Holmes Place: Can the Family Pipeline Really Carry the 2027 and 2030 Targets?
Holmes Place’s Family pipeline matters, but only Be'er Yaakov and Even Yehuda are slated to join the network in 2026, and even they are only supposed to reach target EBITDA after 24 to 36 months. Be'er Sheva and Harish already belong mainly to the 2028 to 2030 story, so Family is a supporting engine, not a leg that can carry the group targets on its own.
The main article already established that the real Holmes Place test is not whether the network can grow, but whether that growth converts into cash and earnings at a pace that justifies the headline EBITDA story. This follow-up isolates only one leg of that plan: the Family pipeline.
The question is simpler than it first looks. Holmes Place ended 2025 at EBITDA of ILS 100.6 million. That means the 2027 target of ILS 121 million to ILS 134 million requires another ILS 20.4 million to ILS 33.4 million. The 2030 target of ILS 165 million to ILS 172 million requires another ILS 64.4 million to ILS 71.4 million. So the real issue is not whether Family is a good format. It is how much of that gap can realistically come from Be'er Yaakov, Even Yehuda, Be'er Sheva and Harish, and on what timetable.
The short answer is that Family is important, but it cannot carry the path to those targets on its own. For 2027, this leg rests almost entirely on Be'er Yaakov and Even Yehuda, both of which are supposed to start operating only in the second half of 2026 and both of which are only supposed to reach target EBITDA 24 to 36 months after opening. Be'er Sheva and Harish belong much more to the 2028 to 2030 story than to the 2027 bridge.
The immediate opening cadence makes that even clearer. After the balance-sheet date, the company reported pre-sales for Icon Agamim Netanya with an expected March 2026 opening, while the investor presentation described Be'er Yaakov and Even Yehuda as openings expected around summer 2026 and said Be'er Sheva and Harish should only begin construction soon. In other words, the market will still see Icon first in 2026. Family joins the story, but it does not carry the first visible step on its own.
The pipeline map: what is close, what is later, and what each club is supposed to carry
| Club | Status at the report date | Implied timing | Disclosed EBITDA target | Main source of friction |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Be'er Yaakov | Final construction stages, built by the municipality | Second half of 2026, and in the presentation around summer 2026 | ILS 5 million to ILS 7 million within 24 to 36 months | Delay sits entirely in municipal construction, outside the company’s control |
| Even Yehuda | Advanced construction stages, built by the local council | Second half of 2026, and in the presentation around summer 2026 | ILS 3 million to ILS 4.5 million within 24 to 36 months | Smaller-format club with fixed annual usage fees and potential fee step-up |
| Be'er Sheva | Building permit in final stages, company currently acts as licensee | Expected opening in 2028 | ILS 5 million to ILS 7 million within 24 to 36 months | Permit, partnership structure and roughly ILS 70 million of build cost |
| Harish | Tender win exists, but the agreement is still unsigned by the Ministry of Interior | 24 months from the work-order date, not on the 2026 timetable | ILS 4 million to ILS 5 million within 24 to 36 months | Signature, work order and roughly ILS 40 million of build cost |
These are two very different layers of pipeline. Be'er Yaakov and Even Yehuda are the only future Family clubs that already appear in the format’s operating-structure table, and even there they are marked as future rows expected in the second half of 2026. Be'er Sheva and Harish are not yet at that stage. They are still projects that have to clear permits, signatures, funding structure and construction. That is the difference between a pipeline that is already on the track and one that is still on the drawing board.
2027 rests almost entirely on Be'er Yaakov and Even Yehuda
Be'er Yaakov currently looks like the most advanced Family project. The company says the club is in final construction stages, that construction should be completed in May 2026 and that services should begin in the second half of 2026. The investor presentation is even more direct and frames the opening around summer 2026. The EBITDA target here, ILS 5 million to ILS 7 million, is meaningful. But it is only supposed to be reached 24 to 36 months after opening. In other words, even if Be'er Yaakov opens on time, 2027 is at most a ramp year, not a maturity year.
Even Yehuda is more conservative still. This is a reduced-format club rather than a full-format one, with a target EBITDA of ILS 3 million to ILS 4.5 million. It too is supposed to start operating in the second half of 2026, and it too is only supposed to reach target within 24 to 36 months. But here there is another layer of economic rigidity: the company will pay annual usage fees of ILS 1.45 million indexed in the first five years, rising to ILS 1.75 million in the option period, plus a 25% increase if an outdoor pool is built. That does not make the club unattractive. It does mean this is less like a new country club that simply opens and succeeds, and more like an operating contract where the margin cushion starts narrower by design.
The combined mature EBITDA range of those two near-term clubs is ILS 8 million to ILS 11.5 million. That is a respectable number, but it is still less than half of the 2027 gap in the low-target case and far less than the gap in the high-target case. More importantly, that is a mature range, not a 2027 contribution. Because both clubs are only supposed to open in the second half of 2026, 2027 gets only a first year of ramp, not 24 to 36 months of maturity.
That is why reading the 2027 target as if Family alone can carry it is too quick. Even in a clean on-time opening scenario, Family gives 2027 a tailwind, not the whole engine. The target still requires better profitability from the existing club base, better absorption in Icon, and probably contribution from the other growth legs management itself highlighted.
Be'er Sheva and Harish are really 2028 to 2030 stories
Be'er Sheva is the heaviest project in the pipeline. On the one hand, its EBITDA target is similar to Be'er Yaakov at ILS 5 million to ILS 7 million, and the company explicitly says it is expected to open in 2028. On the other hand, this is no longer an operating contract on a municipal asset that someone else is building. It is a project with roughly ILS 70 million of planning and construction cost, equity injections from the two partners, and bank financing for the rest. On top of that, as of the report date there is still a Ministry of Interior approval issue around bringing in a partner above 25% in the project. The company does say that if the issue is not resolved it will build the club itself or in a 75:25 structure and that the matter is not expected to delay the opening. But that is exactly the kind of sentence that needs to be read correctly: the bottleneck is not whether the project exists, but the capital and execution price of getting it built.
Harish is different, but not simpler. The tender win is already there, and there is even some demand cushioning: during the first six years the municipality undertakes to top up membership shortfalls up to 10% of its member estimate, and each year in which the target is met carries an incentive payment of ILS 100,000. That softens occupancy risk to some extent. Still, as of the report date the agreement has not yet been signed by the Ministry of Interior, construction cost is estimated at about ILS 40 million, and the start of operations is defined only as 24 months from the work-order date. So the gap here is not only about potential demand. It is first about contractual and execution maturity.
That leads directly to the key 2030 conclusion. If all four clubs open and reach the disclosed EBITDA ranges, the format could add roughly ILS 17 million to ILS 23.5 million. The company itself says in its Family growth plan that successful execution of this strategy should add ILS 18 million to ILS 19 million of EBITDA by 2030, assuming all four Family clubs open by 2028. That is already meaningful. But it is still far smaller than the ILS 64.4 million to ILS 71.4 million gap between 2025 EBITDA and the 2030 target. So even if Family delivers exactly what management hopes, 2030 still does not stand on this format alone.
What the Family pipeline can actually carry
Family is not a decorative strategy slide. It is a real growth leg, with an existing club base the company describes as a successful, high-occupancy format, and with four projects that could take the Family count from 12 clubs to 16 in the coming years. So the mistake is not to underrate the format. The mistake is to claim that this pipeline alone can carry both the 2027 and the 2030 targets.
For 2027, Family offers at most two clubs opening in the second half of 2026 and still far from mature EBITDA. For 2030, it can become a meaningful addition, especially if Be'er Sheva and Harish actually move into execution rather than staying stuck in permits and signatures. But even then this format alone does not close the gap. To get to the 2030 targets, the company will need more profitability from the existing club base, more output from the Icon path, and more contribution from the third leg of new business opportunities as well.
That is why this pipeline matters so much to the Holmes Place read. It is not a test of whether there is growth. Growth already exists. It is a test of weight: how much of the target really rests on two nearby Family clubs, how much on two not-yet-mature projects, and how much still has to come from other engines. At the end of 2025, the answer is fairly clear. Family can strengthen the road to 2030, but it cannot carry the 2027 and 2030 targets on its own.
Disclosure: Deep TASE analyses are general informational, research, and commentary content only. They do not constitute investment advice, investment marketing, a recommendation, or an offer to buy, sell, or hold any security, and are not tailored to any reader's personal circumstances.
The author, site owner, or related parties may hold, buy, sell, or otherwise trade securities or financial instruments related to the companies discussed, before or after publication, without prior notice and without any obligation to update the analysis. Publication of an analysis should not be read as a statement that any position does or does not exist.
The analysis may contain errors, omissions, or information that changes after publication. Readers should review official filings and primary sources before making decisions.