[Jim Thompson]

Let’s say you’re a course operator faced with the uncertain economic future that is sweeping through the US and the Mid-West in particular.  Manufacturing companies, the backbone of all economic activity for the last 60 years, are either, closing, moving or reinventing themselves and a course operator has to make it to the end of that economic transition tunnel.  What would be your recession/depression playbook?  What would you change on and off the course?  What triggers would you recognize to cause you to implement those changes?  Remember, your answers may hold the future of public golf in the balance…

Edit:  Can an owner afford to be the first to make the changes or can he/she afford not to be relative to the market?

[JC Jones]

Let me preface this post by saying I am not a course operator and my only experience is working at golf courses, in all facets, from age 12 to 21.

The first and obvious thing is to reduce rates to a point that entice's people to come out and play.  Often times business owners will offset a reduction in volume with an increase in rates to reach the previous income level.  I think volume is significantly more important than margin.  I think this for several reasons, including "add-on" sales.  While your revenue may be the same with 20,000 rounds at $60 per round as it is with 30,000 rounds at $40 per round, with the latter, you have the opportunity to sell 10,000 more hot dogs, gatorades, sodas, sleeves of balls, hats, shirts, etc., etc.

Secondly, if the owner has a range, I'd pump up the price of a bucket of balls a $1 or $2.  A nominal increase that is likely to go unnoticed by the consumer.

Lastly, I'd cut the budget for the grounds.  Calculate what it costs to keep the grass alive (not necessarily lush green) and the greens smooth and go from there.  I think bunker projects and others will have to be passed on until times get better.

Anyways, those are my ideas, not sure if they are good/valid or not, but I thought I'd take a stab.

[Jason Topp]

I think a good golf course, public or private, becomes like a second home to a core group of golfers. 

I would focus on that group and figure out how to either hang onto that group, make it grow or get it to spend more money. 

[Jim Thompson]

I tried to be general enough so as not to direct anyone's answers, but I guess I needed to do a bit more, my bad.

When would you start changing items that impact architecture, grassing types, mowing patterns, maint practices, etc?  To what extent would you tweak?  Consider bunkering, tees, greens, fairways, cart paths, carts, course supplies, amenities, and the like?

I think most courses are already doing what you are suggesting above in one form or another, trying to hold on to exisitng customers while slashing prices to get new ones.  We all know the secret is to slash price by five bucks but expenses by eight or more.  When does this catch up with you in the market place? Or for those of you who are more inclined to think as players, how much can an operator take away and what, while giving you a discount on fees and keep your loyal business?

It is a very complicated question and one I think a bunch of people in the biz are fighting with every day.  Can they take the risk of being the first to make the needed changes to survive?  Do they need to wait and be the third or fourth in their market to tweak after another has broken the ice so to speak?

[Jim_Kennedy]

Jim,
I think it's best to hold to your existing pricing if you can and sneak in some give-aways now and then. I think people appreciate the occasional freebie more than the couple of bucks per round. 

 

[JMEvensky]

I think cutting back on maintenance should be the last thing.Any word-of-mouth that a course is "not in good shape" would seem to be a very difficult situation to combat,no matter the green fee..

I also realize that the maintenance budget is usually the easiest place to find non-essential expenses.

[Sean_A]

Jim

Its sounds strange, but I would concentrate on making people want to spend time at my course.  I don't know how often I visit places and am not made to feel welcome or valued.  I will often only return to places because of the course, but I think I am in the minority.  Most people will head back to places they feel comfortable and wanted.  First step is to hire people folks who are knowledgable.  Folks that inherently want the customers to enjoy their day.  From a money pinching angle I would focus on course maintenance (whose details are far too many and varied to list) combined with measures that aren't outwardly seen as money pinching.  Offer inclusive deals of food, range balls, golf & carts at normal times.  Say it costs $40 for a guy to walk, let him have the inclusive deal for $45.  Like JC, I believe volume is important even if you are taking a slight hit.  Additionally, let guys play how they want - that means they can walk or ride at anytime. 

I would also consider starting jr programs that a high school golfer could operate.  I see it done for baseball and other sports, why not golf?  Too much emphasis is placed on hiring professionals to do teaching when for many people it isn't necessary or maybe not even idea to get them involved in the game.   

If there is a core group or if its possible to form a core group, why not operate teams from the club who play competively with other clubs, each other and recreationally at their home course and away.  These sorts of things take time to build, but it helps to create interest and get guys to hang about the course. 

Consider a women's day in which they have the 1st tee for a few hours on a Monday or Tuesday or whatever.  Figure out when your ladies like to play and try to make that the time. 

Sell memberships which have advantages of at least some tee time priority - whatever that may be.  Too many places want to take money up front then keep the course packed 24/7 negating any benefit.  The trick is to make the deal a no brainer for whatever you may term a hard core golfer.  Lets say there are 31 weeks of golf.  You figure that a guy a hardcore player plays 31 rounds.  If the normal price is $40 to walk, give him the membership for $850 per year paid up front, cart is extra, but he can have the cart for say $300 a year.  Plus, you offer preferred times on Saturday mornings from say 8-9am.  Non-members can go off before and after, but only members can have the tee at this time.  Perhaps you switch it with Sundays to appeal to more prospective members.  If the number of memberships grow which can justify a larger block of times so be it.  Obviously, you have to cap the membership to a number which makes it desirable and works economically - maybe 30 for a 1 hour time reserved time slot with the thought that only 24 can take up spots on any given week.  Its also a possibility that the same could be done for the afternoon - say 2-3pm.  I realize that most courses don't need to offer deals for the weekend, but this is the sort of thing that I believe would appeal and which may create loyalty - which is what every public course wants. 

Anyway, those are a few ideas. 

Ciao

[Jim Thompson]

I think cutting back on maintenance should be the last thing.Any word-of-mouth that a course is "not in good shape" would seem to be a very difficult situation to combat,no matter the green fee..

I also realize that the maintenance budget is usually the easiest place to find non-essential expenses.

Many would probably agree with you and I think you are headed toward my question.  It is obvious to me that a number of courses cannot afford to be maintained as they have been in the past as input prices continue to rise.  As a result the first thing that shows in the product is overall conditioning and outbreaks here and there as chemical and fertilizer applications become reactionary rather than proactive.  I’m sure most of us can see the dangers in taking this approach.  Most supers I know have been “sitting on the egg" for the past three years up in these parts and, as such, really can't trim much more fat from their budgets. 

So when should one stop considering the problem from the stand point of how to maintain what they have and start considering altering what they have to maintain?  Over history we can see courses that filled bunkers for example, eliminated tees and converted or allowed to “go to poa or natural” playing surfaces, or even decreased the size of playing surfaces.

[RJ_Daley]

I think Sean, JC, Jason and Jim all have viable ideas, and it is very market and region dependent based on the regional economy.

But, Jim you did say:

Let’s say you’re a course operator faced with the uncertain economic future that is sweeping through the US and the Mid-West in particular.  Manufacturing companies, the backbone of all economic activity for the last 60 years, are either, closing, moving or reinventing themselves and a course operator has to make it to the end of that economic transition tunnel.  What would be your recession/depression playbook?

This is specific to a region and particular type of economy and demographic.  It is a semi-blue collar sort of economy that was once good, and folks had jobs, leisure time, and weren't working day and night or looking for anything to tide them over and no discretionary income to spend on golf.  Many of those folks are actually fleeing the area.  When and what will bring THAT SCENE BACK?  You as an operator can try many things described above.  But, at the end of the day you might have to face the prospect that the whole scene and whole economic situation of jobs and prosperity are not coming back in the forseeable future as it relates to that "manufacturing back bone of that economy for the last 60 years".  That simply isn't a scenario that you can as an operator tweak here or there and hold on til it gets better, UNLESS A SEA CHANGE OCCURS THAT CAUSED THE PROCESS TO CHANGE FUNDAMENTALLY.  Jim, you may not like that as politics, we always have great discussions on that.  But the demographic can't just come back without the proper stimulus.  A lot of people banked on free trade and much lower taxes as the cure all for the last 8 years.  Where has that led?  Those so-called benefits of that methodology is now exhausted.  

Is your demographic better off and have enough leisure time and discretionary income?  Are they even soundly employed, with any sense of security?  

Golf comes after feelings of security within the people.  No social security and safety nets, no good jobs, wage disparities and ever widening shifts of wealth to top 1% coming out of your demographic (the middle class recreational guy), and guess what?  No structural change and your recreational facility that runs on discretionary income that comes with the econmomy that was for 60 years and now isn't, and the course operator is whistling past the graveyard with small fixes in marketting.  

So, in a way I can go along with Jim K, if you believe the set back is short term and will come back and incomes and discretionary spending will again rise due to some miraculous shift to a new high tech prosperous economy and fiscal tweaking with national accounting slide of hands.  Then I'd say maintain your pricing, add in the most givaways and incentives you can, so that the expectation that comes with lower prices in hard times won't be killed when you raise them again and possibly create bad will.  

But, if you decide the economic situation is structurally long term fried, and no prospects to shift a large demographic back to a renewed economy and productive environment for the large middle class who are your customers; then punt.  Give it up, move on and try to reorient yourself in career and location, sell the course or land if you can come out with cap gains or profit, and avoid the death of a 1000 slices.  

Taxes are as low as we've ever seen and seems to be no stimulus nor incentive to re-invest profits of anyone benefiting in the high end from the joy times that have been created in that strata's hoarding and house flipping and money sheltering and such.   Manufacturing is gone to the 3rd world, and all those traditional fiscal conservative fixes since Reaganomics have been exhausted.  

Why is golf in Sweden on the upswing?

[Tony_Chapman]

So when should one stop considering the problem from the stand point of how to maintain what they have and start considering altering what they have to maintain?  Over history we can see courses that filled bunkers for example, eliminated tees and converted or allowed to “go to poa or natural” playing surfaces, or even decreased the size of playing surfaces.

Jim -- As a course owner, I'd have to think this would be a very, very difficult decision. Effectively, you are losing the architectual integrity of the golf course.

In the situation you present in the first post, one would really have to look at a business plan and see what meant the most to him, what was most profitable, etc. The first thing I'd look at is the "food" side of things. One can do wonders with just a few "homemade" offerings.

Would you lose money if cart fees went up a little bit? How are you priced compared to other golf courses in the area? Could you do 10-round punch cards for a discount? Same with range balls? A lot of different things to look at, I think.

I think Sean brings up some very good points as well.

Tony

[George Pazin]

So when should one stop considering the problem from the stand point of how to maintain what they have and start considering altering what they have to maintain?  Over history we can see courses that filled bunkers for example, eliminated tees and converted or allowed to “go to poa or natural” playing surfaces, or even decreased the size of playing surfaces.

Obviously I have no idea how much trimming of the fat there has been, but I'd think you could get away with a little more natural maintenance of areas like the rough, and maybe not keeping bunkers quite as maintained. You could even say it's a "green" decision (environmental, not $$$). But the other gentleman is right, you can't allow the fairways or greens to suffer. (You could for me, but I'm a weirdo. )

[Sean_A]

I think cutting back on maintenance should be the last thing.Any word-of-mouth that a course is "not in good shape" would seem to be a very difficult situation to combat,no matter the green fee..

I also realize that the maintenance budget is usually the easiest place to find non-essential expenses.

Many would probably agree with you and I think you are headed toward my question.  It is obvious to me that a number of courses cannot afford to be maintained as they have been in the past as input prices continue to rise.  As a result the first thing that shows in the product is overall conditioning and outbreaks here and there as chemical and fertilizer applications become reactionary rather than proactive.  I’m sure most of us can see the dangers in taking this approach.  Most supers I know have been “sitting on the egg" for the past three years up in these parts and, as such, really can't trim much more fat from their budgets. 

So when should one stop considering the problem from the stand point of how to maintain what they have and start considering altering what they have to maintain?  Over history we can see courses that filled bunkers for example, eliminated tees and converted or allowed to “go to poa or natural” playing surfaces, or even decreased the size of playing surfaces.

Jim

In terms of the maintenance, you are really asking impossible questions.  I think if a course has a great reputation that is long standing they have a bit of leeway with maintenance so long as the basics (greens and I hate to say it because I think far too much is wasted in this area - tees) are in place.  However, this is a small number of courses that is probably dwindling in the current economic climate Michigan is experiencing. 

Still, if it were me and I thought the course could close, you better believe I would hit the maintenance schedule.  I would first concentrate on getting guys on the team who can take orders and be creative.  Pay these chaps well because they will be essential in transitioning the course.  I say transitioning because if times are that bad, there has to be a plan of maintenance reduction which still produces a good product if not the very best product. 

I would probably cut the fertilizer and water down a certain amount to at least slow growth down so I could cut the fairway cutting schedule down - perhaps by as much as 1/3 to 1/2, but concentrating on keeping smooth if not terribly quick greens. 

I would be ruthless with bunkering and fill in the non-essential ones even on a flat site.  So many courses have bunkers which add virtually nothing to the design other than a bit of wow factor.  If a place is charging $40 a game, folks ain't expecting a lot of wow.   Of course, the definition of non-essential changes depends on desperation. 

Consider shrinking green sizes if possible, but perhaps expand the fairways a bit.  Let guys get around a bit easier and bring some of the bunkers into the fairway.  This also makes it easier to fill in some bunkers.  It could also effect outlying rough areas - if fairways are a bit wider then perhaps these areas can be less maintained.  I spose the aim is to eliminate some of the tricky cutting areas and quicken the game a bit, by widening playing corridors - hopefully the two can be near balancing out in cost.  I know everybody appreciates more width whether they admit it not and lets face it, there isn't a punlic course in existence which doesn't struggle with speed of play.   

Finally, think again about your staff.  Make sure you have the team you want.  Even if it means giving away part of the course as pay, the right team is the difference between surviving and not.

Ciao

[Peter Pallotta]

Jim -

I remember Joe Hancock starting a thread like this about a year ago. I wished then and I wish now that I had something to offer - I can't tell you how important I think this subject is (and I'm sure I don't have to). Lots of very good and smart posts here. I can only add from my personal experience, which is that when things have been tough for me, 'cost' has been one factor but not the only one. What I mean is, WHEN I've decided to spend money on golf during tough times, I've spent it - and, while I didn't spend it at the higher end, I didn't look for a cut-rate price or the very lowest end either. A modestly priced course was fine, ONCE I'd made the decision to play. And after that, I wanted to enjoy the day as much as possible. I didn't and don't need pristine conditions etc, but a pleasant environment with good people and staff who care etc. My sense of the course's architecture AS architecture I knew already (if it was a course I'd played) or got a sense of beforehand from the internet if I hadn't. It never occurred to me that there could be such dramatic shifts in maintenance etc to meaningfully affect that architecture. A good solid course will always be that....and when people can, they'll come back. You've just got to hold on....

Peter 

[Tony_Chapman]

Jim -- To piggy-back on Peter's comments, I always look at a golf course by my "go-back factor". That is, for what I got in fees was the golf course worth going back.

I don't know what kind of course you speak of when you started this thread, but I've often found that older municipal offerings always had a better go-back factor than a course built in the last, say, 15-20 years. Generally, it was cheaper and, most often, it was more fun to play. Of course, my top-two "go-back" courses were built in the last ten years -- Wild Horse and Tobacco Road. 

[Jim Thompson]

Guys,

Just a quick reminder, I'm not in the business anymore.  For the first time in my life I have a regular job, one that allows me time to think about stuff like this other than when I used to mow rough or pick the range at the end of the day.  Every once in a while though, I think about what old friends in the business are going through. 

During the creative process with the Angels project we considered building some historical looking features into the design.  By that I mean features that looked like they had been abandoned, changed or altered over time to overcome the sterile new look.  The furry circles on the left of eight would be an example of this, intended to look like filled bunkers from days gone by.  Last year, I was at an old Ross course that had been modified over the years, all that was really left was the greens, trees had been added after bunkers had been filled, fairway lines and green approaches changed significantly etc.  All of this was said to be done for financial reasons over the years; the course is nice but not nearly what it could be.  I'm sure a couple GCAers who are / were members could testify to that fact in spades.

Anyway, I'm sure there are a number of operators out there who are asking themselves these very questions I put forth earlier.  As RJ notes, I'm sure they realize they have little control over the economy, but can't afford to sell their courses for less than the current mortgages, as is all to common the case in Michigan right now.  By the way RJ, I’d blame union labor for driving up production costs and living beyond their means, but lets safe that for a tavern sometime.  Banks are calling notes right and left and most banks in the area have a moratorium on lending to golf related companies.  Operators are being forced to go to nationals or venture firms to pay top dollar for loans due to related risks and quite frankly those that haven’t been forced to do so fear the potential decisions the future brings.  Most are showing a tough upper lift, but fear the future of projects and a life they have come to love, a life of very fulfilling hard work and good people.

They’ve already cut staff, are sending help home early to enjoy the wet shoes that come with end of day cart cleaning; all to hold on to a dream and lifestyle.  They’ve fallen into the quick fix, conventional wisdom trap of rate cutting over the past ten years that has led to devalue their product as the cost of inputs increased.  Now they find themselves near the bottom of the most slippery of slopes.  The one where they cut inputs for a few years and hope they can hold on.  Most have been holding on for the past few years. One of the only things left to fiddle with is the golf course itself.  So what to do?  Most courses have far more bunkers than they need, have more low mowed areas then they need, have grass types that result in excess inputs all which are remnants of a time of excess.  Market economics will always even out supply and demand, but that same conventional wisdom seems to be paring down both sides of the equation rather than just the excess portion.

So still the question looms, how and when does one phase in alterations to return the game via the course to proper proportions?  How would you all decide what to do and when to do it?  Is there a market out there for the fiscal minded transitional architect?

[Jim Thompson]

Jim -- To piggy-back on Peter's comments, I always look at a golf course by my "go-back factor". That is, for what I got in fees was the golf course worth going back.

I don't know what kind of course you speak of when you started this thread, but I've often found that older municipal offerings always had a better go-back factor than a course built in the last, say, 15-20 years. Generally, it was cheaper and, most often, it was more fun to play. Of course, my top-two "go-back" courses were built in the last ten years -- Wild Horse and Tobacco Road. 

Tony,

It is no shcok to me that the munis present the best bang for the buck.  After all, the benefit from waived property taxes and augmented operating costs go a long way to aid in lowering the greens fee.  One of the pit falls to all of this is the potential for the choices to eventually be private or muni with no public operations.  For the most part that has already happened out East and in high density population areas.   The other side of the coin is the projects that are so highly capitalized that they can float the long term business valleys.  Goes along the lies of the old maxim - to make a small fortune in golf, start out with a large fortune.

For this discussion, I'd like to take munis off the table so to speak, but I certainly understand where you're coming from.

JT

[RJ_Daley]

Jim, we have all these golf historians on site, mostly arguing about attributions.  Maybe they should spend some time in the archives and try to dig up the histories and specifically the financial and maintenance measures that golf courses and clubs undertook to weather the great depression.  I mean the approaches were all over the map.  Some places converted to farms or pasture, yet returned to viable courses.  ANGC weathered the hardships of WWII in that way, converting to dairy pasture, and suspending operations.  I know Lawsonia underwent big changes from the opening course vision in 1932 and almost immediately altered maintenance and operations through the depth of the depression that set in.  And, the history of the NLEs that are NLE for the very reason that they had to fold the tent in the face of the crisis would also illuminate what happened to the land (subdivision development, reverse to agriculture, etc.)

Jim, collective action, i.e. organizing in numbers to create a new agenda may be the only thing that is going to help face down the bears and wolves at the door of the blue and now white collar workers.  They were busted as viable unions, and now they saw their jobs go into the night and to the 3rd world, and their home conglomerate companies parcelled up by corporate raiders, and they weren't strong enough to stop it. 

Currently, I'm thinking of truckers and what they face at the moment.  They lost their union to their own Teamsters union overstepping its propriety and bounds just like the corporations have lost their propriety and ethic to greed.  The pendulum is swinging because the powerful get too greedy from what ever side of the labor management equation.  But, things swing back.  The truckers are ripe for someone to come along and organize them and break their culture of "independent" owner operator mentality.  I say organizing and collectively bargaining and striking hard and political hardball will be their only salvation.  Or, the bean counters and transportation corporations will find a way for a chimpanzee to drive trucks and pay them in bananas and bitch the cost of bananas is too high.  And, they'll get their bought-off congressmen to pass the law of any chimp over 3 years old can drive. 

Until those worker guys are back with some jing in their pockets, certain areas of the country where the golf owners are dependant on that blue collar and white collar worker demographic, might as well cash out.  Their new service industry wages at McDonalds and Wall Mart greeters ain't going to buy too many rounds of golf.   

[Jim Thompson]

RJ,

Love the first paragraph!  Great response the question as posed.

As for the rest, nice try, I'll give you that, but I'm not biting.   BTW I think your half right and half nuts with the rest.   You'd probably be shocked to know which parts fall under which pew as I don't think I'm quite as predictable as you might think, but again, we should save that for a couple frosties at a pub.  After all, I know fully that folks never receive my written political comments in the tone they are intended.

Cheers!

JT

[Don_Mahaffey]

Jim,
Golf is a people business. Its all about making it fun for the people who visit, and finding the right people to run the business; starting with the guys behind the counter. It really helps if they are pleasant and actually act like they care if you have a good time. It also helps to have people who do more than work on the course but actually care for the course. Too many owners think the key to success is lots of low price help punching a clock. I’ll take half the help, if I can just find those that have it in their blood. They are out there, but not everyone looks for them. 

I know it sounds simple, but I really believe the key to success if your operating a lower end course is creating a fun environment where everyone can enjoy themselves. That’s what brings ‘em back. Keep the rules simple, keep the rates reasonable and uncomplicated, and treat ‘em fairly and I think a course can survive a downturn provided the demographics aren’t terrible.

[Wade Whitehead]

My $.02:

The key, whether money is abundant or tight, is human capital.

WW

[RJ_Daley]

OK Jimbo, let me go down another alley... 

What ever happened to your cool avitar, "need more cowbell"? 

Maybe more cowbell is the answer, seriously.  I'm thinking of the peer group and follow the leader factor, where in order to keep the group coming back in hard times, you have to have some leaders in the local core group of regular golfers, that everyone still wants to be associated with, even if the prices are relatively high for the economic times that are suppressing more rounds of play. 

I know at our county muni club, there is a very strong Men's club, and many of the participants look up to and sort of clamor to associate and play with certain natural leaders or popular guys.  Isn't that just the way it is in most places, clubs or local public golf courses?  So, you have to constantly prop up those guys that are group leader figures, and help them 'wear the cowbell' to lead or keep the group coming back, despite adversities, that hopefully are temporary.  Hard times need leaders and eachother's society of shared values, even in recreational activities to keep folks sane.  (my pop theory of the day  )

By the same token, you might discourage individuals that bring the customer down psychologically, the ones that bitch and will go even more bitchy if you do have to cut maintenance practices and the appearances go a little more au naturale. 

If you can identify the natural avid core golfer customer leaders and enthusiasts that can help keep the rest of the base understanding of the circumstances and be hopeful and loyal to whatever they can afford to prioritize in their own diminished spending habits; that better times for the course will come again, that might go a long way to surviving the economic valleys for the owner-operator.

[JMEvensky]

OK Jimbo, let me go down another alley... 

What ever happened to your cool avitar, "need more cowbell"? 

Maybe more cowbell is the answer, seriously.  I'm thinking of the peer group and follow the leader factor, where in order to keep the group coming back in hard times, you have to have some leaders in the local core group of regular golfers, that everyone still wants to be associated with, even if the prices are relatively high for the economic times that are suppressing more rounds of play. 

I know at our county muni club, there is a very strong Men's club, and many of the participants look up to and sort of clamor to associate and play with certain natural leaders or popular guys.  Isn't that just the way it is in most places, clubs or local public golf courses?  So, you have to constantly prop up those guys that are group leader figures, and help them 'wear the cowbell' to lead or keep the group coming back, despite adversities, that hopefully are temporary.  Hard times need leaders and eachother's society of shared values, even in recreational activities to keep folks sane.  (my pop theory of the day  )

By the same token, you might discourage individuals that bring the customer down psychologically, the ones that bitch and will go even more bitchy if you do have to cut maintenance practices and the appearances go a little more au naturale. 

>>If you can identify the natural avid core golfer customer leaders and enthusiasts that can help keep the rest of the base understanding of the circumstances and be hopeful and loyal to whatever they can afford to prioritize in their own diminished spending habits; that better times for the course will come again, that might go a long way to surviving the economic valleys for the owner-operator.<<

I agree with this last paragraph.The hard-core golfer will always be worth placating,however possible.

Somehow,while growing the game,the most important golfers have all-too-frequently been overlooked.Now,the term "hard core" is almost pejorative.We spend so much time chasing the guys looking for the shiny new penny that we sometimes forget the guy upon whom the game was built.

At the end of the day,the hard-core guys will still be playing golf,just as always.The others will just find a newer,shinier penny.

[Chris Garrett]

Jim,

This is a tough question to answer, as each facility and its owner are unique.  In a general sense, there are some fundamental starting points.  We’ve all heard the business principle that 20% of the customers bring 80% of the business.

1)   Who are your core customers?  Why do they use your facility?  What amenities and areas of the facility do they use most often?
2)   Who are your money drivers?  At most courses throughout the country, outings fall into this category.  At many public courses, leagues also would fall into this category.  I’d also ask the same follow-up question sof a) Why do they use your facility and b) What amenities and areas of the facility do they use most often?

Just as a private club must do on a consistent basis, public courses must cater to their core customers and their money drivers.  Beef up the operational amenities and areas of the facility that attract these customers and that are most often used.  Even when the going gets tough, it is not time to stop spending.  The old saying “A little love goes a long way” is useful in this situation as well.  Show these customers that you appreciate and want to maintain their business.  Think along the lines of everything from a Thank You card, to customer service standards, to a customer loyalty program.

When the economy is off, keeping your core base of customers and money drivers is crucial.  The occasional golfer, for any number of reasons, will disappear during these times.  If you lose the core of your business, however, you’re down for the count.

Now that revenue is secured as it best can be, focus on cutting back expenses.  Some areas to think about:

1)   Focus on high margin, staple items in the golf shop and food & beverage operations.  Definitely watch food costs.
2)   Be quick to send the wage and flex-time staff home early, and keep the salaried staff on a bit longer.  Any General Manager or Club Manager worth a nickel should be able to spot areas of the operation that are over staffed or miss-staffed.
3)   Identify “luxury” expenses in the operation and cut back in these areas.  A perfect example of this would be clubhouse landscaping.  It is neither crucial to the bottom line nor the customer experience.
4)   Since golf course maintenance is, by far, the largest expense at any course, cuts must be made here as well.  The greens keeper must focus on the core aspects of upkeeping the course conditions.  Under no circumstances should anyone ever jeopardize the future of the golf course for the sake of saving a few dollars on the month’s expenses.  With that said, could the fairways and greens be single cut, instead of double/cross cut a few times a week?  The greens staff should focus on keeping the golf course in good shape, and less on the peripheral elements (i.e. raking leaves and picking up branches in the wooded areas of the property.)

Hopefully this helps shed some light and gives some ideas.  I’d like to say that these ideas were all taken from positive experiences in the golf business.  Some of it was.  However, you also learn from the negative aspects as well (what not to do).  At the end of the day, focus on the core customers.  They are the ones who brought you to the dance, and they’re the ones who will keep you dancing.

[Jim_Kennedy]

RJ,
I can't speak for other regions but quite a few of Connecticut's pre-depression era courses that became NLE's were replaced by housing, as seen in modern aerials of their former sites. You could almost bank on this happening because so many of their locations were close to the center of town, i.e. directions to them were  given as " 'x' number of miles from the train station", and 'x' was usually under a couple of miles.
In later years, say post WW11, commercial sites and highway construction took their toll on the stock of golf courses.

[Jim Thompson]

I tried to be general enough so as not to direct anyone's answers, but I guess I needed to do a bit more, my bad.

When would you start changing items that impact architecture, grassing types, mowing patterns, maint practices, etc?  To what extent would you tweak?  Consider bunkering, tees, greens, fairways, cart paths, carts, course supplies, amenities, and the like?

I think most courses are already doing what you are suggesting above in one form or another, trying to hold on to exisitng customers while slashing prices to get new ones.  We all know the secret is to slash price by five bucks but expenses by eight or more.  When does this catch up with you in the market place? Or for those of you who are more inclined to think as players, how much can an operator take away and what, while giving you a discount on fees and keep your loyal business?

It is a very complicated question and one I think a bunch of people in the biz are fighting with every day.  Can they take the risk of being the first to make the needed changes to survive?  Do they need to wait and be the third or fourth in their market to tweak after another has broken the ice so to speak?

I think most owners understand the importance of their core customers already as well as the value of the "human experience".  They've already offered coupons, customer loyalty rewards, daily memberships, prepaid cart books, merchandise discounts, etc.  Most of the answers thus far are pretty safe and easy ones to give and, quite frankly, don't answer or skirt the question. 

So here it is again:


1. When would you start changing items that impact architecture, grassing types, mowing patterns, maint practices, etc? 

2.  To what extent would you tweak?  Consider bunkering, tees, greens, fairways, cart paths, carts, course supplies, amenities, and the like?

3. When would you consider changing mowing heights, converting bent to blue or, in the case of the north letting bent go to poa?

4. When would you go change fairway and tee dimensions?  Or even close selected tees?  Fill bunkers or more?  What would you replace them with?

Imagine that you are a depression era architect brought back to consult on a modern course facing these very issues.  Or even consider the question as though it were being posed on an architecture site.  (Sorry, for the sarcasm, but I just can't resist )

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()