Jane Fonda sold 17 million VHS tapes but didn’t own the distribution. Kayla Itsines had 450,000 app subscribers paying monthly and owned the platform. That single structural difference captures the entire story of VHS vs app fitness wealth — and it explains more about this industry’s financial evolution than every Forbes list combined.
The VHS Model: How VHS vs App Fitness Wealth Began
The VHS era (roughly 1982–2005) created the first generation of fitness celebrities. Jane Fonda, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Richard Simmons, Billy Blanks, and Tony Little moved product on a scale that’s hard to comprehend today. Billy Blanks generated $500 million in Tae Bo sales. Tony Little moved $3 billion in infomercial products. Susan Powter’s empire hit $50 million annually.
However, the economics were brutal. Talent rarely owned master recordings, and distribution deals gave studios the largest cut. Furthermore, infomercials required massive upfront production costs. When the audience moved on, there was no recurring revenue to cushion the fall. Susan Powter went from $50 million a year to driving for Uber Eats. The VHS generation’s fitness wealth was real — and devastatingly fragile.
The App Model: Why VHS vs App Fitness Wealth Isn’t Even Close
The post-2010 generation understood something crucial: the value of a direct customer relationship. When Kayla Itsines launched Sweat, she sold subscriptions, not units. At roughly $20 monthly across 450,000 subscribers, that’s approximately $100 million in annual recurring revenue — no distributor, no retail markup.
Similarly, Joe Wicks built The Body Coach on free content as acquisition and paid subscriptions as monetization. His app generated £9 million in a single week. Cassey Ho went even further, creating two eight-figure businesses. And Jeff Cavaliere turned Athlean-X into a $10–14 million operation.
The math is fundamentally different. According to Statista’s fitness industry data, app-based fitness revenue continues to outpace traditional models. A VHS tape generated maybe $2 for the talent per unit. An app subscription generates $240 annually per user, with 70–85% going to the creator. That’s not incremental — it’s a 120x difference in per-customer economics.
The Ownership Gap in Fitness Wealth
The most important word in modern fitness wealth is “ownership.” The VHS generation owned their talent and sometimes their brand name. In contrast, the app generation owns those things plus the customer relationship, payment infrastructure, usage data, and distribution channel.
When iFIT bought Sweat for $400 million, they learned the hard way that buying a creator-led brand without the creator is like buying a restaurant without the chef. Subsequently, Itsines bought it back for reportedly far less. The lesson is clear: in the app era, the creator IS the infrastructure.
Chris Heria’s ThenX demonstrates another dimension. By building physical gyms, a training app, a personal brand app, and an apparel line, Heria diversified across digital and physical channels. If YouTube disappeared tomorrow, he’d still have gyms, apps, and merch. That structural resilience was impossible in the VHS era.
The Exit Problem for Both Eras of Fitness Wealth
Nevertheless, the VHS generation had one hidden advantage: anonymity of decline. When Billy Blanks’s sales fell off, it happened quietly. When a modern influencer’s engagement drops, it happens publicly, in real time, with analytics broadcasting every lost subscriber.
The app model is more lucrative but also more precarious. Subscription churn rates in fitness apps average 50–70% annually, according to the Global Wellness Institute. Social media algorithms change without notice. A single controversy can trigger mass unfollows. The modern fitness influencer competes with every other $20/month subscription — Netflix, Spotify, meal kits — every single month.
The Future of Fitness Wealth: Convergence
The smartest operators now combine both models. Cassey Ho sells physical products through DTC and Target while running digital content. Joe Wicks sells books alongside app subscriptions. The hybrid model captures VHS-era product margins with app-era recurring revenue.
The VHS millionaires proved there was a market. The app billionaires proved there was a better business model. Understanding VHS vs app fitness wealth is essential for anyone building in this space, because the next generation will combine both. For the complete VHS-era breakdown, see The Complete Guide to Fitness Celebrity Net Worth. For the modern era, see Fitness Influencer Net Worth Guide.