OT - What do UK GCAers think of this new membership initiative?

[David_Tepper]

Rich G. -

Thanks, but for a guy who has to work for a liviing, I think I get out plenty.

My comments were addressed to golf clubs encouraging locals living in the community who do not play golf to use the club's drinking & dining facilities. I was not speaking to accommodating non-golfing visitors or tourists passing thru town.

For example, Tain GC charges just 10 pounds a year for a social membership. Golspie GC does the same. That is a generous offer for a local who would like to enjoy the comforts of the clubhouse on an occasional basis over the year.

As for accommodating the one-off visitor, as I mentioned earlier, I think some clubs may not want to compete with the local hospitality establishments, particularly if the proprietors of some of those establishments are members of the club. At the clubs I have visited, pomposity has little to do with it.

DT
 

[Duncan Cheslett]

I fear that many of the critical comments come from those disconnected from the reality of life for most mid-level golf clubs in the UK.


The traditional membership model is failing to produce sufficient numbers of committed golfers willing to pay upwards of £1000 pa to be a full member of a golf club. As the age profile of existing members increases, new blood has to be brought in if the club is to have any kind of future.


Most guys I play with took up golf in their 20s or 30s and have been a club member ever since. This is happening today in ever decreasing numbers. All clubs in our area (including the wealthy ones) now offer membership to those in the 18-35 age group at rates far lower than those charged for the middle-aged. Even this has not increased dramatically the number of younger guys overall joining golf clubs. and has tended to concentrate them at the more elite clubs with the better conditioned courses and more extensive practice facilities.


The rest of us are scrabbling around for survival.  With an insufficient membership to cover the running costs an increasing emphasis is placed on green fee income and societies, together with attempts to develop the clubhouse business.


As green fees have got cheaper, and more and more society golf appears, the need for golfers to become full members of a club has reduced.  Pretty much the ONLY reason to be a member of a golf club is to have a CONGU handicap.


I know dozens of people who are avid golfers who have spurned traditional club membership for something more flexible and affordable. They generally house their handicap at a pay and play club or have De Vere type membership at a hotel course.


It is the guys behind the De Vere scheme who have set up PlayMoreGolf.  It appears to be catching on fast; a local club who has been with them 12 months saw their membership income increase by £20k. The manager of the highest profile club (with possibly the best course) in the Manchester area has spoken with our manager about becoming involved.


I am sure we would all rather live in the 1970s or the 1990s, but for all but the very elite clubs at one end, and the sheep-tended honesty-box clubs at the other, survival is tough. It is becoming dog eat dog.


I'm not entirely convinced by this scheme, but I am happy that it will not disaffect existing members. It will be very difficult for PlayMoreGolf members to book Saturday tee times as they will be excluded from the BRS system until a couple of days beforehand, by which time the sheet will be full until at least 2pm.

[Mark Chaplin]

I'm a member of two admittedly top 100 clubs and neither has any problem with membership and gaining new members. In fact RCP has doubled the joining fee this year.


Rich most private clubs are not allowed to serve non members alcohol due to their licensing terms. That is why you technically purchase a temporary membership for the day. Now it's easy to call the clubs snobbish for not bending the rules and allowing outsiders in but the risk of a heavy fine and possible loss of license makes following the rules a no brainer.

[Duncan Cheslett]

I'm a member of two admittedly top 100 clubs and neither has any problem with membership and gaining new members. In fact RCP has doubled the joining fee this year.


Rich most private clubs are not allowed to serve non members alcohol due to their licensing terms. That is why you technically purchase a temporary membership for the day. Now it's easy to call the clubs snobbish for not bending the rules and allowing outsiders in but the risk of a heavy fine and possible loss of license makes following the rules a no brainer.

Top 100 clubs generally won't have a problem. Try telling that to Silloth and Royal St David's though! They do okay, but are very far from flush. Neither has a joining fee to speak of.


The clubs with the problems are probably 90% of the other 3000 golf clubs in the country. Many of them have very good golf courses but find it very difficult to recruit members. There are undoubtedly too many golf clubs at this time.


As for clubs serving non-members, I have often popped into a golf clubhouse for a look round and a coffee or a beer while in the area. The most notable was Royal Birkdale.  I have never been asked to verify my membership or having paid a green fee.

[Jon Wiggett]

Rich,


if you wish to have a coffee or a beer for that matter and watch the golf at Golspie as a passing one off visitor there is no problem. No fee to pay and certainly not the vast amounts you are suggesting even for a years social membership. Infact, except for the big clubs such as Dornoch I do not know of a club up here that would be funny about non golfers using the clubhouse.


Jon

[Thomas Dai]

Appreciate that the traditional 'utopia' model isn't working everywhere. Glad to hear it still is in some places though. Over-supply.


As to non-member social use, I understand that there are UK tax reasons that can make the use of member-club facilities by non-members an issue from the the accounting/admin standpoint. But if there's income to be made things ought not to be insurmountable.


atb

[Rich Goodale]

Thanks for all the thoughtful replies to my rant.  Some of my thoughts:


David T.  Great to know that Golspie has such a low social membership fee.  That being said, even 10 Squid is a barrier to the punter who is driving down the road to the go cart races or to Littleferry and just wants to have a cup of tea.  Yes, I know that local tea rooms like the fact that golf clubs can't compete with them, but that's just an antediluvian relic of the good old days of Guilds and Serfs.  BTW how many locals are Social members at Golspie GC?


As for the "tax issues" that others have mentioned, this is just a Muccian/Victorian barrier that would probably be overturned by Clubs if the courts in the UK were not overly populated by members of Muirfield, Royal St. Georges, etc.  However, haven't these venerated institutions been brought to their knees recently re: women members by the love of Mammon?


As "Deep Throat" famously said, "Follow the money!" and you will get a vision of the inevitable future of golf clubs.  And, that future will be a good one, for the clubs and their communities.

[BCowan]

Rich,


if you wish to have a coffee or a beer for that matter and watch the golf at Golspie as a passing one off visitor there is no problem. No fee to pay and certainly not the vast amounts you are suggesting even for a years social membership. Infact, except for the big clubs such as Dornoch I do not know of a club up here that would be funny about non golfers using the clubhouse.


Jon

Jon,

   Clubs in the US can't get their own members to use the joint.  A big issue is the way modern society in the US dresses down, getting junior to wear slacks is borderline child abuse in the modern world.  Adults and I use the world loosely are as bad.  Do UK clubs allow jeans/denim?  Social memberships in the US are more for Tennis/Swimming IMO, with a few for prestige (Soup Clubs). 
We are at the stage where some clubs 2nd and 3rd tier need to address the money pit of the clubhouse and consider allowing well manored public folks in or close the clubhouse 5 months a year.  In the US the cowards way out of common sense change is yelling over supply. 
 

[Niall C]

Won't work. Do not sign up to schemes. Get off your arses and run your Golf Club properly. If your GM doesn't play golf, sack him/her.

While I wouldn’t necessarily express it quite this way there is indeed a kernel of truth in what Mark says. In the UK there seems to be a shift with clubs bringing in General Managers to replace club secretaries and with that bringing a different and more commercial mindset. What I think is being lost in a lot of instances is a bit of the “clubiness” and the feeling of ownership that you get by being more connected to the management and running of the club. I’m not sure you get that with the new breed of GM’s, no matter how good and efficient they are.


And with all due respect to Adrian and his business model, being a member of a club is much more than the cost per round. It’s about engendering a sense of belonging as part of a group. That’s where the kind of revenue raising schemes discussed here are counterproductive as they undermine the core membership just to try and raise a little bit of extra cash at the margins. If people feel like it’s a pay and play, they will treat it like a pay and play.


It’s become fashionable to sneer at old school ties, and dress codes etc., but it does help to foster a sense of belonging whether people like it or not. Just a thought.
 
Niall

[Adrian_Stiff]

Niall - The problem is that what you and Thomas want from a golf club (and me too) is getting more and more difficult to achieve.


Yes you can still do it at a top 100 club but the typical new golfer/member at the more average club does not see those same values, though it is possible to convert them when they get better and can engage in the teams and competitions.

[Niall C]

Adrian

I don't see this as an either or situation. I think members clubs will survive and thrive and that well run commercial operations like yours will continue to thrive also. Where I think members clubs have a problem is that during the good times they became bloated with unnecessary costs that there seems to be a reluctance to shed.

For example there was a time when catering at clubs was basic and even non-existent and I think that's the level that a lot of clubs should get back to. People join for the golf. If you want a nice meal then there's plenty of choice down the high street.

Niall 

[Adrian_Stiff]

Adrian

I don't see this as an either or situation. I think members clubs will survive and thrive and that well run commercial operations like yours will continue to thrive also. Where I think members clubs have a problem is that during the good times they became bloated with unnecessary costs that there seems to be a reluctance to shed.

For example there was a time when catering at clubs was basic and even non-existent and I think that's the level that a lot of clubs should get back to. People join for the golf. If you want a nice meal then there's plenty of choice down the high street.

Niall

Some clubs will survive on the traditional plan of £1,000 per year. Play as much or as little as you want. Most are made up of people that check their bank statements. Some will dump their membership if they only played 10 times, some won't even consider at 40 times they got their juice, ALL clubs will lose some of their members if locally another golf club has a ROUTE TO PLAY that suits that lower users pocket. If a normal non top 100 club does not adjust what will happen is the high users are content and stay, they hog the tees for the best times and the club flounders because they can't sell to the societies, visitors any reasonable times and even have no room for new members that like them want to golf twice a week at peak times.  That equals  a very busy weekend often mornings but at other times dead but we have been through this scenario 100 times on GCA.


The Catering is usually the biggest loss maker of the lot. If you could get away with buying in sandwiches, pies, pasties it would save a fortune for most UK clubs. Picture this, a club sells 10,000 meals in a year. The Chef is £30k, Waitress £15K, Wash-upper £12K, (have include holidays/NI and WPP at 20%)%of rates £10K, Kitchen equip depr £7K...thats £7.40 per meal sold, add VAT into the equation and every figure there needs to multiplied by 1.2. We have not bought the ingredients yet and we are up to £8.88 to serve the plate. No figure put in for Electric, Gas, Water, Sewerage, Disposal, Admin. If a club can get away with giving it away on a food franchise it will work out the cheapest option...the club just lose the Utilities, Kitchen Equip Depreciation, Admin and probably 25% is added to the Rates because its a food servery. You can twist the figures for accountancy and apportion things in different holes but.


In the grand scheme everything feeds off the other and you will lose customers if you cant serve a breakfast, dinner. But you are right on the money if we learned to eat on the way home and had no clubhouse, however the clubhouse is the members paradise where each members bonds with others for that extra bit that you mentioned as being part of being a member.


No nice solution when all things are considered The FOOD DRAG has to be incorporated.

[Rich Goodale]

Bingo, Adrian!


I remember well the first time I visited Muirfield (April 1978).  After a 3hr round of golf by myself I showered and put on my coat and tie, then walked into the dining room to find 5 dinner ladies standing in front of their public school goodies (roasts, veggies, secret sauces and desserts).  There was only one other person dining that day, a fellow called Paddy Hamner (Capt. RN) the club secretary, and I sat next to him and talked silly talk.


I have no idea what happened to those massive but slightly overcooked joints of beef and lamb and their secret sauces and the bread and butter puddings after Paddy and I left, but I am sure that all the dinner ladies and other club functionaires were well fed.  Muirfield could easily cover the losses on the food bill those days.


These days, clubs cannot afford to cook food for members who do not frequent the club.  That's most clubs, in my 25+ years experience in Scotland.

[Niall C]

Back when Rich was lording it up with Paddy Hammer I was a junior member at my local club. I well recall the summer holidays and having the whole course to myself.


Back then the clubhouse/locker room was open during the day but the bar was basically shut. The pro shop which was separate was open and not counting the greens staff, the pro or his assistant were the only employees of the club present. The bar was for summer evenings and weekends with food served only at weekends and for special club events. Basically staffing was minimal.


Most traditional members clubs in the central belt would have been similar. I’ll bet there are clubs still like that outwith the central belt of Scotland and I’d also bet their subs are 40% to 50% less than those in the central belt. That’s what we should be aiming to get back to and even if there is a bit of a compromise to be reached somewhere in between, it would probably still balance the sums better than schemes like these. Basically the focus should be on trimming costs and not trying (and failing) to raise extra revenue through dubious means.


Niall 

[Ryan Coles]

Adrian

I don't see this as an either or situation. I think members clubs will survive and thrive and that well run commercial operations like yours will continue to thrive also. Where I think members clubs have a problem is that during the good times they became bloated with unnecessary costs that there seems to be a reluctance to shed.

For example there was a time when catering at clubs was basic and even non-existent and I think that's the level that a lot of clubs should get back to. People join for the golf. If you want a nice meal then there's plenty of choice down the high street.

Niall

Some clubs will survive on the traditional plan of £1,000 per year. Play as much or as little as you want. Most are made up of people that check their bank statements. Some will dump their membership if they only played 10 times, some won't even consider at 40 times they got their juice, ALL clubs will lose some of their members if locally another golf club has a ROUTE TO PLAY that suits that lower users pocket. If a normal non top 100 club does not adjust what will happen is the high users are content and stay, they hog the tees for the best times and the club flounders because they can't sell to the societies, visitors any reasonable times and even have no room for new members that like them want to golf twice a week at peak times.  That equals  a very busy weekend often mornings but at other times dead but we have been through this scenario 100 times on GCA.


The Catering is usually the biggest loss maker of the lot. If you could get away with buying in sandwiches, pies, pasties it would save a fortune for most UK clubs. Picture this, a club sells 10,000 meals in a year. The Chef is £30k, Waitress £15K, Wash-upper £12K, (have include holidays/NI and WPP at 20%)%of rates £10K, Kitchen equip depr £7K...thats £7.40 per meal sold, add VAT into the equation and every figure there needs to multiplied by 1.2. We have not bought the ingredients yet and we are up to £8.88 to serve the plate. No figure put in for Electric, Gas, Water, Sewerage, Disposal, Admin. If a club can get away with giving it away on a food franchise it will work out the cheapest option...the club just lose the Utilities, Kitchen Equip Depreciation, Admin and probably 25% is added to the Rates because its a food servery. You can twist the figures for accountancy and apportion things in different holes but.


In the grand scheme everything feeds off the other and you will lose customers if you cant serve a breakfast, dinner. But you are right on the money if we learned to eat on the way home and had no clubhouse, however the clubhouse is the members paradise where each members bonds with others for that extra bit that you mentioned as being part of being a member.


No nice solution when all things are considered The FOOD DRAG has to be incorporated.

Adrian


Of course if catering only turns over 80k you're doomed. Most clubs catering solely to golfers won't do much more than 100k. But there are plenty of Clubs, (including a few in your signature block) where F&B either subsidises the golf or adds to the owners bottom line. Having accepted the service has to be provided, lots of the costs are fixed so why not make the chef and bar manager earn their money with function catering, wakes, dinners etc. Particularly when in most venues they don't impinge on golf or golfers in most instances.

[Adrian_Stiff]

Ryan - Yes your right. Catering is a numbers game. When I was on the board at The Kendleshire  17 years ago, we turned over £250,000 on the F & B, at the time the drinks made £100K and the Food lost £50K, I think we turned over £80k and it cost 130. The numbers have improved greatly at K and I am sure Pat is now well in plus territory, the numbers have grown, they do weddings every week, conferencing. I reckon I do £100k a year on it. Cumberwell always say its a headache and they are very busy. Unfortunately while there is money in selling beer, selling food is incredibly difficult at the right price and you have to do wakes, parties like you say but location plays a big part in selling beer and the customer needs to be able to roll home rather than a £30 taxi fare. You got a good location. Perfect people are hard to find, if hes a great chef he may not be a great bar manager but occasionally they come along.

[Duncan Cheslett]

If a club can get away with giving it away on a food franchise it will work out the cheapest option...the club just lose the Utilities, Kitchen Equip Depreciation, Admin and probably 25% is added to the Rates because its a food servery. You can twist the figures for accountancy and apportion things in different holes but.

This is what we do - the caterer has the kitchen but the club takes a 20% cut of all food sold. This was worth nearly £20k to the club last year. This goes some way towards defraying the clubhouse expenses but is still not perfect. Like most clubs we would be a lot better off with a small bar to accommodate an hour or so's worth of golfers - 40 guys at most. Pork pies and pre-pack sandwiches.


I've suggested selling our Victorian manor house as a nursing home or converting it into apartments and moving the clubhouse into the old greenkeeper's cottage. The typical responses include "What about the snooker table?"  and "Where would we hold the AGM and/or Annual dinner?"


Meanwhile we spend  as much on the House than we do on the course....




... and most newer members change in the car park and never enter the bar!

[Sean_A]

A golf club ain't much of a club if it doesn't have a house where you can get a drink and a sandwich during reasonable hours.  Once you discourage people from coming to club you sign the death note for the club. Some of you guys are suggesting that clubs shouldn't really exist and that pay and play is the answer.  Yes, I agree for some clubs.  I continue to believe that there is no one way for all.  Clubs will survive just fine as is or with minor changes. Clubs won't survive regardless of what they do. Clubs will make major changes and survive or not.  The issue isn't what clubs do, but how many clubs exist or to look at it another way, how many golfers exist. 

To answer the question, I think a scheme such as described will eventually kill off some clubs, but some clubs will be killed off anyway.  In the end, this scheme won't make much difference because what clubs need is money which really means more golfers to tke up the game.  Does anybody seriously think a scheme like this will bring in enough golfers for all the member clubs to remain viable?  There are only so many golfers....and it is dog eat dog.

Ciao

[Mike Sweeney]

  In the end, this scheme won't make much difference because what clubs need is money which really means more golfers to tke up the game.  Does anybody seriously think a scheme like this will bring in enough golfers for all the member clubs to remain viable?  There are only so many golfers....and it is dog eat dog.

Ciao

Lester George post this on his FB:





While reversing the nines, Benkusky configured three-hole routings on Arlington Lakes’ front nine that all lead back to the clubhouse. This setup allows golfers to play the course as a three-, six- or nine-hole loop, giving players more time flexibility.
http://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/articles/2016/10/loop-of-faith--experiment-pays-off-at-arlington-lakes.html


Combined with a TopGolf-style facility, yes I believe you could bring in more golfers.


People like options in life, so this is just an option. Yesterday it was a car logistics day for me. I did not have time for a long drive to play 18. 6 holes in an hour would have worked. Yes, I should go to the range to work on my game, but an hour long walk to break up the day would have been nice.

[Sean_A]

  In the end, this scheme won't make much difference because what clubs need is money which really means more golfers to tke up the game.  Does anybody seriously think a scheme like this will bring in enough golfers for all the member clubs to remain viable?  There are only so many golfers....and it is dog eat dog.

Ciao

Lester George post this on his FB:





While reversing the nines, Benkusky configured three-hole routings on Arlington Lakes’ front nine that all lead back to the clubhouse. This setup allows golfers to play the course as a three-, six- or nine-hole loop, giving players more time flexibility.
http://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/articles/2016/10/loop-of-faith--experiment-pays-off-at-arlington-lakes.html


Combined with a TopGolf-style facility, yes I believe you could bring in more golfers.


People like options in life, so this is just an option. Yesterday it was a car logistics day for me. I did not have time for a long drive to play 18. 6 holes in an hour would have worked. Yes, I should go to the range to work on my game, but an hour long walk to break up the day would have been nice.

Mike


I agree, options are great.  But the big picture demands more golfers...Yes?  So unless options add golfers to the pool, then it remains a dog eat dog situation for clubs.  It sounds negative, but the truth is there are too many golf clubs in GB&I.  With the huge influx of newer clubs (says 80s onwards) a pressure has been created on the market.  It is often the case that these newer clubs are fighting for members amongst themselves and can act as waiting rooms for the best clubs.  I have long been surprised that proper public courses never took hold as is the case in the US. It seems most owners want a membership element of business. If what people are saying is true, that Millenials don't care about clubs, the hassle of membership and handicaps, maybe now is the time for proper public courses to take hold.  This in and of itself would be a dramatic shift in the landscape.


Ciao

[Adrian_Stiff]

Sean - You are spot on when you say there are too many courses. Dog eat Dog is what is happening now. The over-supply cases the power to the customer and he has choice.


The newer golfers to golf (those that did not play before 2000) have a different cultural to those brought up in the 'good old days' where we addressed the captain by captain as opposed to todays 'orrite mucker'.


MOST People change in the car park now, their clubs are safer.


YOUNG People have mobile phones and phones are with them.


THESE people have little loyalty to the golf pro, its £1 cheaper on the internet.


THESE People want to play the cheapest/best value they can and many U40s love nomadic golf experiencing different courses not set to one.


I might be categorizing everyone  but I think you can see the picture what is happening, though not at Burnham and i think BB will stay pretty much as it is and survive the tattoos and white van.


But, there are many of these people joining clubs up and around the country, they join for a year, get another deal, drop the game for year, come back.


You just have to be the best value. Some clubs will become clubhouse less or run from the pro shop but they will lack soul. if you could offer golf only you can do it a lot cheaper without a clubhouse and only 30% actually use the clubhouse, so some will find a £600 a year route instead of the £900. That clubhouse is costing a lot if you cant do the sort of things Ryan Coles mentioned to help square the books.


I am still 100% that our biggest problem with the game is the time it takes to play. 4.5 hours is too long it means most people use up the whole day with an hour before and an hour after. A 3 hour round is more of a half day. I dont think 3 holes or 6 holes are the solution, yes a member might go out and play a few holes but its a hard thing to sell and police. in 30 years less than a handfull of people have asked about playing and paying a fee for anything shorter than 9. 9 holes works though and suits many.

[Marty Bonnar]

For the first time in about thirty years, I am 'Clubless'. I played so little last year, that I thought I would try a spell of nomadic, itinerant golf. I'm still going to play, just not at a 'home' club anymore.


So, I've immediately saved around £550, which can go to paying for occasional treats, weekends away with golfing chums, a mad splash out on some luxury, etc. So far this season, I've already enjoyed Silloth with some dubious characters and a few days on Arran, playing Shiskine twice. Pitlochry is planned for the near future, along with a Round at Gleneagles with a member chum and a possible Edinburgh trip, if I'm not otherwise 'engaged' (caddying!).


For me personally, the reasoning behind the decision came down to some simple factors:
1. I couldn't give a damn about playing in competitions.
2. As a result of factor 1, I can't maintain a meaningful handicap.
3. Speed of Play at Leven has become lamentable. There's a couple of horrendous routing faults which can result in three or four groups standing around, waiting on several tees. My personal favourite!
4. The latest Legislation regarding drink-driving in Scotland has drivers fearing being stopped/banned possibly after even only one drink or even the morning after a session. This one might kill Clubs completely on its own.
5. My current employment situation is, let's say, ehm, 'mobile', so id prefer not to tie myself down even if only for a year.


Certainly, so far I'm missing the cameraderie of a club membership, but that's about all. The times, they are a-Changin'...


F.

[Thomas Dai]

Curious how the kind of sentiments expressed in this thread about visting clubs/courses in GB&I - http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,64407.0.html - seems to be almost the opposite to the way the game seems to be drifting in the UK, as highlighted in this thread.

Will there become a time when, other than perhaps at the very top of the tree clubs, the ambiance some of those visting from overseas seem to appreciate and come to GB&I to experience will have gone from the game? And will there then not be much point in them coming and visitor income decline accordingly? Kind of a viscious circle.

Atb

[Duncan Cheslett]

For the first time in about thirty years, I am 'Clubless'. I played so little last year, that I thought I would try a spell of nomadic, itinerant golf. I'm still going to play, just not at a 'home' club anymore.


So, I've immediately saved around £550, which can go to paying for occasional treats, weekends away with golfing chums, a mad splash out on some luxury, etc. So far this season, I've already enjoyed Silloth with some dubious characters and a few days on Arran, playing Shiskine twice. Pitlochry is planned for the near future, along with a Round at Gleneagles with a member chum and a possible Edinburgh trip, if I'm not otherwise 'engaged' (caddying!).


For me personally, the reasoning behind the decision came down to some simple factors:
1. I couldn't give a damn about playing in competitions.
2. As a result of factor 1, I can't maintain a meaningful handicap.
3. Speed of Play at Leven has become lamentable. There's a couple of horrendous routing faults which can result in three or four groups standing around, waiting on several tees. My personal favourite!
4. The latest Legislation regarding drink-driving in Scotland has drivers fearing being stopped/banned possibly after even only one drink or even the morning after a session. This one might kill Clubs completely on its own.
5. My current employment situation is, let's say, ehm, 'mobile', so id prefer not to tie myself down even if only for a year.


Certainly, so far I'm missing the cameraderie of a club membership, but that's about all. The times, they are a-Changin'...


F.

There are an awful lot of people in Marty's situation, whether long-time club members who find it impossible now to justify or afford the financial commitment of full membership, or newer golfers who have never been members of a club.


Marty's saving of £550 pa is significant; for anyone living in urban England however, the saving would be £900 - £1250 if not more.


Full club membership is geared towards to the golf-obsessed player for whom the week revolves around the Saturday competition, with maybe a social 4-ball on a Sunday and/or a round or two after work midweek during the summer months.


Or the retired guy who plays five times a week...


The 20 rounds a year guy who stumps up for full membership is an endangered species outside the most elite clubs, if not nearing extinction. With entrance fees non-existent at the vast majority of clubs, there is always the safe knowledge that they can rejoin should ever circumstances change.


Full membership suits the obsessive golfer very well. His life revolves around the game and the club and he gets great value for money. An alternative scheme such as that described in this thread will have no appeal for him.


For the Martys of this world however, and for all the countless thousands of people who enjoy an occasional game of golf - not to mention complete novices - schemes like this will have great appeal. The whole point is to bring in golfers who are not currently club members and would otherwise continue not to be club members.


I'm not convinced this particular scheme has got it right. It is however, a step towards fulfilling a definite need among a significant market.


A market which clubs are currently tapping only through selling green fees below cost price.














 

[Sean_A]

Duncan

Lets hope you are right, but I have serious doubts that a scheme such as this will actually increase the pool of golfers.  I am exactly the guy they are targeting and it holds no appeal simply because the quality of the golf courses in the scheme, not surprisingly, is mediocre at best.

Ciao