[Mark Pearce]

Which seems to be almost the consensual position but is a long way from what you posted last night.  I think everyone is agreed that oversupply is a serious problem and it seems inevitable that more clubs will fail.

[Paul Gray]

Club A
Conveyor Belt Golf
Johnny-£10-Green-Fee (and just for the sake of further clarity, Johnny and his ilk aren't the only people ever to play the course but pay and play makes up a larger proportion of rounds than would be the case at your typical Club B)
Continue to thrive

Nothing that can be construed as contradictory there, surely?

I've consistently held that position, i.e. the consensus you're now referring to.

Niall disagrees with what is otherwise a broad consensus. Niall thinks that when the economy picks up Club A will struggle. Niall's view is perfectly reasonable and he's entitled to it.

My experience tells me that when things improve many of the green fee payers at Club A, it being a course and environment they are already familiar with, will opt for membership at Club A.

[Tom Kelly]

The "traditional UK golf club" is the type 'B' clubs that have been around for years with old, average courses. They fight to keep the old traditions hoping to be a type 'C' club but their product (course) isn't as good as the 'C' clubs and they are being under cut by the "new breeders" in type 'A' and 'B' who are being run as businesses rather than members clubs throwing out deals left right and centre and offering a relaxed friendly atmosphere open to all. The way they can compete is to start to evolve and compromise on the traditions and elitism and offer a combination of the new breeders relaxed policies with a hint of the old type 'C' traditions that don't put people off and most importantly offer a solid golf course. They can appeal to the guys who take their game a little more seriously, don't want to see jeans or beer carts everywhere but feel awkward and out of place toasting the Queen with kummel or simply can't afford a type 'C' course. The problem is there aren't many courses like this around that I know of, most are stuck in their traditions and have been run by green committees with little knowledge over the years that have compromised their major asset, the course whilst not offering anything off-course to attract the new golfers. It is these clubs which will fail and as Duncan mentioned it will be a sad state of affairs as some have good golf courses and a great history hidden beneath the trees and tradition. There will be some new breed boom courses which will fail and won't be missed but lots will survive and flourish. The UK will start to lose lots of it's traditional members clubs unless they start to evolve.

The sad thing is Adrian is spot about the stripped fairways, shots over water, lots of rough, fountains etc. unless these older members clubs who are in trouble but have potential sort themselves out and show the masses of golfers currently playing poor type 'A' and 'B' courses what good golf courses can be golf architecture will be what suffers the most.

One final point, get the juniors in. Anyone know of a course with a thriving junior section that is struggling financially? I can't think of any. The more golfers that get taught young in traditional members clubs, the more that are likely to join those rather than the 'new breeders' in later life. Are juniors going to want to join a club with strict mobile phone bans, where they get told off for not wearing long socks with their shorts? Their parents will follow where they go and if you can get them in early and pass on proper golfing etiquette the rules and and traditions which need to be kept to let golf maintain it's identity and for all of us to enjoy the game will naturally survive.

n.b. I'm not suggesting all 'new breeders' are bad courses but I think most would agree we could do with losing more of these than the older traditional members clubs and the ones undercutting others attempting to survive are the clubs dragging the rest of the golf industry into trouble.

[Brent Hutto]

I guess the real nightmare scenario would be the rise of American country-club (private) or country-club-for-a-day (daily fee) clubs with wall to wall green, tip-seeking "service" staff everywhere you turn and of course golf carts for all! Hopefully of all the scenarios you lot are pondering, that one is highly unlikely. Please tell me it's unlikely.

[Adam Lawrence]

I have sympathy with every side of this debate but I do think we all need to try and reduce the stereotyping a bit. Echoing Mark, how many long sock clubs are there now? Really not very many, and those there are correlate pretty tightly with some of the poshest and wealthiest in the land. If those clubs end up struggling, golf has much more to worry about than sock length....

[Mark Chaplin]

We charge around 11 x full membership, 4.5x country and 3x distant, it means the green fee is relatively high but visitors get a quiet course and revenue remains high. Interestingly country and distance members are often high spenders as visits become a treat rather than a quick pot of tea and a toasted tea cake afterwards.

There is probably room for a few unsuccessful clubs to disappear as is happening in the USA. The only one I've heard of was Moatlands aka Kent National they tried all the new fad membership schemes, sucked up £20m in Japanese cash and is are now fallow fields.

[Paul Gray]

Tom,

Spot on.

Brent,

Don't worry!

Adam,

You're absolutely right about the stereotyping, but it does help to define, broadly, different sections of the market. We should though not lose sight of the fact that each and every club doesn't simply fit exactly into a neat category.

[Sean_A]

We charge around 11 x full membership, 4.5x country and 3x distant, it means the green fee is relatively high but visitors get a quiet course and revenue remains high. Interestingly country and distance members are often high spenders as visits become a treat rather than a quick pot of tea and a toasted tea cake afterwards.

There is probably room for a few unsuccessful clubs to disappear as is happening in the USA. The only one I've heard of was Moatlands aka Kent National they tried all the new fad membership schemes, sucked up £20m in Japanese cash and is are now fallow fields.

Chappers

Interesting.  We charge about 12.5 x = full membership and 5.5 x = country membership.  There is always the debate about where to set the fee as visitor/guest income is very important (over 30%) of the club's intake this past year.  I would expect nearly all the top clubs to be nearer 10 x than 20 x.  I would think there are a ton of clubs in the 30 x category.  

Adrian, I notice your place only gives a marginal break for co cards.  What has been your experience with this system?

Ciao  

[Adrian_Stiff]

We charge around 11 x full membership, 4.5x country and 3x distant, it means the green fee is relatively high but visitors get a quiet course and revenue remains high. Interestingly country and distance members are often high spenders as visits become a treat rather than a quick pot of tea and a toasted tea cake afterwards.

There is probably room for a few unsuccessful clubs to disappear as is happening in the USA. The only one I've heard of was Moatlands aka Kent National they tried all the new fad membership schemes, sucked up £20m in Japanese cash and is are now fallow fields.

Chappers

Interesting.  We charge about 12.5 x = full membership and 5.5 x = country membership.  There is always the debate about where to set the fee as visitor/guest income is very important (over 30%) of the club's intake this past year.  I would expect nearly all the top clubs to be nearer 10 x than 20 x.  I would think there are a ton of clubs in the 30 x category.  

Adrian, I notice your place only gives a marginal break for co cards.  What has been your experience with this system?

Ciao  

Yes there will be plenty near 10 and thats even better. Its is a bit like your cholesterol levels it is almost a financial health sign, the lower number the better. We will be 17.86 next year. The worrying numbers start with 30 and up.

County Cards: I am not 100% in favour of them. If they were just for your county then I would be supportive, but they have become a discount card, so not many people pay the full rack rate. The best courses dont take them at all as they have enough traffic. I booked some players in to B&B yesterday. 9 had CC and 3 did not so it was £60 and £75.

At the Players Club we take them midweek and our weekday green fee is £48, and its is £36 with a county card. A lot of people think that B&B is expensive at £60 and £36 expensive at ours, they have an idea all clubs should be £20.
We dont do as many as we used too, My visitors income (inc society) is about 50% of the golf income, Our CC rate, members guest rate, society rate and 241s are all about the same £36 price, I reckon 90% of my golf income is achieved at the -25% rate and I am only getting 10% at full rack.

[Simon Holt]

We are 6x green free for Full Membership and now have our waiting list up to 3/4 years after a solid effort by the younger members to get their mates on the list.  Like many of the recognised Scottish clubs, North Berwick is heavily subsidised by visitor play.  I would be in the minority but I'd happily pay double my membership to have less visitors and more sub 4 hour rounds.

The Glen, which is not even half a mile away, along with many of the other courses in East Lothian that don't benefit from large amount of visitor play, is actively looking for members.  I know most of the fee structures in the area and they tend to be between 6x and 10x the daily rate but not much more than that.

For what its worth I think most of what Adrian says is pretty much on the money for 80% of the golfing population.  The remaining 20% are clubs that I never want to change and would be confident that due to their membership demographic, they will be around for a long time to come.

[Duncan Cheslett]

If golfers are simply making the calculation of whether to join a club based on cheapness per round, most once a week guys will choose to play different courses with a regular bunch of mates at £15 - £25 a round. They have a wide choice of places to play at that price. Club membership only becomes attractive when you play more than once a week or if you want to play in regular competitions.

I do think that clubs could make themselves far more attractive to nomadic golfers as well as existing members if they formed groups with other similar clubs maybe half an hour or so away offering reciprocal playing rights including entry in certain competitions.

This would increase the perceived value of club membership at no real cost to any of the clubs involved.

[Paul Gray]

Duncan,

Couldn't agree more. This is where many of the chains are cashing in. Join a Crown Golf course and play each and every other Crown course up to ten time per year for absolutely no cost. To be clear, that's ten times per course!

Middle of the road private clubs must, much as you have suggested, radically improve their reciprocal arrangements in order to compete.  

[Thomas Dai]

Middle of the road private clubs must, much as you have suggested, radically improve their reciprocal arrangements in order to compete.  

I understood that this was the idea behind the UK County Card system. Originally so that the memberships of what we are calling here, category B clubs, could group together. However, over time the scheme seems to have become tweaked such that quite a number of category A courses have become included and the occasional C or near-C course.
Wales has a separate County Card system to England.

Anyone like to comment on the situation in Scotland and Ireland?

One point I'd like to make it that many golfers don't want to, or are incapable of, playing 18-holes. At most, although I'm sure not all, pay-n-play/business clubs 18-holes is what it's all about. But if you want to just play a few holes it's not financially that attractive. If you're a club member however, especially a retired person and 5-day or restricted member, then playing just a few holes regularly or popping out for a few holes after work or in the evening or just practicing becomes is a different matter and what we are calling B category clubs my be more attractive to some, and to some golf isn't just about value for money or competitiveness, it may be be about companionship and fun and fresh air and exercise and even just getting out the house for a while.

ATB

[Duncan Cheslett]

Middle of the road private clubs must, much as you have suggested, radically improve their reciprocal arrangements in order to compete.  

Exactly Paul.

If membership at one's own local club included playing rights at three or four other decent clubs within a reasonable distance that membership would immediately feel far better value for money. One big obstacle to recruiting new members from the fraternity of nomadic golfers is their reluctance to being tied to playing the same course all the time.

Such reciprocity between clubs could extend to opening up some competitions to members of all clubs within the group, or occasionally moving the entire Saturday medal to one of the other courses. Variety after all, is the spice of life.

Best of all, assuming that the flow of visitors between the reciprocating clubs is fairly even, it is not actually costing anyone a penny.

What's not to like?

[Jim Sherma]

Middle of the road private clubs must, much as you have suggested, radically improve their reciprocal arrangements in order to compete.  

Exactly Paul.

If membership at one's own local club included playing rights at three or four other decent clubs within a reasonable distance that membership would immediately feel far better value for money. One big obstacle to recruiting new members from the fraternity of nomadic golfers is their reluctance to being tied to playing the same course all the time.

Such reciprocity between clubs could extend to opening up some competitions to members of all clubs within the group, or occasionally moving the entire Saturday medal to one of the other courses. Variety after all, is the spice of life.

Best of all, assuming that the flow of visitors between the reciprocating clubs is fairly even, it is not actually costing anyone a penny.

What's not to like?

A good reciprocity program was a very important piece in my decision to go from a public course nomad to joining a club. We have formal reciprocity with 6 good to very good courses all within an hour's drive. Generally, we pay a cart fee, although walking is usually ok, and then we will almost always get some food and drinks after the round. Many members do not make much use of the arrangement but for me this is a great treat and I try to travel to one of the courses at least once a month.

[Duncan Cheslett]

One point I'd like to make it that many golfers don't want to, or are incapable of, playing 18-holes. At most, although I'm sure not all, pay-n-play/business clubs 18-holes is what it's all about. But if you want to just play a few holes it's not financially that attractive. If you're a club member however, especially a retired person and 5-day or restricted member, then playing just a few holes regularly or popping out for a few holes after work or in the evening or just practicing becomes is a different matter and what we are calling B category clubs my be more attractive to some, and to some golf isn't just about value for money or competitiveness, it may be be about companionship and fun and fresh air and exercise and even just getting out the house for a while.

The ability to pop in to play a five or six hole loop before or after work (or at lunchtime) is for me one of the big attractions of belonging to a local club.

[Duncan Cheslett]

A good reciprocity program was a very important piece in my decision to go from a public course nomad to joining a club. We have formal reciprocity with 6 good to very good courses all within an hour's drive. Generally, we pay a cart fee, although walking is usually ok, and then we will almost always get some food and drinks after the round. Many members do not make much use of the arrangement but for me this is a great treat and I try to travel to one of the courses at least once a month.

Jim,

I'd be very interested in learning more about this scheme and how it works in practice.. I am in the early stages of putting together a proposal along these lines to my club.

[Ricardo Ramirez Calvo]

You are assuming that all the clubs entering into such reciprocal agreements are all very similar in many respects: number of members, quality of the course, number of visitors. Although I am not British, I find it difficult to believe that the real world is like that. At least, it's not in this part of the world (which you can call the end of the world, as Pope Francis said).

In addition, you are focusing only on value for money as a reason to join a club. There are many other reasons for which a golfer joins a certain club. For example, sometimes golfers join a club just for the pride of being a member of such club, to show off that they are members of a certain club or just for love of a club. Many golfers do not judge their club memberships on value for money reasons.

I understood that it was argued that the reason for many golfers not joining clubs was old fashioned traditions. But now it has moved to economic issues.

[Adrian_Stiff]

This all sounds great in principle and we (The Players Club) have a reciprocal arrangement with Manor House at Castle Coombe. The plusses have largely be made already, the perceived value.

Here are some of the facts with our arrangement:  About 20% of the membership use both ways. A couple of people use it a lot and perhaps because of that I wonder if that endangers the whole thing. I have caught some of our members taking guests at MH and saying they are members. Rarely do MH not have a space for us and we always try and accommodate them. They tend to use it for groups of between 12-20 when they have corporate days.

We had arrangements with two other clubs (one was 50 miles away) (one was 100 miles away). In two years we only had 2 of our members play at each of theses courses. They were about the same for the 100 miler and the other one used us about 30 times.
I think free arrangements always run the risk that one club/course is better than another. If its an unlimited swap it may cause a problem, in fact you need your fees to be the same(ish).

There is the Crown scheme and there is another amongst 20 or 30 proprietary clubs. I don't know exactly how this has worked but the 2nd hand information back is that it is rarely used but I only have that information from one club. The worry as I see it is that a collection of 20, 30, 40 clubs means that there are good, okay, not bad and not good courses. If you are the good one then your members don't see much in playing lesser ones.

The County Card has over the last 5 years grown into a National Discount Card, I think all but one English County is in the scheme. Some clubs let you play for £10 or half price, some for members guest rate, some give 25% discount or less. Some Clubs (probably most of the top 100 clubs) don't allow county cards. Those clubs as far as I am aware don't get county cards for their members.
County Cards would be great if there were no 2-4-1s and clubs were not struggling for the business. The problem that happens is that the £15 fee you could play ABCDE golf club on a county card is not really any use because they take 2-4-1 vouchers, or you can grab a £15 time on teeofftimes or some other ponce system.

There is a new addition to this mess as well. BRS are a company that operate tee time booking systems for (I think) 700 UK & Ire Clubs, recently they were bought out by GOLF NOW. It costs about £1500 a year for the licence fee, though you can have it all for nothing if you give them 2 tee times per day. I did not think any golf clubs would be so stupid to take up their kind offer and gift them up to 2920 rounds of golf to waive the £1500. If its used just 20% of the time then you have gifted your rounds at about £3. Apparently 150 clubs have signed up to this wonderful scheme. In my view golf clubs should make membership the best route. We should not fuel the nomad route to the extent that its cheaper to play than being a member.

Our policy is our green fee midweek is £48 per round £72 day. Members guest rate is £36. I take 2-4-1s @ 50% of day rate and I accept CCards at £36, For society groups my rate is about the same. I am very precise I never drop the guard and allow cheap routes. We also give away 4ball vouchers for charities to sale, but you see them on ebay for £70 and at some clubs the 4ball voucher hardly makes a tenner. I have stopped giving those out now, I gift a voucher for our second course and they can pay £50 to upgrade. Didn't want to do it but felt I owed it to them.

I don't know if there is a nice answer, dictating prices and terms will never work, so I guess we are left with the competive rat race as is.

[JMEvensky]

You are assuming that all the clubs entering into such reciprocal agreements are all very similar in many respects: number of members, quality of the course, number of visitors. Although I am not British, I find it difficult to believe that the real world is like that. At least, it's not in this part of the world (which you can call the end of the world, as Pope Francis said).

In addition, you are focusing only on value for money as a reason to join a club. There are many other reasons for which a golfer joins a certain club. For example, sometimes golfers join a club just for the pride of being a member of such club, to show off that they are members of a certain club or just for love of a club. Many golfers do not judge their club memberships on value for money reasons.

I understood that it was argued that the reason for many golfers not joining clubs was old fashioned traditions. But now it has moved to economic issues.

I'm neither British nor Argentinean,but I agree with you.Unfortunately,for a lot of people,now a club is nothing more than a commodity.In my part of the world,prospective members,usually younger people,are interested in only the monthly cost--the other factors hardly even matter.

I look forward to "old fashioned traditions" becoming a marketing ploy for Club A to use against Club B.

[Sean_A]

Adrian

I use the Co Card a fair amount and consider it an excellent perk of club membership, but many of the blue blood clubs, mainly southern England pish posh joints, don't accept the card.  I can understand why they don't, but I hope their members aren't then issued a card.  There aren't many courses I want to visit (worth the travel time) which can be found on these tee time deals - a very high percentage of those clubs are in a rat race for a few bob. 

As you say, clubs have to be careful about repricals.  I too can't figure out how 20-30 clubs can be of similar standing/green fees and be worth visiting.  I certainly wouldn't want my club to go that route.  We have five now, all clubs of a somewhat similar standing/green fee.  The thing is, none are close.  The recips are meant for travelling golfers to take advantage of ONE reduced green fee. So the perk is really minor, not nearly as worth while as the Co Card.  Still, I think recips are worth the effort of club managers to arrange because it is a harmless bennie if tightly controlled.

Ciao

[Paul Gray]

Some excellent points to address.

Like Sean, I find the County Card Scheme very useful. Living in Hampshire there are plenty of clubs which it affords me a discount to. Cross the border into Surrey though and things become a little trickier, although many very good second tier (Still Club C's for the sake of this thread) do accept it.

I can speak personally about the Crown scheme and can report that it works very well. In fact, it can work a little too well and safeguards have to be in place to ensure players don't exceed their limit of ten rounds. People have apparently lost jobs over comments made on this site so, temporary though the position may be, I'll refrain from adding too much regarding admnistration of this!

I'm surprised to hear Sean say he struggles to identify enough local clubs of a similar standard, although I know Sean travels a fair distance to his club and, given the reviews he posts, is clearly far more discearning than the average golfer so maybe I shouldn't be so shocked. I think most members of Club B places could easily pick out ten local courses which culd fit the bill and no doubt another ten further afield.

I suspect from Carlos' perspective it is difficult to imagine that ten clubs of a similarly average standard could all be within, say, forty miles of one another. In a small country like Britain where the game is so popular I can assure that it's hard to travel any significant distance without stumbling across a golf course.


 

[Duncan Cheslett]

We have five now, all clubs of a somewhat similar standing/green fee.  The thing is, none are close.  The recips are meant for travelling golfers to take advantage of ONE reduced green fee.

In that case I really don't see the point. My idea of a worthwhile reciprocal arrangement would be with a small number of clubs of fairly equal standing within easy travelling distance so that members had a good alternative to their own course when they felt like a change.

A good example would be a possible arrangement between Reddish Vale and Cavendish. We have a lot in common; MacKenzie courses pretty much as he left them but now not exactly over-flowing with either members or cash. The courses are 30-40 minutes apart.

Reddish Vale is in the lowlands of the Manchester suburbs and is in good nick all year round. Cavendish is on the side of a windswept moor outside Buxton and is unplayable half the year. On a fine summer's day however, it is breathtaking.

The benefits of a reciprocal arrangement for members of both clubs are clear. More importantly, the perceived added value of membership would make it an easier sell to residents of either town.

I'm sure similar examples could be found for many other clubs around the country.

 

[Ricardo Ramirez Calvo]

I suspect from Carlos' perspective it is difficult to imagine that ten clubs of a similarly average standard could all be within, say, forty miles of one another. In a small country like Britain where the game is so popular I can assure that it's hard to travel any significant distance without stumbling across a golf course.

Paul,

I realize that in Britain you can find thousands of golf courses. I have been lucky enough to travel to the UK twice a year at least. However, my point is not about proximity, but about similarity. It refers to the number of members, how good the course is, how many visitors it receives and many other factors. If two clubs reach a reciprocal agreement with one being twice the size in members of the other, I don't see why would that be beneficial to the smaller club. Another example would be a club with a renowned course joining another who has an average course. What would be the benefit for the club with the better course in reaching an agreement with the club with a standard course?

I don't think there is just one answer to the problems which clubs face all over the world and certainly I don't think it is tradition what keeps people away from golf.

[Sean_A]

We have five now, all clubs of a somewhat similar standing/green fee.  The thing is, none are close.  The recips are meant for travelling golfers to take advantage of ONE reduced green fee.

In that case I really don't see the point. My idea of a worthwhile reciprocal arrangement would be with a small number of clubs of fairly equal standing within easy travelling distance so that members had a good alternative to their own course when they felt like a change.

A good example would be a possible arrangement between Reddish Vale and Cavendish. We have a lot in common; MacKenzie courses pretty much as he left them but now not exactly over-flowing with either members or cash. The courses are 30-40 minutes apart.

Reddish Vale is in the lowlands of the Manchester suburbs and is in good nick all year round. Cavendish is on the side of a windswept moor outside Buxton and is unplayable half the year. On a fine summer's day however, it is breathtaking.

The benefits of a reciprocal arrangement for members of both clubs are clear. More importantly, the perceived added value of membership would make it an easier sell to residents of either town.

I'm sure similar examples could be found for many other clubs around the country.

 

Duncan, you have reciprocity - the Co Card.  Or are you looking for freebies?  The issue with my club is the other courses nearby are nowhere near our quality.  I don't see playing a mudhole and having mudhole members clog up my course as a perk  .

But I don't see an issue with agreements between nearby similar quality clubs.  Many clubs are in an envious position to have quality neighbours.  It seems reasonable to make agreements where 1 round is on offer, but I would still say pay the guest rate and games must be organized thru the Sec.  That at least means that if there isn't balance, the one club is compensated somewhat. Hence, the Co Card does the job.  

Paul

I look at it the other way round.  I am surprised so many golfers settle for drab golf.  If I am making the effort, I expect to be well rewarded for money and time.

Ciao

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()