[Jim_Kennedy]

Public golf courses have been discounting their rates for as long as I can remember. Every time a season pass is sold, every time a senior rate is sold, every time an 'after 1pm' rate is sold, every time a round is sold that includes free range balls and lunch, etc., those sales are at a discount.
In the era when you actually had to dial a telephone those discounted rounds were mainly sold at the club, or by print media. Their reach was minimal and easier to manage.
Now that we're in the era where you talk to your phone and it 'dials' itself those same rounds can be sold in a market that contains millions of potential buyers.    
        
There is little or no downside to third party sellers of tee times as long as the facility that employs them follows some guidelines, and the NGCOA lists the most important ones here:

https://images.magnetmail.net/images/clients/NGCOA/attach/BestPractice_ThirdPartyResellers.pdf

[Greg Tallman]

Mike,
Where were you 10 years ago when the third party tee time providers began? I have no interest at all in selling tee times through such providers, but it's been estimated that around 47.5 million rounds were booked online last year, that upwards of 45% of US publics use third-party resellers, and that something less than 1% of all tee-time web bookings are bartered.

There are companies who use the barter system but do not advertise the bartered tee times on their publicly viewed sites. They only offer them to closed subscriber groups.   

Greg,
There's something going on if all your competitors are using the service.

Jim, Yes there is and it is called ADRs not worth opening the doors for. Count me out.

[George_Williams]

Greg-

ADRs??

[Greg Tallman]

Greg-

ADRs??

Average Daily Rate

Don't get me wrong, third party sellers are a necessity but certain outlets are bad for business. We use a few but they are required to sell at our regular rate. Allowing different rates to be promoted to the public is death not to mention publishing the same tee time at two different rates as is being doen on the site in question here.

I am surprised at Jim's "everybody's doing it so there must be something to it" stance.

[Mark Johnson]

This issue is not that the courses are price discriminating.  (the marketing term of discounting some times.)   


The issue is that they aren't gaining all of the profits from doing so and let $$ leave the industry that wont be reinvested in the game.

Courses need to INCREASE the gap between peak and non-peak greens fees but need to have the wherewithal to do this in-house instead of having someone else do it and have to pay them a majority of the games.   

Part of the blame goes to the PGA (and local sections)  who is not training its pros in the marketing needed to maximize revenues at their own course.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Greg,
There's quite a difference between "everyone's doing it" and what I said, which was " There's something going on if all your competitors are using the service".

As you just said, you use similar services, just not Golfnow or that 'model'. I'm not defending Golfnow's practice of selling the bartered round for less than the other rounds a course gives them, and I've said that earlier,  I am saying that third party providers who sell discounted rounds aren't something to be feared. Most courses do it in some fashion or another, and in looking at your website I saw that you have you own, like time of day, seasonal adjustments, player cards, and a resident rate for a skins game. I didn't check out any of your competitors sites, but I'd guess they have programs like yours.

If your competitors chose Golfnow they must have felt that the exposure they get by using such a provider, one whose site is viewed by millions, is worth a few bartered rounds if it will put more focus on them than what is offered by other companies.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Mark,
Lots of individual golf courses sell at their own sites, but they could never afford to pay for the exposure that the third party guys provide.

The money is not leaving the table, every dollar that an outside provider brings to the course that's above and beyond the club's own efforts is 'found' money, dollars they don't have if their tee times are unsold.  
    

[Mark Johnson]

Mark,
Lots of individual golf courses sell at their own sites, but they could never afford to pay for the exposure that the third party guys provide.

The money is not leaving the table, every dollar that an outside provider brings to the course that's above and beyond the club's own efforts is 'found' money, dollars they don't have if their tee times are unsold.  
    

In a short-term view, the money may be going to the course, but it is leaving the industry since it is going away from another course.  As a result, so many courses (especially low-end) all take part in the service so they end up with no competitive advantage.

[Greg Tallman]

Mark,
Lots of individual golf courses sell at their own sites, but they could never afford to pay for the exposure that the third party guys provide.

The money is not leaving the table, every dollar that an outside provider brings to the course that's above and beyond the club's own efforts is 'found' money, dollars they don't have if their tee times are unsold.  
    

Not true in all cases. Most "outside" providers seeling golf in Cabo are simply acting as a middle man and trying to direct rounds where they are being compensated most.

The exposure that a Golf Channel/GolfNow could bring to the table is the only positive of thir program. Unfortunately their method of monetization precludes us from particpating as it 1) takes money off the table before possibly generating anything and 2) promotes the "discount" mentality to the masses creating the "if I can't get the GN barter time discount I will not book the golf at this club.

A smart consumer would plan their vacation and then their golf schedule around the GN barter times effectively taking money out of the pockets of every course they play.

While staying above the fray has its issues once you enter you are done. We will maintain our position and stand on our merits of quality golf and superior facilities while the others sell you 2 cuban cigars and a round of golf for $99.
 

[Greg Tallman]

Greg,
There's quite a difference between "everyone's doing it" and what I said, which was " There's something going on if all your competitors are using the service".

As you just said, you use similar services, just not Golfnow or that 'model'. I'm not defending Golfnow's practice of selling the bartered round for less than the other rounds a course gives them, and I've said that earlier,  I am saying that third party providers who sell discounted rounds aren't something to be feared. Most courses do it in some fashion or another, and in looking at your website I saw that you have you own, like time of day, seasonal adjustments, player cards, and a resident rate for a skins game. I didn't check out any of your competitors sites, but I'd guess they have programs like yours.

If your competitors chose Golfnow they must have felt that the exposure they get by using such a provider, one whose site is viewed by millions, is worth a few bartered rounds if it will put more focus on them than what is offered by other companies.

You did not get that information from our website I assure you. Player Cards? Resident rate for skins game?

You and I differ on calling the time of day pricing discounts but either way it is the discounting off of those rates that is the danger.

The race to the bottom is real.

[Mark Johnson]

Not true in all cases. Most "outside" providers seeling golf in Cabo are simply acting as a middle man and trying to direct rounds where they are being compensated most.

The exposure that a Golf Channel/GolfNow could bring to the table is the only positive of thir program. Unfortunately their method of monetization precludes us from particpating as it 1) takes money off the table before possibly generating anything and 2) promotes the "discount" mentality to the masses creating the "if I can't get the GN barter time discount I will not book the golf at this club.

A smart consumer would plan their vacation and then their golf schedule around the GN barter times effectively taking money out of the pockets of every course they play.

While staying above the fray has its issues once you enter you are done. We will maintain our position and stand on our merits of quality golf and superior facilities while the others sell you 2 cuban cigars and a round of golf for $99.
 

Fair point Greg.   My comments were generally around low to mid price point courses which cater to local golfers.   I believe in some resorts area, this definitely can be value added.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Greg,
You're right, I was looking at the Cabo San Lucas course, not yours.

The program doesn't work for you, it does for others.

[Mike_Young]

I try to simplify it in this manner:
Third party tee time providers do not increase golf rounds within the industry.  They redistribute rounds and force a lower price.  If third party tee time providers did not exist there would still be the same number of rounds.  I resent the PGA trying to make mpney from such a system when all they talk about is growing the game.  All they want is to grow the income of the association.

[Ken Moum]

Those 47.5 rounds would have been played anyway at some place.

Not the ones I booked through GolfNow and EZLinks last year.

I probably booked 20-30 rounds from Oct 2010, through the end of last year, and that would have been cut by at least 60 percent if I had to pay full rate... perhaps more. 

I spent six weeks in AZ helping my after after she broke her arm, and returned with my wife for the holidays. We simply couldn't have afforded prime-season golf at the courses we played.

I suspect that's true of a lot of the people who use GolfNow. 

It allows them to double or triple their rounds.  But another reason I use it is that I am often willing to play anywhere there's decent golf avaliable at a price I can afford.  Instead of having to call a dozen courses, or visit their websites, I can look for tee times at a bunch of courses in one place.

That said, I understand why you think the PGA of A was tone-deaf on this matter.  It's a common problem with alphabet organizations. I worked at one, and belonged to a couple.  it pretty easy for something to sound like a GREAT idea only to have it turn out to be a PR disaster with the members.

K

[Jon Wiggett]

I try to simplify it in this manner:
Third party tee time providers do not increase golf rounds within the industry.  They redistribute rounds and force a lower price.  If third party tee time providers did not exist there would still be the same number of rounds.  I resent the PGA trying to make money from such a system when all they talk about is growing the game.  All they want is to grow the income of the association.

Mike,

this is a problem when an association reaches the size where it starts to think that the membership is there to service the association and not the other way round. It then starts to have to look at revenue sources from outside the membership to help sustain its ever growing wage bill for staff that often have no links to the association outside work and so no driving interest in its membership beyond revenue creation.

This is a problem for many professional bodies in the game these days.

Jon

[Mike_Young]

Ken,
I see your side of GN BUT I do think you would have found a way to play at an acceptable price without GN.  IT PULLS MONEY AWAY FROM THE GAME...and it also prolongs the agony for places that should not have been built in the first place.  I have seen people spend 20 dollars in gas to save 10 dollars in green fee.  But as Jim says there are two ways to look at it..

Jon,
Golf Associations became employee driven years ago IMHO.  If someone would ever delve into the GCSAA they might be amazed at what went on over the last 20 years.  And the PGA and then you get the smaller ones like the NGCOA.  NGCOA starts off as an owners group then goes after the management companies to join for the revenues.  Promotes a "buying group" for revenue (any one can buy at the same prices if they have any sense at all) And I think if you look they will have members that don't know they are members (private clubs) because they purchased/leased ClubCars and automatically became a member via ClubCar signing them up.  Now they justify existence as a "lobbying body".  And we all know the smallest organization of them all.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()