42 eighteen hole course designs per member??? damn...

[Mike_Young]

You know this is my favorite topic to stir.  And Jeff B will be glad to help me I'm sure.  But out of the blue someone sent me a list of ASGCA averages today as a joke and I just couldn't help myself once I realize it was published.  Hey, it's too funny for me not to stir.  The average guy in there is fine but the dude doing the hype is doing it for all the grumpy ones that just wish to restrict trade etc.  I'm being misled.

Anyway, I'm sure one can figure a way to say that 172 members have averaged 42 new 18 hole courses( 7224 total), 71 master plans and 22 18 hole redesigns.  So that can be misleading.  I would rather know how many have designed 3 or more courses under their own shingle.  And then, hoe many have designed any under their own shingle?

I guess their website and marketing dude needed to justify his existence with some hype to show these club boards when they are explaining their superior qualifications. 

Sorry Jeff.  Couldn't help it.  Your turn.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Mike,

I've wondered about those stats as well.  Just in informal discussions with various members, most average nowhere near 42 . There is no comprehensive index, so I am sure it is mostly self reporting. I presume the numbers are inflated about as much as a self reporting survey on penis size. 

All architects tend to inflate their finished project numbers. 

Even Jack claimed something like 40 courses when he started (in a Golf Magazine article) but if you looked closely, he had a lot of future projects not yet started on that list. 

I saw an RTJII course list once with a pin in the map right on one of the courses I designed.  Turns out, he had been called in by a different owner for a feasibility opinion, and figured he would naturally get the job, but it didn't happen that way. 

Some may have reported preliminary designs that also never got off the ground.

New firms often count projects done under their former employer as part of their portfolio.

I haven't asked, but maybe they are counting all members over time?  Then, 7000+ wouldn't be at all out of line.  And, if an old member had worked for Donald Ross, maybe he counts all 400, who knows.

Actually, talking to real golfers, I think the world's busiest architect is a guy I've never met, and is not a member of ASGCA.  But, every time I'm out playing golf, golfers repeatedly refer to Dat Effen, Golf Course Architect.  He has seemingly been involved in every course I've ever played.

I will again disagree that touting the experience of your organization's members is anything more than marketing, and in no way an effort to restrict trade.  Is Coke restricting a smaller beverage mfg.  by advertising it's benefits?

[Mike Nuzzo]

  Is Coke restricting a smaller beverage mfg.  by advertising it's benefits?

No, but The American Cola Society creating specifications for municipalities that cola selections should be made from the American Cola Society is restricting.

[Mike_Young]

Jeff,
Jeff,I have a nephew who was/is a big time marathon/long distance runner.  NCAA at Arizona St/ then went to MIT for PHD and finished in top 100 at Boston Marathon, even higher at New York and top 10 Chicago few years ago.  I'm a 67 year old fat guy who can probably run a mile.  If we started a training academy for long distance runners tomorrow and hired the guy who did the ASGCA webpage it would read  The owners have run an average of 13 marathons between themselves.  They average 2 college degrees each.  ( I never graduated)  They have averaged participating in over 25 NCAA races each a and continue.  It's not a lie but it's BS.
As for the Coca Cola thing....ASGCA is no Coca Cola.  I had a ASGCA guy go into a group and say "I am the only ASGCA approved renovation person in this state. ( few years ago).  Coca Cola can't do that unless they are paying an organization like Pepsi does the PGA.  Plus ASGCA can't show any benefits over outsiders...it may not be a trade restriction and may  just only be an ATTEMPT...Stay safe(that's the politically correct send off)

[Kalen Braley]

Exactly Mike,

And if someone wants to provide the data, I can jam it into a spreadsheet and we can find out pretty quick how many duplicate entries exist in that list of 7,000+ courses. I'm guessing there would be quite a few...

[Mike_Young]

I don't know Kalen.  You ad JN courses, RTJ, RTJ jR, Rees, and a few of the others and you have a few thousand courses.  But then you have others in there that are basically golf supts, guys that sell product to golf courses etc, some that have basically just landscaped course for their brand etc and they might bring it down.  AND I'm not saying these are some type of bad dudes or anything.  I'm just callling BS...

[Kalen Braley]

I don't know Kalen.  You ad JN courses, RTJ, RTJ jR, Rees, and a few of the others and you have a few thousand courses.  But then you have others in there that are basically golf supts, guys that sell product to golf courses etc, some that have basically just landscaped course for their brand etc and they might bring it down.  AND I'm not saying these are some type of bad dudes or anything.  I'm just callling BS...

Perhaps they need separate lists for Designers, builders, supers, etc...

[Mike_Young]

My gut tells me they will end up that way.  Not that they like it but all of the "Associations" end up being there for the association more than the member and in a group that small they would need to do something.  The millennial designer does not need them or want them.  I smell it...

[Jeff_Brauer]

  Is Coke restricting a smaller beverage mfg.  by advertising it's benefits?

No, but The American Cola Society creating specifications for municipalities that cola selections should be made from the American Cola Society is restricting.

Well then, so does AIA, ASPE, Golf Course Builders, GCSAA and everyone else.  Not only was that never a requirement (i.e., select an ASGCA member) I know for a fact that most cities never followed it, as they are usually all about open competition on their out to bid projects.  If so few ever put it in (and even fewer enforced it, if you made one call, it was thrown out) just how restrictive could it be?  How restrictive is ASGCA when in any era, you have Dick Wilson's, Tom Doak's and other designers, prominent and not, getting work?  [/size]As long as non ASGCA members get work, its hard to say ASGCA restricts anyone.  [/size]That said, I agree it does happens.  I had lunch with a non member the other day, and he said he had just lost a job for the first time in a long career, and they said it was because they wanted an ASGCA member.  But, it doesn't happen very often.
[/size]
[/size]BTW, if you want to blame anyone for those words being in there, blame me.  I wrote the damn thing on my own time as a favor to ASGCA and the industry.  I kind of recall debating and then throwing in there, and no one ever objected.    [/size]I'm not even sure those few words are still in the original RFQ document.  I think we took it out just to reduce the number of Mike Young phone calls into HQ.
[/size]
[/size]I hope and think it helped a lot of us in the profession.   [/size]It was never anything more than a form to get cities started in the right direction in issuing an RFQ for what might be a once in a career project for most of the civil servants.   [/size]And, judging by some golf RFQ I have seen in the last few years, it was a needed document to steer those who used it in the right direction.  It probably got everyone calling themselves a gca a better shot of having their qualifications presented and read in a reasonable format.  Of course, you and Mike would never admit that.
[/size]
[/size]Believe me, it hasn't ever been the primary cause of either of you losing a job.  I am probably the lone ranger in the biz, but when I lose projects in competition (which I do often) I am at least smart enough to look in the mirror when placing the blame.  As a company's salesman, it is my job to present my qualifications in the most effective way and when I lose, I figure I blew it. 
[/size]
[/size]Presenting yourself as the most qualified architect for their project has lots more to do with it than being a member of ASGCA.  [/size]Mike N, I recall a project we both submitted proposals for, and I got an interview but you didn't.  You implied in a phone call with me that I had a "great line of BS." In reality, I was willing to fly up on a last minute, $906 air fare (That I recall that to the dollar what it cost 12 years later tells you how much it hurt at the time, LOL) just to introduce myself and talk about their project, take some pictures, etc.  They said that was certainly something that separated me from the other dozen who didn't get the interview.  If you have been thinking that the ASGCA cost you that one, in that particular case, I can assure it didn't.  The successful firm was headed by a big name Tour Pro who also wasn't an ASGCA member, but that name value (and perhaps being a member of the PGA Tour) separated him/them out those 4 of us who did interview.  I knew was a possibility while reading my credit card number to the airline ticket rep, but I took that chance anyway.  (I don't think that project ever got built, though, so I guess spending thousands to try to sell was a joke on me.  But, its part of the biz.)
[/size]
[/size]Long and short of it is, [/size]everyone plays to any advantage they think they have in competition for new commissions, or any other business, and I fail to see anything unethical in that.  That some of us mention our ASGCA membership and it helps every so often is just one example of that, and hardly worth singling out  when describing other folks relative success.  I should also add, as a group, we do discourage any negativity against other architects, so when those things do happen, it is certainly a breach of the ethics the group has preached for a while.
[/size]


[/size]


[/size]

[Mike_Young]

  Is Coke restricting a smaller beverage mfg.  by advertising it's benefits?

No, but The American Cola Society creating specifications for municipalities that cola selections should be made from the American Cola Society is restricting.

Well then, so does AIA, ASPE, Golf Course Builders, GCSAA and everyone else.  Not only was that never a requirement (i.e., select an ASGCA member) I know for a fact that most cities never followed it, as they are usually all about open competition on their out to bid projects.  If so few ever put it in (and even fewer enforced it, if you made one call, it was thrown out) just how restrictive could it be?  How restrictive is ASGCA when in any era, you have Dick Wilson's, Tom Doak's and other designers, prominent and not, getting work? 

Only thing wrong here is that ASGCA is not like GCSAA or GCBAA etc.  Those are objective memberships.  ASGCA is a fraternity or club type organization.  And that's fine but they don't need to act like they are objective until the day they are...

[Mike Nuzzo]

Jeff
We disagree with the specifications stuff - whatever.
I'm concerned with what you said I said to you - we disagree here too.
I have no idea what project you are referring to, the only one I remember that we both submitted proposals for was Laredo - which was a real project - and you also met with the owner here.
My opinion of you has always been that you are highly professional and very knowledgeable about operating your business and submitting proposals.
I have never thought or said that you were submitting BS - how could it be BS if you describe the amount of work you've done in your career?
I have only played one of your courses, so I don't comment on your work.
I never have a high probability of success for a public RFP project, especially with 40 others in the room. 
Peace

[Jeff_Brauer]

Mike N,
[/size]
[/size]First, apologies in advance for the formatting making this hard to read.  Is this from using Edge instead of Google or some other browser? 
[/size]
[/size]I appreciate your comments, especially since I was borderline snarky in mine.   If it means anything, I feel the same way about my chances on any given blind city proposal.  And, one of the biggest benefits of being in ASGCA has been talking to others and realizing they all feel the same, including some of the big name guys.  (misery loves company, I guess.) It's a tough biz.
[/size]
[/size]I have always valued my ASGCA membership as a great experience, not as a sales tool. [/size] [/size]To me, professional societies like ASGCA are about learning and helping fellow professionals, but in practical matters, we obviously try to help those who literally pay their dues to be in ASGCA.  Personally, I have always made it a point to help other architects when I can, either privately or publicly by writing suggested contracts (again, some of the contracts we had to sign based on engineering or other public works contracts were ridiculous) Or the joint ASGCA/GCBAA specs (which came about in part after a few owners using AIA construction contracts use the phrasing about not paying until the "building" (i.e., clubhouse) was occupied, which usually aren't complete until later, to delay payments to their golf course contractor. 
[/size]
[/size]Having been so involved, and feeling like I do, I believe they had value to the profession, and it is unfair to point out one area without acknowledging the intent and benefit.  That said, I certainly have insulted a few, by not considering someone else's perspective.
[/size]
[/size]I went on ASGCA and re-read the municipal RFQ boilerplate, and any reference to hiring only ASGCA members has been removed from that document.  I can't remember how long it has been since that phrase was in, but either way, Mike Y is beating a horse that has been dead at least a few years.
[/size]
[/size]A[/size]nyway, thanks again for the comments and I hope you continue to prosper in gca. 

[Mike Nuzzo]

Thank you Jeff
What I remember about that process was seeing a scoring sheet for the first time and how that was bull shit.
All the pencil pushers grading all the proposal work (not having visited a course) somewhere between a 91 and a 97 so their averages were all in a range, even though they generally don't know good golf from great golf. But it was the land owner who comes in a votes everyone a 50 except for their preference - why would they do any differently. It is their ability to influence for a municipality that was surprising to me, but obviously not to you as you'd seen it many times before which is why you know you should always get to the man in charge. Peace

[Jeff_Brauer]

Mike,


Yeah, not much surprises me anymore.  We thought Laredo was probably in RJT's bag, but then, we saw Perry Dye with the owner at lunch, and wondered if it was tilted in his direction.  Lots of drama, but it was so nice a project it was worth going all in.  I will say, the parks guys called me up to say we didn't get it, no thin letter.  He was almost apologetic because based on how hard each proposer worked, we probably would have won it.  But, RTJ II and LUI was a pretty stout combo to beat.


The process is rarely ever totally fair, and it is often carried out by really knowledgeable people at that level.  And, as you mention, they are rarely rating based on criteria you and I would choose.  Whether minority participation, having some local friend like an engineer on one team, etc. all play into it. But, that is politics.


Hope all is well down there in Houston. Don't go get in those protests and get sick or hurt.

[Kalen Braley]

Hope all is well down there in Houston. Don't go get in those protests and get sick or hurt.

Yes,


Make sure to do it right by storming capital buildings with assault rifles and screaming in cops faces....while they do nothing...