Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture Discussion Group => Topic started by: Dean Stokes on February 29, 2008, 09:25:19 PM
-
I've been thinking about this for sometime now and feel that some of this golf savvy group will be able to supply answers to my question.
We can all go to England this Summer, handicap certificate in hand, and phone the golf shop/secretary of many tremendous PRIVATE clubs. Ganton, Woodhall Spa, Silloth, Wentworth, Swinley Forest etc. etc. all accept bookings from visitors. We can go and play, sit in the bar afterwards and enjoy a beer with the very proud members of these clubs, and if we like - report back to GCA. ;)
We can also go to Australia and play Royal Melbourne, Kingston Heath etc. - some of the most beautiful PRIVATE clubs in the world and play them without needing to know members to "get us on".
What on earth makes the PRIVATE clubs in the US so special that they don't take visitors groups? I love golf, respect the rules and etiquette of the game, dress appropriately on all occasions and play sharpish. However, unless I hit the lottery or befriend members of such clubs as Shinnecock, Merion, Riviera, Hazeleltine, Seminole (the list is endless) I am going to be able to talk about them, visualize them, look at photos of them - but never play them!
Golf courses are meant to be played and most of these courses are well underplayed.
Where are the visitors tee times at PRIVATE clubs in the US?
-
The clubs you speak of in England and Australia are obviously not private. Go to Bandon and pretend it is private.
-
JK,
Every club I mentioned is PRIVATE. And most of them are what you would consider "high end" private in this country. I just do not understand the closed door policy at the clubs in the US. Why limit playing rights to just a few who can afford the ridiculous initiation fees at some of these clubs when the courses are empty 3/4's of the time?
-
How can you tell me those courses are private if they let anyone play. Perhaps they are semi-private. I am a member of a semi-private course that lets anyone play on Mondays as long as they live outside the county. We do not pretend it is private.
Personally I do not wish to play any course in Europe unless with a member. Seems like the rates make more sense.
-
I've found that most private clubs do allow unaccompanied guests for the right price. Usually however you need to call at just the right time and play at the right time and it helps to have a head pro call from a home course elsewhere. I can't speak for Shinnecock, Riviera or Merion but I'm pretty sure you could get on Hazeltine for the right price. Interlachen had more una's last year than the previous 5 as well. Calusa Pines also has quite a few unaccompanied groups as well but they all pay very high rates to do so. Maybe its just a question of how to work the system and it is tougher in the U.S. than elsewhere. I remember hearing that either SF GC or Olympic (not sure which) did allow one una 4-some a week on Monday mornings and getting that slot was extremely tough but the one group was a long standing tradition. Anyway just what I know in my little experience of the golf industry.
-
JK,
Because I was a member at a club similar to them. Extremely private and may I add rather snooty (although I didn't fit into that category). Visitors can pay to play. Just because you are a private club does not mean that you cannot accept visitors. Maybe you should check their websites and read the visitor information - I did before I wrote the question.
-
Dean,
Is there a course in the United States that would not allow you to either join or play? Why do you feel you have the right to pay less than the members?
-
What's the definition of a private club? We discuss this at Pasatiempo a lot, where there are members who own a share of the corporation and pay an annual fee, and get unlimited play, and enjoy restricted members hours...but the course also allows public play during certain hours.
Lots of public courses don't have equity members, and lots of public courses now offer annual fees and unlimited play. Cypress Point allows unaccompanied guests. Olympic hosts public tournaments. Royal Melbourne and most European clubs allow public play.
So what's public and what's private?
Rob
-
Dean -
This topic has been discussed and debated here on several occasions over the past 3-4 years.
As the saying goes, "it is what is is." ;) You could do a masters thesis in sociology to explain why the private club system in the U.S. treats this matter differently from the private club system in in GB&I and elsewhere in the Commonwealth.
DT
-
Gents,
My question is really simple and I do not wish to get into a good ol' argument about the reasons. I'm just intrigued that you can go and play top PRIVATE clubs all over the world as a visitor but you cannot here. Why?
-
Dean -
This topic has been discussed and debated here on several occasions over the past 3-4 years.
As the saying goes, "it is what is is." ;) You could do a masters thesis in sociology to explain why the private club system in the U.S. treats this matter differently from the private club system in in GB&I and elsewhere in the Commonwealth.
DT
Thankyou David. I just feel it's such a disservice to the game that myself and a few friend cannot take a trip to different states and play, analize and discuss the merits of courses we hear about all the time. At the end of the day they are ONLY golf courses and you and I know we would pay well over the odds to play them.
-
Dean,
What course in this country do you want to play that you feel has excluded you from becoming a member? I believe we have a very open system and am a perfect example of a person who can play any course I so choose. It is completely up to me. Where is the problem? Is it your lack of patience?
-
Are there courses in England that are impossible for a given class of person to ever become a member?
-
John,
No club has excluded me from being a member. I do not wish to join these clubs and even if I did I do not have the exorbitant amount of money required or the contacts to sponsor me for membership.
I merely wish to have the ability to play them as a visitor as I pointed out is the norm throughout several other Countries. Have you not been to England, Scotland, Ireland and had the opportunity to play some of the best private clubs they have to offer. How do you think that came about?
-
Are there courses in England that are impossible for a given class of person to ever become a member?
I'm sure there are but you can still play them as a visitor!!!!
-
I think it came about because of much like my local course, the economy sucks and they needed the money, so they decided to go semi-private.
-
I do not understand why you will not name one course in this country that you can not play. I do not think you tried.
-
Dean Stokes,
The answer lies in the legal system in the U.S. and government's policies toward "private" versus public clubs.
I believe that the Judge in the Haverhill case ruled that unaccompanied guests were a form of membership and thus, the ruling catapulted the club from the domain of "strictly private" to a public accomodation/facility, and as such, subjected it to a different set of laws that are/were onerous in their application.
The tax laws in the U.S. also come into play.
Clubs are limited in the amount of outside revenue they can receive.
Should they exceed that threshold, they'd lose their tax exempt status, which again, has onerous consequences.
When you combine these two factors you can understand how guest policies evolved differently in the U.S.
-
Private means private, they get to make their rules. I can abide by that.
My home is private. Should anyone be able to request a seat at my table for my wife's homemade squash ravioli? Even if they're willing to pay for it?
You're allowed to play some courses in Europe because the members of the private club allow you to; the same goes for many courses here. It's that simple. Be grateful to them, don't be hostile toward the owners of American clubs who don't. By this question, I almost feel like you think it's your right to play their course vs. their generous hospitality that allows you to play there.
As some one here once said (it was probably JK) members don't pay to play golf at their club. They pay so others can't. They pay for an underplayed course that is likely to be unclogged any time they desire to play. If that's the way the members (if member owned) or the owner (if privately owned) wants it, then so be it. It's their private property, with assembly (inclusive or exclusive) guaranteed by our first amendment.
I'd never tell any man what to do with his private property.
-
Pat,
Don't you think Seminole could give up their tax exempt status and let anyone who gets to the gate play and still stay solvent.
-
In the USA private is defined as private property rights and for the most part the club is defined by access to a course. There are exceptions where there are very fine golf clubs in the USA without courses.
In GBI, a private golf club is defined by its membership and they may or may not own a golf course. Golf courses are for the most part open but golf memberships (clubs) are private.
What I wrote may not make sense but I think it goes to the different mindsets to the game. In GBI it's more about match play, stablefords, and competitions against fellow members. In the USA it's about posting a score on the course.
-
Dean Stokes,
The answer lies in the legal system in the U.S. and government's policies toward "private" versus public clubs.
I believe that the Judge in the Haverhill case ruled that unaccompanied guests were a form of membership and thus, the ruling catapulted the club from the domain of "strictly private" to a public accomodation/facility, and as such, subjected it to a different set of laws that are/were onerous in their application.
The tax laws in the U.S. also come into play.
Clubs are limited in the amount of outside revenue they can receive.
Should they exceed that threshold, they'd lose their tax exempt status, which again, has onerous consequences.
When you combine these two factors you can understand how guest policies evolved differently in the U.S.
-
JK, There is nothing semi private about Ganton Golf Club. The Walker Cup was there four years ago and it is most definitely a 'well to do ' membership. Last Summer I went to England and twelve of us had a great day there playing 36 holes. We had lunch at the club and pints afterwards.
I am merely questioning why this approach to visitors playing private clubs has never been embraced in the US and why wouldn't it be?
-
Dean,
Please, tell me which course in the U.S. you want to play and how do you know you can't. I always thought Europe was classier than only caring about how much money a guy can produce.
-
Are there courses in England that are impossible for a given class of person to ever become a member?
I'm sure there are but you can still play them as a visitor!!!!
Dean,
Don't bet on it.
Most British and Irish clubs welcome the money from visitors, no matter how prestigous. The members are delighted to have a bunch of furriners spending vast sums on inflated green fees.
A host of American clubs do not rely on outside play to meet their budgets, hence the reluctance to open the gates to the hoi-polloi. An American club member has possibly paid a kings ransome to join a club and sees no benefit in allowing someone not as affluent in sharing his demesne.
As my dear departed Mother told me as a youngster, "Life is inherently unfair, get used to it."
Bob
-
Dean,
Please, tell me which course in the U.S. you want to play and how do you know you can't. I always thought Europe was classier than only caring about how much money a guy can produce.
JK, I do not know ' for sure' what the answer would be to my phonecall but I am presuming if I phoned Shinnecock, Winged Foot or Merion tomorrow and asked for a tee time for 4 visitors I would probably not get one. Do you think I would be able to get on these wonderful golf courses?
-
I think we have the best system in the world where anyone can play any club in this country based on your character instead of your cash.
-
Dean,
Please, tell me which course in the U.S. you want to play and how do you know you can't. I always thought Europe was classier than only caring about how much money a guy can produce.
JK, I do not know ' for sure' what the answer would be to my phonecall but I am presuming if I phoned Shinnecock, Winged Foot or Merion tomorrow and asked for a tee time for 4 visitors I would probably not get one. Do you think I would be able to get on these wonderful golf courses?
I don't understand the need to play with your friends but I do think that if you asked properly you could play any of the above courses in due time. The phone idea is out.
-
Are there courses in England that are impossible for a given class of person to ever become a member?
I'm sure there are but you can still play them as a visitor!!!!
Dean,
Don't bet on it.
Most British and Irish clubs welcome the money from visitors, no matter how prestigous. The members are delighted to have a bunch of furriners spending vast sums on inflated green fees.
A host of American clubs do not rely on outside play to meet their budgets, hence the reluctance to open the gates to the hoi-polloi. An American club member has possibly paid a kings ransome to join a club and sees no benefit in allowing someone not as affluent in sharing his demesne.
As my dear departed Mother told me as a youngster, "Life is inherently unfair, get used to it."
Bob
Bob, my Dad told me the same thing a while ago! While we're on this subject can someone explain how the heck initiation fees ever got so high in the US? I played a course not long ago that was approx. $175k to join. I have played much better courses back in the UK that were under $1000 to join. ???
-
Pat,
Don't you think Seminole could give up their tax exempt status and let anyone who gets to the gate play and still stay solvent.
JakaB,
No.
That's one of the most absurd suggestions I've seen on this site, one you didn't think through before posting.
Under your scenario, anyone who shows up at the gates can play golf, so, when would the dues paying members be able to play golf ?
After midnight ?
Or subject to regulated, limited starting times due to the enormous amount of outside play ?
Think of the impact on private clubs of being subjected to State and Federal public policy/facility laws. The club would be ruined within a year.
However, If you think your idea has merit, it should be tested at the local level.
You should formally petition YOUR club to permit open access.
Surely, the new untapped revenue stream from outside play would offset the loss of the club's not for profit tax status.
Then, anyone who showed up to play would be granted access, and you, as a member, can now wait your turn to play along with the hordes lining up at the front gate.
Please let us know how your petition is received by your club.
If you're successful, I'm sure others on this site will approach their clubs with a similar proposal.[/color]
-
Dean,
Please, tell me which course in the U.S. you want to play and how do you know you can't. I always thought Europe was classier than only caring about how much money a guy can produce.
JK, I do not know ' for sure' what the answer would be to my phonecall but I am presuming if I phoned Shinnecock, Winged Foot or Merion tomorrow and asked for a tee time for 4 visitors I would probably not get one. Do you think I would be able to get on these wonderful golf courses?
I don't understand the need to play with your friends but I do think that if you asked properly you could play any of the above courses in due time. The phone idea is out.
Because I wish to go for a day out with people I want to spend a day with.
-
Pat,
Don't you think Seminole could give up their tax exempt status and let anyone who gets to the gate play and still stay solvent.
JakaB,
No.
That's one of the most absurd suggestions I've seen on this site, one you didn't think through before posting.
Under your scenario, anyone who shows up at the gates can play golf, so, when would the dues paying members be able to play golf ?
After midnight ?
Or subject to regulated, limited starting times due to the enormous amount of outside play ?
Think of the impact on private clubs of being subjected to State and Federal public policy/facility laws. The club would be ruined within a year.
However, If you think your idea has merit, it should be tested at the local level.
You should formally petition YOUR club to permit open access.
Surely, the new untapped revenue stream from outside play would offset the loss of the club's not for profit tax status.
Then, anyone who showed up to play would be granted access, and you, as a member, can now wait your turn to play along with the hordes lining up at the front gate.
Please let us know how your petition is received by your club.
If you're successful, I'm sure others on this site will approach their clubs with a similar proposal.[/color]
Pat,
Are you telling me that the architecture, history and location of Seminole is not of a high enough quality to survive as a public course. I think it would do gang busters.
-
Pat,
Don't you think Seminole could give up their tax exempt status and let anyone who gets to the gate play and still stay solvent.
JakaB,
No.
That's one of the most absurd suggestions I've seen on this site, one you didn't think through before posting.
Under your scenario, anyone who shows up at the gates can play golf, so, when would the dues paying members be able to play golf ?
After midnight ?
Or subject to regulated, limited starting times due to the enormous amount of outside play ?
Think of the impact on private clubs of being subjected to State and Federal public policy/facility laws. The club would be ruined within a year.
However, If you think your idea has merit, it should be tested at the local level.
You should formally petition YOUR club to permit open access.
Surely, the new untapped revenue stream from outside play would offset the loss of the club's not for profit tax status.
Then, anyone who showed up to play would be granted access, and you, as a member, can now wait your turn to play along with the hordes lining up at the front gate.
Please let us know how your petition is received by your club.
If you're successful, I'm sure others on this site will approach their clubs with a similar proposal.[/color]
Pat, I had no idea or concept of tax implications at these clubs.
Would 2/3 tee times a day of guests affect these situations.
Another way I look at this visitor situation is that if ever had the opportunity to build and run my own private club I would want it to be seen. There would be a couple hundred members but I would have tee times set aside for visitors groups. You would need a h'cap cert. and a knowledge of golf etiquette/ rules but I would be more than happy to let golfers come and experience my golf club. Why hide these gems for a few that have the money or were perhaps - how can I put it - born into these clubs.
-
Dean,
Please, tell me which course in the U.S. you want to play and how do you know you can't. I always thought Europe was classier than only caring about how much money a guy can produce.
JK, I do not know ' for sure' what the answer would be to my phonecall but I am presuming if I phoned Shinnecock, Winged Foot or Merion tomorrow and asked for a tee time for 4 visitors I would probably not get one. Do you think I would be able to get on these wonderful golf courses?
I don't understand the need to play with your friends but I do think that if you asked properly you could play any of the above courses in due time. The phone idea is out.
Because I wish to go for a day out with people I want to spend a day with.
This is going to be tougher for you than I thought. Why would you not want to spend a day with the member of a great club who can share with you inside stories and facts? You are going to need some work.
-
The members of private equity clubs own the course. It is true that many clubs that would be considered highly private do allow non-member play at a premium price. Also, I think many would be surprised at the clubs that are accomodating if your pro calls on your behalf. If the members own the club, then they can place any restriction on play they wish. I see no issue.
-
While we're on this subject can someone explain how the heck initiation fees ever got so high in the US? I played a course not long ago that was approx. $175k to join. I have played much better courses back in the UK that were under $1000 to join. ???
I believe the answer is the same as the answer to your original question: Supply & demand.
Many filthy rich men desire to associate strictly with people like them. How do they ensure that? 175k memberships. It's obvious to me they are paying for the camaraderie, not for the quality of the golf course.
Likewise if Augusta offered tee times to anyone wiling to pay $500, the members wouldn't have what they have and pay dearly to maintain. Mike Keiser and the owners of Pebble, Pinehurst, etc, have proven what people will pay to play, and more importantly how many people are willing to pay it.
I think there are more such people here in the US than in Europe, even Great Britain. Hence the market in the UK and here are markedly different.
Again look at your cup as half full -- you can play a bunch of great courses in the UK with a letter to the secretary.
-
PS: Regarding wanting to play with your 3 friends, see my sig line.
-
I want to see this list of UK courses that can be joined for 1,000 U.S. dollars.
-
Because I wish to go for a day out with people I want to spend a day with.
Dean,
Merion and Winged Foot probably have close to 800 members. It is not like these two clubs are empty. Winged Foot has a number of outings on Mondays, you can IM me on details for the New York Athletic Club's outing which supports Olympic Athletes from the smaller sports. Shinnecock has some outings and unaccompanied play in the shoulder season. If you are a cop or a fireman in Southampton, you have probably played the course. You picked 3 US Open courses in the most populous area of the USA!
Trust me, you write a very nice letter to a couple of Flynn, Tilly, Raynor........ courses not located in the middle of everything and chances are a couple will be very generous assuming you don't want a 9:00 tee time on a Saturday in June!
-
Pat,
Are you telling me that the architecture, history and location of Seminole is not of a high enough quality to survive as a public course.
Absolutely.
What no hurricane has done in 80 years would be quick work the moment it went public.
As a public course the architecture would be set upon, made less penal and "more fair".
The history of the club would cease on the conversion date.
Seminole's members and leaders alone are responsible for the perpetuation of the club's traditions and history and they've done a wonderful job of that over the years.
In fact, there's a great new book out.
"The Story of Seminole"
It's historical, architectural, interesting and informative.
Great reading if you're into golf and architecture. [/color]
I think it would do gang busters.
Then there's something wrong with your thinking ;D
Your idea is beyond eccentric, it's insane.
But, you knew that when you were typing.
Why don't you petition the folks at Victoria National to allow unlimited public access and see if your idea flies. Or better yet, let us know if you're still a member a week after your petition hits the President's desk.[/color]
-
Because I wish to go for a day out with people I want to spend a day with.
Dean,
Merion and Winged Foot probably have close to 800 members. It is not like these two clubs are empty. Winged Foot has a number of outings on Mondays, you can IM me on details for the New York Athletic Club's outing which supports Olympic Athletes from the smaller sports. Shinnecock has some outings and unaccompanied play in the shoulder season. If you are a cop or a fireman in Southampton, you have probably played the course. You picked 3 US Open courses in the most populous area of the USA!
Trust me, you write a very nice letter to a couple of Flynn, Tilly, Raynor........ courses not located in the middle of everything and chances are a couple will be very generous assuming you don't want a 9:00 tee time on a Saturday in June!
Thankyou for the advice Mike. I just happened to throw out a few well known private clubs and was not particularly thinking about the areas they're in.
-
Dean,
That is the problem. You come on here claiming to be shut out and you have not even tried.
-
Dean,
That is the problem. You come on here claiming to be shut out and you have not even tried.
From what I hear, getting on in the USA is a piece of cake compared to Japan. I still say Bethpage is the second hardest course to get on (assuming you are past the age of sleeping in a car) in America!
-
Another idea to consider, especially when you speak of course accessability in Great Britain
"The step, under the 1894 Act, of imposing a charge on anyone to play golf in St. Andrews, was unprecedented in the Town's history. But the Old Course continued to be free and open for anyone to play over its venerable turf for many years.
By 1913, however, the congestion was again becoming so acure as to be almost untolerable, with both courses becoming more crowded than ever. A third layout was the Jubilee Course and a fourth the Eden laid out on the west side of the Links. At the same time, and Act of Parliament had to be applied for to enable the local authorities to impose a charge on visitors for playing over the New and Eden, and , most revolutioinary of all, over the Old Course.
Final shattering of the age-old tradition of free golf came when the townspeople, in 1946, were charged up to a maximum of 2 pounds per year for playing golf on their own courses.
Never before, in the age-long history of the Old Course, had they paid for their golf. This measure required a new Parliamentary Order which was preceeded by a lengthy and exhaustive public inquiry at Edinburgh."
James K. Robertson, St. Andrews Home of Golf
At the time that golf was no longer free in Scotland (1946), there were already many ultra-exlusive private clubs in the U.S. which did not permit unaccompanied guests on their courses. I would argue that the reason that unaccompanied guest play is viewed differently in Europe is the infuence of St. Andrews. The poeple of St. Andrews viewed free access for them and any guest (accompanied or otherwise) to be an inherent right. It just didn't come down that way in the States.
-
I believe the answer is the same as the answer to your original question: Supply & demand.
Many filthy rich men desire to associate strictly with people like them.
How do they ensure that?
175k memberships.
It's obvious to me they are paying for the camaraderie, not for the quality of the golf course.
Jason, I don't think you have an understanding of the dynamic of membership at clubs today.
You'll be surprised to know that many "great" clubs have fairly low entry fees.
It's not about the money, it's about the prospective member.
Those clubs with high entry fees tend to be newer clubs where the cost of land and development were high and the owner/s are trying to recoup their investment.
When Mike Pascucci writes a check for $ 46,000,000 just for the land and millions more for the course and facilities, should he give away memberships in the name of charity ? Should he let anyone who shows up play his course ? At the expense of the members who paid for that privilege ?
When Paul Fireman spends $ 120,000,000 of his own money developing his course and facilities should he allow strangers to walk on at their leisure and play at nominal green fees ? [/color]
Likewise if Augusta offered tee times to anyone wiling to pay $500, the members wouldn't have what they have and pay dearly to maintain.
Agreed.[/color]
Mike Keiser and the owners of Pebble, Pinehurst, etc, have proven what people will pay to play, and more importantly how many people are willing to pay it.
Those are RESORT courses, not PRIVATE clubs, and as such, there are different dynamics in play.[/color]
I think there are more such people here in the US than in Europe, even Great Britain. Hence the market in the UK and here are markedly different.
With the DOLLAR where it is, I think you'll find just the reverse these days.[/color]
Again look at your cup as half full -- you can play a bunch of great courses in the UK with a letter to the secretary.
It's more of a tax and public policy issue, irrespective of how you look at the cup..[/color]
-
Dean,
That is the problem. You come on here claiming to be shut out and you have not even tried.
John I will repeat I was not looking to get in an argument tonight. I would like to know why in the US I cannot go on a private clubs website and look at the visitor policies, booking information and green fee/tee time restrictions? Have a look at www.kingstonheath.com One of Australia's top private clubs for how easily this can be achieved.
-
Dean,
That is the problem. You come on here claiming to be shut out and you have not even tried.
John I will repeat I was not looking to get in an argument tonight. I would like to know why in the US I cannot go on a private clubs website and look at the visitor policies, booking information and green fee/tee time restrictions? Have a look at www.kingstonheath.com One of Australia's top private clubs for how easily this can be achieved.
Dean,
20 million people in Oz, 300 million in USA, basically the same geographic size .......... they are different markets. Let's talk about getting on at Hirono!
I would guess that a nice letter will get you on any private club in Maine. Different market.
-
It's pretty simple if not the answer you'd like, Dean.
In the UK they drive on the left, in the US we drive on the right.
In the UK it's mostly typical for private clubs of all kinds to offer some limited tee times to visitors in order to earn additional income for the club. This is even true of the most exclusive clubs such as Murfield or Sunningdale.
In the US there is very little unaccompanied visitor play at high end private clubs.
As somebody said, two countries divided by a common language. It's just a matter of customs.
Do you prefer the UK model? Of course! But that won't change the US model.
-
Dean,
I'm telling you that if someone lives in Australia and flys to this country to study the architecture of a course they have close to a 100% chance of success. Why don't you try to access a private course in this country and then tell me how it went. I believe I will be able to show you a path towards success. My God man, Sweeney just explained how to play Shinnecock which may be the very best we have to offer.
-
Dean Stokes,
You should be aware that most private clubs forbid their own members from using the club's roster for solicitations. Political, charitable or any other type.
The USGA recently altered their policy on access to handicap information.
The climate, especially the legal climate is very different in the U.S.
Do you think that members of a well to do or highly visible clubs would want the general public to know they're members, complete with their addresses and phone numbers ?
Do you think that members with young children would want their personal info made available at the stroke of a key.
There are too many deranged and criminal elements lurking about.
Privacy is a highly valued commodity in the U.S. and neither you nor the public has any right to access privileged information.
-
I believe the answer is the same as the answer to your original question: Supply & demand.
Many filthy rich men desire to associate strictly with people like them.
How do they ensure that?
175k memberships.
It's obvious to me they are paying for the camaraderie, not for the quality of the golf course.
Jason, I don't think you have an understanding of the dynamic of membership at clubs today.
You'll be surprised to know that many "great" clubs have fairly low entry fees.
It's not about the money, it's about the prospective member.
Those clubs with high entry fees tend to be newer clubs where the cost of land and development were high and the owner/s are trying to recoup their investment.
When Mike Pascucci writes a check for $ 46,000,000 just for the land and millions more for the course and facilities, should he give away memberships in the name of charity ? Should he let anyone who shows up play his course ? At the expense of the members who paid for that privilege ?
When Paul Fireman spends $ 120,000,000 of his own money developing his course and facilities should he allow strangers to walk on at their leisure and play at nominal green fees ? [/color]
Likewise if Augusta offered tee times to anyone wiling to pay $500, the members wouldn't have what they have and pay dearly to maintain.
Agreed.[/color]
Mike Keiser and the owners of Pebble, Pinehurst, etc, have proven what people will pay to play, and more importantly how many people are willing to pay it.
Those are RESORT courses, not PRIVATE clubs, and as such, there are different dynamics in play.[/color]
I think there are more such people here in the US than in Europe, even Great Britain. Hence the market in the UK and here are markedly different.
With the DOLLAR where it is, I think you'll find just the reverse these days.[/color]
Again look at your cup as half full -- you can play a bunch of great courses in the UK with a letter to the secretary.
It's more of a tax and public policy issue, irrespective of how you look at the cup..[/color]
Pat, I fully understand the financial outlay and need to recoup at a place such as Sebonack. You also get a course that is voted #1 private club in the country that nobody without $1 mill. to spare can see. Most of the year it will be a ghost town. What's the point in that? Why not allow a few visitors tee times at unpopular times of the day?
-
It's pretty simple if not the answer you'd like, Dean.
In the UK they drive on the left, in the US we drive on the right.
In the UK it's mostly typical for private clubs of all kinds to offer some limited tee times to visitors in order to earn additional income for the club. This is even true of the most exclusive clubs such as Murfield or Sunningdale.
In the US there is very little unaccompanied visitor play at high end private clubs.
As somebody said, two countries divided by a common language. It's just a matter of customs.
Do you prefer the UK model? Of course! But that won't change the US model.
Bill,
Why deter the guy when even you have played NGLA?
-
Why not allow a few visitors tee times at unpopular times of the day?
The owner does, it just isn't advertised, and it just hasn't been me or you!
-
Dean Stokes,
You should be aware that most private clubs forbid their own members from using the club's roster for solicitations. Political, charitable or any other type.
The USGA recently altered their policy on access to handicap information.
The climate, especially the legal climate is very different in the U.S.
Do you think that members of a well to do or highly visible clubs would want the general public to know they're members, complete with their addresses and phone numbers ?
Do you think that members with young children would want their personal info made available at the stroke of a key.
There are too many deranged and criminal elements lurking about.
Privacy is a highly valued commodity in the U.S. and neither you nor the public has any right to access privileged information.
Now we're getting somewhere ;) I'm now starting to learn the reasons for the differing policies in different countries. Great. I hadn't learnt anything today and it's getting late. Thankyou. I may write to Shinny later this year - that's the big one for me.
-
I may write to Shinny later this year - that's the big one for me.
Dean,
God forbid you start a little lower Dean! What is Shinnecock these days, #2? Why not go for the Big Enchilada in Augusta! :D
This has been fun, but now I am going to bed with my fantasy Super Model wife!
-
I may write to Shinny later this year - that's the big one for me.
Dean,
God forbid you start a little lower Dean! What is Shinnecock these days, #2? Why not go for the Big Enchilada in Augusta! :D
This has been fun, but now I am going to bed with my fantasy Super Model wife!
Go gentle ;) Shinny is the big enchilada for me Mike.
-
It's pretty simple if not the answer you'd like, Dean.
In the UK they drive on the left, in the US we drive on the right.
In the UK it's mostly typical for private clubs of all kinds to offer some limited tee times to visitors in order to earn additional income for the club. This is even true of the most exclusive clubs such as Murfield or Sunningdale.
In the US there is very little unaccompanied visitor play at high end private clubs.
As somebody said, two countries divided by a common language. It's just a matter of customs.
Do you prefer the UK model? Of course! But that won't change the US model.
Bill,
Why deter the guy when even you have played NGLA?
Aha! The difference between the US and UK models is you can routinely play top private clubs as an UNACCOMPANIED visitor.
At NGLA I was an ACCOMPANIED guest.
Therein lies the difference between the two systems. Is this really too difficult for you to grasp? What happens when Mr. X calls up the golf shop at Victoria National, or perhaps writes to the General Manager (in lieu of the UK secretary)? Do they tell him when UNACCOMPANIED visitors can play and for how much? Or they tell him to buzz off?
-
I am sure this has been said on here before, but part of me thinks that a PRIVATE club is just that, private. No outside play without a member being present to sponsor you or at least a member writing a formal letter. Any other club that allows outside play for a fee on certain times (outside of a tournament) is not really private, just some hybrid club. I agree with many of the posts on here, would Augusta or Cypress Point really be what they are to the members and even outsiders if anyone could just walk up and hand out some cash and play? Bandon and Pinehurst and great courses, but are they really great clubs? Thats the key, these private layouts are clubs, not so much courses.
-
It's pretty simple if not the answer you'd like, Dean.
In the UK they drive on the left, in the US we drive on the right.
In the UK it's mostly typical for private clubs of all kinds to offer some limited tee times to visitors in order to earn additional income for the club. This is even true of the most exclusive clubs such as Murfield or Sunningdale.
In the US there is very little unaccompanied visitor play at high end private clubs.
As somebody said, two countries divided by a common language. It's just a matter of customs.
Do you prefer the UK model? Of course! But that won't change the US model.
Bill,
Why deter the guy when even you have played NGLA?
Aha! The difference between the US and UK models is you can routinely play top private clubs as an UNACCOMPANIED visitor.
At NGLA I was an ACCOMPANIED guest.
Therein lies the difference between the two systems. Is this really too difficult for you to grasp? What happens when Mr. X calls up the golf shop at Victoria National, or perhaps writes to the General Manager (in lieu of the UK secretary)? Do they tell him when UNACCOMPANIED visitors can play and for how much? Or they tell him to buzz off?
Bill, this is Southern Indiana. If someone takes the time to write a letter we will find a member to host them...I guarantee. We don't tell people to buzz off.
-
That may be true in Southern Indiana. What about Shinnecock, NLGA, Pine Valley, Seminole, Cypress Point, etc etc? I believe those are the level of courses Dean was wondering about. His specific interest is Shinnecock.
-
JK-Thats great that you'll find a member to host someone from outside that wants to play. However, I assure you that many clubs will not. I called an esteemed club in Atlanta (I won't say which one) and spoke with the head pro about potentially playing (I'm a PGA Member) and he pretty much told me to pound off. It was far more wordy than that, but I was still told that without a member sponsoring me I was out of luck and it was against their policy to ask a member to sponsor me. If you are not like that, wonderful, but many are.
-
Jason, I don't think you have an understanding of the dynamic of membership at clubs today.
You'll be surprised to know that many "great" clubs have fairly low entry fees.
It's not about the money, it's about the prospective member.
Those clubs with high entry fees tend to be newer clubs where the cost of land and development were high and the owner/s are trying to recoup their investment.
I understand all of this. I recently moved to Florida and contacted Sugarloaf, their initiation is quite reasonable, as is Bay Hill's.
And I understand that often time's we're paying for real estate with such fees. But other times steep prices are just that. When I lived outside Cleveland I lived beside a new Nicklaus course that was on very cheap land. Jim Thome owned a house there. The 60k initiation was, in my uneducated opinion, merely a price tag to label the course exclusive and keep out even the upper middle class riff raff like myself (I'm not bitter, I'm just making a point, that's their right to make that business decision. I've never played a Nicklaus course I'd want to join, anyway).
Those are RESORT courses, not PRIVATE clubs, and as such, there are different dynamics in play.[/color]
My point in naming resorts was that take a world class golf course [even a remote one like Bandon] and people will pay top dollar and go way out of their way to play it. Meaning if Shinnecock and Augusta posted open tee times on their websites, they'd be booked through 2050. So the vast demand to play these courses proves my point as to why many top private clubs don't (can't) open play to just anyone.
-
That may be true in Southern Indiana. What about Shinnecock, NLGA, Pine Valley, Seminole, Cypress Point, etc etc? I believe those are the level of courses Dean was wondering about. His specific interest is Shinnecock.
Shinnecock is top of the list but there are many Bill!
I'm just trying to work out why so many of us are grateful for the fact we can go to Ireland and play probably one of the best courses in the world, Ballybunion as a visitor, unaccompanied - definitely a private club, but those visitors rules are not reciprocated at the same level clubs here?
-
That may be true in Southern Indiana. What about Shinnecock, NLGA, Pine Valley, Seminole, Cypress Point, etc etc? I believe those are the level of courses Dean was wondering about. His specific interest is Shinnecock.
Bill,
I haven't met Dean and he does come off a little needy and whiny in my book but why do you think a couple of guys like us can play those courses and Dean can't.
Aren't you a little ashamed to claim that American courses are selfish when they have been so open to you?
-
That may be true in Southern Indiana. What about Shinnecock, NLGA, Pine Valley, Seminole, Cypress Point, etc etc? I believe those are the level of courses Dean was wondering about. His specific interest is Shinnecock.
Bill,
I haven't met Dean and he does come off a little needy and whiny in my book but why do you think a couple of guys like us can play those courses and Dean can't.
Aren't you a little ashamed to claim that American courses are selfish when they have been so open to you?
It hasn't been the clubs that have been open to me, it's been individual members who have invited me. There's a huge difference.
Enough said, off to bed.
-
JK-Thats great that you'll find a member to host someone from outside that wants to play. However, I assure you that many clubs will not. I called an esteemed club in Atlanta (I won't say which one) and spoke with the head pro about potentially playing (I'm a PGA Member) and he pretty much told me to pound off. It was far more wordy than that, but I was still told that without a member sponsoring me I was out of luck and it was against their policy to ask a member to sponsor me. If you are not like that, wonderful, but many are.
Your first mistake was using the phone. Why not do some research and write the pro a letter informing him of some history of his club that he may not have known. Make yourself interesting.
-
I'm just trying to work out why so many of us are grateful for the fact we can go to Ireland and play probably one of the best courses in the world, Ballybunion as a visitor, unaccompanied - definitely a private club, but those visitors rules are not reciprocated at the same level clubs here?
Again I go with supply and demand. World class courses here tend to fill up due to the number of golfers vs. the number of courses.
Apparently in Ireland that's less true, there are fewer golfers with high disposable income compared to the number of courses. Hence your ability to get on there.
As with most thing, the free market situation dictates price and supply.
-
That may be true in Southern Indiana. What about Shinnecock, NLGA, Pine Valley, Seminole, Cypress Point, etc etc? I believe those are the level of courses Dean was wondering about. His specific interest is Shinnecock.
Bill,
I haven't met Dean and he does come off a little needy and whiny in my book but why do you think a couple of guys like us can play those courses and Dean can't.
Aren't you a little ashamed to claim that American courses are selfish when they have been so open to you?
It hasn't been the clubs that have been open to me, it's been individual members who have invited me. There's a huge difference.
Enough said, off to bed.
The members are the club at private courses.
-
The members of private equity clubs own the course. It is true that many clubs that would be considered highly private do allow non-member play at a premium price. Also, I think many would be surprised at the clubs that are accomodating if your pro calls on your behalf. If the members own the club, then they can place any restriction on play they wish. I see no issue.
Michael,
How true. It all comes down to the Golden Rule. he that has the gold, rules.
Bob
-
And my funny snobby club moment.
When I was about 14 I was getting in to golf. Got the World Atlas and read it over and over.
So I wrote to a number of top clubs, explained I was 14 and learning about the great golf courses of the world, and asked politely for a scorecard.
Most clubs graciously mailed me a card, to which I responded with thank you letters. Augusta even mailed me a history book on the Masters, a pairing sheet from Sunday of that year's Masters, and scorecards that the members used and the official Master's scorecard! All for the price of my stamp.
The Pine Valley secretary, on the other hand, wrote back on club stationary and explained that unless I was a member, to please not contact them. It'd have been faster to mail me the scorecard!
I still have that letter. I figured one day, maybe I'd frame it overtop the scorecard from the round I'll play there.
These days I just don't care if I ever play there or not. I relish the chances I've had to play places like Oakmont. But I don't go out of my way to seek invitations. It's fascinating to walk in Hogan's footsteps. But it is just as fascinating to me to play get on Black twice in two days just 6 weeks after the 2002 Open, or to play in my league at my club this Saturday morning with the guys.
-
JK-How I contacted the pro was not the point, my point was that, at many clubs, no matter who you are or how you contact them, they simply will not let you on without a member sponsoring and playing with you.
-
JK-How I contacted the pro was not the point, my point was that, at many clubs, no matter who you are or how you contact them, they simply will not let you on without a member sponsoring and playing with you.
J,
You lost me when you said "no matter who you are or how you contact them". It has been my experience that with patience the clubs end up finding you.
-
JK-I was attempting to say that with the ultra private clubs, whether you contact them by phone, letter, email, or any other form of communication, they simply will say no. If you contact the pro or a Board member that is.
BTW--Any gaps in your weekend foursome at Victoria this summer? I'd be more than happy to fill in. :)
-
Dean Stokes,
The tax laws in the U.S. also come into play.
Clubs are limited in the amount of outside revenue they can receive.
Should they exceed that threshold, they'd lose their tax exempt status, which again, has onerous consequences.
When you combine these two factors you can understand how guest policies evolved differently in the U.S.
Patrick, it can be more of a problem than even staying below the "outside income" threshold. If you have visitor tee times or welcome the public in an overt way, you could jeopardize your tax exempt status regardless of the amount of income you earn from the outside activity, which would be really bad for many clubs. Bad as in a non-exempt club can basically kiss 35% of its initiation fees goodbye, and it's easy to end up with a lot of taxable income because of the way expenses are accounted for. A non-exempt club earning, say, $500,000 per year in initiation income would have to have a big pile of nonmember play to make up the $175,000 that goes to the IRS (even aside from other tax liability). 1000 rounds at $175 per, assuming you could get it. Thus, outside play can be a money loser once the tax implications are taken into account.
So Dean, it is hard to see why club members should subsidize outside play.
-
I'm telling you that if someone lives in Australia and flys to this country to study the architecture of a course they have close to a 100% chance of success.
Dean,
Well, I’m from Australia & have played quite a few of the extremely private courses in America, even some of the ones already mentioned. Many of the rounds were due to knowing a member, but some of them were only because I wrote a letter.
Simply speaking, the letter would state who I am & where I come from (including a covering letter from my club), the reasons why I wanted to play their course (which were generally architectural) & that I understand that they are a private club, so I would appreciate any tee time they could accommodate me.
On all but two occasions they grouped me with a member. The members were always more than happy to share with me their knowledge of the course & club, especially when they could see my interest in the architecture & history. Most members of these clubs know what they have & are extremely proud of their club & course.
That has been my experience as an overseas unaccompanied guest. I am not sure whether it will help you living in America.
-
Dean,
I'm telling you that if someone lives in Australia and flys to this country to study the architecture of a course they have close to a 100% chance of success. Why don't you try to access a private course in this country and then tell me how it went. I believe I will be able to show you a path towards success. My God man, Sweeney just explained how to play Shinnecock which may be the very best we have to offer.
Dean
I certainly agree with John. Coming from Melbourne I have had success in playing Shinnnecock, NGLA, Winged Foot, Garden City, Oakmont, San Francisco, Olympic, Cypress Point, Chicago, Merion, Riviera, Bel Air and The Golf Club among aothers all by simply writing well in advance asking what times might be available as a single and when is the best time of year.
At the leading Sand Belt clubs the only way locals can get on is by being a guest of a member, a charity day or a corporate outing. The clubs simply do ont let them play as a "green fee" player. All these clubs allow overseas players with the payment of waht we all see as a high green fee for the access.
Australian clubs are certainly modelled on the British Clubs rather than American clubs with fees that do not preclude many on a financial basis. The leading clubs average about $3000 a year in fees, including RMGC and the Heath.
-
JK-How I contacted the pro was not the point, my point was that, at many clubs, no matter who you are or how you contact them, they simply will not let you on without a member sponsoring and playing with you.
J,
You lost me when you said "no matter who you are or how you contact them". It has been my experience that with patience the clubs end up finding you.
Not quite sure if they found Joe, but he is persistent!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXvxRyHxSzE&eurl=http://top100golf.blogspot.com/
http://top100golf.blogspot.com/
There are three courses in Japan ranked in the world's top 100 courses. Kawana (ranked #80), often described as the Pebble Beach of Japan, is a resort course. Unless you consider the 8,000 mile flight a hindrance, it is not that difficult to get on the course and play. The other two include Naruo (ranked #75) which is located in Osaka and is a private club and Hirono Golf Club (ranked #35) also a private club, located in Kobe.
I had fun last year trying to get on the #47 ranked course in the world, Morfontaine in France. It was a learning experience to try and play a course in a foreign land without any contacts. I received a lot of good feedback about my many aborted attempts to play this ideal French course and I was ultimately successful. So, I'm at it again.
This time, I am trying to gain access to the top ranked courses in Japan. As usual, I am aiming high, trying to get onto the best private courses in the land of the rising sun. I did a Google search for both Hirono and Naruo and found the phone numbers for both. I figured a good first try would be to just call them up and see if I could schedule a round. I was steeling myself for a tough time. My odds of this being successful are low, however, given the language barrier. I'm not too worried about breaking through eventually, since I've been rebuffed, turned away and put in my place by some of the best private clubs in the world. I have become very resilient and feel that when I put my mind to something I can achieve it.
With my calling card in hand, I decided to ring them up and give it a try. Since so much can be lost in translation, I have included an actual audio transcript below of my first attempts to play a round at Hirono and Naruo. Well, as you'll hear, the language barriers between Japan and English are high.
I'm still not quite sure whether she told me 'no' or whether it was 'no problem' and I actually have a date and time when I'm supposed to play. My guess is the former. Japan is a country with a lot of customs, traditions and protocols. Perhaps asking directly for a tee time was the wrong approach at Hirono. Maybe I need to be more polite and respectful of their customs first.
My phone call to Naruo took a different tact. Naruo is one of the oldest and most distinguished private clubs in all of Japan, so I thought rather than asking for a tee time directly, I would ask to be introduced to a member. Still a disaster. A total breakdown in communication, even though they could hear me.
Apologies about the herky-jerky nature of the recording. I went to the Richard Nixon school of tape recording management.
_____________________________
-
JK-I was attempting to say that with the ultra private clubs, whether you contact them by phone, letter, email, or any other form of communication, they simply will say no. If you contact the pro or a Board member that is.
BTW--Any gaps in your weekend foursome at Victoria this summer? I'd be more than happy to fill in. :)
J,
I tee off in three hours. Just go to the gate and ask for me, if you are a bit late the shop will shuttle you out to our group. If you can't make it today just let me know when you will be in town.
-
JK-I was attempting to say that with the ultra private clubs, whether you contact them by phone, letter, email, or any other form of communication, they simply will say no. If you contact the pro or a Board member that is.
BTW--Any gaps in your weekend foursome at Victoria this summer? I'd be more than happy to fill in. :)
J,
I tee off in three hours. Just go to the gate and ask for me, if you are a bit late the shop will shuttle you out to our group. If you can't make it today just let me know when you will be in town.
He's completely serious. And a lot of fun to play with.
-
Mike Sweeney,
I'm headed to Japan tomorrow morning. Maybe I should just take the clubs along and show up at the gate at Hirono and see what happens?
Thanks for a great laugh.
-
Pat, I fully understand the financial outlay and need to recoup at a place such as Sebonack.
You also get a course that is voted #1 private club in the country that nobody without $1 mill. to spare can see.
What course are you talking about ?
And, how do you know that it can't be accessed ?[/color]
Most of the year it will be a ghost town.
But, that's what the members want, a course that they can tee it up on at any time of day or year without any inconvenience. That's what they're paying for. It's like their own private course.[/color]
What's the point in that?
Convenience[/color]
Why not allow a few visitors tee times at unpopular times of the day?
The answer to that question is very simple.
Because the club does NOT know the character of the visitor.
Will they steal something from a members locker, play slow, insult staff, dress and behave improperly, etc., etc..
Why should they open up their doors to perfect strangers who have NO accountabililty ?
Forget the tax and public policy laws for a second.
Suppose they did, and suppose they charged a hefty green fee.
You and others would be complaining that it should be more affordable.
Some seem to feel that they have a right of entitlement to barge in, play when they want and pay little or nothing for the privilege.
There's a reason clubs adopt a policy where a member has to sponsor visitors, it's called quality control. The member is responsible for the quality and conduct of his guests, and that's the way it should be.[/color]
-
I want to see this list of UK courses that can be joined for 1,000 U.S. dollars.
Think 2 of the top 10 in the world.
-
I believe that if Seminole allowed outside play at $400.00 per round on Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday, that by the fourth year of doing so their tee sheets would be practically void of outside play. Same with Merion, SandHills, Peachtree, etc.
Pine Valley could maybe hold out for a little more.
Americans are limited in their willingness to part with their money, maybe not as much as the GBI'ers, but still limited.
The problem with overcrowding won't come until a course gets on the Japanese golfer's radar screen. Augusta Nat'l could never do it because they would be overrun just like Pebble Beach
-
I believe that if Seminole allowed outside play at $400.00 per round on Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday, that by the fourth year of doing so their tee sheets would be practically void of outside play. Same with Merion, SandHills, Peachtree, etc.
Pine Valley could maybe hold out for a little more.
Americans are limited in their willingness to part with their money, maybe not as much as the GBI'ers, but still limited.
The problem with overcrowding won't come until a course gets on the Japanese golfer's radar screen. Augusta Nat'l could never do it because they would be overrun just like Pebble Beach
Don't underestimate the power of business golf. Those courses (especially in the big cities) would be full for years.
-
I've found that most private clubs do allow unaccompanied guests for the right price. Usually however you need to call at just the right time and play at the right time and it helps to have a head pro call from a home course elsewhere. I can't speak for Shinnecock, Riviera or Merion but I'm pretty sure you could get on Hazeltine for the right price. Interlachen had more una's last year than the previous 5 as well. Calusa Pines also has quite a few unaccompanied groups as well but they all pay very high rates to do so. Maybe its just a question of how to work the system and it is tougher in the U.S. than elsewhere. I remember hearing that either SF GC or Olympic (not sure which) did allow one una 4-some a week on Monday mornings and getting that slot was extremely tough but the one group was a long standing tradition. Anyway just what I know in my little experience of the golf industry.
I have found that courses with lots of out of town members tend to provide at least some accomodation for unaccompanied guests. Usually a member has to make the time for you, but he doesn't have to be there. I suppose that is because these clubs have less play and so the crowd problem is not a big deal. In addition, if a member wants to set up his friends, it is not always possible to be there with them if he lives out of town. Usually the tee times for this are pretty limited, but it at least provides some access. I know Cypress has this policy (I played it unaccompanied), but I am not sure how many of the very exclusive clubs do it.
-
Dean Stokes,
The tax laws in the U.S. also come into play.
Clubs are limited in the amount of outside revenue they can receive.
Should they exceed that threshold, they'd lose their tax exempt status, which again, has onerous consequences.
When you combine these two factors you can understand how guest policies evolved differently in the U.S.
Patrick, it can be more of a problem than even staying below the "outside income" threshold. If you have visitor tee times or welcome the public in an overt way, you could jeopardize your tax exempt status regardless of the amount of income you earn from the outside activity, which would be really bad for many clubs. Bad as in a non-exempt club can basically kiss 35% of its initiation fees goodbye, and it's easy to end up with a lot of taxable income because of the way expenses are accounted for. A non-exempt club earning, say, $500,000 per year in initiation income would have to have a big pile of nonmember play to make up the $175,000 that goes to the IRS (even aside from other tax liability). 1000 rounds at $175 per, assuming you could get it. Thus, outside play can be a money loser once the tax implications are taken into account.
So Dean, it is hard to see why club members should subsidize outside play.
Jeff
You mentions some big ifs. Are there clubs out there that have been hauled up for overtly accepting outside cash? Your figure of 1000 rounds is interesting. That is two 4 balls a day (counting on a 25 week year and no visitors on the weekend).
I believe that if a club is private then nobody should have a problem with the rules they make so long as its all kosher. Obviously I would like to see clubs take visitors, but I have the feeling it wouldn't matter anyway cuz the top ones would charge crazy money for a game.
I must say that the letter writing deal can be effective and I suspect clubs can be most gracious with guys who seem to be on the up and up. I have tried it only once and the experience has encouraged me to do so again in the future.
JakaB, your understanding of what constitutes a private club is nonsensical. FYI, I have joined two cracking clubs whose combined entry fee was well under $1000 - in fact, the figure is closer to $500. Mind you, I have to put up with visitors, but I don't see that as any great hardship so long as matters are kept under control.
Ciao
-
Because the club does NOT know the character of the visitor.
Will they steal something from a members locker, play slow, insult staff, dress and behave improperly, etc., etc..
Why should they open up their doors to perfect strangers who have NO accountabililty ?
Forget the tax and public policy laws for a second.
Suppose they did, and suppose they charged a hefty green fee.
You and others would be complaining that it should be more affordable.
Some seem to feel that they have a right of entitlement to barge in, play when they want and pay little or nothing for the privilege.
There's a reason clubs adopt a policy where a member has to sponsor visitors, it's called quality control. The member is responsible for the quality and conduct of his guests, and that's the way it should be.[/b][/color]
Are you suggesting that the likes of Muirfield, Prestwick, Royal St Georges and Sunningdale might have issues with "quality control"?
-
Chris--any club that allows unaccompanied outside play has an issue with 'quality' control.
--Just look at some of the people that come to a public course, they do not care at all about what they do to the course, or anything else.
--Clubs like PV, CPC, and others simply do not want to deal with it.
--I feel that if Pacific Dunes, Pebble Beach and Pinehurst #2 were to all be closed to the public, they would be ranked far higher than they are by the major publications since the course conditioning would be better with the lack of play.
-
Chris Kane,
I'm not familiar with the guest/visitor history of any of the clubs you mention. Are you stating that NONE of them ever had a problem associated with outside play ?
I do KNOW that outsiders have stolen from member's lockers when clubs have held outside events, be they charity events, business events or community events.
I'm also aware of a situation where a U.S. Attorney and/or a Deputy U.S. Attorney had his wallet and his credentials stolen from a locker.
At my home club in NJ I've left my locker unlocked for over 40 years and never had a member related problem. I like that comfort factor and want to see it retained.
-
I believe that if Seminole allowed outside play at $400.00 per round on Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday, that by the fourth year of doing so their tee sheets would be practically void of outside play. Same with Merion, SandHills, Peachtree, etc.
I can assure you that outside play at Seminole at $ 400 per round would dwarf Pebble Beach. The concentration of wealth from Stewart to Miami is astounding.[/color]
Pine Valley could maybe hold out for a little more.[/b][/color=green]
Shirley, you jest ;D[/b][/color]
Americans are limited in their willingness to part with their money, maybe not as much as the GBI'ers, but still limited.
Not in Palm Beach County.[/color]
The problem with overcrowding won't come until a course gets on the Japanese golfer's radar screen. Augusta Nat'l could never do it because they would be overrun just like Pebble Beach
-
Chris--any club that allows unaccompanied outside play has an issue with 'quality' control.
--Just look at some of the people that come to a public course, they do not care at all about what they do to the course, or anything else.
--Clubs like PV, CPC, and others simply do not want to deal with it.
--I feel that if Pacific Dunes, Pebble Beach and Pinehurst #2 were to all be closed to the public, they would be ranked far higher than they are by the major publications since the course conditioning would be better with the lack of play.
How much higher can these courses go in the rankings? All three are top 20 and they are among some stiff competition.
Ciao
-
Sean--Pebble was ranked #1 in the world after it held the US Open and Pinehurst was higher in recent years than it is now. I would guess that #2 gets 60,000 rounds a year. It is booked at all times and I don't think it closes any day like many private clubs do. So, you cut that down to 15,000 like many of the clubs ahead of it in the rankings, and I assure you that the conditioning will go up and so will the ranking.
-
Firstly, I believe that private clubs have every right to be just that, private, and make whatever rules they want. But, where it gets tricky for me is what is truly a "private" club, and what are the tax exempt benefits for being not-for-profit private in the totally exclusive sense. By what specially situated status do they get to buy land, take it off tax rolls, receive public permitting to do things to the land, then promulgate a totally exclusive atmosphere to be arbitrary and capricious in who they allow to use the facility that uses public resourses of water, and other environmental impacts that in one way or the other effect the outside community at large?
There are a variety of equity and non-equity private clubs, with many sub-variations and structure within these different equity and non, examples. I don't pretend to know the subject enough to really make any definitive comments on their structures... maybe Jeff G., does.
But, I ask about the example of Sebonack (or perhaps it could be Riviera or Cypress Pt).
Take Sebonack; it was developed by Mr P. He is said to have paid 41 mill just for the land, lord knows how much for the design/construction. He 'sells' or 'offers' memberships to an exclusive group for a million initiation fee that I assume he approves or declines these memberships. Then he relieves the members of some princely yearly fees. If it is non-equity, I assume that if the member leaves they get some or all the million back, right? If it is equity, does he retain deed and title to the course and facilities and still retain the right to tell you if you don't please him that you are no longer a member? What do the members of equity actually own if one guy can rule the roost? If it is equity, then can't the members by some sort of majority vote decide what their privacy policies and guest play should be, after considering tax consequences and such? I understand the Japanese guy that "owns" Riviera makes the rules and even decides who gets to remodel the course, etc. What do the members get for their yearly fee, the right to pay again next year?
I'm more interested in what the members get in these various situations, and how much control of the actual deeds and titles to the land and facilities these mega founder/developers get to retain, and how that all plays out on the "PRIVELEGE" granted by the government for them to do all these things and NOT PAY TAXES as a not-for-profit. What do the rest of the taxpayer citizens get for granting this non taxable privelege to a private developer/owner/club mogul like Mr P or others so situated?
-
I understand the Japanese guy that "owns" Riviera makes the rules and even decides who gets to remodel the course, etc.
Dick,
Why is this the only owner whose ethnicity you mention? Do you think he is the only owner who chooses what architects get to work at his course, etc.
-
I'm not familiar with the guest/visitor history of any of the clubs you mention. Are you stating that NONE of them ever had a problem associated with outside play ?
No, I'm not. Where did you get that idea? What I'm suggesting is that allowing visitors hasn't been the downfall of these august clubs - otherwise they wouldn't persist with such policies.
-
"Firstly, I believe that private clubs have every right to be just that, private, and make whatever rules they want. But, where it gets tricky for me is what is truly a "private" club, and what are the tax exempt benefits for being not-for-profit private in the totally exclusive sense. By what specially situated status do they get to buy land, take it off tax rolls, receive public permitting to do things to the land, then promulgate a totally exclusive atmosphere to be arbitrary and capricious in who they allow to use the facility that uses public resourses of water, and other environmental impacts that in one way or the other effect the outside community at large?"
Thank you RJ.
This has to be one of the scariest posts I have seen in a long time. My private exclusive arbitrary and capricious private clubs tax exempt status is for income tax purposes. Not sure it has any bearing on the workings of the local government (even though we are the largest employer) as we pay market rate real estate taxes and we have to beg to get any "public permitting" even though we would probably be in for a fight were we to build the houses the land is zoned for and for which we pay taxes on.
-
If Muirfield can have full sheets on Tues/Thurs at $450 a pop, Seminole would no doubt be able to do the same....
quality control is the main issue...they don't want to deal with it...end of story
when we were at Muirfield last year, someone not in our group was caught taking pictures inside the clubhouse...a major no no....I am sure the members were not happy, but the full tee sheet offset that anger a little bit ;D
-
Sean,
There are usually one or two of these cases a year. The theory behind the tax exemption is basically that a group of people getting together for social purposes, who each throw money in a pot to pay for it, don't generate business activity. An example is a group that meets montly for social purposes, caters a meal for the meeting, and pays for it that night by dividing up the cost. No tax on the collections that pay for the meal. That isn't really different from charging the group montly (or yearly) "dues" in advance to pay for the meeting and meal. The "closed circle" is what does it.
However, if they finance their activities by selling brownies to the public, and use the proceeds to lower the cost to the "members", then they are engaged in business of a sort and engaged with the public, and get taxed.
There's a lot of other stuff that goes into it, but basically, that's the idea.
Jeff
-
"Firstly, I believe that private clubs have every right to be just that, private, and make whatever rules they want. But, where it gets tricky for me is what is truly a "private" club, and what are the tax exempt benefits for being not-for-profit private in the totally exclusive sense. By what specially situated status do they get to buy land, take it off tax rolls, receive public permitting to do things to the land, then promulgate a totally exclusive atmosphere to be arbitrary and capricious in who they allow to use the facility that uses public resourses of water, and other environmental impacts that in one way or the other effect the outside community at large?"
Thank you RJ.
This has to be one of the scariest posts I have seen in a long time. My private exclusive arbitrary and capricious private clubs tax exempt status is for income tax purposes. Not sure it has any bearing on the workings of the local government (even though we are the largest employer) as we pay market rate real estate taxes and we have to beg to get any "public permitting" even though we would probably be in for a fight were we to build the houses the land is zoned for and for which we pay taxes on.
People from Wisconsin have a strong Progressive or liberal history! Think Fighting Bob LaFollette -- or Fighting Dick Daley! ;D
-
I wonder if such attitudes preclude Dick from playing golf at these arbitrary and capricious places that through their tax status take advantage of the disenfranchised?
-
Overall, I think these clubs in America simply do not want to lose exclusiveness by allowing outside play on the course. There is, to me, a certain mystique about Augusta National, Pine Valley and Cypress Point that simply would not be there if all those courses were open to the public.
-
I'm not familiar with the guest/visitor history of any of the clubs you mention. Are you stating that NONE of them ever had a problem associated with outside play ?
No, I'm not. Where did you get that idea? What I'm suggesting is that allowing visitors hasn't been the downfall of these august clubs - otherwise they wouldn't persist with such policies.
Chris,
How many times must you be reminded of the enormous difference in the legal, Tax and governmental environment those clubs operate in versus clubs in the U.S. ?
What's also gone unmentioned are the liability issues.
Why would a club want to subject itself to those problems ?
As a member, why would you want to expose the club to those issues and problems.
Why would you want to curtail your enjoyment of the club, something you pay dearly for, in favor of perfect strangers who would pay a nominal fee ?
And, $ 400 or $ 500 is a nominal fee compared to the initiation, dues and assessments paid on an annual basis by members.
-
Firstly, I believe that private clubs have every right to be just that, private, and make whatever rules they want.
But, where it gets tricky for me is what is truly a "private" club, and what are the tax exempt benefits for being not-for-profit private in the totally exclusive sense.
By what specially situated status do they get to buy land, take it off tax rolls, receive public permitting to do things to the land, then promulgate a totally exclusive atmosphere to be arbitrary and capricious in who they allow to use the facility that uses public resourses of water, and other environmental impacts that in one way or the other effect the outside community at large?
RJ,
You're completely uninformed.
Private clubs are NOT off the tax rolls.
Where did you get that notion ?
They pay Real Estate taxes like everyone else.
They pay Sales taxes like everyone else.
They pay State and Federal taxes related to employee wages.
They pay for their water, electricity, gasoline and every other usable commodity.
You're way off base on this issue.[/color]
There are a variety of equity and non-equity private clubs, with many sub-variations and structure within these different equity and non, examples. I don't pretend to know the subject enough to really make any definitive comments on their structures... maybe Jeff G., does.
Then you shouldn't make erroneous broad based statements related to private clubs and taxation.[/color]
But, I ask about the example of Sebonack (or perhaps it could be Riviera or Cypress Pt).
Take Sebonack; it was developed by Mr P. He is said to have paid 41 mill just for the land, lord knows how much for the design/construction. He 'sells' or 'offers' memberships to an exclusive group for a million initiation fee that I assume he approves or declines these memberships. Then he relieves the members of some princely yearly fees. If it is non-equity, I assume that if the member leaves they get some or all the million back, right? If it is equity, does he retain deed and title to the course and facilities and still retain the right to tell you if you don't please him that you are no longer a member? What do the members of equity actually own if one guy can rule the roost? If it is equity, then can't the members by some sort of majority vote decide what their privacy policies and guest play should be, after considering tax consequences and such? I understand the Japanese guy that "owns" Riviera makes the rules and even decides who gets to remodel the course, etc. What do the members get for their yearly fee, the right to pay again next year?
RJ,
I have news for you. Mike Pascucci isn't putting a gun to anyone's head and forcing them to join.
I have addtional news for you. All of the PROSPECTIVE members are keenly aware of the lay of the land, the rules and their rights BEFORE they ELECT to join.
They've agreed to EVERY facet of how Mike chooses to run the club.
And, if they don't like it, the exit door is perpetually open for them.[/color]
I'm more interested in what the members get in these various situations, and how much control of the actual deeds and titles to the land and facilities these mega founder/developers get to retain, and how that all plays out on the "PRIVELEGE" granted by the government for them to do all these things and NOT PAY TAXES as a not-for-profit.
The members get what they bargained for. In "good faith" I might add.
Let me fill you in on another misconception you're laboring under.
As stated above, all of these clubs you're referencing PAY their taxes.
I'd like you to identify clubs that run at a profit.
I don't know of any, but, then again, I only have limited, specific knowledge on that topic.
There's a reason that clubs have assessments.
It's because they operated at a loss for the year.[/color]
What do the rest of the taxpayer citizens get for granting this non taxable privelege to a private developer/owner/club mogul like Mr P or others so situated?
What NON-TAXABLE privilege are you talking about.
You're dead wrong on this issue, Clubs PAY TAXES.
Where did you come up with the idea that they don't ? [/color]
-
How many times must you be reminded of the enormous difference in the legal, Tax and governmental environment those clubs operate in versus clubs in the U.S. ?
I don't think I've ever been reminded of the "enormous difference in the legal, Tax and governmental environment those clubs operate in versus clubs in the U.S. ?" That had nothing to do with my point, which was a specific response to your "quality control" argument.
You are out of control.
What's also gone unmentioned are the liability issues.
Why would a club want to subject itself to those problems ?
As a member, why would you want to expose the club to those issues and problems.
No I wouldn't, but this has absolutely no relevance to any point I've made on this thread
Why would you want to curtail your enjoyment of the club, something you pay dearly for, in favor of perfect strangers who would pay a nominal fee ?
So the members of Prestwick, Muirfield, Royal Melbourne, Royal St Georges, Walton Heath and Hoylake have their enjoyment "curtailed" by allowing visitors a couple of days per week? I'd be interested to hear what they have to say about that.
-
Chris,
As someone who belongs to clubs in the US, Europe and Africa you need to know one thing.
Anywhere but in the US, golfers, no matter the prestige of their membership of choice, do like their golf to be cheap. I know of a couple of exceptions but the Clubs LOVE the funds contributed by unaccompanied guests. This is not the case here.
Bob
-
RStG have tee times fo non-members often off the 10th tee and outside of "peak" member hours. They even allow 3 and 4 balls on a Tuesday to cater for visitor demand. The HCEG allow visitors on 2 days a week, I cannot imagine the members are caused too much inconvenience.
Sunningdale allows visitors and corporate golf Mon-Thursday, I guess there is always a course available to the members.
Everything is horses for courses, some US clubs charge more in monthly dues than a few UK clubs charge their members for a years golf. However visitors not only pay greenfees but also spend money in the bar and restaurant, US clubs clearly have minimum spends to enable a full service to take place.
I guess my membership and total spend at my club last year was around £2000 that includes all golf, food, bar bills, summer ball for 2, etc. My initiation in 1999 was £250. We have reciprocal arrangements with 25 clubs around the world including several world top 100 venues and enjoy limited local reciprocal arrangements with some very fine clubs when we are closed for events. All in all I believe my membership gives me fantastic value for money.
Could I get the same stateside for under $10 000 a year at a US top 50 club? I guess in the UK we are used to paying considerably less for club life.
-
Chris,
As someone who belongs to clubs in the US, Europe and Africa you need to know one thing.
Anywhere but in the US, golfers, no matter the prestige of their membership of choice, do like their golf to be cheap. I know of a couple of exceptions but the Clubs LOVE the funds contributed by unaccompanied guests. This is not the case here.
Bob
I'd have to agree with this - I also think this enables more people to become Members at clubs as the joining fees and annual subs are - generally - more affordable than to comparable clubs in the US.
Personally, I have no problem with limited and controlled visitor play. I've benefitted from it and have also occasionally suffered from it. I've only ever lived in the UK so I'm used to our system.
I would also much rather play with a Member as you get their insight and often stories about the course and club, and it's always nice to meet new people who have a shared passion.
-
So the members of Prestwick, Muirfield, Royal Melbourne, Royal St Georges, Walton Heath and Hoylake have their enjoyment "curtailed" by allowing visitors a couple of days per week? I'd be interested to hear what they have to say about that
I imagine that they do. My enjoyment of my club was curtailed in numerous ways by allowing outside, unaccompanied guests.
I would think the corporate days held at RM and other Sandbelt clubs aggavate members who may want to play on those particular days. I had access to one through a place I worked when I was at University, and it seemed that every time I wanted to play, I couldn't, because there was a corporate day.
It is just that in the UK and Australia, the members are prepared to suffer a little inconvenience for having cheaper subs. Not so in the USA, for which the members are willing to pay for their privacy, much like I was at St Andrews Beach, which was supposed to have NO play unless accompanied by a member.
-
Tom makes a very good point. The experience of playing with a member can enhance you visit 10 fold if they have a passion for the club. Secretaries or the pro will often put if asked a lone visitor with a member (although understandably you will not get signed in).
-
Chris Kane,
I responded, directly below each one, to the points you made in your post.
The relevance is apparent, you're just blind to it.
As to the curtailed enjoyment, that question was answered with clarity, wasn't it.
-
Forgive my ignorance of American tax law, but what is the history behind the tax exemption for private clubs? What is the reasoning behind this exemption? I'm sure the exemption isn't just for golf clubs, yes? What other kinds of clubs receive this exemption?
I don't have an agenda with this - it's just normal ignorance.
Thanks in advance for any help on this.
-
Forgive my ignorance of American tax law, but what is the history behind the tax exemption for private clubs? What is the reasoning behind this exemption? I'm sure the exemption isn't just for golf clubs, yes? What other kinds of clubs receive this exemption?
I don't have an agenda with this - it's just normal ignorance.
Thanks in advance for any help on this.
Kirk,
Look up IRS section 501 (c) and it will explain the nature of the income tax exemption. Sections 503 and 505 expand upon the issue.
501 (c) (3) and 501 (c) (7) are probably the most pertinent.
-
Private clubs are not-for-profit organizations, therefore, the money they take in is supposedly only for operating expenses. This is the same with an organization such as the USGA or something like the Salvation Army. There is no tax paid because there is no income to be taxed. The property and such is still taxed at the going rate. If clubs allowed outside play, they may begin to fall into the category of for-profit, since they are not using outside money to cover expenses. (How Augusta National works with the coffers of money they get each year from the Masters, I am not sure. But ANGC is not-for-profit)
-
If clubs allowed outside play, they may begin to fall into the category of for-profit, since they are not using outside money to cover expenses.
Thank you, gentlemen.
The question that arises then is, what if a club is having trouble meeting expenses with a diminished membership? Would they be allowed to have limited public play to cover needed expenses? What about a restoration or renovation? Or is that a slippery slope?
-
"What on earth makes the PRIVATE clubs in the US so special that they don't take visitors groups?"
Dean:
I'm not sure I understand that remark. Why are you assuming that private clubs are special or think they're special simply because they prefer not to take visitors not sponsored or invited by members? Or are you implying that some golf courses that are private that most of the world thinks are special courses and special architecture have some moral responsibility to share the course with the rest of the world simply because much of the world thinks it's special?
-
If clubs allowed outside play, they may begin to fall into the category of for-profit, since they are not using outside money to cover expenses.
Thank you, gentlemen.
The question that arises then is, what if a club is having trouble meeting expenses with a diminished membership?
Would they be allowed to have limited public play to cover needed expenses?
Yes, but, it's not an attractive alternative and if they did, it could change their tax status AND their "strictly private" categorization, opening them up to public interest laws.[/color]
What about a restoration or renovation? Or is that a slippery slope?
If a club was short on funds for operations, it would be difficult to imagine that they had a large capital reserve fund for restoration or renovation.
And, I would imagine that they'd be hard pressed to assess the members for the cost of such a project. It's been done, but, it's painful.[/color]
-
If clubs allowed outside play, they may begin to fall into the category of for-profit, since they are not using outside money to cover expenses.
Thank you, gentlemen.
The question that arises then is, what if a club is having trouble meeting expenses with a diminished membership? Would they be allowed to have limited public play to cover needed expenses? What about a restoration or renovation? Or is that a slippery slope?
Kirk,
Most non-profit clubs are allowed some non-member income, which is called unrelated business income. They are taxed if this non-member income exceeds 15% of gross income, and their tax-exempt status can be revoked.
Sadly, my club has experienced this scenario you speak of with diminshing membership over the past few years, to the point where we can no longer continue under the current structure. We are in the process of restructuring our club to a for-profit entity, with some public play being allowed, along with opening up the dining facility to the public. It's a sad road to go down, but unfortunately, we don't have any other way.
Scott
-
Scott,
I see that scenario as a possibility at a good number of clubs.
One of the things that disturbs me the most is the perpetuation of the status quo when the utilization patterns, cultural values and demographics dramatically changed over the years.
Yet, club leaderships continued to do things as they had in the past with little or no effort to react and respond appropriately and responsibly to these new forces.
-
"If clubs allowed outside play, they may begin to fall into the category of for-profit, since they are not using outside money to cover expenses. (How Augusta National works with the coffers of money they get each year from the Masters, I am not sure. But ANGC is not-for-profit)"
J Kenneth:
I think what you must have meant to say is clubs that use too much outside money to cover expenses no longer maintain their status as "not for profit" and can consequently lose their "private" status.
With ANGC and The Masters, the fact is they are two separate legal entities and the monies derived from the Masters tournament may not excessively flow into and inure to the benefit of the members of ANGC exclusively. The Masters Tournament entity is a separate charitable entity.
I guess what some on here who are wondering about an American private club's ability to restrict outside non-member play need to appreciate is the US Constitution's "Right to Freedom of Association".
What that means in effect is if a club agrees to operate under various restrictions they are legally allowed to keep anyone out of their club that they choose.
-
Scott,
I see that scenario as a possibility at a good number of clubs.
One of the things that disturbs me the most is the perpetuation of the status quo when the utilization patterns, cultural values and demographics dramatically changed over the years.
Yet, club leaderships continued to do things as they had in the past with little or no effort to react and respond appropriately and responsibly to these new forces.
Pat,
You are stating precisely the reasons we are where we are. The demographics in our area have changed so drastically over the past 10 years or so, but our governing boards over that time failed to do much about it. When they did announce the required assessments, which seemed to grow from year to year, more and more people left the club.
Thankfully, we have enough passionate members with the financial resources to make our transition a successful one, or at least, we hope it will be.
Scott
-
If clubs allowed outside play, they may begin to fall into the category of for-profit, since they are not using outside money to cover expenses. (How Augusta National works with the coffers of money they get each year from the Masters, I am not sure. But ANGC is not-for-profit)
As was noted below too, The Masters is a separate entity aside from ANGC. Regardless, I think I remember seeing somewhere a rough guesstimate of the annual revenue the tournament gets from advertising and television rights alone (i.e. IBM, Coca-Cola, CBS, ESPN, and I can't remember the other one) and it was simply staggering. But nevertheless, ANGC donates a ton of that Masters revenue back to the Augusta community and other charities around the country / world - they just happen to do it very quietly.
-
]
(i.e. IBM, Coca-Cola, CBS, ESPN, and I can't remember the other one)
Exxon Mobile.
-
Sean,
There are usually one or two of these cases a year. The theory behind the tax exemption is basically that a group of people getting together for social purposes, who each throw money in a pot to pay for it, don't generate business activity. An example is a group that meets montly for social purposes, caters a meal for the meeting, and pays for it that night by dividing up the cost. No tax on the collections that pay for the meal. That isn't really different from charging the group montly (or yearly) "dues" in advance to pay for the meeting and meal. The "closed circle" is what does it.
However, if they finance their activities by selling brownies to the public, and use the proceeds to lower the cost to the "members", then they are engaged in business of a sort and engaged with the public, and get taxed.
There's a lot of other stuff that goes into it, but basically, that's the idea.
Jeff
Jeff
Thanks. So there have been clubs which lost their tax exempt status due to collecting visitor fees? If so, were they cases in which it was deemed the club collected an unreasonable amount (over the limit - whatever that is) of visitor fees for a tax exempt body? I was under the impression that a certain percentage (though I am unsure of that number) of visitor (perhaps this is confused with guest or perhaps there is no essential difference between the two in tax law?) money was allowable - which for some clubs is quite a significant amount of money.
Ciao
-
Sean:
That's true. The limit is considered to be 15% although some clubs seem to get into some pretty creative bookkeeping.
-
Sean,
That's exactly why my non-equity club requires non-members that want to have a wedding to join as social members. And we happily retain many of them.
Back to not-for-profit. There are some very big non-for-profits in the USA that you'd never think were not for profit. I used to work for one of them, The Vanguard Group in Valley Forge, PA.
Back to visitor fees. A club is just that - a group of people with a love of golf that got together and built their own golf course and related facilities. How can you not respect the right of a club to remain completely private if they so choose? And if they do open up a few tee times for visitors, you should be expected to pay a premium for the privilege.
-
Back to visitor fees. A club is just that - a group of people with a love of golf that got together and built their own golf course and related facilities. How can you not respect the right of a club to remain completely private if they so choose? And if they do open up a few tee times for visitors, you should be expected to pay a premium for the privilege.
Good point. A private club I know in California charges $35 for accompanied guests, $250 for unaccompanied guests. You have to be sponsored by a member in either case, but pay dearly for playing without the member.
-
Dan:
There has been a pretty interesting apparent belief that's floated around this website with a few of its contributors since the beginning, and that is if someone really loves golf or architecture they should have some inherent right to be able to experience any of the great courses no matter how the clubs are structured. I suppose I can understand that feeling but it sure isn't very realistic. The interesting part comes when those people start to criticize members of private clubs for being exclusionary. As Bob Huntley said on this thread, on the other side they allow way more visitor play than over here because they want to maintain cheaper golfer for themselves over there. Over here there are just a whole lot more people who don't mind paying a lot more to maintain privacy.
-
Bill McB:
That private club example in California is something I remember at Seminole and many years ago. An accompanied greensfee was really low. But with unaccompanied rounds the deal seemed to be they didn't really want them and the way to stop them or really limit them was to make them sort of unappealing by slotting them really early and charging a fortune for them. I remember my father who was on the board and certainly didn't seem to be an exclusionary guy to me said it was insane----eg they priced them so high back then they thought that would stop it but it didn't and they felt they just couldn't turn down oodles of easy money. But in my life and in my memory it wasn't the private clubs that created this ultra high greensfee mentality in America---it was a course that's always been public that always set that bar---Pebble Beach GC.
-
Mr. Paul:
Good for you, based on your post #127 it would appear you do not read many of the OT-political posts in this discussion group. :)
Were you to read them, you would find many of these same folks think they have a lot of inherent rights that others should support. It is not only golf tee times. :)
-
Mr Hearst:
Thank you very much but I'm only stating the realities that I know and have grown up knowing and understanding.
However, that does not necessarily reflect my own personal opinion on these things.
I'm actually an old broken down 1960s liberal revolutionary from New York. If I ran this country I'd transport all the fancy-smancy members of Seminole, ANGC, Maidstone, Piping et al on a forced march into the ghettos of America and transport the ghetto dwellers to have free run of Seminole, ANGC, Maidstone, Piping et al.
At least I'd do that for a minimum of a week just to see how things might shake out and to get a really good laugh!
If the excercise actually promoted some interesting results the next thing I would do as the one who runs this county is make Christopher Hitchens the Secretary of the State, Interior and Justice so he could put a God-damn clamp on the pomposity of Christianity in America.
Then I'd change the National Anthem to John Lennon's "Imagine" and get Lloyd Cole from GOLFCLUBATLAS.com to sing it to the Nation.
Don't worry about it Hamilton---I have my eye on a really cool crack-house in North Philadelphia I think you'd have a total ball in for a week! After that it would be back to the gravy train for you with a whole different outlook on things! ;)
-
Tom & Dan
So are you telling me that a club with a $2.5 million operating budget can have up to $375,000 of it from visitors? Something sounds fishy here. I spose a chunk of that allowable income disappears for an annual open tournament and/or a charity event (which may be tax exempt anyway as clubs often don't make money or much on these - as is the intention). Say, 100 golfers each at $750. That still leaves $225,000. Say a club gets 100 guests a week at $250 a pop all in - thats another $130,000. This leaves $95,000 left over for visitor rounds at say $400 (all in) - that means over 200 outside rounds can be played. This total amount of outside play sounds incredibly high to be legal for a tax exempt body. If we put this into perspective, Muirfield allows 2704 visitors a year which probably brings in something close to £500,000 a year when you consider food & drinks as well.
Ciao
-
I understand the Japanese guy that "owns" Riviera makes the rules and even decides who gets to remodel the course, etc.
Dick,
Why is this the only owner whose ethnicity you mention? Do you think he is the only owner who chooses what architects get to work at his course, etc.
As with every racist comment concerning Asian golfers or owners on this site R.J. Daley's comment seems to have been given a pass. I was wondering, do European golfers hate the Asian influx as much as American or at least Golfclubatlas posters? Would Muifield or the like fill a day up with nothing but Koreans?
-
As a function of their personal political beliefs, some people get a free pass for innapropriate or racist comments. Others do not.
-
If the excercise actually promoted some interesting results the next thing I would do as the one who runs this county is make Christopher Hitchens the Secretary of the State, Interior and Justice so he could put a God-damn clamp on the pomposity of Christianity in America.
Is this site no longer moderated?
Mike
-
"HBH is entirely correct, it all depends upon your agenda."
Kelly:
Mr Hearst is entirely correct about that in my opinion. And my agenda is nothing other than humour. And I believe in Mark Twain's sentiment:
"Nothing on earth can withstand the onslaught of humor."
I believe that should be all inclusive---eg Christians, non-Christians and most certainly people who take themselves too seriously, including those who believe all golf courses should be natural looking and that the world should be ridded of Fazio and Rees Jones architecture and even those whose first reaction is to scream for moderators to protect them from freedom of speech. That's the beauty of this country----everyone has a unfettered right to make a complete ass of themselves in public and that certainly includes me! ;)
-
"Tom,
I am totally with you on the humor part, I attempted some this weekend and was immediately outed as something, the ones that attempted to out me didn't have the balls to say it, they just implied something sinister which is almost as bad as what John did calling RJ a racist for what seems to me to be an innocent comment. The reason I raised your comment is to illustrate the inequities in these matters. You can diss God, Jesus, Texans, whites, little white kids, dogs, cats, babies all you want you won't offend me."
You're right Kelly, and what that means is you and I should combine our considerable forces and take on with humor all the over-arching humorless slimeballs we're aware of. The fact that hardly any of them "get" our humor is their problem, and not ours!
Heh, by the way, I don't like your list of who I can diss:
It should include not just God, Jesus, Texans, whites, little white kids, dogs, cats, babies----but also Jews, Muslims, bling-ladden black rappers, atheists, Pres. Bush, candidates Clinton and Obama and also comedians.
I once heard one of those ultra-wasp types down in Southampton say:
"If you can't insult your friends, then what is the world coming to?"
Truer words have never been spoken, in my opinion! ;)
-
I have a question and a comment on this thread-
1. Do the "private" clubs on Britain, Ireland, Australia, Scotland,etc. have the same open door policy to local residents as they do for overseas visitors?
2. I remember after 9/11 that Pine Valley opened its doors to the public for two days for a charity event to help the firefighters. It was $1000 per person, but for a good cause and well worth it and mostly tax deductible, as well! Likewise, the Oakmont event this past fall where anyone could play for $500. for a charity event.
I think if more of the exclusionary clubs would hold such charitable events at least many non-members could have the opportunity to play and the clubs would benefit as well.
-
There are all sorts of charity events that anyone can play in at even the most private of clubs. Charities pick clubs that will attract players and provide some sort of value proposition while raising the most money possible for the cause.
How would the clubs themselves benefit? And are you suggesting they open up tee times to the public on their own with the proceeds going to the public?
-
8)
Why are you dissing the Houston TEXans football team.. ?1/??@#?@?$?@$%@?
oh... you probably didn't even know there was NFL football down here other than the DallasCowboys...
i assume you were referring to native born Texans and not all the yankee transplants... playing golf in 75F weather that last week or so
-
I wasn't really talking about a purely "economic" benefit to the clubs from holding charity events, but I would think that clubs do charge for the use of their club, carts, green fees, food, etc. for charitable and non-charitable events.
I don't have any idea how you misread my comment to suggest that private clubs should open their doors to the public and then give the money to the public.
All I was suggesting is that the clubs do more of it. After all, don't most clubs enjoy substantial real estate tax savings than if their property were zoned in some other fashion? Isn't that a public benefit that they receive? Why not give something back by way of more charity functions?
-
"Patrick, it can be more of a problem than even staying below the "outside income" threshold. If you have visitor tee times or welcome the public in an overt way, you could jeopardize your tax exempt status regardless of the amount of income you earn from the outside activity, which would be really bad for many clubs. Bad as in a non-exempt club can basically kiss 35% of its initiation fees goodbye, and it's easy to end up with a lot of taxable income because of the way expenses are accounted for. A non-exempt club earning, say, $500,000 per year in initiation income would have to have a big pile of nonmember play to make up the $175,000 that goes to the IRS (even aside from other tax liability). 1000 rounds at $175 per, assuming you could get it. Thus, outside play can be a money loser once the tax implications are taken into account.
"So Dean, it is hard to see why club members should subsidize outside play. " Jeff Goldman
Damned government making the game inaccessible to all of us unacceptable to the top clubs of the country! Really Jeff, with highly qualified experts like you, I don't think most in the Top 10 would have a hard time squeezing-in a couple of non-member groups during the week mornings, or on Sunday afternoon. That is, if they wanted to. For the good of the game, of course.
It seems to me that not all European clubs are all that welcoming. Muirfield apparently has a few times for outsiders a couple of days a week, which, the secretary wrote to me, fill up as much as a year in advance. During my visit, I asked to play any one of four days at any time and was summarily turned down. For me, I might have as well asked Augusta National for persmission.
Some seasonal American clubs like Shinny even restrict member accompanied play during the busy months. I was told by a Pine Valley member that he sometimes has a hard time getting on due to all the guest play (accompanied) there. It seems perfectly reasonable for a member of an exclusive private club to expect to play his course pretty much when he wants to without having to place a ball in queu on the first tee.
-
John,
I think RJ is being descriptive, adding detail, we teach our kid's to do that in their english classes, I think it is not racists, rather it reflects the successful upbringing of RJ and should be a compliment to his parents.
Kelly,
Here is RJ's quote once more "I understand the Japanese guy that "owns" Riviera makes the rules and even decides who gets to remodel the course, etc."...Substitute Japanese with Jewish, Black, woman or any other minority that has commonly been oppressed in golfing society and see how it reads. Am I just imaging the Asian stereotypes held by most American golfers? Given that the growth of the game seems to lie in Asia should we continue to stand for this type of thinking? As I have traveled the country I have seen a disturbing trend arising where golf courses are being segregated as Asian and Non-Asian...I don't understand why this one brand of hate is so acceptable. note: As an engineer who loves to play poker I have spent many hours of my life as the only white guy at the table. I guess I am biased towards people with whom I have so much in common.
-
John,
I would add that when Pebble Beach was bought by the Japanese consortium from Marvin Davis, the improvement in conditioning and infrastructure was a joy to behold.
Bob
-
Mr. Federman
Many clubs are doing as many outings as they possibly can, and if they are not, they probably don't need the money.
Should Monday outing day only be for charities? Just tell me how you want the system to work and who you want to foot the bill. I have played in many charity functions at many different courses.
I will alert you that the real estate tax component is a local function so I would not assume the substancial real estate tax savings you trumpet.
-
I played in a charity event last year at a new local club, and in that instance the club donated the use of the course and grounds to the charity in question, the Junior Diabetes Research Foundation.
Isn't this more common than the club actually being compensated for the use of their course for charitable purposes?
-
I say screw the government giving me "free" health insurance....I want a tee time every Tuesday at Seminole! It is totally unfair that these greedy, rich industrialists get to have so much exclusionary fun on the taxpayers dime.....
-
Mr. Hearst-
I am not sure what it is that has gotten you so fired up on this thread. I am not trumpeting anything - only suggesting that to the extent private clubs receive public benefits by way of tax savings, they should reciprocate by holding charity events whereby non-members can play the course and help a worth cause, as well. Hardly revolutionary thinking!
-
Mr. Federman
Now I get it, finally you are being clear. My clubs do not receive any tax benefits that I am aware of other than being taxed as a "not-for profit" which, if you read the thread, might be part of the problem.
Of course, some on this thread think that it is a "benefit" in that local utilities are willing to sell water four our purposes.
-
Mr. Federman
Now I get it, finally you are being clear. My clubs do not receive any tax benefits that I am aware of other than being taxed as a "not-for profit" which, if you read the thread, might be part of the problem.
Of course, some on this thread think that it is a "benefit" in that local utilities are willing to sell water four our purposes.
HGH,
I am suprised that we have not heard a plaintive call for access to luxury boxes at football and basball stadia. After all, some of these facilities were built with public funds.
Bob
-
With ANGC and The Masters, the fact is they are two separate legal entities and the monies derived from the Masters tournament may not excessively flow into and inure to the benefit of the members of ANGC exclusively. The Masters Tournament entity is a separate charitable entity.
I certainly understand the two legal entities for the Club and the Tournament.
However, I was always under the impression that ANGC and its membership are very proud of their low initiation fee and low dues (a quick Google search - see point #14 -htttp://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/augusta/news/preview/secrets.html).
The annual changes that the club undergoes seemingly points to the Tournament money covering a large chunk of the tab. They could take the position that the Tournament benefits as much as the Club but that would seem to be a grey area at the least considering the Tournament is 1 week and the course is open approximately 24 weeks. Apparently the Club has a workable solution.
This debate is only interesting from the point of view as to whether the GB&I model can be done in the US. Anyone who seriously stakes a claim to having the inherent right to play any of the Top 10 privates is missing the big idea. At some point the upper six figure initiation fee course building will slow down (if it hasn't already) and some new golf course building financial model will evolve. It remains to be seen whether this is viable.
If it becomes viable then you may be able to convert some of the old-time clubs to a new way of operating.
-
Bob,
I've been a beneficiary of those a couple of times. As part of the public assisted financing of the Ballpark in Arlington (TX), or whatever name it currently operates under, the city or its sports board got a luxury suite and some box seats in the deal. One of my son's friends had access to free tickets through his councilman father, and when the Rangers weren't playing well, we'd get the occasional call.
Regarding Asian golf, I've had some experience with that at a couple clubs in Texas. Invariably, they let it be known to the pro shop that they did not want other people to join them and largely kept to themselves. Perhaps I am being prejudiced, but with the exception of one or two, they were not very good golfers yet insisted on playing the back tees and holing out each putt. It was a nightmare getting behind often a dozen or more players, mostly regular guests and a few members, and never being asked to play through. Fortunately, the pro shop tried hard to work around the well-know problem, resulting in only one or two known scuffles. And you want to talk about cigarette butts left on the course!
-
Getting back to the original reason for the thread...
It does seem that many of the finest courses in Europe allow groups of visitors to play....so why can't that happen in America? Why should it be so difficult for a group of guys visiting Long Island to get a game on Shinnicock? Is it really all about liability?
How would GCA'ers feel if getting on the best clubs in the UK became more difficult to impossible?
-
Maybe I don't want unacompanied guests because they have not been properly vetted? Why would I want to take the chance that some knucklehead is going to ruin my day? For what? We don't need the money, and the money you are talking about paying is less than the average cost per round for many of the members.
Why should a membership take a chance that a guest could ruin a member's day.
As far as Europe, I really don't care what GCA'ers feel, that is not my problem and with my connections and those of my friends and fellow members, access is not a problem.
Judging by some of the intemperate remarks by some on this board, I would be afraid to leave you alone in the men's grill.
-
Judging by some of the intemperate remarks by some on this board, I would be afraid to leave you alone in the men's grill.
Pithy and perfect.
-
Getting back to the original reason for the thread...
It does seem that many of the finest courses in Europe allow groups of visitors to play....so why can't that happen in America? Why should it be so difficult for a group of guys visiting Long Island to get a game on Shinnicock? Is it really all about liability?
How would GCA'ers feel if getting on the best clubs in the UK became more difficult to impossible?
Easy - we're selfish. I pay a good buck to belong to a private golf club. I like to talk to other members out on the course and to share a laugh. But it's mostly about being able to walk to the pro shop, get a game, and be on the first tee within 30 minutes of my arrival. And play in 3.5 hours.
But I'd happily have anybody as a guest, as long as they know the very easy to follow etiquette-type stuff.
-
David Federman - I do not know of any club in the UK that restricts local visitors, remember we are not a very big country. Some clubs including my own still have artesian membership for local people - usually resident in the town or up to 5 miles from the club. Tee times are restricted, seperate clubhouse and sometimes a requirement to work on the course for an agreed number of hours a year. These memberships are often highly sought after and in some cases can be harder to obtain than membership of the parent club!
-
Tom & Dan
So are you telling me that a club with a $2.5 million operating budget can have up to $375,000 of it from visitors?
Something sounds fishy here.
There's NOTHING fishy about it at all.
You just don't understand it, nor do you understand club financial's in the U.S.[/color
I spose a chunk of that allowable income disappears for an annual open tournament and/or a charity event (which may be tax exempt anyway as clubs often don't make money or much on these - as is the intention).
Do you actually THINK before you type ?
What annual open tournament would a club run ?
What are you talking about ?
Clubs that host tournaments for the local, state or regional golf associations that they're members of, typically LOSE money on those events. A club would be deemed extremely lucky just to break even.[/color]
Say, 100 golfers each at $750. That still leaves $225,000.
NO, that leaves $ 300,000 according to your assumption.[/color]
Say a club gets 100 guests a week at $250 a pop all in - thats another $130,000.
Most clubs in the U.S. are seasonal, not open 52 weeks a year.
Some Southern clubs open in Oct and close in May.
Many Norther clubs are closed in December, Jan, Feb and even March.
During season,
Most clubs are closed on Mondays
Tuesdays and Thursdays are often Ladies days
Wednesdays were historically professional and business days.
Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays have heavy member play.
So where are you going to slot these 100 guests a week ?
Where are you going to put these 25 foursomes, 33 threesomes or 50 twosomes ?
On Ladies days ?
On Business days ?
On Long Weekends ?
The members of these clubs, who pay substantive initiation fees, dues, minimums and assessments, aren't going to have the flexibility of playing when they want, their enjoyment of the club would be limited by strangers who have NO obligation toward the club.[/color]
This leaves $95,000 left over for visitor rounds at say $400 (all in) - that means over 200 outside rounds can be played. This total amount of outside play sounds incredibly high to be legal for a tax exempt body.
You're so oblivious to reality that it's simply amazing.
What part of 15 % of total operating revenue don't you understand ?
Do you think that individual golfers or foursomes are the sole source of outside revenue ?
How about the charity affairs held at the club and the revenue from them ?
How about the community affairs held at the club and the revenue from them ?
How about weddings and parties held at the club and the revenue from them ?
Don't they count toward the 15 % ?
What you also don't understand is that most clubs in the U.S. don't run at a profit, they lose money, especially the kitchens which are like a black hole in the accounting/financial world of clubs. That's why clubs have imposed dining room minimums to try to shore up their loses.
Please, adhere to the adage that it's better to remain silent on an issue you're not familiar with and have people think you're a fool, rather than to open up your mouth and prove it.[/color]
If we put this into perspective, Muirfield allows 2704 visitors a year which probably brings in something close to £500,000 a year when you consider food & drinks as well.
That's irrelevant.
At seasonal clubs in the U.S. with 12,000-14,000 rounds played per year, allowing 2,704 visitors to play the golf course would do one thing, it would insure a membership revolt and the removal of the Executive committee and the Board.[/color]
-
David Federman - I do not know of any club in the UK that restricts local visitors, remember we are not a very big country. Some clubs including my own still have artesian membership for local people - usually resident in the town or up to 5 miles from the club. Tee times are restricted, seperate clubhouse and sometimes a requirement to work on the course for an agreed number of hours a year. These memberships are often highly sought after and in some cases can be harder to obtain than membership of the parent club!
Mark,
Are the artesian members under water?
Bob
-
Patrick Mucci - Kudos! Perfectly stated!
-
I have a question and a comment on this thread-
1. Do the "private" clubs on Britain, Ireland, Australia, Scotland,etc. have the same open door policy to local residents as they do for overseas visitors?
2. I remember after 9/11 that Pine Valley opened its doors to the public for two days for a charity event to help the firefighters. It was $1000 per person, but for a good cause and well worth it and mostly tax deductible, as well! Likewise, the Oakmont event this past fall where anyone could play for $500. for a charity event.
I think if more of the exclusionary clubs would hold such charitable events at least many non-members could have the opportunity to play and the clubs would benefit as well.
Dave,
They do.
However, they're limited by the 15 % outside revenue cap, amongst other limitations.
When you consider that the revenue cap isn't limited to GOLF, but applies to all "outside" club activities, you have to be careful in how you schedule outside events.
Remember too, that clubs get requests for their facilities years in advance.
These functions have to be scheduled, approved, budgeted, staffed, etc., etc. The process and hosting of outside events can't be viewed in a cavalier fashion.
If a miscalculation is made, and the 15 % exceeded, an audit could cause the club to lose its tax exempt status.
At a club that I'm very familiar with, they ceased approving/hosting "Sweet Sixteen" parties due to the potential for legal liability.
In addition, hosting outside events, where liquor is served, brings in another set of issues, problems and liabilities.
The overall issue is far more complex than meets the eye, and probably beyond the comprehension of those clamoring for unlimited, open access.
-
Mr. Mucci
Thank you for chronicling the financial and legal arguments. Those arguments should be fairly easy for most here to understand. ;)
I suspect they will never understand the class arguments and I don't think it is the job of waitstaff to constantly have to tell people to turn-off cell phones, a blackberry counts, take off your hat, eat with the correct fork and don't sit at Mr. Hearst's round table in the corner? :o
-
David Federman - I do not know of any club in the UK that restricts local visitors, remember we are not a very big country. Some clubs including my own still have artesian membership for local people - usually resident in the town or up to 5 miles from the club. Tee times are restricted, seperate clubhouse and sometimes a requirement to work on the course for an agreed number of hours a year. These memberships are often highly sought after and in some cases can be harder to obtain than membership of the parent club!
Mark,
Are the artesian members under water?
Bob
Bingo, Bob!
-
Tom & Dan
So are you telling me that a club with a $2.5 million operating budget can have up to $375,000 of it from visitors?
Something sounds fishy here.
There's NOTHING fishy about it at all.
You just don't understand it, nor do you understand club financial's in the U.S.[/color
I spose a chunk of that allowable income disappears for an annual open tournament and/or a charity event (which may be tax exempt anyway as clubs often don't make money or much on these - as is the intention).
Do you actually THINK before you type ?
What annual open tournament would a club run ?
What are you talking about ?
Clubs that host tournaments for the local, state or regional golf associations that they're members of, typically LOSE money on those events. A club would be deemed extremely lucky just to break even.[/color]
Say, 100 golfers each at $750. That still leaves $225,000.
NO, that leaves $ 300,000 according to your assumption.[/color]
Say a club gets 100 guests a week at $250 a pop all in - thats another $130,000.
Most clubs in the U.S. are seasonal, not open 52 weeks a year.
Some Southern clubs open in Oct and close in May.
Many Norther clubs are closed in December, Jan, Feb and even March.
During season,
Most clubs are closed on Mondays
Tuesdays and Thursdays are often Ladies days
Wednesdays were historically professional and business days.
Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays have heavy member play.
So where are you going to slot these 100 guests a week ?
Where are you going to put these 25 foursomes, 33 threesomes or 50 twosomes ?
On Ladies days ?
On Business days ?
On Long Weekends ?
The members of these clubs, who pay substantive initiation fees, dues, minimums and assessments, aren't going to have the flexibility of playing when they want, their enjoyment of the club would be limited by strangers who have NO obligation toward the club.[/color]
This leaves $95,000 left over for visitor rounds at say $400 (all in) - that means over 200 outside rounds can be played. This total amount of outside play sounds incredibly high to be legal for a tax exempt body.
You're so oblivious to reality that it's simply amazing.
What part of 15 % of total operating revenue don't you understand ?
Do you think that individual golfers or foursomes are the sole source of outside revenue ?
How about the charity affairs held at the club and the revenue from them ?
How about the community affairs held at the club and the revenue from them ?
How about weddings and parties held at the club and the revenue from them ?
Don't they count toward the 15 % ?
What you also don't understand is that most clubs in the U.S. don't run at a profit, they lose money, especially the kitchens which are like a black hole in the accounting/financial world of clubs. That's why clubs have imposed dining room minimums to try to shore up their loses.
Please, adhere to the adage that it's better to remain silent on an issue you're not familiar with and have people think you're a fool, rather than to open up your mouth and prove it.[/color]
If we put this into perspective, Muirfield allows 2704 visitors a year which probably brings in something close to £500,000 a year when you consider food & drinks as well.
That's irrelevant.
At seasonal clubs in the U.S. with 12,000-14,000 rounds played per year, allowing 2,704 visitors to play the golf course would do one thing, it would insure a membership revolt and the removal of the Executive committee and the Board.[/color]
Pat
You are gonna give yerself a heart attack, calm down.
Many clubs hold an annual Invitational or some such event in which the point is to bring guests to the club for a few days of golf and socializing.
I understand that some clubs hold events for state/nation golf associations. It is my understanding that often times this is not included in the allowance because the golf associations are tax exempt - same for charities.
I also understand that many clubs are seasonal. What are you some kind of dope? I was just using a very conservative set of numbers to get an idea of how the system works. I merely commented that 15% of outside cash is quite a large amount of money and it would be interesting to know the breakdown. Instead, you get off on some tirade - probably assuming that I am angling for a reason to allow visitors. I don't care either way if US clubs allow visitors because I think the pricing of most of the ones of interest to me would be prohibitive. As usual, you were most helpful.
Ciao
-
Pat:
I think even more than that is doable. Consider this scenario.
Take a standard club that is closed 4 months out of the year (winter). This leaves 34 weeks per year of being open. If public play is allowed two days per week, say Tuesday and Thursday between 11 AM and 1 PM opening 12 time slots of 4 somes per day.
The numbers break down like this:
34 weeks X 2 days per week = 68 days
68 days X 12 time slots per day on 10 minute intervals = 816 tee times
816 tee times X 4 per group = 3264 rounds per year.
3264 rounds X $100 per round = $326,400 extra per year.
Are you saying there is that much demand that members would be pissed to not have 4 hours per week open to the public on Tuesdays and Thursdays in non early AM hours. And to boot all of thier coveted Friday, Saturday, and Sunday time slots are still wide open.
Sure your high end clubs wouldn't care about an extra $320k per year, but I would find it hard to believe a very good non-elite private wouldn't want that extra money laying around for renovations or the like.
-
I'd never tell any man what to do with his private property.
Now, this statement I had to challenge.
I watched a man FORCED to sell his property in an upscale community in Knoxville, simply because he left two junk cars in HIS yard, on HIS property. Of course, the rational given the City Council [who threatened him with condemnation, even though his house was fine and very livable], was that he was bringing down property values of other people who did NOT own HIS property.
I have lived in housing where it was forbidden to put up a clothesline. Recognize this?
It is all based on the same 'truth'. Wealthy owners WILL ALWAYS get what they want from local government, because they have the power to buy influence. And if that means 'telling someone what to do with their property', tough crap! You can be made responsible for other people's prejudices, like the idea that 'po white trash' would be in your neighborhood if you bought property where there was a clothesline, junk car etc. Therefor, instead of denying others their biases, they WILL be encouraged!
Been there, seen that.
But do not say you would never 'tell any man what to do with his private property' unless you are certain you would never do any of these things. I do not know you, so perhaps you would not. On the other hand, i have been on GCA a while, and have listened to lots of people's words. Some here WOULD.
Just a little aside. I, myself, have only ever played one private course, and that at the direct invitation of a very kind member. I shall never be able to play Pine Valley or afford to play CP. Likely not even Bandon. But I am not asking. I have still gotten to play some great courses, and am pretty much content.
Doug
-
The overall issue is far more complex than meets the eye, and probably beyond the comprehension of those clamoring for unlimited, open access.
Who is clamoring for "unlimited, open access"? I don't know of any top club, ANYWHERE, which has the unlimited, open access you talk of.
The idea that allowing visitors is an all or nothing proposition, where the place would be overrun with undesirables who prevent members getting a tee time, ignores the reality at some great clubs outside America.
It couldn't work in America unless and until the tax liability laws are amended. Furthermore, top clubs in America tend to have high initiation fees and enormous yearly dues, something the best clubs overseas tend not to have. If you're spending $20,000 a year, I can understand why you'd have difficulty seeing someone play unaccompanied for a few hundred dollars.
I have a question and a comment on this thread-
1. Do the "private" clubs on Britain, Ireland, Australia, Scotland,etc. have the same open door policy to local residents as they do for overseas visitors?
In Australia most of the top clubs don't allow local residents to play as manager's guests: its restricted to interstate and overseas. I never came across a similar restriction in the UK.
-
I wasn't really talking about a purely "economic" benefit to the clubs from holding charity events, but I would think that clubs do charge for the use of their club, carts, green fees, food, etc. for charitable and non-charitable events.
They do, and that counts toward the 15 % cap.
As to the profit they make, that's always been a grey area.
Wear and tear on the facility, having to pay staff overtime, forcing staff to work 7 days a week, all season long are just some of the problems associated with outside events[/color]
I don't have any idea how you misread my comment to suggest that private clubs should open their doors to the public and then give the money to the public.
All I was suggesting is that the clubs do more of it.
Why is your assumption that they don't ?
Dave, you're presuming that they don't and you're wrong.
Are you aware of how much these clubs presently host outside events ?
Do you want to examine the Winged Foot's and Baltusrol's of the golf world ?
They're extremely generous with their facilities, BUT, they have to be careful, for if they overdo it, they'll lose their tax status and "strictly private" classification, hence, the members will suffer, financially and from the perspective on not having access to THEIR club.
As a member would you want to run that risk ?[/color]
After all, don't most clubs enjoy substantial real estate tax savings than if their property were zoned in some other fashion?
No, they don't.
Where did you get that notion from ?
The highest potential use value was a concept that was onerous to all landowners, not just golf courses. It's been largely dismissed.
Ask the neighbors, the municipal residents of the town of situs how they'd like a mall, factory, industrial or commercial buildings in their back yard insteqad of a golf course.
[/color]
Isn't that a public benefit that they receive?
No, it's not, because they don't receive it. It's inapplicable.[/color]
Why not give something back by way of more charity functions?
Again, you make a false presumption.
Where are you getting your information from ?
What clubs don't host outside events ?
Can you name 10 clubs being contexted out of the thousands ?[/color]
-
With ANGC and The Masters, the fact is they are two separate legal entities and the monies derived from the Masters tournament may not excessively flow into and inure to the benefit of the members of ANGC exclusively. The Masters Tournament entity is a separate charitable entity.
Do clubs that hold regular tour events or other majors also take the dual entity approach?
-
What you also don't understand is that most clubs in the U.S. don't run at a profit, they lose money, especially the kitchens which are like a black hole in the accounting/financial world of clubs. That's why clubs have imposed dining room minimums to try to shore up their loses.
Doesn't this confirm that the traditional model does not work for most clubs?
I can't recall a substantial number of GB&I clubs citing dining room losses or any operating losses for that matter. I'm not claiming a direct cause & effect between limited guest play and operating surpluses/deficits but it seems most overseas clubs are financially healthier than their US counterparts.
-
"It does seem that many of the finest courses in Europe allow groups of visitors to play....so why can't that happen in America? Why should it be so difficult for a group of guys visiting Long Island to get a game on Shinnicock? Is it really all about liability?"
Craig:
No, it's not all about liability. It's all about the fact that Shinnecock doesn't want a ton of visitors playing their golf course, and it's all about the fact they don't need their money either as apparently many of the European clubs feel they do.
-
I can't believe this thread has gone 5 pages...I had no idea anyone actually paid to play golf!
Joe
-
I think Osama Obama and Hillary may have a platform here: guaranteed health care insurance, guaranteed mortgage rate and guaranteed access to nearest top 100 private club! One out of three ain't bad.....isn't that a Meatloaf song?
-
With ANGC and The Masters, the fact is they are two separate legal entities and the monies derived from the Masters tournament may not excessively flow into and inure to the benefit of the members of ANGC exclusively. The Masters Tournament entity is a separate charitable entity.
Do clubs that hold regular tour events or other majors also take the dual entity approach?
Apples and oranges as ANGC owns and conducts The Masters. Most Tour events are run by non-for profit entities that lease the course for the week. The other majors are the same as the USGA (for this year) has an agreement with the City of San Diego (as owners of Torrey Pines).
EDIT: One possible exception is The Players Championship and TPC Stadium Course. I would assume the TPC Stadium is set-up as a for profit venture but that is a guess.
-
Pat:
I think even more than that is doable. Consider this scenario.
Take a standard club that is closed 4 months out of the year (winter). This leaves 34 weeks per year of being open. If public play is allowed two days per week, say Tuesday and Thursday between 11 AM and 1 PM opening 12 time slots of 4 somes per day.
Kalen, I'm going to give you some good advice and hopefully educate you in the ways of club life and life in general.
If there's ever been two (2) Cardinal rules at Country/Golf clubs, it's this.
Rule # 1 Don't fuck with women's golf days.
Rule # 2 Go back and reread rule # 1.
Abide by those rules and life will be far more enjoyable at your club.
Violate them and .... well..... Hell hath no fury ...... ;D [/color]
The numbers break down like this:
34 weeks X 2 days per week = 68 days
68 days X 12 time slots per day on 10 minute intervals = 816 tee times
816 tee times X 4 per group = 3264 rounds per year.
3264 rounds X $100 per round = $326,400 extra per year.
Are you saying there is that much demand that members would be pissed to not have 4 hours per week open to the public on Tuesdays and Thursdays in non early AM hours. And to boot all of thier coveted Friday, Saturday, and Sunday time slots are still wide open.
You bet I am.
And, in addition, what you may not understand is the 15 % revenue cap.
With large outside functions/outings/parties chewing up big chunks of revenue, there's not that much room for outside GOLF[/color]
Sure your high end clubs wouldn't care about an extra $320k per year, but I would find it hard to believe a very good non-elite private wouldn't want that extra money laying around for renovations or the like.
# 1 They couldn't take the revenue, it would trigger onerous tax
consequences
# 2 Who wants to play a non-elite private club ? What's the lure ?
# 3 It could cause them to be classified as a public facility, which is has
onerous consequences.
A Judge in MA already ruled that outside play was a form of membership and as such cast the club over the member threshold (300 or 400) required for "strictly private" qualification.
It's a lot more complex than most think.[/color]
-
Private European golf clubs had open gates long before golf tourism took off.
-
John,
I think RJ is being descriptive, adding detail, we teach our kid's to do that in their english classes, I think it is not racists, rather it reflects the successful upbringing of RJ and should be a compliment to his parents.
Kelly,
Here is RJ's quote once more "I understand the Japanese guy that "owns" Riviera makes the rules and even decides who gets to remodel the course, etc."...Substitute Japanese with Jewish, Black, woman or any other minority that has commonly been oppressed in golfing society and see how it reads. Am I just imaging the Asian stereotypes held by most American golfers? Given that the growth of the game seems to lie in Asia should we continue to stand for this type of thinking? As I have traveled the country I have seen a disturbing trend arising where golf courses are being segregated as Asian and Non-Asian...I don't understand why this one brand of hate is so acceptable. note: As an engineer who loves to play poker I have spent many hours of my life as the only white guy at the table. I guess I am biased towards people with whom I have so much in common.
John,
Asian-based memberships have been around quite a while. Why? I am not certain. I was in communication with a Korean who wanted to buy a club in the NY metropolitan area for the purpose of creating Korean based membership. I am working at a club that originally was going in that direction but opted for another alternative. The club where I played in Houston took in about 24 japanease members, but found that they would have no interaction with the other members and scheduled a block of tee times each Saturday only for themselves, never inviting other non-Japanease members to join them. Eventually the owner gave back their initiation fees and ask them to leave. Racists, biaest or not? We don't know for sure. My point is that you are more than willingly to claim someone is a racist without really knowing. In my view that's dropping the bomb on someone and in RJ's case you have no basis for making that accusation. you care more about Asians than you do about RJ and that is not fair. Race (gender, religion, etc) Matters, ask Cornell West, and not just the color of your skin or the part of the country you come from, that is stereo typing because not all blacks, or asians think the same way they all have different experiences so you should not lump them all into a neat little category.
Are we forcing the Koreans into the same position we forced the Jews into 50 or more years ago. We got some nice clubs out of that deal but is hate ever good for golf? Are the Koreans the new Jews?
-
Remember - the topic is Guest Fees!
-
Remember - the topic is Guest Fees!
Not quite...It is so much about keeping people you do not want off of your course. Or, like in Europe, charging 10 times the going rate to a bunch of rubes so you can play on the cheap.
-
With ANGC and The Masters, the fact is they are two separate legal entities and the monies derived from the Masters tournament may not excessively flow into and inure to the benefit of the members of ANGC exclusively. The Masters Tournament entity is a separate charitable entity.
Do clubs that hold regular tour events or other majors also take the dual entity approach?
Apples and oranges as ANGC owns and conducts The Masters. Most Tour events are run by non-for profit entities that lease the course for the week. The other majors are the same as the USGA (for this year) has an agreement with the City of San Diego (as owners of Torrey Pines).
I understand. But clubs are paid for hosting tournaments, whether in the form of lease payments or other arrangements. For example, Westchester was paid $1.1 million as a buyout for this year's Barclays. I would think these could exceed the 15% threshold by themselves. So I was just wondering if clubs account for income from regular tour events through a "seperate entity".
-
John - not exactly. Anybody that joins me has a fee of about $70. Non-accompanied folks pay a lot more.
Anybody can play our course easily if you know a member and he/she invites you. Or, we have a number of Monday outings, which are open to all.
As a club decidedly outside the top 1%, I think we've very typical of what you see in the USA.
How does Canada handle things? From what I understand, they're more like the States than Europe in this regard.
-
John - not exactly. Anybody that joins me has a fee of about $70. Non-accompanied folks pay a lot more.
Anybody can play our course easily if you know a member and he/she invites you. Or, we have a number of Monday outings, which are open to all.
As a club decidedly outside the top 1%, I think we've very typical of what you see in the USA.
How does Canada handle things? From what I understand, they're more like the States than Europe in this regard.
So what? Where can't you play easily if a member invites you?
-
How does Canada handle things? From what I understand, they're more like the States than Europe in this regard.
I have been told that clubs in British Columbia have to make themselves available to some public play, but do not advertise the fact and set the rates quite high. It has something to do with land use and some old dusty statute. I can't be sure as the esteemed gentleman who told this to me is no longer.
Bob Jenkins should be able to correct or illuminate my ramblings.
In general, Canada is more like the US, although I think it is generally a little easier to get on the exclusive courses.
-
I think Osama Obama and Hillary may have a platform here: guaranteed health care insurance, guaranteed mortgage rate and guaranteed access to nearest top 100 private club! One out of three ain't bad.....isn't that a Meatloaf song?
Going back a page or two in regards to Mr. Daley's reference to Riviera, but with Mike's subtle dig (above) . Is Mike just being descriptive? I think not. I'm sure it was a typo. Right Mike?
-
John - Would you set up a system similar to British Columbia (thanks for the info Will) here in the States?
-
John - Would you set up a system similar to British Columbia (thanks for the info Will) here in the States?
That info is second hand from a dead guy and not easy for me to verify at this time.
-
John - Would you set up a system similar to British Columbia (thanks for the info Will) here in the States?
You will have to explain that model before I can answer. I will say that many private courses have a style of architecture and maintenance that is too fragile to handle outside play from unaccompanied visitors. I am a member of such a course and would hate to see slower greens, fewer hazards and zoysia fairways just so anybody with a wad of cash can play. This Saturday we allowed carts out on the fairways because you can trust the members to treat the course as if they owned it...We could not do that if we were a wad receptacle.
-
Ed Oden,
You can't compare a local private club to a club that hosts a PGA event.
As to the allotment of revenue for PGA events, it was my understanding that a good deal of the revenue goes into capital improvements for the event and as such, is excluded from the 15 %. Someone more familiar with accounting for PGA events would know better.
The buy-out payment might be charged to a differently category.
You should also know that Westchester is a huge operation, 36 holes, Tennis, Swimming, with hundreds, if not in excess of a 1,000 members (including family members), complete with a hotel and other facilities.
Their annual operating budget could be well in excess of $ 7,000,000
-
Patrick,
Is Westchester a 501(c)(7) non-profit? I had thought that the host of a yearly pga event would have a hell of a time maintaining its exemption without a ruling by the IRS or very careful management of other outside income. The IRS does provide an exception for occasional "windfalls" of income like hosting a US Open, but it is hard to see how that could apply to holding a yearly PGA tourney. I think it would likely count against the 15% gross receipts limit, regardless of whether it is balanced by losses or capital expenditures. The expenses or capital expenditures could limit the tax paid on the tourney income (which could be due in any event as UBTI), but I don't think it would act to safeguard the status of the club. Thanks.
Jeff
-
Ed Oden,
You can't compare a local private club to a club that hosts a PGA event.
As to the allotment of revenue for PGA events, it was my understanding that a good deal of the revenue goes into capital improvements for the event and as such, is excluded from the 15 %. Someone more familiar with accounting for PGA events would know better.
Not sure why Westchester would be any different than Knollwood, Quaker Ridge, Winged Foot or any other courses in the county. The IRS doesn't care if you host a PGA TOUR event or an MGA event.
So if a club that doesn't host a PGA TOUR event takes all the income from outside play and devotes it to capital improvements for the sake of a local association tournament (instead of a TOUR event) the income wouldn't be charged to the 15% cap?
-
John - Would you set up a system similar to British Columbia (thanks for the info Will) here in the States?
You will have to explain that model before I can answer. I will say that many private courses have a style of architecture and maintenance that is too fragile to handle outside play from unaccompanied visitors. I am a member of such a course and would hate to see slower greens, fewer hazards and zoysia fairways just so anybody with a wad of cash can play. This Saturday we allowed carts out on the fairways because you can trust the members to treat the course as if they owned it...We could not do that if we were a wad receptacle.
John;
Now I am ashamed. I think I left a body-sized unraked area in that right-side bunker on #15! ;)
Doug
-
Geez, I forgot I even posted to this thread and when I saw it went 6 pages thought I'd look in, and then was shocked that my name was used in context that I'm a racist because I couldn't remember the name of that Japanese fellow that 'owns' Riviera, that I'd seen a number of references to over the years from the many discussions that ensued about him arbitrarily having Fazio alter architecture, and being referred to as a bit of a tyrannt in matters of ruling the club. But, then I realised that what had happened was that I was tarred with the broad brush of "implying" from that innocuous description of the guy that runs Riviera, that I am surely a racist for using that description. WOW, you guys must be so afraid of any of my social opinions on the other thread, that you have to resort to making that leap of calling me a racist for describing a guy as "Japanese".
Then, after I made clear from my opening statement that I am all for private clubs remaining just that, private, I entered into areas I clearly stated "here is where it gets tricky for me is what is truly a "private" club, and what are the tax exempt benefits for being not-for-profit private in the totally exclusive sense."
Well holy crap, excuse me for asking any questions. Pat Mucci tried to be nice and informative to call to my attention where he thought I might be misinformed about "tax exempt" because I did ask if there is some conflict with the concept of a Privelege of being tax exempt and stating "off the tax rolls" I misstated that, and realise now that I was wrong to assume that these clubs don't pay ANY REAL ESTATE TAXES. Sorry, for my ignorace, even though I asked about this, not declared that it was factual.
My entire post was asking folks that know, and wondering how the relationship works with a club that is 'not-for'profit' referred to as such as 'tax-exempt' and further what the relationship is with members concerning equity members vis-a-vis rights to deeds ownership of the property of the club, and rules making.
I implied that I can think of a few things where a private club is granted 'priveleges' by government. They can be given permits to do things with environmental impact, they can be given diverse zoning, and can be evaluated for taxation of real estate on varying models. I ask; is that correct? If it is so, does that have any baring on if it is truly so private that it can make any rules that might be contrary to public policy.
Shockingly, I think they can make their own rules despite granting of various governmental permits to varying public common resources, like access to the regional aquifer as one example.
I'm willing to learn how private clubs operate because I am in the dark here.
I asked questions here, and feel sorry for cheapshotters that want to tar me as racist, or imply that my views on serious public policy matters like our rights as citizens to define healthcare as a fundamental right to pass legislation over, is that scary or threatening to some of you. Sorry to scare you Corey. But, was I swiftboated for my other views that I thought I had a right to express? Next, you guys will have me going to meetings of the communist party. ::) :-\ :-[
-
Dick,
If some Japanese guy bought Wild Horse would it concern you more than if Mr. Pascucci decided to invest? Do you have any negative sterotypes toward Asian golfers or ownership? Since your post both Lou and Kelly have come to your defense saying that Asians refuse to play with white people...Is that true? I think you have a problem with Asians buying the great courses in this country...Am I wrong?
-
Does the 'tax-break' provide benefits to the US Club apart from paying tax on profits? I can't imagine a club that builds its budget 60% from member subs and 40% from green fees to meet its 100% expenditure having any 'profit' which would require any significant income tax to be paid.
Of course, if the club was 'for profit', well .......
In Australia, our member-owned clubs do not pay income tax. But, we do pay rates and taxes to the local council, all employee related costs such as workers compensation levies and we also pay 10% GST (similar to VAT and sales tax but on everything, including subs, beers, food and comp fees).
I also accept that it is the Club's choice as to their openess to visitors. I do not understand the difference in pricing that occurs between locals, nationals and foreigners that occurs in many places (including Australia). It reminds me of trying to buy a gelati at the Leaning Tower of Pisa. The locals always seemed to get a triple cone for the price a tourist paid for a single cone. And apparently, that is fine, even when it comes to golf fees. Of course, it isn't racist (locals can be any race, as are foreigners) so thats ok! :(
James B
-
Dick
To be fair you also wrote "then promulgate a totally exclusive atmosphere to be arbitrary and capricious in who they allow to use the facility that uses public resources of water".
Can they shut off the electricity also?
I would argue they should receive the same treatment of any other not for profit in the area. Nothing more, nothing less. Sadly, local governments are more political than that.
-
JK, you are uttlely wrong. I wouldn't like to see any individual buy WH or any other facility previously open to the public community enjoyment and then shut it down to only an exclusive group, whether that group was mono ethnic, or whatever. But, if a fellow did, I don't care what ethnic group he is from, if he owns it, he can do it if it is his private entity, in my view. But, I don't have to like it... ::)
Corey, good question. I was asking the question as well. I don't know. I am not about to do a semester of study trying to find the balance of the public's ownership of a publicly legally regulated utility, and how that plays in with a private golf club, owned essentially by an individual, who makes all the rules of the club.
But, while I also don't know much legally about water ground resources and ownership, I do know that there are strict regulation to access to that water that can be imposed by the lawful authorities, State, County, or Federally, depending on where the water is located. It is a question I have, whether an individual owner of a club granted the privelege of not-for-profit status, and receiving some access by one means or another to a common resource that is regulated by some entity of the public's government, can be completely arbitrary in exclusivity to access to that private facility and make absolute rules on the facilities governance/operations. I repeat; I don't know, and you shouldn't be scarred that I don't know and ask? ;) ::) ;D
-
'Regarding Asian golf, I've had some experience with that at a couple clubs in Texas. Invariably, they let it be known to the pro shop that they did not want other people to join them and largely kept to themselves."
JK,
Above is what I said. I don't necessarily think that Asians discriminate on the basis of color. It might be as simple as prefering to play exclusively with their friends or maybe just a certain shyness due to language and cultural differences. As a partial correction to my statement, one group did include a caucacian member who I never saw play with any other members.
I openly admit some bias toward Orientals on the golf course largely as a result of numerous experiences playing behind very slow groups. I tend to be impatient with slow players of all stripes, and, unfortunately, it is too easy and unfair to generalize. Something more for me to work on.
-
Dick,
saying that Asians refuse to play with white people..Am I wrong?
John, your stereotyping, I spoke only of 24 persons in Houston, don't assume this is true for an entire race. I don't. Your not wrong, your just cut straight from the mold from which Al Sharpton came from...you can't help yourself. You purposely take someone's statement and assign assumtions to it....you are the worst kind of evil in this world. Well not really, but your on the paved road toward it!
24 people in Houston were removed from a club because they enjoyed playing with people of their own race. How did I know that they weren't white? Racism is a strong word when it is so clowded in ignorance and tradition. I don't blame Dick for his views of Riviera and how a "tyrant" hired Fazio when he could have hired an untested Geoff Shack..I think Dick is just a bit naive and believes too much of what he reads. I will say today is the first time I have heard a benevolent dictator called a tyrant. I guess a dictator is easier to swallow if he looks like his subjects.
On my views, perhaps the ole school yard saying of "It takes one to know one" needs to be played.
-
Let's be honest here. Do we really think that the tax and liability issues are the reasons that private clubs are very restrictive about outside, unsponsored play? Me thinks that if there was no tax or liability issues to allowing more play, the vast majority of high-end clubs wouldn't change their outside play policies one bit.
Now, let me say that I completely support a private club not allowing or greatly restricting outside play if they so choose. That's one of the advantages of a private club....you pay dues so that when you go to the club, you know the others there, you know you won't have a problem getting on, and you know that those playing the course are more apt to take care of it because they have a sense of ownership.
The tax and liability reasons are valid justification for closed-door policies, but I don't think they are the true reasons for these policies.
-
Not sure why Westchester would be any different than Knollwood, Quaker Ridge, Winged Foot or any other courses in the county. The IRS doesn't care if you host a PGA TOUR event or an MGA event.
Knollwood, Quaker Ridge and Winged Foot don't run a hotel and other enterprises as Westchester does, and as such, their corporate structure and accounting practices may be different from the other clubs.[/color]
So if a club that doesn't host a PGA TOUR event takes all the income from outside play and devotes it to capital improvements for the sake of a local association tournament (instead of a TOUR event) the income wouldn't be charged to the 15% cap ?
Revenue from outside play, not associated with a specific event, would be general and not dedicated revenue.
I believe that the revenue from the event hosted must be earmarked for capital improvements associated with that specific event in order to be excluded from the 15 % revenue cap..[/color]
-
Let's be honest here. Do we really think that the tax and liability issues are the reasons that private clubs are very restrictive about outside, unsponsored play ?
Mike, I think those can be the primary as well as the secondary issues.
The issue of not running afoul of being declared a "pubic" facility is also a major issue.
But, those aren't the only issues.
Member inconvenience, liability and others come into play along with the ones mentioned above.
My guess is that, members of a private club that was having financial problems would opt for increased dues before opening the club up to outside play.
Some clubs gain considerable revenue from outside play, accompanied and unaccompanied. I know a good number of members who joined a particular club because they permit unaccompanied guests. However, these guests must be sponsored by a member.
I don't know any member of a private club that would opt to open their club up to play by total strangers not affiliated in any manner, shape or form with a current member.
I think guest play, including unaccompanied guest play is a plus for a club and it's members, provided it's properly regulated and doesn't inconvenience the membership in any way.[/color]
Me thinks that if there was no tax or liability issues to allowing more play, the vast majority of high-end clubs wouldn't change their outside play policies one bit.[/b][/color=green]
I know for a fact that that's not true at a number of clubs.
The concern over being classified as a "public" facility is a huge concern, one that strikes to the very core of clubs.[/b][/color]
Now, let me say that I completely support a private club not allowing or greatly restricting outside play if they so choose. That's one of the advantages of a private club....you pay dues so that when you go to the club, you know the others there, you know you won't have a problem getting on, and you know that those playing the course are more apt to take care of it because they have a sense of ownership.
The tax and liability reasons are valid justification for closed-door policies, but I don't think they are the true reasons for these policies.
The concern over being declared a "public" facility can't be minimized.
It's a huge concern. The club's liquor license and every other license is put at risk.
And, today, with so many clubs encountering financial difficulty, you can't ignore or minimize the financial consequences of a club losing it's not for profit status, and/or incuring liabilities that they didn't have to expose themselves to .[/color]
-
JK, you are quite correct that I went overboard in using the word "tyrant" to describe what I had been led to believe is more likely a "benevolent dictator" of the club policies at Riviera. And, I can't speak from personal knowledge that he is a bit of a dictator, and I was indeed only making that example based on other discussions about how the new owner rules the roost there. My bad.
I'd still like to know what his "buying" that club entails. Does he own the property in title and deed? Is it for profit or not-for-profit. Can he own the property and make the rules, but lease the property and facilities to a not for profit golf or golfing club?
I am probably naive when it comes to all these forms of country club organization and ownership, and what constitutes all these entities. I have been asking repeatedly now for clarification, so I can not be so naive or misinformed. I do have questions based on my limitted, and perhaps uninformed understandings of some aspects of these structures of CC ownership, and wonder how they relate to public policies if permits to do various things are granted by public government authorities.
I can pretty much guarantee I'll never be a member of one of these cc's that I have questions about, as they are all out of my league. But, I can only assure you it isn't some sort of envy thing. I do note that some clubs seem more welcoming than others, though there is no apparent difference in their legal - organizational structure. So I'd have to chalk the differences in guest policies to internal culture. I made it pretty clear, I support their right to make their own rules if they are private. I don't know how much more I can say, and still ask questions that I didn't think were all that unreasonable.
-
Saw this in the paper today and made me think of this thread:
(http://images.ucomics.com/comics/nq/2008/nq080303.gif)
-
I am still not certain I understand the answer to ANGC and The Masters. How does it work? The revenue from the Masters is reinvested into the course while the members still have to pay dues, is that correct? Can I assume that the dues at Augusta are very low, or am I way off on that one? I am more interested in how the joint entity works in that situation though, since someone or some 'company' makes loads of money somehow and it goes somewhere.
-
I am still not certain I understand the answer to ANGC and The Masters. How does it work? The revenue from the Masters is reinvested into the course while the members still have to pay dues, is that correct? Can I assume that the dues at Augusta are very low, or am I way off on that one? I am more interested in how the joint entity works in that situation though, since someone or some 'company' makes loads of money somehow and it goes somewhere.
http://www.golfdigest.co.za/stories/df_Special_Report_Masters_in_Finance259.php