Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 3 4 5

Original poster

to think the cost of taking a baby swimming for 10/15 min is a rip off

104 replies

arthurbaby · 07/03/2014 20:44

We took our baby DD to the swimming pool for her first time this week and she loved it. But it cost £8.40 for two adults and a baby. We were only in the pool 15 minutes and would love to go every week but simply cannot bare to pay so much. I have researched discount cards/active cards etc. We were the only people in the baby pool. Am I being unreasonable to think if they charged less they would get more customers and in the long run make more money? But also raise a healthier generation of children?

OP posts:

MyNameIsKenAdams · 07/03/2014 21:34

But the swimming is free for your child. It costs the adult. So it is already subsidised.

And theres a heck of a lot a child can do for free to get exercize.

Pagwatch · 07/03/2014 21:35

at 'reading properly'

Yes. I disagree so probably read badly.

starlight1234 · 07/03/2014 21:36

Our local pool under 7's are free...

Our pool also has a suggestion box also maybe make a suggestion to the management but as for subsidising so both of you can go is madness...Childcare needs subsidising to help people work a baby swim does not require 2 people and if that is what you want to do then pay for it

Amissbyanyothername · 07/03/2014 21:36

To be fair my current school lunches are nice (if very very stingy). I have ate some very minging one's though, particularly around Christmas time.

ikeaismylocal · 07/03/2014 21:38

I don't think a tiny baby is getting any physical benefit from splashing about in a swimming pool. The only excersise babies need is rolling about on a blanket on the floor.

If you were saying low income families with toddlers or older children should get reduced rates I'd think it was a good idea but I don't see why a trip which I see as mostly for the parents ( familiy time, a baby doesn't give a flying toss if they are swimming with mummy and daddy or Madonna) should be subsidised.

Amissbyanyothername · 07/03/2014 21:38

Ken, we had to pay for DD

Original poster

arthurbaby · 07/03/2014 21:39

Mynameiskenadams- Our child was not free, we did have to pay.

OP posts:

winterhat · 07/03/2014 21:40

That does sound expensive.

scottishmummy · 07/03/2014 21:43

But you chose to leave after 15min,you weren't compelled to?i can't see issue

meerschweinchen · 07/03/2014 21:43

I'm surprised you had to pay for your child. I would have thought littlies would be free - they are where I am. In that case, I agree with you to some extent, that it could be made slightly cheaper. Out of interest, what were the exact costs per person?

Amissbyanyothername · 07/03/2014 21:44

My final word is schools should invest their share of the 60 mil on better sausages. Surely entrails and eyelids can't be healthy living

MyNameIsKenAdams · 07/03/2014 21:45

Ypu had to pay for a tiny baby?

Original poster

arthurbaby · 07/03/2014 21:46

90p for a tiny baby.

OP posts:

CharlesRyder · 07/03/2014 21:46

I also think a baby is more likely to poo/vomit in the pool causing a costly evacuation and clean up.

God love ya Ikea for thinking they evacuate and clean up the pool for this. It's just all in there you know!

OutragedFromLeeds · 07/03/2014 21:47

How much did you pay for each person?

I think it's reasonable. There are all sorts of ways you could have made it more cost effective. You chose to both go and you chose to all get out after 15 minutes. I don't think subsidising that should be a government priority tbh.

OutragedFromLeeds · 07/03/2014 21:48

They do evacuate for poo/vomit!! What sort of pool do you go to?

FoodieToo · 07/03/2014 21:49

Ten euro for 2 adults and a baby is unbelievably cheap!

I know you didn't stay in long but you could have. Businesses can't function allowing people to 'pay per minute'. They have to have some kind of flat charge.

WorraLiberty · 07/03/2014 21:49

I'm sorry but use of the phrase 'tiny' baby is really making me laugh

Would it make a difference if the baby was big?

scottishmummy · 07/03/2014 21:51

Haha twee parents pay less for tiny babies

AmandinePoulain · 07/03/2014 21:54

Does your pool run special parent and baby sessions? Ours does on weekday mornings and before 10 at weekends - it's £2.50 for an adult and child under 5 (it's normally £7 for adults because it's a leisure pool with slides, waves etc), or the 'lessons' I take dd2 to (basically splashing and singing ) are £3. Our local council pool offers free swimming for children in school holidays so might be worth seeing what else is available.

We've got a neoprene suit (a Speedo one) and it keeps dd2 warm for a good half hour. We've been going weekly since she was 2 months old and she's a little fish

ikeaismylocal · 07/03/2014 21:54

Our local pool canceled all the baby swimming classes that afternoon because of a nappy explosion in the pool. Not sure what they did about the poo, maybe just left it so it could settle to the bottom of the pool.

AmandinePoulain · 07/03/2014 21:56

Oh and we've been evacuated before when another child was sick, they do clean it out. Then they had to run some sort of tests on the water before we were allowed back into the teaching pool.

dellybobs · 07/03/2014 22:00

Just a question, genuine one. All the people saying up dont have to take a baby swimming and todo something else what else do you suggest? Soft play is hardly suitable for a tiny baby? Swimming seems to be the only thing that a baby can actually take part in iykwim? When we go for a walk to the park she just falls asleep and at the park she's too small to go on anything as she can't even sit up.

HarrietSchulenberg · 07/03/2014 22:04

Seeing as you adults probably got more from the session than your baby, I don't think £8.40 is steep at all. You could have stayed for longer, or just one of you could have gone. You really do not need 2 adults so why should you expect one adult to be subsidised so they can have a lovely time.
Christ! Talk about entitled!

Lucylouby · 07/03/2014 22:05

I do agree that if the prices were lower, the swimming pools would be better used. We would go far more often if it were cheaper. The children love going and when they were younger we went far more often. DHs old job used to give cheap swimming for us both at the local pool as a perk and we went every weekend. That was a lot of swimming. Since he started his new job we go once every month or two because the cost puts us off.

Flip

1 2 3 4 5