[A_Clay_Man]

Perhaps it can all be attributed to the "Green is Good" mentality. From there you get all the bells and whistle that old lady so and so just can't do without.

[Bill_Spellman]

A Clayman-At one of the clubs that I was asscociated with, we spent 10 minutes going over expense cuts, and 20 minutes discussing why "Mrs. Jones" didn't have a towel on her cart. I suggested that we cut out providing towels(at the clubs expense) as a cost cutting measure and therefore solve two problems: 1 save money, and 2. cut down on time spent at board meetings discussing "minutia" . This is probably why I am no longer a club professional.

John Conley- I am in the Ocean City MD. area and most of the clubs in the area are resort-public facilities. Ther are only about four private clubs out of twenty two courses. The private clubs struggle because of overhead and relying on their members to cover costs, while the for profit clubs with simply-designed facilities, minimal food service, no bag storage, retired people manning many jobs that other clubs fill with PGA assistants, don't have.

    One of the local owners with three courses, has a very simple, effective approach that says spend money on design and construction and keep daily costs to a minimum. There is pne Director of Golf for all three, and no Head Professional at two of them. My heart says that every club should have a PGA professional, but my head says, Why.

I will pose this question: At one the clubs where I worked the supoerintendant was paid $90,000. The pro who owned the shop, made in excess of $250,000.this was an extroadinary situation, but none the less, existed. Is there something out of line here?  

[Paul Turner]

One of the reasons that US private clubs are much more expensive than the GB&I equivalents is the size of membership.  

From my limited experience, 300 members is typical for a top private club (18 holes) here in the North East.  In contrast, a top, 18 hole club in London will typically have 600-800 members.   I think it's similar in Scotland, unless you get right out into the sticks.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Bill,
I'm surprised to hear someone with your obvious experience say the things you did.
Supers and managers do get a percentage of the green fees, it's called a raise, and as you've shown their salaries reflect this.
The Pro owning the shop concession is great insulation for a club while providing a wanted service. Clubs would also have a tax liability and find it necessary to track every cent spent in the shop by non-members. This would limit the number of outings and probably cost the club much more than the potential gain from the shop revenues.  
Salesmen on commission bases will tend to sell the higher margin items or those with manufacturer incentives, irregardless of proper fit. The club Pro tends to sell the member what he or she needs, lest he wishes to piss off said member. Bye-bye job.

All the private clubs in my area have full houses w/waiting lists. Most are fiscally sound operations. The only ones that are experiencing some difficulties haved poured money into non-course items. The $1-2.00 @ per round they pay for their pro and super are MINOR line items.      

[Dickie Wrist]

The fundamental point is that they are more expensive because people are willing to pay more money, the real question is 'why are people in the US prepared to pay more for their golf'.

Having played extensively in the US, and a member of a club in the UK the following spring to mind:

1.  Presentation is far more important in the US, and this seeps down through everyhting, people are prepared to pay (and to be able to be seen to pay) to belong to a course that can claim a big name architect, a x0,0000 feet clubhouse, a humidor, etc. etc.  Little consideration appears to be given to the playability of the course or the enjoyment derived from playing, most enjoyment seems to be derived from being seen to be playing.

2. Golf in the UK is not cool, and doesn't have the same marketability that it does in the US.  Therefore pros and people in the golf industry are not paid as much, new courses do not generate as much interest and claiming to be a golfer at a private course does not carry the same cachet.  General interest in the game (with the exception of small pockets of Ireland and Scotland) is much lower than general interest in the US.

3. Corporate UK (whatever that might be), has not embraced golf in the same way that Corporate US has.  I work for an American company, 100 employees in the UK and two of us play golf. In the US headquarters all top management play golf and pay to play golf.  Sponsorships in the UK tend to be local (Sid the plumbers) in both nature and funding.

4. Land in the UK is cheap for golf (although land in general is expensive) for a couple of reasons, one is that the courses have been there so long that the price of the land that they are based on fails to matter (as previously mentioned), but the second is the common agricultural policy.  A very large percentage of the new golf courses that I am aware of in the UK are based on farmland, in Europe farmers are actually given subsidies to turn land use to things other than farming because of the food mountain.  In addition they can get extra funds for things like planting a certain number of trees and I believe (although I do not know for certian) providing recreational facilities.

The course I belong to had around 550 members and charges about £500 a year (joining fees were around £1000).  This is, I feel reasonabl value for what we get.  It may not be Augusta conditions, the green staff is limited, but at around £10 per round for the year, it's cheaper than paying to play per round, which along with playing in club competitions is surely the objective.

Dickie

[Ed_Baker]

Dickie:

Do you need a fat, but affable house boy? I work cheap and am an absolute star at the bar! I had the locals rolling in the aisles up in Metfield last summer, they dubbed me the "funny fat yank!" A term of endearment I'm sure.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()