GCA’s who retired early or changed profession

[Craig Van Egmond]

There was a young Australian fella that played at some GCA events back in the old days who worked for Tom Lehman for a while. I found out later he left the business. I can't recall his name.

I think you are thinking of Josh Taylor, who came to the Archipalooza event in Bandon twenty years ago.  I heard from him a couple of months ago, offering to send a bunch of my collected writings for use on my new web site.  He is living in Minneapolis, doing well.

That was him!  Great guy.  Thanks.

[Tim Liddy]

"The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated," Mark Twain

[Jeff_Brauer]

Tim,


Hah!


I think one of the reasons we don't hear any "final tour" proclamations like you might hear from music acts or what not is that the cost of entry and even staying in the gca biz isn't all that large, especially now with 2/3 of us working out of our houses, thanks to tech.  I could retire for five years and if an old client called, be back up an running, perhaps without even updating my software.  I would need to store my portable light table where I do hand drawings, dust it off and put it on the dining room table for my last plans.  In a nice bit of symmetry, my first "on my own" plans were drawn on my folks dining room table, just before I moved to Texas.

[Jeff Schley]

Many people in other industries (not just GCA), are "consultants" in their preferred profession and work in another to pay the bills. Very common actually and although perhaps they go years without being paid as a consultant they keep their toes in the water with this affiliation.
Quite a few former colleagues of mine in the company I work for are "consultants" in whatever they choose. Doesn't bother anyone, so pretty harmless and maybe someone will hire them in the future so keeps the door open.

[Ally Mcintosh]

Don’t confuse “consultants” with architects though, Jeff. The latter is responsible and accountable, the former often isn’t.

[Jeff Schley]

Don’t confuse “consultants” with architects though, Jeff. The latter is responsible and accountable, the former often isn’t.

I don't know how GCA's advertise themselves, I was talking about former colleagues of mine who advertise themselves as independent consultants in their profession. If they are hired they will have deliverables for their scope and will be paid based on that. Theoretically a GCA consultant could be hired to deliver something to XYZ specifications yes? I think it is semantics perhaps, but consultant means I'm free to be hired to advise and in some cases deliver XYZ. Some just give advice, while some have to deliver something.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Ally, I guess you are responding to the other Jeff, as I am very much aware of, and practice as a gca who takes responsibilities for the final product, and pay the errors and omissions insurance premiums to prove it.


I know many people, including my first wife, who have opened consulting businesses in every related field from their home.  It's a tough gig, IMHO.  Most people will pay for someone who can deliver results, but are always skeptical of paying someone to oversee those professionals with a second layer of people to watch the ones doing the work, although there is some market for that.  The cost effective way to do that in golf is to interview and hire the right people as gca or contractors to start with.

[Ally Mcintosh]

To the other Jeff, Jeff...


... I guess what I was getting at is that in the smoke and mirrors world of GCA, consultants are often just an excuse to add a marketing name...  or they are the guy that has a keen interest in history and introduced the architect to the club.


Other professions are a bit different. I wouldn’t be questioning a consultant medic in the same way, for instance.

[Wayne_Kozun]

What’s Ian Scott-Taylor up to these days?


😉

Most interesting GCA thread EVER!