Personal trainer and sports coach to launch new gym in north Norfolk
A personal trainer and sports coach are joining forces to open a new gym in north Norfolk.
With five years of experience as a personal trainer, Josh Willis and sports coach Hannah Carter are opening Carter's Gym in North Walsham.
The pair saw a "gap in the market" for weight space gyms in the area that are not bodybuilding-focused.
The pair wants to create a space where people feel comfortable using weight equipment (Image: Carter's Gym) The new space hopes to target those who lack confidence surrounding the use of weights.
"I have a good clientele at the moment who will be joining me over here and I will continue to offer friendly service to help build people's confidence," Mr Willis said.
'We have received a really good response so far and now it is finally kicking in the excitement is building."
READ MORE:
Gym goers can expect a range of weight equipment as well as cardio machines.
Personal training sessions and small group classes limited to eight people to ensure "a more personalised experience" will also be on offer.
"With it just being the two of us at the moment, we are a gym for our members,' Ms Carter added.
READ MORE: Norfolk's largest taxi operator rebrands after 30 years
Carter's Gym is opening at the end of June (Image: Carter's Gym)
"We will act on our members' feedback as we want to show them that their money is being put back into the gym."
Carter's Gym is opening in Robertson House, Laundry Loke, at the end of June.
A monthly direct debit membership is on offer for £28.99, small group training sessions for members cost £6 and personal training is £30 an hour.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
How I became 'king of billboards' and sold my business for £1bn
When serial entrepreneur Damian Cox shunned university for skiing in the late 1990s and returned to London some five years later looking for a job, it was for anything other than being an estate agent. Cox had previously attended the now-closed Douai School in Berkshire, run by Benedictine monks, and says that around three quarters of his year went on to run their own businesses. 'There must be a direct correlation between the fact that we learned nothing, other than how to look after ourselves and maybe how to create something out of nothing,' says the founder and CEO of Wildstone, one of the world's biggest billboard companies valued today at £2bn. 'As a result, I think we all became quite entrepreneurial.' Read More: The boss who has found 'nature's answer to plastic' Growing up alongside a single mother and three sisters, Cox asked a recruitment friend for any upcoming vacancies and started as a development executive for a start-up called Blow Up Media, which signed up sites and put adverts on scaffolding. As its first UK employee, Cox witnessed scale firsthand as the firm reached a multi-million pound turnover in a few years. He also believed he was the 'worst paid person in the company'. This after negotiating its first sale of £80,000 per month. Following a meeting with the CEO and with no pay rise forthcoming, he left the firm. Cox co-founded a competing venture the next day, having already built a network of landlord contacts. He admits now to lacking business know-how, cash flow experience and, crucially, that being paid on the same day simply didn't exist. 'There was this sort of Gordon Brown-esque extended payment term of 30, 60, 100 days. So you had to pay your landlords on Monday and you didn't get your money for 100 days. And that was a very, very big lesson in business.' Over a year later, a business magazine profiled Cox and his business, EK Straas, which was seen by leading outdoor advertising companies JCDecaux ( and Clear Channel (CCO), the latter offering an undisclosed 'life-changing amount of money' despite not yet being profitable. Cox, 50, worked as a senior executive for Clear Channel for about a year but soon shunned the corporate world after witnessing what he says was a lack of ambition, innovation or growth. Instead, he challenged the consolidated outdoor billboard market with his next agency venture in 2004. Ocean Outdoor aimed to find the best assets and attract a greater revenue profile. Read More: Meet the company that finds 'must-haves' to make everyday life easier He negotiated a deal with a central London landlord on one of the highest profile banner sites by Tottenham Court Road station before erecting the first digital panel in Liverpool. 'The business snowballed from there,' says Cox. In 2010, he was effectively sacked from his start-up after bringing a chairman on board he failed to bond with and the market having suffered from the 2008 financial crisis. 'I was trying to be all things to all people without acknowledging what I'm really good and bad at. So maybe they made the right decision,' recalls Cox. 'But the market did return quickly and that was a pretty brutal learning for me. I'm very thankful today that it did happen because I wouldn't have Wildstone without that period of negativity.' Wildstone, his third venture he co-founded with Patrick Fisher in 2010, set out as a consultancy business as it first extracted revenue from landlords and took commission before becoming the world's largest media infrastructure company. 'We became successful very quickly, however you sometimes underestimate your own ambition. I didn't have the ambition to take over the world, but soon it became apparent that actually that's what I wanted to do again. 'I'm fortunate enough to suffer from ADHD which allows me to compartmentalise things easily. My mother was also a huge guiding force for me in lots of ways because I watched someone bring up four kids with nothing. I can't sit at home doing nothing. I love putting a creative vision in place and seeing if it's achievable.' Wildstone has acquired, upgraded and digitised super-sized billboard posts into architecturally-led designs. The Hammersmith-based firm, which employs 130 staff globally, was sold to private equity in September 2022 for around £1bn, with Wildstone now boasting around 5,500 billboards across the UK, Ireland, Spain, the Netherlands and Germany, as well as Australia. 'People often see the other side, that you've made some money and it must be easy for you,' admits Cox, who lives in the Cotswolds and is an avid collector of emerging artists. 'But they don't see the 10 years of not sleeping or the anxiety that goes with it. Having a business bank account with £50,000 in it and you've got a wage bill on Friday of £400,000; those kinds of elements get lost in history and it's really difficult. 'I wouldn't underestimate that to anyone starting a company. You're navigating politics, revenue, cash flow, a market you can't control. And all of that has to come together in a way that allows you to move forward and survive.' Read More: The life lesson behind 335-year-old funeral business When the business was sold 12 years after being founded, Wildstone's leadership ensured a 'lump sum of cash' for every employee and further qualification for remaining at the company. Staff turnover remains small. Cox remained as global CEO after the sale, following several months of feeling 'deeply unhappy and depressed' after spending years scaling companies. Reinvigorated, he says that billboards today are 'still at the front of everything' when it comes to contextual advertising. 'It's the last broadcast medium that you can't swipe,' says Cox, who aims to grow Wildstone globally to the tune of a £15bn valuation. 'If it's on the side of a road you're driving down, you're going to see it. That for me makes it very attractive and we are becoming more and more valuable.' Helping a competitive market grow You do get slightly aggravated by the level of red tape, tax and constant desire by governmental bodies to take off you, which makes business harder as time goes on. In our industry, business rates are a prime example. Local authorities hate advertising, but they're happy to slap a 40-45p in the pound business levy on every advertising asset for doing nothing. Cash flow means you're very rarely positive for at least a couple of years on building one advertising panel. The benefit we have is that I am able to say that we own that infrastructure and I'll give you 100 billboards that are now digitised. I'll let you pay in arrears for the first quarter so you've got time to build up that cash flow to be able to pay. So actually our business makes the market wholly more competitive than it ever has been before. And it means that the stranglehold some of the bigger players have isn't necessarily as tight as they'd like it to be. We're able to push some of the smaller players up into the market. This is great because, after all, it's hard building a business. Read more: Meet the 'jokers from London' who sold 100,000 blocks of butter in first 10 weeks 'My sofa took six months to arrive — so I built a £20m business' 'I paid myself £4 an hour to get my Rollr deodorant off the ground'Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Why the BBC thinks it can get Labour to give it more funding
Tim Davie struck a gloomy tone when discussing the BBC's finances on Tuesday, as he renewed calls for extra funding. 'I want proper investment and not begrudging, grinding cuts to the BBC, which you've had in the last 10 years, which have just not helped,' the director general said. The timing of his comments was key. Davie is currently locked in talks with ministers ahead of the BBC's Charter renewal in 2027, as he fights for the future of the licence fee. Bosses in W1A acknowledge that the funding model requires reform in the modern media age. But how this will affect the BBC's stretched finances is a critical question as it continues to lose viewers at an alarming rate. The licence fee has existed in some guise since the BBC's launch in 1922, when the government decided the new broadcaster should be publicly funded. This, the corporation says, allows its UK output to remain 'free of advertisements and independent of shareholder and political interest'. While the BBC was initially limited to radio services, the first combined radio and TV licence was issued in 1946 for £2. Fast-forward to the 21st century and the BBC has transformed from a fledgling broadcaster into a public service behemoth. Income from the licence fee stood at £3.7bn last year, a significant chunk of the UK's entertainment and media market, which is valued at around £100bn by PwC. However, this scale does not tell the full story. With the emergence of streaming rivals such as Netflix and Disney, as well as social media platforms such as YouTube and TikTok, the BBC is facing an identity crisis. While the public service broadcaster continues to dominate the UK media space – around 86pc of adults consume its services each week, according to the latest Ofcom figures – it is losing ground. This is particularly acute among 16 to 24-year-olds, who spend just 5pc of their in-home video time with the BBC, compared to the 23pc for over-35s. Waning interest has meant lower income as viewers vote with their feet. The number of households paying the licence fee dropped to 23.9m last year – a 500,000 fall that sucked £80m from the BBC's budget. The figure is 2.3m lower than the peak of 26.2m between 2017 and 2019. Cost is likely to be a factor. At £174.50 per year, the licence fee comes in at around £14.50 a month. That compares to £5.99 a month for Netflix's ad tier, or £12.99 for its standard ad-free service. Disney charges £4.99 with ads and £8.99 without. While the BBC argues it offers good value for money given the breadth of its service, this is unlikely to win over apathetic youngsters who consider Auntie irrelevant. The fall in licence fee payers is not the only driving force behind the BBC's squeezed finances, however. Over the last 15 years, repeated government interventions have taken their toll. In 2010, George Osborne announced the licence fee would be frozen for seven years at £145.50. Nadine Dorries, the former culture secretary, then froze the levy again in 2022, even as inflation surged. The fee will now increase in line with inflation until the end of the Charter in 2027, but only after another Tory culture secretary, Lucy Frazer, stepped in to prevent a 9pc – or £15 – rise amid concerns it would fuel the cost of living crisis. Adding further strain to the budget, the government in 2015 forced the BBC to take over the cost of providing free licence fees to the over-75s, while it also handed over the main burden of funding the World Service. Analysis shows that government interference, coupled with a decline in licence fee payers, amounts to a real-terms decrease of around 30pc – or £1.4bn – in the broadcaster's domestic funding over the last 15 years. The question, then, is how to plug the gap. Davie has been wielding the axe on both staff and programming as he seeks to strip £700m from the BBC's annual budget. Yet this whittling down of resources has fuelled anger and concern about the impact on the quality of the broadcaster's output, with spending on new shows poised to fall by £150m this year. The BBC has also ramped up enforcement of the licence fee, with 41m warnings sent out in the 2024 financial year – an increase of almost 13pc year on year. Another method championed by Davie, the former BBC Studios boss, is to boost the broadcaster's commercial income to help balance the books. Measures so far have included taking full control of BritBox International, the BBC's joint streaming venture with ITV, after buying out its rival for £225m. The BBC has also struck a co-production deal with Disney to air Doctor Who overseas, worth an estimated $100m (£73m). But other schemes, such as its plan to run adverts around radio and podcast output, have been scrapped in the face of fierce opposition from commercial rivals. Despite its bold aims, the BBC's commercial income fell to £1.7bn last year from just under £2bn the year before. Overall, the BBC is forecasting a £33m deficit for the coming year. While this is down from the eye-watering £500m shortfall the previous year, it highlights the ongoing strain on the corporation's finances. It is against this precarious backdrop that the BBC has entered discussions with the Government. Ministers have made it clear, however, that reform, or even scrapping, of the licence fee is top of the agenda. While the licence fee is now lower as a proportion of average household income – 0.46pc last year compared to 0.64pc in 2012 – the levy is facing scrutiny in a world where viewers have a plethora of entertainment options. What's more, the licence fee is regressive, with poorer households paying more relative to their income and women disproportionately prosecuted for not paying. So if the licence fee were to be scrapped, what could take its place? One option is replacing it with a subscription model, similar to those of streaming services. However, critics have warned that such a move risks undermining the BBC's ability to serve its audiences and would limit the scope of its output. 'A subscription funding model would be antithetical to the BBC's public service mission, necessarily ending universality of access and undermining its breadth of content,' said analysts at Enders Analysis. Similarly, funding the BBC through advertising has been viewed as a non-starter as it would draw too much money away from the commercial TV and radio sector. Both Davie and Samir Shah, the BBC chairman, have pushed to retain the licence fee with reforms, acknowledging the shortcomings of a regressive flat tax. But what would this look like? Lisa Nandy, the Culture Secretary, has pushed back against the idea of funding the BBC through general taxation, saying it would leave the broadcaster exposed to political interference. Another option is a household tax similar to the one used in Germany. This would boost the BBC's income by widening the payment of the licence fee to all households, rather than just those who use its services. It could also be linked to council tax bands, creating a more progressive system where wealthier households pay more. Other options under consideration include linking the levy to broadband bills – a measure that would take on particular relevance as Britain prepares to switch off terrestrial TV and move to a streaming-only model. It is thought that any of these reforms would reduce the rate of evasion, though ministers will no doubt be reluctant to introduce new taxes, especially in light of the upcoming spending review. In a speech last month, Davie said: 'When it comes to funding, we are not asking for the status quo. We want modernisation and reform. But in doing so, we must safeguard universality.' Alternatively, as the BBC's Charter comes up for renewal, ministers could opt for a bolder rethink. The corporation retains its Reithian principles – named after John Reith, the first director-general – to inform, educate and entertain. But in the modern age, does the BBC still need to be all things to all people? Some industry watchers note that the BBC could drop some of its more peripheral services, such as its education unit Bitesize. BBC bosses are themselves alive to this possibility, and the broadcaster in March launched its largest ever public survey to ask audiences what they want from the broadcaster in the future. A more radical view espoused by a number of industry bigwigs is a merger between the UK's public service broadcasters. Sir Peter Bazalgette, the former chairman of ITV, says: 'There's no doubt in my mind that there ought to be mergers between domestic broadcasters, not just in England, but right across Europe, in order for those broadcasters to survive and have big enough businesses in their streaming services.' Speaking at a conference in London this week, Wayne Garvie, Sony Pictures' international boss, said: 'We've got five public service broadcasters in Britain. The rest of the world might have one. 'It is unsustainable and the future has got to be, surely, Channel 4 and the BBC coming together.' The idea of slimming down the BBC or combining it with its rivals will no doubt rankle supporters who view the universality of access as a key tenet of its purpose. But as competition grows and audiences continue to defect, it is clear the status quo cannot continue. Instead of trying to do more with less, it may be time for the public service broadcaster to simply do less. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
The closing of a local hair salon tells you why Britain is going bust
On Wednesday, Rachel Reeves will stand up in the House and announce her latest plans for saving the country from bankruptcy. Somehow, she will have to produce plausible remedies for a crisis that seems insoluble: how to deal with catastrophic levels of government debt when there are endless demands for more public spending including a brand new commitment to provide more funding for defence. Having ruled out tax rises that clearly impinge directly on what they call 'working people' – income tax, VAT and employee National Insurance contributions – Labour has made this situation more complicated. But, perversely, they have chosen to make it even worse by pushing many of the most productive contributors to the economy out of business. The Labour Government, by putting supposed ideological solidarity over economic reality, has created the perfect formula for the failure of precisely the business sector which contributes most to national vitality and growth. Let me offer an illustration in the hope that it might prove instructive to the present and any future Chancellor. A hairdressing salon that I know in a prosperous North London neighbourhood closed for good several weeks ago. It had been at its current location for over thirty years and was so popular that it often took days to get an appointment. After lockdown it recovered well with its loyal customers delighted to return. The emergence of the four day working week meant that Fridays became as busy as Saturdays and the salon was humming. So what went wrong? The owner was hit simultaneously by the increases in the minimum wage and employer NICS. Added to ever-increasing energy costs (exacerbated by green levies), this burden finally broke them. Even though they were a well-run thriving business, they could not survive. Sadly all of the junior staff and trainees were laid off. Given the economic climate now, they will struggle to find similar jobs anywhere else so they will not be paying any tax for the indefinite future and will almost certainly have to claim unemployment benefit: a double loss for the Treasury. The salon as a company has gone so it will no longer be paying corporation tax. The senior stylists who have carried on working privately are now self-employed which means they can, perfectly legitimately, claim all their work expenses against tax – so they will pay less income tax than they did under PAYE when they were employees. You get the picture. The net effect of the Government's measures has been to reduce the tax take for their own coffers and increase unemployment among people starting out in their working lives whose chances are further damaged by the ridiculous stipulation that they must have full rights to secure employment from the day they are hired. What happened to one hair salon might not seem all that significant to the nation's future. But this pattern is being repeated in small businesses – particularly the ones that provide employment to young people starting out in working life – in countless numbers. Retail shops, building services and hospitality outlets are cutting staff and failing to hire new recruits because the cost of employing them is back breaking. As a result, they are not expanding and developing their businesses as they might have – and so not contributing to the growth of the economy in the significant way that small businesses, with their inherent dynamism and industriousness, once did. Labour, in its supposed determination to support 'working people' has created a doom loop in which fewer people will be joining the workforce and the consequent reduction in tax revenue will make the government even less able to meet the limitless demands of the welfare system as well as pay off its debts. Needless to say, there have been some obvious winners in the Labour dynamic: public sector employees have had their mouths stuffed with gold not only because Labour is historically inclined to favour the unions which represent them but because they can threaten disruption on a scale that reduces any complaining chorus from the small business sector to an inconsequential squeak. But there is more to it than that, in ideological terms: business generally, and small business in particular, are seen as inherently self-interested enterprises. Because they have been created, developed and run by private individuals in the hope of making a profit, they must be morally suspect and less worthy of support than the services that the state funds and operates for the general good of society. Carry this to its logical conclusion and it becomes admirable to penalise people who want to profit from other people's need for their services in order to pay for the provision of services dispensed 'fairly' (and without profit) by the government. You know where this ends, don't you? The most innovative, resourceful, determined individuals who might have developed new ways of creating real wealth and employing more people in experimental ways have impossible demands put on them which threaten their survival or, at the very least, make their continued existence as difficult as possible. They are encumbered with inflexible employment conditions which might possibly be appropriate for huge public sector organisations but are death to experimental emerging enterprises. Their tax arrangements are made so horrendously complicated and difficult to master that expensive accountancy advice becomes essential. I know self-employed sole traders in the creative industries who would like to enlarge their practice but are terrified of crossing the income threshold that would require VAT registration which now involves coping with Making Tax Digital – a peculiarly sadistic form of monitoring which, as HMRC has just discovered in its attempt to introduce it in self-employed income tax, can be susceptible to cyber hacking. Yes indeed, create a business on your own and try to make it a success – just try. The Government, and its agents in HMRC who can't even be bothered to answer the phone, will make your life as difficult as possible. And the more obstacles they put in the way to prevent you from flourishing and expanding, the more virtuous they will feel even though you and the real wealth that you create are the only things that might have saved them. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
