not everyone is building exclusive padel clubs. One Substack reader, for example, runs a facility in Denver offering free play from 10am-4pm every weekday. That’s the kind of thinking we need more of, where both players and operators can win. Accessibility → adoption → community → sustainable revenue.

While I still have difficulty finding other 🇺🇸 clubs that function like this, I see reasons to be hopeful.

However, a handful of folks argued: “Maybe padel needs to start as luxury and ‘trickle down’ over time. That’s how American consumer behaviors work.”

Here’s why I don’t buy it: Hyper-globalization today has allowed countless Americans to instantly become familiar with padel, yet many (rightfully so) still can’t afford to play regularly, if at all. And they don’t want to wait 5 years; they want to play now! I cannot overstate how many folks I’ve spoken to who say they’d drop pickleball overnight and go all-in on padel if the sport were simply more accessible / affordable.

Furthermore, operators need to understand that people have shown this sport is addictive as f*ck. According to Playtomic’s 2025 Global Padel Report, 92% of first-time players return after their first game. NINETY-TWO PERCENT… that’s insane retention.

Put bluntly, I really don’t think [at least 90% of] players have a deep need for all this hoity-toity developer-driven (pardon my Greek) skatá. I am starting to see this unfold in real time in the US. Clubs aren’t closing down because people don’t want to play padel, it’s because, generally speaking, there’s a huge disconnect between what operators think players want and what players actually want.

So if the blueprint already exists in Spain, Argentina, Italy, etc., why not just copy it while accounting for higher overhead in the US? I don’t see a compelling reason to start with a low-volume, high-margin model and wait several years to scale when (1) demand is already proven, and (2) it’s already accessible yet profitable in so many other parts of our world.

Look at places like Costa Rica and Araoz in Buenos Aires, or Suma and Sportcity in Valencia - just four examples of many I’ve regularly played at. Courts turn over nonstop: 90 minutes, you’re out, the next four are in - rinse, repeat. These clubs prioritize accessibility and community over exclusivity and amenities, and their courts are always full because of it.

Plus, now isn’t the time to fancify padel. The ~2021 ZIRP era of when a golden retriever could outperform a hedge fund manager is long gone. Inflation is real, salaries aren't keeping up, and consumers are penny-pinching. If I were in the 90% of operators, I’d optimize relentlessly for accessibility. Lower barriers expand the player base, strengthen community density, and create flywheel effects that compound over time.

It's not rocket science. This concept exists all over Europe and LatAm where, other than a small bar area for post-game drinks, these facilities just do padel. That's it. Nothing fancy. And they're occupied 24/7 because the same people keep coming back and bringing their friends (who bring their friends, and so forth), which yields a strong, vetted community.

4) Operators’ “Awareness” Problem Is Legit, But They’re Thinking About It Wrong

To further complicate matters, countless operators cite a fundamental challenge: most Americans still don’t know what padel is.

Many told me versions of: “Pricing isn’t the main problem - awareness is. If Agustín Tapia walked into a local American grocery store, nobody would recognize him. How do you fill courts when most people don’t even know the sport exists?”

But here’s where I push back. The “awareness problem” and the “pricing problem” aren’t separate issues. They’re directly connected, and high prices actively make the awareness problem worse.

High prices suppress awareness growth because:

• Fewer people try it → Fewer word-of-mouth referrals → Slower awareness spread

• It signals exclusivity → People assume it’s “not for them,” or “it’s too expensive,” or “I’ll just stick to pickleball instead”

• Lower occupancy → Fewer people see courts being used → Less organic visibility

The operators complaining about awareness while charging premium prices have it backwards. You don’t build awareness through premium prices and exclusivity, especially when your courts consistently hover below ~50-60% occupancy. You build awareness through accessibility.

As my buddy Austin from Padel Nation said, “If you create a product that 1% or less of the market can afford, at best you’ll attract 1% or less of the market. Precisely why squash has floundered for so long in the US.”

Some New Ideas I Had

1) Potential Hot Take 🔥: If You’re Going Exclusive, Compete with the Big Boys

If you want to be an exclusive facility with tons of luxury amenities, you need to compete more directly with places like Life Time and Equinox.

Think about it from an operator POV: most (if not all) of your ideal prospective members are affluent, health- & wellness-conscious folks who likely aren’t yet familiar with padel. Or they already know about it, but you’re the first facility that’s opening nearby. They likely either already belong to an exclusive local gym or country club, where they’re surrounded by amenities like cold plunges, infrared saunas, yoga classes, etc.

Respectfully, why would anyone spend their limited time and money across TWO premium memberships with tons of overlapping amenities? That’s objectively redundant and frivolous, even for folks with high disposable income.

To add some interesting intel to the mix, I’ve spoken with two separate people in different parts of the US who independently heckled Life Time’s corporate team to add padel courts in their new locations. Corporate said they have no intention of doing so and are instead going full pickleball (huge mistake imo).

Given what I’ve mentioned so far, I feel like it’s a no-brainer. If you want to win in the exclusive space, be a better version of Life Time / Equinox by offering padel and charging a slight premium for it. Why have separate memberships to higher-end gym + padel clubs when you can save time by accessing both at once, for less?

Ballers in Philadelphia does this well - it’s a complete fitness/wellness destination (full gym, sauna, cold plunge, yoga, etc.), where padel is a key additional feature.

In Spain, Suma is like a slightly-less-bougee Life Time with integrated padel courts. Sportcity is another great example with more padel emphasis.

Point is, if you don’t intend on becoming a padel-providing Life Time or Equinox, don’t bother with the premium positioning. Just build an accessible, community-focused facility with padel (+ maybe a small snack & drink bar), nothing else. Your prices go down, accessibility increases, people get addicted much quicker, and operators can just focus on keeping courts occupied without extra operational complications.

Anything in between is awkward positioning that’s too expensive to be accessible, but not comprehensive enough to replace someone’s gym membership.

2) Size Culture Matters

There’s a final dimension to this that goes beyond economics and accessibility: the culture and community aspect of US padel feels substantially inferior to everywhere else I’ve played.

From what I’ve seen and experienced in the US, there’s just not much... culture. Individual members show up, play their match, and leave. There’s not much hanging around, grabbing a beer together, or getting to know one another. No real community. No real uniqueness or distinct vibe.

In Europe (particularly in the Mediterranean) / LatAm, most people stick around post-match. They have an asado together. They grab drinks. Their families are there. Kids are running around while parents are socializing. It’s a communal experience, not some 90-minute exercise block.

To see what I mean, peep the video (below) from my friend Allison. This is 9:45pm on a Tuesday night in Brazil. 🇧🇷 There’s an asado corner where meat is being grilled for the community post-match. There are kids playing and watching soccer together. There are families integrating, eating, drinking, and actually spending time together beyond just the match itself. It’s a vibe. It’s communal. To me, this is what padel culture should feel like.

Look, I get it. Americans are hyper-busy. There’s more of a “grind” culture... it’s the price you pay for living in “the land of opportunity.” A padel match is their 90-minute workout for the day, and then it’s back to work, picking up the kids, etc.

It also doesn’t help that many US facilities (especially outside places like Florida and California) are built in windowless warehouses due to climate constraints. Not exactly an environment that makes you want to hang around afterward…

But I still think US operators can tear a page or two from this book, while still operating within the constraints of American lifestyles. At the end of the day, culture is a critical component that many operators neglect to monitor because it’s non-numeric. Ironically, it’s one of the strongest drivers of retention and word-of-mouth referrals.

3) Were We Lied to the Entire Time?

As I’ve dug deeper into the economics and operator realities, I’ve candidly become much less bullish on the “explosive growth” narrative of US padel than I was just a few months ago. And I hope I’m wrong.

Industry “experts” keep throwing around this projection of 30,000 courts in the US by 2030.

But let’s do some basic math. As of late January 2026, the US currently has ~900 courts. To hit 30,000 by 2030, we’d need to build ~29,100 courts in five years. That’s ~5,800 courts per year, or ~16 new courts opening every single day for five straight years.

For context, Spain has ~16,000 courts built over decades of organic growth. The US population is ~7x larger, which would suggest a proportional target of ~112,000 courts if demand matched Spain’s per-capita penetration. But we’re not talking about that. We’re talking about 30,000 courts, which would still require >33x growth in five years, while Spain took decades to reach 16,000 with ideal conditions: favorable climate, lower costs, government support, and deeply embedded sports culture.

Hmmm… are these projections based on genuine analysis, or are they just aspirational marketing designed to attract investors and operators into the space?

Because after talking to operators, crunching numbers, and seeing facilities struggle to hit even 40-50% occupancy at current price points, I’m starting to think we’re in one of two possible scenarios:

Scenario 1: The “experts” are right
Here, demand for padel is so overwhelming that market forces will naturally correct toward accessibility. Operators will lower prices to achieve >75% occupancy. More people get hooked. Construction costs scale down as the industry matures. Municipalities get involved to more closely mimic Europe. We develop a robust grassroots player base, build legitimate competitive depth, and padel becomes as accessible as tennis.

30,000 courts becomes achievable because we’ve cracked the code on accessible yet profitable operations.

Scenario 2: The “experts” are pump-and-dumpers
Growth projections are inflated to attract capital, sell services, move equipment, or juice early valuations… while falsely optimistic investors & operators absorb all the downside risk. When the numbers don’t pencil, these same voices quietly move on, leaving others to clean up the mess.

In reality, pricing reveals exactly where we stand. There’s just no way you can have explosive growth and exclusive pricing. One has to give.

***

Thus, to all the “experts” pumping 30,000 courts by 2030: Either explain (clearly and quantitatively) how the economics support that outcome, or admit the narrative is doing more marketing than math. Right now, the numbers don’t add up, and well-intentioned people are going to get financially hurt chasing this mirage.

Wrapping It All Up

Looking further into 2026 and beyond, I think there’s a fundamental question we need to wrestle with:

Can you operate a US facility that:

• Charges accessible rates (<$25/hour, ideally $10-20 per person for 90 minutes if we’re realistic about what would drive mass adoption)

• Invests heavily in quality staff, programming, and community building

• Achieves high (enough) occupancy (75% minimum) through volume, retention, and vibrant community culture

• Actually makes the economics work well enough that operators want to keep building?

If the answer is no, we should stop pretending “explosive growth” is inevitable and start being honest about the constraints.

The thing is, padel doesn’t fail in 🇺🇸 because people don’t love it. It fails when pricing, positioning, and facility economics drift too far from how the sport is actually consumed everywhere else in the world.

Also, will the long-term winners & losers match these takes? I’m eager to see how the market ultimately corrects itself: which incumbents endure, which flame out, and how new entrants adapt.

Only time will tell, as this is only the beginning… much more to come!

---

What’s your take after reading Part II? Am I more off-track or onto something? Drop your thoughts below or reach out directly.

If you’re following along on this knowledge journey, hit subscribe and follow @padelyanqui on Instagram. Plenty more where that came from!