I do believe that in some areas there is a market for architecturally basic, inexpensive golf courses. One local example I found interesting.
There's a course north of Denver called Riverdale Dunes. Designed by Pete and Perry Dye (Mr. Doak also worked on the course, although I've never read exactly who did what there), it is a terrific golf course, and a great value ($39 on weekends). There is also a sister course there, Riverdale Knolls (no designer is credited with the course on the Riverdale website) which is a fairly uninteresting design but even less expensive ($26 on weekends).
Given the qualities of the Dunes course, I would expect that it would get the majority of play. When my friends want to golf out there, none of us ever even brings up playing the Knolls.
But it turns out that the numbers skew the other way. Last year the Knolls course had 44,000 rounds, while the dunes had 38,000. Of course, since the Dunes charges a higher fee, the lower number of rounds still turns out to be more gross dollars, although the maintenance budget may be higher for the Dunes course (more elaborate bunkering, mowing, etc).
Still, more folks, given the choice, played the less-expensive, less interesting course. Not sure what it means, but it's worth noting I suppose.......