Assuming no debt, what should be the cost per round at Ballyneal?

[Jay Flemma]

They didn't SPONSOR me, I had to pay $350 total for the round and the caddie.

[Mark Johnson]

I'm guessing Colton isn't paying $500/round.  It all comes down to your own utility function.  There are guys who will happily pay $5000/year just to say they belong and might get out once a year for a couple rounds and there are guys who live far away who get 50+ rounds/year in.  It takes a village.  Funny how $400 per round at a local upscale club is no big deal but somehow it's an abomination when you only get a dozen rounds a year in on a couple visits to a National Club.

Throw in my sunk costs and I'm probably close to twice that. Maybe (probably) I'm just a fool, but I'd still say it was worth every penny. Plus I have Tom D's respect. At least I got that going for me.

Think of how much it would be if you didnt play 8 rounds in a day...

[Ben Sims]

They didn't SPONSOR me, I had to pay $350 total for the round and the caddie.

Jay,

Dismal River is public access?  Ballyneal too?  Before lambasting how "good for the game" these PRIVATE destination clubs are, you might want to consider that they are under no obligation to allow access to you or your employer.  

I am sure they would be more than happy to read an honest and justified opinion on the quality of their course and facilities.  But it appears you are looking a gift horse in the mouth by writing on a public forum that you think the pricing structures are bad for golf.  I'm sure you would agree that they are also under no real obligation to provide value to their subsidized GUESTS on a cost/round basis.  

Jay, come on man.

[Adam Clayman]

I can't read this whole thread and forgive me if I'm on the wrong page BUT. 5 years ago Jay and I paid $157.50 to play DR plus 50 for the caddie. We went to SH to look not play. I don't know what Jay paid at BN but the rate at that time was $100 plus caddie. $85 max. 

[Jay Flemma]

So Ben, the way GCA.com works in your mind (and others, apparently), is if someone doing the job they are being paid to do gives their honest opinion and you don't like it, you make ad hominem attacks on them (some of which are lies) and then insinuate that maybe they or their emplyer shouldn't be allowed back...even going so far as to post their future itinerary and make sinister oblique references...

That is not promoting frank discussion of architecture...in fact, it sounds suspiciously like suppressing it...

And Adam, I paid $250 + 100, not 157.50...maybe you got a better rate than I did...

[Chris Johnston]

They didn't SPONSOR me, I had to pay $350 total for the round and the caddie.

Dang, Jay.  How much did you pay the caddie?  $350 for both sounds a bit high and I'm glad to see AC clear the numbers up. Caddies are an option at Dismal and the club doesn't set the rates.  The $157.50 + $50 sounds more like it, at least today.

Ben - Like everyone else out here except Prairie Club, we are aren't public access, but do attempt to selectively accommodate limited non member sponsored play if we can.  We do ask these folks to pay for the experience.  This just seems a right thing on so many fronts, and is a cousin to the Scottish model.  Jay is welcome back although I thought he missed it on the lack of availability of ground game options at Dismal.

 

[Ben Sims]

So Ben, the way GCA.com works in your mind (and others, apparently), is if someone doing the job they are being paid to do gives their honest opinion and you don't like it, you make ad hominem attacks on them (some of which are lies) and then insinuate that maybe they or their emplyer shouldn't be allowed back...even going so far as to post their future itinerary and make sinister oblique references...

That is not promoting frank discussion of architecture...in fact, it sounds suspiciously like suppressing it...

And Adam, I paid $250 + 100, not 157.50...maybe you got a better rate than I did...

Jay,

If you'll carefully read both my last post and my response to your PM to me, you'll clearly see that I have no issue with your honest assessment of a golf course or its facilities.  I think there are people that actually like your take on courses and their architecture/conditioning.

But to imply--rather overtly I might add--that the pricing structure of a private destination club is bad for golf and its members don't care about the future of golf is RTJ II-ish at best.  You don't see a difference in the two?

[Tom_Doak]

That is not promoting frank discussion of architecture...in fact, it sounds suspiciously like suppressing it...

Pretty much none of this discussion has been about architecture at all.

Jay, the only way a place like Ballyneal or Dismal River will be built is if somebody is willing to put up the money to play them.  If they charged $100 a round or less, like you want them to, there is no way they'd survive.  So are you saying they shouldn't be built?  Or are you just complaining about the reality of golf course development?

[Adam Clayman]

*edit*

Sorry Jay. The only number I got wrong was how many years ago it was. It was in '06 and that was 6 years ago. Numbers are my life and I remember It perfectly. They told us both it was $150 plus a 5% service fee.
That included the caddie fee, but we were responsible for the tip.
 Their phone lines were down, so we payed after the round with plastic. We discussed how weird it was to charge a 5% service fee.

I remember it so well, because it was the first time since I was 12, that I left the house without cash.

 The caddie was a Scot, and believed me when I told him I would mail the $50 check, the following day. Which I did. Do I need to produce the old check, for you to believe me?

[Ben Sims]

Jay,

Take a step back and don't just argue because you're a lawyer.  Why would a group of guys including Jim Colton and Tom Doak be arguing you so vehemently?  Is it because you've touched a nerve or--more likely--that you've ran aground of the consequences of a ridiculous assertion?

[Jay Flemma]

Thank you Chris, I appreciate it deeply.  I can't wait to see the changes made and to tour the new site.  I also am glad that we can agree to disagree on opinions on architecture without people savaging the person expressing an honest opinion.

I never said Dismal wasn't good. I never said not to go play it.  All I said was I felt that with regard to what I paid - 250 + 50 caddie fee and a $50 tip = $350, that I've seen much better value in golf - that's all.

[Jay Flemma]

That is not promoting frank discussion of architecture...in fact, it sounds suspiciously like suppressing it...

Pretty much none of this discussion has been about architecture at all.

Jay, the only way a place like Ballyneal or Dismal River will be built is if somebody is willing to put up the money to play them.  If they charged $100 a round or less, like you want them to, there is no way they'd survive.  So are you saying they shouldn't be built?  Or are you just complaining about the reality of golf course development?

No Tom I'm not saying that at all!!!  All I am saying is $350 is a lot to shell out for 5 hrs.  Nothing more nothing less.  I have an answer to your question, but I have no inclination to share it here because every word I am saying is being twisted by others and I have other urgent priorities with regard to my writing gig.  We can talk about it off list.  For those of you that wanted to chase me off the discussion, congrats, you did it...now go get your congratulations from the rest of the "we hate Jay also" crowd...

Ben, I disagree with your position.

[Jim Colton]

Jeff, Tim I do not agree.  Again if you take that argument to its conclusion. it's bad for the game.  To not allow for cost is to leave certain people behind. Golf is one o the few sports you can play from cradle grave, and the lifeblood of the game isn't the country club guy with the "{have clubs, will travel" attitude, it's the family down the street all playing together on Sunday afternoon on a beautiful fall day, creating memories that last a lifetime and inpiring a love of the game in the younger generation of kids they are raising.

Who said this a zero-sum game? I can and will support both groups.

Ben, getting back to the topic, I'm still waiting for an answer to this one.

[Chris Johnston]

Jay -  I love the diversity of opinion here and have absolutely no problem with yours.  btw, the windmill on #4 was there long before the course.  Jack probably used it rather than planting a tree which would have really been a bad fit...since we have no trees at all.  And, #10 is one of the most member loved and favorite holes, but it certainly is a unique approach to a 150 yard hole.  Maybe its an acquired taste.

For the record, Jay does make a very valid point.  I have no doubt he was charged what he recalls as he played here years ago - it was a very different time and the price was above what I believe was proper.  I would have been unimpressed too and given the value equation a D-.  He is also correct that rates like that very much set back Dismal River, just like the high cost to join hurt Ballyneal in this economy.

Tom, as usual, is correct.  Or, at least I agree with him. This thread certainly does relate to architecture as, in order for quality architecture to flourish, the underlying business must succeed.  This may be the crux of any thread on the future.  In a short 5 month season, the economics are not easy.  Thats why the experience must be top notch and that is why this thread has value.

Kudos to Mr. Kavanaugh for beginning this one.

[Ben Sims]

Jay,

Of course you disagree with my position.  You have to justify your existence, right?  My point is simply that you failed to take into account many individuals when you say "...if you take that argument to its logical conclusion, its bad for the game."

For example, Brad Klein has been known to write some pointed pieces on certain golf courses out there.  But he writes on golf architecture.  Writing publicly that a private destination club's pricing structure is bad for the game is crossing a line and makes you--as the writer of a piece that gives press to said club--somewhat suspect in credibility.  How can you go on a trip to play the golf course, give it a spot in your mag or blog with a photograph or two, and then say its bad for the game because it prices out certain demographics?  Of course it prices out a demographic, its a private club!  

Sand Hills, Ballyneal, and Dismal River's pricing structures are a blip on the radar screen of golf in terms of efficiency, affordability, and the ambiguous term of "family golf."  However, I bet their respective memberships have done more for a bright future for public "Joe Blow"golf than every golf blog combined.

[Jud_T]

The price point was too high only in the sense that the market would no longer support it.  There's a place for decent fun courses that are a great value and open to anyone with a wifebeater, a pair of ripped jeans, a garbage bag full of malt liquor and $20 bucks in rolled up quarters.  Fortunately there's also a place for places like Ballyneal. (Wait for it....)

On one hand, I resent the notion that this is the dichotomy that exists in golf, that there are those who can afford private club golf, and there are a bunch of guys in wifebeaters, jeans, etc.

On the other, though, it's clear that there are plenty of golf options available, and a course like Ballyneal shouldn't have to have some sort of egalitarian ideal in mind when they set their prices. They want to prosper, they want to attract a quality membership, and as a business they have to make the price-point decisions that they feel are best for their club.

Maybe I can't afford to join a private golf club (while at the same time not wearing a wifebeater, drinking malt liquor, etc). But I can't afford an Audi R8, either. Life does continue. But I'll say this - I've had a few opportunities to play some private club courses and for the life of me I can't remember how much I payed at any of them. It's the experience I remember.

Kirk,

Couple of points:

1.  Most likely you can afford to join a private golf club, it's just a question of which one.  There are some that are cheaper than dirt, although they may not be around the corner or make golf dorks have to run out and buy a fresh pair of boxers.

2. It's best not to get one's panties in a bunch over comments from a jaded middle aged internet hack with flashbacks and a warped sense of humor.

[Jay Flemma]

Jay,

Of course you disagree with my position.  You have to justify your existence, right?  My point is simply that you failed to take into account many individuals when you say "...if you take that argument to its logical conclusion, its bad for the game."

For example, Brad Klein has been known to write some pointed pieces on certain golf courses out there.  But he writes on golf architecture.  Writing publicly that a private destination club's pricing structure is bad for the game is crossing a line and makes you--as the writer of a piece that gives press to said club--somewhat suspect in credibility.  How can you go on a trip to play the golf course, give it a spot in your mag or blog with a photograph or two, and then say its bad for the game because it prices out certain demographics?  Of course it prices out a demographic, its a private club!  

Sand Hills, Ballyneal, and Dismal River's pricing structures are a blip on the radar screen of golf in terms of efficiency, affordability, and the ambiguous term of "family golf."  However, I bet their respective memberships have done more for a bright future for public "Joe Blow"golf than every golf blog combined.

Ben, with great respect, after the things that were done and said on this thread, I won't discuss it again.  Sorry, but you guys went way overboard for me to see any reason to engage in conversation with you about it.

[PCCraig]

This thread is a joke. Complete with Ballyneal rumor mongering, Jay Flemma "journalism," sales pitches for Dismal River, and a Ben Sims "internet ass kicking."

[Kirk Gill]

Jud, no worries. No bunching on my part. Just wanted to defend the great unwashed.

And I think that in many parts of the country there are golf clubs that would be "join-able" for me and my family. Just none within decent driving distance !

[Sean_A]

I am not sure why a journalist can't express his opinion about the pricing structure of private club and how it may relate to the future of golf.  While I don't follow Jay its far more interesting get a direct opinion than just another white wash piece which really is covering as a an ad.  Its widely believed that golf costs too much and at least some people think for golf to grow again (if one cares about this sort of thing - which all in the business have a vested interest in) than clubs and courses and courses need to deliver high value services at rates that are cheaper than the go go times.  What is the issue with an using a real example to hammer home a point?  This is what journalists should do.

Ciao

[John Kavanaugh]

Jay,  Here in your own words is what you paid.


Tommy, I didn't use a lawyer's service, there's something new now, you can call information and ask for someone's phone number...they gave me the naccarato two towns over.  I notice you're still four months late on that phone chat we were supposed to have.

While we're at it, its rude to put personal, offlist things on the list.  What business is that of the list...except you trying anything you can to discredit me in front of my peers.

And no Kevin, I paid full boat for my round at DR.  $237.50...and its none of the lists business for whom I write.  While we're at it, anybody looking from Ben's porch can easily see the difference between sand hills and dismal river.  Go out there some time and lok for yourself.

 Kevin, this is the third thread where you've attacked me and my credibility out of the blue for no reason.  With your track record, I know I must be doing something right.  You sure were wrong in your supposition I got comped now, weren't you?  Get your facts straight.

In fact...its a similar refrain on every thread of mine...Jason, Kevin and Tommy hating on me...yawn...old news.

The thread: http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,25469.50.html

[Adam Clayman]

I am not sure why a journalist can't express his opinion about the pricing structure of private club and how it may relate to the future of golf.  While I don't follow Jay its far more interesting get a direct opinion than just another white wash piece which really is covering as a an ad.  Its widely believed that golf costs too much and at least some people think for golf to grow again (if one cares about this sort of thing - which all in the business have a vested interest in) than clubs and courses and courses need to deliver high value services at rates that are cheaper than the go go times.  What is the issue with an using a real example to hammer home a point?  This is what journalists should do.

Ciao

You mean an exaggerated example?



His premise is off, when he says it was 350. That may have been the published rate, but it was not what we payed. Journalism should be factually accurate. Do you agree?

The real question is why isn't it worse, when public courses charge $300+. Supply and demand. 

[Carl Rogers]

Is there a market for a Fabrege Egg?  Sure.
Is there a market for 15 carat Tiffany diamond? Sure
Vintage Bugatti anyone??

I can appreciate and vicariously enjoy a lot of things I can never have or experience.  Yes they SHOULD exist ... just not for me.

[C. Squier]

I am not sure why a journalist can't express his opinion about the pricing structure of private club and how it may relate to the future of golf.  While I don't follow Jay its far more interesting get a direct opinion than just another white wash piece which really is covering as a an ad.  Its widely believed that golf costs too much and at least some people think for golf to grow again (if one cares about this sort of thing - which all in the business have a vested interest in) than clubs and courses and courses need to deliver high value services at rates that are cheaper than the go go times.  What is the issue with an using a real example to hammer home a point?  This is what journalists should do.

Ciao

Comparing the price structure of a high end destination club and the future of golf is no different than comparing the price of a Ferrari and the future of motoring. The pricing structure of golf in the sand hills or Ballyneal has absolutely nothing to do with making golf affordable for beginners or for people who can't afford the luxury of a destination club. I'd assume spa services in Vail are pricey too, but let's not compare it to escalating health care costs.

If there is one thing I've learned through my profession, it's that one shouldn't ever pass judgment on another's spending habits. If driving down the road throwing twenty dollar bills out of your window makes your day.....have at it. If it makes you happy and your wife doesn't kick you out, it's a value.

[Sean_A]

I am not sure why a journalist can't express his opinion about the pricing structure of private club and how it may relate to the future of golf.  While I don't follow Jay its far more interesting get a direct opinion than just another white wash piece which really is covering as a an ad.  Its widely believed that golf costs too much and at least some people think for golf to grow again (if one cares about this sort of thing - which all in the business have a vested interest in) than clubs and courses and courses need to deliver high value services at rates that are cheaper than the go go times.  What is the issue with an using a real example to hammer home a point?  This is what journalists should do.

Ciao

You mean an exaggerated example?



His premise is off, when he says it was 350. That may have been the published rate, but it was not what we payed. Journalism should be factually accurate. Do you agree?

The real question is why isn't it worse, when public courses charge $300+. Supply and demand.  

Adam

Yes, the correct numbers should be included in any journalistic piece and I shall not begin to take sides on what the true amount was.  However, this is a very much a side issue.  What Jay is questioning is value for money.  Whatever he did pay, he didn't believe it represented good value nor a good fee structure for golf to follow.  That seems a very valid opinion to me - especially given golf's history of excess and the bad PR that generates.  

The distinction between publics or privates charging large fees doesn't matter to me as it means the same thing once I open the wallet.  Either way, I have the option not to pay - I can't ask for anymore than that.  

Clint

You have your opinion and Jay has his.  Life is good.

Ciao