[Michael Dugger]

What I would like to know is this:

Provided Melvyn obtains the requisite information he has asked for, what does he plan to do with it?

Write an "in my opinion" piece for gca.com reader's pleasure (or pain?)

[Melvyn Morrow]

Why do I need to do something with it apart from learning and understanding what goes on in your private clubs.  Even if I had some use for the information apart from understanding the workings of the US clubs, have no fear as I would not post anything again In My Opinion, as I expect not many would want to understand let alone care to understand the opinions of others.

Michael you don't care so why bother to make a comment, just stirring the pot as usual.

Melvyn

[Lloyd_Cole]

Melvin,

This is how you started this thread - "Clearly revenue is not an issue so can you name a list of private clubs in the US that advocate riding over walking. Perhaps you may also be able to offer an explanation as to why they are pro carts.

Melvyn"

You opened with a statement, erroneous, with no reference to how you came to conclude this, and then you followed up with a question related to the erroneous statement.

All I want is for you to think before you write. Cite your references if you're going to open with a potentially contentious statement. We haven't all read all the threads here... And if you're not going to, please try to be less thin skinned - I will continue to call out rotten arguments when I see them. This website is the premier resource for students of GCA all around the world, we should all try to make our arguments and comments thoughtfully.

[Bill_McBride]

What is the issue about revenue?

If a member walks, carrying his/her bag or pushing a trolley, the club gets zero revenue. 

If a member rides in a cart, the typical cost is $18 or $36 for the twosome riding. 

So there is definitely revenue, whether it derives from members or guests. 

Typical at a US private might be 30,000 rounds x 60% in a cart = 18,000 @ $18 = $162,000.   Real revenue and most likely an important profit center.  Roger Wolfe does a good cost/profit analysis above in this thread. 

[Tim_Weiman]

Melvyn,

My experience has been that carts are typically promoted at resorts  and upscale public courses. Walking is more common at "muni" courses and private courses.

I am not aware of any top US private courses that promote riding over walking.

[Mike_Trenham]

It was better when the golf pro's had a share of the cart revenue as they needed to make sure the caddie program was strong so that they were not blamed for its demise.  My father who was our golf professional worked real hard to have an active caddie program with a bunch of kids and characters.

Our caddiemaster was always selling the caddies and promoting them over carts.  Also he would have carts by the 10th tee gratis on the hottest days for guys that got tired but had taken a caddie.  This is not promoted today as the board members that ride don't think it is fair for someone supporting the caddie program to get a "free" cart for 9 holes.  You can get one but don't talk about it.  

At my club in the past 20 seasons, the price of a cart has gone from $18.00 to $24.00 the caddie fee has gone from $30 to $60 and the price of a draft has gone from $1.75 to $4.00.  Inflation is pushing the other two up, guys that ride carts and are on the board are keeping the first one low.

The finest club in the area charges the same rate for a cart that a caddie earns, that rate also applies if you want to use a cart to spectate during a club event.

[Keith Phillips]

Jupiter Hills comes to mind - an outstanding club, with (surprisingly) no caddie program and carts are favored.

[Sam Morrow]

When factoring in revenue at a lot of private clubs you need to factor in the trail fee charged to people who own their own carts. I think the club I grew up at charged $55 a month for the trail fee.

[Melvyn Morrow]

I believe that the argument re revenue as related to carts is just a smoke screen to maintain the easy option.

Once we have taken in the cost of leasing/or initial purchase of the carts, the cart tracks, storage, maintenance shops, engineers where applicable or the more constant requirement for maintenance for both carts and more importantly the course I wonder if there really is a need to have a fleet or carts instead of a few for the old or less mobile among us.

Is the regular course maintenance budget pandering more for cart damage /repair over the more general run of the mill (day to day) maintenance?  Yes carts bring in revenue but they also require more than just cart maintenance.

It would also seem that clubs are promoting carts more for the revenue they perhaps potentially may bring in over playing golf in the traditional manner. If this is indeed true then one has the right to question the standing of each club when they claim to be a golf club.

We then need to question if they should be promoting the names of past great designers because the course if modified in any way to accommodate the cart is no longer reflecting the original design intent.  So if players seek out courses by specific designers why continue to do so if the course is now mainly non-walking – noting that the course was designed for the walking golfer in the first place. Has the club betrayed its roots and their history for a small pocket full of more change than a pile of bank notes.

The equation seems out of kilter, unbalanced and I question if a course designed for walking can or should be considered as a non-walking course.

My understanding is that neither of the past great Golden Age Designer ever designed a course for carts.

Revenue is important but I still have not got to the bottom of understand the psyche of the US Private Clubs.
Nor can I see any better satisfaction than walking a gruelling 18 or 36 Holes during which one has tested both body and mind.

In closing I thank those who have entered into the spirit of this topic & debate which I believe is what Ran had originally intended for this site. To those who just seek confrontation and hostilities from their first post, I feel sorry for your partners due to your closed minds and the apparent belief that only you have an opinion and those of others are of no importance.   

Melvyn

[David Whitmer]

David

Did your club have tracks or were carts allowed on the fairways? If so, how did they affect the course, by that did you notice by Monday evening any excessive wear and tear caused by the carts? Also was there any time during the year that carts were not actually used for any reason?

Melvyn

When the course was built in 1996, cart paths were not included. However, after one year of play it became apparent that enough members wished to ride that paths were deemed necessary. When conditions allowed carts to leave the path, we really pleaded that the carts ride up the fairway as opposed to the rough. When people thought carts should not stay in the fairway, they inevitably all rode up the rough, right next to the fairway. That created wear and tear, and it did not look good. When we realized that we wanted carts to stay in the fairways, the course looked better. Obviously, the fairways don't look as trampled as the rough.

The course did show signs of play come Tuesday morning. I'm generalizing here, but most people who played in Monday outings did not take good care of the golf course, certainly not like our members did. The outings made big bucks for the club, so we chalked up the Tuesday fixings to the cost of doing business.

[David Whitmer]

On the private course side, there are 2 top 100 that I can think of that are not big on caddies (if they offer caddies at all).  1 is Pete Dye GC in West Virginia.  I did not see any caddie shack and was never offered a caddie when I played there.  2 is Double Eagle in Columbus, Ohio.  Both would be very difficult to walk and were not designed for walking.  

Michael,

Just to let you know my experience, I have played Double Eagle about 20 times. Probably 15 of those times I walked with a caddie, and the other 5 we rode (because my host wanted to) and took a forecaddie. I found Double Eagle to be very walkable.

[Bradley Anderson]

The only two clubs that I know of that actually promote walking over riding are Old Elm, and Merion. But I am sure that there are more. I am guessing that Pine Valley and Cyprus Point also promote walking?

To the issue of revenue, has anyone convincingly studied all of the costs that are created by carts to verify that they actually make revenue? The cost of:

purchasing/leasing the carts
installing the cart paths
upkeep of the cart paths - they don't last forever
counteracting compaction created by carts - extra fertilizer, herbicides, periodic sodding of path edges and ends
irrigating more than is needed to prevent tracking of carts on firm semidormant turf - compromising the course architecture
dressing of path adornments - curbs, flowerbeds, stairways, all of which seemed to have become a part of golf courses after carts came on the scene

[Jud_T]

It's pretty simple in my mind with regard to the US market...  Caddie programs are tough to maintain.  Clubs that do so generally require you to take a caddie when one's available whether you're walking or riding.  At some clubs one can request a caddie ahead of time but they're not always available.  Otherwise carts are available as is the option to carry or pull.  Some courses and climates are more conducive to walking than others.  I haven't seen a private club where one isn't allowed to walk if really intent to do so...

[Brent Hutto]

To the issue of revenue, has anyone convincingly studied all of the costs that are created by carts to verify that they actually make revenue?

Just keep in mind that you can't compare a tally of costs such as you list to the total amount of money charged as cart fees. That is not a complete accounting of revenue impact.

You'd have to use some assumption about how many rounds (for a public course) or members (for a private) would be lost if riding were not available. And that's hard to know, it would be a guess and one subject to considerable influence from emotional or wishful thinking in either direction, depending.

It's quite easy to imagine a club where 80% of the rounds are riding and the carts were removed, maybe the number of rounds would go down by 50%, 60%, 70%. Or where 80% of the member ride when they play and some large proportion of those would leave the club if they could not ride to play. Losing one member's $750/year in cart fees is peanuts compared to also losing his $10,000/year in dues.

Complete accounting of both sides is trickier than it looks. Not that it matters as I suspect very few private clubs are at all interested in seeing an honest accounting analysis such as a Lou Duran type (hi Lou, have fun at Buda!) would expect from a business venture.

[Bill_McBride]

I believe that the argument re revenue as related to carts is just a smoke screen to maintain the easy option.

That's not accurate.  Once carts became part of American golf, the revenue streams became ingrained in most clubs' financial statements.

Like it or not, that's the reality.

So we are beyond the point of no return in America, but perhaps you can stave off what seems to be a growing trend toward buggies in the UK.

[Mark Chaplin]

Bradley Pine Valley has carts for getting around the property and playing the short course, they are not permitted on the main course, players walk with a caddie. The Country Club is walking with caddies but you are permitted a cart with "doctors note". My mate used one last
week due to an ankle injury.

[Michael George]

To prove Bill's point, most private courses are not starting to charge a fee for taking a caddie (whether they take it from the caddie's set fee or just charge your account).  They have lost too much revenue from carts and have to replace it somewhere.

Also, I enjoy walking as much as anyone.  However, we should not say that carts don't have a place in golf.  My father would not be playing anymore if it was not for golf carts.  Playing a round with him at this stage of our lives is invaluable to me and is what makes golf the most special sport on the planet.  Again, I prefer to walk but keeping people involved in the game is not a bad thing.

[Carl Johnson]

Clearly revenue is not an issue so can you name a list of private clubs in the US that advocate riding over walking. Perhaps you may also be able to offer an explanation as to why they are pro carts.

Melvyn

Melvin,

Obviously, I'm personally familiar with the details on only a small number of private clubs.  None of the ones I know "advocate riding over walking," at least as I would use the word "advocate."  They all offer a riding option, but mandatory riding is limited to a very small percentage of the time and to certain "events."

Question back to you.  What, in your mind, would be the clues that a private club "advocated" riding over walking?  Would you say that a club that required riding only on Sat. morning before noon, and at events such as occasional member-guest tournaments, should automatically be placed in the "advocate riding" category?

[Melvyn Morrow]

Carl

If a club has a No Walking policy, be it for just a few hours then I see it as supporting riding over walking. If both are available with walking not banned then no, they are not advocating carts over walking.

Melvyn

[Brent Hutto]

Question back to you.  What, in your mind, would be the clues that a private club "advocated" riding over walking?  Would you say that a club that required riding only on Sat. morning before noon, and at events such as occasional member-guest tournaments, should automatically be placed in the "advocate riding" category?

I'm with the Scotsman on this. Yes, that is advocating riding. Or encouraging or favoring, whatever word one might choose.

[Bill_McBride]

Question back to you.  What, in your mind, would be the clues that a private club "advocated" riding over walking?  Would you say that a club that required riding only on Sat. morning before noon, and at events such as occasional member-guest tournaments, should automatically be placed in the "advocate riding" category?

I'm with the Scotsman on this. Yes, that is advocating riding. Or encouraging or favoring, whatever word one might choose.

That would be the evil "required" category.

[Carl Johnson]

Carl

If a club has a No Walking policy, be it for just a few hours then I see it as supporting riding over walking. If both are available with walking not banned then no, they are not advocating carts over walking.

Melvyn

Melvyn,

Well, then by your definition, I'll name a private club that advocates riding over walking.  That would be my club, Carolina Golf Club, in Charlotte, NC.  Hope this helps you.  On the other hand, I can't give you an explanation as to why.  I could only guess, and I don't want to do that.

[Matt MacIver]

I can't recall if this has already been mentioned but a lot of courses in the US site "pace of play" issues when requiring/offering carts.  Maybe if we fix slow play we can limit cart use? 

But also, pace of play issues over here have one other major factor that isn't a factor in Scotland - it's the hike between green-to-tee on {most?} courses built these days and certainly those with a real estate component.  I wouldn't / couldn't walk certain courses given either the terrain and/or distance, much less in 3-4 hours.  Scotland mostly doesn't have these problems. 

[Robin_Hiseman]

Isn't it distressing that our sport has developed down a path whereby fit, willing and able participants are FORBIDDEN to walk?  Under any circumstances!  I just find that really sad.  I'm not against cart play at all, but one should ALWAYS have the option to walk.  The walk, the exercise and being able to feel the landscape pass by under your feet is one of the great joys of golf.  Now, there are times and climates in which you might want to ride, even if it is just between the holes, but speaking as someone who has designed a fair few miles of cart paths, we do, as I'm sure comes as no surprise, tend to keep them out of sight and hopefully out of mind of play.  This isn't so much of a problem if clubs permit them to run down the fairway, but the experience of the course is truly miserable when carts are confined to the path.

Now, on the flip side, there are clearly great courses in existence that would never have been conceived on those sites without an emphasis on cart play.  Take one of my favourite architects Mike Strantz as an example.  I can think of three of his courses (Tot Hill Farm, Royal New Kent and Stonehouse) that would never have been built if it wasn't for carts.  The layouts are just not practical for an emphasis on walking. Tobacco Road may be a fourth, though I remember walking that without too much stress.  On balance, I expect we are more grateful for these and other similar courses being in existence thanks to there being carts to use.  Just let us walk if we want to.

[Sean_A]

I grew up at a club which only allowed juniors to walk and carry.  Proper members had to use caddie when available and cart when no caddie was available - which was most of the time.  I know guys raise the cart "revenue" (a misnomer if there ever was one) issue as a mainstay in a budget, that isn't the issue.  To me the issue is making guys that want carts to pay for carts.  Of course that means their fees essentially shoot up, but then at least folks can walk without having to drag a caddie about.  My boyhood course was and is a joy to walk and it just doesn't make sense from a "revenue" perspective or not, not to be able to walk if one chooses to do so.  It is for this very reason that I never joined the club full time.  They were stuck in some 70s time warp they refused shake off.  I didn't see the point when I could go play any number of courses for less money that allowed me to play the game on foot.  As Robin writes, it is a sad state of affairs when so called "revenue" issues dictate if one can walk or not.  Talk about not seeing the forest for the trees.

So Melvyn, the long and short of it is there is a certain private club on an island south of Detroit which definitely promotes riding over walking.

Ciao    

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()