[Bill_McBride]

Back to visitor fees.  A club is just that - a group of people with a love of golf that got together and built their own golf course and related facilities.   How can you not respect the right of a club to remain completely private if they so choose?   And if they do open up a few tee times for visitors, you should be expected to pay a premium for the privilege.

Good point.  A private club I know in California charges $35 for accompanied guests, $250 for unaccompanied guests.  You have to be sponsored by a member in either case, but pay dearly for playing without the member.

[TEPaul]

Dan:

There has been a pretty interesting apparent belief that's floated around this website with a few of its contributors since the beginning, and that is if someone really loves golf or architecture they should have some inherent right to be able to experience any of the great courses no matter how the clubs are structured. I suppose I can understand that feeling but it sure isn't very realistic. The interesting part comes when those people start to criticize members of private clubs for being exclusionary. As Bob Huntley said on this thread, on the other side they allow way more visitor play than over here because they want to maintain cheaper golfer for themselves over there. Over here there are just a whole lot more people who don't mind paying a lot more to maintain privacy.

[TEPaul]

Bill McB:

That private club example in California is something I remember at Seminole and many years ago. An accompanied greensfee was really low. But with unaccompanied rounds the deal seemed to be they didn't really want them and the way to stop them or really limit them was to make them sort of unappealing by slotting them really early and charging a fortune for them. I remember my father who was on the board and certainly didn't seem to be an exclusionary guy to me said it was insane----eg they priced them so high back then they thought that would stop it but it didn't and they felt they just couldn't turn down oodles of easy money. But in my life and in my memory it wasn't the private clubs that created this ultra high greensfee mentality in America---it was a course that's always been public that always set that bar---Pebble Beach GC.

[HamiltonBHearst]

Mr. Paul:

Good for you, based on your post #127  it would appear you do not read many of the OT-political posts in this discussion group.  

Were you to read them, you would find many of these same folks think they have a lot of inherent rights that others should support.  It is not only golf tee times.

[TEPaul]

Mr Hearst:

Thank you very much but I'm only stating the realities that I know and have grown up knowing and understanding.

However, that does not necessarily reflect my own personal opinion on these things.

I'm actually an old broken down 1960s liberal revolutionary from New York. If I ran this country I'd transport all the fancy-smancy members of Seminole, ANGC, Maidstone, Piping et al on a forced march into the ghettos of America and transport the ghetto dwellers to have free run of Seminole, ANGC, Maidstone, Piping et al.

At least I'd do that for a minimum of a week just to see how things might shake out and to get a really good laugh!

If the excercise actually promoted some interesting results the next thing I would do as the one who runs this county is make Christopher Hitchens the Secretary of the State, Interior and Justice so he could put a God-damn clamp on the pomposity of Christianity in America.

Then I'd change the National Anthem to John Lennon's "Imagine" and get Lloyd Cole from GOLFCLUBATLAS.com to sing it to the Nation.

Don't worry about it Hamilton---I have my eye on a really cool crack-house in North Philadelphia I think you'd have a total ball in for a week! After that it would be back to the gravy train for you with a whole different outlook on things! 

[Sean_A]

Tom & Dan

So are you telling me that a club with a $2.5 million operating budget can have up to $375,000 of it from visitors?  Something sounds fishy here.  I spose a chunk of that allowable income disappears for an annual open tournament and/or a charity event (which may be tax exempt anyway as clubs often don't make money or much on these - as is the intention).  Say, 100 golfers each at $750.  That still leaves $225,000.  Say a club gets 100 guests a week at $250 a pop all in - thats another $130,000.  This leaves $95,000 left over for visitor rounds at say $400 (all in) - that means over 200 outside rounds can be played.  This total amount of outside play sounds incredibly high to be legal for a tax exempt body.  If we put this into perspective, Muirfield allows 2704 visitors a year which probably brings in something close to £500,000 a year when you consider food & drinks as well.

Ciao

[John Kavanaugh]

  I understand the Japanese guy that "owns" Riviera makes the rules and even decides who gets to remodel the course, etc.
  

Dick,

Why is this the only owner whose ethnicity you mention?  Do you think he is the only owner who chooses what architects get to work at his course, etc. 

As with every racist comment concerning Asian golfers or owners on this site R.J. Daley's comment seems to have been given a pass.  I was wondering, do European golfers hate the Asian influx as much as American or at least Golfclubatlas posters?  Would Muifield or the like fill a day up with nothing but Koreans?

[HamiltonBHearst]

As a function of their personal political beliefs, some people get a free pass for innapropriate or racist comments.  Others do not. 

[Mike Hendren]

If the excercise actually promoted some interesting results the next thing I would do as the one who runs this county is make Christopher Hitchens the Secretary of the State, Interior and Justice so he could put a God-damn clamp on the pomposity of Christianity in America.

Is this site no longer moderated?

Mike

[TEPaul]

"HBH is entirely correct, it all depends upon your agenda."

Kelly:

Mr Hearst is entirely correct about that in my opinion. And my agenda is nothing other than humour. And I believe in Mark Twain's sentiment:

"Nothing on earth can withstand the onslaught of humor."

I believe that should be all inclusive---eg Christians, non-Christians and most certainly people who take themselves too seriously, including those who believe all golf courses should be natural looking and that the world should be ridded of Fazio and Rees Jones architecture and even those whose first reaction is to scream for moderators to protect them from freedom of speech. That's the beauty of this country----everyone has a unfettered right to make a complete ass of themselves in public and that certainly includes me!   

[TEPaul]

"Tom,
I am totally with you on the humor part, I attempted some this weekend and was immediately outed as something, the ones that attempted to out me didn't have the balls to say it, they just implied something sinister which is almost as bad as what John did calling RJ a racist for what seems to me to be an innocent comment.  The reason I raised your comment is to illustrate the inequities in these matters.  You can diss God, Jesus, Texans, whites, little white kids, dogs, cats, babies all you want you won't offend me."


You're right Kelly, and what that means is you and I should combine our considerable forces and take on with humor all the over-arching humorless slimeballs we're aware of. The fact that hardly any of them "get" our humor is their problem, and not ours!

Heh, by the way, I don't like your list of who I can diss:

It should include not just God, Jesus, Texans, whites, little white kids, dogs, cats, babies----but also Jews, Muslims, bling-ladden black rappers, atheists, Pres. Bush, candidates Clinton and Obama and also comedians.

I once heard one of those ultra-wasp types down in Southampton say:

"If you can't insult your friends, then what is the world coming to?"

Truer words have never been spoken, in my opinion! 

[David Federman]

I have a question and a comment on this thread-

1. Do the "private" clubs on Britain, Ireland, Australia, Scotland,etc. have the same open door policy to local residents as they do for overseas visitors?

2. I remember after 9/11 that  Pine Valley opened its doors to the public for two days for a charity event to help the firefighters. It was $1000 per person, but for a good cause and well worth it and mostly tax deductible, as well! Likewise, the Oakmont event this past fall where anyone could play for $500. for a charity event.

I think if more of the exclusionary clubs would hold such charitable events at least many  non-members could have the opportunity to play and the clubs would benefit as well. 

[HamiltonBHearst]

There are all sorts of charity events that anyone can play in at even the most private of clubs.  Charities pick clubs that will attract players and provide some sort of value proposition while raising the most money possible for the cause.

How would the clubs themselves benefit?  And are you suggesting they open up tee times to the public on their own with the proceeds going to the public? 

[Steve Lang]

 

Why are you dissing the Houston TEXans football team.. ?1/??@#?@?$?@$%@?

oh... you probably didn't even know there was NFL football down here other than the DallasCowboys...

i assume you  were referring to native born Texans and not all the yankee transplants... playing golf in 75F weather that last week or so

[David Federman]

I wasn't really talking about a purely "economic" benefit to the clubs from holding charity events, but I would think  that clubs do charge for the use of their club, carts, green fees, food, etc. for charitable and non-charitable events.  

I don't have any idea how you misread my comment to suggest that private clubs should open their doors to the public and then give the money to the public.  

All I was suggesting is that the clubs do more of it. After all, don't most clubs enjoy substantial real estate tax savings than if their property were zoned in some other fashion? Isn't that a public benefit that they receive? Why not give something back by way of more charity functions?

[Lou_Duran]

"Patrick, it can be more of a problem than even staying below the "outside income" threshold.  If you have visitor tee times or welcome the public in an overt way, you could jeopardize your tax exempt status regardless of the amount of income you earn from the outside activity, which would be really bad for many clubs.  Bad as in a non-exempt club can basically kiss 35% of its initiation fees goodbye, and it's easy to end up with a lot of taxable income because of the way expenses are accounted for.  A non-exempt club earning, say, $500,000 per year in initiation income would have to have a big pile of nonmember play to make up the $175,000 that goes to the IRS (even aside from other tax liability).  1000 rounds at $175 per, assuming you could get it.  Thus, outside play can be a money loser once the tax implications are taken into account.

"So Dean, it is hard to see why club members should subsidize outside play. "  Jeff Goldman

Damned government making the game inaccessible to all of us unacceptable to the top clubs of the country!  Really Jeff, with highly qualified experts like you, I don't think most in the Top 10 would have a hard time squeezing-in a couple of non-member groups during the week mornings, or on Sunday afternoon.  That is, if they wanted to.  For the good of the game, of course.

It seems to me that not all European clubs are all that welcoming.  Muirfield apparently has a few times for outsiders a couple of days a week, which, the secretary wrote to me, fill up as much as a year in advance.  During my visit, I asked to play any one of four days at any time and was summarily turned down.  For me, I might have as well asked Augusta National for persmission.

Some seasonal American clubs like Shinny even restrict member accompanied play during the busy months.  I was told by a Pine Valley member that he sometimes has a hard time getting on due to all the guest play (accompanied) there.  It seems perfectly reasonable for a member of an exclusive private club to expect to play his course pretty much when he wants to without having to place a ball in queu on the first tee.

[John Kavanaugh]

John,

I think RJ is being descriptive, adding detail, we teach our kid's to do that in their english classes, I think it is not racists, rather it reflects the successful upbringing of RJ and should be a compliment to his parents. 

Kelly,

Here is RJ's quote once more "I understand the Japanese guy that "owns" Riviera makes the rules and even decides who gets to remodel the course, etc."...Substitute Japanese with Jewish, Black, woman or any other minority that has commonly been oppressed in golfing society and see how it reads.  Am I just imaging the Asian stereotypes held by most American golfers?  Given that the growth of the game seems to lie in Asia should we continue to stand for this type of thinking?  As I have traveled the country I have seen a disturbing trend arising where golf courses are being segregated as Asian and Non-Asian...I don't understand why this one brand of hate is so acceptable.  note:  As an engineer who loves to play poker I have spent many hours of my life as the only white guy at the table.  I guess I am biased towards people with whom I have so much in common.

[Bob_Huntley]

John,

I would add that when Pebble Beach was bought by the Japanese consortium from Marvin Davis, the improvement in conditioning and infrastructure was a joy to behold. 

Bob

[HamiltonBHearst]

Mr. Federman

Many clubs are doing as many outings as they possibly can, and if they are not, they probably don't need the money.

Should Monday outing day only be for charities?  Just tell me how you want the system to work and who you want to foot the bill.  I have played in many charity functions at many different courses. 

I will alert you that the real estate tax component  is a local function so I would not assume the substancial real estate tax savings you trumpet.

[Kirk Gill]

I played in a charity event last year at a new local club, and in that instance the club donated the use of the course and grounds to the charity in question, the Junior Diabetes Research Foundation.

Isn't this more common than the club actually being compensated for the use of their course for charitable purposes?

[Michael Christensen]

I say screw the government giving me "free" health insurance....I want a tee time every Tuesday at Seminole!  It is totally unfair that these greedy, rich industrialists get to have so much exclusionary fun on the taxpayers dime.....

[David Federman]

Mr. Hearst-

I am not sure what it is that has gotten you so fired up on this thread. I am not trumpeting anything - only suggesting that to the extent private clubs receive public benefits by way of tax savings, they should reciprocate by holding charity events whereby non-members can play the course and help a worth cause, as well. Hardly revolutionary thinking!

[HamiltonBHearst]

Mr. Federman

Now I get it, finally you are being clear.  My clubs do not receive any tax benefits that I am aware of other than being taxed as a "not-for profit" which, if you read the thread, might be part of the problem.

Of course, some on this thread think that it is a "benefit" in that local utilities are willing to sell water four our purposes. 

[Bob_Huntley]

Mr. Federman

Now I get it, finally you are being clear.  My clubs do not receive any tax benefits that I am aware of other than being taxed as a "not-for profit" which, if you read the thread, might be part of the problem.

Of course, some on this thread think that it is a "benefit" in that local utilities are willing to sell water four our purposes. 

HGH,

I am suprised that we have not heard a plaintive call for access to luxury boxes at football and basball stadia. After all, some of these facilities were built with public funds.

Bob

[erichunter]

With ANGC and The Masters, the fact is they are two separate legal entities and the monies derived from the Masters tournament may not excessively flow into and inure to the benefit of the members of ANGC exclusively. The Masters Tournament entity is a separate charitable entity.

I certainly understand the two legal entities for the Club and the Tournament.

However, I was always under the impression that ANGC and its membership are very proud of their low initiation fee and low dues (a quick Google search - see point #14 -htttp://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/augusta/news/preview/secrets.html). 

The annual changes that the club undergoes seemingly points to the Tournament money covering a large chunk of the tab.  They could take the position that the Tournament benefits as much as the Club but that would seem to be a grey area at the least considering the Tournament is 1 week and the course is open approximately 24 weeks.  Apparently the Club has a workable solution.

This debate is only interesting from the point of view as to whether the GB&I model can be done in the US.  Anyone who seriously stakes a claim to having the inherent right to play any of the Top 10 privates is missing the big idea.  At some point the upper six figure initiation fee course building will slow down (if it hasn't already) and some new golf course building financial model will evolve.  It remains to be seen whether this is viable.

If it becomes viable then you may be able to convert some of the old-time clubs to a new way of operating.   

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()