Does Scotland (not) have enough Golf Courses?

[Keith Phillips]

I believe that the general consensus is that the number of golfers is decreasing - I read that this is happening in the UK as well as the US.  I also have to believe that the number of golfers going to Scotland to play golf is also not increasing but let's say that it is at least maintaining its current level as opposed to decreasing. That means that you have a given number of potential customers who may come and play your courses.  Am I then correct that if a new course is built that it will have to take golfers from other courses in order to generate revenue to pay for it and make a profit and at the same time reduce the number of golfers/customers going to other courses.  Perhaps you might suggest that more golfers will go to Scotland because of this new course but is there really anything to support this proposition - are golfers going to Scotland because of Castle Stuart or Kingsbarns or would they be going anyway?

Jerry, by that standard Keiser and the ilk would never have invested in remote locales which have become attractive golfing destinations like Bandon, central Florida or Inverness, NS.  If the courses are of sufficient quality the 'build it and they will come' philosophy applies.  I've played a lot of golf in Ayrshire and Fife but have never made it to the north - it's more likely that I'll make that trip if Coul Links were to join Castle Stuart and Trump Aberdeen (and obviously Dornoch et. al.) as additions to the itinerary.  While the number of golfers and rounds played may be down on a macro level, it is by definition true that rounds played at 'elite architectural destinations' have increased dramatically.  I suspect the groups suffering are the 2nd or 3rd tier architectural destinations like some of those resorts in Florida, New England, etc.

[Jon Wiggett]

I believe that the general consensus is that the number of golfers is decreasing - I read that this is happening in the UK as well as the US.  I also have to believe that the number of golfers going to Scotland to play golf is also not increasing but let's say that it is at least maintaining its current level as opposed to decreasing. That means that you have a given number of potential customers who may come and play your courses.  Am I then correct that if a new course is built that it will have to take golfers from other courses in order to generate revenue to pay for it and make a profit and at the same time reduce the number of golfers/customers going to other courses.  Perhaps you might suggest that more golfers will go to Scotland because of this new course but is there really anything to support this proposition - are golfers going to Scotland because of Castle Stuart or Kingsbarns or would they be going anyway?

Jerry, by that standard Keiser and the ilk would never have invested in remote locales which have become attractive golfing destinations like Bandon, central Florida or Inverness, NS.  If the courses are of sufficient quality the 'build it and they will come' philosophy applies.  I've played a lot of golf in Ayrshire and Fife but have never made it to the north - it's more likely that I'll make that trip if Coul Links were to join Castle Stuart and Trump Aberdeen (and obviously Dornoch et. al.) as additions to the itinerary.  While the number of golfers and rounds played may be down on a macro level, it is by definition true that rounds played at 'elite architectural destinations' have increased dramatically.  I suspect the groups suffering are the 2nd or 3rd tier architectural destinations like some of those resorts in Florida, New England, etc.

Keith,


I think you will find that most of the modern courses are aimed at people like you and I am glad you take the time and effort to visit Scotland. I would suggest however that there is more than enough great golf up here already to entice the self professed multi trip golfer without a new course. I would recommend you travel up north whether Coul Links is built or not. Most of the big courses have much less traditional Scottish golf and too much cooperate golf for many but there are still many very good courses close to the beaten track that offer an authentic experience.


Jon

[Jerry Kluger]

Keith - my point was that building new courses in remote locations doesn't have to take away golfers from existing locations but building new courses where there are an abundance of courses already would most likely take away golfers from other courses in the area.  Your statement that adding Coul Links would now be a reason to go to the north so you could add it to a trip including Trump Aberdeen and Castle Stuart is what mystifies me.  There is so much really good golf in the north of courses built many years ago but modern courses are the ones that attract you to the north.  I don't mean to be smug but if you were to go to St Andrews would you play Kingsbarns ahead of TOC, or the New or the Jubilee, etc.?

[Niall C]

Keith/Jerry,


What impact do you think the opening of another high end pay and play course for mainly US tourists, who make up for only a very very very small fraction of rounds played in Scotland, will have on the health of Scottish golf overall ? Curious to hear your thoughts.


Niall

[BCowan]

Perhaps, in order to get permission to be built, every new 18-holer should have to have a kids course or muni pitch-n-putt or Himalayas type putting green as well?
atb

Are you joking? 

[Jerry Kluger]

Niall: I read recently that the number of Scottish golfers is decreasing; non-tourists.  So will another high end course have an impact on Scottish golf - probably not. I mean that from both the local as well as visitor standpoint.  Most golfers from outside Scotland don't need another high end course in order to induce them to come.  We played TOC back in June and out 4th was joining us because the friends he was supposed to meet up with had flight delays and weren't getting in until the next day.  He told us where his group was playing and it was all high end courses all over Scotland - they were getting around by helicopter.  That type of player will go to a new course and pay the big bucks and will only decrease revenue at other high end courses.  My question is if there are enough people in the area looking for work to support the needs of the new club - it could be good for the local community if there are people that need the work.  I remember when we played Sand Hills and Dismal River that the big contreversy was the limited number of people available for staff both clubs - Ballyneal was built as a walking course but they struggle to find caddies because of the limited population.


Niall: getting back to your question, is it not so that outside play is what helps Scottish courses pay their bills?  Look at Golspie and what they had to go through to get sufficient funds to big a new lawnmower.

[Jon Wiggett]

Jerry,


having no money is both a problem but also a blessing. The reason there are so many courses that have not been ruined by tinkering committees is down to it. Golspie would certainly benefit from more green fee play and one of the aims the developers of Coul Links has is to get visitors to stay a fair bit longer and spend in the region. I think this will be the real defining point as to the success of the project.


Jon

[Jerry Kluger]

Jon: I'm sorry but I don't see the connection.  There are enough reasons for players to stay in the area now but they choose not to. They don't stay in Carnoustie but certainly they could, instead, they come for the day and leave.

[Jon Wiggett]

Jerry,

if you do not understand the connection between getting players to stay longer in the area and them therefore spending more money in the local economy then I doubt I can explain it. I assume this is the connection you fail to grasp though it is not clear from your post.

Jon

[Adam Lawrence]

Jon: I'm sorry but I don't see the connection.  There are enough reasons for players to stay in the area now but they choose not to. They don't stay in Carnoustie but certainly they could, instead, they come for the day and leave.

Jerry


There are enough reasons for players to stay in the area now but they choose not to.

This sentence is clearly incorrect. There can't be enough reasons for players to stay in the area, or they would do so!

[Thomas Dai]

Generally the more days you are away from home on a golf trip paying for accommodation, transport, meals etc the more the overall cost of the trip goes up.
Also in some countries employees get shorter holidays than in others.
I guess these have less effect on the wealthy or the wealthy/retired but maybe factors such as the above tend to have an effect on many play-n-move-on golf-trippers?

atb

[Niall C]

Jon: I'm sorry but I don't see the connection.  There are enough reasons for players to stay in the area now but they choose not to. They don't stay in Carnoustie but certainly they could, instead, they come for the day and leave.

Jerry


There are enough reasons for players to stay in the area now but they choose not to.

This sentence is clearly incorrect. There can't be enough reasons for players to stay in the area, or they would do so!

Call me Mr Pedantic if you will but there can be enough good reasons to stay but it's just that what is being offered elsewhere is more attractive  . Case in point is the multitude of golfers on the grand tour of Scotlands top courses who decide to go and play Carnoustie or Muirfield or Troon the next day rather than hang around to play Golspie. I can't see a new upmarket course changing that unless of course they peg the green fees to something that the non-grand tourists can afford to play more than once, say £50/£60 a round or £300 for a week ticket.

That would help locate golfers in the area for more than an over night stay however I think that kind of price structure is just wishful thinking on my part.


Niall

[Sean_A]

I don't think high end golf in Scotland effects local membership.

At some point there could be a critical mass where golfers will want to stay in areas longer to play all the top guns offered.  What that critical mass is I don't know.  In the case of Coul Links it could well be the case with Dornoch, Castle Stuart, Carnegie and Nairn already there.  It could also be the case that Nairn or Carnegie drops off the top gun list if folks don't want to spend more than two/three nights in the general area. It is clear that the Highlands can hold the attention of golfers for an entire holiday should they be inclined.  Time will tell.   

Jerry

"The area" for Carnoustie could spread from Fife to Aberdeen...the day trips are easy from these areas. 

Ciao 

[Adrian_Stiff]

Do these areas lack 4 star/good hotels? If yes then surely that needs to be addressed, plus it needs some other stuff as well, but the golf trip is usually 2 nights and three rounds of golf. For American's which we are largely talking would they kind of take this in as a multi-stop and look for something like;
Fly to Glasgow or Edingburgh
Move to Fife to stay/play 3 nights - 4 rounds
Move North stay/ play 3 nights - 3 rounds
Return from Glasgow or Edinburgh


From the UK tourist perspective I suppose it could detract from the Tain, Golspies, Broa. As these course might dip off the radar from the 3 course package with Couls/ Dornoch/ Trump / Castle Stuart the new main pickers.


Certainly very few UKers golf for 7 nights/7 rounds at multiple courses. Do Americans look at a One place stay for 7 days outside of Edinburgh, Fife or Ayr?

[Jerry Kluger]

You want some reasons to stay in an area - how about staying over in Carnoustie and playing Panmure, how about staying over in Dornoch and playing Brora and Golspie.


I am not trying to portray some type of evil or bad motive for building these new courses rather my point is that I don't see them doing anything more than splitting the money of the golfers who want to brag that they played a given course. 

[Jon Wiggett]

Niall,


you have a good point about belt notching tourist who are mainly American. However this is not what I was talking about as I doubt they could ever be persuaded away from the bling that is the 'BIG GUN' circuit. The big selling point for the local communities being pushed by the developers is getting golfers to stay longer in the area. These could be and most certainly will be non American though doubtless it will attract a its share. This could be done by offering packages whereby the greenfee cost for playing is set at a much lower rate than the £100+ bracket.


Jerry,


If you follow the Trump economic system then you are dead on but I doubt that this will be the case at Coul Links as it has not been the case at Castle Stuart




Jon

[Michael Whitaker]

Jerry,

If you follow the Trump economic system then you are dead on but I doubt that this will be the case at Coul Links as it has not been the case at Castle Stuart

Jon

Jon - I’m not following what you are saying here. What is the “Trump economic system” and how does Castle Stuart differ?

[Jon Wiggett]

Michael,


CS has always tried to integrate itself and make itself relevant to the local golfing population which is why they offer a SGU golfer rate of about £90 and a locals rate of £60 thus making themselves accessible for the average local player. Trump's locals rate was so close to the top rate as to make no difference. The average UK golfer is not going to stump up £150+ for a greenfee but then Trump never liked the locals anyway.


Jon

[Jerry Kluger]

Jon: CS was charging 105 pounds this year for SGU members.  Besides taking a shot at Trump - which also has a reduced rate that is higher than CS but the standard rate is higher as well - are you saying that there are a substantial number of SGU members who regularly play the course - I doubt it. Granted, there is a lower rate at CS for locals but I would maintain that they are not willing to pay that rate. I would be quite surprised if the vast majority of play at CS was not from golfers paying the higher rate. BTW: Kingsbarns shows a rate comparable to Trump and does not show a lower rate for SGU members although I would guess that they have one that requires a phone call. [size=78%] [/size]

[Niall C]

I played KB earlier this year the week before the Masters and from memory paid £100. That was easily the most money I've paid to play there and I've played a number of times over the years. For the record there was 8 of us, all Scots (what I'd term local) and 1 of us used a caddy which is a rarity.


Again played CS a number of times and never ever paid top dollar. I've played Balmedie only the once and that involved a convoluted contra deal with a fellow GCA'er so the cost was c.£50 from memory. The advantage with being a "local" is you can take the opportunity to take a deal when it presents itself. Travelling golfers don't have that luxury.


Niall

[Jon Wiggett]

Jerry,


I was not aware the SGU rate had gone up as being local I get the £60 deal which is used by quite a lot of local golfers. You are probably correct with the assumption that more plays are upper rate but there are quite a few locals who play CS at least once a year. Trump might have a cheaper rate for locals but at £155 for the main season it is still way outside what most Scots will pay.


Jon

[Jerry Kluger]

Jon: So you made my point - locals might play CS once a year and other Scots aren't about to pay the higher rate so the vast majority of players are from outside of Scotland. Most of those outside players go and play a course and leave the area as they want to play all of the big name courses which means Coul Links is just going to take a piece of that action.  I doubt that those foreign players are going to come to Scotland just to play Coul Links and leave.  Bandon, Cabot and Gamble as well as Streamsong and Kohler are primarily destination golf where players come for a few days to play the courses and not much else. 

[David_Tepper]

"So you made my point - locals might play CS once a year and other Scots aren't about to pay the higher rate so the vast majority of players are from outside of Scotland."

Jerry K. -

I am not so sure about that. You will note Jon W. said "at least once a year," not only once a year.

I have no way of knowing for sure, but my guess is the number of rounds played each year at Castle Stuart by residents of the greater Inverness area and SGU might surprise you. While the "majority" of the people playing CS are visitors to Scotland, my sense is a healthy minority are not.

Frankly, I do not accept the notion that the native Scots are not willing to pay up for an occasional "special" golf experience that is different from their home clubs. Some of the most enthusiastic fans of Castle Stuart I have met over the years are the locals. Given that many Scots have watched the Scottish Open played at CS multiple times on TV, it is not far fetched to guess that many of them have an interest in playing the course.   

On a different note, it is worth noting that the traffic across the Atlantic to play golf is by no means a one way street these days. There are a sizable number of folks from Scotland (and elsewhere in the UK) who travel to North America for a golf holiday and are willing to pay a premium to do so. I have met a number of Scots who have played a wider variety of golf courses in the U.S. than I have.   

DT   

[Jon Wiggett]

Jon: So you made my point - locals might play CS once a year and other Scots aren't about to pay the higher rate so the vast majority of players are from outside of Scotland. Most of those outside players go and play a course and leave the area as they want to play all of the big name courses which means Coul Links is just going to take a piece of that action.  I doubt that those foreign players are going to come to Scotland just to play Coul Links and leave.  Bandon, Cabot and Gamble as well as Streamsong and Kohler are primarily destination golf where players come for a few days to play the courses and not much else.

Jerry,


no I have not made your point. Like DT said I did not say 'once a year' but 'at least once a year' and even if local did only play once a year this does not automatically mean it would make this group a small percentage of green fees as there are quite a lot of golfers up here. You are drawing conclusions on assumption rather than what was written.


As I have mentioned in other posts I think the success of Coul Links will be measured in how many golfers stay in the area for longer. You seem to make the assumption that it can/is only overseas visitors who come to the Highlands in which you are much mistaken. Not sure what Bandon, Cabot and Gamble as well as Streamsong and Kohler have to do with it. Different country, different concept and different market.


Jon