Even though back tees are relatively small, they still require construction and 18 on a new project is not an insignificant line item when you consider additional tree clearing & grubbing, topsoil stripping & stockpiling, shaping, root zone mix, topsoil spreading and seeding/sodding costs. Keeping the area between the back tee and the next set as native can reduce the need for irrigation by saving a few heads, but the irrigation pipe required to service the back tee is not reduced. Additional cart path construction may be required as well.
It is rather insignificant if you factor in what investors are paying for land. Cart path construction is not needed unless very high end course. When you are talking about a good deal of courses being done for $10 million, and tip tee construction is a result of maybe $1 more a round if u depreciate it. The amount the dining room and clubhouse use, nobody does cost benefit analysis for that and makes adjustments. I believe TD doesn't build USGS spec greens, which saves a lot more money imo then building small tip tee boxes which don't have to be maint. to high standard if its a low budget course.
Contrary to what you think, the quest for 7,000 plus yard golf courses has led to the need for more land, increasing golf course construction costs further. New technology has given a small minority the ability to hit the ball further, straight and offline.
That is utter nonsense. RE housing tracks have lead to larger parcels of land. Also the need for seclusion in between holes. Forget technology, that has been beaten to death on here. It isn't going away either.
Longer courses can lend themselves to longer rounds, especially when people are tempted by their ego to play the very back tees. The major problem is if the back tees are those closest to the preceding green, requiring the vast majority of players to add many hundreds of extra yards to their journey - and that most definitely increases the length of a round. If possible, the middle tee should be located in close proximity to the previous green to limit the walk for the majority.
Forced carries, lack of consideration for fellow golfers, lack of ready golf, plum bobbing, and putzing around have lead to slow rounds. I play in 4 somes on my home track which is 7000 yards from the tips and people finish in under 4 hours. walking an extra 30 paces is nothing compared to a 2 min pre shot routine. This goes back to controlling people who we deem unfit to make decisions for themselves.
I don't have a problem with clubs maintaining a championship tee in the 7,000 yard range, but they are fooling themselves if they don't think it comes with additional costs that are borne by the entire membership and not the 2-3% who would use them with any frequency. The tee still needs to be mown, irrigated, fertilized etc.
Public and Private have them for they possibly deem them to attract 3-10% who want to play them. So they have to determine if its cost effective, definitely public courses do. At the 6700 yard course i grew up at, 10-15% played the tips. If 3% or less us the tees, cost needs to come down in maint. assuming we are talking about public course with smaller means. If less than 3% use it and it is costing more than revenue, a club/course can always let it go native.