[Sean_A]

I guess the club has to spend the expensive green fee income on something.  Its the way of the Scottish golfing world. 


Ciao

Sean


The reason why the greenfee is so high on no. 1 is to actually discourage visitors so as to keep it free for members.

Niall

Niall


This isn't actully the case.  The idea for big clubs is to set the visitor greenfee at price which will substantially reduce costs for members while keeping the course(s) relatively available for members.  I like all three courses (nearly all the courses we talk about n this forum are good!), especially #3 if one leaves a driver in the boot, but think #s 1 & 2 are over-priced considering their quality.


Brian


Tax laws still allow a considerable amount of outside income for private clubs.  Its more than tax laws at work in the US; members want their courses empty...hence the reason for low membership numbers.  While I wonder about this attitude, it is their choice.  Its just a different culture in the US compared to GB&I.  Many US clubs are effectively extensions of members' homes.  So money is spent on stuff which isn't (or at least wasn't) considered important in GB&I...and you don't invite just anybody to your home!   



Ciao

[Michael Graham]

I don't know the exact figure but I'm fairly sure the yearly subscription for Gullane is under £800. That is tremendous value for three courses which play almost exactly the same in the depths of winter as they do in the height of summer. They can, of course afford to charge members so little due to visitors paying upwards of £130 to play #1.

Does anyone have an idea of how much money (if any) member owned clubs such as Gullane and Royal Aberdeen receive for hosting the Scottish Open?

[Niall C]

Sean


I don't think we are disagreeing. I know a few members at Gullane including a recent captain and what I've been told is that the pricing structure is designed to encourage play onto 2 and 3 and discourage play on 1 which is generally seen as the members course.


Of course they will charge what they can but at the end of the day Gullane, like Troon, Muirfield or a handful of other Scottish courses, need to limit the number of visitors somehow or they will get over run. The price structure is one way of doing it. They are member clubs and run for members so there is no quibble from me on that score.

[/size]Niall [size=78%]

[Ed Brzezowski]

Mike:


First time I've seen good, in-depth pictures of Gullane -- it looks like a really fine course. Plenty of width for what I assume is a pretty exposed and windy site. Thanks for sharing.
 
Played it three years ago and the fescue was above knee height. Yes it had some nice width to the fairways but you were in jail if you were ten feet off the rough line. Really great course
, thanks for bringing back some great memories Mike. well except for what is on that plate.
 
ed

[MCirba]

Without resorting to hyperbole, I think I'm in love with Gullane #1.

I've long argued that golf should be a much simpler game than we make it and our golf course architecture can be equally overwrought.   Gullane #1 lets the land and conditions dictate the play and doesn't get in the way as we go on a little adventure out of town, up over the hill, and then takes the golfer on a gorgeous, whimsical, adventurous nature walk across hill and dale with a terrific routing that I can't imagine improving before sadly taking you home to just rewards.   There isn't a single thing out of place or forced or otherwise contrived.

Perfect. 

That being said, I did flinch a bit when I saw the price listed here;  we benefited from much reduced off-season pricing so folks might want to take note and advantage.

I'm glad folks enjoyed the photos and I didn't think they needed much in terms of my superfluous commentary or attempts to describe what each photo represented.   I would encourage others to take that magical walk out of the charming town, up over the hill, and experience it for themselves. 

Thanks!

[Michael Graham]

Mike makes a valid point about the reduced winter green fees. The price I listed of £135 is the 2016 full weekend rate. From the 1st of October until the 31st of December #1 is £52 during the week and £61 at the weekend.

I would venture that an awful lot of golfers visiting Gullane take advantage of their winter rates.

[Jon Wiggett]

Sean,

when you say flat I assume you mean a lack of movement at the course is anything but flat sending the golfer up and down the hill on several occasions during the round.

I still find it a shame that clubs don't just limit greenfee play by restricting the number of slots available and asking a price that reflects what it is worth not what some are willing to pay.

Jon

[Adam Lawrence]

Sean,

when you say flat I assume you mean a lack of movement at the course is anything but flat sending the golfer up and down the hill on several occasions during the round.

I still find it a shame that clubs don't just limit greenfee play by restricting the number of slots available and asking a price that reflects what it is worth not what some are willing to pay.

Jon

My studies in economics are many years back, Jon, but one of the first things I remember learning is that the value of a good is what someone is prepared to pay for it 

[Sean_A]

Jon


The course relies on tilt rather than contour...sort of the exact opposite of TOC.  I didn't mean the there was little elevation change, not that the changes at Gullane are that wonderful in terms of the golf produced.  For me, Gullane is a good, solid course without flair...nothing wrong with that.  Its just that I don't care to pay the green fee which to me should in terms of quality be likely less than half of what it is.  In other words, Gullane is miles out on bang for buck.  No worries, I can play North Berwick.  That said, I don't blame Gullane for riding Muirfield's coat tails...thats life in the big city. 


Ciao 

[Jon Wiggett]

My studies in economics are many years back, Jon, but one of the first things I remember learning is that the value of a good is what someone is prepared to pay for it 

Adam,

if you are only looking short term then you are correct however businesses such as golf clubs really need to look at a long term strategy. As Sean points out Gullane No. 1 is not worth the price they are asking from a quality point of view. Their strategy is based entirely on high paying overseas players (US golfers if we are honest) paying above price fees. If these visitors were to stop coming then they and others with this strategy will end up with a massive hole in their finances.

What my economics studies taught me was 'not to put all your eggs in one basket'. 

Sean,

that is what I assumed you meant.

Jon

[Tony_Muldoon]

My studies in economics are many years back, Jon, but one of the first things I remember learning is that the value of a good is what someone is prepared to pay for it 

Adam,

if you are only looking short term then you are correct however businesses such as golf clubs really need to look at a long term strategy. As Sean points out Gullane No. 1 is not worth the price they are asking from a quality point of view. Their strategy is based entirely on high paying overseas players (US golfers if we are honest) paying above price fees. If these visitors were to stop coming then they and others with this strategy will end up with a massive hole in their finances.

What my economics studies taught me was 'not to put all your eggs in one basket'. 

Sean,

that is what I assumed you meant.

Jon

Jon, Gullane may not be worth it to YOU, but the market is correct. Just try and book a time at Muirfield or the Old Course at present rates and you will find they are already at or close to capacity.  If the courses were about maximizing income I would suggest those two, who are at the top end of "luxury brand names" could double their prices and tee times would still be hard to get.  That's todays economy where the top end "brands" charge a huge premium. Unlike you I don't see much chance that this will change anytime soon. It sounds to me like the argumnets made by people waiting for house prices to readjust downwards, before they buy. There's an argument the clubs should take the punters money while it’s available and can discount later if it became necessary. In Ireland a couple of top end courses have maintained their headline rate whilst having to offer a second discounted one to keep times full. Once the market picks up they can get rid of the later. All this has a knock on effect on other Clubs with a strong brand. The North Berwick West Links now collect enough visitor money during the week that they have been able to drop unaccompanied visitor play at weekends. As I'm sure you are all too aware at the other end of the golf 'brand' equation prices charged are constantly being revised in a downward spiral. The gap ("inequality") is getting larger.  |

The net result is NOW is the time to play your bucket list courses folks.   Increasingly these course will see a ‘once and done’ visitor and I expect there to be more effort to make that visit memorable for those prices.  E.g. at TOC you get a little souvenir bag, doubt it costs them 1% of the greenfee but is a nice reminder.  My bucket list featured the Open courses and I've only got Carnoustie to tick off. I will have to make a real effort to get there, but effectively I will pay what it takes to play it before the Open returns in July 2018. 

 
 
 
Mike delighted you had good weather and really enjoyed yourself. I’ve been hoping you’d post more about your trip and it’s starting to come together. I await your next thread with interest.
 
 
I’ve played Gullane 1&3.   Will return for No 2 but there’s too many other local interesting course I’ve yet to see, to be tempted back to 1 soon.  I didn’t play well and it didn’t capture my imagination.  The locals speaking up for it on this thread seem to have played it several times and perhaps there’s the rub. I doubt I’ll get that many opportunities but I do remember the views.

[Sean_A]

Spangles hit the nail with a proper hammer (he usually uses a rubber mallet  ).  Playing a course many times can offer insight which others simply don't have.  Of course, that insight could lead to a favourable OR negative opinion.  For good or bad, courses have to offer something to grab onto which encourages golfers to return because the field is deep for those who care to drift away from top 100 lists.  This is especially true for relatively small countries which have a concenrtated amount of high quality...such as the UK and Ireland.  Often, it is eye candy which is the named draw because lets face it, thats the only thing folks come close to agreeing upon. Hence, Spangles mentions the views of Gullane.


Ciao

[MCirba]

There is elasticity and spring about the Gullane turf that you seldom find anywhere else; and as for the putting greens, even with all the wear and tear of a season's play, where will you find their marrow?  Then, have you anywhere in all the world such delightful 'heichs and howes' giving relief to the muscles, variety to the battle, and sustaining the interest, as you have at Gullane?  There is no unpardonable monotony here.  You never tire.  As our lamented friend John Thomson sang:-

It's up the hill, it's down the hil,
And roun' the hill, an a' man;
To Gullane Hill, wi' richt guide will,
If yes can gowff ava, man.

The turf is soft as maiden's cheek,
Wi' youth and beauty bloomin';
And bonnie thyme, wi' odour sweet,
The caller air's perfumin'.
There's heights and howes, there's bosky knowes,
As far as the eye can cover;
By sea and land, a picture grand
Dame Nature shows her lover.

From "The Golf-Book Of East Lothian" - John Kerr, 1896

[Niall C]

Mike


As I said on the other thread re Gullane/NB etc, I've not come across better golfing turf anywhere in Scotland and as John Kerr suggested over a hundred years ago it is invariably in great nick all year round.


Niall

[Thomas Dai]

At quite a few places in Scotland the linksland is owned by a local authority/trust and several golf clubs, including sometimes an exclusive ladies club, have rights to play over it.


Is Gullane like this, ie is there just one Gullane GC or is there more than one club that plays over the courses?


Also, is the land 'open' for dog walkers and those out for a stroll etc or is it golfers only?


Atb

[Tony_Muldoon]

Mike


As I said on the other thread re Gullane/NB etc, I've not come across better golfing turf anywhere in Scotland and as John Kerr suggested over a hundred years ago it is invariably in great nick all year round.


Niall

I saw that and I must say I was surprised. Undoubtedly the ball ran well but the sward seemed thicker than usual on Links? The lies didn't appear as tight and the hay was the equal of Muirfield's. I found it a little disconcerting and both times wondered during the round if that was contributin to my less than wonderful feeings?

However the ball ran true and I'm sure i could come to apreciate it.

[Jon Wiggett]

Tony,

I do not disagree with what you have said in the current climate and if your point of view is taken but the model is very heavily skewed towards one type of client. I do not know what the figures for US visitors was in 2002 compared to 2001 but if for whatever reason that market dries up, which is not as far fetched as it may seem in todays world, then high end clubs will suffer big time in that first year.

I would also point out that Muirfield restricts the number of greenfees severely compared to most clubs so there is no surprise it fills its greenfee spots in the main season. TOC is a municipal course which should be run for the benefit of the general public and its greenfee should reflect this IMO. It is however being run as a profit making business which in itself is not a bad thing but the emphasis being put on making the maximum profit possible is not in holding with its public ownership. The Links Trust could easily be seen as abusing St. Andrews status in the game of golf to its own ends.

Thomas,

you can walk with your dog across any golf course in Scotland under the' right to roam' act. The Dog just needs to be under control and you must not interfere with play. I am not sure that golfers have the right to take a dog with them however and suspect this is down to the individual club.

Jon

[Sean_A]

Jon


Its an interesting situation with the "Right to Roam Act" (in England & Wales formally called the Countryside and Rights of Way Act...not sure what it is called in Scotland).  In England & Wales golf courses are an exception to the rights of way...I spose partly on the grounds that it would be potentially dangerous.  However, the Act doesn't effect existing public rights of way.  In Scotland, the Act does allow for pedestrian access to golf courses except for the greens...I spose because they can easily be damaged.  In Scotland, if the land owner believes damage is likely to occur he can restrict access.  For instance, fencing which will keep horses off the property, but not restrict pedestrian access.  Given that the law is on the books, it seems to me that clubs should invest in paths to guide pedestrians through the property in a safe manner.  Otherwise, there will certainly be trouble at some point with folks being hit by golf balls.  If everybody acts rationally there shouldn't be many problems...the paths encourage people to act rationally    because lets face it, a ton of ramblers don't have a clue what they are doing in terms of safety on a golf course.  While it is unfair to burden golf clubs with the cost this Act has inflicted, in the long run paths will be good investments.

Ciao

[Michael Graham]

I can understand a golfer wanting to play a round of golf with his best friend in tow. I think it's great seeing golfers out with their dogs tied on a lead to their trolleys.


What I can't, however, understand is non-golfers wanting to use a golf course to take their dog(s) out for a walk. At my course in Edinburgh it is a constant frustration the number of people walking their dog on the course. As they are non-golfers they tend to lack the awareness where balls may be coming from or golfers about to tee off or hit a shot. I'm no great dog lover and apologies if you are but Edinburgh has enough parks and green spaces that I would have thought would be much more suitable and preferable to enjoy a walk with your dog.

[Niall C]

Sean


Rights of access or separate from the legislation you are referring to. A right of access, obtained either by prescription or by contract (servitude or wayleave) are fairly specific in terms of the area that the right of access is over as well as fairly specific what the access is for.


The recent legislation commonly referred to as right to roam allows Joe Public to pretty well stomp anywhere as long as it doesn't impinge on the owners privacy. From memory it refers to an access code which is a fairly woolly document in terms of establishing what is and what isn't acceptable. Therefore for anyone involved in managing open space and countryside it can be a nightmare. I very much doubt that there is anything a club can do to stop anyone walking across a green providing they don't do any damage.

You also have to understand that ramblers, like cyclists, have their militant tendency within their ranks who live to be awkward.

Niall

[Jon Wiggett]

Michael,

dog walkers like to roam across golf courses because they are pleasant, green spaces devoid of children and others where they can walk their dogs in peace. It does however present the problems that you highlight and for urban golf courses it must be quite a quandary as to what to do.

Niall,

I do not believe that cyclists are allowed to leave designated rights of way. The act as I understand it, gives open access to pedestrians but not vehicles or horses, bicycles, etc.

Jon

[Sean_A]

Niall

See below...the Right to Roam is Act fairly clear...in theory.  In practice...well thats another matter and a reason why courses should not have been included in the Act...as is the case in England/Wales.

6.–(1) The land in respect of which access rights are not exercisable is land–... (e) which has been developed or set out– (i) as a sports or playing field; or (ii) for a particular recreational purpose”.

7.-(7) Section 6(1)(e) above prevents the exercise of access rights over land to which it applies only if–... (b) the land is a golf green, bowling green,... or other similar area on which grass is grown and prepared for a particular recreational purpose”.

How it was determined that fairways aren't prepared for particular recreational purpose is beyond me...eventually the lawyers will sort that out. 

Ciao

[Michael Graham]

Jon,

I understand where you're coming from and why dog walkers choose golf courses over other urban spaces. I can only speak for Edinburgh but there are other outdoor spaces where dog walkers don't have to worry about errant tee shots and shouts of fore.

Mortonhall where I'm a member has issued this advice to members on the club's website due to a lot of confusion.

"...It would be incorrect for Council to recommend approaching or speaking to dog walkers, and it would be for members individually to decide whether it is appropriate to do so in any particular circumstances. However, members may find it helpful to know in outline, about the rights of responsible access established under the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003, commonly known as “Right to Roam”, which came into force in February 2005."


"Do members of the public really have unfettered rights of access over our golf course? The answer is “No”!"


"Golf courses, other than greens, are not exempted from “Right to Roam”. Whilst it is believed that the exemption for greens was possibly intended by those who drafted the legislation, when using the phrase “golf green”, to mean the entire course, unfortunately that interpretation has not yet been upheld in court decisions. However, what is abundantly clear from legislation, is that rights of access must be exercised responsibly, which means that anyone exercising rights of access must do so without interfering with the rights of any other person, including the landowner. That means that walkers are not allowed to interfere with the game of golf being played on a golf course!"


"The 2003 Act makes reference to the Scottish Outdoor Access Code, which is regarded as the main point of reference for determining what constitutes reasonable exercise of rights of access, and in the case of a golf course, the Code seems to make it clear that access should be limited to crossing the course to get from one place to another. In other words, walkers cannot wander about a golf course at random."

[Niall C]

Sean

Thanks for posting that excerpt. I hadn't realised there was specific get out for sports grounds although if I read it right the public is still allowed to cross it if they want, just not hang about for recreational purposes. Even if my reading is wrong and there is no explicit right to cross a golf course, in practice you could still wander across it without fear of being prosecuted as there is no trespass law in Scotland.

Michael

As the advice from your club alludes the position won't become clear until there is a body of case law to back up the legislation.

Niall

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()