Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture Discussion Group => Topic started by: Mike Sweeney on April 03, 2014, 06:33:30 AM
-
Google knows much about us, yet they keep their own algorithm secret.
Facebook knows much about us, yet they keep their own algorithm secret.
Hundreds of millions of dollars are spent, massive amounts of discussion surrounds trying to figure out how those models work to "get to the top of Google search" and "maximize ROI on Facebook".
It is a game that millions of people like to play.
The private golf club market in the USA has a history of secrecy around it. My impression is the next generation does not want to play that game and the private club market is suffering.
Over on the Dismal River thread, some of the "old guard" are keeping their private club secrets from being revealed online. Typically, one dinner, one beer, and maybe one email and they sing the truths of the private club finances in private conversations.
For the benefit of the private club market, is it time to discuss how private clubs work online?
-
Mike,
No. At least not at Golf Club Atlas. We are here to discuss golf architecture. Getting into financial matters will only discourage people involved with projects from participating here and that would be a step backwards.
Financial matters should remain private.
-
::) ??? ::)
I think private club strategies to grow memberships are certainly open for,discussion here. As to individual clubs balance sheets that is more of a sticky wicket. Certainly if you are thinking of joining a club you would want to know if assessments are a matter of course and the financial,health of the club is an important consideration .
It is an important conversation for golf, if slightly OT for GCA?
-
What goes on at club X is of passing interest and not something I would raise as a topic of discussion. I don't have anything against discussing private club business here, but I wonder why its so fascinating for some. On the other hand, it could be the case that serious negative discussion when a club is in a financial bind could be very harmful. I think its silly that this can be the case, but perceptions can damage reality.
Ciao
-
A few years back, someone posted the overall plan of a NC club here. Very informative, and discussable from the standpoint of the type of members they were going for affected the style of golf course design.
From memory, they realized they were a transition club, one step above an entry club, but not the final destination for serious golfers. Interesting to see that the private club market is really several markets.
That said, I don't know who posted it, whether they had permission, etc. and I suspect most clubs, while they would work together for the greater good of the industry, would want to see their financials posted here, or anywhere. They have the club manager meetings for that type of information sharing.
You guys already think you are really helping the gca's of the world....and now you want to "expand the brand" and tell club managers how to run their businesses? I doubt it would be as well received as in the design industry, and as you all know, gca.com isn't exactly well loved in the golf design industry, either!
-
.
-
Mike,
No. At least not at Golf Club Atlas. We are here to discuss golf architecture. Getting into financial matters will only discourage people involved with projects from participating here and that would be a step backwards.
Financial matters should remain private.
Tim,
1. It is really nice to see you posting again.
2. Here is why you are completely wrong :)
It was 10+ years ago that I played golf at Yale with Tommy, Dr Childs and a friend of theirs who was a very thoughtful guy and obviously he really loved golf course architecture. He was a GCA.com guy before there was GCA.com and this kooky website brought us together. Now I was just starting to drink the juice so I just listened to these three guys rip into and have absolute passion for Yale Golf Course (today it is "The Course at Yale" - yikes).
I was somewhat surprised when this thoughtful guy posted a thread at GCA.com titled "Is Yale The Greatest Tragedy in Golf?". ;)
Now at the time I was just starting to understand my appreciation for golf courses, I was a new "Ivy League Member" at Yale, aka second tier non-Yalie, so I did not know what to think or how to respond. I tiptoed my way around that thread (my first, not logged in response, was on page 3) http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,5219.0.html Yes, Yale is a private golf club in the European tradition, but this was a controversial topic back then.
That thread by a thoughtful and well meaning guy, imo, was a catalyst of many many things at Yale Golf Course. I won't go into all the drama but fast forward to today and Yale:
- sits pretty solidly on most of the rankings list except for Golf Digest, which can be argued is a good thing
- has hosted the NCAA regionals and they are coming back in a few years
- is beloved on gca.com and has hosted many outings and trips via many gca.com members
- has the perfect Super in Scott Ramsey, he is trusted and tireless in his passion
- hopefully is profitable on the Yale P&L, but certainly is at least a great alumni contributor catalyst
- had a now also famous thread by Tom Doak about Yale's boldness/craziness just last summer after a recent re-look/visit
I really don't think it is too much of a stretch to say that thread by Tim Weiman contributed to the updating of Yale Golf Course. Let's not kid ourselves however, great architecture does cost money.
Fast forward to last summer and three of us (Mark, Jon, Mike) hosted an outing for GCA.com on a Sunday at Yale and Scott Ramsey came out on a Sunday to speak with the group at lunch before the round. Now since I "know everything about Yale" I stayed at the range to hit balls with my son and to make sure newbies knew the logistics as the range is a long walk from the clubhouse. I walked in at the end of the talk grabbed a burger and traded some cheap shots with Pat Mucci.
Now I married a Connecticut girl and I have been playing Yale, been a member, love the place for over 20 years (yikes #2). It was not until Pat Mucci (see the ultimate in private club old guard) published highlights of Scott Ramsey's talk on GCA.com that I ever knew the yearly greens budget of Yale.
My reaction: How can I continue to support Yale to meet its annual nut? I did recruit a new member this year so I have that going for me.
My wife always says about her business, "Information is the cure.". Kids today get their information from the internet, not PDF files, and certainly not phone calls. Architecture cost money, so my thought is let's talk about how much it cost and why private golf is so expensive. I always think to John Kavanaugh's position that he pays to "not have people on his golf course".
Maybe Tom Doak will step in and post his P&L in Google Docs for us to review :) Just kidding Tom....
PS. Just saw Archie's thread on Atlantic City CC. Maybe the perfect case study as it has bounced around a variety of models over the last 20 years. I also love that place.
-
You know, Mackenzie wrote that great architecture should cost less, or at least great advice should (ie professional advice), and so the question being raised on the Dismal thread are I think appropriate and relevant. David is trying to understand what that project offers in lessons of economic sustainability of architecture. Some interesting stuff has come out, like routing choices.
In an economic sense we tend to focus on people like Doak because of his revenue impact. We don't test Mackenzie's words often or deeply enough. Asking about the cost efficiency of the work by people like Doak and Mahaffey (and Nuzzo) seems like a great way to do that.
(And, no, just because the questions are raised doesn't mean a person in the know has to answer them. And, no, I'm not talking about professional fees as a source of cost savings. I'm talking about how Party A can build something better and cheaper than Party B.)
-
You know, Mackenzie wrote that great architecture should cost less, or at least great advice should (ie professional advice), and so the question being raised on the Dismal thread are I think appropriate and relevant. David is trying to understand what that project offers in lessons of economic sustainability of architecture. Some interesting stuff has come out, like routing choices.
In an economic sense we tend to focus on people like Doak because of his revenue impact. We don't test Mackenzie's words often or deeply enough. Asking about the cost efficiency of the work by people like Doak and Mahaffey (and Nuzzo) seems like a great way to do that.
(And, no, just because the questions are raised doesn't mean a person in the know has to answer them. And, no, I'm not talking about professional fees as a source of cost savings. I'm talking about how Party A can build something better and cheaper than Party B.)
The biggest cost efficiency in architecture is a sandy site...nothing else comes close...given that water is available at a reasonable cost.
-
You know, Mackenzie wrote that great architecture should cost less, or at least great advice should (ie professional advice), and so the question being raised on the Dismal thread are I think appropriate and relevant. David is trying to understand what that project offers in lessons of economic sustainability of architecture. Some interesting stuff has come out, like routing choices.
In an economic sense we tend to focus on people like Doak because of his revenue impact. We don't test Mackenzie's words often or deeply enough. Asking about the cost efficiency of the work by people like Doak and Mahaffey (and Nuzzo) seems like a great way to do that.
(And, no, just because the questions are raised doesn't mean a person in the know has to answer them. And, no, I'm not talking about professional fees as a source of cost savings. I'm talking about how Party A can build something better and cheaper than Party B.)
The biggest cost efficiency in architecture is a sandy site...nothing else comes close...given that water is available at a reasonable cost.
Mike-I think you are 100% correct so doesn't this become an apples to oranges exercise when trying to compare building on sand versus anything else and especially a clay based site? Additionally with sand there is a high expectation that the flora or lack thereof is also completely different? Seems that there is some hope of applying specific principles across the board when many are most certainly site specific.
-
All,
I agree that there is a ton of information that could be shared in the name of sustainability and/or good practice, yet few share it. That is the reason I love the site and contribute, including a new course from beginning to completion.
Disacussion of a given model may be worthy, as long as it doesn't destroy what the club is in the process.
Mike, it isn't "old guard" to keep member information private. Some members are open and I am encouraged with that. Other members aren't, and that simply must be honored as well. Pretty simple, really.
I think we have shared as much, if not more, about the goings on at Dismal River than most anyone. What I am unwiiling to share, for very good reason, is something that involves another, for example, a member who simply might object to it being shared. That would be both poor form and not very good business. Pretty common stuff.
That said, I'm more than happy to share various aggregate costs, and have, on the new course. For similar reasons to the above, things like design, consulting, and irrigation fees are not my place to share, and are at times bound by confidentiality. Those are the private affairs of another, and could impact their own proprietary information. That's why the numbers, in aggregate, work best. It may be different in 30 or 50 years.
There is also no one standard for cost, for the process is "alive". For example, there is cost to build, and there is cost to build and grow in. There is cost for drainage. We have completed one and, understandably, are still very underway in the others. Last is cost to maintain, and we can't provide information for we simply aren't fully past the grow in stage.
The new course at Dismal is on sand, and water is in abundance today. That certainly helped costwise, and will also be a benefit going forward.
CJ
-
Could we discuss the business model at ANGC?
-
Brian, around its founding and construction? Sure, there is a pretty decent amount of information in the public domain.
Mike, thanks for that. Given a locale, eg sand-based, will costs vary much depending on the design and the team chosen?
-
I do not see how you can separate the issue of architecture from the business model for the course. Mackenzie and Tillinghast sold their services as resulting in efficiencies for their clients. The financials determine whether couses get built, their location, how they are maintained and whether or not they survive.
Maintenence practices and budgets are critical factors in determining whether or not courses survive. I just played La Quinta Mountain and the shop apologized for the condition of the course because the were unable to overseed this year due to summer flooding. The course is in perfect condition and looks great to me.
Often those budgets are facing pressure due to the decision of club boards to build a huge clubhouse. If one does not understand those financial pressures, one cannot advocate in his own club to avoid such fate.
One conclusion I have reached over time isthat courses tend to get built on the cheapest land and that has been true since Links courses were built. It is an interesting concept that helps one to understand where courses were built in the past and where they are likely to be built in the future.
I agree with Chris that you should be respectful of those in the trenches but great architecture only happens if the financial model is effective. We need to talk about such issues.
-
Brian, around its founding and construction? Sure, there is a pretty decent amount of information in the public domain.
Mike, thanks for that. Given a locale, eg sand-based, will costs vary much depending on the design and the team chosen?
I would be curious to know what type of money the club generates from The Masters on an annual basis. My motivation is purely based on curiosity.
-
Brian, around its founding and construction? Sure, there is a pretty decent amount of information in the public domain.
Mike, thanks for that. Given a locale, eg sand-based, will costs vary much depending on the design and the team chosen?
I would be curious to know what type of money the club generates from The Masters on an annual basis. My motivation is purely based on curiosity.
Would you really believe anything you read here? I doubt if the members know.
-
Mike,
Thanks for your response to my post and for that quite interesting blast from the past.
I have been privileged to enjoy many memorable experiences visiting famous golf courses, but that day at Yale was certainly a classic. It is flattering that you give me so much credit for how things progressed at Yale, but my memory certainly credits others.
Tommy Naccarato's tough love speech to the Yale brass was priceless and probably served as the inspiration for the Yale tragedy thread. Geoff Childs put a great effort into encouraging Yale to understand what they had. Ditto for George Bahto who had a great appreciation for the place from his research on CBM and Raynor. Finally, I believe Brad Klein wrote his own tough love editorial in Golfweek soon thereafter.
-
I vote no, and am in full agreement with John Kavanaugh and Chris Johnston. Literally none of your business, and not for the public record.
-
Although I'm naturally curious, it's none of my business how a particular club manages its finances or runs its business, especially clubs of which I am not a member.
-
Surely there can't be a problem discussing the business models of the private golf clubs owned by public companies like Toll Brothers?
-
I vote no, and am in full agreement with John Kavanaugh and Chris Johnston. Literally none of your business, and not for the public record.
I think you are attributing a meaning to Chris's post which simply isn't there. In fact it seems to me as if he's saying yes, so long as you don't reveal member information. Why a general discussion about a particular business model should be a problem is entirely beyond me. You'd discuss the business model of a company, wouldn't you?
-
Hi Mark,
I guess my reluctance to talk about club finances comes from personal experience. I joined two clubs in the past decade which had financial problems and reorganized. In general, talking about what happened and how the clubs are financed seems private to me.
I agree that general discussions about financing clubs is reasonable. However, David Elvins was asking John Kavanaugh some personal questions, which involved further discussion about his role in Dismal River finances. John didn't want to talk about it further. Chris followed up with some general comments. It's only fair game if the principals want to discuss it.
I have to go. I'm going to Disneyland. It's right across the street.
-
My wife always says about her business, "Information is the cure.". Kids today get their information from the internet, not PDF files, and certainly not phone calls. Architecture cost money, so my thought is let's talk about how much it cost and why private golf is so expensive. I always think to John Kavanaugh's position that he pays to "not have people on his golf course".
Maybe Tom Doak will step in and post his P&L in Google Docs for us to review :) Just kidding Tom...
Mike:
I stopped looking at the Dismal River thread right after a couple of friends quit the web site over it. I didn't realize it had rolled around to the economics of the operation.
I agree with your wife. I wish I could talk about the economics of golf course architecture and development, in much greater depth than I have done. I try to teach a bit about it to my interns and associates -- but they'd better not post here the P&L statements for my company that I have shared.
By the same token, many/most of my clients feel that information on design fees and cost of construction is proprietary, so I'm obliged not to talk out of school about it. It's too bad, because really talking about it would blow some people's minds; but I can only do so in private, with potential clients.
With respect to Mark Pearce's question, talking about the business models of various companies without discussing the specifics of how they are working, is pretty pointless. And as John Kirk says, discussing the finances of particular clubs is unfair unless you are going to do it across the board. They're like banks ... loose talk can lead to a loss of confidence and cause a run on one ... even though many of their competitors are really in the same or worse position, and just better able to avoid talking about it.
-
Agree with Tom here. While it might be an interesting topic, if you don't talk about them all, there really is no point to the exercise. And I say that hearing there really are so many positive things happening at a host of clubs.
Further, the exercise is futile given the way some here choose to treat those that attempt to share much anything at all...it certainly doesn't motivate conversation, and only serves to harm. It's a shame, really.
-
A few years back, someone posted the overall plan of a NC club here. Very informative, and discussable from the standpoint of the type of members they were going for affected the style of golf course design.
From memory, they realized they were a transition club, one step above an entry club, but not the final destination for serious golfers. Interesting to see that the private club market is really several markets.
That said, I don't know who posted it, whether they had permission, etc. and I suspect most clubs, while they would work together for the greater good of the industry, would want to see their financials posted here, or anywhere. They have the club manager meetings for that type of information sharing.
You guys already think you are really helping the gca's of the world....and now you want to "expand the brand" and tell club managers how to run their businesses? I doubt it would be as well received as in the design industry, and as you all know, gca.com isn't exactly well loved in the golf design industry, either!
Jeff, could have been the club I belong to (Carolina GC in Charlotte), since our GM has put a lot on GCA about our model. However, the description "they realized they were a transition club, one step above an entry club, but not the final destination for serious golfers" would not be very accurate for our club, which targets golfers who are not interested in the entire, traditional American country club model. Since we don't offer the full package (but do have a swimming pool) and are less expensive than the full-scale model, some join for cost reasons and may later go to a full-scale club if that's what they really want when they can afford it. However, the serious golfers, if that's all they are interested in - golf - stick around. I think that sort of information is worth it on this site - it does relate to the course, in that we really focus all of our efforts on the course, both from a design and maintenance standpoint, and can afford to do so because we are spending little money on other things. I our area Carolina GC's approach is pretty well known.
-
Mike; The title of this thread is somewhat misleading. If the question is whether we can/should discuss the viability of various models for private clubs on a theoretical basis, supplementing the theory with real world applications (perhaps without identifying the club) then that is at least tangentially related to architecture and it should be fair game. However, absent permission from the owner/members, disclosure of non-public financial information about any club is in bad taste at best and actionable at worst. While I am as curious as the next fellow and have been privy to the workings of more than a few institutions as part of my work, I don't believe its anybody's business. Candidly, we get in enough trouble around here when we critique the work of experts in the design field. I shudder to think what would happen to this site if we began to disclose confidential financial information about clubs and follow that uo with the temerity to comment on their mistakes. Let's stick to pursuing our central area of interest.
-
Furthermore,
There have been posters who have asked direct questions about clubs' fees and dues without regard to a clubs' privacy in the past. Some may not have any experience with the private club model. Essentially, unless a price is quoted somewhere on a public website, assume that you shouldn't be asking questions out of school. Private inquiries through the proper channels for those serious about potential membership will yield the answers you seek. If you're not a real potential member, then it's not your concern.
-
Mike; The title of this thread is somewhat misleading. If the question is whether we can/should discuss the viability of various models for private clubs on a theoretical basis, supplementing the theory with real world applications (perhaps without identifying the club) then that is at least tangentially related to architecture and it should be fair game.
I tried, it would not fit !!
Has anyone under 45 years of age posted on this thread?
That is the segment that golf is not reaching, and let's not even talk about women!
-
Mike; Nice answer re the title. Historically, clubs have recruited the vast majority of non-legacy members from those 40 and older because that is when the level of financial stability allows the investment. Whether golf is reaching the younger generation so that when their time comes they will join is an interesting question. Our club has added a large number of members in their 40's in the last few years due to a concerted effort. I don't know if that means anything in the greater community.
-
...discussing the finances of particular clubs is unfair unless you are going to do it across the board. They're like banks ... loose talk can lead to a loss of confidence and cause a run on one ... even though many of their competitors are really in the same or worse position, and just better able to avoid talking about it...
I agree with this point of view but it is not without it's moral complications.
-A friend lost $50,000 on a poor investment in a golf club.
-I did not know him well at the time but his loss may not have happened if I had shared my knowledge of the club on here.
-It is not easy to rationalise this on a personal level.
I am far from the only one that has encountered this issue. Many members of the GCA community have been burnt by poor investments in golf clubs. On most occasions information made public by GCA posters would have helped them make a more informed decision.
Is our loyalty to the golf industry, our friends, or the GCA community? Answer: None of the above.
It's not easy to say but the reality of the situation is that self interest rules the day. People (including me) do not discuss private golf club matters because it is in their best interest not to.
-
David,
People lose on investments all the time. That means they either didn't do their own due diligence or they just timed the market poorly. Part of joining a club is understanding the balance sheet of the club and getting references from current and former members. If one doesn't know one or two guys to talk to about a club's situation before joining, and if they can't afford for things to turn south, they probably shouldn't be joining. None of this needs to be broadcast to the public at large.
-
Jud,
I agree, and follow the same logic. But it doesn't always hold up when developers or owners push the limit of what is ethical or legal.
Did people who invested with Bernie Madoff not do enough due diligence?
-
David; 2 points. First, with respect to Madoff, in many cases the answer to your question is yes, people failed to perform due diligence. Many who sought real information were turned away by Madoff, replaced by those who only saw the "returns" and who were willing to accept the benefits without understanding the "hows and whys". But more importantly, if you have information that someone may be committing a fraud, the place to expose the fraud is not a website inhabited by a limited number of people. Moreover, if you are wrong and you make your revelation, the reputational harm you create could be tremendous. I am certain that each of us can empathize with your concern for your friend. If you had knowledge that might have prevented his loss, I suspect that you wish you had been given the opportunity to tell him. But it is equally clear that he did not ask your opinion. Taking that one example and suggesting it creates an open season for disclosing either confidential information or even worse, one's suspicions that a club is having difficulties would be a major mistake
-
'Investing' in golf clubs is much the same as 'investing' in cars.
-
Now we are talking!
1. Put me in the line of stupid people who drank the GCA.com juice at the top of the market.
2. I know from many private exchanges that I am not number one on the list here on GCA.com who lost money from bad deals on new clubs.
3. If I had read the fine print of "2 in for every 1 out", perhaps this thread does not start.
For every dollar lost on my obsession of golf courses (I keep telling my wife that many men have worse obsessions :) ) an Autistic kid via my son's charities does not get that dollar.
So I again ask, "Should the private golf club business model be discussed openly on GCA.com?"
I do not accept the premise that this is a "golf architecture only website". Sure there are exceptions such as Wild Horse but Yale Golf Course was the most expensive ever built when it was completed. I love it, but it was paid off years ago because the business model was unique:
- the land was donated to Yale
- the course was surrounded by a very financially sound (most of the time) academic institution that subsidized the financing of the course
Fishers Island, Shinnecock, Winged Foot and many others had difficult times before they figured it out.
I have never met Chris Johnston, have never been to Dismal River and in general do not like guys from Notre Dame (relax it is a Boston College insecurity issue, not Chris or Pat Mucci's fault!) but I appreciate the fact that he talks about the reality of golf course architecture rather than the coffee table book version.
What is the problem with supporting golf in the big picture as opposed to worrying about a dying model of private clubs that are short members by 20-30% on average?
-
Now we are talking!
...
What is the problem with supporting golf in the big picture as opposed to worrying about a dying model of private clubs that are short members by 20-30% on average?
Yes, now we ARE talking. There's absolutely nothing in the world of golf that can't be solve by closing 20-30% of the golf courses in America. It worked for public accounting! There were 5 and they were all struggling. Shut down 1 (20%) -- thanks Enron! and the other 4 have been on easy street ever since!
-
btw, anybody who wants to continue this conversation in person let's meet at Gaonnuri (a fabulous korean restaurant on the 39th floor at the southeast corner of Broadway and 32nd) tomorrow around 1. I'm buying!
-
David; 2 points. First, with respect to Madoff, in many cases the answer to your question is yes, people failed to perform due diligence. Many who sought real information were turned away by Madoff, replaced by those who only saw the "returns" and who were willing to accept the benefits without understanding the "hows and whys". But more importantly, if you have information that someone may be committing a fraud, the place to expose the fraud is not a website inhabited by a limited number of people. Moreover, if you are wrong and you make your revelation, the reputational harm you create could be tremendous. I am certain that each of us can empathize with your concern for your friend. If you had knowledge that might have prevented his loss, I suspect that you wish you had been given the opportunity to tell him. But it is equally clear that he did not ask your opinion. Taking that one example and suggesting it creates an open season for disclosing either confidential information or even worse, one's suspicions that a club is having difficulties would be a major mistake
Shelly, I 100% agree with you, I was just stating that there are obvious negatives to a less than open environment. Fraudsters, scammers and pyramid schemes thrive in an environment that is less than open and transparent. Many pyramid schemes promote themselves as a invite only exclusive club with limited publicly avalable information. This also happens to be the drawing card of many legitimate and great golf clubs. This makes the private golf club market an environment that is perfect for shady types to rip off golfers as it becomes very difficult to tell the difference between what is going to be great exclusive club and what is a club being run by a group of shonky operators.
-
I had to look up "shonky". The word was new to me but the meaning wasn't. :)
David, we architects run into all types in the course of looking at potential jobs, and sometimes even we have no idea who we're dealing with until late in the game. We do our best, but anyone can get fooled.
It's easy to turn down a job if you have doubts about the client at the beginning. It's not so easy once you're under contract.
Nevertheless, in 30 years in the golf business, the only "pyramid scheme" I've heard of was the one in Japan where a fellow was selling memberships to an exclusive new course for a half-million dollars apiece. It turned out he sold close to 10,000 of them before he was caught.
-
I think I have a new favorite word! And it rhymes with wonky, another favorite.
Anyone curious about any non-profit's financial situation can easily find its 990 (Federal tax form for non-profits) online. Look at a few years and you see if an operation, be it a charity or a club, is vibrant or not. You can even see how much Tim Finchem is being overpaid.
-
I have never met Chris Johnston, have never been to Dismal River and in general do not like guys from Notre Dame (relax it is a Boston College insecurity issue, not Chris or Pat Mucci's fault!) but I appreciate the fact that he talks about the reality of golf course architecture rather than the coffee table book version.
Mike,
I can be counted amont the casualties of the "join it and lose it" gang. I joined a really cool club in Jackson Hole that went bankrupt. That's why I mentioned debt as an issue years back - I was burned by it, and that's why we operate the way we do.
I will forgive you the Notre Dame bias and affection for Boston College. If you ever happen to visit, be forewarned, you might not find some of our signs to your tastes, but we do hold Mass on the back deck from time-to-time. ;)
If I were looking at an independently owned club, here are the "Top 10" things I would want to know, would ask and/or would pay attention to:
1. Does the club generate cash flow, if not net income? (Disclosure nugget for those curious: Happily, Dismal River does both)
2. Is the club overleveraged? (as many of us have seen firsthand, excessive debt kills)
3. Does the club take care of CapEx needs. You can easily "eyeball" this on the course and facilities.
4. Is the membership high cost and refundable, or lower cost and non refundable? (know what you are buying)
5. Have there been financial "red flags" in the clubs history, are they openly disclosed, and have they been addressed?
6. Is there any history of ownership, is ownership hidden or engaged, and can you meet the owner?
7. Is there a strong continuity of employees, or do they churn every year? (Stability here is a very good sign)
8. What is the "get out" procedure?
9. Are there any club minimums, or other limits, that aren't a good fit for me?
10. Do I like and fit into the club and it's culture, and do the members seem engaged in the club?
If the "top 10" generate a green light, you should be in good shape.
-
Mike,
I think you need to distinguish differentiate between the private club which is a 501c4 , non profit model and the private club which isowned by an individual or group for profit. Two totally different animals. Also I see no reason for anyone not to discuss the model if they wish BUT they should do so with the understanding that if their club frowns upon it they cannot be upset if asked to leave. :) Anyhow, the two types operate in an entirely different manner.
-
Gotta say, these last several days have changed my perception of your participation here immeasurably Chris.
We've never met and I may not have ever addressed a question to you so it's possible we've had absolutely zero interaction although I've viewed and read many of your posts.
Typically I've thought your posts demonstrated over the top bias about your course. Recently it occurred to me that if a course I were a member of (let alone an owner!) was the topic of so much discussion here you can bet I would point out all of the positives I could about it...so with the light of a little different perspective, thank you for contributing here. Even in this thread (which seems like a time bomb my friend Mike) that last post may be the most valuable anyone on this site could take away in hoping to learn about a prospective club's business model.
-
Well, I like Jim's sentiments even though I never thought Chris an ott booster. Chris has taken some unreasonable licks so far as I am concerned, probably down to the evils of electronic communication. I wish we had a club manager as invested in my club the way Chris is in his.
Ciao
-
. . . absent permission from the owner/members, disclosure of non-public financial information about any club is in bad taste at best and actionable at worst. While I am as curious as the next fellow and have been privy to the workings of more than a few institutions as part of my work, I don't believe its anybody's business. . . .
I agree that one needs to be circumspect regarding non-public financial information. However, a lot of financial information is readily available on "nonprofit" clubs. Clubs like Augusta National and Quail Hollow (Charlotte) are organized as closely-held business corporations and their financials are not available. However, most (educated guess) private clubs are organized as 501(c)(7) nonprofit social organizations and as such file an annual report on Form 990 with the IRS each year, and a heck of lot of financial information (including salaries of high paid employees) is available there. One place to source these forms - which are legally required to be open to the public - is http://foundationcenter.org/findfunders/990finder/
-
Carl and Tim; You are absolutely correct about the information disclosed by not for profits. Much to be learned, particularly debt levels. That information is fair game. But for information disclosed only to members and prospective members, it would be a breach of confidence and good faith to publish it here or anywhere else. For those whose only concern is that they might be tossed out of the club, they have a different understanding of what it means to "give one's word" then I was taught. If there is a fraud being perpetrated then one has a duty to report it to the proper authorities, particularly if you are a member of the institution. But if you just don't like it, keep your promise and move on. Alternatively, stay at the club and fight the good fight to change the model.
-
Gotta say, these last several days have changed my perception of your participation here immeasurably Chris.
We've never met and I may not have ever addressed a question to you so it's possible we've had absolutely zero interaction although I've viewed and read many of your posts.
Typically I've thought your posts demonstrated over the top bias about your course. Recently it occurred to me that if a course I were a member of (let alone an owner!) was the topic of so much discussion here you can bet I would point out all of the positives I could about it...so with the light of a little different perspective, thank you for contributing here. Even in this thread (which seems like a time bomb my friend Mike) that last post may be the most valuable anyone on this site could take away in hoping to learn about a prospective club's business model.
Agreed.
Chris,not sure I'd do the same were I in your position,but I give you a lot of credit for defending/explaining your club in an open forum.
-
For those who have been involved in private club governance (equity, non-equity, or for profit), is information on joining fees, monthly dues, minimums, assessments, etc. fair game for public consumption? Is offering the same deal to all prospective members with exceptions for age and membership levels a Must Do or a nicety?
As an aside, the world would be infinitely better if we all had SL Solow's understanding of "one's word', and more importantly, that it prescribed our behavior in all but the most desperate situations.
-
Mike; The title of this thread is somewhat misleading. If the question is whether we can/should discuss the viability of various models for private clubs on a theoretical basis, supplementing the theory with real world applications (perhaps without identifying the club) then that is at least tangentially related to architecture and it should be fair game.
I tried, it would not fit !!
Has anyone under 45 years of age posted on this thread?
That is the segment that golf is not reaching, and let's not even talk about women!
Yes . . . although I'm just barely under!
Chris's list of 10 questions are pretty close to the ones I've discussed with the savviest of our club's prospective members. It's pretty amazing to me, however, how many don't seem to ask any of these questions.
-
What is the problem with supporting golf in the big picture as opposed to worrying about a dying model of private clubs that are short members by 20-30% on average?
Mike,
Not exactly sure what you mean by this...can you clarify? I'm just a dense public school kid...
-
Mike,
The culture and utilization patterns are changing at private clubs, but the business model remains viable.
"TIME" seems to be the biggest impediment with the emerging demographic.
If clubs don't reduce their time to play to 3:30 to 3:00 they'll have problems restocking their membership ranks
-
What is the problem with supporting golf in the big picture as opposed to worrying about a dying model of private clubs that are short members by 20-30% on average?
Mike,
Not exactly sure what you mean by this...can you clarify? I'm just a dense public school kid...
1. Don't try that stuff with me :D, I work with a Founder who in his words "has a high school degree from Florence" (Firenze) and is smarter than just about anyone I know.
2. "public school kid" - As a result of #1 and a number of other factors in my life including a crazy wife and a membership at Kabul Golf Club***, I made a conscience decision at some point to not be a typical St. Joe's Prep kid from the Main Line. Call it niche marketing, call it contrarian, I simply get bored easily and the old school "private country club model" is boring to me and does not fit our family vibe. I love golf, and consider myself "a golfer", and I play at a golf club - Yale. With that, I have a limited membership which gives me the mental freedom to play other courses without worrying about "getting my money's worth."
As Mike Young and others have stated, there are a variety of private club types. I will make the first attempt at defining these types:
- 1. totally private club which is a 501c4 non profit model - example Shinnecock* (I think)
- 2. semi-private club which is a 501c4 non profit model - example Cape Arundel - I think l
- 3. private club which is owned by an individual or group for profit - Dismal River - I think
- 4. private club - university ownership - Yale**
- 5. others ? - Outpost Club is one example
* There are lots of different ways these clubs are funded. In general, they seem to be debt/bond but I am sure this will be challenged :)
** There seem to be many ways to allow outside play at university golf courses, so this can easily slide into a separate category.
*** Recruiting picture of GCA.com member to follow.
To answer Sully's question, I believe that other than the top clubs in the country and the top club in a specific region, many private clubs seem to be down 20-30% in memberships. There are many reasons for this, but certainly I am part of the problem. At an obnoxious period of my life I belonged to 4 private clubs. None were that expensive but today I am down to Yale. Why? Hey spending $450+ per round is not flying with The Boss these days and I really don't want to live that way.
#3 above is the new model, lets hear about the variety of models and we don't need to hear the names. Chris Johnston is adding alot to this discussion and if he gets a few enemies but more members, that is great in my opinion.
#5 is also what I would like to hear thoughts on. Obviously Streamsong is not a private club, but similar to Yale it got its land for free. Not sure this ever works for a for-profit private club, but if the Union League completes its purchase of Torresdale Frankford Country Club, should they not get some tax breaks for saving jobs and saving open space?
-
"TIME" seems to be the biggest impediment with the emerging demographic.
If clubs don't reduce their time to play to 3:30 to 3:00 they'll have problems restocking their membership ranks
Agreed, but I think the next generation looks at private clubs as silly and stupid. I work with a 27 year old hipster from Hoboken and he is a casual golfer and he post on http://www.reddit.com/r/golf
If I posted this thread on Reddit, I would be tossed and laughed at. When I was with a business partner who is a similar age to me and we explained to 27 year old hipster how the private club scene works he politely said to us "wow that is crazy". If I knew how to use Reddit, my guess is there is a thread on there titled "So two Manhattan old guy golfers tried to scam me today with a private golf club membership" :)
-
Hi Mike,
Fortunately, as a Carroll kid who grew up caddying instead of playing private courses I have none of the mental baggage of a privileged Prep kid ;D
As to the question of your thread, I would say, in a general sense "sure", though as far as specifics on particular clubs, "no"
I think for those who are interested with the right intentions it is not hard to find info on fees, dues, membership process, etc. through asking around. I do not think it is appropriate to post some of this information on the internet for clubs where the member and/or owner wishes it to remain private.
I would also add that I am 36 and my club has many non-legacy members in their 20s and 30s. I think your "down 20-30%" figure might be true of some clubs, but certainly not all.
If you did want more information on your "model #3" (and a real time example), I would suggest interviewing the owner of Long Island National, who has converted it to a private club and is currently selling memberships:
http://www.linationalgc.com/new-membership/
Finally - I am firmly of the belief that if you can't use your initiation fee as kindling without shedding a tear, you are making a foolish decision in joining a club.
Cheers,
Kevin
-
If you did want more information on your "model #3" (and a real time example), I would suggest interviewing the owner of Long Island National, who has converted it to a private club and is currently selling memberships:
http://www.linationalgc.com/new-membership/
Wow. Thanks for posting that. Our group had the 7:08 tee time "membership" (see #5) on Saturday's when LI National opened. There is a case study there for sure...
-
What is the problem with supporting golf in the big picture as opposed to worrying about a dying model of private clubs that are short members by 20-30% on average?
Mike,
Not exactly sure what you mean by this...can you clarify? I'm just a dense public school kid...
As Mike Young and others have stated, there are a variety of private club types. I will make the first attempt at defining these types:
- 1. totally private club which is a 501c4 non profit model - example Shinnecock* (I think)
- 2. semi-private club which is a 501c4 non profit model - example Cape Arundel - I think l
[[/list]
Most clubs are actually 501(c)(7)s. Here's Shinnecock's 990, which reports (c)(7) status.
http://990s.foundationcenter.org/990_pdf_archive/111/111324970/111324970_201212_990O.pdf See line I at the top of page 1.
I could not find a 990 for Cape Arundel (assuming it's the club in Maine), so it may be differently organized (not a 501(c) nonprofit, unless the official name is different).
Here's a list of the 29 different tax exempt org sections of the IRC. Golf clubs would fit much better under (c)(7) than (c)(4), IMHO.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/501(c)_organization
-
Mike,
The culture and utilization patterns are changing at private clubs, but the business model remains viable.
"TIME" seems to be the biggest impediment with the emerging demographic.
If clubs don't reduce their time to play to 3:30 to 3:00 they'll have problems restocking their membership ranks
Pat,
There is one other thing that will save private clubs and if it isn't fixed quickly they will decrease in number rapidly. The average ageof the member is 59 nationwide and it needs to be down in the high 40's to early 50's range. With as many baby boomers as we have passing 60 it is going to be hard to do without getting a lot of 35 year olds in the mix...I don't see it happening and not sure it can be fixed....
-
I'm in the under 35 golfer demographic and te furthest thing from my mind is pace of play. First, I've found the pace of play at the private clubs I've been fortunate to play to be just fine. Such things are handled well internally.
Secondly, my wife and, I assume, most non-playing wives understand that with travel time, range time and post-round beer a trip to the course is going to be a 5+ hour commitment so trimming off 30 minutes by speeding up pace of play is not likely to have any impact on the decision to play or not play. Even on days where I'm just trying to get out to play and nothing else the spousal assumption is 4 hours plus travel time and again, another 30 mins is not going to make or break that decision. Either my wife and I are willing to commit the time for me to play or not but shaving at the margins is not the issue.
The 3 things, in my opinion, that are at the forefront are:
1. Commitment to the game. My generation is much more committed to being active in our children's lives than the previous generation. Wr also work more hours (and for less money, see #2) There is time, however, to play golf but not to play golf and have 10 other hobbies. Guys I know are just choosing other hobbies over golf.
2. Cost. The price to join clubs as increased along with baby-boomer ability to pay. My generation isn't making as much money as the previous generation considering wages have not increased with cost of living and we are more responsible for our retirement than the baby-boomer generation. The money just isn't there for a lot of people.
3. Spouse involvement. Like a lot of things, if the spouse sees value in the club beyond the golf then the club has value. A good friend of mine is a member of a traditional club and his wife doesn't play but her father is a member and they eat at the club often, use the pool, tennis courts, exercise room, etc. My wife (nor I) did not grow up at a club and she finds other outlets for such things so she doesn't see any value in a club with all of those amenities.
This all being said, the private clubs in Charlotte are doing well (I can't say that as a matter of fact but they seem to be) and my favorite club here, even with a hefty initiation, has 500 members and a waiting list. Most of their new membership are guys in my demographic who are avid golfers. So, the people are out there, it's just finding the right mix of 1, 2 & 3 to fill the membership rolls.
There might be markets out there that have too many clubs for their economic and population demographic and so they either need to change or close. But, in Charlotte that doesn't seem to be a huge problem.
I think the multi-million dollar question is WHY are guys choosing biking, hiking, running, etc. over golf? Pace of play might be some of an issue for public golfers but not for people who would join a private club. In Charlotte, we have a brewery that has a run club. On Wednesday nights, a bunch of people get together around 6pm, run for an hour or so and then have a couple beers. Why would they rather do that than go play 9 holes? The Saturday AM cyclists go out in groups for hours. That isn't a pace of play/time commitment issue.
What changed about the game? Or, did nothing change we just have too many golf courses?
-
A little dated from 2008, and not Mike Young's favorite group, but here is a pretty good report from the NGF on private clubs:
http://media.naplesnews.com/media/static/Private_Club_Report_final.pdf
-
Mike,
Thanks for posting that. The 2 things that stood out glaringly at first glance were that 1) There's a 40% higher female participation rate at private clubs and 2) the average score shot at private clubs is 101. How many private courses, and clubs for that matter, have been designed and maintained primarily to accommodate #1 & 2?
-
As touched on earlier the costs associated with construction and maintenance is an interesting topic to me. George Thomas gives some general dollar amounts in his book:
Clearing....$4k (5%) approx. $54k after inflation adjustment
Grading....$18k (22%) approx. $243k inflation adjustment
Water system....$24k (30%) approx. $324k inflation adjustment
Seed....$2k (2%) approx. $27k inflation adjustment
Sowing fairways....$4k (5%) approx. $54k after inflation adjustment
Labor...$20k (25%) approx. $270k inflation adjustment
Sand for traps....$4k (5%) approx. $54k inflation adjustment
Other infrastructure costs (roads, bridges)....$5k (6%) approx. $67k inflation adjustment
Total $81k approx. $1.1million after inflation adjustment.
There is really no reason for me to know this information but it is interesting to me…despite the unrealistic dreams, chances are I won’t build a course anytime in my life.
As far as operating budgets I do feel this topic is a bit more important to know about, especially when joining a private club, and hopefully the budget includes the loan payments from building/purchasing the land/course. Not sure if the affordable golf symposium goes into details about golf course budgets but there are tons of reports on the internet written by consultants that analyze the operations of golf courses. Here’s one about the LA municipal courses and then an aggregated study on all courses. Not surprising the budgets for private courses are significantly higher than public courses. (http://www.laparks.org/golf/pdf/Final%20Golf%20Study%20Report_September%202011.pdf http://www.golfcourseindustry.com/gci0212-state-of-industry-report.aspx)
To discuss the topic further I’m 30 and joined a private club at 28 that I think falls into category 2 (semi-private club which is a 501c4 non profit model - example Cape Arundel). I don’t understand all the tax implications for clubs, and figure most people don’t understand the tax codes. When I was looking at clubs to join it was frustrating to try and find out what the costs were going to be. I’m sure there is a subset of people that says if you’re concerned about costs you shouldn’t be joining a club…well that’s not me and I don’t think that’s a realistic viewpoint for most perspective private club members. I didn’t like that I had to give my name and information to the club and then have the club contact me. I felt like it was the same process when buying a car. We do our research online and are forced to enter our information and have a representative contact us and give us a price. Why do they add this unnecessary layer? Just publish the information online. From my perspective the only logical reasons to keep the information under wraps is so they can charge different customers different prices without upsetting those that pay more and to allow the sales guys to sell. Even after two years I’m still getting occasional e-mails from clubs asking about my interest (just got one 2 weeks ago from a top 100 club). There are some that say they want their finances private. I get that but people who want to know can find out, they just have to do a little more leg work. Further I would much rather have my neighbor know what I paid than spread rumors that I paid 200k to join such and such club. I feel expectations on privacy are changing, you can figure out when someone has a bowel movement by following them on twitter or friending on facebook.
When we joined the club I was able to find an archive of the minutes from the board of directors and in the minutes they seemed to be discussing changes in the membership structure and the initiation fees. When I asked the membership coordinator about this she wouldn’t provide any details about the potential changes. About 3 months after we joined the initiation fee went down 66% for the category we joined.
To be honest joining the club clearly wasn’t the smartest economic decision we’ve made. We’re both in careers where we move every few years and joining a private club really doesn’t make a lot of sense in this situation. I think moving often due to multiple job changes is becoming more of the norm. All of my college friends have moved multiple times (this is a bit unique) but even when looking at my high school friends I can only think of one that has stayed with the same company since finishing undergrad, and even he has moved once in the last 9 years.
I also agree with everything JC said in his last post and I think courses that want to attract younger members are going to have to change if they want to survive.
-
I'm not sure these semi private clubs can come under a non-profit club status...I think it requires that only a small amount of income come form non members....not sure but have heard it often..
MikeS,
It's not that NGF is not one of my favorites...they just happen to be a good picture of what happened to golf...and they are corporate driven idiots... :)
-
Joe_Tucholski,
Great post
-
http://www.golfcourseindustry.com/gci0212-state-of-industry-report.aspx)
I didn’t like that I had to give my name and information to the club and then have the club contact me. I felt like it was the same process when buying a car. We do our research online and are forced to enter our information and have a representative contact us and give us a price. Why do they add this unnecessary layer? Just publish the information online. From my perspective the only logical reasons to keep the information under wraps is so they can charge different customers different prices without upsetting those that pay more and to allow the sales guys to sell.
Joe,
1. Thanks for posting that report, very informative.
2. Your perspective of "membership sales" is exactly what I was expecting when I posted this thread. Thanks for posting and hopefully some of the Old Guard will see this. As you are obviously a golf nut since you post here, perhaps 90% of the younger candidates never even fill out the form. I hope they understand this....
-
I'm in agreement with Joe.
I have a hard time understanding why membership fees for private clubs are not readily available to people looking for a club to join.
What is the reason to require contacting a membership person at each club for pricing? What are they hiding? Certainly competitors stay aware of pricing. If it's to appear “exclusive”, that practice in no longer aligned with the times.
Whenever someone is not open about the price of their product or service, I am suspect.
Today, people expect transparency on pricing to make comparisons and decisions easier. Unless a club does not need members, publish rates.
And clubs wonder why younger people aren't joining....
-
Are you guys who are for complete transparency also for allowing in every race, creed, gender and sexual orientation? How about every a$$hole with a checkbook?
-
Are you guys who are for complete transparency also for allowing in every race, creed, gender and sexual orientation? How about every a$$hole with a checkbook?
Yup. Bigots also. As long as they can pay their dues....
-
Dave, I agree with you. Guys from my generation don't like contacting a membership director, and clubs that are looking for members would be well-served to publish their rates online, especially if they're competitive.
Jones, do you think part of the attraction to hiking, cycling, running, and other endeavors stems from how much more casual they are? I wear jeans to work a few days a week, but I can't wear them to my club. I don't see a lot of guys our age who get excited to throw on a sport coat and slacks to go eat comfort food with a bunch of old people.
I don't think the issues clubs are facing have a lot to do with golf. Rounds are down over the last 15 years, but it's not a gigantic decline. I see the bigger issue lying with club culture itself. My anecdotal observations that private clubs locally have struggled, closed, declared bankruptcy, or rearranged their business models with far more frequency than public courses supports that notion. Most guys my age just aren't that interested in boring club food, eating at the same place over and over again, drinking average booze, and dressing in clothes that are dressier than what we wear to work. Clubs aren't going to get younger until the decision-makers at clubs get younger, and the atmosphere and activities become more youthful. Of course, moving in that direction risks driving off a lot of the old guys who pay the bills. It's a tough balance to strike.
-
Dave, I agree with you. Guys from my generation don't like contacting a membership director, and clubs that are looking for members would be well-served to publish their rates online, especially if they're competitive.
Jones, do you think part of the attraction to hiking, cycling, running, and other endeavors stems from how much more casual they are? I wear jeans to work a few days a week, but I can't wear them to my club. I don't see a lot of guys our age who get excited to throw on a sport coat and slacks to go eat comfort food with a bunch of old people.
I don't think the issues clubs are facing have a lot to do with golf. Rounds are down over the last 15 years, but it's not a gigantic decline. I see the bigger issue lying with club culture itself. My anecdotal observations that private clubs locally have struggled, closed, declared bankruptcy, or rearranged their business models with far more frequency than public courses supports that notion. Most guys my age just aren't that interested in boring club food, eating at the same place over and over again, drinking average booze, and dressing in clothes that are dressier than what we wear to work. Clubs aren't going to get younger until the decision-makers at clubs get younger, and the atmosphere and activities become more youthful. Of course, moving in that direction risks driving off a lot of the old guys who pay the bills. It's a tough balance to strike.
Thanks Jason. I'm one of "the old guys who pay the bills". A few of us recognize the need to change from the stodgy old traditions and get some young guys to start paying the bills before the club goes under. You still will never see me wearing my hat backwards while eating the boring food in the dining room ;D
-
I'm in the under 35 golfer demographic and te furthest thing from my mind is pace of play. First, I've found the pace of play at the private clubs I've been fortunate to play to be just fine. Such things are handled well internally.
Secondly, my wife and, I assume, most non-playing wives understand that with travel time, range time and post-round beer a trip to the course is going to be a 5+ hour commitment so trimming off 30 minutes by speeding up pace of play is not likely to have any impact on the decision to play or not play. Even on days where I'm just trying to get out to play and nothing else the spousal assumption is 4 hours plus travel time and again, another 30 mins is not going to make or break that decision. Either my wife and I are willing to commit the time for me to play or not but shaving at the margins is not the issue.
The 3 things, in my opinion, that are at the forefront are:
1. Commitment to the game. My generation is much more committed to being active in our children's lives than the previous generation. Wr also work more hours (and for less money, see #2) There is time, however, to play golf but not to play golf and have 10 other hobbies. Guys I know are just choosing other hobbies over golf.
2. Cost. The price to join clubs as increased along with baby-boomer ability to pay. My generation isn't making as much money as the previous generation considering wages have not increased with cost of living and we are more responsible for our retirement than the baby-boomer generation. The money just isn't there for a lot of people.
3. Spouse involvement. Like a lot of things, if the spouse sees value in the club beyond the golf then the club has value. A good friend of mine is a member of a traditional club and his wife doesn't play but her father is a member and they eat at the club often, use the pool, tennis courts, exercise room, etc. My wife (nor I) did not grow up at a club and she finds other outlets for such things so she doesn't see any value in a club with all of those amenities.
This all being said, the private clubs in Charlotte are doing well (I can't say that as a matter of fact but they seem to be) and my favorite club here, even with a hefty initiation, has 500 members and a waiting list. Most of their new membership are guys in my demographic who are avid golfers. So, the people are out there, it's just finding the right mix of 1, 2 & 3 to fill the membership rolls.
There might be markets out there that have too many clubs for their economic and population demographic and so they either need to change or close. But, in Charlotte that doesn't seem to be a huge problem.
I think the multi-million dollar question is WHY are guys choosing biking, hiking, running, etc. over golf? Pace of play might be some of an issue for public golfers but not for people who would join a private club. In Charlotte, we have a brewery that has a run club. On Wednesday nights, a bunch of people get together around 6pm, run for an hour or so and then have a couple beers. Why would they rather do that than go play 9 holes? The Saturday AM cyclists go out in groups for hours. That isn't a pace of play/time commitment issue.
What changed about the game? Or, did nothing change we just have too many golf courses?
This is one of the best posts I have read on this matter. One issue facing many of my friends in the 30-35 age range not mentioned above is student loan debt. Several friends who could afford to join a club today are instead putting a lot of their disposable income towards their student loans.
-
I'd like to say, firstly, that I do not think that clubs necessarily need to publicly disclose their membership structures and dues. They are, still, a private club and anyone who is interested in joining shouldn't have a problem reaching out to the membership director. I think this, along with pace of play, are the two biggest distractions in this discussion. I agree with a lot of what Joe had to say and even share with him some of his issues in making a decision on joining a club but I do not agree with the availability of cost issue. I think that should remain private and I don't think people who are seriously interested in joining a club would let that preclude them from joining.
Thurms, I think casualness does have some influence. Some clubs can get away with it depending on their prestige and exclusivity, then again, those are the clubs who aren't really having a problem. For example, I think it is silly that one has to wear a jacket to eat lunch in the men's grill at Shoreacres but I doubt Shoreacres is on an active membership hunt. And really, I think all of the issues we are talking about are not relevant to a certain subset of private clubs. You're right though, a modern club that is struggling financially should not be jacket only and a single seating for dinner.
That being said, I belong to a club that asks that you take your hat off before entering the clubhouse. I don't see a problem with that and was always taught to take my hat off before entering any building. The game has always expected a certain level of decency and decorum, and I think that is fine. How decent is an interesting question and there is certainly a happy place in between requiring all golf be played in long pants and allowing people to play in jeans.
I think your other points regarding food and atmosphere are interesting. Our generation likes to eat at different restaurants, we like craft beer and cocktails and are generally more of the "foodie" set. I'm still not sure how much of a role that plays in the decision making matrix.
I still think cost is the prevailing issue. The report that Mike Sweeney linked to had data to suggest that cost was the biggest factor and I still think it is. The other activities I cited are certainly cheaper than golf. I think clubs need to seriously consider meaningful discounts to junior members and scaling up membership costs. Some clubs have junior programs but they are not significantly different than the regular membership or they cut off too early.
-
I'm in the under 35 golfer demographic and te furthest thing from my mind is pace of play. First, I've found the pace of play at the private clubs I've been fortunate to play to be just fine. Such things are handled well internally.
Secondly, my wife and, I assume, most non-playing wives understand that with travel time, range time and post-round beer a trip to the course is going to be a 5+ hour commitment so trimming off 30 minutes by speeding up pace of play is not likely to have any impact on the decision to play or not play. Even on days where I'm just trying to get out to play and nothing else the spousal assumption is 4 hours plus travel time and again, another 30 mins is not going to make or break that decision. Either my wife and I are willing to commit the time for me to play or not but shaving at the margins is not the issue.
The 3 things, in my opinion, that are at the forefront are:
1. Commitment to the game. My generation is much more committed to being active in our children's lives than the previous generation. Wr also work more hours (and for less money, see #2) There is time, however, to play golf but not to play golf and have 10 other hobbies. Guys I know are just choosing other hobbies over golf.
2. Cost. The price to join clubs as increased along with baby-boomer ability to pay. My generation isn't making as much money as the previous generation considering wages have not increased with cost of living and we are more responsible for our retirement than the baby-boomer generation. The money just isn't there for a lot of people.
3. Spouse involvement. Like a lot of things, if the spouse sees value in the club beyond the golf then the club has value. A good friend of mine is a member of a traditional club and his wife doesn't play but her father is a member and they eat at the club often, use the pool, tennis courts, exercise room, etc. My wife (nor I) did not grow up at a club and she finds other outlets for such things so she doesn't see any value in a club with all of those amenities.
This all being said, the private clubs in Charlotte are doing well (I can't say that as a matter of fact but they seem to be) and my favorite club here, even with a hefty initiation, has 500 members and a waiting list. Most of their new membership are guys in my demographic who are avid golfers. So, the people are out there, it's just finding the right mix of 1, 2 & 3 to fill the membership rolls.
There might be markets out there that have too many clubs for their economic and population demographic and so they either need to change or close. But, in Charlotte that doesn't seem to be a huge problem.
I think the multi-million dollar question is WHY are guys choosing biking, hiking, running, etc. over golf? Pace of play might be some of an issue for public golfers but not for people who would join a private club. In Charlotte, we have a brewery that has a run club. On Wednesday nights, a bunch of people get together around 6pm, run for an hour or so and then have a couple beers. Why would they rather do that than go play 9 holes? The Saturday AM cyclists go out in groups for hours. That isn't a pace of play/time commitment issue.
What changed about the game? Or, did nothing change we just have too many golf courses?
This is one of the best posts I have read on this matter. One issue facing many of my friends in the 30-35 age range not mentioned above is student loan debt. Several friends who could afford to join a club today are instead putting a lot of their disposable income towards their student loans.
That is a good call. $50,000 in student loan debt is roughly equal to $500/mo for 20+ years.
-
I think the multi-million dollar question is WHY are guys choosing biking, hiking, running, etc. over golf? Pace of play might be some of an issue for public golfers but not for people who would join a private club. In Charlotte, we have a brewery that has a run club. On Wednesday nights, a bunch of people get together around 6pm, run for an hour or so and then have a couple beers. Why would they rather do that than go play 9 holes? The Saturday AM cyclists go out in groups for hours. That isn't a pace of play/time commitment issue.
What changed about the game? Or, did nothing change we just have too many golf courses?
I love to hike and cycle with my wife because it is not competitive. I play tennis and golf with my friends because they are. The younger generations were raised on tee ball and not keeping score. Cycling and hiking feeds into the unisex everybody wins culture.
My wife and I always tie when we hike and cycle. If I had to tie her playing golf I would quit. A nice pic from our hike in the red rocks of Colorado.
https://myspace.com/gillettesilver/mixes/profilemix-213623/photo/66613579
-
^ if you had to wait for other runners/cyclists/hikers to get out of your way, you'd bitch too! ;D
-
Generally speaking, folk in the western world are living longer and retiring or semi-retiring earlier. So maybe the grow-the-game element is actually the 50+ age group?
atb
-
''That being said, I belong to a club that asks that you take your hat off before entering the clubhouse. I don't see a problem with that and was always taught to take my hat off before entering any building. The game has always expected a certain level of decency and decorum, and I think that is fine. How decent is an interesting question and there is certainly a happy place in between requiring all golf be played in long pants and allowing people to play in jeans.'' +1
''The younger generations were raised on tee ball and not keeping score.'' +1 ;D ;D
I just think people on here tend to go to extremes. Blazer to blue jeans, come on. I have actually witnessed a top club allow jeans in their clubhouse area to try and bring in more revenue from the family aspect, very sad IMHO. Can't people wear Khakis. :)
Many people have made valid points. Besides it varying from region to region, it comes down to less purchasing power, more upscale public (that didn't exist 25 years ago to the same extent), college debt, less interest in CC life, and outdated model. There are a lot a guys who's wives don't play and they both work, and he can't justify spending $5,000+ a year in dues to play 40 times a year. They can go to Europe, buddies trips to Bandon ext., and travel sports for Jr. Single memberships, smaller clubhouses, and a good value is what more people are looking for IMHO. I do like when clubs are transparent on their website, but I respect their privacy since most don't like to post info. I just can't stand talking to the membership rep/Secretary telling me all the platitudes of their course.
-
^ if you had to wait for other runners/cyclists/hikers to get out of your way, you'd bitch too! ;D
I live on a beautiful paved path that runs along the river. The damn thing is so full with dog walkers and children that I had to buy a truck to transport my cycles to an urban environment that is less crowded with people looking for a healthy alternative. To either hike or cycle in pristine environments without human intrusion the costs equal golf. Your friends are not serious about either to save money.
I also agree with Thomas that golf is best suited for the old. Get out and run and jump till you can't run and jump no more.
-
One of the great joys in life is to have friends that cover the spectrum of all aspects of life. One great way to keep that from happening is to leave the price tag on your toys.
-
I also agree with Thomas that golf is best suited for the old. Get out and run and jump till you can't run and jump no more.
I shot a few baskets the other day while waiting for a session with a personal trainer. I attempted a jump shot. My feet did not leave the floor and my shot got half way to the basket. I am headed back to the golf course.
-
That is a good call. $50,000 in student loan debt is roughly equal to $500/mo for 20+ years.
JC,
I agree with you point about cost being the number 1 issue but your math on student loans is wrong by about $150/month...unless you've got the worst loan in history.
I'd put available time (not pace of play) as the number 2 issue. Hard to start January 1 spending $10,000 (reasonable all in here in the Philly area) on golf and a couple months swimming and tennis is tough. Even a generous/wishful look at the ROI is difficult. If I knew I'd have the time to play 50 rounds the ROI looks fine but hoping to get in 20 is different.
Regarding the posting of membership rates at a private club; the whole point is to be invited to join by a member so shopping for a club like it's Amazon isn't really the right flow of information.
-
One of the great joys in life is to have friends that cover the spectrum of all aspects of life. One great way to keep that from happening is to leave the price tag on your toys.
Back in the day, I had a friend who wouldn't take the plastic covering off his nerf football...
Many "private" courses could market themselves alot better if there was more transparency. Alot of times, you "hear" about special deals to join, so and so course is having a centennial deal, information is hard to come by, and unless you know someone at the club, it's not the easiest thing to determine. Go to their website, and it's bare bones information.
-
Regarding the posting of membership rates at a private club; the whole point is to be invited to join by a member so shopping for a club like it's Amazon isn't really the right flow of information.
Sully:
I'm guessing in many communities these days, it's not so much that folks are shopping ala Amazon for clubs -- it's that clubs are pretty keen on selling like Amazon. ;D As Sweeney suggests (I have no inside information, but my hunch is that he's right), a few top-tier clubs are doing fine and not worried about memberships. But I'd bet two-thirds to three-quarters of golf-centric clubs in any given community want (and need) membership. The Madison WI area has five major private golf-centric clubs, and I'm pretty sure I could join four of them with little trouble and a general inquiry. I might -- maybe -- need an invitation to the fifth one.
-
"Alot of times, you "hear" about special deals to join, so and so course is having a centennial deal, information is hard to come by, and unless you know someone at the club, it's not the easiest thing to determine. Go to their website, and it's bare bones information."
The rates and specials aren't published because they are not available to everyone. The Club needs to be able to screen applicants, this is not the local health club, where anyone can join. It doesn't take more than a handful of jagoff Members to ruin an otherwise good club. And just because you have the money doesn't mean the rest of the Members want you to join them. It's exclusive, which means the club retains the right to exclude YOU.
How hard is it to pick up the phone and have a conversation with the Membership Director? Their job is to sell memberships, for fuck's sakes, is is impossible for someone under 35 to have an actual human interaction, pick up the phone and call.
-
"Alot of times, you "hear" about special deals to join, so and so course is having a centennial deal, information is hard to come by, and unless you know someone at the club, it's not the easiest thing to determine. Go to their website, and it's bare bones information."
The rates and specials aren't published because they are not available to everyone. The Club needs to be able to screen applicants, this is not the local health club, where anyone can join. It doesn't take more than a handful of jagoff Members to ruin an otherwise good club. And just because you have the money doesn't mean the rest of the Members want you to join them. It's exclusive, which means the club retains the right to exclude YOU.
How hard is it to pick up the phone and have a conversation with the Membership Director? Their job is to sell memberships, for fuck's sakes, is is impossible for someone under 35 to have an actual human interaction, pick up the phone and call.
Perfect! :)
-
''Regarding the posting of membership rates at a private club; the whole point is to be invited to join by a member so shopping for a club like it's Amazon isn't really the right flow of information.''
I don't think a club that is 60-70% full is going to be selective. But that wouldn't shock me. Amazon is doing very well i hear.
''How hard is it to pick up the phone and have a conversation with the Membership Director? Their job is to sell memberships, for fuck's sakes, is is impossible for someone under 35 to have an actual human interaction, pick up the phone and call. ''
It is very hard to listen to someone tell me about the club that doesn't play golf and the tired old platitudes. Human interaction with people who actually listens to the consumer, now that is a breath of fresh air. We aren't talking about the business model of top 50 golf courses who are mostly immune to hurting private model.
-
How hard is it to pick up the phone and have a conversation with the Membership Director? Their job is to sell memberships, for fuck's sakes, is is impossible for someone under 35 to have an actual human interaction, pick up the phone and call.
Can't we text? Or hit them up on Twitter? Phone calls are so 1876.
I don't think anyone is saying clubs should be forced to post rates online or anything ridiculous like that. I do think if a club is struggling and looking for members, it's a whole lot easier to attract them with transparency. That's especially true if they want younger members. Some clubs may not want a lot of younger guys to join, and that's their prerogative. Whatever gets the bills paid. A membership shortage will ruin a club much faster than those "few jagoff applicants" you mention. Can you name one club that went under because three jagoffs applied for membership? Or are you just citing the same excuses that every member tends to cite when their club is operating in the red but can't muster the courage to change anything about how they've always operated?
Ben, you make a good point about platitudes. Every golf course website I visit sounds like it was written by the same 13 year old. It's always something like "Our lush, pristine, manicured golf course winds up and down hills and through trees with beautiful white sand bunkers and fast, undulating greens. Our beauty and challenge make Slobbersuck Hills a favorite to every member and guest." It's amazing to me that there doesn't appear to be a club in a metro area within 200 miles of me that has figured out a way to break the mold and market itself differently and offer a substantially different and more interesting product, particularly for younger people and families.
Actually, I take that back. There is one club in Lexington that just came up with what appears to me to be an exceptional package. Their geographic location isn't the best, but I suspect they could be very successful in spite of that.
-
If someone is relocating to an area that has a dozen private clubs, it's disappointing to have to waste 2 or 3 days playing phone tag with membership directors. How hard it it to add a simple price chart to the club web site? I've had cases where a membership director called me every few months with a lower initiation fee "deal" each time. What does that say?
As for membership directors screening out A-holes, I can say from experience that it doesn't work. Having been a member of a few clubs, I interestingly found that the more "exclusive" the club, the higher the A-hole ratio!
It's the age of easy access to information and competition. Have a good product at a fair price and stop hiding behind secrecy.
-
A difficult problem caused in large measure by oversupply in many metropolitan areas. Our club is in one such area. Here is a variation which appears to be working although one can never tell when one is completely out of the woods. We are a full service family oriented club with a wonderful old Colt & Alison course and a very nice but relatively modest sized clubhouse. Like many clubs, our membership has aged and during the downturn we fell below an optimum size. We took the following steps. To respond to competition we reduced initiation fees. I attended a seminar where the consultant recommended raising initiation fees but we went the other way. We made some improvements in our facilities in response to requests of mostly younger members. But most importantly, we went to the membership and urged it to become much more active in introducing new members, particularly those below the age of 50, to our club. We thought that the facilities and members would sell if people were exposed. Over the last 3 or 4 years , even allowing for the usual attrition, we have increased our membership by more than 10% and we are very pleased with the quality of our new members. There are no "special deals",prospective members, who must be introduced by 2 existing members, get a fact sheet showing the classes of membership, where they fall and what it will cost. We are now in an acceptable range and hope to add another 7-10% over the next few years. Like all clubs there are issues for the long term. We took on some debt to make the improvements which will be paid by the members in the relatively near term. Like Pat, I hate taking on debt. Capital items wear out; in the future we will need to replace our irrigation system (long term) and our equipment shed (somewnat sooner). But we are budgeting for those items now and getting a buy in from the members. A lot of this depends on the atmosphere of a club, if the young and old interact and there is respect for the desires of the various groups, you have a chance. We try to remind the older members (like me) that we were young once and wanted to make the club work for our families so we should understand the motivation of our younger group. We try to tell the young folk that before they know it they will be in our position and they want to be able to enjoy the club then. Of course, not everyone buys in, any group of 200 or more people contains some who don't get it. But if the leadership works to foster camaraderie and understanding a club can thrive because the members have more in common than most would believe. Its just a question of making them understand their common interests. If done right, it can be a lot of fun. I have friends who I play with at the club who are about 20 years older than me and several who are at least 20 years younger. Until you understand that aspect of club life, you really can't evaluate the pluses and minuses. If it is just a dollars and sense proposition, a private club rarely makes sense. Of course it helps if you have a really good golf course in a desirable location.
-
I don't think a club that is 60-70% full is going to be selective. But that wouldn't shock me.
Groucho Marx: "I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member." Sorry if this has been posted on this thread earlier.
-
It's the age of easy access to information and competition. Have a good product at a fair price and stop hiding behind secrecy.
It is a matter of perspective as well as geography. We have 8-10 private clubs in the DFW area that are doing very well with wait lists and joining fees at or above historic highs. For many folks, finances are very personal, something not discussed in public and only occasionally in close relationships. Those clubs seeking new blood get the word out via their membership. If someone has the qualifications- demeanor, financial, reputational- it is not a problem learning this information. We also have some publications like Avid Golfer which publishes this information every so often, however, it is often wrong.
I think JC is right. It is mostly a matter of economics. We are blessed in Texas that most of our major cities are doing very well and there are a large number of people making sufficient money to afford the private club lifestyle.
-
Guys,
If the prices are posted online and anyone with a paypal account can join with a mouse click, what exactly is private about the private club?
-
J,
Come on. Paypal, that was a good one. Posted prices are transparent and helps people avoid agonizing phone conversations. I am sure people are going to equate those people with non loyal members and that is fine. Transparency screams public golfer!!!???
-
I think JC is right. It is mostly a matter of economics.
Lou, I'm going to frame this.
Most of the privates in Charlotte seem to be doing well. In fact, the publics seem to be in the most pain.
-
8) Discussed openly... NO
seems like due diligence, making a sincere effort to check out a club, talk to folks, play it, think on it ... is now to be replaced with online dude diligence???
-
It sounds like there are at least some cities where one could do well being a broker of memberships.
-
Can't wait for Augusta, Cypress and Seminole to post their initiation and dues structure on their websites.
-
Can't wait for Augusta, Cypress and Seminole to post their initiation and dues structure on their websites.
Step 1 for those courses will be to create websites.
-
Someone mention that this is not like joining a health club. From a historical perspective, I see this period as similar to the era of "City Athletic Clubs".
Social Stratification In New York
City Athletic Clubs, 1865-1915
by: J. Willis and R. Wettan
Queens College
http://library.la84.org/SportsLibrary/JSH/JSH1976/JSH0301/jsh0301e.pdf
Almost all of them are gone now with the exception of the NYAC and have been replaced the NY Sports Club, Chelsea Piers, Equinox and similar for-profit health clubs with multiple locations and flexible memberships.
Lou Duran,
How accurate is this list for Dallas?
http://golfersbag.com/private-golf-course-directory.php
-
A few points:
1. agree these are 'private clubs' and the idea of posting entry fees and dues in the public domain seems counter to the ideal - 10 years ago few clubs even had a membership director, so there was no one to call...you had to really 'know' a member or three to understand the realities...anyone unwilling to pick up the phone to speak to a market-oriented membership director doesn't really care enough to join...these are private 'clubs' after all, not private 'courses'
2. the costs at most clubs are remarkably close on an all-in basis (and also remarkably high) - you either can or cannot afford to be a member of a private club - there is generally no way to justify membership on a cost per round basis - those that 'can' afford membership should focus on the softer aspects of membership...do they like the course, do they like the membership, is there a caddie program, are there starting times etc.
3. dress code - anyone who finds it a challenge to remove their cap when walking into the clubhouse really shouldn't be concerned about joining a private club; if you can't deal with that inconvenience there are many other issues that will turn you off! and yes, can't people put on khakis?
-
If someone is relocating to an area that has a dozen private clubs, it's disappointing to have to waste 2 or 3 days playing phone tag with membership directors.
One would hope that the process of joining a private club isn't limited to forwarding a check to the lowest bidder
How hard it it to add a simple price chart to the club web site.
Depends on how stupid the club is.
Why provide your pricing model to your competitors such that they can "shadow price" you ?
I've had cases where a membership director called me every few months with a lower initiation fee "deal" each time. What does that say?
It says that they're in financial trouble and desperate for members
As for membership directors screening out A-holes, I can say from experience that it doesn't work.
If all you had to do was write a check to gain admission that wouldn't surprise me
Having been a member of a few clubs, I interestingly found that the more "exclusive" the club, the higher the A-hole ratio!
I've found just the opposite.
The more thorough the vetting process the stronger the membership.
What clubs are you referencing ?
It's the age of easy access to information and competition.
Have a good product at a fair price and stop hiding behind secrecy.
For whom ?
People who walk in from off the street whose only requirement for membership is writing a check ?
I'm pretty sure that ANGC, Pine Valley, Cypress Point, Seminole and others all have tried and true admissions policies that produce the desired membership results.
Joining a private golf club isn't like shopping in a discount super market.
-
The Club needs to be able to screen applicants, this is not the local health club, where anyone can join. It doesn't take more than a handful of jagoff Members to ruin an otherwise good club.
I don't know about that. I belong to a club with Jud and JC, and I still think the club is pretty good. ;D
-
Clubs in financial straits should do what they must to attract members. I know I want to avoid talking to a Membership Director as much for not wanting them to have my contact details as anything. As a matter of fact, I would wonder why in the hell a club would waste money on a membership director :-\. Can't the club manager do this as part of his/her duty. Most of the time, I bet its taking calls about the, you guessed it, pricing structure :-X. Surely, once a potential member has his foot in the office door there is a pleasant handover to members and they sell the club by being good, genuine guys. If a club is lucky, they will have a pro who can be instrumental in the process, but for gods sake, keep the suits out of it, that sort of extra layer would bug the hell out of me. And if the club is well known, it sells itself.
I understand if a club is ticking along fine, no need to go fishing. I also understand that its best if future members are located by current members. Which begs the question, why do so many cubs then charge a stupidly high guest fee? For someone to become well acquainted with the club before joining, it may cost a small fortune.
Ciao
-
Out of interest, do private clubs in the US - and anywhere else for that matter - allow new members to spread payment of joining/initiation fees over a few years or does payment have to be made as a one-off lump sum upfront payment?
In the UK in recent years spreading payments appears to have become a more regular option for newbie members at private clubs.
atb
-
Thomas,
Depends on the club, but I believe it has become more common here as well as the market has become more competitive.
-
For those speaking about the traditions of the private club, I offer this conclusion section from the report on city athletic clubs:
http://library.la84.org/SportsLibrary/JSH/JSH1976/JSH0301/jsh0301e.pdf
From 1880 to 1893 the leading clubs of the city underwent a
drastic change in focus. Competition among clubs for status
and prestige led to the building of extravagant facilities, an
increase in activities of a social nature, and the instituting of
highly selective membership policies. The most prestigious
athletic club of the period based upon members’ occupational
scores and social club memberships was the University A.C.
followed by the Manhattan and New York A.C.’s.
The period of transition which occurred between 1893 and
1900 was marked by the financial collapse of many of the leading
clubs and the consolidation of others. The financial difficulties
experienced by most clubs was due to the combination of
poor management, overextension of financial resources and
economic recession.
After the turn of the century there was a resurgence of small
athletic clubs which were unencumbered by grandiose clubhouses
and social preoccupations. Once again clubs were readily accessible
to a larger segment of New York society through the
organization of neighborhood, occupational, religious, social
welfare agency, public school, and park department athletic
associations. This era can best be characterized by the vast
number of clubs, the transitory nature of many of the clubs, and
the unprecedented involvement of athletes from socio-economic
levels to whom athletic competition had been beyond reach.
____________________________________________________
Is the pending purchase of Torresdale Frankfort by The Union League the start of a new trend?
I was surprised to see a golf resort, Seaview, purchased by a college but perhaps it is a trend towards different ownership models in golf:
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2010/09/stockton_college_purchases_sea.html
-
How are private clubs looking to fill their membership ranks? Relying on word of mouth from their members? Surely there are other methods?
So there are at least 20 private courses within a 10 mile radius from where I live. I probably know a member of about 5 of them. So there's an in for a handful, what about the other 15 or so courses in the area? Looking for me to call them? And if I don't happen to know anyone there, no deal?
-
We can't generalize across the spectrum of private clubs.
Clearly, clubs that are doing well financially and have a waiting list to join can do as they please, make whatever rules they want, and keep the membership a secret. No argument there.
Clubs that need members to sustain themselves need to adapt to survive. Make membership fees & process more transparent. Lighten up on rules to attract younger members & families. It's an evolutionary process, as the environment changes, it's adapt or become extinct. These are the clubs that I'm talking about. From what I read, clubs in this category are in the majority these days.
No one expects to fill out an on-line application for Augusta National. It's not unreasonable to expect to be able to see membership process any pricing information online for the “average” private club.
On the positive side, time and the economy will sort this all out.
-
How are private clubs looking to fill their membership ranks? Relying on word of mouth from their members? Surely there are other methods?
So there are at least 20 private courses within a 10 mile radius from where I live. I probably know a member of about 5 of them. So there's an in for a handful, what about the other 15 or so courses in the area? Looking for me to call them? And if I don't happen to know anyone there, no deal?
I knew no one when I moved to DFW zillions of years ago. It took but a few months to get the lay of the land and garner invitations from new acquaintances and work colleagues to join a number of clubs. Colonial CC in Fort Worth near my office was one, and for just a little more than a no-name/bad course club near our home. My wife, working in Dallas and wanting to play tennis, lobbied for the other club with the lame excuse that she would never drive to Fort Worth after work, so we joined the lesser club. It was a decision I have always regretted, but to this day, location remains the most important factor driving many of our decisions. There is not a club in the DFW area where a call to the Membership Director would not get you the necessary information to begin the process of evaluating a potential match. In most cases, there is at least general information available publicly for self pre-qualification prior to making that call.
Mike Sweeney,
The linked information is not accurate. In a number of cases, even the names of the clubs have changed. Couldn't easily find the date, but the data seems very old. Here is a more current one that also contains numerous errors.
http://www.avidgolferonline.com/issues/2014/1404agdfw/cover-story-best-of-private-clubs-2014.aspx
-
Lou, you're missing my point. It's not about me finding a club to join. How are clubs in the area who are looking for members getting access to me? Hoping I know a member? Hoping I call them out of the blue? What should the 15 other clubs in the area be doing to get my business?
-
Keith,
They should have their members looking for you. If the membership isn't working hard to "sell" the benefits and value of the club how can they expect to survive?
Phil McDade,
Of course you're correct...every club wants to "sell like Amazon". It's pretty clearly an over supply issue don't you think? Eliminate one of those clubs in Madison and the whole entry process changes, right?
Dave Doxey,
There has certainly been a trend in the direction you're talking about but the real question is how is that good for anyone? If you were to pay a $5,000 initiation fee and $5,000 a year for a few years and felt invested in and connected to the "club", would you want someone to simply see the price and write a check with no invitation or screening process?
-
I was looking at a well known club recently. Well regarded, great pedigree. I would think they are concerned about finding the next generation of members, people my age (43) and younger.
This is a club that anyone here would be happy to play or join. The club has initiation fees, membership categories and dues posted online. I don't perceive this degree of transparency as lowering the image of the club; there was no paypal tab, and you still need sponsors.
I think that invoking Cypress, Seminole and Augusta is kind of a silly comparison to make. Local, non top 100 clubs that model themselves on the elite are likely choosing a perilous path.
-
Lou, you're missing my point. It's not about me finding a club to join. How are clubs in the area who are looking for members getting access to me? Hoping I know a member? Hoping I call them out of the blue? What should the 15 other clubs in the area be doing to get my business?
Sorry. I am not an expert in finding members for private clubs, but that shouldn't stop me from opining, right? :D
The link I provided is from a free glossy magazine available at nearly all public and private courses in north Texas. This one and others contain offerings from a number of facilities. The local paper carries occasional ads as well and publishes a "Texas Golf Annual" issue (this year on May 11) which attempts to rate the top courses throughout the state with some segmentation for the different market categories (e.g. on the public side- high, medium, low-priced). Courses can and do market in this edition as well. Marketing or membership directors apparently have access to targeted lists of potential members (I get emails occasionally). Many of the "needy" courses have generous incentive programs for their current members to sponsor new members. "Guest Day" specials are common and a good way to introduce like-minded folks to the club. I suspect that member referral is the most effective marketing tool. Couponing, primarily during the week, working with hotels, corporate and charity outings, and other similar marketing endeavors serve to give exposure to the course.
IMO, once they get you there, much of this goes for naught unless the course is properly maintained and the set up is thoughtful every day. Add to that staff and members who are helpful without being over-the-top, friendly, and welcoming. Getting the little details right is important in promoting a desirable experience. I had a guest one time who was just moving his lunch special around the plate. I finally asked him if he wasn't feeling well and, with some embarrassment, he confessed that the fish was not cooked in the inside. In fact, it was still frozen, the cook probably harried or distracted in the kitchen making a lasting impression even though my friend had a decent day on the course.
-
Dave Doxey,
There has certainly been a trend in the direction you're talking about but the real question is how is that good for anyone? If you were to pay a $5,000 initiation fee and $5,000 a year for a few years and felt invested in and connected to the "club", would you want someone to simply see the price and write a check with no invitation or screening process?
Of course not. I'm not suggesting on-line joining - just posting of membership costs and requirements to allow prospective members to decide which club they want to apply to. As was mentioned here a couple of times, moving to a new area now requires a long information gathering process.
Once a prospective member narrows down choices (location? costs? openings?) the application, course visit process, etc. would proceed.
-
I can't speak for other cities, but I feel like I have a pretty good handle on the private clubs in Montgomery County, MD, at least those in the Bethesda/Potomac/Rockville area--e.g., Congressional, Chevy Chase, Columbia, Bethesda, Woodmont/Lakewood. None of those clubs posts online the costs of membership (i.e., initiation fees, monthly dues, other expenses). But it is incredibly easy to get that information by either asking a member or contacting the club, especially if (but not only if) you are slightly serious about possibly joining.
That's the story on the costs of membership. Detailed financial information about the clubs (debt, operating expenses, revenue, CapX, etc.) is a different matter. First off, a lot of prospective members don't even ask for this information--nor do many members (even though it's available to them). For those who ask, my sense is that only those people who are perceived to be reasonably serious about applying will see that stuff. But even this information is hardly a state secret--it's the stuff of constant grill room gossiping.
-
Phil McDade,
Of course you're correct...every club wants to "sell like Amazon". It's pretty clearly an over supply issue don't you think? Eliminate one of those clubs in Madison and the whole entry process changes, right?
Maybe -- but maybe not. All markets for this kind of product (private country club membership) are unique, and not static. And I'd guess in most communities (some, of course, more than others) the private golf clubs exist in a market that's offering varying degrees of the same thing -- broadly speaking.
Since I moved to Madison 25 years ago, there has been one private club added to the roster of the four well-established clubs in town. The big growth has been in daily-fee courses -- nine 18-hole courses built in that time (one is a 36-hole operation -- 18 on the main course, a 9-hole youth/senior/executive course, and a 9-hole down the road a bit), plus another well-established 18-hole course adding a full-scale 9 holes. They range from cheap and not very good to pretty good, with the UW's University Ridge the most prominent of those. That was on top of the Madison muni golf system, which offers 72 holes at four courses conveniently located around town, and a few other modest courses around the area.
On top of that, Wisconsin has seen a boom in high-end courses, well-known here on GCA and in the golf world -- Kohler's quartet near Sheboygan, Erin Hills, Nicklaus' Bull near Sheboygan, a few others.
My guess is lots of folks (I know a few, actually) -- looking at the golf landscape here -- just say: "Forget it; I don't need the private club model, and its bothersome dining minimums and boring dinners/lunches; I can just get a discounted rate membership at URidge, join my buddies for some charity outings at some local courses for variety, and make a special trip or two every year to Kohler/Erin Hills/Sand Valley 8)." It might even be cheaper.
In short, if one of the privates in Madison were to suddenly close, I'm not sure all of those folks would flock to the other four and tighten the market. And I think the privates get that, as much of their marketing of late (at least from what I can tell) has been aimed at family-like activities (swimming, tennis, co-op memberships with fitness and dining clubs, strong junior programs) that aim to keep the lone-wolf golfer like Sweeney tied to the club.
Interestingly, to switch gears here, the old-money club in town -- the Maple Bluff Country Club -- has scads of information on membership available for anyone to peruse on their website. I was actually pretty impressed when I looked it up today:
https://www.maplebluffcc.com/Club-Info/Membership-(1)/Invitations.aspx
-
Carl,
I'd agree with you.
Nobody, desiring to be a member, asks to see the books.
The only question I might ask, if I didn't already know the answer is: How much debt is the club carrying and under what terms ?
The great majority of those joining clubs aren't transients, they're familiar with the community and the golfing environment in the area.
Those moving into the community are usually introduced or find out about the lay of the land prior to moving.
Some moves are voluntary, some are transfers/offers that can't be refused, so each circumstance is different.
-
Phil,
Clearly Maple Bluff is struggling and the evolution of other options is likely a primary culprit.
That said, the numbers they're showing are $9,000 per year (plus food minimum). Let's assume the other 4 average $7,000. If they're open then they have at least a couple hundred people paying it even though they have the same access to local courses you described above. I've heard 350 per 18 holes is a reasonable number for full membership.
While I agree that each situation is unique, a significant number of the members of whichever of those five clubs closes first are going to join one of the others...making them all healthier...and likely eliminating the need for Maple Bluff to give away $0 dues for several months as a lure.
-
While I do not recommend asking a club about its finances I do recommend checking out the 990's filed for tax purposes by all clubs that are nonprofits (i.e. a sizeable percentage). While the information is usually from the prior year, it does provide more accurate information than the members are likely to have and allows you to compare the revenue from the prior year to that from earlier filings. You also can see the long term debt the club is carrying.
http://foundationcenter.org/findfunders/990finder/
I have found it educational to compare the filings of clubs I know are fine with those I know are struggling.
-
I've enjoyed reading Making The Masters, especially the stories about attempts to recruit new members. Clifford Roberts sent out invitatiions to anyone he could get his hands on. Using Grantland Rice to extoll the virtues of his club, and Bobby Jones. I liked the response he received from a prospective member, who would sign up under the stipulation that 99 others would join as well. That quota wasn't made.
-
I can't speak for other cities, but I feel like I have a pretty good handle on the private clubs in Montgomery County, MD, at least those in the Bethesda/Potomac/Rockville area--e.g., Congressional, Chevy Chase, Columbia, Bethesda, Woodmont/Lakewood. None of those clubs posts online the costs of membership (i.e., initiation fees, monthly dues, other expenses). But it is incredibly easy to get that information by either asking a member or contacting the club, especially if (but not only if) you are slightly serious about possibly joining.
That's the story on the costs of membership. Detailed financial information about the clubs (debt, operating expenses, revenue, CapX, etc.) is a different matter. First off, a lot of prospective members don't even ask for this information--nor do many members (even though it's available to them). For those who ask, my sense is that only those people who are perceived to be reasonably serious about applying will see that stuff. But even this information is hardly a state secret--it's the stuff of constant grill room gossiping.
Carl,
DC is hardly a place to use to compare with the rest of the US.
Dave D. and Will,
I agree with you
-
Phil,
Clearly Maple Bluff is struggling and the evolution of other options is likely a primary culprit.
That said, the numbers they're showing are $9,000 per year (plus food minimum). Let's assume the other 4 average $7,000. If they're open then they have at least a couple hundred people paying it even though they have the same access to local courses you described above. I've heard 350 per 18 holes is a reasonable number for full membership.
While I agree that each situation is unique, a significant number of the members of whichever of those five clubs closes first are going to join one of the others...making them all healthier...and likely eliminating the need for Maple Bluff to give away $0 dues for several months as a lure.
So closing down a nice golf club is a good thing? A club that has been around for 80+ years is oversupply? Or just inability to adjust to market trends? Seems as though following a model that Mike suggests might do it good. You have many people that would join private golf clubs, but hate CC's. But people just don't seem to get that.
-
While I do not recommend asking a club about its finances . . . .
Assuming you are seriously interested in becoming a member, why not ask? That's something I would recommend.
-
The linked information is not accurate. In a number of cases, even the names of the clubs have changed. Couldn't easily find the date, but the data seems very old. Here is a more current one that also contains numerous errors.
http://www.avidgolferonline.com/issues/2014/1404agdfw/cover-story-best-of-private-clubs-2014.aspx
Thanks for posting. That is very well organized despite some errors that you mention. The cart girl of the year is ..... interesting? ;)
-
I have been following this thread closely as I can relate to the frustrations shared by the posters. I am 36 and have taken advantage of junior membership deals at a couple clubs over the past 10 years. I subsequently declined full membership when I reached the age where full membership was required. I did my research and have found other options that will satisfy my golf needs.
While I really enjoyed the golf aspect at these clubs, the following "extras" are really just added barriers to playing golf and increase the cost of membership to levels that I can't justify.
- Mandatory Caddies - While everyone enjoys having a caddy, the fact is that the going rate of $70-$80 in the northeast is not sustainable. There might be value in paying that much for a caddy when you have never played the course, but after your 50th round, what can a caddy really add to the round other that carrying the bag? This rate has also pushed out the high school kid in favor of the career caddy at most clubs. Why is there such a stigma around carrying your own bag or pulling a cart?
- Club Tournaments - I've paid my dues and now I have to pay a fee to play on a Saturday morning because there is an ABCD best ball going on? On top of that I'm not going to be able to play the back tees and I'm paired with partners who have no chance of breaking 100. It seems like there are two of these weekend tournaments every month at most clubs.
- Restaurant Minimums - I have no interest in eating dinner at a club. I don't like subsidizing the restaurant for the 30 members who want the restaurant open 6 days a week. The entire board of the club is usually found within this group of 30 members.
- Climate - This is obviously geography related but we have a 7 month golf season at best in the northeast. Paying full monthly dues when you have no use for the club November to March is a tough one to get your head around.
- Debt - Most clubs have it right now and it will be 10-20 years before its paid off. Many boards have taken the "kick the can down the road" strategy to address necessary capital improvements. Even worse, the debt is usually related to the clubhouse which I don't even want in the first place. When you are my age and pay your initiation fee, you have assumed this debt.
I see that most clubs are trying to add services in order to attract more members. I think the best model for many clubs is to reduce services and focus on core operations. This would negate the need for more members and help to drive down costs for 90% of members who really just want to play golf.
-
I can't speak for other cities, but I feel like I have a pretty good handle on the private clubs in Montgomery County, MD, at least those in the Bethesda/Potomac/Rockville area--e.g., Congressional, Chevy Chase, Columbia, Bethesda, Woodmont/Lakewood. None of those clubs posts online the costs of membership (i.e., initiation fees, monthly dues, other expenses). But it is incredibly easy to get that information by either asking a member or contacting the club, especially if (but not only if) you are slightly serious about possibly joining.
That's the story on the costs of membership. Detailed financial information about the clubs (debt, operating expenses, revenue, CapX, etc.) is a different matter. First off, a lot of prospective members don't even ask for this information--nor do many members (even though it's available to them). For those who ask, my sense is that only those people who are perceived to be reasonably serious about applying will see that stuff. But even this information is hardly a state secret--it's the stuff of constant grill room gossiping.
Carl,
DC is hardly a place to use to compare with the rest of the US.
Dave D. and Will,
I agree with you
I'm not sure what you mean. Are you saying it's harder to get information about the costs of membership in other places? Or that it's easier to get detailed financial information in others?
-
Thanks for posting. That is very well organized despite some errors that you mention. The cart girl of the year is ..... interesting? ;)
The owner/publisher of AG deserves credit for being quite the golf entrepreneur without heavy capital investment in hard assets. His strengths appear to be not in distinguishing the finest courses, but in catering to the preferences of the "retail golfer" in DFW. The magazine might be better named the "Avid Bon-Vivant" as the coverage of upscale cars, drink, food, women, and other toys often associated with golf for the upwardly mobile male appears to be far superior than what is devoted to the actual golf course (this is no knock as the "avid golfer" is probably more interested in the clubhouse and the "amenities" than he is on the course itself). Like SI's swim suit issue, Avid Golfer's annual cart girl issue is highly anticipated.
I have been following this thread closely as I can relate to the frustrations shared by the posters. I am 36 and have taken advantage of junior membership deals at a couple clubs over the past 10 years. I subsequently declined full membership when I reached the age where full membership was required. I did my research and have found other options that will satisfy my golf needs.
While I really enjoyed the golf aspect at these clubs, the following "extras" are really just added barriers to playing golf and increase the cost of membership to levels that I can't justify.
......
I see that most clubs are trying to add services in order to attract more members. I think the best model for many clubs is to reduce services and focus on core operations. This would negate the need for more members and help to drive down costs for 90% of members who really just want to play golf.
First of all, congratulations.
At the risk of delving into the forbidden subject of politics, in reading your post, I just couldn't help but thinking how what you note about golf memberships also describes my thoughts about the ACA and much of what our federal government does, supposedly on my behalf. The crucial difference is that while I can opt out of a club whose policies aren't to my liking, if I do the same vis-à-vis my protectors in Washington, guys with guns will come after me. I suppose it is unreasonable, certainly futile, to ask the Beast to take your advice and cut services. And when membership is essentially free, no luck in curtailing the number of members. Yes, I got my tax stuff in front of me and I am just procrastinating. Don't mind me. :(
-
While I do not recommend asking a club about its finances . . . .
Assuming you are seriously interested in becoming a member, why not ask? That's something I would recommend.
Now that I think about it you are probably correct, although I rarely find members well informed about the issue.
-
One fundamental problem with club membership structure is the fact that people move much more often today than they did in the past. If working my way up within my company were a primary goal of mine, I would probably never join a club because I would be much more likely to move within the next couple of years. Because I know we are unlikely to move, I can join.
I would think clubs would want upwardly mobile professionals as members. There has to be a membership structure that can accomodate someone that will live in town for a limited period of time.
-
One fundamental problem with club membership structure is the fact that people move much more often today than they did in the past. If working my way up within my company were a primary goal of mine, I would probably never join a club because I would be much more likely to move within the next couple of years. Because I know we are unlikely to move, I can join.
I would think clubs would want upwardly mobile professionals as members. There has to be a membership structure that can accomodate someone that will live in town for a limited period of time.
This is a huge,and currently unsolvable,problem in my part of the world.
-
One fundamental problem with club membership structure is the fact that people move much more often today than they did in the past. If working my way up within my company were a primary goal of mine, I would probably never join a club because I would be much more likely to move within the next couple of years. Because I know we are unlikely to move, I can join.
I would think clubs would want upwardly mobile professionals as members. There has to be a membership structure that can accomodate someone that will live in town for a limited period of time.
That has been an issue for the past 50 years, and it was a consideration early in my career, albeit, in hindsight, not one deserving much merit. Folks with some stretch in an organization who love golf can typically make room in their budgets, particularly if they're joining as junior members. Assuming that they might return and are the type of members a club wishes to keep, they can probably go on non-resident or inactive status. Club Corp. and other non-equity private, multi-club owners also provide the attractive option of being able to transfer the membership to a location of the new job.
Next to the condition of the economy and the risk of stable employment which in the past 20 years or so has affected white-collar workers as much as it always has their blue collar colleagues, I think that the time pressures on the groups who join clubs coupled with the availability of very good CCFADs at much lower prices might have something to do with the decline in the private club market. I suspect that the number of members at private clubs who only play a handful of times each year has decreased considerably. It takes a special person to not give a passing thought to the cost per round. And if the a la carte alternative down the street is just as good and a great deal cheaper, why not?
-
Lou:
While the potential of moving out of town has always been a barrier for some to join private clubs, the difference now from 25-50 years ago is that there are more options available to someone who opts NOT to join a club -- better daily-fee courses, destination clubs for long weekends, and a much better selection of resort courses. The old-school private clubs have made a mistake in not addressing this in their structure -- though of course, the best of them don't have to.
-
One fundamental problem with club membership structure is the fact that people move much more often today than they did in the past. If working my way up within my company were a primary goal of mine, I would probably never join a club because I would be much more likely to move within the next couple of years. Because I know we are unlikely to move, I can join.
I would think clubs would want upwardly mobile professionals as members. There has to be a membership structure that can accomodate someone that will live in town for a limited period of time.
This is exactly why you call the membership director. Clubs are very flexible if you are a serious golfer who will become an asset to the club.
I'll never forget the 45 minute phone conversation I had with the membership director at St.Louis CC. I was young and not familiar with true old money clubs. He could not have been nicer and actually made me feel that I just might get in if I survived the eight year vetting process. It would have been impossible to outline on an internet page.
-
This is exactly why you call the membership director. Clubs are very flexible if you are a serious golfer who will become an asset to the club.
I'll never forget the 45 minute phone conversation I had with the membership director at St.Louis CC. I was young and not familiar with true old money clubs. He could not have been nicer and actually made me feel that I just might get in if I survived the eight year vetting process. It would have been impossible to outline on an internet page.
John,
You are referencing a conversation from 20+ years ago? I think that is an incorrect reference point, and to be candid I think you are stretching the truth. There was someone with the title of "Membership Director" at Saint Louis Country Club 20some years ago? Please clarify.
-
This is exactly why you call the membership director. Clubs are very flexible if you are a serious golfer who will become an asset to the club.
I'll never forget the 45 minute phone conversation I had with the membership director at St.Louis CC. I was young and not familiar with true old money clubs. He could not have been nicer and actually made me feel that I just might get in if I survived the eight year vetting process. It would have been impossible to outline on an internet page.
John,
You are referencing a conversation from 20+ years ago? I think that is an incorrect reference point, and to be candid I think you are stretching the truth. There was someone with the title of "Membership Director" at Saint Louis Country Club 20some years ago? Please clarify.
JakaB stretching the truth? Say it isn't so!!! :o
-
Mike,
I can respond later. On way to ride bikes with the wife.
-
I had to stop at Sears to take a dump, so let me clarify. I called StLCC to join after 9/11/2001 because I was already a member of VN. If I were to guess I would say that I left my name and number and was called back by the director of the membership committee. I went on to join Norwood Hills instead. Even at Norwood I obtained a variance from their stated rules on the distance required to be a national member. I also was not required to introduce my wife to the women's committee when I told them that she didn't know all the clubs where I had memberships and I did not plan on telling her about this one. My point being, all this is impossible over the internet.
Back on the bike!!
-
When times are good, there are folks with excess $$$ who don't analyze the bottom line down to the last penny.
Times won't be good for most for a long long long long time. If you want to succeed with the model as is, you'd best be catering to one of the extremes.
-
Fascinating thread!
Put me in the camp of guys in their 30's who have searched all the private clubs' websites around me to see how much it would be to join.
I just want to play golf. I love the game. I don't want to call anyone until I know it's within the realm of possibility of affording it. And if I do contact them, it's more likely to be through email, than by calling them. Looks like I'm not the only one.
I don't have a lot of extra time away from work and family to play, mostly very early in the morning. I work from home, so am not going to meet other members of clubs in the office, etc.
One of the main reasons I participate in golf forums is to meet new golfers to play with. Luckily, I don't have to play thousands of dollars to sign up and hundreds of dollars a month to do that!
-
I do agree there needs to be some level of privacy, I mean it is a private course. However, times are different now than they used to be. You can find out financial information on almost any person or business on the internet. We are in an age where we have access to whatever we want, whenever we want, from anywhere. As a matter of fact, you can really get all of this info pretty easily. If, as someone stated previously, a club price competes against another, they can do as little as send an email, make a call, or stop by that club and gather all of the financial information, or even have a friend do it for them so they can get it. Since it is as easy as that, why not put the info out for all to see.
I think the best solution would be at the very least, to list your categories, and the monthly price of said membership, along with some type of description of the additional fees. Leave the initiation out of it. I think that is one of the bigger identifiers of the level and exclusivity of the place. It also allows the club to decide on the fly how they would apply it, if they choose. Most people making a decision based on the money associated with it know if they can afford $300, $400, $500 or $600 per month. That number often times will tell what the initiation would likely be.
The Louisville Business Journal recently released financial info on all the not-for-profit clubs in the area and how they had performed the last 4 years. It was an interesting look at what is going on in the area, especially if you are aware of the clubs in our area. I will have to find it again and link it here.
-
I have been following this thread closely as I can relate to the frustrations shared by the posters. I am 36 and have taken advantage of junior membership deals at a couple clubs over the past 10 years. I subsequently declined full membership when I reached the age where full membership was required. I did my research and have found other options that will satisfy my golf needs.
While I really enjoyed the golf aspect at these clubs, the following "extras" are really just added barriers to playing golf and increase the cost of membership to levels that I can't justify.
- Mandatory Caddies - While everyone enjoys having a caddy, the fact is that the going rate of $70-$80 in the northeast is not sustainable. There might be value in paying that much for a caddy when you have never played the course, but after your 50th round, what can a caddy really add to the round other that carrying the bag? This rate has also pushed out the high school kid in favor of the career caddy at most clubs. Why is there such a stigma around carrying your own bag or pulling a cart?
- Club Tournaments - I've paid my dues and now I have to pay a fee to play on a Saturday morning because there is an ABCD best ball going on? On top of that I'm not going to be able to play the back tees and I'm paired with partners who have no chance of breaking 100. It seems like there are two of these weekend tournaments every month at most clubs.
- Restaurant Minimums - I have no interest in eating dinner at a club. I don't like subsidizing the restaurant for the 30 members who want the restaurant open 6 days a week. The entire board of the club is usually found within this group of 30 members.
- Climate - This is obviously geography related but we have a 7 month golf season at best in the northeast. Paying full monthly dues when you have no use for the club November to March is a tough one to get your head around.
- Debt - Most clubs have it right now and it will be 10-20 years before its paid off. Many boards have taken the "kick the can down the road" strategy to address necessary capital improvements. Even worse, the debt is usually related to the clubhouse which I don't even want in the first place. When you are my age and pay your initiation fee, you have assumed this debt.
I see that most clubs are trying to add services in order to attract more members. I think the best model for many clubs is to reduce services and focus on core operations. This would negate the need for more members and help to drive down costs for 90% of members who really just want to play golf.
Great post!!!
-
One fundamental problem with club membership structure is the fact that people move much more often today than they did in the past. If working my way up within my company were a primary goal of mine, I would probably never join a club because I would be much more likely to move within the next couple of years. Because I know we are unlikely to move, I can join.
I would think clubs would want upwardly mobile professionals as members. There has to be a membership structure that can accomodate someone that will live in town for a limited period of time.
Great observation, Jason! Being a club member stopped for me after 30 years, when I moved for a 'short term' job. For 10 years, I've been 18-24 months away from moving back to where I came from. As a result I've never joined a private club here, not wanting to put up the initiation fee for a short period of membership.
I can't say that I have a solution. A club needs people to commit, otherwise it's little more than a public course. Some 'membership exchange' that clubs could belong to and allow initiation fees to transfer among them might work, although the logistics of that would be difficult, as would getting it to critical mass.
One would think that the 'country club for a day' concept would do better for this type of player, but CCFADs seem to be little more than high priced publics. What I miss from membership is having a group of guys that play together regularly and a closed population where one can always show up and know someone for a match. If somehow non-private courses could foster that tight community of players, it would be a success. I've seen the 'inner club' idea at some publics, but not often and usually limited to old farts. Unfortunately I'm approaching that classification :).
For me, a private club has always been entirely about enjoying my fellow members and having a decent course. I could care less about the rest of the amenities.
-
While I do not recommend asking a club about its finances . . . .
Assuming you are seriously interested in becoming a member, why not ask? That's something I would recommend.
Now that I think about it you are probably correct, although I rarely find members well informed about the issue.
Then, I would suggest, going to the membership committee, GM, or someone who does know. If that doesn't work, for whatever reason, this may be a club you should pass up.
-
I'm not sure what all the fuss is about. Guess what- private clubs have heard of the internet. They are free to post their fees on a website. Some do. This is generally a sign that the membership isn't full or close to it. If a guy isn't willing to play a course with a couple members, really check out the course and the club, and get the real scoop on the place in the process, then perhaps they should sit home and look for Groupons for their local pitch and putt. If you don't like all the stuff that comes with a full service country club, then join a golf club. There are clubs out there for all demographics- families, hard-core sticks, folks who want tons of service and luxury and guys who prefer great golf and a cooler of beers and sandwiches. And yes, finding the perfect club for you involves more than googling it in your jockeys.
-
My point being, all this is impossible over the internet.
I had a friend compare the process of applying to private golf clubs as similar to applying to private colleges:
- The ROI rarely works - http://www.bestcolleges.com/features/best-roi-colleges/
- The membership committee and admission committee process is unclear/black box
- SAT's and handicaps are NOT really optional
- What you actually pay versus the other members/students is often similar to airline seating pricing, it varies
- Both golf courses and colleges hate ranking :) - http://www.reed.edu/apply/news_and_articles/college_rankings.html
Somehow, Harvard (private), Berkley (public), and Cornell (semi-private) all publish their pricing in the internet era, and then all seem to be doing okay.
Does it make sense for private clubs that are down 20-30% in their numbers to publish something like:
Financial Structure - In a perfect world, we could run our non-profit club with a small profit at 200 members @ $10,000 per year. However, we prefer to have a diverse membership in age, demographics and ethnicity. As a result, we look at each golfer on an individual basis, and we hope to achieve a membership of 275 - 325 golfers who love the game, our club, and appreciate their fellow members.
Before you take your shots, I remind all that few would have said that:
- Augusta National in Augusta, Georgia would become the most prestigious golf club in the world
- Sand Hills in the middle of Nebraska would become the #1 modern course in America
- A golf resort on the remote coast of Oregon would become (arguably) the number 1 resort in America
Thinking different in golf seems to work!
-
We all have family, friends, employees and even employers who we would not like to know how much money we piss away on golf. Some of us even have internet stalkers. Pissing away money on a hobby does not compare to sacrificing for your child's education.
I'm really not interested in some jerk googling what I pay for golf. What I will pay next year at LSU, not so much.
-
We all have family, friends, employees and even employers who we would not like to know how much money we piss away on golf. Some of us even have internet stalkers. Pissing away money on a hobby does not compare to sacrificing for your child's education.
I'm really not interested in some jerk googling what I pay for golf. What I will pay next year at LSU, not so much.
John,
Let's be honest, you are many things but terms like "average" "on the mean" or "typical" do not spring to mind.
If your wife does not know all the clubs you belong to, how would anyone else? Oh wait, you have a login at GCA.com, and you have no self-control!
-
Mike,
Great post. I've noticed more Country clubs closing than Golf clubs. I also notice not many Golf Club options, the ones that are, seem to be doing well. It just would be to bad to lose a great gem of a golf course due to stubborn out dated outlooks. It seems to be a lack of adjusting to reality. The quasi-private golf course I play at posts their fees and has a 3-5 year waiting list, they must be doing something wrong....
-
Mike S,
Are you seriously suggesting that you don't have a pretty good idea of what the downstroke and dues are at most of the clubs in your neck of the woods just from experience and word of mouth? If that's the case, and I'm willing to wager a fair amount that it is, then what's to be gained from public disclosure aside from some semblance of egalitarian mental masturbation? Cost is only one of many criteria when evaluating a potential club. One generally has a pretty good idea what economic strata they are in in golf just as in society at large. If you're new to town and have no clue, then it's probably in everyone's best interest for you to spend a season or two getting to know people and clubs in the area before getting out the excel spreadsheet and the Vaseline.
-
We all have family, friends, employees and even employers who we would not like to know how much money we piss away on golf. Some of us even have internet stalkers. Pissing away money on a hobby does not compare to sacrificing for your child's education.
I'm really not interested in some jerk googling what I pay for golf. What I will pay next year at LSU, not so much.
John,
Let's be honest, you are many things but terms like "average" "on the mean" or "typical" do not spring to mind.
If your wife does not know all the clubs you belong to, how would anyone else? Oh wait, you have a login at GCA.com, and you have no self-control!
Exactly, and that's why they build public courses that subscribe to Golfnow.com. Go play!!!
-
Mike S,
Are you seriously suggesting that you don't have a pretty good idea of what the downstroke and dues are at most of the clubs in your neck of the woods just from experience and word of mouth? If that's the case, and I'm willing to wager a fair amount that it is, then what's to be gained from public disclosure aside from some semblance of egalitarian mental masturbation? Cost is only one of many criteria when evaluating a potential club. One generally has a pretty good idea what economic stratus they are in in golf just as in society at large. If you're new to town and have no clue, then it's probably in everyone's best interest for you to spend a season or two getting to know people and clubs in the area before getting out the excel spreadsheet and the Vaseline.
I know EXACTLY what the numbers are, but I think it is pretty clear that I have some issues, golf being one of them. ;) As I said earlier in the thread, "information is the cure".
I have an ability in life to separate myself from a conversation. I love golf, not as much as Pat Mucci or John Kavanaugh, and I would like to see more "Golf Clubs" come out of this recession. I am sure that John and Pat disagree with much of what I am saying. While I get a kick out of that because they are my friends, I am truly interested in the "Euro Model" for golf in this country.
I am headed to Maine for July 4th, which I chose over many other locations. Some small part of it is due to my appreciation for the Euro-style of golf in Maine. I have always loved Cape Arundel for its course, it's clubhouse with a few candy bars and Gatorades, and its membership with lobsterman in plaid shirts and jeans (now made popular by Brooklyn Hipsters) and former a President of the United States who plays golf in long sleeved Brooks Brothers button downs!
-
Exactly, and that's why they build public courses that subscribe to Golfnow.com. Go play!!!
Oh come on, have a real conversation. There are two private clubs on Long Island that are Garden City-ish in my opinion. Reality is I am in Connecticut on weekends but I would love to join either one if they:
- Blew up the clubhouses
- Turned them into golf clubs
Under the current structure, they will probably not last since I can play them almost anytime other than Saturday mornings via a reciprocal at a slight premium to Bethpage Black in terms of pricing.
-
Mike,
FYI- I agree with you. We just may not agree with how we get there. My contention is that it's the inexorable economic and demographic changes that we will continue to see over the balance of our lifetimes that will bring about change. No amount of verbal regurgitation by naval gazing GCA futurists can speed up what Father Time has in store for us IMO. We are definitely becoming more European, well beyond golf. Of course this has it's own baggage, both good and bad...
-
Mike,
I don't see the issue in your life. You know for a fact that you can walk in any club in the country and get a better deal than what would be posted for public view. You have two choices, fellow members who are not afraid of interpersonal relationships or click and pick internet guys. What do you choose?
-
Mike,
I don't see the issue in your life. You know for a fact that you can walk in any club in the country and get a better deal than what would be posted for public view. You have two choices, fellow members who are not afraid of interpersonal relationships or click and pick internet guys. What do you choose?
I already stated that I don't personalize this stuff for me. I love my golf life. I am just a guy who loves golf, not a rater, not looking for freebies, not looking for access (anymore :) ), not looking to make money off of golf....
I see the changes in the next generation in many phases of life outside of golf. I played Middle Bay CC on Long Island a few years back with Gib and we both were surprised at how we liked, not loved, this RTJ golf course. It is now on its 2nd re-opening this season:
http://www.southbaycountryclub.com
This was NOT one of the two courses that I referenced earlier, but it seems like it could be a nice Euro-style golf membership but they seem to be doing the updated 2nd tier country club model with "Catering" featured prominently on the menu before golf. Yes, Golfnow.com is more appealing to me on that one.
-
Mike
Do you think there is a certain stigma about privates that pushes some folks into thinking don't think they belong there? Do you think publishing dues and entrance fees is one way to break down a barrier thats puts people off privates? Why do you think the British style of golf membership hasn't taken off in the US?
Its an interesting question about knowing the situation about privates in one's area. I don't know the story about all the clubs around me. I can take a good guess and probably be ball parking it pretty well for dues, but I wouldn't know about joining fees - that can be radically different even in the low brow area for golf that I live.
Anyway, I think the point of publishing more data about membership fees and the process is one way struggling clubs can reach out for members. I don't think anybody is saying it should be done across the board. For me though, its very helpful because I don't want to talk to a suit over the phone just to get basic info on the club. Its not much different when thinking about visiting a club. If the info isn't on the website, I usually give that course a miss unless I know its one I really want to play. In essence, I want my leisure time to be easily organized and any extra effort required to enjoy myself doesn't go over well with me. I am sure there are swaths of younger folks who may take my line of thinking even further.
Ciao
-
Why do folks here (Sean, Jud, Sully) suggest private clubs that post detailed information on their membership costs are struggling, or hurting for membership? Maybe they are being run by people who recognize the Thurmans, Tucholskis, and Doxeys (and Sweeneys! ;)) of the world have a point, and greater transparency might actually be a good thing for a club (and even a marketing ploy for the under-45 set that will probably make or break a bunch of private clubs in the near term).
When I did a bit of digging on the five major clubs in my town, I found: detailed financial information on membership from two of them; and little to no information about the cost of memberships from the remaining three (with the least amount of information from the club I'd be most inclined to join -- sigh....). Dig far enough into one club's website, and you'll find the kind of pablum that could be said of any of thousands of clubs around the country: http://www.bishopsbay.com/_filelib/FileCabinet/FAQs/FAQs_for_website.pdf
-
- What you actually pay versus the other members/students is often similar to airline seating pricing, it varies
I am aware of your egalitarian bent, but if many private clubs are already having a problem competing, wouldn't posting joining fees and monthlies on the internet be counterproductive? Do you play poker with all your cards showing?
Publishing sticker prices that no one pays invites haggling while possibly discouraging some who self-qualify solely on that basis. If I was a manager responsible for the long term well-being of a club, I'd prefer the flexibility to cut deals based on its needs and each candidate's qualifications. Not all prospective members are created equal, and nothing is probably more debilitating to the club's culture and daily vibe than to have a bunch of new members who everybody knows got in for pennies on the dollar (I know, I've been on both ends of this).
-
The more I think about it, the clearer it is that the world is full of clubs that think they're Neapolitan Mastiffs when they're really Norfolk Terriers. Part of the allure of a Neapolitan is that it doesn't give a shit about little people, but terriers only thrive if they're friendly and welcoming, and they get put down if they're standoffish and borderline hostile. The US private club model has bred too many litters of terriers with distemper. The average club as we know it is doomed.
-
I shudder to think about what the landscape will be 20 years from now. How many courses will go the way of the Links Club? This board will be littered with threads waxing poetic about the past, which could have been avoided.
-
- What you actually pay versus the other members/students is often similar to airline seating pricing, it varies
I am aware of your egalitarian bent, but if many private clubs are already having a problem competing, wouldn't posting joining fees and monthlies on the internet be counterproductive? Do you play poker with all your cards showing?
Publishing sticker prices that no one pays invites haggling while possibly discouraging some who self-qualify solely on that basis. If I was a manager responsible for the long term well-being of a club, I'd prefer the flexibility to cut deals based on its needs and each candidate's qualifications. Not all prospective members are created equal, and nothing is probably more debilitating to the club's culture and daily vibe than to have a bunch of new members who everybody knows got in for pennies on the dollar (I know, I've been on both ends of this).
I'm not aware of any club that cuts deals on a candidate-by-candidate basis--I'd be curious to know the ones that do. Around here (in DC), clubs are always tweaking their initiation fees, incentives, etc., but if two people join the same day they get the same deal as each other--or at least that's the way it happens where I belong. It might be different than the deal offered one year ago or one year from now, but today's deal is the same for everyone. Of course, maybe I'm the one who got fleeced by paying sticker when I joined!
(On a related note, one of the relatively more contentious issues at my club arose from the fact that 25 or so years ago, the club was extending something like equity/refundable memberships to new members, as well as existing members who paid for the option. There were thus two categories of "full" members--those who could leave and get their money back, and those who couldn't--and when the club decided to go back to non-equity/non-refundable memberships only, that created some tension as equity members started leaving.)
-
Phil,
Do you find at least a little irony in the fact that the club you'd be most likely to join doesn't post fees? Do you honestly have no clue as to what the rough costs are? Why is that the one you'd most want to join? Best course, membership, location, amenities? How would them posting their fees affect your desire to join, unless the prices were radically different than your initial ballpark figure? Do you know any members of this club? You don't strike me as the type who's too timid to ask a couple of pertinent questions of them if you were serious about joining.
It seems it varies greatly by location. While I'm generalizing, clubs in good standing in major metro areas, as a rule, don't post prices. For instance, so far I've found 1 club of dozens in the Chicago area that lists a corporate membership price. I'm flabbergasted that guys seem to have no idea of what the costs are. That means 1) you've never belonged to a private club and 2) you don't socialize or work with many people who belong to a private club and 3) you've played very few private clubs and 4) you aren't serious about joining anyway. Guys (not Phil ) are falling all over themselves defending the rights of clubs to exclude whoever they want and trotting out freedom of association rights in First Amendment cases on one hand, yet at the same time get their panties in a bunch if the same club doesn't post the locker and range ball fee on their website? Give me a break. CLUBS ARE NOT FAILING BECAUSE THEY DON'T POST PRICING FOR EVERYONE TO SEE. Rant over...
-
Lou states:
I am aware of your egalitarian bent, but if many private clubs are already having a problem competing, wouldn't posting joining fees and monthlies on the internet be counterproductive? Do you play poker with all your cards showing?
1. Just trying to help out the sons of immigrants! :D
2. When you play poker, it is with a fixed number of players. Private clubs have a shrinking number of players.
Lou states:
Publishing sticker prices that no one pays invites haggling while possibly discouraging some who self-qualify solely on that basis. If I was a manager responsible for the long term well-being of a club, I'd prefer the flexibility to cut deals based on its needs and each candidate's qualifications. Not all prospective members are created equal, and nothing is probably more debilitating to the club's culture and daily vibe than to have a bunch of new members who everybody knows got in for pennies on the dollar (I know, I've been on both ends of this).
As I mentioned earlier, the original private clubs that started to publish sticker prices are private universities. At one point in time, Harvard was all-white male basically WASP and guys named Sweeney and Duran were sent packing to Chestnut Hill (BC) and Amherst (UMass, not Amherst College). Now Harvard is one of the most diverse clubs in the world, and seems to be doing pretty well and very few are paying the same price:
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/04/05/economic-diversity-at-harvard-cont/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0
People need to understand that golf, education, politics and many other seemingly "social causes/events/organizations" are businesses with a P&L. If I was a club manager, I would follow Harvard's lead rather than the City Athletic Club:
http://www.squashtalk.com/html/columns/junjulaug02/diner-2002-7.htm
"the loss of the City Athletic Club doubles court and of the highly-respected institution itself constitute a heavy psychological blow, on both a squash and a social level, and provide yet another sobering and cautionary reminder of time's relentless passage."
Back to work on MY P&L :)
-
Phil,
Do you find at least a little irony in the fact that the club you'd be most likely to join doesn't post fees? Do you honestly have no clue as to what the rough costs are? Why is that the one you'd most want to join? Best course, membership, location, amenities? How would them posting their fees affect your desire to join, unless the prices were radically different than your initial ballpark figure? Do you know any members of this club? You don't strike me as the type who's too timid to ask a couple of pertinent questions of them if you were serious about joining.
It seems it varies greatly by location. While I'm generalizing, clubs in good standing in major metro areas, as a rule, don't post prices. For instance, so far I've found 1 club of dozens in the Chicago area that lists a corporate membership price. I'm flabbergasted that guys seem to have no idea of what the costs are. That means 1) you've never belonged to a private club and 2) you don't socialize or work with many people who belong to a private club and 3) you've played very few private clubs and 4) you aren't serious about joining anyway. Guys (not Phil ) are falling all over themselves defending the rights of clubs to exclude whoever they want and trotting out freedom of association rights in First Amendment cases on one hand, yet at the same time get their panties in a bunch if the same club doesn't post the locker and range ball fee on their website? Give me a break. CLUBS ARE NOT FAILING BECAUSE THEY DON'T POST PRICING FOR EVERYONE TO SEE. Rant over...
Jud:
This is all an intellectual exercise for me; I cannot see any circumstances in the next decade where I would join a club locally. On the other hand, if I were to consider it (as I mentioned earlier in this thread), I don't think I'd have too much trouble finding out enough details of a particular club to get a decent idea of what I was getting into.
But your current residence and mine I think are pretty good test cases for Sweeney's original query. Madison certainly doesn't have the kind of quality (GCA speaking ;)) private clubs that you'd find in Philly, Chicago or Westchester County. But it has five private clubs of varying quality, three of which I'd be happy to play regularly as a club member. What this area does have is the kind of thing Tom Doak mentioned -- a large number of daily fee courses that surely compete against the privates as a choice for golfers in the area (that weren't around 25 years ago). And Wisconsin has a bunch of high-quality CCFADs (with more to come ;)) that provide a top-flight experience -- both in the golf quality and overall amenities -- that are another layer of competition for the privates around here. A relatively golf-centric person moving to Madison has to weigh all of that in deciding whether or not s/he wants to join a club. I'm glad to see there are at least a couple of local clubs that seem to recognize that, and provide some financial details at the click of a button.
Chicago seems even more of a case for doing so: a bunch (really, quite a lot...) of quality privates, a public golf scene that seems somewhat indifferent, and a CCFAD landscape that is mixed ((Harborside and Thunderhawk? I'll take Bonnie Brook; we'll both take Spring Valley, arguably a suburb if you stretch the definition.... :o). So what's Thurman or Doxey to do when he gets promoted to a job in Chicago that affords him the opportunity to join a club? OK, it doesn't take a genius to figure out he's not getting into Chicago GC or Old Elm for a while. But how to distinguish among the others? You and I might know the differences pretty well (as would Thurman), but we're geeks and therefore outliers; what about the guy who just wants to join a club for all the right reasons, but doesn't want to waste his investment on what might turn out to be the wrong choice? Might providing some kind of public information be worth it in the long run for some clubs?
-
I'm not aware of any club that cuts deals on a candidate-by-candidate basis--I'd be curious to know the ones that do.
(On a related note, one of the relatively more contentious issues at my club arose from the fact that 25 or so years ago, the club was extending something like equity/refundable memberships to new members, as well as existing members who paid for the option. There were thus two categories of "full" members--those who could leave and get their money back, and those who couldn't--and when the club decided to go back to non-equity/non-refundable memberships only, that created some tension as equity members started leaving.)
It is less common in DFW today than it was two to three years ago, but I am aware of different deals being cut right now at "needy" clubs, even at places that swear that such is not happening. The problem as you note is exemplified in an excellent area club which offered a special, limited access deal to get new people to try it with the hope that enough would step up to the full membership level. It was mispriced (no joining fee, starting at $59/month), and it totally alienated the existing membership, many who paid $10k+ to join, and $500+/month. Though the program was restructured and most of the 250 or so "$59 members" (as the old guard called them) are gone, I have reports that the relative few who have ponied up to full membership still get the cold shoulder.
So what's Thurman or Doxey to do when he gets promoted to a job in Chicago that affords him the opportunity to join a club? OK, it doesn't take a genius to figure out he's not getting into Chicago GC or Old Elm for a while. But how to distinguish among the others? You and I might know the differences pretty well (as would Thurman), but we're geeks and therefore outliers; what about the guy who just wants to join a club for all the right reasons, but doesn't want to waste his investment on what might turn out to be the wrong choice? Might providing some kind of public information be worth it in the long run for some clubs?
It comes down to how much you want to join a club and the amount of due diligence you are willing to do. Unless the cost of joining and remaining are nominal- in which case you know that there is likely a problem with the club and/or the local economy- the best method I've found is to talk to a variety of existing members and to carefully evaluate what they have to say. Clubs in difficult circumstances might consider trial periods- one upscale CC locally deferred the joining fee for one year, allowing the new member to evaluate if the club suited his needs. The economy doing very well currently, the club no longer offers that option and my proposal for a shorter term to another club I was interested in pursuing was rejected. In most places, I suspect that Jason would have little trouble gathering the information he needs in short order to evaluate a joining opportunity.
Mike Sweeney-
It is because I do understand that these organizations are businesses that I don't want to tie their hands with unreasonable, unreliable requirements or expectations. What good is knowing that the tuition sticker at Harvard is $50k if it doesn't reflect what a great number of students who get in actually pay? Doesn't projecting an incorrect estimate of cost (or value) defeat the benefits of transparency? Double Keystone a product to then offer a 50% discount is hardly beneficial to the consumer unless he values psychic rewards (he thinks he got a great deal) more than hard cash in his pocket. As to diversity, we can have a long discussion about its costs and benefits another time, another place.
-
No time to post in depth but I can assure you that there are no "special deals" at our place. Nor are we an ultra elite club with a long waiting list. Our members also see the financials every year
-
Mike Sweeney, et. al.,
It's a matter of money and value, only. You can continue to try and obfuscate and draw up straw men but the people who have posted on this site from the generation you old people are trying understand are telling you it's an economic issue. Certainly there are some ancillary issues but THE issue is money and whether the person sees a value in spending the money.
-
The private club isn't just selling golf, they're selling a lifestyle. But, it's still a 'business", for the club and prospective member/consumer.
-
Mike Sweeney, et. al.,
It's a matter of money and value, only. You can continue to try and obfuscate and draw up straw men but the people who have posted on this site from the generation you old people are trying understand are telling you it's an economic issue. Certainly there are some ancillary issues but THE issue is money and whether the person sees a value in spending the money.
Then why do they post here that they would join if the could just click and pick from their couch?
-
JK,
They wouldn't join, they just want to know the information. If they were serious about joining they wouldn't create imaginary barriers.
-
JC; Well put. Quite simply, their appear to be many who either don't buy into the value proposition and/or would like to belong to/play the courses but can't afford it. Accordingly, they challenge the premise upon which the clubs are built. If enough people maintain that view for a long enough period, some clubs will fold. the unanswered question is whether a model will evolve to allow the courses to survive and provide the kind of golf that the same people expect? Perhaps we will evolve to a more european model with less exclusivity, lower maintenance standards etc. Alternatively, we may just have fewer golf courses. I suspect it will be some of both. Much depends on the state of the economy over the long term.
-
Phil,
Do you find at least a little irony in the fact that the club you'd be most likely to join doesn't post fees? Do you honestly have no clue as to what the rough costs are? Why is that the one you'd most want to join? Best course, membership, location, amenities? How would them posting their fees affect your desire to join, unless the prices were radically different than your initial ballpark figure? Do you know any members of this club? You don't strike me as the type who's too timid to ask a couple of pertinent questions of them if you were serious about joining.
It seems it varies greatly by location. While I'm generalizing, clubs in good standing in major metro areas, as a rule, don't post prices. For instance, so far I've found 1 club of dozens in the Chicago area that lists a corporate membership price. I'm flabbergasted that guys seem to have no idea of what the costs are. That means 1) you've never belonged to a private club and 2) you don't socialize or work with many people who belong to a private club and 3) you've played very few private clubs and 4) you aren't serious about joining anyway. Guys (not Phil ) are falling all over themselves defending the rights of clubs to exclude whoever they want and trotting out freedom of association rights in First Amendment cases on one hand, yet at the same time get their panties in a bunch if the same club doesn't post the locker and range ball fee on their website? Give me a break. CLUBS ARE NOT FAILING BECAUSE THEY DON'T POST PRICING FOR EVERYONE TO SEE. Rant over...
Jud,
Take Toledo a small market. The privates don't post their fees either. Who is advocating club's must post their fees by using the gov't as a means??? It is one aspect that has do to with clubs failing!!! Maint is one of the other biggies, as is FAMILY MEMBERSHIP MODEL instead of INDIVIDUAL MODEL. You state that if clubs post their fees then they are failing, which is a blanket statement. I qualify for all 4 of your criteria.. Go compare the Australia and English models to America (private clubs). I'd be happy to compare Australia's top course fees with most of the top US 100 fees.
-
I'm not sure the English model is one that would work here. I think we want some sort of exclusivity and don't want to share the course with daily fee people. Many courses already have a quasi-English model, in the form of the season pass.
-
I'm not sure the English model is one that would work here. I think we want some sort of exclusivity and don't want to share the course with daily fee people. Many courses already have a quasi-English model, in the form of the season pass.
JC,
Take the Australia model. Please explain the English private model, i didn't know that the public was allowed on Sat morning? What if that exclusivity is hanging on by it's chin and is a great course that could potentially end up a housing development? Due to inability of old folk (who make the rules) to adjust or open up their eyes to another model? Season passes are offered at public US courses with no restricted times for those season pass members (so it is pointless).
-
- What you actually pay versus the other members/students is often similar to airline seating pricing, it varies
I am aware of your egalitarian bent, but if many private clubs are already having a problem competing, wouldn't posting joining fees and monthlies on the internet be counterproductive? Do you play poker with all your cards showing?
Lou,
You are all over the place. Don't you advocate prices for healthcare, yet when it come to private golf you use Poker as an example?? What a laugh.
-
Why do folks here (Sean, Jud, Sully) suggest private clubs that post detailed information on their membership costs are struggling, or hurting for membership? Maybe they are being run by people who recognize the Thurmans, Tucholskis, and Doxeys (and Sweeneys! ;)) of the world have a point, and greater transparency might actually be a good thing for a club (and even a marketing ploy for the under-45 set that will probably make or break a bunch of private clubs in the near term).
Phil,
My earlier comment about Maple Bluff struggling wasn't based on them posting their prices online, it was based on them offering zero initiation fee and zero dues for several months.
Regarding the posting of dues and ancillary costs online, I suspect it will increase but will have no impact on the clubs health.
Will one of you guys that think it's valuable (necessary even) please explain how having costs online makes it more likely for you to join a club?
-
I'm not sure the English model is one that would work here. I think we want some sort of exclusivity and don't want to share the course with daily fee people. Many courses already have a quasi-English model, in the form of the season pass.
JC,
Take the Australia model. Please explain the English private model, i didn't know that the public was allowed on Sat morning? What if that exclusivity is hanging on by it's chin and is a great course that could potentially end up a housing development? Due to inability of old folk (who make the rules) to adjust or open up their eyes to another model? Season passes are offered at public US courses with no restricted times for those season pass members (so it is pointless).
Season passes are valuable for public courses like Radrick or others because they give the value to the public golfer who likes the "feeling" of private. I don't think exclusivity will ever go out of fashion because not everyone wants to hang out with you or anyone else, even if you or they can "pay the fee."
-
I'm not sure the English model is one that would work here. I think we want some sort of exclusivity and don't want to share the course with daily fee people. Many courses already have a quasi-English model, in the form of the season pass.
JC,
Take the Australia model. Please explain the English private model, i didn't know that the public was allowed on Sat morning? What if that exclusivity is hanging on by it's chin and is a great course that could potentially end up a housing development? Due to inability of old folk (who make the rules) to adjust or open up their eyes to another model? Season passes are offered at public US courses with no restricted times for those season pass members (so it is pointless).
Season passes are valuable for public courses like Radrick or others because they give the value to the public golfer who likes the "feeling" of private. I don't think exclusivity will ever go out of fashion because not everyone wants to hang out with you or anyone else, even if you or they can "pay the fee."
It is a season membership pass, they have the right to not renew a membership from the likes of you ;D!
Yeah, exclusivity is really doing well! Does your club have a 3-5 year waiting list?
-
I'm not sure the English model is one that would work here. I think we want some sort of exclusivity and don't want to share the course with daily fee people. Many courses already have a quasi-English model, in the form of the season pass.
JC,
1. I really don't understand what you are saying, please clarify.
2. I have taken many cheap shot at your Midwest roots, but once you drive above Fairfield County (CT) and exclude "Inside 128" in Boston, New England golf has a different vibe. Private is much closer to London than NYC.
3. I said "Euro" not "England". John Kavanaugh will take his cheap shots at me, but the reality is I am a member of Enniscrone Golf Club in Ireland. It makes no sense, and John will not dip into his frequent flyer account to even visit his heritage let alone pay a membership fee in Ireland. I hide it from my 1/2 English, 1/2 Ukraine wife (who is dreaming of Bruce Springsteen at some fake Rock n Roll event in Brooklyn on a "Girl Power" night as we type), and everybody is happy that way :) Well, John is tortured because he has to play flat courses and we all know that he really wants to be a real member of a MacRaynor course :)
4. Okay, 2 and 3 are GCA.com humor, but "exclusivity" is the most boring thing in the world to me. I know enough guys like me.
-
Mike,
I know enough guys like you too ;D
-
What's the point of this thread? I stopped paying attention days ago. Honestly, I've been staring at photos of Meghan Hardin instead.
According to the federal government, I believe I have a right to a club membership regardless of cost or ability to pay. As for exclusivity, this is the age of Obama; exclusivity is a thing of the past! So when can I expect my membership number from Seminole?
-
There is no point beyond hearing from people of our generation, Hoover, explaining the issues in joining more clubs. Beyond that it is a bunch of old people and others who don't or haven't belonged to clubs trying to explain why more people of the under 35 generation don't belong to clubs. Nonsense, really.
-
There is no point beyond hearing from people of our generation, Hoover, explaining the issues in joining more clubs. Beyond that it is a bunch of old people and others who don't or haven't belonged to clubs trying to explain why more people of the under 35 generation don't belong to clubs. Nonsense, really.
So when these old folks die off, and their clubs go belly up, we should buy one in receivership.
-
There is no point beyond hearing from people of our generation, Hoover, explaining the issues in joining more clubs. Beyond that it is a bunch of old people and others who don't or haven't belonged to clubs trying to explain why more people of the under 35 generation don't belong to clubs. Nonsense, really.
So when these old folks die off, and their clubs go belly up, we should buy one in receivership.
;D
We got a winner
-
I stopped paying attention days ago.
According to the federal government, I believe I have a right to a club membership regardless of cost of ability to pay.
Brian,
Congratulations. You just joined the GCA Double Standard Club with Pat Mucci, Tom Doak, and John Kavanaugh.
Who in the world is outlawing private golf clubs?
I totally support private golf, I just think the second tier should be realistic/adjust and they should blow up the club houses, tennis courts, and bocci ball courts. Let's get back to golf and if I have to let a scammer like JC Jones onto my "private" course on a Tuesday at 10 am, let's charge him full freight rather than let him on with a Rater Card so that I can attract more members on a Top 100 list, maybe.
-
Obviously sarcasm is lost on you. I was JOKING.
I don't care for clubhouses, food & beverage minimums and superfluous stuff either. Unfortunately the only true golf club in my area is well out of reach for me.
-
Obviously sarcasm is lost on you. I was JOKING.
I don't care for clubhouses, food & beverage minimums and superfluous stuff either. Unfortunately the only true golf club in my area is well out of reach for me.
Brian,
Honestly, I did not pick up on your humor.
And this is exactly why I started this thread. There is a niche in golf in the USA that is being missed, imo. Every area seems to have one or two "true golf clubs", and it is my opinion that there is a need for two or three.
Sean Arble posted a question about a "stigma" towards public golf. I only have one stigma towards public golf in the NYC (and other) areas. I hate 5 hour rounds, otherwise, I would not drive 45 minutes each way to Yale. There is a GREAT group of golfers at many munis. Unfortunately, I have a architecture hang-up and I can't stand around for for each and every shot. Yale is never a rarely a quick round, but it is never boring even when you don't have your "A" game (channeling Tiger while watching The Masters).
-
Obviously sarcasm is lost on you. I was JOKING.
I don't care for clubhouses, food & beverage minimums and superfluous stuff either. Unfortunately the only true golf club in my area is well out of reach for me.
Brian,
Honestly, I did not pick up on your humor.
And this is exactly why I started this thread. There is a niche in golf in the USA that is being missed, imo. Every area seems to have one or two "true golf clubs", and it is my opinion that there is a need for two or three.
But it doesn't mean I want or need to know about the finances at any club that I'm never going to join.
-
Hoover,
The same yahoo's that love Supply side economics, think it doesn't apply to private golf clubs that are hurting. That is the hypocrisy i love. Voodoo golf club model :D
-
Hoover,
The same yahoo's that love Supply side economics, think it doesn't apply to private golf clubs that are hurting. That is the hypocrisy i love. Voodoo golf club model :D
I haven't read the rest of this thread so I can't comment. I enjoy the occasional steam or hot towel in a posh locker room, and it's awesome to sit in a plush leather chair and sip fine whiskey. But I'd rather play golf.
-
Will one of you guys that think it's valuable (necessary even) please explain how having costs online makes it more likely for you to join a club?
In no way do I think it's necessary for clubs to post membership costs online, I won't even say it will be valuable for a club to post these costs (my experiences below may lead some to believe there is value for some clubs), but I will say I want to see costs. I've said why previously:
I didn’t like that I had to give my name and information to the club and then have the club contact me. I felt like it was the same process when buying a car...From my perspective the only logical reasons to keep the information under wraps is so they can charge different customers different prices without upsetting those that pay more and to allow the sales guys to sell.
Jud said:
I'm flabbergasted that guys seem to have no idea of what the costs are. That means 1) you've never belonged to a private club and 2) you don't socialize or work with many people who belong to a private club and 3) you've played very few private clubs and 4) you aren't serious about joining anyway.
1) Technically I was a member at a private club during the summers when I was 13-14, but I just knew my grandma paid for it as a Christmas gift. I wasn't welcome in the locker room, or dining facility and only on the course and range when full members weren't around 2) I don't socialize or work with many people who belong to a private club. 3) Before joining a club I only played 3 private courses, all as a result of junior golf. 4) I was serious about joining a club and did join a club.
I don't see how it is difficult to comprehend that I wasn't familiar with the process or the finances associated with private clubs. I went to most of high school in Monterey CA. There are a few private courses in the area, and there were outlandish rumors about million dollar membership fees and ex-presidents being denied membership. That was my experience with private clubs.
Sean asked
Do you think there is a certain stigma about privates that pushes some folks into thinking don't think they belong there? Do you think publishing dues and entrance fees is one way to break down a barrier thats puts people off privates?
I can say I grew up under the impression I wasn’t welcomed at private clubs. In the US isn’t it fair to say if you’re not a member or a guest you are not welcome? Less than a block from where I lived in Maine there was a private beach club for those who summered in the area. Locals referred to it as the Mayflower Club because they said you had to be a descendant of someone on the Mayflower to join. I realize now that isn’t the case but it’s symbolic of people’s beliefs. It’s not like I grew up underprivileged. My dad is an officer in the military (there is a pretty rigid caste system between officer and enlisted). I do think publishing dues and entrance fees will at least let people see if it’s a realistic option. If places aren’t publishing prices I assume it’s because they don’t want me to enquire. It makes sense that CPC, PV, Seminole, ANGC, LACC and the likes have no membership information online…they don’t want me there. I get the same message from other private courses that follow the same model…only it may not be the case at other places.
To talk specifics I’m willing to talk about my experiences.
1) We move every 3 years or so due to work but wanted to have a house paid off when we retired. Luckily both of us have managed to finish our undergrad and graduate degrees without debt, so decided to look into buying a house. One of my requirements was it needed to be in an area with great golf. We narrowed down places we thought we would consider living, then started to look at golf courses in these areas. Because we had no real specific locations the number of courses to look at was overwhelming. I ended up looking at places listed online (on sites like this or articles online) that were reportedly good values and I looked at places that published information online. There were definitely a lot of clubs/courses I didn’t consider because I assumed they were impossible to join. We ended up buying a house in Pinehurst and joining the club there (also provides a clubcorp membership). From my perspective it’s very similar to the British club model. Residents of the village have the opportunity to join the club and pay annual dues for playing privileges. I feel very comfortable with this set up. After one of my first posts John K said something condescending about my European Luxury cars to which I responded I drive a 1997 Jeep. I don’t feel like fellow members will look down at me when I park the Jeep in the Pinehurst parking lot. It’s pretty clear there are people that wouldn’t let me through their vetting process because I choose to drive an older car…and that’s probably a good thing because I don’t think I’d enjoy being a member at a club where that is the opinion of most members.
2) We are pretty sure at some point we will move to Dayton OH (thought it was going to be last year) so I looked into the options there. NCR is the big name course in the area. They list their membership categories online and I saw there was a military membership category. I contacted NCR because I saw a listed promotion on their website. If they didn’t list a military membership category, I never would have contacted them. I looked at other courses in the area online and don’t remember seeing information on pricing so haven’t contacted any of them, and chances are when we do move to Dayton I will play my golf at NCR or at the base course.
3) There are a number of US members on this site who spend part of their time in the UK and have overseas memberships. I fully expect to be a member at a club in the UK/Ireland as an overseas/international member. When planning my month+ long trip to the UK I researched overseas memberships because I wanted to play courses that offer overseas memberships so when the time comes to join I’ll know the courses I like. I’ve done the same thing for Ireland, and really appreciate all the information that’s available about courses in Northern Ireland with life memberships. When the Ireland trip occurs I’ll be visiting courses that list life memberships online.
-
Thanks Joe. Your responses help answer my questions. My line of thinking had nothing to do with private clubs being snobbish because they don't publish membership info or that they must publish info. Private clubs can do whatever they want. I was getting more into ways privates that need more members can possibly attract them by offering more info online. It seems like a no brainer to me and is a very common way to operate in the UK - practically all UK clubs need more members :P Besides, publishing online makes it easy for clubs to check up on the competition. It must be a pesky jobfor the Sec to call the local clubs with a fake accent ;)
Ciao
-
Joe,
So you're saying that even though there may be a more enjoyable course or club, and possibly even a less expensive one, you won't bother to look into it because they don't post prices? For instance, Dayton Country Club is a Ross course that also has military memberships. You wouldn't even bother to call to check it out because that makes you feel unwelcome somehow?
I guess I really am a golf snob. I'm more concerned with which course won't bore the s*#% out of me after 200 rounds and has the right vibe and only then decide whether I can afford it and how to go about joining. Interesting to know that others view it more like buying a used car from a snooty fraternity brother.
As Sean states that most UK clubs need members, the Semi-Private model everyone is promoting on this side of the pond, while more politically correct to some, may not be the answer to our prayers.
-
Jud
What are you on about? I think the bottom line for most saying use a webpage to sell a club is about hooking up potential members with a potential club. Why you are so entrenched in thinking that membership info on a website is pointless. Would you be upset if your club published its membership info and if so, why?
Ciao
-
I wouldn't be in favor of it because that would be implying that price is the best thing we have to offer and would attract members accordingly. Golf clubs aren't a commodity. It's not like searching for the cheapest gallon of milk in town. If it is you're wasting a lot of time on the wrong website. :)
-
I wouldn't be in favor of it because that would be implying that price is the best thing we have to offer and would attract members accordingly. Golf clubs aren't a commodity. It's not like searching for the cheapest gallon of milk in town. If it is you're wasting a lot of time on the wrong website. :)
Jud
Thats very bourgeois attitude ;D. Of course, if you have bags of money, money isn't an issue. But if you are on a budget, money is critical. I am talking about the first step of membership - is it affordable? Many don't have to ask themselves that question and they should consider themselves fortunate. For many others the affordable question is easily the most important question. You seem to be talking about a guy who will join a club, its just a question of where. Its fine if clubs don't want to publish membership info, but in addition to many other reasons, it makes it difficult to have sympathy for struggling clubs. I would feel the same about a single sex club. I have no issue with it, but if the club is struggling, wouldn't it make sense to open the doors to other 50% of the population? Again, its about making it easy to hook up potential members with potential clubs. If for any reason a club is seen as standoffish and loses interest because of it, is it down to the customer or the club to change?
I would also say keeping info strictly private puts a lot of power into the hands of office workers. I don't know how many times I have contacted a club and felt the club's rep was less than friendly or helpful. It can be a trivial matter which if happens often enough, can earn a club a poor public rep (in this age of rating sites such as Top100 - its amazing how many comments are about the club welcome) and thus lose even more interest in joining. Sure, snobby culture about who gets in and who doesn't still lingers about in the US and that will be the case forever, but I think this attitude is becoming less prevalent in the age of transparency, or at least it isn't so obvious ;)
Ciao
-
Sean,
Price is certainly important to virtually all of us. I guess the question is are you looking to attract members for whom price is the most important variable. Of course clubs who are struggling need to do whats in the club's best interest. My point is 1) they are- many list pricing and 2) if they are struggling it's probably got little to nothing to do with whether or not they post prices.
-
I wouldn't be in favor of it because that would be implying that price is the best thing we have to offer and would attract members accordingly. Golf clubs aren't a commodity. It's not like searching for the cheapest gallon of milk in town. If it is you're wasting a lot of time on the wrong website. :)
I disagree with this. I can find the list price on everything from milk, to a rolls royce to a private jet to a small island. It's only the petty minded who think it adds kudos to have things clouded in secrecy. Some Clubs wise up, some don't and the top 1% don't need to.
Costs are facts and do not enhance or reduce exclusivity in any way. The Club either wishes to receive applications for membership or it doesn't.
You're assuming that everyone equates value with price. Give people the facts, they will either see it as good value or they won't. It is terrible business to lose a potential member/visitor because he or she wrongly "assumes" that the cost is higher than it is.
-
Sean,
Price is certainly important to virtually all of us. I guess the question is are you looking to attract members for whom price is the most important variable. Of course clubs who are struggling need to do whats in the club's best interest. My point is 1) they are- many list pricing and 2) if they are struggling it's probably got little to nothing to do with whether or not they post prices.
Jud
I am guessing that for a significant percentage of first time private club shoppers, price is the most important element of the decision. This is the market clubs need to exploit. Whether or not publishing membership info will attract members is a question to which I don't know the answer. But, one big reason for a website is to attract members - no? So, why not provide the most pertinent information for a signicant percentage of shoppers? I can understand if a club doesn't want "walk ins" as prospective members because its ideal for members to find prospective members. But much of the world operates in less than ideal conditions. That said, its quite easy for events to overtake clubs who aren't thinking 5-10 years down the line. I know if it were my club, I would want to know that steps are being taken to recruit new members regardless if they are needed at the moment.
In any case, we can agree to disagree. I was just speaking from experience and situation of not wanting to deal with plastic smiling suits where golf is concerned.
Ciao
-
I wouldn't be in favor of it because that would be implying that price is the best thing we have to offer and would attract members accordingly. Golf clubs aren't a commodity. It's not like searching for the cheapest gallon of milk in town. If it is you're wasting a lot of time on the wrong website. :)
I disagree with this. I can find the list price on everything from milk, to a rolls royce to a private jet to a small island. It's only the petty minded who think it adds kudos to have things clouded in secrecy. Some Clubs wise up, some don't and the top 1% don't need to.
Costs are facts and do not enhance or reduce exclusivity in any way. The Club either wishes to receive applications for membership or it doesn't.
You're assuming that everyone equates value with price. Give people the facts, they will either see it as good value or they won't. It is terrible business to lose a potential member/visitor because he or she wrongly "assumes" that the cost is higher than it is.
Spot on Ryan! Plus all the semi-private clubs i know are doing well and there are different semi-private models. It is funny i know of a few Top top clubs that their annual fees are very very low. So i guess you can have your cake and eat it too.
-
Some of the comments here are precisely the reason some people, with the means to do so, do not want to join private clubs. I would need to be paid to be around some of these attitudes.
Let me throw out a couple of real world thoughts here. My area has one club that does not list their rates online. They have a website where you can view information and read about the course. It is in great condition, has a well-known designer, has a sizeable initiation and I honestly have no idea on the monthly prices. There is a waiting list to get OUT and they can sell their memberships for whatever amount they like. It is part owned by the membership and part by another entity. I would wager any member there has the money to continue to stay a member there as long as they like, but they don't feel they get the value they would like.
Another club, is the "old money" of my area. If you are not a member you can only see the homepage. It is an early 1900's design by a well known designer that has been modified a couple times I believe. I have no idea of initiation or monthly fees.
Another, down the street from the first, has all information online and is probably the only club in the area to have a waiting list to get IN. If it were closer to my home it would be in consideration of a club I would join.
Another, closer to my home has most of their information online except for all pricing, is run by a golf club company, has a small initiation, is not full, and decent prices. It is a generally unwalkable subdivision course so it does not really interest me.
I say this to say it is all about value. The first is one you would think would have an initiation to get in, but the players arent getting the value. The second probably has a similar price to the first, but nobody would ever know. They are ultra exclusive and they may not even have minority members here in 2014. The third is an active club that is probably the second or third membership of many of the first two. The fourth is a good course, presents the illusion of exclusivity, yet actually has room for members based on conversations I have had. The place I would like to join is the one with info online, although it is probably more expensive than the last and is actually, if pressed to join somewhere besides where I am, would be the place I had to join because of proximity and facilities.
Another club in town is very in tune with social media and up to date information on their website. It's a decent course, in a subdivision but not crowded. They actually are the most expensive of the two courses I spoke of I would consider. They have a huge clubhouse with an excellent practice facility, tennis courts, two pools, etc. They were on the verge of bankruptcy a decade ago. They re-structured, built the best or second best online presence in the area, maintained an upscale profile, and are not full on membership, but have a good number. Roughly half of their membership is under 50. This model lets me believe there is something to the transparency and younger generation responding to them embracing the fact that they actually live in this century and not the previous one like so many others that are struggling.
A lot of the people here that are pushing for info online, do hold memberships, and are in the generation that should be focused on by struggling clubs. I think instead of the old guard pushing back on the customers they should be attempting to gain, they should shut up and listen so they have a place to play.
-
I wouldn't be in favor of it because that would be implying that price is the best thing we have to offer and would attract members accordingly. Golf clubs aren't a commodity. It's not like searching for the cheapest gallon of milk in town. If it is you're wasting a lot of time on the wrong website. :)
I disagree with this. I can find the list price on everything from milk, to a rolls royce to a private jet to a small island. It's only the petty minded who think it adds kudos to have things clouded in secrecy. Some Clubs wise up, some don't and the top 1% don't need to.
Costs are facts and do not enhance or reduce exclusivity in any way. The Club either wishes to receive applications for membership or it doesn't.
You're assuming that everyone equates value with price. Give people the facts, they will either see it as good value or they won't. It is terrible business to lose a potential member/visitor because he or she wrongly "assumes" that the cost is higher than it is.
Ryan,
You disagree that a singular club is not a commodity? A commodity is a widget. A 2014 Rolls Royce is the same regardless of which dealer you buy it from. If a club is missing out on members because they wrongly overestimate the costs of membership that means that 1) that person has likely never played the course with a member 2) probably doesn't know any members well 3) is more concerned about price than anything else. If price is the most important variable, the vast majority of private clubs are not for you. Generally speaking you'll find better value at a modestly priced public or semi-private track. If price is only one of the things that you factor into your "value equation", then you aren't going to find those other key elements out without VISITING THE CLUB AND PLAYING THE COURSE WITH A MEMBER. If that's the case, then finding out pricing is a trifling matter and you're thesis is out the window. Sorry, I would have responded sooner, but I was busily crafting a GolfNow special for today for a club that panicked after reading this thread... 8)
-
Sean,
Price is certainly important to virtually all of us. I guess the question is are you looking to attract members for whom price is the most important variable. Of course clubs who are struggling need to do whats in the club's best interest. My point is 1) they are- many list pricing and 2) if they are struggling it's probably got little to nothing to do with whether or not they post prices.
Jud
I am guessing that for a significant percentage of first time private club shoppers, price is the most important element of the decision. This is the market clubs need to exploit. Whether or not publishing membership info will attract members is a question to which I don't know the answer. But, one big reason for a website is to attract members - no? So, why not provide the most pertinent information for a signicant percentage of shoppers? I can understand if a club doesn't want "walk ins" as prospective members because its ideal for members to find prospective members. But much of the world operates in less than ideal conditions. That said, its quite easy for events to overtake clubs who aren't thinking 5-10 years down the line. I know if it were my club, I would want to know that steps are being taken to recruit new members regardless if they are needed at the moment.
In any case, we can agree to disagree. I was just speaking from experience and situation of not wanting to deal with plastic smiling suits where golf is concerned.
Ciao
I would say this is correct Sean. As was mentioned previously, some may have just paid off student loan debt and feel they can apply that money to another fixed monthly expense. I wasnt aware every private club member had to come from the so called blue bloods of America as some have alluded to. Some people, such as myself, come from an area that the closest private club in the area was 45min to an hour away. Some people, in the entrepreneurial spirit of our country, are self-made and could (gasp) be first time club members. As some have mentioned, some people move from time to time. Kids go off to college now, and sometimes stay where they went to school. News flash, they don't know the "elite" of the area to join a club there. I just think its sickening the amount of self-righteous, entitled BS that is spewed by some here when private membership is discussed. Those people are obviously in the old guard and are not in touch with the evolution golf has made in the last 30 YEARS!
-
I wouldn't be in favor of it because that would be implying that price is the best thing we have to offer and would attract members accordingly. Golf clubs aren't a commodity. It's not like searching for the cheapest gallon of milk in town. If it is you're wasting a lot of time on the wrong website. :)
I disagree with this. I can find the list price on everything from milk, to a rolls royce to a private jet to a small island. It's only the petty minded who think it adds kudos to have things clouded in secrecy. Some Clubs wise up, some don't and the top 1% don't need to.
Costs are facts and do not enhance or reduce exclusivity in any way. The Club either wishes to receive applications for membership or it doesn't.
You're assuming that everyone equates value with price. Give people the facts, they will either see it as good value or they won't. It is terrible business to lose a potential member/visitor because he or she wrongly "assumes" that the cost is higher than it is.
Ryan,
You disagree that a singular club is not a commodity? A commodity is a widget. A 2014 Rolls Royce is the same regardless of which dealer you buy it from. If a club is missing out on members because they wrongly overestimate the costs of membership that means that 1) that person has likely never played the course with a member 2) probably doesn't know any members well 3) is more concerned about price than anything else. If price is the most important variable, the vast majority of private clubs are not for you. Generally speaking you'll find better value at a modestly priced public or semi-private track. If price is only one of the things that you factor into your "value equation", then you aren't going to find those other key elements out without VISITING THE CLUB AND PLAYING THE COURSE WITH A MEMBER. If that's the case, then finding out pricing is a trifling matter and you're thesis is out the window. Sorry, I would have responded sooner, but I was busily crafting a GolfNow special for today for a club that panicked after reading this thread... 8)
THIS. ::)
-
Adam,
This is a gross mischaracterisation. Just because I defend PRIVATE clubs desire to not post their fees online I'm an a$$hole member of the old guard? I'm sorry that the Country Club landscape in your area sucks. That's why I ONLY JOIN GOLF CLUBS. It's just tiresome to hear so many guys who don't belong to private clubs tell those clubs how to run their businesses. This is akin to a lifetime vegan telling a slaughterhouse owner and a butcher how to run their business to attract more vegans. I'll shut up and let you guys twattle on.
P.S. Enjoy your 5 hour round tomorrow...
-
Those analogies are so far off, it is laughable. What many are saying is that there is a shortage of GOLF CLUBS! My (muni) lol, Golf is played in 4 or less! Just because it isn't Member owned (Property taxes at the member owned course i grew up at is $78,000 a year) equates to $23 additional a month in dues (real biggie, not) doesn't mean Joe blow can call and get on. We do reciprocals. Most on here have either grown up at a member owned or have been members, so that is laughable. Price is a big factor in determining VALUE! Please post what you have crafted up for GOLFNOW, gotta love how GCAers go to extremes and they don't even make a worthwhile point.
With CC's closing left and right and being posted on here on a weekly basis (maybe some yahoo's should listen to their potential customers) That would require common sense, which is in short supply!
-
Jud,
I just read the Kingsley website looking for information about joining. I would have loved to know what you and each and every member payed and exactly who are the members of the great clubs mentioned. But then again I do enjoy TMZ.com now and then. Gossip is fun, dirty, wrong and addictive but fun none the less.
I'm on another email spam list of a popular club that sends me updates on their pending increases. I love getting these emails and pondering how they are doing.
I once bought a rare car and a local banker, who was a competitor, went to kellybluebook and printed off what he thought I paid and put a copy of it on my friends desk that I play golf with. I have no idea how many other people he distributed copies too. He didn't do it in case my friend wanted to buy the same car. This thread is 99% about gossip with a possibility of 1% membership losses thrown in for laughs.
-
I wouldn't be in favor of it because that would be implying that price is the best thing we have to offer and would attract members accordingly. Golf clubs aren't a commodity. It's not like searching for the cheapest gallon of milk in town. If it is you're wasting a lot of time on the wrong website. :)
I disagree with this. I can find the list price on everything from milk, to a rolls royce to a private jet to a small island. It's only the petty minded who think it adds kudos to have things clouded in secrecy. Some Clubs wise up, some don't and the top 1% don't need to.
Costs are facts and do not enhance or reduce exclusivity in any way. The Club either wishes to receive applications for membership or it doesn't.
You're assuming that everyone equates value with price. Give people the facts, they will either see it as good value or they won't. It is terrible business to lose a potential member/visitor because he or she wrongly "assumes" that the cost is higher than it is.
Ryan,
You disagree that a singular club is not a commodity? A commodity is a widget. A 2014 Rolls Royce is the same regardless of which dealer you buy it from. If a club is missing out on members because they wrongly overestimate the costs of membership that means that 1) that person has likely never played the course with a member 2) probably doesn't know any members well 3) is more concerned about price than anything else. If price is the most important variable, the vast majority of private clubs are not for you. Generally speaking you'll find better value at a modestly priced public or semi-private track. If price is only one of the things that you factor into your "value equation", then you aren't going to find those other key elements out without VISITING THE CLUB AND PLAYING THE COURSE WITH A MEMBER. If that's the case, then finding out pricing is a trifling matter and you're thesis is out the window. Sorry, I would have responded sooner, but I was busily crafting a GolfNow special for today for a club that panicked after reading this thread... 8)
Sorry but you clearly come here to write, rather than to read.
It is not my thesis, nor my value equation, it is yours which you advanced earlier in the thread and again have done so above. I disagree. In your rather narrow view, anyone who doesn't know one of your precious members, is ONLY interested in price and will base his golf expenditure sole on what is cheapest. I disagree with this. Not everyone equates value with price.
If a Club only wants members to be introduced by existing members only, that's fine. Their website is purely a vanity exercise and the issue of putting the costs in the public domain via the site is a moot point.
P.S. A Rolls Royce price does indeed vary between dealer.
P.P.S. There is plenty of golf played well between your extreme ends of the spectrum between bargain basement and exclusive memberships. That's just immature hyperbole.
-
Adam,
This is a gross mischaracterisation. Just because I defend PRIVATE clubs desire to not post their fees online I'm an a$$hole member of the old guard? I'm sorry that the Country Club landscape in your area sucks. That's why I ONLY JOIN GOLF CLUBS. It's just tiresome to hear so many guys who don't belong to private clubs tell those clubs how to run their businesses. This is akin to a lifetime vegan telling a slaughterhouse owner and a butcher how to run their business to attract more vegans. I'll shut up and let you guys twattle on.
P.S. Enjoy your 5 hour round tomorrow...
I would guess if mischaracterization is taking place, its coming from you to me. I am a member of "country club" that is really a golf club. We have a pool, but only because we have always had a pool. The place is all about golf with a few wives taking advantage of the pool.
We also, as luck would have it, have sub 4 hour rounds 6 out of 7 days of the week on average. If I am there for 4:15 I count it as 30 extra minutes with the guys.
The problem in my area are that there are TOO MANY country clubs. I have onlly lived here for 5 years, so I don't know everything about it, but if you know me, you know I know enough. See, what you are missing is the fact that in a previous life, I was a golf pro. I've seen the books for more clubs than I care to count. I still talk to people from the business, at all types of facilities who keep me up to date. I loved the business, but hated the lifestyle. Anyway, that is for another time. Therefore, I enjoy discussing the business because, unlike you (characterizing here) I know what goes on in this business. Just another example of how those that have always been a part of the "old guard" making assumptions about people who don't see and bow to the almighty exclusive private and their ancient views and rules.
-
When I was looking for possible non-resident membership options, I emailed the membership director/coordinator at each of the clubs I had some interest in exploring. With a few notable exceptions (which I won't mention), most of the clubs were quick to respond to me with information, including pricing. The clubs that did respond either did so through email or by phone and my inquiry was responded to either by the membership director or a member who chaired the membership committee (because the club wanted to make sure I wasn't fishing for market information and that I was sincerely looking for membership information).
It was not a difficult process. I don't see what the problem is.
-
Some of the comments here are precisely the reason some people, with the means to do so, do not want to join private clubs. I would need to be paid to be around some of these attitudes.
Let me throw out a couple of real world thoughts here. My area has one club that does not list their rates online. They have a website where you can view information and read about the course. It is in great condition, has a well-known designer, has a sizeable initiation and I honestly have no idea on the monthly prices. There is a waiting list to get OUT and they can sell their memberships for whatever amount they like. It is part owned by the membership and part by another entity. I would wager any member there has the money to continue to stay a member there as long as they like, but they don't feel they get the value they would like.
Another club, is the "old money" of my area. If you are not a member you can only see the homepage. It is an early 1900's design by a well known designer that has been modified a couple times I believe. I have no idea of initiation or monthly fees.
Another, down the street from the first, has all information online and is probably the only club in the area to have a waiting list to get IN. If it were closer to my home it would be in consideration of a club I would join.
Another, closer to my home has most of their information online except for all pricing, is run by a golf club company, has a small initiation, is not full, and decent prices. It is a generally unwalkable subdivision course so it does not really interest me.
I say this to say it is all about value. The first is one you would think would have an initiation to get in, but the players arent getting the value. The second probably has a similar price to the first, but nobody would ever know. They are ultra exclusive and they may not even have minority members here in 2014. The third is an active club that is probably the second or third membership of many of the first two. The fourth is a good course, presents the illusion of exclusivity, yet actually has room for members based on conversations I have had. The place I would like to join is the one with info online, although it is probably more expensive than the last and is actually, if pressed to join somewhere besides where I am, would be the place I had to join because of proximity and facilities.
Another club in town is very in tune with social media and up to date information on their website. It's a decent course, in a subdivision but not crowded. They actually are the most expensive of the two courses I spoke of I would consider. They have a huge clubhouse with an excellent practice facility, tennis courts, two pools, etc. They were on the verge of bankruptcy a decade ago. They re-structured, built the best or second best online presence in the area, maintained an upscale profile, and are not full on membership, but have a good number. Roughly half of their membership is under 50. This model lets me believe there is something to the transparency and younger generation responding to them embracing the fact that they actually live in this century and not the previous one like so many others that are struggling.
A lot of the people here that are pushing for info online, do hold memberships, and are in the generation that should be focused on by struggling clubs. I think instead of the old guard pushing back on the customers they should be attempting to gain, they should shut up and listen so they have a place to play.
Adam,
Firstly, I think sarcasm and playfulness is hard to convey on an internet forum so don't take too seriously some of the digs and barbs. Secondly, I think this is a very good post, though there are some assumptions that are made to help prove your overall point but we all do that.
I would say this, I don't think the presence of membership prices on a website is at all a factor in the success/lack of success of the clubs you mentioned. I think that the marketing strategies of the clubs are different. My question to you is whether you think the club who has the active social media presence would be as successful if they didn't post their prices online but did all of the other things you mentioned or do you think that the placing of prices online is a critical part of their social media?
Also, you mention the social media savvy club is not full but seem to care less about that fact than you do with the other clubs who are also not full but do not meet your social media expectations. Why is that?
Lastly, I don't think that most people here looking for prices online are under 35. Mike Sweeney is FAR from under 35 and he is the biggest advocate. ;D
-
When I was looking for possible non-resident membership options, I emailed the membership director/coordinator at each of the clubs I had some interest in exploring. With a few notable exceptions (which I won't mention), most of the clubs were quick to respond to me with information, including pricing. The clubs that did respond either did so through email or by phone and my inquiry was responded to either by the membership director or a member who chaired the membership committee (because the club wanted to make sure I wasn't fishing for market information and that I was sincerely looking for membership information).
It was not a difficult process. I don't see what the problem is.
Similar experience and completely agree.
-
I wouldn't be in favor of it because that would be implying that price is the best thing we have to offer and would attract members accordingly. Golf clubs aren't a commodity. It's not like searching for the cheapest gallon of milk in town. If it is you're wasting a lot of time on the wrong website. :)
I disagree with this. I can find the list price on everything from milk, to a rolls royce to a private jet to a small island. It's only the petty minded who think it adds kudos to have things clouded in secrecy. Some Clubs wise up, some don't and the top 1% don't need to.
Costs are facts and do not enhance or reduce exclusivity in any way. The Club either wishes to receive applications for membership or it doesn't.
You're assuming that everyone equates value with price. Give people the facts, they will either see it as good value or they won't. It is terrible business to lose a potential member/visitor because he or she wrongly "assumes" that the cost is higher than it is.
Ryan,
You disagree that a singular club is not a commodity? A commodity is a widget. A 2014 Rolls Royce is the same regardless of which dealer you buy it from. If a club is missing out on members because they wrongly overestimate the costs of membership that means that 1) that person has likely never played the course with a member 2) probably doesn't know any members well 3) is more concerned about price than anything else. If price is the most important variable, the vast majority of private clubs are not for you. Generally speaking you'll find better value at a modestly priced public or semi-private track. If price is only one of the things that you factor into your "value equation", then you aren't going to find those other key elements out without VISITING THE CLUB AND PLAYING THE COURSE WITH A MEMBER. If that's the case, then finding out pricing is a trifling matter and you're thesis is out the window. Sorry, I would have responded sooner, but I was busily crafting a GolfNow special for today for a club that panicked after reading this thread... 8)
Sorry but you clearly come here to write, rather than to read.
It is not my thesis, nor my value equation, it is yours which you advanced earlier in the thread and again have done so above. I disagree. In your rather narrow view, anyone who doesn't know one of your precious members, is ONLY interested in price and will base his golf expenditure sole on what is cheapest. I disagree with this. Not everyone equates value with price.
If a Club only wants members to be introduced by existing members only, that's fine. Their website is purely a vanity exercise and the issue of putting the costs in the public domain via the site is a moot point.
P.S. A Rolls Royce price does indeed vary between dealer.
P.P.S. There is plenty of golf played well between your extreme ends of the spectrum between bargain basement and exclusive memberships. That's just immature hyperbole.
Ryan, I'm under 35 and not a member of any guard so I am curious to know why, if you were interested in joining a particular club, you'd let the lack of pricing on the internet cut off your desire to be a member of the club?
-
Clubs can do whatever they want, relative to sharing rates & other information. Clubs not in need of new members have no incentive to share anything.
My interest in this discussion is on thinking about ways to stem the current decline in private course membership. Having been a long time private club member and having to change clubs as I moved around the country, I try to look it from the consumer angle.
If I were running a club that wanted to new members, some things that I would do:
Publish as much information on the club as I could. Photos, rates, amenities, tournaments, clubhouse, pro shop, lessons, junior golf, food menus & whatever else I could think of. Publish the club’s mission statement. Extra credit if I could craft a clever message that showed the club to be in good financial health (not sure how I’d do that…)
Publish a clear description of the membership application process and requirements. A contact name, phone & email for more information.
Hold open house days a couple of times a year. Perhaps require a request for invitation, perhaps not. Include facility and course tours, a chance to meet & talk to members & staff, maybe even a chance to play, or a group lesson from the pro.
The idea is not “click & join” – it’s marketing and information sharing in a new age when people expect easy access to information online. The joining requirements and process need to change little, if at all.
Not finding the information easily available, I will assume that the club is full or not interested in new members outside of a select network, which is fine. That is also information to be taken into account when making a selection.
-
Golfers under 35 most especially do not need the costs of their hobbies published for coworkers and employers. It's bad enough that we have to publicly post when and where we play. I would never hire someone that posts more than 7 scores a month.
I remember in my first job out of college I bought a Volvo and it pissed off my boss. I quit six months later after learning a valuable lesson.
-
Dave,
I think those are great ideas and agree, the sharing of information is absolutely vital. As Adam rightly noted in his post, my generation needs to have more information available, we are just accustom to that.
The only point I'd challenge you on is whether you think the club could be successful if it implemented all that you mention above but did not include pricing? Lets say it just had a "Membership FAQ" and gave all the information but said at the bottom "for membership inquiries and plans, please contact the membership director," do you think that would significantly affect the success of the marketing plan?
-
Golfers under 35 most especially do not need the costs of their hobbies published for coworkers and employers. It's bad enough that we have to publicly post when and where we play. I would never hire someone that posts more than 7 scores a month.
I remember in my first job out of college I bought a Volvo and it pissed off my boss. I quit six months later after learning a valuable lesson.
I think there is something to this. The partners at my old law firm certainly were aware of the cars the associates drove.
-
Golfers under 35 most especially do not need the costs of their hobbies published for coworkers and employers. It's bad enough that we have to publicly post when and where we play. I would never hire someone that posts more than 7 scores a month.
I remember in my first job out of college I bought a Volvo and it pissed off my boss. I quit six months later after learning a valuable lesson.
I think there is something to this. The partners at my old law firm certainly were aware of the cars the associates drove.
When I started at my old law firm out of law school, one of the partners told a few of us that having a low handicap was not something that many partners looked upon favorably. Regardless of the amount and quality of our work, having a low handicap implied that one was more focused on golf than work. It was total bullshit, but that was the perception. I'm no longer working at a law firm and I certainly don't miss it.
-
Golfers under 35 most especially do not need the costs of their hobbies published for coworkers and employers. It's bad enough that we have to publicly post when and where we play. I would never hire someone that posts more than 7 scores a month.
I remember in my first job out of college I bought a Volvo and it pissed off my boss. I quit six months later after learning a valuable lesson.
I think there is something to this. The partners at my old law firm certainly were aware of the cars the associates drove.
When I started at my old law firm out of law school, one of the partners told a few of us that having a low handicap was not something that many partners looked upon favorably. Regardless of the amount and quality of our work, having a low handicap implied that one was more focused on golf than work. It was total bullshit, but that was the perception. I'm no longer working at a law firm and I certainly don't miss it.
What's your current handicap? ;D
-
When I started at my old law firm out of law school, one of the partners told a few of us that having a low handicap was not something that many partners looked upon favorably. Regardless of the amount and quality of our work, having a low handicap implied that one was more focused on golf than work. It was total bullshit, but that was the perception. I'm no longer working at a law firm and I certainly don't miss it.
What's your current handicap? ;D
[/quote]
Not as low as some of the guys I used to work with.
-
Golfers under 35 most especially do not need the costs of their hobbies published for coworkers and employers. It's bad enough that we have to publicly post when and where we play. I would never hire someone that posts more than 7 scores a month.
Why? Because you're making an assumption about that person? Total bullshit. I posted plenty of scores each month when I was an associate at my old firm, but I never let it get in the way of work. If I had an assignment that demanded my time, I was always there. But when I had free time, I spent it with my wife or on the course. What's wrong with that?
Would you also not hire someone who has kids?
-
Golfers under 35 most especially do not need the costs of their hobbies published for coworkers and employers. It's bad enough that we have to publicly post when and where we play. I would never hire someone that posts more than 7 scores a month.
I remember in my first job out of college I bought a Volvo and it pissed off my boss. I quit six months later after learning a valuable lesson.
I think there is something to this. The partners at my old law firm certainly were aware of the cars the associates drove.
I know this is getting more o.t., but, Mr. Jones - to show just how naive I am, at age 72 and having been first an associate and then a law firm partner for my entire working life before I retired several years ago . . . o.k., partners at your firm were aware of the cars associates drove, but what did they make of it? Was it viewed as "better" for an associate to drive a 17 year-old dump? A late model Ford or Toyota (e.g., Fusion/Camry) sedan? or a new $60K BMW (if there is such a thing)? Why?
-
Dave,
I think those are great ideas and agree, the sharing of information is absolutely vital. As Adam rightly noted in his post, my generation needs to have more information available, we are just accustom to that.
The only point I'd challenge you on is whether you think the club could be successful if it implemented all that you mention above but did not include pricing? Lets say it just had a "Membership FAQ" and gave all the information but said at the bottom "for membership inquiries and plans, please contact the membership director," do you think that would significantly affect the success of the marketing plan?
JC:
I guess my response would be: Why leave it out? Why not make it transparent? What's the argument for not including it? I have yet, in nine pages of this thread, to see a really sensible argument for not including pricing, and making that widely available. The two main arguments offered so far seem to be:
-- We're private, and a club, ergo we don't have to.
-- Publicizing pricing might lead to membership discounting, which would lead to resentment in the club.
Neither one strikes me as terribly compelling, in light of the likely (and rather substantial, I'd argue) fall-out in golfing rounds that is on the horizon.
-
Golfers under 35 most especially do not need the costs of their hobbies published for coworkers and employers. It's bad enough that we have to publicly post when and where we play. I would never hire someone that posts more than 7 scores a month.
Why? Because you're making an assumption about that person? Total bullshit. I posted plenty of scores each month when I was an associate at my old firm, but I never let it get in the way of work. If I had an assignment that demanded my time, I was always there. But when I had free time, I spent it with my wife or on the course. What's wrong with that?
Would you also not hire someone who has kids?
I work in a seasonal industry that corresponds with the golf season. I once had a little league coach working for me. What a disaster that was, he would shut down the crew on game day. I've played golf for 46 years and know enough about people who take the game seriously that they are not productive in the summer. Plus, they ain't gonna like how much I golf.
-
Golfers under 35 most especially do not need the costs of their hobbies published for coworkers and employers. It's bad enough that we have to publicly post when and where we play. I would never hire someone that posts more than 7 scores a month.
Why? Because you're making an assumption about that person? Total bullshit. I posted plenty of scores each month when I was an associate at my old firm, but I never let it get in the way of work. If I had an assignment that demanded my time, I was always there. But when I had free time, I spent it with my wife or on the course. What's wrong with that?
Would you also not hire someone who has kids?
I work in a seasonal industry that corresponds with the golf season. I once had a little league coach working for me. What a disaster that was, he would shut down the crew on game day. I've played golf for 46 years and know enough about people who take the game seriously that they are not productive in the summer. Plus, they ain't gonna like how much I golf.
::) I'm sorry for getting off topic.
-
Dave,
I think those are great ideas and agree, the sharing of information is absolutely vital. As Adam rightly noted in his post, my generation needs to have more information available, we are just accustom to that.
The only point I'd challenge you on is whether you think the club could be successful if it implemented all that you mention above but did not include pricing? Lets say it just had a "Membership FAQ" and gave all the information but said at the bottom "for membership inquiries and plans, please contact the membership director," do you think that would significantly affect the success of the marketing plan?
JC:
I guess my response would be: Why leave it out? Why not make it transparent? What's the argument for not including it? I have yet, in nine pages of this thread, to see a really sensible argument for not including pricing, and making that widely available. The two main arguments offered so far seem to be:
-- We're private, and a club, ergo we don't have to.
-- Publicizing pricing might lead to membership discounting, which would lead to resentment in the club.
Neither one strikes me as terribly compelling, in light of the likely (and rather substantial, I'd argue) fall-out in golfing rounds that is on the horizon.
I've not followed this tread closely, but here's my argument, which seems to me to make sense. Clubs have real differences. Clubs have different membership needs. Clubs have different ideas about how to "market" themselves, if at all. Some may want to publish prices because they think that will help the club. Others don't see the need -- don't think it will help their club. In either case, time may tell whether they were right or wrong. What I take from this is that it is very hard to read much into the publish vs. not-publish decision made by any particular club. It is not an issue I would focus on if "shopping" for a club.
-
I wouldn't be in favor of it because that would be implying that price is the best thing we have to offer and would attract members accordingly. Golf clubs aren't a commodity. It's not like searching for the cheapest gallon of milk in town. If it is you're wasting a lot of time on the wrong website. :)
I disagree with this. I can find the list price on everything from milk, to a rolls royce to a private jet to a small island. It's only the petty minded who think it adds kudos to have things clouded in secrecy. Some Clubs wise up, some don't and the top 1% don't need to.
Costs are facts and do not enhance or reduce exclusivity in any way. The Club either wishes to receive applications for membership or it doesn't.
You're assuming that everyone equates value with price. Give people the facts, they will either see it as good value or they won't. It is terrible business to lose a potential member/visitor because he or she wrongly "assumes" that the cost is higher than it is.
Ryan,
You disagree that a singular club is not a commodity? A commodity is a widget. A 2014 Rolls Royce is the same regardless of which dealer you buy it from. If a club is missing out on members because they wrongly overestimate the costs of membership that means that 1) that person has likely never played the course with a member 2) probably doesn't know any members well 3) is more concerned about price than anything else. If price is the most important variable, the vast majority of private clubs are not for you. Generally speaking you'll find better value at a modestly priced public or semi-private track. If price is only one of the things that you factor into your "value equation", then you aren't going to find those other key elements out without VISITING THE CLUB AND PLAYING THE COURSE WITH A MEMBER. If that's the case, then finding out pricing is a trifling matter and you're thesis is out the window. Sorry, I would have responded sooner, but I was busily crafting a GolfNow special for today for a club that panicked after reading this thread... 8)
Sorry but you clearly come here to write, rather than to read.
It is not my thesis, nor my value equation, it is yours which you advanced earlier in the thread and again have done so above. I disagree. In your rather narrow view, anyone who doesn't know one of your precious members, is ONLY interested in price and will base his golf expenditure sole on what is cheapest. I disagree with this. Not everyone equates value with price.
If a Club only wants members to be introduced by existing members only, that's fine. Their website is purely a vanity exercise and the issue of putting the costs in the public domain via the site is a moot point.
P.S. A Rolls Royce price does indeed vary between dealer.
P.P.S. There is plenty of golf played well between your extreme ends of the spectrum between bargain basement and exclusive memberships. That's just immature hyperbole.
Ryan, I'm under 35 and not a member of any guard so I am curious to know why, if you were interested in joining a particular club, you'd let the lack of pricing on the internet cut off your desire to be a member of the club?
I'm under 35 and manage a golf club.
I never said it would put me off.
I said that if a Club is seeking new members and has a website to promote the Club, it makes little sense to shroud the subscription/joining fee in secrecy. It makes no commercial sense. Give people the facts in a way that is easy for them, or don't bother having a website or pretending you're interested in recruiting new members.
No more, no less.
-
Clubs can do whatever they want, relative to sharing rates & other information. Clubs not in need of new members have no incentive to share anything.
My interest in this discussion is on thinking about ways to stem the current decline in private course membership. Having been a long time private club member and having to change clubs as I moved around the country, I try to look it from the consumer angle.
If I were running a club that wanted to new members, some things that I would do:
Publish as much information on the club as I could. Photos, rates, amenities, tournaments, clubhouse, pro shop, lessons, junior golf, food menus & whatever else I could think of. Publish the club’s mission statement. Extra credit if I could craft a clever message that showed the club to be in good financial health (not sure how I’d do that…)
Publish a clear description of the membership application process and requirements. A contact name, phone & email for more information.
Hold open house days a couple of times a year. Perhaps require a request for invitation, perhaps not. Include facility and course tours, a chance to meet & talk to members & staff, maybe even a chance to play, or a group lesson from the pro.
The idea is not “click & join” – it’s marketing and information sharing in a new age when people expect easy access to information online. The joining requirements and process need to change little, if at all.
Not finding the information easily available, I will assume that the club is full or not interested in new members outside of a select network, which is fine. That is also information to be taken into account when making a selection.
Spot on.
-
I've not followed this tread closely, but here's my argument, which seems to me to make sense. Clubs have real differences. Clubs have different membership needs. Clubs have different ideas about how to "market" themselves, if at all. Some may want to publish prices because they think that will help the club. Others don't see the need -- don't think it will help their club. In either case, time may tell whether they were right or wrong. What I take from this is that it is very hard to read much into the publish vs. not-publish decision made by any particular club.
Makes sense to me. Well said.
-
One, I never said under 35. I said under 50 is the target. Most people under 50 that would have an interest in joining a club probably have become familiar with the internet, smart phones, etc and their benefit.
I do agree the clubs I mentioned havent succeeded because they put their rates online. I thought my post would have been understood to say that it is because they actually embraced, technology, the internet, social media, etc that the world today has moved toward for everything.
Additionally, regarding the courses I mentioned.... the one with the waiting list that I like is THE most active social media presence in my area. The one with the "old money" uses nothing except for the home page of the website with the login. In that business article I mentioned in another post they were the most profitable club in my area of member owned clubs. I'd be willing to wager a guess they have 100's of thousands of dollars in the bank as well. They don't NEED to put the info out there, and I respect that. It's like someone mentioned earlier, if you are going to put information out there on your website for all to see, why not put your rates out there. At the very least, like many do, put a questionnaire or email address on there to obtain information.
Also, several talk about each club as though they are all full and thriving financially. I'd say for 75% or more of the private clubs out there in the U.S., that is not the case. As things have changed over the last couple of decades, in not only this but also in other areas of it, the golf business has been one of the slowest to adapt. A big part of that is probably due in part to the fact that clubs give junior members basically no say in how the board operates the club, but the old board yearns for the "good ol' days" and tries to recapture that instead of moving forward and trying something new.
-
Here's a private golf club model to be discussed.
From a CharlotteObserver.com photo gallery today.
Dan Burrell was one of about seven protesters picketing in front of The Tradition Golf Course on Friday. Lifetime members of the Carolina Trails golf group paid thousands of dollars for a lifetime of fee free golf. When the Carolina Trails owners went into foreclosure and the courses purchased by a new company.... poof..... lifetime memberships would no longer be honored. Seven "members" who lost about $55,000 as a group, some whose memberships would have extended for years. protested at The Tradition Golf Course along Prosperity Church Road Friday april 11, 2014.
Ron Bruzzese (left) and Dan Burrell try to flag down an arriving golfer at the Tradition Golf Course to convince them not to play Friday. Lifetime members of the Carolina Trails golf group paid thousands of dollars for a lifetime of fee free golf. When the Carolina Trails owners went into foreclosure and the courses purchased by a new company.... poof..... lifetime memberships would no longer be honored. Seven "members" who lost about $55,000 as a group, some whose memberships would have extended for years. protested at The Tradition Golf Course along Prosperity Church Road Friday april 11, 2014.
Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2014/04/11/4834314/golfers-protest-carolina-trail.html#storylink=cpy
-
So let me get this straight. You move to town. There are two private clubs. 1 is an Art Hills course from the 90s that posts fees online. The other is an old Tillinghast gem that embodies everything you love about GCA and have been reading about here for the past decade. They are currently undergoing a sympathetic restoration documented extensively here. Their website says "for membership inquiries contact Jane Doe". You guys choose the Hills track cause mommy never taught you to pick up the phone and have an adult conversation. This has to be the single funniest thing I've read here.
-
Here's a private golf club model to be discussed.
From a CharlotteObserver.com photo gallery today.
Dan Burrell was one of about seven protesters picketing in front of The Tradition Golf Course on Friday. Lifetime members of the Carolina Trails golf group paid thousands of dollars for a lifetime of fee free golf. When the Carolina Trails owners went into foreclosure and the courses purchased by a new company.... poof..... lifetime memberships would no longer be honored. Seven "members" who lost about $55,000 as a group, some whose memberships would have extended for years. protested at The Tradition Golf Course along Prosperity Church Road Friday april 11, 2014.
Ron Bruzzese (left) and Dan Burrell try to flag down an arriving golfer at the Tradition Golf Course to convince them not to play Friday. Lifetime members of the Carolina Trails golf group paid thousands of dollars for a lifetime of fee free golf. When the Carolina Trails owners went into foreclosure and the courses purchased by a new company.... poof..... lifetime memberships would no longer be honored. Seven "members" who lost about $55,000 as a group, some whose memberships would have extended for years. protested at The Tradition Golf Course along Prosperity Church Road Friday april 11, 2014.
Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2014/04/11/4834314/golfers-protest-carolina-trail.html#storylink=cpy
Bruce, I'm not sure I put these courses in the "private club" column. I'd call them daily fee courses that sold "memberships." The "memberships," as I understand it, were sold by the ower and/or course manager, Carolina Golf Trails, and would give the player a right to play at any of the CGT courses. I think there were different "membership" deals, with different rights as to numbers of rounds, but I never really looked at what was involved - no need, in my case. I thought it was more like purchasing the right to X tee times in advance. Of course, I do feel sorry for those whose money seems to now have gone down the drain.
Carl
-
So let me get this straight. You move to town. There are two private clubs. 1 is an Art Hills course from the 90s that posts fees online. The other is an old Tillinghast gem that embodies everything you love about GCA and have been reading about here for the past decade. They are currently undergoing a sympathetic restoration documented extensively here. Their website says "for membership inquiries contact Jane Doe". You guys choose the Hills track cause mommy never taught you to pick up the phone and have an adult conversation. This has to be the single funniest thing I've read here.
It can work, believe it or not. A fellow member of my club told me that when he moved to our town a number of years ago he wanted to join a local private club. He didn't know anything about the clubs here, but made a list of what he thought looked like the best options. Then he picked up the phone. The first club he called was at that time (unbeknownst to him) THE exclusive old money club in town. He said he was politely told that they were not looking for new members at that time. He then called other clubs, and eventually found and joined our club. He seems to have had no problem with the process. (By the way, this was pre-website days - he used the phone book.)
I'll add that my own club does not put initiation/dues info on our website, but does invite inquiries. Of the ten current candidates for membership/wait list this month, three began the process through such an "inquiry," while the others were introduced initially through existing members. So that approach is viable too, at least in our case. Public portion of our website: https://www.carolinagolfclub.org/Home.aspx
-
So let me get this straight. You move to town. There are two private clubs. 1 is an Art Hills course from the 90s that posts fees online. The other is an old Tillinghast gem that embodies everything you love about GCA and have been reading about here for the past decade. They are currently undergoing a sympathetic restoration documented extensively here. Their website says "for membership inquiries contact Jane Doe". You guys choose the Hills track cause mommy never taught you to pick up the phone and have an adult conversation. This has to be the single funniest thing I've read here.
Having a conversation with a secretary from a Tillie or Ross course is excruciating. Listing to some old broad tell me all the platitudes as if I've never experience a great course. Hill's had 6-8 associates working for him at that time, possible Foster did the design.... Prob a lot of tools at the tillie course and I may opt to join the Hills course, but then again we are using extremes as examples which is typical on GCA... Usually the clubs that are hurting and don't want to post their costs in the 21st century are in debt up to their eye balls, but debt is taught as a good thing in most college economics classes..
-
So let me get this straight. You move to town. There are two private clubs. 1 is an Art Hills course from the 90s that posts fees online. The other is an old Tillinghast gem that embodies everything you love about GCA and have been reading about here for the past decade. They are currently undergoing a sympathetic restoration documented extensively here. Their website says "for membership inquiries contact Jane Doe". You guys choose the Hills track cause mommy never taught you to pick up the phone and have an adult conversation. This has to be the single funniest thing I've read here.
Having a conversation with a secretary from a Tillie or Ross course is excruciating. Listing to some old broad tell me all the platitudes as if I've never experience a great course. Hill's had 6-8 associates working for him at that time, possible Foster did the design.... Prob a lot of tools at the tillie course and I may opt to join the Hills course, but then again we are using extremes as examples which is typical on GCA... Usually the clubs that are hurting and don't want to post their costs in the 21st century are in debt up to their eye balls, but debt is taught as a good thing in most college economics classes..
BCowan, take a look at my post above (just now modified by the addition of the second paragraph) in response to Jud's comment. Our club is a very nice Ross course. I really, sincerely, doubt that a conversation with [whoever] at our club, if you were to inquire about a membership, would be excruciating. I'd suggest you may be overstating it a bit here.
BCowan, also, keep in mind that the "old broad" has no idea who you are. If she did, she would not get into the platitudes. Instead, she'd . . . . I'm not going there.
Carl
-
So let me get this straight. You move to town. There are two private clubs. 1 is an Art Hills course from the 90s that posts fees online. The other is an old Tillinghast gem that embodies everything you love about GCA and have been reading about here for the past decade. They are currently undergoing a sympathetic restoration documented extensively here. Their website says "for membership inquiries contact Jane Doe". You guys choose the Hills track cause mommy never taught you to pick up the phone and have an adult conversation. This has to be the single funniest thing I've read here.
Let's help you 'get it straight'...
You move to a metro area for a job. There are 27 clubs within reasonable distance from your new house. You've only ever heard of 2 of them. You have no idea of who the architects were for most of them. Your wife would make use of tennis if available. Your kid is interested in competitive swimming. You may need to join a health club, unless you find a course with one. You're trying to get your wife to play golf more seriously and think that lessons might help. Saving for college tuition requires that you limit club membership expenses to a set amount.
Which clubs are in your price range? Which have waiting lists? What are the practice facilities like?
Your friend dropped $50K initiation at a club that went Chapter-11 2 years later, eliminating his membership after being sold at auction. That will be in the back of your mind when you write that joining check.
People at your new office play a few times per year at various CCFDs. They take turns picking a course & setting it up. One guy is a member at a course & invites you. It's a dull course.
You've got a few clients who love golf & would gladly accept an invitation to join you for a day and dinner after.
It's March and the season will start soon. Better start dialing....
-
Dave,
It would take about 15 seconds to find out who designed every course in town on Golflink. If you're more concerned with Country Club amenities than golf then why wouldn't you simply take a season to figure it out, particularly in light of your friend's experience (and why waste time slumming it here?)
-
So let me get this straight. You move to town. There are two private clubs. 1 is an Art Hills course from the 90s that posts fees online. The other is an old Tillinghast gem that embodies everything you love about GCA and have been reading about here for the past decade. They are currently undergoing a sympathetic restoration documented extensively here. Their website says "for membership inquiries contact Jane Doe". You guys choose the Hills track cause mommy never taught you to pick up the phone and have an adult conversation. This has to be the single funniest thing I've read here.
Let's help you 'get it straight'...
You move to a metro area for a job. There are 27 clubs within reasonable distance from your new house. My advice, for whatever you may think it's worth. You're fortunate to have so many options. Most would envy you. You've only ever heard of 2 of them. You have no idea of who the architects were for most of them. Focus on the course, not the architect, unless name dropping is important to you. Your wife would make use of tennis if available. Your kid is interested in competitive swimming. You may need to join a health club, unless you find a course with one. You're trying to get your wife to play golf more seriously and think that lessons might help. It's not going to be a simple process as you have lots of interests to satisfy. As I said at the outset, it's great that you have so many options to look at. Saving for college tuition requires that you limit club membership expenses to a set amount. I think that we've all (or most all) been there. I started with a little swim club when my kids were small. Then we switched to a tennis and swim club. Finally, when my kids' educations were taken care of, I felt like I could move to a golf club. So, how much you value where you put you money is a critical decision, your first step. No big deal if you've got it to burn, but if not, don't be hasty.
Which clubs are in your price range? Which have waiting lists? What are the practice facilities like? With all of the options you have, and all of your interests, I'm with Jud on taking your time. But I'd say you should take a couple of years, not just one. And it's just not practice facilities, course architect, etc., but what's the culture of the club? Cultures can change over time, but what's there now is what's there now. You need some time in your new city to get that figured out.
Your friend dropped $50K initiation at a club that went Chapter-11 2 years later, eliminating his membership after being sold at auction. That will be in the back of your mind when you write that joining check. That's why you don't want to be hasty. Calm down and take your time.
People at your new office play a few times per year at various CCFDs. They take turns picking a course & setting it up. One guy is a member at a course & invites you. It's a dull course. Unless the swimming and tennis (after all, it's not all about you) are superior, forget this club.
You've got a few clients who love golf & would gladly accept an invitation to join you for a day and dinner after. That can wait.
It's March and the season will start soon. Better start dialing.... Bad idea. First, check out the websites for what they do or don't tell you. Then talk to folks, lots of folks. Be cool. Try to visit as many of the clubs as you can, one way or another, in the next couple of years. Then start dialing, if you must.
-
I think a good number of clubs don't put their pricing online so that they can get you on the phone and hit you with a sales pitch. I am not saying that this is bad but just the way of the world. Additionally the vetting process from both the club representative and prospective member can play out better than with a string of emails. Even if the pricing is online I can't imagine that any real due diligence is accomplished without a live conversation where both parties can ask what they feel are pertinent questions of the other.
-
So let me get this straight. You move to town. There are two private clubs. 1 is an Art Hills course from the 90s that posts fees online. The other is an old Tillinghast gem that embodies everything you love about GCA and have been reading about here for the past decade. They are currently undergoing a sympathetic restoration documented extensively here. Their website says "for membership inquiries contact Jane Doe". You guys choose the Hills track cause mommy never taught you to pick up the phone and have an adult conversation. This has to be the single funniest thing I've read here.
Having a conversation with a secretary from a Tillie or Ross course is excruciating. Listing to some old broad tell me all the platitudes as if I've never experience a great course. Hill's had 6-8 associates working for him at that time, possible Foster did the design.... Prob a lot of tools at the tillie course and I may opt to join the Hills course, but then again we are using extremes as examples which is typical on GCA... Usually the clubs that are hurting and don't want to post their costs in the 21st century are in debt up to their eye balls, but debt is taught as a good thing in most college economics classes..
BCowan, take a look at my post above (just now modified by the addition of the second paragraph) in response to Jud's comment. Our club is a very nice Ross course. I really, sincerely, doubt that a conversation with [whoever] at our club, if you were to inquire about a membership, would be excruciating. I'd suggest you may be overstating it a bit here.
BCowan, also, keep in mind that the "old broad" has no idea who you are. If she did, she would not get into the platitudes. Instead, she'd . . . . I'm not going there.
Carl
Carl,
I had dinner tonight with the GF's parents who were in town from Chicago. I asked them if dtown Chicago restaurants 30-40 years ago used to not put prices of items on the menu. The said yes, that it was much more prevalent than today. The old adage if you have to ask how much something costs your cheap. A Donald Ross course (Non Major track) in a declining burb vs one in a booming burb is going to be drastically different and one is going to be thriving.
I went to a course in the A2 area today, a great gem that i played last fall to drop off a flier. It went under after the 08' crash and was bought by another area course (that sucks) but is in a good burb (school district). The pro told me that they used to have 400+ members, but the membership got old, I am sure they never did a cost analysis to see if opening the pool was worth it. They haven't gotten many new members, selling the same ole CC model. The ole guard and the new ownership doesn't understand the changing demographics. Many people that I know who were members of golf clubs couldn't justify the FAMILY golf membership model when they were the only ones using the facilities. The course now has around 150 members and is treading water. If they used the individual member model, spent 10k advertising I would have no doubt they would gain lots of members. Guys from 30-55 who just want golf, list your prices ( I don't want to talk to some lady who doesn't play golf to tell me dues that are and a horrible value when I am the only one using the facilities. Once we get past dues, we can determine how good their burger is, craft beer, practice facilities, and members. I get it she is doing her job, but private clubs waste my time and their time! (It is principle). The CC's used to go after the Dr's, lawyers, and so forth and there are only so many of those members that play 5 times a year and write a blank check. So if someone here would be so kind to tell a solution for a course that is a gem that has 150-190 members what they would do to survive let me know? We aren't talking about Merion, PV, Kingsley, Double Eagle, or top 100 club, we are talking about gems XYZ CC's that could prosper as Golf Clubs. The solution of spending 2 years to find a club you like, my god life is short, do you take a year to find the best restaurant? Many on here would say let the club fail (and yell over supply), instead of admitting the model was flawed.
-
I said earlier, pool your money and get ready to buy something in receivership in a few years.
Unfortunately I think lots of clubs are compelled to cater to the long time members who still come for dinner several evenings per week and who have deep pockets. God bless 'em, but when they're gone, the clubs are going to be in trouble unless they can attract new members. The way to attract new members has to be market-based. Focus on golf above all, not fluff.
Personally I'd prefer a golf club but there isn't one close to me that (a) interests me or (b) I can afford (or that is beating down my door to have me as a member). My wife has no interest in using a club except for the rare trip to the pool and if we want to eat, we go out to a restaurant.
-
So let me get this straight. You move to town. There are two private clubs. 1 is an Art Hills course from the 90s that posts fees online. The other is an old Tillinghast gem that embodies everything you love about GCA and have been reading about here for the past decade. They are currently undergoing a sympathetic restoration documented extensively here. Their website says "for membership inquiries contact Jane Doe". You guys choose the Hills track cause mommy never taught you to pick up the phone and have an adult conversation. This has to be the single funniest thing I've read here.
Having a conversation with a secretary from a Tillie or Ross course is excruciating. Listing to some old broad tell me all the platitudes as if I've never experience a great course. Hill's had 6-8 associates working for him at that time, possible Foster did the design.... Prob a lot of tools at the tillie course and I may opt to join the Hills course, but then again we are using extremes as examples which is typical on GCA... Usually the clubs that are hurting and don't want to post their costs in the 21st century are in debt up to their eye balls, but debt is taught as a good thing in most college economics classes..
BCowan, take a look at my post above (just now modified by the addition of the second paragraph) in response to Jud's comment. Our club is a very nice Ross course. I really, sincerely, doubt that a conversation with [whoever] at our club, if you were to inquire about a membership, would be excruciating. I'd suggest you may be overstating it a bit here.
BCowan, also, keep in mind that the "old broad" has no idea who you are. If she did, she would not get into the platitudes. Instead, she'd . . . . I'm not going there.
Carl
Carl,
. . . The solution of spending 2 years to find a club you like, my god life is short (true, so don't screw it up - obviously, how much time and effort you want to put into your search is a personal choice, and mine would be to take my time, but clearly that's not you), do you take a year to find the best restaurant? Of course not, but you're talking about one night and a relatively small amount of money. Many on here would say let the club fail (and yell over supply), instead of admitting the model was flawed. Haven't done a survey, but I'd say that many here, including myself, agree that the old model is now flawed as a single solution. There's still some demand for the old-style country club, but, I think, plenty of room for pared down models that focus on golf. Some clubs will hang on to the old and survive, some will fail, some will change and survive, and some will change and fail. Re: price listing, which seems to be your major complaint - hard to tell - some restaurants will give you oral specials without stating the price. Simple. Ask. It's the smart thing to do. Club? Ask if not published. If you don't get the answer you'd like, quietly move on - it's not your kind of place. Don't fret about it. You're in the right, they're wrong. Let it go. Life's too short to go around being pissed at things that don't go your way.
-
''Life's too short to go around being pissed at things that don't go your way.''
Carl,
I am happy with the club I play golf at, life couldn't be better! Nobody solved the puzzle for the club with 150 members. What do you have to hide?
-
I'm 54 and starting to slow down on my number of rounds. When I'm 64 then 74 it will only get worse. I hope that I have the same sense of loyalty that the old men before me have shown and I continue to pay dues so the younger generations can enjoy golf as I have. I am not positive I will but have never pretended to be anything but a selfish self centered douche. Damn, if I won't how likely is it that the waiting for bankruptcy crowd will.
I hope the same people who wait to join bankrupt clubs buy mold invested foreclosed homes and mud choked flooded cars.
-
JakaB
Fear not, the romance with golf doesn't fade with age.
Good years lie ahead for you
-
I see both sides of putting membership info on the website. And there are pros/cons of both.
I get not putting it out there for public consumption. That leaves club with a little more control over the information. In addition, the club can follow up with a potential candidate for membership, invite them to the club, answer questions. The rub, of course, is that these clubs might miss out on some potential candidates -- people might not call, they might have a preconceived notion that the club is out of reach from a financial standpoint, they might never experience the club.
I also get why a club would put info out there. These clubs probably get members every year who came through the website. I think in some cases it can help prospective members realize that it might not be as expensive as they think or the like. The downside is that some people might make a decision before every stopping out at the club.
My club currently has info about our spring trial membership up on both the website and the Facebook page. There isn't, however, a full listing of charges, etc.
I don't believe the whole thing about competitive reasons to post or not post membership info. I know many clubs gather information in a variety of ways on competitors and they have a pretty good idea of what the landscape is.
Like most things with private clubs, they vary from market to market. What's right for a club in Minneapolis might not work in Miami. And what's happening in Portland might not work in Philly. And, obviously, there's a big difference between what clubs with waiting lists need to do and what clubs that need to recruit 15-20 members every year need to do.
-
I hope the same people who wait to join bankrupt clubs buy mold invested foreclosed homes and mud choked flooded cars.
So I am guessing you have not embraced the Pope Francis era yet?
(http://www.nwjesuits.info/ACTS/wp-content/uploads/bergoglio-kissing-feet.jpg)
:) ;) :D
-
In reflecting on this thread, it occured to me that the plague that's been sweeping America might be at the core of this thread.
What plague you ask ?
The plague known as "the right of entitlement"
WHY should a private club display confidential information to satisfy the requests of strangers ?
Why should a private club provide any information for public consumption ?
-
In reflecting on this thread, it occured to me that the plague that's been sweeping America might be at the core of this thread.
What plague you ask ?
The plague known as "the right of entitlement"
WHY should a private club display confidential information to satisfy the requests of strangers ?
Why should a private club provide any information for public consumption ?
[/quote/
think I'm on your side of this. But, the answer is "business." Not the request of stangers, but of customers, if they're needed. Jeff Shelman's said it right, above.
-
Pat; That may be part of it but I think there is more. The suggestion appears to be that private clubs are facing hard times. This is undoubtedly true because it is true for all golf. We are overbuilt so there are a certain number of clubs that are struggling.
The suggestion is that by making its fee schedule public, a club will have a better chance to compete. Additionally, there appears to be a fear that the reason a club will not go "public" is because it makes special deals for favored applicants. I suspect that if an individual needs to see the fees in public and is unwilling to make the effort to find out through a personal call, he is unlikely to become a member. Its not much of an effort for one who is truly interested in making a significant financial and personal commitment. As to the special deals, if the club is member owned and operated, that practice would be very difficult to maintain.
What I think is missing from a lot of these comments is the lack of feeling for that which makes a club a "club". The camaraderie and friendships that arise at a club, the fun that is had playing in competitions with fellow members over time and the satisfaction gained working on shared projects are the glue that binds clubs. Thus the emphasis on dollars and cents and the failure to consider the intangible aspects shows a lack of understanding of the real appeal of a club. Jackie Burke had a nice section on this aspect in his book.
Candidly, a lot of this discussion strikes me as rationalizations. Historically, other than people with old money, people joined clubs in their late 30's to early 50's after they had their feet on the ground in their careers and had a sense of where they stood economically and building their families. That hasn't changed and we will find out how many of those entering into these years are interested in club life. The economy will play a role. But a core of people will enjoy our game and others will want club life. Perhaps there will be a movement toward other forms of clubs. Of course many muni's have their own form by establishing Men's and Women's Associations which hold events on the local course. Before I was ready to join my club, that is how I played my golf.
Finally, the amount of disinformation passed around to try and make a point is pretty bad. For example, Ben, if you want to tell me that restaurants in Chicago gave out menus without prices and sold food 30 to 40 years ago, you will have to name the restaurants and not rely on "parents of a friend". Perhaps some establishments retained a sexist practice of keeping prices from the fairer sex, but those were mostly clubs. How do I know? 39 years ago I returned To Chicago from Cambridge after finishing law school and I didn't cook much so I spent a lot of time in restaurants on my own and chasing girls. 30 years ago I still lived in the metropolitan area and had started my family and I continue to live here. I can't remember a single instance where I didn't see the prices.
Moreover, I am active in club administration for the entire Chicago District and the characterization of the admission process by the critics in this thread is not reflective of the situation in Chicago except that most clubs don't post their fee schedule. you still have to ask. For most member owned clubs, you still have to be sponsored and interviewed. that's because the members want to know who they are admitting; its part of keeping the club friendly. But if the economics get tough enough, some will change. Regardless, I believe a significant number of clubs and courses will fold. Overbuilding in a bubble results in problems. The sad part for architecture buffs is that we can't choose the courses that will fail.
-
Shelly and Pat,
The point of this thread was to explore alternative models, not to exclude ANY models - public, private, or semi-private.
Since Shelly extended the conversation of the "no prices on the restaurant menu", I heard about this restaurant the other day (have not visited) in Red Bank, New Jersey, which is near the Jersey Shore:
Our vision here at Soul Kitchen is to serve healthy, delicious, and when possible, organic meals. At Soul Kitchen you will notice there are no prices on the menu and you might have been seated with someone you don’t know. Customers pay the minimum donation or volunteer in some way to earn a dining certificate for a meal.
http://www.jbjsoulkitchen.org/about
Now it is well funded by Jon Bon Jovi's Foundation (I am fond of him, but not his music) but my guess is it will need to build a sustainable model on its own, otherwise it will not last. The vibe that they present on the website is very compelling to me, and if I head to the Jersey Shore this summer to visit friends at the beach this is the restaurant that I would want to visit. Why? Well having a Special Needs son has probably made me overly sensitive to the topics of inclusion, and this place just has a great vibe from here on the other side of a computer screen.
What does this remind me of in golf? The artisan golf club, and one could even say The Golf Club @ Golf Club Atlas where donations are accepted to maintain our little nuthouse and many golf trips are run at break-even by members of this site.
12 years later, I still like Gib's thread - You have started your own club - who gets in?
http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,3876.0.html
-
In reflecting on this thread, it occured to me that the plague that's been sweeping America might be at the core of this thread.
What plague you ask ?
The plague known as "the right of entitlement"
WHY should a private club display confidential information to satisfy the requests of strangers ?
Why should a private club provide any information for public consumption ?
Pat,
When was the last time you played a club with 50% of its membership filled? In your neck of the woods being in close relationship to the printing press and a propped up stock market you have nothing to worry about. It's called people of your generation not knowing how to adjust to market forces. You are also the type to believe in Supply Side economics, that if you just cut taxes it will bring in more revenue for the FED gov't, but then you tell me that wouldn't work at a Golf Club that is significantly hurting and I say fuey!
-
Pat; That may be part of it but I think there is more. The suggestion appears to be that private clubs are facing hard times. This is undoubtedly true because it is true for all golf. We are overbuilt so there are a certain number of clubs that are struggling.
The suggestion is that by making its fee schedule public, a club will have a better chance to compete. Additionally, there appears to be a fear that the reason a club will not go "public" is because it makes special deals for favored applicants. I suspect that if an individual needs to see the fees in public and is unwilling to make the effort to find out through a personal call, he is unlikely to become a member. Its not much of an effort for one who is truly interested in making a significant financial and personal commitment. As to the special deals, if the club is member owned and operated, that practice would be very difficult to maintain.
Overbuilt in some areas, but quality always shins through. Overbuilt is the excuse. He is less likely to waste his time and your time. Again if you have 150 members and 350 is your limit, you should be eliminating jobs to save money. No special deals, restructuring of membership to a 21st Century model.
What I think is missing from a lot of these comments is the lack of feeling for that which makes a club a "club". The camaraderie and friendships that arise at a club, the fun that is had playing in competitions with fellow members over time and the satisfaction gained working on shared projects are the glue that binds clubs. Thus the emphasis on dollars and cents and the failure to consider the intangible aspects shows a lack of understanding of the real appeal of a club. Jackie Burke had a nice section on this aspect in his book.I have very close bonds at the quasi private club I play at, we have club Championships and very easy to make games with people of ages ranging from 27-75. The Jackie Burke quote was from when? It is out of date and an excuse. Why do restaurants post the price of a filet, and many post their menu on the outside of their restaurant (fine dining)
Candidly, a lot of this discussion strikes me as rationalizations. Historically, other than people with old money, people joined clubs in their late 30's to early 50's after they had their feet on the ground in their careers and had a sense of where they stood economically and building their families. That hasn't changed and we will find out how many of those entering into these years are interested in club life. The economy will play a role. But a core of people will enjoy our game and others will want club life. Perhaps there will be a movement toward other forms of clubs. Of course many muni's have their own form by establishing Men's and Women's Associations which hold events on the local course. Before I was ready to join my club, that is how I played my golf.Back in the 30's we were on a gold standard and inflation wasn't 5%. Yes, it has changed drastically. Comparing Muni's to what Sweeney and I are talking about is the extremes of GCA in which you can't have a rational discussion about this issue. My club has a 3-5 year waiting list, the CC that is 7 miles away has 150 members and the dues are double. Your hard core golfers want private for pace of play reasons, friendships, and the love of golf (Golf club model type). My course doesn't have an initiation, and people don't leave (amazing) blows the whole people will leave because they aren't invested theory out of the water.
Finally, the amount of disinformation passed around to try and make a point is pretty bad. For example, Ben, if you want to tell me that restaurants in Chicago gave out menus without prices and sold food 30 to 40 years ago, you will have to name the restaurants and not rely on "parents of a friend". Perhaps some establishments retained a sexist practice of keeping prices from the fairer sex, but those were mostly clubs. How do I know? 39 years ago I returned To Chicago from Cambridge after finishing law school and I didn't cook much so I spent a lot of time in restaurants on my own and chasing girls. 30 years ago I still lived in the metropolitan area and had started my family and I continue to live here. I can't remember a single instance where I didn't see the prices.What i underlined is basically what they said, I was using it to show that in some part times have changed some. I am also not saying posting of dues and fees is going to result in a big gain of members (Also not suggesting it is needed for every club). Restructuring of the model is the most important aspect of failing private clubs IMHO. Oh, to be young again and chasing girls, I miss those days.
Moreover, I am active in club administration for the entire Chicago District and the characterization of the admission process by the critics in this thread is not reflective of the situation in Chicago except that most clubs don't post their fee schedule. you still have to ask. For most member owned clubs, you still have to be sponsored and interviewed. that's because the members want to know who they are admitting; its part of keeping the club friendly. But if the economics get tough enough, some will change. Regardless, I believe a significant number of clubs and courses will fold. Overbuilding in a bubble results in problems. The sad part for architecture buffs is that we can't choose the courses that will fail. Shell, you have to think outside Chicago. I don't know the Chicago Golf market, do you have private clubs that are half full? This is what bothers me, instead of admitting that some CC's need to go to the GOLF CLUB model similar to Australia and England to be healthy, you say they need to close due to overbuilding. There are great gems that are in danger of closing, due to following and doubling down on the CC model in the wrong burb. These clubs were built 80+ years ago. We aren't talking about your golf course which is in a solid burb. I also agreed with and enjoyed your post regarding new members.
-
As a history nerd, I don't want to see anything historical, including a golf course, go under. But at the same time, if the members of a club refuse to change and the club/course goes under, then so be it. Perhaps someone like Trump will step in and buy it on the back end and convert it to a golf club or resort.
The idea of the Aussie or UK model is great in theory, but one thing we are forgetting is the tax impact. Many clubs here in the USA are tax-exempt entities and as such it's just not possible to open them up to visitor play...unless they want to face the possibility of paying UBIT, which surely they do not if they're hurting for cash.
-
''The idea of the Aussie or UK model is great in theory, but one thing we are forgetting is the tax impact. Many clubs here in the USA are tax-exempt entities and as such it's just not possible to open them up to visitor play...unless they want to face the possibility of paying UBIT, which surely they do not if they're hurting for cash.''
I'd imagine there are many healthy clubs in Australia that aren't on the major rotation that people don't visit from other countries. Forget Aussie or UK, how about the courses Sweeney and I play at. I can't speak for Yale, but my club has a 3-5 year waiting list.
-
''The idea of the Aussie or UK model is great in theory, but one thing we are forgetting is the tax impact. Many clubs here in the USA are tax-exempt entities and as such it's just not possible to open them up to visitor play...unless they want to face the possibility of paying UBIT, which surely they do not if they're hurting for cash.''
I'd imagine there are many healthy clubs in Australia that aren't on the major rotation that people don't visit from other countries. Forget Aussie or UK, how about the courses Sweeney and I play at. I can't speak for Yale, but my club has a 3-5 year waiting list. You should go email Royal Melbourne and see what there dues are, then compare it to one of our top 40 courses.
The only reason I would email a club to ask about pricing would be if I was serious about joining. I wish I could say that I was looking to join RM, but unfortunately that is not the case.
Regardless of that, how do you get around the tax issue? It's not so easy to go from tax-exempt status to taxable, particularly if you're in need of cash.
-
''Regardless of that, how do you get around the tax issue? It's not so easy to go from tax-exempt status to taxable, particularly if you're in need of cash.''
I don't understand. I am not advocating taxing change. Single memberships, may have to take out a loan to advertise. If the price is right, people will come. Do cost benefit analysis too, to see what areas a club needs to shut down (Pool?) Tennis has been in decline for 20 years i believe (don't hold me to that).
-
''Regardless of that, how do you get around the tax issue? It's not so easy to go from tax-exempt status to taxable, particularly if you're in need of cash.''
I don't understand. I am not advocating taxing change. Single memberships, may have to take out a loan to advertise. If the price is right, people will come. Do cost benefit analysis too, to see what areas a club needs to shut down (Pool?) Tennis has been in decline for 20 years i believe (don't hold me to that).
I assumed that the Aussie and UK c,ub model would include allowing visitor play to generate revenue. But that's not feasible with the tax status of many country/golf clubs in the USA.
I agree that struggling clubs ought to do a cost-benefit analysis. My guess is that F&B is a loss generator at many clubs (but I have no evidence). I also assume that upkeep on clubhouses is a big drain on cash. Not sure about pools because the ones at the clubs I've been at seem to do a brisk business. Tennis could be a loss but the upkeep of tennis courts seems to be rather minimal. What if the cost-benefit analysis shows that the golf course is the biggest money loser? What then?
-
There one other key differentiation I don't think I've seen mentioned - equity vs. corporate ownership private clubs.
I've been in both, and I prefer the corporate model. Lots of reasons, but the primary is that we don't have a Green Committee chair that can screw around with the design of the golf course.
Key to me because the course design is the primary reason I joined where I am now. The other factor was pace of play.
It's a dumb economic decision to join, but it's a great quality of life decision. That's the balance clubs need to sell - the quality of life, because without it, you may as well be selling Orlando-area timeshares! :)
-
''Regardless of that, how do you get around the tax issue? It's not so easy to go from tax-exempt status to taxable, particularly if you're in need of cash.''
I don't understand. I am not advocating taxing change. Single memberships, may have to take out a loan to advertise. If the price is right, people will come. Do cost benefit analysis too, to see what areas a club needs to shut down (Pool?) Tennis has been in decline for 20 years i believe (don't hold me to that).
I assumed that the Aussie and UK c,ub model would include allowing visitor play to generate revenue. But that's not feasible with the tax status of many country/golf clubs in the USA.
I agree that struggling clubs ought to do a cost-benefit analysis. My guess is that F&B is a loss generator at many clubs (but I have no evidence). I also assume that upkeep on clubhouses is a big drain on cash. Not sure about pools because the ones at the clubs I've been at seem to do a brisk business. Tennis could be a loss but the upkeep of tennis courts seems to be rather minimal. What if the cost-benefit analysis shows that the golf course is the biggest money loser? What then?
I would say F&B staying open in the cold months is a big money loser. Pool depending on location can do really well, so I agree with you. I grew up at a golf club that had a pool and a successful social membership just for the (pool). Tennis courts are suppose to be resurfaced every X amount of year. Well personally i think private clubs spend more on maint then their upscale public counterparts (maint arms race). I would say the model is wrong. The private club model is set up for family's. Well I grew up with both parents playing so it was beneficial to us. The single guy or gal who is into golf can't justify the model when they break down the cost per round, paying $100-200 a round to play your own course doesn't make sense for a lot of people. (This is coming from a friend who went to Ryder Cup at Valderama and the British Open, serious golfer I'd say) The Single membership with small fees for kids 13-22 seems to work very well where I play. That way if your wife plays, she is more of a serious golfer. If you have 350 active family memberships vs 700 individual memberships you open up to more potential players. I know there is only X amount of Sat morning times, but it seems to work spontaneously very well.
-
Brian
I think there are plenty of private clubs that could accept the tax element in becoming a business and do very, very well. The issue is more the members don't really want a business for their golf club and that is understandable. Some clubs will be forced to go public and in these cases, I wonder why the UK model isn't attempted. Basically, a public with a club attached. Of course, the club would have to have some special treatment to make it viable, but I have always thought the marriage could work in the US.
Ciao
-
1. Yale and Radrick are University golf courses. As such they are not true semi private public entities (even if anyone with $500 can "join" a club and play Radrick).
2. Many clubs do have individual member categories and are not full.
3. So clubs are supposed to plow under the tennis court, pool and big old clubhouse, cut maintenance and get rid of the silly outdated membership process so anyone can join for a season. Good luck selling that to any membership without a fire sale and an ownership change.
-
Brian
I think there are plenty of private clubs that could accept the tax element in becoming a business and do very, very well. The issue is more the members don't really want a business for their golf club and that is understandable. Some clubs will be forced to go public and in these cases, I wonder why the UK model isn't attempted. Basically, a public with a club attached. Of course, the cub would have to have some special treatment to make it viable, but I have always thought the marriage could work in the US.
Ciao
Sean, I would love for the UK model to find its way here to the USA. Eventually it could happen, but I think you're right about the issues holding it up. I don't begrudge members not wanting to open up their course to outside play. It's their club so they have every right to do with it what they want. But some day, when the deep pocketed members are gone or few in number, they may need to think of adopting a model that allows the club to survive.
-
3. So clubs are supposed to plow under the tennis court, pool and big old clubhouse, cut maintenance and get rid of the silly outdated membership process so anyone can join for a season. Good luck selling that to any membership without a fire sale and an ownership change.
Not sure anyone is saying that. I for one certainly don't advocate that any club should do anything that its members don't want (we still do believe in some measure of private property in this country, I think).
But at some point it may come to that, to some extent, at man clubs. Maybe not in big markets like NYC, Chicago or San Fran, but perhaps here in "flyover country" where the supply of future members at country/golf clubs is rather limited. It would be a shame to see classic courses go under simply for the sake of adherence to an unfeasible economic model...but if that's what members want, then they have every right to do so.
-
1. Yale and Radrick are University golf courses. As such they are not true semi private public entities (even if anyone with $500 can "join" a club and play Radrick).
Yeah, you can't get a tee time off the street, hence quasi private. Equity clubs aren't the only private model.
2. Many clubs do have individual member categories and are not full.
they aren't half dues, they are most likely 10-15% of a family membership is my bet.
3. So clubs are supposed to plow under the tennis court, pool and big old clubhouse, cut maintenance and get rid of the silly outdated membership process so anyone can join for a season. Good luck selling that to any membership without a fire sale and an ownership change. --
Yeah keep putting money into a sinking ship. If you don't have the social members to pay for the pool expenses (closing/opening and operating) you aren't a wise club. Funny thing is the people that are alum at the course I play at continue to re-sign their memberships at $1800 a pop. A friend has been there for 22 years. I don't expect them to change, they will just typically complain about who resides at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, much easier. The definition of insanity.
-
Brian
I think there are plenty of private clubs that could accept the tax element in becoming a business and do very, very well. The issue is more the members don't really want a business for their golf club and that is understandable. Some clubs will be forced to go public and in these cases, I wonder why the UK model isn't attempted. Basically, a public with a club attached. Of course, the cub would have to have some special treatment to make it viable, but I have always thought the marriage could work in the US.
Ciao
Sean, I would love for the UK model to find its way here to the USA. Eventually it could happen, but I think you're right about the issues holding it up. I don't begrudge members not wanting to open up their course to outside play. It's their club so they have every right to do with it what they want. But some day, when the deep pocketed members are gone or few in number, they may need to think of adopting a model that allows the club to survive.
I am not advocating opening a club up to public (maybe on a monday if outing isn't booked). The individual membership model does work (when implemented properly).
-
Brian,
Members who paid 10, 20, 50 k down will have to be dragged kicking and screaming off the course before they vote to give up the amenities they bought into and have become used to.
-
Brian,
Members who paid 10, 20, 50 k down will have to be dragged kicking and screaming off the course before they vote to give up the amenities they bought into and have become used to.
I'm not saying they don't have every right to enjoy what they have paid for. More power to them if they have the means to pay for that. But someday, there may not be enough deep pocketed members to fund those amenities.
-
Mike; Thanks for your response. I think I understood the purpose of your post. Many of us involved in golf discuss these issues regularly. They are not easy. I suppose that is why I am so troubled by the tenor of this discussion. What was intended to be a discussion of alternate methods of running a golf operation quickly devolved to a combination of complaints that one of the current models is unsatisfactory to the individual writer and a series of largely amateurish and idealistic proposals for a better way to run courses. Golf courses are very investment intensive. The cost of the land and improvements is high. Fixed costs for maintenance are high. Ancillary services often operate on extremely tight margins. There exists oversupply in many markets. These are all important topics for discussion although they are only ancillary to architecture issues. But they are also complex issues and the discussion here has been less than enlightening. So while I understand the purpose of the discussion, for anyone who has spent anytime looking at industry numbers and thinking about these issues, the discussion lost interest very quickly. These types of issues involve a complex interaction between, economic, demographic and cultural issues, all of which are dynamic. They are not easy to analyze in the best of forums with a truly informed group of participants. Here, the discussion has no chance. Perhaps I shouldn't have posted.
Ben; It seems that every time a discussion goes beyond personal tastes in golf courses or means of play, you feel compelled to attack the knowledge/qualifications of those on the other side and resort to apocryphal anecdotal evidence to support your theories. Of course, no one ever bothers to ask you about your experience as it is unnecessary, the substance of your comments tells us enough. But I am getting a little tired of you suggesting to others who have real experience in the field that they have to get out more, that they don't know enough or that they are somehow sheltered from the real world. One last time for me; I have noted that I work in golf administration in the Chicago area as a way of giving back. In connection with that work, I interact with others in the golf business all around the country. In my real work, I deal with distressed companies in many industries including golf. As such I have seen the operating statements of a lot of troubled enterprises of all types and sizes including golf clubs and I have even advised individuals and groups about reorganizing or acquiring troubled golf courses. So I respectfully suggest that I have the bona fides to discuss the problems of operating a golf club, issues impacting the industry, and approaches to reorganizing troubled operations. I don't claim to be the only one and I am sure there are others on this board who have unique perspectives that I would enjoy learning about. But don't think that you are alone in interacting with smaller clubs even in Detroit. You might be surprised at what some others have seen, even in your neck of the woods. In any event, I have concluded that further dialogue of this type is a waste of time so I will return to discussing architecture. I am sure I will have ample opportunity to discuss these issues elsewhere.
-
Brian,
Members who paid 10, 20, 50 k down will have to be dragged kicking and screaming off the course before they vote to give up the amenities they bought into and have become used to.
Kinda like the guy I saw kicking and screaming as they closed the doors on the last Blockbuster, complaining he had no where else to rent videos. :'(
I admire anyone who has joined a private golf club -- they've clearly made an investment in an entity that many of us around here care about (stewardship of good and sometimes historic golf clubs, or recognition of the growing quality of modern-day architecture).
But some of the comments here -- not all, but more than a few -- seem to suggest that private golf clubs can somehow be immune from the vast changes occurring both economically and socially in our country. Maybe it's just the circle of folks I run with, but.....
-- I know of no one under the age of 25 who subscribes to a newspaper (sayeth the ex-newspaper man);
-- I know of no under under the age of 16 who doesn't own a cell phone -- and most of those are smart phones;
-- I know of no one who -- as the first step in buying a car -- goes directly to a dealership and asks: "What's on the lot?"
-- I know of hardly anyone who hasn't used Amazon in some way in the past year for an economic transaction.
A few other nuggets to chew on:
-- The baby boom is on the verge of not playing golf much anymore; I was born in 1961, at the very end of the baby boom that began in the mid-1940s, and I probably won't play much golf in about 10-15 years. I assume those born at the start of the baby boom have largely stopped. Birth rates are now roughly half of what they were during the baby boom, and have been mostly flat for the past four decades: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/09/06/chart-of-the-week-big-drop-in-birth-rate-may-be-levelling-off/
-- Wages (disposable income?) make up a smaller share of the GDP than at any time since the mid-1970s: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/13/sunday-review/americas-productivity-climbs-but-wages-stagnate.html Say what you will (I won't ;)) about economic wage disparities these days, but I'm doubtful private golf clubs can survive on the wage gains of the upper strata of our economy alone. Some will, but not nearly as many as we have now.
-- The best golfer of all time admits his children don't play golf anymore: http://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/print-edition/2012/04/13/golf-clubs-moving-past-economic-malaise.html?page=all
What's the point of all this? ??? I wonder if private golf clubs aren't missing the larger picture here. The world out there is an increasingly transparent one, and hyper-connected one, and institutions (not just private golf clubs) that don't recognize that risk, in my view, their enterprise. The issue, to me, isn't whether or not a club posts membership pricing on its website; it's that clubs that don't start to resemble the corner bookstore, or buggy-whip maker, holding on to old traditions that make little sense anymore. As the great Danny DeVito said, the surest way to go broke is to gain an increasing share of a shrinking market: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62kxPyNZF3Q
-
In reflecting on this thread, it occured to me that the plague that's been sweeping America might be at the core of this thread.
What plague you ask ?
The plague known as "the right of entitlement"
WHY should a private club display confidential information to satisfy the requests of strangers ?
Why should a private club provide any information for public consumption ?
Pat,
When was the last time you played a club with 50% of its membership filled?
Ben,
When I'm a guest at a club I'm not prone to walking into the club's office and examining the books.
A club with 50 % membership means dues have doubled, ergo I don't believe they can survive, and I have my doubts as to whether member owned clubs with only 50 % membership exist. Could you name five ?
In your neck of the woods being in close relationship to the printing press and a propped up stock market you have nothing to worry about.
Washington D.C. Isn't in my neck of the woods, and, the stock market isn't propped up. It's attraction to cash is a super low interest rate environment. I don't see the relevance of the location of the New York Stock Exchange any more than I do the location of the CBOT.
Clubs in the Metro NYC area are struggling and I'm familiar with the efforts those clubs are making to increase their membership ranks.
At the core all of these clubs are asking and depending upon their existing members to find and recruit new members.
Publishing their rates, which can change on a whim, is not the method of choice.
Having sat on membership committees and boards of numerous clubs over 50 years I think my experience in this area is well grounded
It's called people of your generation not knowing how to adjust to market forces.
The people of my generation are pretty astute and probably the last generation to have lived better than their parents.
We're cognizant of the changing mores, culture and demographic.
What many seem to forget is that joining/belonging to a private club is a luxury, one that can or can't be afforded.
Private clubs try to strike a balance between accommodating their aging population, the need to restock their ranks with younger members and the need to satisfy the requirements of their core membership, male and female, and it isn't accomplished by posting the financials on the Web.
You are also the type to believe in Supply Side economics, that if you just cut taxes it will bring in more revenue for the FED gov't, but then you tell me that wouldn't work at a Golf Club that is significantly hurting and I say fuey!
What you don't understand is that the Federal Government can just print more money and incur more debt.
Private clubs can't do that.
They have to raise the funds to pay for their annual and long term operating and capital expenses.
If your operating expenses are $ 3,000,000 and your revenue is $ 2,500,000 you don't reduce your revenue to $ 2,000,000 in an attempt to solve your problems.
Clubs have gotten into trouble for a number of reasons.
One reason is spending money currently without having the funds available, currently, through the membership.
Enter "DEBT" stage left.
The second reason is that many clubs tried to be all things to all members.
The third reason is that many clubs thought that the good times would last forever.
I've fought against incurring debt at clubs my whole life.
I believe in "pay as you go" and not passing the burden to the next generation or future members.
Getting out of the current financial dilemma isn't just about initiation and dues, it's about reexamining the culture of the club and operations, today and for the foreseeable future, line item by line item.
-
Mike; Thanks for your response. I think I understood the purpose of your post. Many of us involved in golf discuss these issues regularly. They are not easy. I suppose that is why I am so troubled by the tenor of this discussion. What was intended to be a discussion of alternate methods of running a golf operation quickly devolved to a combination of complaints that one of the current models is unsatisfactory to the individual writer and a series of largely amateurish and idealistic proposals for a better way to run courses. Golf courses are very investment intensive. The cost of the land and improvements is high. Fixed costs for maintenance are high. Ancillary services often operate on extremely tight margins. There exists oversupply in many markets. These are all important topics for discussion although they are only ancillary to architecture issues. But they are also complex issues and the discussion here has been less than enlightening. So while I understand the purpose of the discussion, for anyone who has spent anytime looking at industry numbers and thinking about these issues, the discussion lost interest very quickly. These types of issues involve a complex interaction between, economic, demographic and cultural issues, all of which are dynamic. They are not easy to analyze in the best of forums with a truly informed group of participants. Here, the discussion has no chance. Perhaps I shouldn't have posted.
Ben; It seems that every time a discussion goes beyond personal tastes in golf courses or means of play, you feel compelled to attack the knowledge/qualifications of those on the other side and resort to apocryphal anecdotal evidence to support your theories.
Shell, when people attack the course that I play at (ribbing) It doesn't sit well with me. There is no theories the books of my course don't lie. We donate $130k back to the University. I'd imagine if the course was member owned the prop taxes would be around $80k a year, which gets you around $9 extra a month for 750 members. Alum pay $1800 a year and we have 750 individual members (facility pay less, seniors pay less, and then you have mathaeii members who donate $500 at the beginning for access plus fees each time we play, those members aren't even required to turn a profit maybe 50 of us total. We don't have any riff raff either and I am sure they reserve the right to not renew an undesirable out! Now I have respect for you and you giving back, I give back myself, spending money putting together walking events isn't cheap.
Of course, no one ever bothers to ask you about your experience as it is unnecessary, the substance of your comments tells us enough. But I am getting a little tired of you suggesting to others who have real experience in the field that they have to get out more, that they don't know enough or that they are somehow sheltered from the real world.
Please provide to me when I said or implied that you didn't get into the real world? I though your last post was weak. I have worked golf construction, have friends that own a course, maint, caddied, have close friends who are archies. They seem to echo my outlook, but they don't post on here, I don't need my own cheer leading team for validation! You are reading way to much into this, really what it is when someone offers up an idea or something that has worked the old guard likes to shoot them down!
One last time for me; I have noted that I work in golf administration in the Chicago area as a way of giving back.That is great, my mom's best friend ran the Toledo mens district for 30+ years and many Ohio events and is in the Ohio Golf Hall, we have dinner 5 or 6 times a year. I give back by hosting walking events, something I believe in. Also the gentlemen who taught me to play the game has the lawn named in his honor at the OSU Evans house.
In connection with that work, I interact with others in the golf business all around the country. In my real work, I deal with distressed companies in many industries including golf. As such I have seen the operating statements of a lot of troubled enterprises of all types and sizes including golf clubs and I have even advised individuals and groups about reorganizing or acquiring troubled golf courses. So I respectfully suggest that I have the bona fides to discuss the problems of operating a golf club, issues impacting the industry, and approaches to reorganizing troubled operations.That is great, i am open to your ideas. I may not like them, but i will give them respect, if you do the same to me.
I don't claim to be the only one and I am sure there are others on this board who have unique perspectives that I would enjoy learning about. But don't think that you are alone in interacting with smaller clubs even in Detroit. You might be surprised at what some others have seen, even in your neck of the woods. In any event, I have concluded that further dialogue of this type is a waste of time so I will return to discussing architecture. I am sure I will have ample opportunity to discuss these issues elsewhere.
There has been many great posts, and many people have chimmed in what they look for in a private club! Jud, happens to get sarcastic and I give it back to him. I like Jud and yourself. I also never implied for this to be blanket one way or the highway. Please let us know what clubs have done in the poorer parts of Chicago to survive? I have 3 friends who drive an hour to play at the quasi private that others call a muni. Maybe we should start listening to the younger market and the Scots who invented the game. Remember the Perry Maxwell quote, he had very good foresight!
I will bow out of this thread, for I would like to hear more from the 40 and younger crowd.
-
Someone mentioned about the US getting into the "Golf Club" movement. My club has already made a move toward that. The tennis courts had not been used but once or twice in a couple years. We were getting so full for outings and Thursday-Sunday that we needed more parking. What did we do? Voted to get rid of the tennis courts and make it more parking.
Some of the membership feel the pool is not enough of a necessity to keep it as well, and have been pushing to close it. They feel that the pool is drain on expenses and those funds could be used to do some projects on the golf course that we would like to have done. With a wife and daughter who do use the pool, personally I am not behind this movement, but as a board member I am willing to review the numbers to see if the difference in what we might save would make significant impact for golf course projects. We are going to do a study dating back to two summers ago which was very hot, this past summer which was quite cool, and this summer and potentially next year to determine the best course of action. Our club is mostly a golf club as is. I am glad that we have seen the light over the past couple of years to actually review our best options to move forward. Next up is gaining more young membership, much like these old classic country clubs where many of you seem to members. We have probably about 250 memberships, and I would wager that only 20 or so are under 35.
As a younger person, and I am sure many of you will deplore the idea I am about to speak of, I believe these TopGolf facilities that are being placed in some metro areas around the nation could potentially help in growing the game. It is becoming something that is drawing out younger people and exposing them to golf. I can only hope my metro area is lucky enough to get one of these facilities located here. We already have a dearth of quality driving ranges available to the general public, so I think one of these facilities could really be successful and potentially help our area in increasing participation among mine, and even younger generations.