[Steve Lapper]

Though I'm neither a member of Kingsley, Ballyneal or The Outpost Club, it strikes me as innovative and exciting to see a concept like this succeed. In today's economic environment with its shifting tides of demographics and opportunities, the OC's model suggests a creative solution for those marvelous private clubs that desperately seek extra revenue to maintain their staff and facilities.

Too many very good private clubs are facing increasingly difficult times and are unable to attract sufficient numbers of any membership class. They have core members who will never be able to successfully sustain prosperous clubs by themselves and as Mark Chaplin said, long travel times and limitation of diversity (not to mention substantial costs for some national memberships) don't help. The pool of ardent golfers who want and can afford a national membership far from home is shrinking, not expanding.

The emergence of the Eden and Outpost clubs seems to me to a breath of fresh air in serving both the avid and travel-friendly golfer while providing real value for the clubs that benefit from their visitation. The model of joining one of these clubs, allowing me to meet and play with other golf nuts at wonderful venues makes sense to me. David Baum (of Golf Odyssey) and myself have had recent conversations about how this is a win-win for everyone involved. We both recognized that the quality of the founders coupled with the quality of the courses they play will inevitably result in building a quality membership.

Does anyone here (and John I'd be interested to hear why you might disagree) believe otherwise?

[John Kavanaugh]

I don't want to hurt anyone or be thrown off the site so I am going to let this one go.

[Steve Lapper]

I don't want to hurt anyone or be thrown off the site so I am going to let this one go.

I for one will ALWAYS defend your right to disagree and as not a member anywhere involved, can't be hurt.....send me an IM! I'm very interested to hear your take.

Steve

[Steve Lapper]

To be honest, until this morning, I hadn't even heard of this Outpost Club or whatever it's called, and I still don't really know what it is, but I think I have a sense.  It's basically a time share/spread-around/join-one-join-a-bunch deal for golfers, right?  Guys, there's nothing new under the sun, and I'm sure this has been tried before...

Shiv,
http://www.outpostclub.com/

Might not be an absolutely new idea, but it's timing and execution appear to be right.

[Tim Bert]

I don't believe that it is a win-win for everyone involved.  I think it can be a win, but there is also potential downside as well.

I believe it is a win for current members of private clubs involved only if their home club was going to shut the doors or go broke.  If it somehow salvaged the member's home course it is a win.  Otherwise, I'd be hard-pressed to be swayed that existing members of some of these clubs got a "win."

I believe it is a win for the private clubs if they get some much needed revenue.  I would hope the clubs did their homework appropriately and decided it was a necessity for them, in which case it should serve as a win (at least in the short-term).  In the long-term if prospective members decide that the Outpost Club is a better value and join Outpost INSTEAD of a private club (as opposed to being someone that wasn't going to join a club otherwise) then that's not a win for the private clubs.  Likewise, if young members that aren't in an initiation heavy plan at one of these clubs decides to bail out for the "greener pastures" of the Outpost, then that isn't a win for the private clubs.

I don't have any idea what type of up front initiation or ongoing fees Outpost requires.  I also don't know if they required the clubs to sign long-term deals.  But one potential scenario where this isn't even a win for an Outpost member is if the deals are short-term in nature and the economy turns and the nicer clubs back out of the arrangement and Outpost members are left holding a less valuable membership.

In the interest of full disclosure, I recently joined as a national member at a club that I believe can be also be accessed through Outpost.  I was aware of Outpost at the time and didn't bother to pursue the financial details or attempt to join, so shame on me if it would have been cheaper and provided broader access.  To me, the most important criteria in selecting my membership was that I love the golf course, the people, and the culture and I wanted to be a part of this place and support this club.  I'd love to play some of the Outpost courses, but I'll worry about that when I have the time, the money, and the invitations to do so.  I completely understand why those that decided to join Outpost did so, and I don't fault anyone for that decision.  Different things work for different people.

But saying it is an absolute win-win for everyone is just as biased as it would be for me to say it is a lose-lose for everyone involved.  I think it is somewhere in between.

[Steve Lapper]

I don't believe that it is a win-win for everyone involved.  I think it can be a win, but there is also potential downside as well.

I believe it is a win for current members of private clubs involved only if their home club was going to shut the doors or go broke.  If it somehow salvaged the member's home course it is a win.  Otherwise, I'd be hard-pressed to be swayed that existing members of some of these clubs got a "win."

I believe it is a win for the private clubs if they get some much needed revenue.  I would hope the clubs did their homework appropriately and decided it was a necessity for them, in which case it should serve as a win (at least in the short-term).  In the long-term if prospective members decide that the Outpost Club is a better value and join Outpost INSTEAD of a private club (as opposed to being someone that wasn't going to join a club otherwise) then that's not a win for the private clubs.  Likewise, if young members that aren't in an initiation heavy plan at one of these clubs decides to bail out for the "greener pastures" of the Outpost, then that isn't a win for the private clubs.

I don't have any idea what type of up front initiation or ongoing fees Outpost requires.  I also don't know if they required the clubs to sign long-term deals.  But one potential scenario where this isn't even a win for an Outpost member is if the deals are short-term in nature and the economy turns and the nicer clubs back out of the arrangement and Outpost members are left holding a less valuable membership.

In the interest of full disclosure, I recently joined as a national member at a club that I believe can be also be accessed through Outpost.  I was aware of Outpost at the time and didn't bother to pursue the financial details or attempt to join, so shame on me if it would have been cheaper and provided broader access.  To me, the most important criteria in selecting my membership was that I love the golf course, the people, and the culture and I wanted to be a part of this place and support this club.  I'd love to play some of the Outpost courses, but I'll worry about that when I have the time, the money, and the invitations to do so.  I completely understand why those that decided to join Outpost did so, and I don't fault anyone for that decision.  Different things work for different people.

But saying it is an absolute win-win for everyone is just as biased as it would be for me to say it is a lose-lose for everyone involved.  I think it is somewhere in between.

Tim,

   Since measuring risk is a large part of my occupation, I'll make the case that this club model works as win-win with very limited, if any, down side.

1) Participating clubs (offerring periodic play) gain incremental revenue with little or no additional cost. They reap $$ for greens fees, F&B and the intangible exposure to their club and course. They hardly need to be in the position of going bust to enjoy these benefits. After all, is this any different than hosting an outing? Most clubs (and a majority of their members) will be happy to supplement their revenues and offset their costs with limited outside play, especially one with golf aficionados (vs. drunken local CCFAD regulars).
  
To your point about joining that club  If you live in the Midwest, would you be a likely candidate to join a club in the Northeast? or in the Plains?  Maybe, but I'd bet that any love affair found with such a club should well attract another candidate who might never had played there before, save for the OC.  This attraction would well offset the implied negativity of not joining one specific away club.
    As for losing a young new member, the OC doesn't really appear to function as a replacement for a local club membership. For all but the most exclusive clubs, initiation fees are dropping fitfully all over. This appears to be just starting and endemic to even some of those venues beloved by GCA fans

2) You are right about the goal of signing longer-term deals with these clubs, but my guess is that with the over abundance of clubs and courses, today's blend of attraction and relatively low cost of entry will enable an OC member to more than happily amortize his or her investment with very good courses for at least a good number of years.

Other than for the regular curmudgeons who sneer at any outside play on their exalted grounds, how is this not a win-win for everyone? From the list of people who compose the OC's advisory board (inc. Golf's most beloved), I highly doubt the visiting crowd won't be manageable and pleasant.

I'm not biased at all here as I have no horse in this race. I'm just happy to see a golf business model that helps preserve terrific clubs and the principals of the game.


Shiv,

   Hey whats wrong with a little Avon Lady and a timeshare you might actually use and isn't tradable??

[PThomas]

just supply and demand working, isnt this?

[Geoffrey_Walsh]

Geoff Walsh, don't worry about the guys in shades driving the suburban that will be following you for the rest of the day, it has nothing to do with starting this thread.

I just burst out laughing in the quiet car on the train home...

[Tim Bert]

I agree with Paul that there is a large aspect of supply and demand here and we will see it play out.  I think Outpost and maybe some other similar ventures will crop up given the current economic environment.  I'm not here to make the case that it is losing proposition, only that I don't agree with the rose-colored glasses assessment being made that it is win-win for all.

I continue to struggle to see how this is a win for a member that perhaps paid $50k or more to join a private club.  Perhaps in an equity situation.  Sure, as Steve points out some of the initiation fees are in a free fall, but I don't quite understand how opening up the club to a broader audience on a regular basis stabilizes the initiation fee or benefits the member directly.  If by win-win you are addressing only Outpost and the private club and disregarding the membership base, then I am more open to your viewpoint.

As for the private clubs, I think they need membership to survive in the long haul.  I don't think they can stay viable simply by having Outpost type membership.  To me, this means that it is necessary that Outpost not be drawing from the same pool of people that would otherwise join a national club.   I tend to think that many of the members of Outpost might otherwise be seeking one of these "good deals" with deflated initiation fees if the Outpost alternative wasn't available.  If I'm right, then I don't think the clubs necessarily win with this solution.  I think it depends upon how many potential members they lose.  If I'm wrong and the vast majority of Outpost members would have otherwise under no circumstance considered a national membership then I'll grant that this is likely a win for the private clubs involved.   

I also measure and assess risk on occasion - while I don't think that makes my opinion or his more valid, I just wanted to go ahead and declare that point a wash with Steve.   

[Sean_A]

Tim

The benefit you seem to be skipping over is immediate cash revenue for a club hosting an outing.  I don't get the impression that Outpost guys have free run over clubs - rather restricted visiting rights for a relatively short period of time.  I would also say that this sort of thing can work as marketing to attract members rather than deplete the pool of possible members.  Essentially, this sort of thing is very common in the UK only they are called societies.  The sort of society this Outpost gig seems to be is equivalent to the older societies in the UK that have a long established rota of top notch clubs they visit yearly.  These guys are members of the very same clubs, but the society is usually a group of old school boys, military officers, professional classes etc.  Its as much social as golf.  Of course the big difference and the reason (I very much suspect) that the fee for the Outpost club is expensive is for access.  It used to be that a few clubs in the UK had access issues and that the old boy societies were exempted, but that is quite rare today.

Anyway, I think anytime a club opens its doors for limited and sensible access (to guys who may be possible future members) it is often a win-win situation.  

An excellent society which has slowly gained prominence in the UK is linked below.  It does access the best courses at a hefty price, but because of it extensive schedule and competitive nature, I bet there are some guys who don't belong to a club. However, I suspect many guys sign up to play top courses in a comp which they don't have to organize.  It can sometimes be difficult to find players willing to travel around for expensive games so this society is excellent for solving that problem as I would think Outpost does.

http://www.volvogolf.co.uk/society/societyhandicap.aspx

Be sure to check out the volvo in Golf section - its incredible - just like a proper tour.   

Ciao

[Tim Bert]

Sean

I left out benefits as I was only picking apart the "ideal nation" argument. I was starting the Steve's notion of a perfect win-win scenario and only presenting a few areas where I thought it might not be pure win-win down the road. I am not trying to convince anyone that Outpost is bad or anything else. I will follow JaKa's lead and wisely drop out of the discussion as I sense people may get the wrong impression of my motives here, and I have none other than to introduce some balance.

[John Kirk]

So, all these guys who tell me they are members of Ballyneal and Kingsley are really just members of the Outpost Club?

Let me state this a bit more clearly.

Since I am a founder at one of the participating clubs, and a charter member at another, my investment was more than fifty times what Outpost Club members invest.

The Outpost Club held their member/guest at one of my clubs, and is holding another event at the one club I didn't think they could touch.

I expect to be treated with the added respect appropriate for a member who invested in the construction and development of these fine courses.

[John Kavanaugh]

So, all these guys who tell me they are members of Ballyneal and Kingsley are really just members of the Outpost Club?

Let me state this a bit more clearly.

Since I am a founder at one of the participating clubs, and a charter member at another, my investment was more than fifty times what Outpost Club members invest.

The Outpost Club held their member/guest at one of my clubs, and is holding another event at the one club I didn't think they could touch.

I expect to be treated with the added respect appropriate for a member who invested in the construction and development of these fine courses.

John, I apologize and did not mean disrespect in any way.  I personally don't understand how a great club could respect one visitor or member over another.  My only requirement or desire is to be treated in an honest manner.  I already know of people who have quit their clubs because their club made a deal with Outpost and did not inform the membership.  Most successful adults don't care near as much about money as being treated fairly.  Clubs that contract with the Outpost or other similar organizations owe it to the membership to inform them that they to have the same option as these new members.  Many members of private clubs across the country want to stay and pay dues where they are but could be pushed away if given a legitimate excuse.  A member guest held by phantom members, unless on a Monday, could be that very reason.

One other question.  I am a joiner, besides the fact the Outpost would not have me, why would I pay an initiation fee and dues as a national member at a club that is a member of their organization.  I would rather sit home than play the rube.

note: I was out of this thread but John pulled me back in, isn't that always the case.

[Mike Sweeney]

One other question.  I am a joiner, besides the fact the Outpost would not have me, why would I pay an initiation fee and dues as a national member at a club that is a member of their organization.  I would rather sit home than play the rube.

John Kavanaugh,

This is a great post and it is why I genuinely am glad you are back. Like with all things in life, these relationships are situational. I am a member at Yale, and I love it warts and all. I can play Yale without being a member as a result of my membership at The Cornell Club in NYC. I can play pretty much at will and pay a daily fee via The Cornell Club. However, I love the place so I am a member because they are great to me and my friends who play there. I try to play in a Yale Golf Club tournament or two per year. Yale did not ask or inform me of their relationship with Outpost and that is okay as I consider myself a guest of the club and university despite my membership. My financial commitment is much smaller and I never consider Yale as a traditional private club. They have always been generous to golfers who appreciate the place.

On the other side of life, I and a number of others had the lack of communication that you and John Kirk reference at a different club. In the new year, I will say this was "disappointing" and I expected more after putting in real dollars.

I think Outpost Club is a great concept and I am not a member at this stage of life. We own a time share at Disney and trust me it works great for my wife!! 

[Steve Lapper]

John Kav,

    I wholeheartedly agree with your siren call for transparency and honesty. Each and every club involved with any of these national entities should inform their membership of that group's impending use. The problem is such policy is nearly wholesale absent and always has been, outside of management and a few club bigwigs. How many clubs tell there members who is there on a Monday outing? I don't believe it is the obligation of an Outpost or Eden club to inform the membership of those venues it visits, but instead such obligation belongs to those steering the hosting club's policies and finances.

   Today's private club world presents so many new issues, conundrums, and available opportunities that it's doubtful many directly weigh joining a national multi-club entity vs. joining a single local club. They may weigh the former against a national membership at a single well-distanced club, but it's just another part of the risk a remote club has inherent to it's business model.

John Kirk cites the example of belonging to several clubs that will afford an Outpost or Eden club access, yet he knew full well that joining those locales presented some form of principal risk when he made his initial decision. The dollars may be meaningful, but the choice is ours and capitalism often shifts a premium to optionality when it debt is involved. Supply and demand are no different in this universe.

[jeffwarne]

John Kav,

    I wholeheartedly agree with your siren call for transparency and honesty. Each and every club involved with any of these national entities should inform their membership of that group's impending use. The problem is such policy is nearly wholesale absent and always has been, outside of management and a few club bigwigs. How many clubs tell there members who is there on a Monday outing? I don't believe it is the obligation of an Outpost or Eden club to inform the membership of those venues it visits, but instead such obligation belongs to those steering the hosting club's policies and finances.

   Today's private club world presents so many new issues, conundrums, and available opportunities that it's doubtful many directly weigh joining a national multi-club entity vs. joining a single local club. They may weigh the former against a national membership at a single well-distanced club, but it's just another part of the risk a remote club has inherent to it's business model.

John Kirk cites the example of belonging to several clubs that will afford an Outpost or Eden club access, yet he knew full well that joining those locales presented some form of principal risk when he made his initial decision. The dollars may be meaningful, but the choice is ours and capitalism often shifts a premium to optionality when it debt is involved. Supply and demand are no different in this universe.

Since I don't know what clubs are participating, are there any clubs where your pro can't simply pick up the phone and provide the same access?
No disrespect intended, just trying to figure it all out.

[John Kirk]

why would I pay an initiation fee and dues as a national member at a club that is a member of their organization.

First of all, John.  My apologies, as my comment was not directed at you in any way.

A couple of my clubs are having difficulty filling their rosters.  The Outpost Club is a superior value.  So that's a concern, to be sure.

[Sean_A]

Sean

I left out benefits as I was only picking apart the "ideal nation" argument. I was starting the Steve's notion of a perfect win-win scenario and only presenting a few areas where I thought it might not be pure win-win down the road. I am not trying to convince anyone that Outpost is bad or anything else. I will follow JaKa's lead and wisely drop out of the discussion as I sense people may get the wrong impression of my motives here, and I have none other than to introduce some balance.

Tim

Thats fair enough, few things in life are absolutely ideal beyond folk dancing and saxophones.  However, unless guys are seriously anal retentive (in which case it doesn't matter what happens because they will always find fault), I don't see what a club is giving away in this instance other than a bit of exclusivity and a few tee times - not much really.  Its a shame if that really matters to people, but I fear it does.  

I find the talk of transparency odd.  Do clubs go in front of the membership and talk about the outings they are to host and point out that the members can if they choose partake in these outings in lieu of membership?  Its a half baked idea that I bet very few members would have any interest in at all except for the bottom profit or which charity is benefited.    

Mike

Your comments promted me to look at the Yale membership info.  Why do you spose they allow non-Yale affiliation membership?  

Ciao

[John Kavanaugh]

I find the talk of transparency odd.  Do clubs go in front of the membership and talk about the outings they are to host and point out that the members can if they choose partake in these outings in lieu of membership?  Its a half baked idea that I bet very few members would have any interest in at all except for the bottom profit or which charity is benefited.    

Yes, Victoria National just sent me a calendar of events for 2011 with every member outing listed.  Victoria has had a long standing policy where they allow unaccompanied play.  I fully support a foresome coming in and paying more for one round of golf than what I pay for a full months dues.  It would be ignorant and selfish for me to feel any other way in this economy.

If Victoria National were to hold a member/guest for phantom members that disrupts my weekend play it would indeed be upsetting.  I don't care what they do on Mondays and we are not informed as such.

[Mark Chaplin]

I maybe wrong but the OC's member/guest events are members of the OC and their guests. It is not implying they are members of the club where they are playing the event.

I know things on this side of the pond are different but here we have societies and clubs who play their home matches at places where they are not members. The MCC have The Berkshire as their home club, the Judges of the Old Bailey use new Zealand and all the schools have home clubs.

[Carl Nichols]

I find the talk of transparency odd.  Do clubs go in front of the membership and talk about the outings they are to host and point out that the members can if they choose partake in these outings in lieu of membership?  Its a half baked idea that I bet very few members would have any interest in at all except for the bottom profit or which charity is benefited.    

Yes, Victoria National just sent me a calendar of events for 2011 with every member outing listed.  Victoria has had a long standing policy where they allow unaccompanied play.  I fully support a foresome coming in and paying more for one round of golf than what I pay for a full months dues.  It would be ignorant and selfish for me to feel any other way in this economy.

If Victoria National were to hold a member/guest for phantom members that disrupts my weekend play it would indeed be upsetting.  I don't care what they do on Mondays and we are not informed as such.

I know about every Monday outing at my (non-national) club -- they're posted on the club calendar. 

[Sean_A]

I find the talk of transparency odd.  Do clubs go in front of the membership and talk about the outings they are to host and point out that the members can if they choose partake in these outings in lieu of membership?  Its a half baked idea that I bet very few members would have any interest in at all except for the bottom profit or which charity is benefited.    

Yes, Victoria National just sent me a calendar of events for 2011 with every member outing listed.  Victoria has had a long standing policy where they allow unaccompanied play.  I fully support a foresome coming in and paying more for one round of golf than what I pay for a full months dues.  It would be ignorant and selfish for me to feel any other way in this economy.

If Victoria National were to hold a member/guest for phantom members that disrupts my weekend play it would indeed be upsetting.  I don't care what they do on Mondays and we are not informed as such.

Clubs allow outings and OP on their course on weekends?  I always assumed we were talking weekdays, but if the weekends are utilized I wouldn't be terribly happy as a member.  This is one of the downsides of being a memebr of a good club in England - there are many events taking place in the name of competitions (which don't mean anything) like county matches/events, club matches, club comps, old boy societies etc etc.  Its incredible how many slots are taken up by this sort of stuff.

BTW - why do you fully support a 4ball playing VN at what must be a muy largo rate if it costs as much as one month's dues, but it isn't okay for UK clubs to take visitors at a much higher rate than the guest fee?  We all live in the same world - no?

BTW Dos - I am not talking about recieving a yearly diary.  I was more talking about the committee taking the decision-making about these outings to member level.  Jeepers, if a diary is all that it takes for full transparency than sure, send em' out.   

Ciao      

[John Kavanaugh]

Carl,

I could find out what the Monday outings are but they are mostly charities and then I might have to play, and pay of course.  One thing I am proud of is that after being a member of Victoria for 10 years I still have not played in one scramble.

[John Kavanaugh]

BTW - why do you fully support a 4ball playing VN at what must be a muy largo rate if it costs as much as one month's dues, but it isn't okay for UK clubs to take visitors at a much higher rate than the guest fee?  We all live in the same world - no?

Ciao      

I think it is great that UK clubs can get tourists to subsidize their memberships.  I just want clubs and members to be honest on why they are doing it.

note:  I do not believe for a second that Sand Hills or their membership needed my money when they so graciously hosted me this summer.  They are the exception to the rule.

[Mike Sweeney]

Mike

Your comments promted me to look at the Yale membership info.  Why do you spose they allow non-Yale affiliation membership?  

Ciao

Sure, just send me an email. After looking at Joe's recently sent Yale pics, I might get a second membership in case they get tired of me:

http://xchem.villanova.edu/~bausch/images/albums/yale/

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()