Belvedere's and Lawsonia's being built we don't know about?

[Jeff_Brauer]

Thought I had chimed on this one, but in this climate, it would seem the best approach would be to find a course needing a total remodel, and some enterprising young thinking architect could portray himself as a Langford expert and convince someone to remodel the course in the Lawsonia style.

[BCowan]

Great post Steve

   I am a little fuzzy with the history.  So Charlevoix Golf club was the first willie watson to the South and is 9 holes original Watson? Belvedere was his 2nd design and was the routing effected by the depression, or just Charlevoix Golf club?  

[Josh Tarble]

I would argue that these types of courses are being built.  Maybe not in northern Wisconsin or Michigan, but all over the US.  Just in Golf Digests list of Best New courses in 2013 there are 3 courses that fit a lot of your criteria.

Max A. Mandel Municipal
Fyre Lake Golf Club
Boiling Springs (by GCAs own Jeff Blume)

All 3 of these courses are public access and less than $60 for weekend play.  Just shows you people are trying, it's just not easy to make money with this type of business model and environment.

[Matthew Lloyd]

I've really enjoyed this thread and the various debates found within it re the economics and aesthetics involved.  Though I think a lot of the premium public courses are ridiculously overpriced, I will concede that if they're filling their tee times then that is the free market at work.  Nothing to be done about that unfortunately.  The analysis about how these courses are a niche within a niche within a contracting market was all very true.  Again, unfortunately.

And while it's nice to see some of these high-level public courses continuing to thrive, you could also argue that this ultimately has a negative impact on the greater good.  I'm not sure any of us on this site are a good example of the average golfer -- I'd bet we're all willing to travel to remote destinations, pay steep green fees and appreciate the finer aspects of the sport -- but it's hard to grow the popularity of a recreational sport when the top courses are either exclusively private or so expensive that they essentially become private.  And I think this is why it's harder to create a successful Belvedere-like course in this era.  The "average golfer" who doesn't play that often is probably less likely to appreciate the nuance, history and niche appeal of a place like Belvedere because they simply haven't been exposed enough to the high-level courses.  It seems that they'd rather pay a high greens fee to play a place they've read about, seen a commercial for, etc.  The type of place they can tell their friends they played -- a name course that would be recognized. 

Continuing with the northern Michigan theme because Belvedere inspired this thread, the entire region is a GREAT example of this.

The Grand Traverse Resort courses SUCK.  There is no way to defend those courses.  The pace of play is abysmal, the mandatory cart use is a joke, the players are terrible, etc.  I could go on and on.  Maybe the courses are decent, but you're so enraged the entire time you can't even pause to take notice.

The Treetops courses are arguably worse than Grand Traverse. 

But these places are ALWAYS crowded.  The average golfer and the public has to be smarter about seeking out quality.  It's the same reason why "The Avengers" makes $900 million and "Nebraska" can barely find an audience. 

As somebody who has played golf every summer in Traverse City for the last 25 years, I remain stunned that High Pointe went out of business.  That course was EXACTLY what this thread is talking about.  Elite course, reasonable price, great location.  I will never understand how that course failed. 

I personally think Belvedere is a better course than Arcadia, and certainly a better deal.  I find Arcadia enjoyable, but the price tag is just too steep.  For $75 I would call it a great course.  For $175 I would call it slightly above average. 

[Jud_T]

Matthew,

I'm not sure why it's bad for the game if people are lining up like lemmings to pay $180 to play Arcadia and $370 to play Whistling Straights when there's so much other interesting, reasonably priced golf around.  They're called schmucks.

[Matthew Lloyd]

Matthew,

I'm not sure why it's bad for the game if people are lining up like lemmings to pay $180 to play Arcadia and $370 to play Whistling Straights when there's so much other interesting, reasonably priced golf around.  They're called schmucks.

Well, to clarify my intent a bit, for our own purposes (those of us that seek out less crowded hidden gems) the crowds at the publicized courses is a great thing, but for overall growth and interest in the game I think it's a net loss.  Ben's original post got me thinking about this because I think if what he suggested were to happen, we'd see a lot more interest in the game and in course design specifically.  I love the optimism and aspirations of his post, but just don't think the average golfer is looking for those things.  They seem to be looking for carts, cart girls, etc.

[BCowan]

Matthew,

I'm not sure why it's bad for the game if people are lining up like lemmings to pay $180 to play Arcadia and $370 to play Whistling Straights when there's so much other interesting, reasonably priced golf around.  They're called schmucks.

+1 (Can't believe i just agreed with Jud)

Matthew

    Thank you for you post and enthusiasm.  There are a good few amount of people that like everything Belvedere represents, they just don't know about it.  If there are some great cost effective way clubs like Belvedere could advertise to those people directly without the GD pubs, that would be great.  Belvedere has hosted the Michigan Am like 30+ times, people who don't compete at that level just don't know about it.  The course used to be private, now it is semi.  I have thought about changing the post topic slightly.  Keep the ideas flowing ''out of the box'' is good!

[JC Jones]

Great post Steve

   I am a little fuzzy with the history.  So Charlevoix Golf club was the first willie watson to the South and is 9 holes original Watson? Belvedere was his 2nd design and was the routing effected by the depression, or just Charlevoix Golf club?  

Steve,

Our window is tight this year, tighter than last but Aug 1 seems to be a good target.

BCowan,

The Chicago Club is on the north side of round lake.  The Charlevoix muni is 9 holes, some of which is comprised of the original WW course, mainly on the north side of 31.  Belvedere is built on farmland quite a bit south of the channel on Marion Center rd.  it was built by the Belvedere Club, which is a club on the south side of round lake.

My understanding is the building of Belvedere had nothing to do with the financial hardships of the Chicago Club.  What is interesting to me, and I have zero data to back this up other than my own observation of license plates in the parking lot is that Belvedere seems to have many St Louis people as members.  Not sure if that was the case back in the go-go days of Charlevoix and that Belvedere was established as an alternative to the Chicago Club. 

Charlevoix has a really cool history including such things as its people being responsible for bringing down a monarchy.

[Richard Hetzel]

I thoroughly enjoyed my round with JCJones a few summers back at Belvedere GC. We had a great round, and I left thinking how great the course was. I have yet to venture to Lawsonia, but it is on the bucket list. I would say that ( I am guessing anyway) that Belvedere has long been paid off and they don't have a bank note to pay on the property. With a limited playing season, the semi-private aspect adds additional funds to augment their membership dues. It seems that courses where the owner has to pay a payment are the ones that more than likely struggle financially.

[BCowan]

JC and Richard thanks for the info.  I think i prefer the Belvedere semi-private model over Lawsonia.   

Belvedere



Lawsonia

[Richard Hetzel]

Not to mention, when driving back to Glen Arbor after my round at Belvedere, I snuck in 9 walking holes at Elk Rapids GC (Ross) without the family knowing.

[Lou_Duran]

some are being built....

Where and how are they faring?

When were Belvedere and Lawsonia built and under what circumstances?  Might the reasons for that type not being built today have something to do with their inability to capitalize the prevailing cost of the land, construction, financing, and maintenance?

BTW, a fellow GCAer and I passed up another round at Crystal Downs to make the long drive to Belvedere.  I am hardly a course snob like my companion, but my Doak-like rating would fall in the "worth another round if under a half an hour to get there" category.  Fortunately, we were able to hustle back and play a dozen or so holes at CD before it was too dark to see.  Which begs the question in my mind at least, why aren't more Crystal Downs being built today?   

[Jud_T]

Lou,

Noone's suggesting skipping a round at Crystal Downs for Belvedere.  That's like cancelling a reservation at Alinea because you felt like Edzo's Burgers.  But damn if those burgers aren't tasty.  Belvedere is not worth a special trip to see, but is well worth playing if you're within an hour's drive and much better value than the likes of Arcadia.

[BCowan]

some are being built....

Where and how are they faring?

When were Belvedere and Lawsonia built and under what circumstances?  Might the reasons for that type not being built today have something to do with their inability to capitalize the prevailing cost of the land, construction, financing, and maintenance?

BTW, a fellow GCAer and I passed up another round at Crystal Downs to make the long drive to Belvedere.  I am hardly a course snob like my companion, but my Doak-like rating would fall in the "worth another round if under a half an hour to get there" category.  Fortunately, we were able to hustle back and play a dozen or so holes at CD before it was too dark to see.  Which begs the question in my mind at least, why aren't more Crystal Downs being built today?   

 Lou

   I agree with Jud.  I would disagree that more Crystal Downs type courses are attempted to be built then Belvedere's.  Mike is right that there are Belvedere models being built, it is just hard to find them.  I personally am a little over playing the best of the best, I rather look for a great burger and craft beer vs an expensive bottle of wine.  Cost of land in Northern Michigan is not bad, not talking about Lake Michigan views, but very solid rolling sandy land is abundantly for sale up there.   

[Paul Gray]

Excellent contribution Matthew.

A bigger answer to the question then, in a nut shell, is that these places aren't being built because the dark ages are far from over. No surprise there; the golf media still promote the same generic product as if it's the definition of western civility. Love him or loathe him, Donald Trump builds big, expensive golf complexes because he can make big money out of them. If he could make the same money out of more refined affairs he'd (probably) be doing just that.

As is true of any art form, it is inherently true that the connoisseurs are required to promote the purest of that art forms' virtues.

[Joe Hancock]

I think it's simple economics. What wise business person is going to lay out the capital required to build even a modest golf course where the ROI isn't in a reasonable time frame or, more likely, not to happen at all?

I see it all the time; the more expensive course(not just the famously expensive, either) is doing well, while the mom and pop course that has been paid for is struggling to get play sufficient to keep up the place. I think it has to do with corporate play and outings, or it could simply be human behavior.

The Mines GC in Grand Rapids is very familiar to me. It's what this group of 1500 say is needed, what the public wants and what is good for the game....and I agree. It's good design, it's low maintenance(bluegrass/ fescue fairways and roughs, which makes it look "muni" to some of you guys) and it's in town. But, the reality is that while they do well enough to get by, they aren't full up all the time either(a superintendents dream, right?). So, other than being a golf philanthropist, the smart money is in high end, destination golf....with an ocean view, preferably. Mr. Keiser seems to be onto a pretty reliable program, wouldn't you say?

Joe

[Peter Pallotta]

Joe - you know how much I enjoyed The Mines, and how highly I think of it (both as a course and as a value). I have to defer to your experience and insights into the place, and of the broader golfing 'marketplace' - you've seen the business from all sides and you're probably right in your conclusion. And yet, I find myself believing that a course like The Mines hasn't quite hit its stride yet, and that it will in years to come grow ever more popular and profitable, always modestly, never spectacularly, but steadily and for a long long time. Is it just wishful thinking on my part? Or do you think I just might be right?

Best
Peter

[Dan Moore]

I'm informed by a source in the know that all of the trees on the back nine at Lawsonia have been removed this winter.  That includes all of the trees surrounding the 13th and 14th greens. 

Lawsonia

[/quote]

[BCowan]

I think it's simple economics. What wise business person is going to lay out the capital required to build even a modest golf course where the ROI isn't in a reasonable time frame or, more likely, not to happen at all?Are you taking into account that the cost of the land at Arcadia dunes was my guess substantially higher than the mines?  People have different opinions of modest

I see it all the time; the more expensive course(not just the famously expensive, either) is doing well, while the mom and pop course that has been paid for is struggling to get play sufficient to keep up the place. I think it has to do with corporate play and outings, or it could simply be human behavior.Do you know for sure, are some of them in debt up to their eye balls?  What if economy retracts are they going to make it?  I agree that mom and pa's who don't spend any money on advertising or have a strong base are going to struggle.

The Mines GC in Grand Rapids is very familiar to me. It's what this group of 1500 say is needed, what the public wants and what is good for the game....and I agree. It's good design, it's low maintenance(bluegrass/ fescue fairways and roughs, which makes it look "muni" to some of you guys) and it's in town. But, the reality is that while they do well enough to get by, they aren't full up all the time either(a superintendents dream, right?). So, other than being a golf philanthropist, the smart money is in high end, destination golf....with an ocean view, preferably. Mr. Keiser seems to be onto a pretty reliable program, wouldn't you say?

  I think the Mines GC is great example.  I haven't played it, but I am first thing this spring.  Grand Rapids is doing really well in Michigan.  The Mines course is closed on Sunday, am I right?  That doesn't make any sense to me.  If they have bluegrass/fescue fairways (used to be a bent snob) I am even more intrigued to play it.  If I hadn't played another DeVries track and didn't know how great of an archie he is, I wouldn't have known about the course.  Do the Boyne courses and The Dream/Nightmare advertise well, I would say yes.  Mr Keiser seems to have very deep pockets and he actually advertises what I have been advocating mid tier great tracks do!  All or most of his courses promote walking (big time), great green complexes, and respect for the game.  I think his SV project is his best idea yet, it's proximity to Chicago and other top tier clubs that are walking only or offer and promote it.  Let me ask you something Joe, since I haven't played the Mines, but if I lived in Grand Rapids I would consider joining it if it offered Season Passes with times blocked off for members/pass holders.  Do you think it would bring more traditional golfers if they changed the model to Season Pass holders get the course from 8 AM-11AM, then open for the general public?  One big reason people join a club besides the comradere, is ''Pace of Play'' and public courses usually are much slower IMHO.  So if the Mines is a great course, I think they could make a lot more money going to a semi-private model with season pass/member times blocked off IMO.  What do you think?

[Jud_T]

Dan,

That is really good news.  Have to get up there this summer.

[Lou_Duran]

The Mines GC in Grand Rapids is very familiar to me. It's what this group of 1500 say is needed, what the public wants and what is good for the game....and I agree. It's good design, it's low maintenance(bluegrass/ fescue fairways and roughs, which makes it look "muni" to some of you guys) and it's in town. But, the reality is that while they do well enough to get by, they aren't full up all the time either(a superintendents dream, right?). So, other than being a golf philanthropist, the smart money is in high end, destination golf....with an ocean view, preferably. Mr. Keiser seems to be onto a pretty reliable program, wouldn't you say?

Joe

I think you are right that it is about economics, and, therefore, human behavior.  Someone here (I think it was Tim Weiman) once said that what the golfer really wants is to pay less (he may have also said play more, which does follow).  He is probably 99.9% right (there is probably a sliver of the golfing population who may not consider a bargain-price course on that basis alone, sort of like someone I know who won't order a bottle of wine at a restaurant that's under $50).

It seems that you're mistaken regarding what the "public" wants as much of the rest or your comments seem to suggest.  Apparently, the public does discriminate- you may recall the thread on this site on Ron Whitten's article regarding golf becoming like the pizza business, competing mostly on price and not on quality or product differentiation.

I would also question that the 1500 participants of this website with posting privileges have a unified opinion of what is needed or what is good for the game (though the latter may be your opinion, and I struggle with the notion that any one of us can divine what is in the "public good", I probably share).  What is written on this site and what I see and hear at any number of gca.com related events are often quite different things.  My opinion is that a plurality of participants (most who don't post) hold the Golf is a Big World view, and appreciate that there are a number of niches for golf courses to fit in.  Me personally, referencing the recent post with an aerial of Augusta National and Augusta CC side by side, I celebrate the differences.  Too bad that an aerial of nearby Aiken GC was not linked.

As to Mr. Keiser, I think that he might have a lot of the folksy elixir of Warren Buffett in him.  The pricing of his Bandon properties hardly make me think of him as a golf philanthropist (I know you're not suggesting that he is).  Too bad he and other of his ilk don't look for areas needing a Belvedere or Lawsonia and find a way to get a few courses built.

20+ years ago I had an acquaintance of a highly regarded player/architect approach him with a plan to form a public/private partnership to design, build and manage a few municipal facilities of the type we're discussing.  The thesis was that a municipality would provide the land, water rights, and bond financing; the architect would design and build the course for a nominal fee plus the cost of construction, provide course management, lease the land on very attractive terms, and have an escalating profit sharing agreement over the life of the lease (30 years, with one or two options, at the end the improvements and personal property would revert to the municipality and it would have 100% fee simple ownership).  There were some resolvable issues with the structure, but we were never able to generate much interest from the guy.  Most cities today have no wiggle room, but I was involved with one deal for a short time that was structured similarly (without a big name architect and bond financing) and it has been a homerun.

[Joe Hancock]

Peter,

As usual, I think you have it right. Slow and steady isn't all bad, is it?

BCowan,

I can't answer with authority to any golf courses debt load. If I was privy to that info, I wouldn't break trust with an owner by posting their financials, in specifics, on a website. But, I agree that it's safe to assume that the land acquisition at Arcadian was higher than the Mines.

The Mines offers season memberships; I am not aware of times blocked off, but it's possible. I have rarely felt like pace of play was slow there, but as anywhere, it can happen.

Lou,

You always have a very logical analysis of situations, and in this regard you do as well. On the issue of cost vs. product, there's a breaking point somehow. The lowest end facilities(with the lowest prices, of course) don't seem to be faring well, but my observations of the CC for a day models seem that they have a good amount of play. I have done a fair bit of work each of the last 3 years for one of these types of facilities in Grand Rapids, and maybe it's the conditioning, maybe it's the fact that they are making modest improvements each year...I don't know exactly, but they keep growing in clientele. As an example, I built a short game area at this facility, and the following season they matched the previous years' range income by late June...people were more likely to practice with the expanded facilities, I suppose. They also more than doubled their wedding bookings due to the improved aesthetics the short game area provided as viewed from the banquet facility. You are likely to have observations that corroborate or contradict my ramblings. I would enjoy hearing them, either way!

Joe

[BHoover]

Not sure whether this is the appropriate thread to bring this up, but it seems as good as any to do so.  It seems to me that whatever development is going on these days in the US is in the high-end market.  There are potential new developments in Wisconsin (both the new Keiser project and the news that Herb Kohler is thinking about asking Mr. Dye to design a 5th course at Kohler), there's Streamsong, Cabot Links and of course Bandon.  I'm probably missing a few more.  But my point is that it seems like most of the new development is on the high-end rather than the middle market (for lack of a better term).

I don't see this trend changing any time soon.  I just don't know whether the demand is there for new courses that aren't destination spots.  Admittedly, I'm not in the golf industry, so I could be wrong.  I'm just going by what I see and the talk that I see on GCA and on Golf Channel.

[Rees Milikin]

I am not convinced that starting middle class type courses similar to Lawsonia or Belvedere are going to happen right now or anytime soon.  However, I think restoration projects of muni's and similar courses would be the closest thing we will be seeing to a Lawsonia or Belvedere.

I really enjoyed this recent piece from Adam Lawrence and think it is relevant to what is being discussed here: http://www.golfcoursearchitecture.net/Article/Municipal-courses-spreading-the-gospel-of-golf-for-over-a-century/3055/Default.aspx#.Uw-PTvRdUd5

[BCowan]

Brian

   I think Mike Young is right, you just don't hear about them.  Yes Keiser, DT, and Kohler get all the press.  What Kohler and Keiser and somewhat of DT have in common is they build great golf courses.  Kohler and Keiser focus on all of the things i have advocated (tradition, spirit of the game, walking courses, caddies, and great archies)!  They have the money to build high end and people are going!  I think SV is brilliant and might bring the fees at Kohler down some.

   The owners of Forest Dunes would be an example building a 2nd course with two solid archies.  Both courses allow walking and the original is $130 peak time.  I would consider that med retail and I think they did really well last summer.  Med. end courses have to find cost effective ways to advertise the things that make them special without the Golf Channel and Mags!