Locals writing letters to Pound Ridge in effort to convince them to lower prices

[Jay Flemma]

I like Matt Ward a lot, but he has been proven horribly horribly wrong about Pound Ridge - several locals who live in Pound Ridge have begun a public letter writing campaign to Pound Ridge GC in an effort to get them to lower rates and offer discounts to Westchester County or town or PR residents because - as they wrote -

"So many Pound Ridge residents and Westchester County regional golfers love the club, and would like to make it our home course or at least “a regular in the rotation,” but with the steep price – well over $200 – it will be at that cost, a luxury that we’ll avail ourselves of occasionally at best....In short, it seems a shame to see Pound Ridge golf course underutilized by Pound Ridge locals like myself."

My source - a rich, well-educated, man with a great job - lives around the corner from the club.  He's not a multi-millionaire though.  He and his friends and their golf buddies have spoken - Pound Ridge's prices are too high and locals - and especially families - CAN'T pay it.  They go to other courses where they play for a lot less, and wherre the whole family can play at a reasonable price - well less then the over $1100 it would cost a family of four to play at PR.  Frankly they are also tired of losing at least a dozen balls and getting beat up on the scorecard.

So Matt, please save me the whole "Now wait a minute buckaroo" stuff  The locals have spoken with their wallets and their pens.  There is nothing you are going to write that will speak louder than the locals' own words to the PRGC operators.  These people are not stupid enough to drop $1,100 for a weekend round of golf for themselves the wife and kids...and they can't afford/won't pay $235 for a round of golf more than once or twice a year...and most importantly from the letters I read, even now they are only showing up on the one discount day a year when they can play for $100 or thereabouts.

My source said, "Pound Ridge is a nice course, but it's not pebble Beach."  The $235 price tag is outrageous, even here where people are reasonably affluent.  It's a $100-$150 course maximum."

Besides..in the recession era, aren't we supposed to not spend foolishly with both hands?  Pound Ridge is too expensive at that price point.  So contrary to what some might think...the locals are talking and writing...and they think it's not worth that price either.

[Jud_T]

Jay,

40 rounds at $200 equals 8k.  Most nice clubs in the area charge 16k dues plus 50-100k upfront...Isn't the owner loaded? I don't think he really cares unfortunately....

[Jay Flemma]

Jay,

40 rounds at $200 equals 8k.  Most nice clubs in the area charge 16k dues plus 50-100k upfront...Isn't the owner loaded? I don't think he really cares unfortunately....

he was loaded until he had to pay the Dyes to dynamite all the rock:)  It cost over $30 million to build that place.  From what I hear, it's not getting a lot of play.

[Michael Blake]

Just what we want to hear.  Wealthy people in a town where $1.5MM is the average listing price for a home complaining about a course they can't afford to play on a regular basis.

There are lots of courses I'd like to play regularly too that I can't afford, or join a club I can't afford... I chalk it up to 'tough shit.'

[JNC Lyon]

We should all remember that $1.5 Mill in Westchester does not go nearly as far as it does in other parts of the country,  Therefore, people will have less excess cash to spend on leisure activities like golf.

I don't care who the residents are in the area around Pound Ridge.  I don't care how much money they make.  235 bucks for one round of golf is too much money.  We cannot compare it to the prices of the private clubs in the area because it is a public course.  It is meant for public, everyday play.  If the owner wanted to charge private course fees, he should have made Pound Ridge a private course.

Everyone needs to read Tom Doak's post on the recent "Why? Why? Why?" thread.  It is a shame that young golfers cannot go over to their local public course and play for cheap.  It is a shame that students at Stanford cannot drive down the coast on weekends and play Pebble as Watson did when he was a student.  How are golfers, especially young golfers, expected to love the game and be inspired by the game if they do not have access to the game's best courses.

I am not just talking about Pound Ridge here.  Public access to great golf is severely limited in the United States.  Since being in Britain, I have seen that great golf that is also affordable.  Hell, I played a 13-time British Open venue for under 100 bucks.  That just would not happen in the U.S.  But it should happen.  Why should it be any different?  It may be "tough shit," but it is "tough shit" that people need to do something about.

Will writing to the owner work? Who knows.  But at least he will find out that there are more golfers out there than the multi-million dollar jetsetters who are in the city for the weekend.

[Tim Nugent]

It's unfortunate that there is a mindset that equates quality and price.  While for somethings this goes hand-in-hand but for others it doesn't.  It's just perception.  A nuevo-rich (sp?) attitude of "if it costs alot, it must be good".  We had the same thing in Chicago with The Glen Club.  They looked around and priced it out-of-the-box slightly above Kemper Lakes (when it was still public and had a track record of USGA and PGA events - not many public players get to play a Major course).  The thinking was "if it costs more than a course that held a PGA Championship, it must be worth it".  Time will tell but since it is a major mgmt co's hometown flagship, we may never know.

But, if it cost $2m to operate the place, @$235/rnd, all they need is 8,500 rnds.  The rest goes to debt service. So another $2.4m @8% on $30m is 10,000 rnds. Plus 4,300 rnds for principle over 30 yrs.  So If they can pull in 23,000 rnds. they break even.

[Michael Blake]

Perhaps the owner set the green fees super-high at $235 to keep the riff-raff off the course.  

Tim's right.  Player: If it costs $235 it must be a good course.  Developer: If the course design fee of A is 500K and course design fee of B is 250K then the course design of A must be twice as good as B's.

I undertand the whole affordability argument but the letter still 'reads' like a bunch of rich guys who feel entitled to play a golf course that they cannot afford.  If the tee sheets are full then it's still 'T.S.' but if they're not, then it's a different story.

[Steve_ Shaffer]

Jay,

If they can't afford to play there, other options exist:

http://www.westchester.com/Westchester_News/Sports/County_Golf_Courses_Opening_And_Reserve_Dates_Set_2010022212854.html

If your source is really "rich" then he shouldn't complain. My guess is that his mortgage,taxes, private school tuitions,vacations and BMW 750 lease payments eat up most of his income.

I agree about the high rates.Perhaps he should make his letter writing campaign public by contacting the Westchester News and getting an article published.

[Tom_Doak]

I grew up maybe ten miles from there.  If it had been $50 back in the day [my guess as to the 1980 equivalent of $235], I probably never would have played it.

Eventually the developer will realize that the course will never be full at that rate, and find a different price point.  Or, not.  It's really his call, that's why he's the owner.

One of the problems with everyone doing the math on these deals [even Tim !] is that you are failing to allow for shoulder season rates.  If $235 is the rack rate, and you want to project total revenues for the year based on x number of rounds, you should figure an AVERAGE green fee of something like 65% or 70%.  Nobody will pay $235 in March or April or November, and you're lucky if you can get it on the weekdays in the summer.

That's why the pro formas for most golf courses over the past 20 years missed the revenue side by so darned much.  They not only overestimated ROUNDS, they overestimated $/ROUND.

[BCyrgalis]

I feel like Pound Ridge is emblematic of a certain type of golf course -- and golf course design/development -- that has wrongfully taken over the landscape of new courses.  It's like an equation to pump into a machine and produce yourself a major-championship golf course: hire a name-brand designer, give him a blank check, charge and arm and leg for membership/daily dues ... and viola! 

Turns out, more often then not, the course ends up being too hard for the average golfer, too expensive for even the high-end golfer, and overrated for the fact that media (myself included) can get swept up in the PR machine these places produce.  Of course, that's not always the case.  I mean, brand-name architects are hired because they are the best and most consistent (we're looking at you, Doak).  But that doesn't mean every course they design is going to be a home run.  And sometimes, when the owner tells them they want a major-championship track, it's the job of the architect to create something that meets those demands.  So the lack of good courses being built that are affordable and accessible is one that just seems to be in a downturn, unfortunately. 

Pound Ridge is a very good course, undoubtedly one of the best in the area, but is it half as good as Pebble Beach, as the price would imply?  I very much doubt that.  It's very hard from any set of tees, even for a low-handicapper, and when you pay $235 bucks and end up losing a $50 box of balls, it is not a pleasant experience.

But no, it doesn't make any sense for guys like Dye and Doak to start building courses out of charity that are easier and cheaper.  And no, it doesn't make any sense for people to think Pound Ridge should lower their rates.  It's up to the owner to decide what he wants to charge, and it's up to the public to pay that much if they think it's worth it.  To write letters to the owner asking him to come down on price is a nice, homely way to try and make it happen -- but it's nobody's right to be able to afford to play a golf course.  It would just be nice if affordable, good golf courses -- which ARE being built -- were being built with more frequency than over-the-top, super-high end, hope-to-have-a-major-someday tracks with starry-eyed owners whose pockets will seem shallower as the years of debt accumulation build up. 

[Sean_A]

While I understand the eat shit and die attitude, I think golf does have a problem in that it isn't clear if the next generation or two of golfers has been properly defined in the way past generations have.  I am not talking about growth per se, but maintaining the status quo or at least stemming the decline of an absence of young golfers getting into and staying with the game.  Okay, to a large degree, this sort of planning is down to individual clubs and organizations, but I believe it would behoove the "industry" as a whole to come up with some sort of plans.  As JNC points out, part of that over-all plan could be for clubs and organizations to begin reaching out for youngster who don't necessarily have the country club background, but do show promise.  Its sort of like what caddie programs did and do for 12-16 year olds - no?  IMO, any effort to implore owners to reduce fees has to be a good thing even if it is for selfish reasons.  Too much of what happens in and around golf is dictated and driven by money.  It sort of like looking for the right candidates for a job but excluding men or women from consideration.  Golf needs to spread its wings and dig a bit deeper to find the next generations of golfers or we could start to see more clubs closing their doors in a sort of vicious cycle. 


Ciao

[Matt Day]

I would have thought having the locals play on a regular basis was a good idea?

After attending the NGCOA event at San Diego I was interested in getting feedback on why nine hole rounds aren't a big deal in the states? Public play (council/municipal) in Australia sees nine hole rounds at 55-65% of all rounds played, yet it hardly rates in the US an option.

[Tom_Doak]

Sean:

I really don't think the attitude is as you described.  When a guy builds a course out of his own pocket, it's up to him to decide how he wants to share it, isn't it?  In the long run, he's got to get tired of losing money on it, and the price will come down, but how is that not his decision to make?

Instead of writing letters to lower green fees, maybe someone should suggest to the owner that since his course is only half full anyway, he should set up a really good junior program in the off times and let them play for next to nothing with his spare capacity.  If he starts thinking about it that in those terms, then either choice he makes to reduce the spare capacity would be good for the community.

[Sean_A]

Sean:

I really don't think the attitude is as you described.  When a guy builds a course out of his own pocket, it's up to him to decide how he wants to share it, isn't it?  In the long run, he's got to get tired of losing money on it, and the price will come down, but how is that not his decision to make?

Instead of writing letters to lower green fees, maybe someone should suggest to the owner that since his course is only half full anyway, he should set up a really good junior program in the off times and let them play for next to nothing with his spare capacity.  If he starts thinking about it that in those terms, then either choice he makes to reduce the spare capacity would be good for the community.

Tom

I fully understand any owner's right to set pricing or club to exclude visitors.  My only point is for the next generation of golfers to properly emerge I think lower green fees are gonna have to play a role.  Of course one's efforts can be more directed at organizing a junior prorgam, but I also don't see anything wrong with making representations for lower green fees across the board.  It doesn't take much time and one never knows until he asks. 

Ciao

[Adrian_Stiff]

I am with the camp its the owners call. Market conditions will dictate in the end but at $235 per go if you drop it to $150 you have to produce 60 to 70% more business to get back in front. It may that the initial business plan is highly flawed as are many and that a high ender was not what was needed.

[Tim Nugent]

Tom, of course my #'s were over-simplified. They were just to put some prespective onto the discussion.  A true proforma is several pages of spreadsheets that does take the items you speak of and many others into consideration.  But you are right in that courses need to look how to fully utiize slack time.

Sean, contrary to the belief pf many, a good number of courses/clubs DO donate alot of time to the next generation.  My daughter just finished 4 yrs of High School golf.  Over that time she went from shooting 135 to high 80's-low 90's and placed in Sectionals.  She was able to do this because she got to play everyday for 2 1/2 months every year.  Local courses gave free o reduced rates to allow this to happen.  And at a small town CC is was working at, they allowed 4 or 5 high schools from around the area to use they course - Gratus, as they felt it there duty to give back to the community. 

[jeffwarne]

"So many Pound Ridge residents and Westchester County regional golfers love the club, and would like to make it our home course or at least “a regular in the rotation,” but with the steep price – well over $200 – it will be at that cost, a luxury that we’ll avail ourselves of occasionally at best....In short, it seems a shame to see Pound Ridge golf course underutilized by Pound Ridge locals like myself."

My source - a rich, well-educated, man with a great job - lives around the corner from the club.  He's not a multi-millionaire though.  He and his friends and their golf buddies have spoken - Pound Ridge's prices are too high and locals - and especially families - CAN'T pay it.  They go to other courses where they play for a lot less, and wherre the whole family can play at a reasonable price - well less then the over $1100 it would cost a family of four to play at PR.  Frankly they are also tired of losing at least a dozen balls and getting beat up on the scorecard.


My source said, "Pound Ridge is a nice course, but it's not pebble Beach."  The $235 price tag is outrageous, even here where people are reasonably affluent.  It's a $100-$150 course maximum."

Besides..in the recession era, aren't we supposed to not spend foolishly with both hands?  Pound Ridge is too expensive at that price point.  So contrary to what some might think...the locals are talking and writing...and they think it's not worth that price either.

So which is it?
Too expensive? or "tired of losing at least a dozen balls and being beat up on the scorecard"?

Does your friend lower the price of his services when people complain $500 an hour is too much for legal services, or dentistry, or Dr. visits? The free clinic would be cheaper.

Would you spend $30 million to build a business then charge lower rates than make sense to eventually turn a profit?
Frankly I think it's a difficult business model and not a course I would enjoy or patronize, but he should only lower his rates if it makes sound business sense and improves his eventual bottom line, not because a "rich" local decides it's too much for him to pay.
My guess is your friend thinks he's too good to play the local public options (or doesn't want the pace of play issues that exist at such places) and is too cheap to join a private club. (and as pointed out already is certainly comparable to $235/round)

The same reasons that make a house cost an average of $1.5 million in that area are the same issues that make a golf round on a new course cost $235 if the owner ever is going to recapture some of his investment.
the market will decide, not the pleadings of an entitled guy who has plenty of other options... or not.

In the end it's a business decision, and if it makes sense to discount rates, he will.

[PCCraig]

In the grand scheme of things, I'm going to have to agree with Jud's math.

Jay,

40 rounds at $200 equals 8k.  Most nice clubs in the area charge 16k dues plus 50-100k upfront...Isn't the owner loaded? I don't think he really cares unfortunately....

At the end of the day most people don't even play 40 rounds a year, at public or private clubs alike, and either way $8,000 in that area isn't that much.  If the course is privately owned the local residents really only have the power to not play there to prove their point that they don't agree the value meets the price point.

In just doing some light googling, Westchester County has what it looks like 7 county-owned courses, 6 of them with a MAX rate of ~$40...that's pretty affordable. And apparently the premier county-owned course, Hudson Hills, is at the most $85.

I think in this case complaining that Pound Ridge isn't doing its civic duty is a little far-fetched considering all the other affordable options in the county. Could Pound Ridge offer some local high schools the unused tee-times in the late afternoon for the golf teams to play matches or practice? Of course, but to lower the price because some cheap-o wants to save a couple thousand a year off of his already high overall expense level is pretty lame.

--------------

Also, Tim N. Re: The Glen Club. That is really a semi-private golf course. They offer memberships (about 75-100) to primaries of local companies and corporations. As of a handful of years ago they paid something like $50k initiation and $5k a year in dues, which compares to the local private golf scene of $100k initiations and $10k in dues. Then they also allow public play to make times for a rate of ~$200/person. Tuesday's were also big days for outings, sometimes with a 150+ person shotguns. There was no such thing as a "twilight" rate there, so after about 2 or 3 in the afternoon the 1st tee pretty much shut down and to Kemper's credit they let employees play for free after the last tee time and local high schools (and the Northwestern U teams) play during that time as well.

The high fee comes from I'm assuming the extreme high cost of building the complex. There is a $10M clubhouse with banquet facilities and even a hotel. The land at the time was high value as it sits on the North Shore of Chicago. And the land that was left for the golf course was a dead flat landing strip and had to be totally revamped to look like a (somewhat) natural space for a golf course.

Overall, the course catered to the "corporate" golfer, not so much the guy who wants to pay daily green fees for his repeat Saturday morning games. Whether or not that can be considered a good business model in today's times remains to be seen, but at the same time that was the business model that was chosen, and it serves them no purpose to lower their green fees and dilute their course's "stature." Much like Pound Ridge, if they cut their green fees there is a slim chance they will ever be able to raise them again once the economy turns around.  

[Michael Blake]

I mean, brand-name architects are hired because they are the best and most consistent   

Brand-name architects are hired for lots of reasons.  But because they are the BEST?  I'd guess there are plenty of architects out there (even on this site) that don't believe that for a second.

Probably worthy of a new thread--don't want to threadjack.

[Tim Nugent]

Pat, re: the Glen Club, granted, the land was flat, but from a cost standpoint, it was coupled with the ability to purchase the adjacent housing parcels. And it was zoned as a golf course/recreational open space so there wasn't a "better and higher" use for it. Plus, someone got alot of $$$ by charging tipping fees for fill dirt to offset some costs.  I used it as an example of how business models and pricing can come about, not commenting on the viability of their business model.  But it is the rack rate that serves as the basis for the value, percieived or otherwise, of a semi-private structure.  The corporate business membership is an interesting concept, especially in tight labor markets.  How it works in the current climate is what will tell if it can be a viable option in the future. 

In the final analysis, there really isn't one tried and true model.  That's why the world needs developers,  to identify a nitch and try to figure out a way to fill it and make a profit in the process.  This calls for alot of "crystal balling" as no one can predict the future.  Just as in golf, it's a risk/reward equation.  But, if it weren't for these developers, we would be living in a Soviet-style 'stackem and packem' concrete abode.  So, be careful what you wish for, you just might get it

BTW, any idea on how Chicago Highlands is selling?  From driving past, it seems they to be behind on their original timeline.

[Jud_T]

From what I hear the bigger problem with the course is all the forced carries off the tee...As for pricing, why is it OK for a private club a few miles away to do 12,000 rounds and charge the rough equivalent of $400/round and not this "public" course to do 24,000 rounds at $200 each? You can't compare real estate prices in rural England with prime metro New York and then whine about how expensive it is...Of course for 8 grand you can get a family seasonal membership at Yale and have $1000 left over for beer money!

[Bruce Katona]

I have no idea how you can spend $30 million on a public golf course and expect to get any return on your investment, but it' snot my money.  The Owner had a vision and executed on it.  It's his money, his land, and receieved approvals to build his vision. 

If $235 is the price, either you pay that rate or play somewhere else.  Hudson Hills, the high end County Course, had struggled to fill its tee times as well, as that customer base believed the price point too high for the value received.  perhpas this has changed or price point been modified to reflect current conditions.

[Mike Cirba]

My understanding is that the owner knows he isn't going to recoup his investment.   The numbers don't even begin to work in his lifetime.

As I heard it, he built it as both a labor of love as well as a bit of a monument to himself and his family.

I'm not sure how that plays into this effort to get him to reduce prices there, but I suspect he isn't too easily swayed.

[Matt_Ward]

Jay, et al:

Thanks for the plug -- but how is it that I am wrong about PR ?

Tom D said it best -- the management can create a tiered pricing system and still keep the premium numbers for the prime weekend & holiday times. The shoulder season is where those who are local can entice people to play more. This is no different than what they are doing at various clubs in the USA -- even Black Mesa does this and it works because it keeps everyone in mind without undercutting the critical tee times during the prime playing dates / months.

Jay, if the dude you mentioned is THAT rich with a GREAT (my ephasis added) then how does he begin to scream poverty. What type of rates does he charge for the professions he's in ? Jay, my good friend, do the math and research -- plot out the zip code for the area and you are talking about people at the top 5% of all income earners in the nation. Measure out the fees for what a comparable person pays at a nearby private club and the differences -- if one exists -- aren't that much in real terms.

If the guy you mentioned is really tight with the $ -- then get a Westchester County course pass and enjoy playing with the masses - including the proverbial six-hour round with so-so turf conditions thrown into the mixture.

The issue for most people at PR is the upper level demands the course provides. That's the real issue with PR.

[Adam Clayman]

Was the subtext of Jay's point that the architecture is not that bad if people want to play there?  If so, I would take issue with it because the only ones willing to write are nearby residents. That only confirms ease of playing nearby and says nothing about the quality of the course.   If you owned the place and received these letters what would you think/do?