The glass is too big

[Ben Sims]

I'm leaving my current job and going back to the operations side of the street.  My squadron commander (best I've had in 8 years active duty) asked me to have a "debrief" of the year I've spent being an administrator for our student population.  It included some mentoring.

He threw up a picture of a glass with some water in it.  He asked me if the glass was half full or half empty.  I said "Boss, you know I'm going to say half full, even though I'm always looking for something wrong and a way to fix it."  

He then said something very cool which I thought warranted sharing here.  He said, "Ben, the problem isn't the water, it's the glass.  It's too big."

I was confused at first, then amazed.  What an incredible way to look at the old metaphor.  And that made me think about golf.  Is that what is wrong with golf?  It's not bad or good, it's just too big?  Is the machine so big that a devolution of sorts was inevitable?

[John Kavanaugh]

He stole from George Carlin.

[Mike_Young]

Ben,
I think it's the opposite when it comes to golf.  The glass is much smaller than the amount of water we try to put in it.   Business has tried to make it a much larger game than it really is and never realized that part of the growth they considered golf was nothing more than the use of golf to create housing value.  And now everyone thinks we need a larger glass

[Mark Bourgeois]

He stole from George Carlin.

Your posts have been excellent, lately. Very concise but well-thrown daggers, every one. That said, eating your second donut has nothing to do with genetics. Where your body puts the donut, sure. Eating vs not eating #2, no.

[Sean_A]

Ben,
I think it's the opposite when it comes to golf.  The glass is much smaller than the amount of water we try to put in it.   Business has tried to make it a much larger game than it really is and never realized that part of the growth they considered golf was nothing more than the use of golf to create housing value.  And now everyone thinks we need a larger glass

Mike

I agree.  Golf used to be shot glass, then it became a tumbler (without too much grief) and now folks want it to be a pint glass.  I think we should look for ways to keep the tumbler full and see how it goes.  The only way golf is going to be a pint glass is if the Chinese "own" the game.  Maybe that day will come, but I am not convinced it would a pretty sight for traditionalists and lovers classic golf. 

Ciao

[Rich Goodale]

The Chinese wil rule the game, sooner rather than later, but they don't drink pints and will probably revert to a small ceramic tea cup or an elaborate hookah.  If the latter, how do you know if a hookah is half empty or half full?  If it's like a bong, you probably don't care.......

[Mark Johnson]

I think that was a great point, which actually makes me think about my own job/career in consumer products.   Every year or two, most brands change brand directors.   Being up and comers, these brand directors want to make an impact, which usually results in one of two things-- they either change the packaging or look to extend the brand into a place where it doesn't belong.   All of these efforts are in an attempt to expand the reach of the brand; what usually happens, though, is that the new brand loyalists are dwarfed by the number of core consumers who either leave the brand or buy much less of it.

Now back to golf.  I just don't know if trying to grow the game at this point even deserves merit.   Why can't we just focus on maintaining the game that we have, continuing to manage the cost and develop sustainability?

That is my biggest issue with Golf 2.0.    While it address a few minor concerns, I think alot of it is trying to fix a problem that really doesn't exist.

[Mike_Young]

IMHO, golf in china is a bubble bigger than here....the people can't learn to play on the courses being built.  We have to accept that growth isn't always the answer.  The problem is corporate America doesn't want that for golf.

[Steve Lang]

  .. some might say, but it may also be too brittle, if made out of plastic and cheaply mass produced, will you have litter?

[Jud_T]

The problem is not only is the glass too big, but the water it's been filled with is too murky...

[Ben Sims]

Ben,
I think it's the opposite when it comes to golf.  The glass is much smaller than the amount of water we try to put in it.   Business has tried to make it a much larger game than it really is and never realized that part of the growth they considered golf was nothing more than the use of golf to create housing value.  And now everyone thinks we need a larger glass

Mike,

I think we're on the same track re: the analogy.  My thought is that if golf itself is the glass and golfers are the water, then thw entire operation has become too large for the product it provides.  There is too much stuff surrounding the critical functions of the business of golf.  All I see from initiatives from the associations going forward is ways to increase the water, and none designed to shrink the glass.

[Mark Bourgeois]

As for the analogy in original context, it seems to mean we should lower our ambitions and / or consider that we actually are close to realizing our full potential -- give up on our greatest dreams.

Since the State Council outlawed golf course construction in China in 2005, 3-5 courses have been built legally. All the others, nearly 600 in total, are illegal. In its own way, China may yet rescue Ben's analogy and shrink the glass.

[Kris Shreiner]

Mike Young,

DING DING DING and another DING for good measure! You hit it square in the kisser. The bloated golf industry has continued to try and justify its existence based on an unsustainable premise. Sadly, the administrative bodies, suckling ever more on the sponsorship teat, have become complicit...which is an even BIGGER problem. A significant course correction is needed, more mindset centered, rather than just reaction to current economic constraints. Time will tell how well we do.

Cheers,
Kris

[Jon Wiggett]

IMHO, golf in china is a bubble bigger than here....the people can't learn to play on the courses being built.  We have to accept that growth isn't always the answer.  The problem is corporate America doesn't want that for golf.

Mike,

you could be right about the type of golf course being built in China. As for your last statement maybe it would be more apt to look at it in the same way as the original post of this thread. The problem with much in golf (and much in the world) might not be what corperate America wants but corperate America itself. I suspect in the end it will either reinvent itself or be left behind.

Jon

[Ronald Montesano]

Isn't the glass filled with sand?

[Mark Bourgeois]

These pretzels are making me thirsty.

[David Harshbarger]

That used to be my answer, too, but now I prefer:

Look at how much potential for growth we have in our cup!

Isn't that what we have in golf?  We have all this infrastructure, it's a great game, there's capacity to expand, so let's get the word out and get people engaged!

[Mike_Young]

Ben,
I think it's the opposite when it comes to golf.  The glass is much smaller than the amount of water we try to put in it.   Business has tried to make it a much larger game than it really is and never realized that part of the growth they considered golf was nothing more than the use of golf to create housing value.  And now everyone thinks we need a larger glass

Mike,

I think we're on the same track re: the analogy.  My thought is that if golf itself is the glass and golfers are the water, then thw entire operation has become too large for the product it provides.  There is too much stuff surrounding the critical functions of the business of golf.  All I see from initiatives from the associations going forward is ways to increase the water, and none designed to shrink the glass.

The biggest problem in golf is the associations and I have been saying that for years.  They want to control the game more than the owners or the members of the clubs that allow them to exist.  The PGA thinks it should be involved with every course on the planet, the GCSAA thinks they should do the same.  That's over.....When the  "business of golf" was expanding as it was for 30 years the associations grew and grew and the executives became "Most powerful people in golf" type folks.  And now these groups can't downsize because the executives will have to go away.  Even look at the builder and architect groups.  Such an effort was made to justify existence over the last 60 years and to try and convince people that golf architecture was a profession when it was barely a business.  And now it is almost non existent and what will most do?  Lower requirements or bend them in order to survive and collect dues?  They certainly will not be paying dues...same for builders....I predict before all of the is over the actual owners of these places will be saying "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore. "
The associations have been leeches to the vendors for years and as the rolls dwindle they try to become more so and the vendors now have their own problems.  There are a lot of big people freaking out in this golf business and people just don't realize it yet.   

[Carl Rogers]

Golf is an impossibly difficult niche game with compelling visuals ... for me that is  it's conumdrum.

[SB]

Mike,

There's no question a number of those housing development courses shouldn't have been built and need to close to make the survivors viable.  But it's very difficult when the course that is closing is the one in your backyard.  Indian Creek, a course outside Atlanta, recently closed and now it appears it is reopening.

http://www.covnews.com/section/1/article/29177

[Ben Sims]

Mike,

There's no question a number of those housing development courses shouldn't have been built and need to close to make the survivors viable.  But it's very difficult when the course that is closing is the one in your backyard.  Indian Creek, a course outside Atlanta, recently closed and now it appears it is reopening.

http://www.covnews.com/section/1/article/29177

SBusch,

My OP was designed to make people think about the difference between supply and demand in golf right now.  I think you've really hit on something with the post above in that vein.  Everyone is quick to say that too many courses got built, golf is too big, etc.  But when it is a local course, everyone is quick to lament its demise.  Is there is way to keep golf courses around and also respond to the lack of demand?