Youth Sports & Education
Brooklyn Basketball Academy: A Plan You Can Read Yourself
Brooklyn Basketball Academy — New York
By Dallas Coleman · Updated
- full business plan published — read it page by page, no email gate
- core questions of youth-sports economics answered in the plan
- 4
- of financial projections built from operating assumptions, not round numbers
- 100%
The case in brief
The problem, the work and the result.
CMA’s Brooklyn Basketball Academy plan connected programming, revenue architecture, local demand and facility economics. It is a published worked example of a plan whose enrollment, court usage and pricing assumptions can be traced through the financial projections.
- Concept
- Youth basketball academy
- Market
- Brooklyn, NY
- Format
- Published in full — no email gate
- Deliverables
- Plan · Projections
Density of basketball-engaged families in the catchment, what they spend on training today, and which existing options left demand unmet.
The engagement
Brooklyn Basketball Academy set out to build something the borough’s youth sports market rewards but rarely gets right: a structured training academy with real programming depth, not just open gym time with a logo. Before facilities, coaching staff, and families would commit, the concept needed what every new venture needs — a plan that proves the model.
The planning work had to answer the questions specific to youth sports economics:
- Programming and revenue architecture — how clinics, leagues, training tiers, and camps stack into a revenue model that survives the school-year calendar’s seasonality
- Market demand — the density of basketball-engaged families in the academy’s catchment, what they currently spend on training, and which existing options were leaving demand unmet
- Facility economics — the cost structure of court time, the academy’s single largest operating constraint, and the utilization rates the model required
- Financial projections — enrollment ramp, pricing, and the path to sustainability, built from operating assumptions rather than round numbers
Why this one is public
Most CMA plans are confidential — they contain clients’ financial details, market strategies, and competitive positioning. This one is published with permission as a worked example of the firm’s planning standard, so prospective clients can judge the quality of the deliverable directly instead of taking our word for it.
This plan is available as a worked example on request. Ask the firm for the full PDF and we will send it over.
What to look for as you read
- How the market analysis ties to decisions — every demographic claim feeds a specific programming or pricing choice, rather than padding a chapter
- Financial projections built from operating assumptions — court hours, enrollment counts, session pricing — so a reader can trace any number back to a driver and test it
- Structure a lender can navigate without a guide — the document answers questions in the order a reviewer asks them, which is a quality you only notice when it’s missing
- The honest treatment of risk — seasonality, facility dependence, and staffing are named and addressed, because credible plans surface their own weaknesses before the reader does
If this is the standard you want behind your own venture, the plan you’re reading is the product: this is what CMA delivers.
Credible plans surface their own weaknesses before the reader does.
Engagement details are shared with client permission or presented in anonymized form. Results described are specific to the engagement and client circumstances shown and are not a guarantee of future outcomes. See our full disclaimer.
The Transformation
Before & after
Before
A concept families, coaches, and facilities couldn't yet commit to.
After
A plan that proves the model before anyone signs on.
Before
Demographic claims that pad a chapter without driving anything.
After
Every market claim feeds a specific programming or pricing decision.
Before
Round-number projections a reviewer can't test.
After
Numbers traceable to court hours, enrollment, and session pricing.
Before
Risks left for the reader to discover.
After
Seasonality, facility dependence, and staffing named and addressed up front.
The Work, In Sequence
How the engagement ran
- 1
Programming and revenue architecture
Clinics, leagues, training tiers, and camps stacked into a revenue model that survives the school-year calendar's seasonality.
- 2
Market demand analysis
Density of basketball-engaged families in the catchment, what they spend on training today, and which existing options left demand unmet.
- 3
Facility economics
The cost structure of court time — the academy's largest operating constraint — and the utilization rates the model required.
- 4
Financial projections
Enrollment ramp, pricing, and the path to sustainability, built from operating assumptions so any number traces back to a driver.
FAQ
Questions about this build
What did CMA deliver in the Brooklyn Basketball Academy engagement?
CMA’s Brooklyn Basketball Academy plan connected programming, revenue architecture, local demand and facility economics. It is a published worked example of a plan whose enrollment, court usage and pricing assumptions can be traced through the financial projections.
How did facility economics shape the financial plan?
The cost structure of court time — the academy's largest operating constraint — and the utilization rates the model required.
Related engagements
Free Checklist
Are you raise-ready?
You've read the theory — now score yourself against the 12 things a lender or investor checks first. Free checklist, straight to your inbox.
- A three-statement model that holds up
- A DSCR and downside case lenders read
- An honestly sized market (TAM/SAM/SOM)
- A use of proceeds tied to milestones