Here is something else to consider:
If Coul links had been built and sucessfull it would only have taken away traffic and revenue from other areas.
Only so much in the pot and as another thread say's Scotland is sinking fast. It might be the multitude of not so good courses going under but it would raise the bar.
Scotland does not really need any new golf courses.
These are just assumptions and we all know what "ASSuME" means...;-)
Questions:
1. When Sand Valley opened did it takeaway golf revenue from Kohler or Erin Hills in Wisconsin or did it make Wisconsin a more compelling golf destination over Michigan or northern Minnesota or Pinehurst - all which have se
en millions invested recently?2. Would Coul have taken golf revenue away from other "hub locations" (Ayrshire, etc.)? Yes, perhaps, that was also the goal. Other areas or "hubs" have seen multi-million $$ in outside investment in the last 10 years. Dornoch was losing hotel revenue YOY and the developers sought to reverse that.
What's wrong with playing a bit of offense in a competitive market?
The situation was simple: Perry Golf vans (as an example) ferried the tourist players up to Dornoch from Inverness (or wherever). They let them off in front of the pro shop and met them 5 hours later with box lunches or meals prepared elsewhere.
So, these 12 golfers spent a bit of money at RDGC, but ZERO in the town.
No restaurants, no hotels...squat. RDGC driving revenue for themselves, but not for the town. With Coul, the idea was also simple:
- perhaps these golfers would stay 1-2 nights. Eat dinner at local restaurants, stay in local hotels, buy souvenirs in the shops as they played another round at RDGC, one or two at Coul and one at Brora, Tain, Golspie or Skibo (gulp$).
- RDGC does around 12,000 visitor rounds per year last i checked. Great for the club, not as great for the town. If those vistors stayed in the area to play more, then the economic benefit would flow through.
Keiser has a well published track record of making his courses global destinations.