[Tim Nugent]

George hit upon one of the realities of development, the land where the population is expensive because the population is there.  The cheap land is often too removed from a critical mass of population to make it work.  Sure, there are the exceptions like a Sand Hills that eeryone points to and says "see? it can be done".  Remember that Sand Hills was relatively an inexpensive build.

The 1st thing you learn in Real Estate Development is Highest and Best Use. So, you had better find land that has no higher or better use (perferably land that you can lease as a % of gross income so youhave no upfrnt carrying costs and are never out of pocket).

The 1st thing you learn in owning a Golf Course is it is a 14-hour a day (before the sun comes up til after the sun goes down), 7 days a week business and depending on where it is located, up to 12 months a year. Either you live on or nearby and run it yourself or you hire a management company to run it, knowing that they will add about $10/round to the greens fee.  Depending what segment of the market you are trying to get, that may only be 10% ($90 to $100) or it may be 30% ($30-$40).

ANd, yes, Clubhouses are like boats, they leak and require large sums of $$$ to keep those leaks plugged.  Actually, anything over 3000 -4000sf is wasted.  And a dining room? Forget that!  You are a golf course not a restraunt.  Restraunts fail more then any other business.  Build a bar and stop there.  There is a 300% markup on beer and soda. Food service? Hot dogs and hamburgers plus sandwiches/wraps. And if the design is done right, the proshop and bar can be operated by the same person/people (2!).

Perhaps the most efficient setup I've seen is Frank Jemseks operation at Pine Meadow.  The old one at Cog Hill was just like it but then they got ideas and built a bigger one with a stand alone proshop.

Cart Barn? Nope!, cart pen.  And minimize the maintenance building.  I've seen some that could sevre as the Country Public Works Building.  An off-the-shelf metal building is more than sufficient.

Clubhouse and maintenance buildings will cause staff/equipment to grow to match their size.

[Grant Saunders]

All the other stuff that an architect can provide like clever internal contours, maximising angles and differing pin placements that offer different strategies etc arent actually needed to play golf upon.

They are if you don't want your members to be bored sh*tless after 100 rounds.

Jud

Im not saying its the right way to go. I just believe that its a situation thats pretty much inevitable for a lot of courses.

[Ronald Montesano]

George, how far is Nemacolin? It's pretty "out there," is it not?

[George Pazin]

George, how far is Nemacolin? It's pretty "out there," is it not?

Probably an hour south of the Burgh proper, maybe 1 1/2 from me. And driving around here is pretty easy, at least relative to my experiences around NYC and Chicago.

I've been there 3 times that I can think of, played it twice, it was           e      m       p      t         y           each time. Can't imagine that place would survive without a gigantic helping hand from 84 Lumber.

[Mike_Young]

Mike Young,

So how many courses do you need to have in the ground to call yourself a golf course             (designer, architect, creator, builder)? You fill in the blank.  

I often find my thinking aligning with yours, but that statement intrigues me because I believe you are on to something.

Lester

Lester,
I don't know.  I sort of look at it like if I am a baseball pitcher and I don't pitch anymore; am I a baseball pitcher.  Hmmmm..IMHO I would say that if one has to rely on something else other than his golf course making in order to make a living then he is not a full time golf course maker.  If some guy decided to build a course on his farm and never built another; he might also be a golf course maker but could he get hired to build a second one?  So you see my thinking never aligns....

Paul:You say "Mike...golf course maker sounds really right...ASGCM...I will nominate you as First President with Tom D as VP/Sec...no dues though, pay as you go.
As for me it's new business cards and my pickup going door to door, and I'm just fine with that."
Nah...last time I tried that architect fraternity stuff they came after me harder than they did Herman Cain.

Mac says: "Any of y'all ever thought of that?"
Yep Mac,  for the last two years we started operating courses that were going into receivership or foreclosure and have purchased one and looking for another.  
______________

Ian,
You are a golf course maker...and you are full of BS  remember that....

____________

Form reading the last few post it seems many have the same thoughts on the subject.

I agree with what Ian is saying as to how a club can benefit from using an architect and it cost less than the irrigation of the designed green.  BUT what is not being discussed is volume.  Guys can't charge 5 or 6 clubs in their area $3-$4 thousand dollars for consulting and stay in business.  Sure we can all get these types of jobs here and there but what else are you going to do in the mean time.

Just in commenting on some of the post such as Mac's re how analyst went into other businesses.  I'm am in the process of changing my website where it doesn't emphasize golf design as much as other aspects of the golf business.  That doesn't mean I don't love it it just means I got to figure out how to use what I know and be able to live to fight another day.  And in the meantime it might be that some other avenues in golf seem more profitable.  For example:  I have never been a fan of most management companies.  Of course there are some good ones but it seems now there is a golf pro with one on every corner.  And the sales pitch is usually " we can bring you more rounds".  I call BS.  All you can do is steal more rounds from the area courses and then they will steal them back and it is a race to the bottom.  An architect or a supt might know how to work the other side of the equation and cut thru the BS and trim the cost making them profitable.  All sorts of things are out there.  If I told you I would have to shoot you.
And finally:  You guys are thinking that you got a deal if you are building a course for 2.5 mill.  Trust me  I am seeing golf courses that were foreclosed for over 4 mill being bought for under $750,000.  Now the problem is some of them could not ever make it if the bank gave it to you.  BUT there are and will be in the coming two years DEALS...and also....$200,000 should be max for a clubhouse.  You got to get the right location and the right price now because it will only be a year or two of this stuff.  And after that I don't know how guys can ever justify building a new course for a long time.  The cost difference doesn't allow for competition.
So now I am changing my name to MYDGOLF Systems.  How is that for rocket science sounding stuff Lester?    We will design em, build em, own em, operate em and even cook the burgers.  Git er done

[Don_Mahaffey]

OK Mike, but please don't complain when supers, cooks, or pros start saying they're golf architects

[Jud_T]

Clubhouse and maintenance buildings will cause staff/equipment to grow to match their size.

The corollary to how I always advise friends looking to put in a wine cellar.  Regardless of what size room you build, you will eventually fill it.  Kind of a waste to have a 3000 bottle wine cellar when you only drink 50 bottles a year and many varietals turn for the worse within 10 years...

[Randy Thompson]

 4. USGA greens are important
Ummm don´t agree with this point, I have been getting farther and farther away form USGA greens and our results seem to be getting better and better. Were still using herringbone drainage, the fine gravel layer that creates a good bridge and 100 percent pure coarse sand. Bentgrass in a warm transition climate, has thick dense roots down to the gravel layer! The best greens in Chile we used the same formula 15 years ago and they are still incredible.

[Mike Nuzzo]

 4. USGA greens are important
Ummm don´t agree with this point, I have been getting farther and farther away form USGA greens and our results seem to be getting better and better. Were still using herringbone drainage, the fine gravel layer that creates a good bridge and 100 percent pure coarse sand. Bentgrass in a warm transition climate, has thick dense roots down to the gravel layer! The best greens in Chile we used the same formula 15 years ago and they are still incredible.

That sounds like a USGA green to me - or will be eventually when it creates its own amendments.

[Tom_Doak]

I haven't seen an irrigation system under $1,000,000. in a long, long time.

You'll have to ask Tom D or Mike Y if they can make your number work.
I'm not a golf course maker  
I only know what it costs to build a course using a contractor.

Ian:

You will never see an irrigation system under $1 million if you let the certified irrigation designers at it.  However, our irrigation system for Dismal River will be a little bit under $1 mil with Don M. at the controls.

Even so ... Pacific Dunes and Barnbougle and Ballyneal were all under $2.5 million total construction budget [not counting architect's fees or grow-in].  For all three, the irrigation system was close to 50% of the total expenditure.

Regarding your pro forma ... the one element that you've got wrong [which I've always had wrong] is what it costs to operate the clubhouse etc.  At most of the clubs we've built that have struggled, somehow they are spending a million dollars or more outside the maintenance operation [mostly on personnel and insurance], and they are not making it back selling shirts!  I can't believe the operating expenses of many clubs.

[Mike_Young]

TD and Ian,

I am working on one right now in Nicaragua where there will be an abundance of quick coupler and then series of heads that can be operated at the controllers instead of a central.  Why?  Labor is 1.20 per hour and it is a much simpler system requiring less maintenance.  It will come in well well under $1 mill.  And it will work.

Tom,
I agree re the clubhouses.  All we hear is how the course is killing these places when you can find any place with a 30,000 sq ft clubhouse and realize it doesn't work.  IMHO the problem is CMAA.  If food and beverage people are running these clubs then food and beverage will be justified over all else.  And once you have one of these monster clubhouses it's hard to slow it down.   

[Tim Nugent]

]

....Regarding your pro forma ... the one element that you've got wrong [which I've always had wrong] is what it costs to operate the clubhouse etc.  At most of the clubs we've built that have struggled, somehow they are spending a million dollars or more outside the maintenance operation [mostly on personnel and insurance], and they are not making it back selling shirts!  I can't believe the operating expenses of many clubs.

Tom, reminds me of Dad's CH philosophy, "The best is the starter's shack at St. Andrews.  Anything more is just a waste."  "If you want to sell shirts, buy a clothes store, if you want to sell food, buy a restraunt, if you want  to sell tee times, get a phone and a cash register and put it in a kiosk".  The problem is the Grand Clubhouse is a relic from a business model that is no longer relevant.  
With our course, we had the higherst net margin when we had a single wide trailor and Delux port-a-poddies.  Go figure.

Mike, we should talk again   PS, a 30,000 sf clubhouse could make for some nice condo conversions.

[Mike_Young]

Tim,
I know of one that is converting to B&B for use by guest of members.  But I like your idea.

[Tim Nugent]

Tim,
I know of one that is converting to B&B for use by guest of members.  But I like your idea.

Well, let's call a B&B baby steps and okay if it it is a holding strategy with the idea of being able to convert back in the future (but then we are back to square one and repeating history).  However, it still requires staff and you still own it and are on the hook for everything that goes with that.  As mentioned earlier, Taxes, Insurance and Utlity Bills are 3 things that the average golfer (even club member) rarely consider but add up to real money.  For many taxing bodies, the CH is the element that they are familar with, as they can easily equate it's value. The GC portion is harder because it is open space.  Some taxing bodies will value it on a gross receipts basis (ie, it's worth what it can generate).  If a struggling entity can cut staff and rid itself of these bills AND generate some free cash from the sale of the building, it could go a long way to solvancy.

[Philippe Binette]

Poor Ian,

wanting to start a thread on the future of golf course design and here we are talking about clubhouse.. (I kind of started it, sorry)... so

here is the start of my answer:

A simple test, if you add up those numbers, what would it give you:
340+500+140+320+160+400+430+290+310+420+510+200+300+370+120+270+180+340
the answer is simple:

see it on my blog:
http://binettegolfarchitecture.blogspot.com/2011/12/matter-of-numbers.html

the future of golf lies in those numbers.

[Ian Andrew]

Poor Ian,

au contraire mon amie ... I'm enjoying the directions it has gone in ...

[Philippe Binette]

Ian, the discussion is leaning toward to future of golf, period. But of course, if there's no golf, there's non golf course desgin

[Mike McGuire]

Kye Goalby is Michaelangeloic.

The Architect on the machine. Worked for us at WBCC.

[Sean_A]

You have to apply basic business principles if you are thinking of developing golf courses, it might sound very ABC but work out what you think the market will stand for a round of golf and work your sums backwards what you can afford to spend. Most people on here would bust the joint very quickly because they cant detach their minor opinons and develop for the masses.

1.Location is very important 2. Small parcel of land is very important 3. Carts are important 4. USGA greens are important 5. Water is important 6. Small clubhouse is important 7. A buisness designed to operate on a low staffing

If you want to work outside those points your project enters a danger zone.
1. Not enough people 2. Expensive to buy 3. They yield good inome 4. You wnt be near great soils, you need great greens. 5. Water is expensive you need a lake to irrigate frm, allow the design to recycle the water. 6 Clubhouses leak money make sure its a small hole. 7 Staff cost a lot of money, people dont play golf in the rain, the staff still want paying, keep it lean.

If you want a dream course, ignore this post. You will have a great time building it, you will then have one more great day and that will be the day you sell it.

Adrian

The odd part is The Players Club (sort of your personal flagship?) has a fairly large clubhouse - though at least the design is sensible in that one bar tender can deal with two lounges during slow periods.  I never understood why most don't consider less as more with the house.  One of the very best basic houses I have seen is Wildwood Green near Raleigh.  A handful of tables to eat a dog and drink a beer after buying from the counter - very much halfway house style, a few tables outside, a small proshop, a small locker room with a few showers and maybe 50 lockers.  Its all that is needed for a lot of public courses - especially the sort that is very community based. 

Somebody mentioned the greens don't need to be USGA spec.  I think in wet areas with clay soil it can be a very useful advantage over other clubs in terms of grabbing/retaining business.

Ciao

[Niall C]

]

....Regarding your pro forma ... the one element that you've got wrong [which I've always had wrong] is what it costs to operate the clubhouse etc.  At most of the clubs we've built that have struggled, somehow they are spending a million dollars or more outside the maintenance operation [mostly on personnel and insurance], and they are not making it back selling shirts!  I can't believe the operating expenses of many clubs.

Tom, reminds me of Dad's CH philosophy, "The best is the starter's shack at St. Andrews.  Anything more is just a waste."  "If you want to sell shirts, buy a clothes store, if you want to sell food, buy a restraunt, if you want  to sell tee times, get a phone and a cash register and put it in a kiosk".  The problem is the Grand Clubhouse is a relic from a business model that is no longer relevant.  
With our course, we had the higherst net margin when we had a single wide trailor and Delux port-a-poddies.  Go figure.

Mike, we should talk again   PS, a 30,000 sf clubhouse could make for some nice condo conversions.

Tim and others,

You have largely been talking about US pay and play but equally you could be talking about a lot of members clubs in the UK. In the last few decades it was very popular to spend big on either a new clubhouse or make extensive renovations with a view to offering more off course facilities. It all has to be paid for. Unfortunately the members will still be paying for it as long as the building stays the way it is. Makes you wonder if it might be worth doing a cost benefit analysis for undertaking a partial demolition of some of these existing clubhouses.

Niall

[Tim Nugent]

Niall, true as there are so many more pay and play facilities over private. Plus the businessness model is more flexible.  Perhaps it stems from an image issue.  A century ago, there were 2 places people socialized at, Church and the Country Club.  Although anyone could go to church, only the select few gained entry to the Club.  Hence, it became a symbol of status.  The upper echelon of society had the money and spent it, primarily on the Clubhouse.  As the middle-class expanded  and the upper-middle-class came into being, some savey operators tapped into this and created scaled down versions of private clubs.  They dropped tennis and swimming and concetrated on using the Clubhouse and course conditions to set the stage.  Hence the birth of "Country Club for a Day" operations.
They blurred the line between Public and Private.
At private clubs, members would meet, play golf (or tennis) and then have dinner at the club's fine dining room.  This required showers and a locker room.  This didn't ocur at public courses and they found that locker rooms rarely got used and eliminated them. But the Business/Charity Outting business still required full kitchens and 200 person capacity dinning rooms.  All too often I have been in planning meeting with Clubhuse architects where, over the course of several hours, the building would grow in size to accomodate the "if your going after this market, you will need...X, and if you do that, then you might as well do...Y". Then the parking lot grows in size, the bathrooms need more lavatories, you need a coat room, more storage for extra tables/ chairs/ food/ liquor.  Before you know it 6,000sf becomes 12,000 and then 18,000.
Niall, curious, how are Clubs taxed there? Is there a difference in Private vs Pay to Play?

Phillipe, the future of golf design is a subset of the future of golf.  That is directly related to the busness of golf.  A strong arguement could be made that there was a disconnect between the two has led us to this point.  Unfortunately, getting back on track will be as easy as turning around a loaded supertanker.  It can be done, but it will take time and effort.  And there will be an effect on golf design as it will have to relate to whatever changes in the business model.   One can be either reactive and wait to see what comes about (the safe route) or be proactive and guess what will occur and try to get out front.  This is the riskier approach, but like golf the greater the risk, the greater the reward.

[Adrian_Stiff]

Sean - Its not as big as it looks if that makes sense, though it is 10,000 sq ft which I term average size. The only area that does not get much use is the changing rooms, most people change in the car park these days (more secure). We could be a bit smaller but not much, we are going to do 458 societies this year (2011) some days we may have 4 or 5 so they need feeding. Our market place is visting groups so the food and beverage operation needs to be more than a sandwich, we try use the rooms for conferencing when we are quiet (I do not currently have 1 bookinh for January or February).... its tough though and the taxes the gov charge make it tough for business's. I am largely against clubhouses because they lose money, one club I was involved in turned over £1,200,000 per year, £600,000 was vis the golf and £600,000 the F & B..profit wise we made £250,000 that year, stripped down that equated to £200,000 via the golf and £50,000 via the F & B further stripping that down the bar made £150,000 and the food bit lost a £100,000.... that aside when the club hit £1,500,000 turnover it was split 650 and 850, but the extra 250 of turnover on the F & B equated to 140,000 of profit ...once you hit good numbers in catering you can make a profit. Clubhouse Location isvery important.

[Philippe Binette]

I wrote on my blog

" It becomes obvious, especially in the current demographics and in the interest of bringing families, future players in the game, that 5600 yards is the way to go for everyday play... Nobody learn to play baseball in a 50 000 seats MLB-size stadium. The same should be applied to golf, let championship courses have championships and let the every day courses be fun for all. "

Where did the need for "championship courses" came from... did owners built "championship courses" to host championships some day of was it just a marketing scheme?

[Niall C]

Philippe

Define "Championship course". If you mean a course good enough to test the pro's then there's absolutely no reason why a championship course can't also be fun for every standard of golfer (let me qualify that by defining golfer as being someone who is proficient enough to hit the ball, however well, in the general direction they are aiming most of the time). At 9 handicap I'm no great shakes at this game but I absolutely love Carnoustie, as I do Troon, and if I had one course to play for the rest of my days it would be Silloth. On each of those courses I've played with golfers a good bit worse than me who have had a great time.

Being short doesn't necessarily make a course fun, and just because its shorter and players should in theory get round quicker, isn't necessarily going to make them come back. Things might be different in the US or where ever but I've yet to hear of a golfer over here say "lets not play there because we can't get round in under 4 hours" or what ever time you want to play to. Personally I don't see the point in replacing one stereotype with another. A really good fun course is a really good fun course irrespective of how long it is.

Tim

Not sure what the different tax regimes are for club versus pay and play but I suspect that Adrian could give you the A to Z.

Niall

[Tim Nugent]

Phillipe, it's been my experience that most courses do contain a 56-5900 yd. option. However if you force everyone to play from there, I expect that the pace of play would suffer.  All it would take is for one or a couple longer drivers to be constantly waiting for their landing areas to clear to start backing up the course.  But I understand you line of lthinking, you just swung the pendulum too far in the oppostite direction.  For me it's 66-6800 yds.  Then drop that by +/-400 yards a pop to get 6100, 5700, 5300 and 4900.  That should cover just about 99% of the golfers that have graduated to regulation golf.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()