Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture Discussion Group => Topic started by: Philip Hensley on December 22, 2014, 02:37:05 PM
-
I just got some membership info for Southern Pines GC. Does anyone know if the walking fee is a new thing? The nice lady on the phone that I talked to sounded like some of the membership information had changed recently, and so I was curious if this was a new thing or not at this particular course.
I know there have been discussions regarding walkers vs. cartballers, which is better for the course in terms of revenue, maintenance, etc. I think I'm probably opposed to a walking fee, however SPGC has an incredibly low initiation fee and monthly dues are low. So even after you factor the walking fees in, a normal user will end up with roughly the same bill per month as someone joining a club that has a more traditional pricing structure. But it also means during the months where you can't get to the course to play as much you will be paying the low monthly rate so it won't feel like you're wasting money. There are many courses in my area that charge 3-4 times what SPGC charges per month and their courses aren't anywhere near as good as SP.
-
There is a thread halfway down the first page on this very topic. Fairly extensive back and forth on the matter over the past few days.
http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,60150.0.html
In summary, it seems to be an unusual but not at all unheard of policy around the country.
-
I didn't phrase my question well. I'm asking if anyone knows if this policy is new to SPGC in particular.
-
I didn't phrase my question well. I'm asking if anyone knows if this policy is new to SPGC in particular.
It has to be fairly new. When I was a member in 2010/2011 there was never an extra fee to walk. That's why we joined in the 1st place.
-
I think they once had a "Basic" membership for something around $1,200/yr, but you paid under $10 to walk, maybe twice that to use a cart.
-
Hi, I work for the current management of Southern Pines Golf Club. The fee for walking has been around for years. It was in place at the time the current management took over, and they simply continued it.
My understanding is that the original fees were coded as a "cart fund" fee and "trail fund" fee.
Again it is my understanding that these fees had been used by the Elks to pay for maintenance/upgrades to the cart paths and the carts.
I believe it was originally $1 per 9 holes for each fund for a total of $4 per 18.
Later it was increased to $2 per 9 holes for each fund for a total of $8 per 18.
Brandon Livengood
Southern Pines Golf Club
-
Brandon,
Are there any plans to get a few trolleys at SPGC to rent out? When i played in November my future father in law would have loved to walk, but the shop said you didn't have any to rent. It was his favorite course in Southern Pines.
-
Walking fees are dumb.
-
Pat,
Walking fees are suspect I agree, but walking fees to help pay for carts and cart paths are really dumb! Nothing better than supporting the lazy!
chris
-
Pat,
Walking fees are suspect I agree, but walking fees to help pay for carts and cart paths are really dumb! Nothing better than supporting the lazy!
chris
Golf is the only sport I can think of that has so many out of shape and non-athletic participants, and punishes the player for doing a behavior that is clearly healthy and beneficial. I was a member of a private club back in the early 90's, they implemented a $4 walking fee on weekends. The walkers talked among themselves and responded by deciding not to buy anything at the bar, grill, or pro shop. The fee ended very quickly. That is the way to make a message. Walking fees are stupid, no they are asinine and those who are charged these ridiculous fees can make a statement in their own unique way. The sport is in trouble, and how can we attract people to the game when some of the playing fields punish us for doing a healthy practice.
-
Eric,
That could be one of the best things I have heard. So far here in Northern Ohio, courses and clubs have not started charging walking fees. I hope none of them get any ideas?!
chris
-
Eric,
That could be one of the best things I have heard. So far here in Northern Ohio, courses and clubs have not started charging walking fees. I hope none of them get any ideas?!
chris
Doubt it, walking fees are still not a common practice and in this environment what a stupid way to turn off current or perspective members.
If clubs need money, there are better, more discreet ways to do it, but not in the face of those that are playing the game the WAY it was intended. And not only intended, but in the most healthy manner.
-
No matter how hard you beat your chest, at the end of the day you are still a golfer. Once you start categorizing golf as part of a healthy lifestyle you have already given up. Walkers don't walk because they are cheap and cart riders aren't lazy, but they are both still golfers. No matter how you look at it you can't get past that basic fact.
I just paid my $500 per year dues at a local private club where I played two 18 hole rounds last year. I do play in a league and drink there most everyday so I fully support their $5 trail fee. You pay to play, it's what you got to do if you want dues to stay at $500 per year with only 200 members.
The odd thing is that at this club the cart riders look up to the walkers instead of thinking they are just cheap skates looking for a free ride. It's nice on that off day where I find myself walking down the fairway.
-
Had a guy at the club I grew up at, retired teacher I think, played every day of the week except Mondays, walked right from the parking lot to the first tee, and from the 18th green straight to the parking lot. Didn't keep a locker, brought a sandwich to eat during the round, barely talked to anyone. One of the few members of a club who could actually say they do get their money's worth.
The club briefly implemented a walking fee on weekends and we figured it was aimed at this guy. Not surprisingly he quit playing on the weekends.
-
I just paid my $500 per year dues at a local private club where I played two 18 hole rounds last year. I do play in a league and drink there most everyday so I fully support their $5 trail fee. You pay to play, it's what you got to do if you want dues to stay at $500 per year with only 200 members.
John,
then your a member of a private bar with attached golf course. Do you have to pay to stand up whilst taking a whizz ;)
Jon
-
Wow, we just spent a ton of pages on this very subject recently . Walking is a great way to,play golf,, and good for seeing the course and enjoyIng your fellow players. But no matter how you slice it the club needs to make revenue to survive and thrive . If everyone walked , dues would have to go up to offset revenue losses from cart fees.
At a public course walkers typically get a discounted rate from cart riders , but the golf isn't free, no matter how you slice it !
-
Wow, we just spent a ton of pages on this very subject recently . Walking is a great way to,play golf,, and good for seeing the course and enjoyIng your fellow players. But no matter how you slice it the club needs to make revenue to survive and thrive . If everyone walked , dues would have to go up to offset revenue losses from cart fees.
At a public course walkers typically get a discounted rate from cart riders , but the golf isn't free, no matter how you slice it !
If more walkers played you would have more membership dues from more members or public green fees. Don't cut other things, that might make sense. I know they don't cut waste in NJ...
-
Walking fees are dumb.
stupid Americans at their best
-
Wow, we just spent a ton of pages on this very subject recently . Walking is a great way to,play golf,, and good for seeing the course and enjoyIng your fellow players. But no matter how you slice it the club needs to make revenue to survive and thrive . If everyone walked , dues would have to go up to offset revenue losses from cart fees.
At a public course walkers typically get a discounted rate from cart riders , but the golf isn't free, no matter how you slice it !
Archie,
I'm probably misinterpreting, but your statements above almost remind me of how our government works. Raise taxes to provide ill-aimed or overpriced services, instead of streamlining services by cutting the frills and making do with what is available.
In the aspect that a club needs to make money to survive, well, you're correct. But that's true with any private enterprise venture. As much as I love golf, I have yet to understand why some think every course should exist despite bad plans, bad management, or bad people.
Joe
-
I realize that walking fees are for the most part a labeled aspect of golf dues...either way the member will pay. But to somehow target a walker as trying to avoid dues by not using a cart and therefore not paying his fair share is perverse. It is afterall the cartballers who are putting pressure on the club by creating an expenditure which for many members and in many clubs clubs is completely unnecessary. There is no question many clubs have created a white elephant by spending money on carts and paths then using that as a pretense to raise dues. I am normally all in for club dues....meaning everybody in the same class membership pays the same dues. However, in the case of such a heavy expense due to carts which for many clubs is not only unnecessary, in many cases compromises the quality of the course, it is an unrealistic expectation. Going a step further, to then believe that carts are a necessary evil as a revenue stream is layering the shit on the burnt cake. If dues need to be raised, they should be raised rather than coming up with what is for most clubs a completely irrational reason for expenditure and raised dues. This is a concept I will never get my head round.
Ciao
-
???
Ben and Joe . This is a DG where most of us really love golf and walking golf! My favorite tournament every year in my youth was 54 holes carry your own at Freeway Golf Club , you could take a cart but it was a penalty per round. I do live in NJ but have been an outspoken critic of the sham that is our governments desire to tax or control anything that moves. Just because one lives in a state or country does not mean they agree with its politics.
It's really funny to see my pragmatic view on golf fees engender me or even throw me in with NJ legislators and taxing bodies.
I am a senior player now , a little chubbier than I'd like , but regularly carry my bag or at the very least throw it on with an older or less ambulatory cart mate and walk unfettered by the bag . Love caddies but they don't work everywhere. Built and owned a golf course where walking fees were $40 less than the riding fee. So maybe you don't actually understand me!
Just to be clear , I'm not for walking fees , but if you don't have carts and cart revenue the dues will generally be higher. Many older players unfortunately can't or won't walk , and we'd lose some great members by excluding carts. Some people that walk are slower than cart players , yes this is heresy , but we here are probably an aberration from the norm , at least in America . Pace of play is a huge issue .
That being said I'm sure calling me stupid or a communist isn't personal , , and we'd greatly enjoy playing and having a pint afterwards and talking GCA.
-
...an expenditure which for many members and in many clubs clubs is completely unnecessary.
Carts for 99% of USA clubs are "necessary" in the sense of "required if you want the club to have enough members to remain solvent". But no, you don't need carts in order for a golf course to exist any more than you need 18 holes rather than 9 or you need toilets and running water on the premises.
My club has about 300 members which is barely at the break-even level. Of the 200 or so who play golf regularly about 80% of them take carts and I'd estimate if there were no carts available 150 of the them would not be members and the course would be bulldozed to build houses or something instead.
When 3/4 or more of the golfers in a club's target market always play golf using a cart, there's not much future in arm-waving away carts as "completely unnecessary". And I say this as someone who has ridden in a golf cart maybe 12-15 of my last 1,000 rounds.
-
Archie,
Your alright by me, except you are missing the big picture. 2ndly I don't use GCA outlook when thinking of the golfing sector of hardcore golfers who could care less about GCA.
I am a senior player now , a little chubbier than I'd like , but regularly carry my bag or at the very least throw it on with an older or less ambulatory cart mate and walk unfettered by the bag . Love caddies but they don't work everywhere. Built and owned a golf course where walking fees were $40 less than the riding fee. So maybe you don't actually understand me! Amen
Just to be clear , I'm not for walking fees , but if you don't have carts and cart revenue the dues will generally be higher. Many older players unfortunately can't or won't walk , and we'd lose some great members by excluding carts. Some people that walk are slower than cart players , yes this is heresy , but we here are probably an aberration from the norm , at least in America . Pace of play is a huge issue .
This is where you totally lose me. Many players over 50 start using trollies. That sector is a huge sector of potential members that you are overlooking. My parents are both college educated and both worked. They play 100 rounds between them and only take a cart when it is above 90 deg. Very typical at their club and the club i play at. That sector would not be a member if they had to pay for carts each time and def. not for a walking fee. My parents would join another club in their area that is $200 more a month if they could use their trollies, but the failing club still insists on caddie or cart. Ala they focus on revenue, while not realizing that there aren't enough people in the area that can afford the $9000 a year membership plus cart or caddie fees. So member shortages cause people to start coming up with revenue BS lines that drive away members or potential members. People under 45 don't hang out and support their clubs in the winter months like their grandparents did. So losing lots of money the cold 5 months a year keeping a big clubhouse heated and overstaffed hardly ever gets addressed or looked at. That creates debt in poor economies and BS walking fees. A 1% club in metro detroit does close their clubhouse 3-4 months in winter and is doing very well post 08' Recession. Pace of play is much faster walking then riding. People that don't know cart golf, play in 4+ hours, again i totally disagree with you assuming we are talking about a course routed with walking in mind.
and we'd greatly enjoy playing and having a pint afterwards and talking GCA
would love to. I don't think your a pinko either. I hope i was able to shed some light on another way to look at it.
-
Brent , you said it all!
There is no homogenized way to run any club , it requires hands on management , but for the majority of American golfers carts have become a necessary part of the equation. For those lucky enough to play at walking only courses , enjoy the privilege !
Ben , I love to walk . But there's no way you can walk as fast as we play in carts. Remember I'm assuming we all really know our way around a golf clurse. We both most likely play fast whether walking or riding. However , if Imhave a slow player in the group we can jockey them around. Pretty hard to move a slow walker !
-
...an expenditure which for many members and in many clubs clubs is completely unnecessary.
Carts for 99% of USA clubs are "necessary" in the sense of "required if you want the club to have enough members to remain solvent". But no, you don't need carts in order for a golf course to exist any more than you need 18 holes rather than 9 or you need toilets and running water on the premises.
My club has about 300 members which is barely at the break-even level. Of the 200 or so who play golf regularly about 80% of them take carts and I'd estimate if there were no carts available 150 of the them would not be members and the course would be bulldozed to build houses or something instead.
When 3/4 or more of the golfers in a club's target market always play golf using a cart, there's not much future in arm-waving away carts as "completely unnecessary". And I say this as someone who has ridden in a golf cart maybe 12-15 of my last 1,000 rounds.
I believe Sean was talking about cart paths. He wasn't talking about having no carts. Talking about detouring potential members with walking fees. Please don't take Sean out of context. So the 20% that walk, do they have walking fees? It's funny you left a club that had walking fees and the membership was aging. Great model, lol
-
How much is an annual membership at Southern Pines?
-
...an expenditure which for many members and in many clubs clubs is completely unnecessary.
Carts for 99% of USA clubs are "necessary" in the sense of "required if you want the club to have enough members to remain solvent". But no, you don't need carts in order for a golf course to exist any more than you need 18 holes rather than 9 or you need toilets and running water on the premises.
My club has about 300 members which is barely at the break-even level. Of the 200 or so who play golf regularly about 80% of them take carts and I'd estimate if there were no carts available 150 of the them would not be members and the course would be bulldozed to build houses or something instead.
When 3/4 or more of the golfers in a club's target market always play golf using a cart, there's not much future in arm-waving away carts as "completely unnecessary". And I say this as someone who has ridden in a golf cart maybe 12-15 of my last 1,000 rounds.
Brent
Sorry, cart and paths aren't "necessary" for a lot of clubs...they are desireable...very different issue....and in which case I would say let riders pay the extra fee. I wonder how "necessary" carts would be if there was a true cost difference in dues between cart members and walking members...nothing wrong with offering this as a difference in class membership. Its just that people throw around the concept of carts as necessary when we don't really know that to be the case for a lot of clubs because the true cost difference is not made available as a membership option.
Ciao
-
Believe as you will, Sean. But I'm telling you for truth. The majority of golfers in the Southeastern USA where I live do not even consider the question of whether to walk or ride. For them golf is a game played in a cart. They will judge a club or public course based on what it costs to play golf in a cart, the question of what it might or might not cost to ride never enters their mind.
Now in some counter factual alternative reality where carts do not exist would all those folks indeed never play golf because they would have to walk? I don't know. Ask a science fiction writer. Because that hypothetical has no connection with the actual on the ground reality right here and right now.
I have never in my life seen an otherwise innocuous concept like a club charging its members a couple dollars per round turn people whom I've long considered among the most level-headed, thoughtful and generally well-grounded members of the forum into bloody-minded absolutists who refuse to acknowledge even the most obvious realities of the real world of American golf in the current day. Had I known what a loaded topic this was, I would never have typed the first word on it honest to god.
-
Believe as you will, Sean. But I'm telling you for truth. The majority of golfers in the Southeastern USA where I live do not even consider the question of whether to walk or ride. For them golf is a game played in a cart. They will judge a club or public course based on what it costs to play golf in a cart, the question of what it might or might not cost to ride never enters their mind.
This isn't Brent's opinion,this is absolute fact. I don't understand why people continue to argue the what-ifs; there aren't any. In this part of the world--nae carts,nae golf.
-
Brent, don't unnecessarily and needlessly get the hump. I am most definitely not arguing areas. That is Brent's JME's assumption that I am...look at the language of my posts. Still, I adamantly believe that it is perverse to find any way to blame walking members for not paying their fair share...then charge a walking fee because they choose not to use extraneous facilities...which carts are...at a lot of clubs. Even at some clubs in south where the heat and humidy combine to make most unpleasant golfing conditions....there are those who walk...and yet they are sometimes asked to pay for those who choose to play a more expensive version of the game. That kind of logic doesn't work for me. If folks want to spend more, then they should pay more. Quite a simple and reasonable argument.
Ciao
-
Sean; I am a walking golfer. My club in the Chicago area has a strong caddy program. In a sense, we are even more restrictive because when caddies are available, walkers are required to take a caddy. We make that decision every year because we believe it is important to maintain a caddy program. It is part of our culture so we impose the restriction. Those who disagree are free to play elsewhere. Similarly, other clubs may view cart revenue as an important component of their revenue stream and as a means of keeping dues at a reasonable level. Of course there are attendant costs associated with carts, leasing or acquisition, maintenance, fuel or electricity, cart path maintenance, insurance etc. So, if the club is smart, they don't view all the cart fees as net revenue, but priced correctly carts contribute to the bottom line. Clubs that view this as an important component and which have a riding culture could rationally decide to recapture all or part of the "spread" between cart costs and cart revenue by charging a walking fee, however it is denominated. While you or I might not favor that culture, it is not irrational. It is merely one of any number of ways that a club can choose to spread the cost of operations in a way that its members or ownership deems to be appropriate given their particular economic circumstances and behavioral preferences. As I said; I am a walker. At my club, a caddy is more expensive than a cart. But we have made our decision. I am sure there are many who would object preferring to avoid the cost and pull or carry on their own. Same type of reasoning but a different result compared to the walking fee. Better for the course and the game in my opinion.
-
Shel,
It's not exactly an apples to apples comparison. Are members required to take a forecaddie if they take carts? Theoretically the caddie is providing a service and the club has decided to support the program for good, charitable reasons. A straight up fee to pull or carry strikes me as simply an odd way of masking real dues or greens fees.
-
Brent, don't unnecessarily and needlessly get the hump. I am most definitely not arguing areas. That is Brent's JME's assumption that I am...look at the language of my posts. Still, I adamantly believe that it is perverse to find any way to blame walking members for not paying their fair share...then charge a walking fee because they choose not to use extraneous facilities...which carts are...at a lot of clubs. Even at some clubs in south where the heat and humidy combine to make most unpleasant golfing conditions....there are those who walk...and yet they are sometimes asked to pay for those who choose to play a more expensive version of the game. That kind of logic doesn't work for me. If folks want to spend more, then they should pay more. Quite a simple and reasonable argument.
Ciao
Sean,
I don't think I understand your argument. Whatever a cart fee is, some portion of that is straight revenue for the club, right? (I know you aren't arguing that carts don't provide a revenue stream at all.) Clearly, the club is not providing carts at cost, right? So why is it that I should be able to walk at cost? The fact that cart costs are higher than walking costs is irrelevant, isn't it?
I walk almost 100% of my rounds at my club (approx. 125 last year, and 22 already in 2015), and during Daylight Savings Time on Sat. and Sun. before noon, I am charged a $10 trail fee. Management is very honest with those of us who walk; the trail fee is needed revenue for the club. Just as riders pay a fee above cost for riding, so do I; I don't think I see the difference at all. In fact, I'm grateful that my club waives the trail fee during Standard Time AND that they don't require me to ride on weekend mornings.
What is so complicated about this?
-
AG
You are confused. Carts do add cost to clubs and therefore members must find a way to pay the extra cost. Walking doesn't add any cost to clubs. Saying carts generate revenue for a private club is completely false. The club charges members money to cover the costs (well that is the theory, but I am not convinced) of carts and cart paths plus a bit more. The golf would be cheaper if there were no carts and no paths...correct? My argument is since some members want carts, they should bear the true cost of that amenity. Of course these days, we are on a second generation of cartballers so as Brent points out, people now think of carts and cart paths not as an added amenity, but a necessity. My entire point is to show how far removed some clubs are from the concept of a simple club...to the point where a member is charged to walk is course! Its no wonder so many middle class clubs are in financial difficulties when they think of things like carts and paths as a necessity.
Ciao
-
AG
You are confused. Carts do add cost to clubs and therefore members must find a way to pay the extra cost. Walking doesn't add any cost to clubs. Saying carts generate revenue for a private club is completely false. The club charges members money to cover the costs (well that is the theory, but I am not convinced) of carts and cart paths plus a bit more. The golf would be cheaper if there were no carts and no paths...correct? My argument is since some members want carts, they should bear the true cost of that amenity. Of course these days, we are on a second generation of cartballers so as Brent points out, people now think of carts and cart paths not as an added amenity, but a necessity. My entire point is to show how far removed some clubs are from the concept of a simple club...to the point where a member is charged to walk is course! Its no wonder so many middle class clubs are in financial difficulties when they think of things like carts and paths as a necessity.
Ciao
Right on Sean.
The problem is that carts and cart paths ARE viewed as a necessity. This makes the whole proposition a whole lot more costly. My Atlanta area club has spent tens, maybe hundreds, of thousands on cart path repairs over the last few years. The fairways are frequenty tore up by imbeciles that insist on riding down the fairways when they were told quite clearly that it is cart path only. I cannot imagine how much we spend each year placing new turf, the carts tear the course apart and members drive so close to the putting areas, when they are clearly told not to. We have a lot of hot rodders out there, that push these carts to the limit and slam the brakes, I cannot imagine what maintenance costs must be.
Yes, we have gotten so far away from the concept of a simple club, no wonder so many are closing and so many cannot afford to play. If I have to pay for walking, I will quit the game. Not that I am cheap or can't afford it, but stupid is stupid and you have to draw the line somewhere. There are plenty of other pastimes out there, I think people are starting to realize this, the idiosyncrasies of this game and those that manage it can really be mind boggling at times.
-
I know you all know this, but in the SE US nearly all the courses built in the last 20-30 years had a residential component...so the routings aren't tight loops but 6-8 mile death marches. Walking takes forever, is often wayyyy too hilly, etc., so management forbids walking, esp at peak times.
Then, some of the people that buy these houses have never played golf - they bought the bourse for the location, the pool, the possibility of learning golf - so this is their first intro to the game, and carts ARE a part of it, walking ISN'T.
PS no flames please I walk at home 90%+ because it's allowed, and possible.
-
AG
You are confused. Carts do add cost to clubs and therefore members must find a way to pay the extra cost. Walking doesn't add any cost to clubs. Saying carts generate revenue for a private club is completely false. The club charges members money to cover the costs (well that is the theory, but I am not convinced) of carts and cart paths plus a bit more. The golf would be cheaper if there were no carts and no paths...correct? My argument is since some members want carts, they should bear the true cost of that amenity. Of course these days, we are on a second generation of cartballers so as Brent points out, people now think of carts and cart paths not as an added amenity, but a necessity. My entire point is to show how far removed some clubs are from the concept of a simple club...to the point where a member is charged to walk is course! Its no wonder so many middle class clubs are in financial difficulties when they think of things like carts and paths as a necessity.
Ciao
No, I'm not confused. Of course carts add costs; the cart fee a golfer pays absorbs those costs and then provides profit to the club above and beyond the cost. That's a pretty simple business matter, and I know you understand that.
Let's agree that it is simplistic to argue that there are NO costs to the club when a golfer walks; that isn't true. For that to be the case, it would mean that there is NO maintenance necessary outside of the use of carts, that there is NO wear and tear to the course outside the use of carts, and clearly this isn't the case.
The club has a maintenance budget that has to be paid by the membership, whether it's in the form of dues only, or in the form of user fees like a cart fee or a trail fee. There is no difference, is there? The only alternative is higher dues, with no user fees at all; otherwise, the riders are subsidizing at least some portion of the walkers' wear and tear on the course.
If you don't like user fees as a way to fund a service, that's fine. But the revenue has to come from somewhere, or the service can't be provided. That's true for the national park system, a toll road, or a golf club. User fees, or higher taxes/dues. Pretty simple, really.
If my club raised the dues high enough to provide carts at cost and no trail fees, it would lose membership because some of the more casual golfers/families wouldn't see the the value in their membership. The lower membership numbers would then force the dues to go even higher, or the club to shut down; we've seen this all over the country.
As it is, I pay $150/month, and $10 on weekend mornings during DST. It's a helluva deal, really, and I've never resented the trail fee for a moment. The alternatives are poor at best.
-
There are many ways to fund a club.
Higher dues may turn off an infrequent player, and the club may need to resort to user fees.
A "user" fee is simply a different model where those who use a facility more pay more.
Surely there's a way to make this work without pissing off walkers.
Every golfer creates a certain operational cost (maint, clubhouse, staff)
The trick is finding out how you want to pay for it.
If a club has cartpaths that were there when you joined , thinking you don't have to pay for them is a bit like thinking you don't have to pay for a pool, the clubhouse amenities , the "overpaid pro ;) ;D", or the practice area if you don't use them.
It makes good sense however to charge a large enough premium on car usage to encourage walking on an economic basis, as this will reduce coursewear and tear, and ultimately create a need for a smaller fleet, thus further lowering everyone's cost.
But that doesn't mean noncart users should be exempt from a per use fee--IF that's the model the club has chosen to adopt rather than pure dues.
But don't call it a "walking" or "trail fee" ;) ;D ::)
and those who think walkers don't cause ANY damage haven't taken a good look at all the signage, ropeage, worn out turf, and artificial paths ringing many of the more popular courses overseas caused by trolley traffic.
-
There are many ways to fund a club.
Higher dues may turn off an infrequent player, and the club may need to resort to user fees.
Clubs that resort to user fees are usually in trouble, trying to patch a big hole of debt.
A "user" fee is simply a different model where those who use a facility more pay more.
Surely there's a way to make this work without pissing off walkers.
Every golfer creates a certain operational cost (maint, clubhouse, staff)
The trick is finding out how you want to pay for it.
If a club has cartpaths that were there when you joined , thinking you don't have to pay for them is a bit like thinking you don't have to pay for a pool, the clubhouse amenities , the "overpaid pro Wink Grin", or the practice area if you don't use them.
Bad analogy, if the social membership isn't strong and paying for the pool, most likely fill it in. Best for CC in declining burbs to do this. Yes overpaid head pro and that now has a teaching professional that gives all the lessons. Isn't that the pro's job?
It makes good sense however to charge a large enough premium on car usage to encourage walking on an economic basis, as this will reduce coursewear and tear, and ultimately create a need for a smaller fleet, thus further lowering everyone's cost.
But that doesn't mean noncart users should be exempt from a per use fee--IF that's the model the club has chosen to adopt rather than pure dues.There is simply no point in joining a private club if you have to pay to walk. Beyond nickle and dimming, all the Golden Age Archies and Old Tom are turning over in their grave. Adopting this means ur trying to fill a leak with a bandaid.
But don't call it a "walking" or "trail fee" Wink Grin Roll Eyes
and those who think walkers don't cause ANY damage haven't taken a good look at all the signage, ropeage, worn out turf, and artificial paths ringing many of the more popular courses overseas caused by trolley traffic. If the course has a great walking culture they take the trollies around the bunkers. Don't some of those ban trolleys in the winter time, lets compare apples to apples.
-
No, I'm not confused. Of course carts add costs; the cart fee a golfer pays absorbs those costs and then provides profit to the club above and beyond the cost. That's a pretty simple business matter, and I know you understand that. I don't disagree with you there.
Let's agree that it is simplistic to argue that there are NO costs to the club when a golfer walks; that isn't true. For that to be the case, it would mean that there is NO maintenance necessary outside of the use of carts, that there is NO wear and tear to the course outside the use of carts, and clearly this isn't the case.Are you serious? Walkers provide no wear and tear in the US. Please elaborate?
The club has a maintenance budget that has to be paid by the membership, whether it's in the form of dues only, or in the form of user fees like a cart fee or a trail fee. There is no difference, is there? The only alternative is higher dues, with no user fees at all; otherwise, the riders are subsidizing at least some portion of the walkers' wear and tear on the course.I would never join a club that I had to pay walking fees. I would quit the game if the area i lived in within an hour had walking fees and no walking policies at most of the courses.
If you don't like user fees as a way to fund a service, that's fine. But the revenue has to come from somewhere, or the service can't be provided. That's true for the national park system, a toll road, or a golf club. User fees, or higher taxes/dues. Pretty simple, really.
We always love to talk about revenue, WHAT ABOUT EXPENSES???? Really when you see how the golf club is run vs how it was 70 years ago, it really isn't that simple for many on here. Head Pro's used to make a living on the lesson tee, now they punch cart tickets. The one thing you didn't mention to offset expenses is MORE MEMBERS
If my club raised the dues high enough to provide carts at cost and no trail fees, it would lose membership because some of the more casual golfers/families wouldn't see the the value in their membership. The lower membership numbers would then force the dues to go even higher, or the club to shut down; we've seen this all over the country. Instead of raising dues, why not attract new members?? Again if you are in the North A.J. have you looked into shutting down the clubhouse or limiting the hours the clubhouse is open in the Winter months? What we have seen all over the country is too many CC, that think they are in the 1950's. Ones that were you can't carry your bag till after 4pm, they would rather close their doors before ever allowing a trolley, heaven forbid.
As it is, I pay $150/month, and $10 on weekend mornings during DST. It's a helluva deal, really, and I've never resented the trail fee for a moment. The alternatives are poor at best.Forced user fees whether it is a locker, range fee, food min. are idiotic, they have been led to walking fees. With nickle and dimming i would rather just play a muni or quit the game all in all.
-
Jud; I know that the comparison is inexact. It was simply an illustration of choices that clubs make as a counterpoint to those who suggest that walking should be a free choice. At clubs with mandatory caddy programs, walkers do not pay a use fee toward overhead as the caddy keeps his entire fee. Yet the charge to walk, admittedly for a service, is required and exceeds a trail fee. The club then pays for costs via higher cart fees or increased dues.
As to the bulk of the other objectors, their arguments are not grounded in economics but rather in an idealized version of the type of club that they desire. Perhaps that is part of the reason why economics has been labeled the dismal science. One must recognize that many clubs cannot generate enough play without carts to be economically viable. Those of us who are walkers, myself included, may regret this reality, but it doesn't change the fact. While the costs of carts have been conceded by everyone, it is equally true that priced correctly with an appropriate spread, carts create revenue which help carry the costs of the operation. The question is whether those who walk should contribute something on top of their green fees to help cover those costs? If the cart fee covered costs for cart use and there was no margin, then economically, the use of a cart would be neutral as compared economically to walking without a fee. If the cart rider is asked to contribute a spread, why not a walker? The spread leads to profit for a public course or reduced dues for a member owned facility. Thus the decision comes down to a choice of how one wants to run the facility. My club wants a caddy program so we require caddies but receive no revenue from that program, indeed the cost of a caddy master etc. increases costs. That leads to higher dues. But we make the choice. Other clubs allow walking at any time with no upcharge. Again a choice which leads to higher fees elsewhere. Still others charge the walking fee.
This is true of all fees. We hear objections to mandatory lockers. But some clubs feel an inviting locker room is important and require locker charges as a means of providing that atmosphere. Right or wrong? Neither. Its a choice guided by the desires of club members. Food minimums? Analysis remains the same. No one is required to join any of these clubs. For those who don't agree, they need not apply. So long as the choices do not violate more important societal norms, members or owners should be free to structure their operations in a way they deem appropriate for their wants and needs and consistent with their economic preferences. Clubs are for groups of like minded individuals to come together for recreation and perhaps more, including in many cases, charitable and other good works. Merely because one doesn't like the model proposed by a club to pay for the services its members want doesn't make those choices wrong, it means that club is the wrong one for that individual.
-
Shel,
Well reasoned as usual. I suppose in these times of shifting demand in the industry that all options are on the table. Some of us who prefer transparency and no hidden fees at clubs don't care for all the little extras on top of dues, but so be it. Clubs have profited for years on the generosity of members who pay dues and barely use the facilities. Similarly folks who walk and play every day have benefited from a fixed dues structure. Some might rightly argue that trail fees are in fact a more equitable distribution of costs by usage. Each market is a microcosm and making broad generalities about the way things "should" be done in financing a course/club while serving an ideal may not be in the best economic interests of a given club in a given neighborhood with it's own micro economy, climate, demand and competitive landscape. Only a small percentage of clubs are in a position to be painting with a broad brush with regard to these matters these days. Whatever structure keeps the sprinklers on at the marginal Doak 5 is a good thing in this environment. Live and let live...
-
I know that the comparison is inexact. It was simply an illustration of choices that clubs make as a counterpoint to those who suggest that walking should be a free choice. At clubs with mandatory caddy programs, walkers do not pay a use fee toward overhead as the caddy keeps his entire fee. Yet the charge to walk, admittedly for a service, is required and exceeds a trail fee. The club then pays for costs via higher cart fees or increased dues. Ur course is in the N. burbs of Chicago, hardly a representation of 95% of the private clubs in the US. That is great that you have a caddy program, the Evans is a wonderful organization. Basically courses that used to have caddy programs now have cart boys. Clubs that do not have Caddy programs still give a portion of their monthly dues to the organization.
As to the bulk of the other objectors, their arguments are not grounded in economics but rather in an idealized version of the type of club that they desire. Perhaps that is part of the reason why economics has been labeled the dismal science. One must recognize that many clubs cannot generate enough play without carts to be economically viable. Those of us who are walkers, myself included, may regret this reality, but it doesn't change the fact. While the costs of carts have been conceded by everyone, it is equally true that priced correctly with an appropriate spread, carts create revenue which help carry the costs of the operation. The question is whether those who walk should contribute something on top of their green fees to help cover those costs? If the cart fee covered costs for cart use and there was no margin, then economically, the use of a cart would be neutral as compared economically to walking without a fee. If the cart rider is asked to contribute a spread, why not a walker? The spread leads to profit for a public course or reduced dues for a member owned facility. Thus the decision comes down to a choice of how one wants to run the facility. My club wants a caddy program so we require caddies but receive no revenue from that program, indeed the cost of a caddy master etc. increases costs. That leads to higher dues. But we make the choice. Other clubs allow walking at any time with no upcharge. Again a choice which leads to higher fees elsewhere. Still others charge the walking fee. Carts are needed in the USA, so i totally disagree with Sean. The fact clubs rely on that income for their bottom line is sad, for the market (economics) is talking, it says you don't have enough members. The high cart fee goes to pay the bottom line when the club loses money in other areas of the club. Privately managed Muni's have a cart fee and a walking fee, with no trail fee. Those do good. Other clubs allow walking at any time with no upcharge. Again a choice which leads to higher fees elsewhere. This statement is utter nonsense. You aren't including people that are potential members that would overlook a course due to your line of thinking. What is the point of being a member of a private club?
This is true of all fees. We hear objections to mandatory lockers. But some clubs feel an inviting locker room is important and require locker charges as a means of providing that atmosphere. Right or wrong? Neither. Its a choice guided by the desires of club members. Food minimums? Analysis remains the same. No one is required to join any of these clubs. For those who don't agree, they need not apply. So long as the choices do not violate more important societal norms, members or owners should be free to structure their operations in a way they deem appropriate for their wants and needs and consistent with their economic preferences. Clubs are for groups of like minded individuals to come together for recreation and perhaps more, including in many cases, charitable and other good works. Merely because one doesn't like the model proposed by a club to pay for the services its members want doesn't make those choices wrong, it means that club is the wrong one for that individual. Courses featured on this website (unnamed) have a monthly dues that include everything (they are 98% full). It isn't a disingenuous scheme of charges. Again your locker room analogy is important to 10% or less of private clubs (GCA snobbery). Yes, no one is required to join the club (if only health care was that way), but clubs where founders broke their backs with great risk to build clubs, that people would rather see go under than be a low key private club (attrition excuse). The audacity of people not using a shoeshine room. Tiger Woods changes his shoes in the parking lot, gasp. The way they deem appropriate is causing massive closing of Golden Age clubs, due to regressive ways of thinking. Enough with the charity nonsense, 1% clubs are used for Biz purposes and social status. it means that club is the wrong one for that individual that is such a snobby comment. A club in S. Chicago burbs can't run itself like a club in the N. Chicago burbs (unless very highly ranked). It's called economics, and your version of economics is causing closings. I suggest reading up on the Perry Maxwell quote that Geoff Schack. posted not to long ago on his blog. Your outlook sounds as though you possibly are pro attrition (too many private clubs) because we don't want to restructure the Club. Poor leadership and stewards of great golden age golf courses causing aging memberships and closings.
Jud's response was very good and articulate.
-
I'll give you a real world example.
At my club I have played very little the last few years due to me playing in a large number of events.
If they were to adopt a lower dues structure and a user fee each time you played, and LOWER the dues to attract more members, I would be thrilled.
With two kids in private college it's a yearly decision to decide whether I want to continue to pay for something I rarely use.
That would mean you pay x to walk, x + cart fee to ride, or x + trolley fee to ride.
Perhaps in the age of destination clubs and less leisure time this is the way to incentivize people to join and stay joined at clubs, rather than play solely at their destination clubs, daily fees, and as guests of others.
My rounds cost $600 each and others that play daily may get that down to $40 per round.(good for them-I aspire to that ;D )
That only works if I and others continue to subsidize their high frequency of play by staying members and paying dues.
That may not be the way going forward, especially for those with other options or obligations.
More and more clubs may adopt a per use fee that is in no way aimed at walkers, just a different fee structure which may well have its place in certain markets.
calling it a walker fee is a poor PR decision
-
Jeff,
User fee totally diminishes one reason for joining a private club. John Doe play 50 rounds and Jeff play 8 rounds, and Jack plays 70 rounds, it becomes pointless to join if we begrudge heavy users. If you looked at the Individual membership model my course has, it enable the guy like yourself (who plays infrequent) to pay half what he would pay for the Family Active Membership at private club down the street. Where husband & wife play 100 rounds for $5k as a the guy who pays 5k for himself to play 40 rounds. Individual membership model attracts serious golfers and is utilized best at a golf club. It works extremely well, we have a waiting list. It's also cool seeing brand new A8 drinking craft beer in the parking lot after a round parked next to a guy in 15 year old chevy, Gasp! All to often people are worried about weekend times of 7am-10am, as if no market share of golfers play after that ::) ::)... Being that you are on LI, I'm thinking this is unneeded, you already close your clubhouse down 6 months a year so ur ahead of the curve ;)
P.S.- Why would you pay $600 a round when you have thee Goat?
-
How much is an annual membership at Southern Pines?
A couple months ago I contacted them and they quoted $115/month
-
Jeff,
User fee totally diminishes one reason for joining a private club. John Doe play 50 rounds and Jeff play 8 rounds, and Jack plays 70 rounds, it becomes pointless to join if we begrudge heavy users. If you looked at the Individual membership model my course has, it enable the guy like yourself (who plays infrequent) to pay half what he would pay for the Family Active Membership at private club down the street. Where husband & wife play 100 rounds for $5k as a the guy who pays 5k for himself to play 40 rounds. Individual membership model attracts serious golfers and is utilized best at a golf club. It works extremely well, we have a waiting list. It's also cool seeing brand new A8 drinking craft beer in the parking lot after a round parked next to a guy in 15 year old chevy, Gasp! All to often people are worried about weekend times of 7am-10am, as if no market share of golfers play after that ::) ::)... Being that you are on LI, I'm thinking this is unneeded, you already close your clubhouse down 6 months a year so ur ahead of the curve ;)
P.S.- Why would you pay $600 a round when you have thee Goat?
You just made my point for me.
I have options (the club I work at,the club I'm a member at , events I play in, The Goat that I play quite often, my destination club Palmetto, and Sag Harbor Golf Club)
Costs keep going up. If my club were to raise dues and I and others resign, they have to further raise dues, making it even harder on the infrequent golfer.
None of that is actually true in the Hamptons which exists in yet another bubble-but you get my point.
Lower dues via user fees are simply another model-nothing more-nothing less.
They make more sense (to walkers) though if everyone pays them. i.e. I pay $29 for a $25 cart ($25 +4$ user fee)
-
Hi, I work for the current management of Southern Pines Golf Club. The fee for walking has been around for years. It was in place at the time the current management took over, and they simply continued it.
My understanding is that the original fees were coded as a "cart fund" fee and "trail fund" fee.
Again it is my understanding that these fees had been used by the Elks to pay for maintenance/upgrades to the cart paths and the carts.
I believe it was originally $1 per 9 holes for each fund for a total of $4 per 18.
Later it was increased to $2 per 9 holes for each fund for a total of $8 per 18.
Brandon Livengood
Southern Pines Golf Club
Is SPGC interested in promoting walking? Is it something that comes up in discussion? Last time I was there I briefly talked to one of the employees there he seemed dismissive and said the course is so hilly and the typical player there is older so they aren't interested in walking much.
I walked the course that day and it is certainly hilly but out of the many times I have played it, walking made the experience much more enjoyable.
-
Hi, I work for the current management of Southern Pines Golf Club. The fee for walking has been around for years. It was in place at the time the current management took over, and they simply continued it.
My understanding is that the original fees were coded as a "cart fund" fee and "trail fund" fee.
Again it is my understanding that these fees had been used by the Elks to pay for maintenance/upgrades to the cart paths and the carts.
I believe it was originally $1 per 9 holes for each fund for a total of $4 per 18.
Later it was increased to $2 per 9 holes for each fund for a total of $8 per 18.
Brandon Livengood
Southern Pines Golf Club
Is SPGC interested in promoting walking? Is it something that comes up in discussion? Last time I was there I briefly talked to one of the employees there he seemed dismissive and said the course is so hilly and the typical player there is older so they aren't interested in walking much.
I walked the course that day and it is certainly hilly but out of the many times I have played it, walking made the experience much more enjoyable.
Phillip,
Sometimes it can depend greatly on who owns the cart concession.
If the pro owns it, chances are good his staff will promote riding.
It would seem to me, if the club owns the concessions, that it would be good to find the correct fee structure that encourages management to
promote walking, as ultimately it wears less on the course, and walking creates more predictable traffic flow (singles and duos in carts can wreak havoc playing through the world)
-
Hi, I work for the current management of Southern Pines Golf Club. The fee for walking has been around for years. It was in place at the time the current management took over, and they simply continued it.
My understanding is that the original fees were coded as a "cart fund" fee and "trail fund" fee.
Again it is my understanding that these fees had been used by the Elks to pay for maintenance/upgrades to the cart paths and the carts.
I believe it was originally $1 per 9 holes for each fund for a total of $4 per 18.
Later it was increased to $2 per 9 holes for each fund for a total of $8 per 18.
Brandon Livengood
Southern Pines Golf Club
Is SPGC interested in promoting walking? Is it something that comes up in discussion? Last time I was there I briefly talked to one of the employees there he seemed dismissive and said the course is so hilly and the typical player there is older so they aren't interested in walking much.
I walked the course that day and it is certainly hilly but out of the many times I have played it, walking made the experience much more enjoyable.
I have walked that course and yes it might be rolling, but there are many tougher walks than SPGC. It is not even close to the hilliness of other courses in the area. A good example would be Dormey Club, now that is some hills, but a course very much enjoyed when walked. I live in Northwest Georgia, many incredibly hilly tracks. After walking some of these courses, there is not only a better appreciation of the design and connection with nature, but an almost morphine like euphoria when you are done and just sit back to chill. All the tension feels gone, you feel totally disconnected from the lunacy around you. And to add, the positive feeling that you did something good for your body and soul, and maybe postponed for many years an income stream for some cardiologist.
-
BCowan; When you first came on this board, you immediately became involved in a series of vitriolic exchanges with a number of members including me. Your propensity to engage in ad hominem attacks has surfaced again. Candidly, I am reluctant to engage in another round because little has ever become of our prior discussions. But because others view the site, I will try once again.
I am glad you concede that US clubs need carts. Your solution to almost all problems is to increase membership. As a long time professional dealing with economically troubled enterprises, I have learned that the universal answer to fixing a failing enterprise is to increase sales. I have also learned that this "obvious solution" rarely works. In this case, that solution assumes that there are sufficient members to fill the courses and that the elasticity of demand is such that by lowering the cost, membership will grow sufficiently to makeup the loss of revenue per member. It also assumes that cost is the main reason clubs or tee sheets are not full. Finally it assumes that the existing members who have created the model at their clubs, would support the changes. I submit that there is no data to support any of these assumptions. I also suspect that your experience is insufficient to justify reliance on your assertions.
Interestingly, you suggest that there is no cost to the club for a walker. There is a cost to the club for every round. All overhead, whether it is to maintain the course, the clubhouse, pay the staff or otherwise is borne by the members. If you start with my assumption, that properly priced, cart fees will cover all direct and marginal costs of cart usage and contribute a profit, then cart users contribute more as their dues/greens fees are equal to the walker and the profit goes to the bottom line. Everybody brings costs. Carts add costs but priced correctly, the costs are offset and they even contribute to the bottom line. That said, I don't like them and use them only at facilities where they are required.
Similarly, your suggestion to fill in pools and end other services that are unprofitable is poorly reasoned. It assumes that the cost will disappear and that membership will remain constant, or any loss in membership will be made up by those flocking to join the club with fewer amenities but a lower cost. Again, no data. Moreover, if it were that easy, those in control of clubs would have already tried your solution.
Understand, I have no objection to any club that decides it wants to proceed in this way. My entire premise is that there are a variety of ways a club or public course can structure itself. Each club must find a formula that works for its members. I have had a great time at no frills all golf facilities. I have been unimpressed by the golf experience at some high prestige tracks. But I support each membership/owner's right to determine what works for them.
Finally regarding some of your more personal remarks. I may have views about the inevitability of contraction in the market, but I do more than pontificate about it on the internet. I contribute a significant amount of my time as an officer/director of one of the largest Golf Associations in the country where I spend a fair amount of my time working with our member clubs to assist them in remaining viable. I suspect I have had more discussions with decision makers in this area than most and I have seen financials for a few clubs. But I suppose that qualifies me as one who wants contraction in the market.
Similarly, your dismissal of the charitable contributions of many clubs strikes me as uninformed and ill mannered at best. Caddy programs in Chicago contribute to the Evans Scholar program via contributions from virtually every member. My club has its own scholarship program on top of the Evans for caddies and other employees and their families. Additionally, many clubs, including mine, require applicants to demonstrate a history of charitable giving on the theory that those who are fortunate enough to be able to enjoy a private club should give back. Your suggestion that this is some form of hokum is insulting. What you apparently refuse to recognize is that clubs can be more than a place to play golf. Again, there is nothing wrong with the golf only model if that is what works for a club. But your blanket dismissal of other models reveals a lack of intellectual flexibility and an ignorance of the market.
Finally, and I hesitate to even discuss it, I refer to your suggestion that I am a snob. I have been on this board for a long time. A lot of the folks here have come to know me. I am a lot of things, but one thing I am certain I am not, is a snob. What I am is a stickler for clear thinking and careful research. I am also one who, having made a living for 40 years engaged in argumentation that was more meaningful than idle debates about a mutual interest, insists that arguments be carried on in a respectful manner recognizing that one can only defeat an argument by establishing its weaknesses, not by attacking the proponent. To the extent my remarks here are deemed an attack on you, I apologize. I don't know you. They are intended to be a critique of your arguments and the manner in which they have been made. If that reflects on the proponent, it is an unfortunate byproduct.
-
Jeff,
User fee totally diminishes one reason for joining a private club.
Why then is there a charge for beer or food or lockers or carts or trollies?
What if I want to drink 5 days a week and you want to play golf?
Why would you charge me a drinking fee while you can play without a user fee?
-
Thank you, Mr. Solow, for an extremely articulate, reasoned contribution to a discussion largely devoid of same.
Jamey
-
Jeff,
User fee totally diminishes one reason for joining a private club.
Why then is there a charge for beer or food or lockers or carts or trollies?
What if I want to drink 5 days a week and you want to play golf?
Why would you charge me a drinking fee while you can play without a user fee?
you pay dues to play Golf at a Golf club. Beer, locker, a trolley that's not ur's it is extra. Join an Elks club if you wanna drink 5 days a week. We don't have drinking fees, BYOA.
-
Thank you, Mr. Solow, for an extremely articulate, reasoned contribution to a discussion largely devoid of same.
Jamey
True. Personally this is what came to mind:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIdUlp3QAsk
-
Jeff,
User fee totally diminishes one reason for joining a private club.
Why then is there a charge for beer or food or lockers or carts or trollies?
What if I want to drink 5 days a week and you want to play golf?
Why would you charge me a drinking fee while you can play without a user fee?
you pay dues to play Golf at a Golf club. Beer, locker, a trolley that's not ur's it is extra. Join an Elks club if you wanna drink 5 days a week. We don't have drinking fees, BYOA.
You don't have alcohol at the public course at which you are a season pass holder because alcohol is prohibited on all UM campus property. I wonder if you'd like to amend the above so as to not publicly admit to violating policy.
http://radrick.umich.edu/wp-content/uploads/info-guide-14.pdf
-
Jeff,
User fee totally diminishes one reason for joining a private club.
Why then is there a charge for beer or food or lockers or carts or trollies?
What if I want to drink 5 days a week and you want to play golf?
Why would you charge me a drinking fee while you can play without a user fee?
you pay dues to play Golf at a Golf club. Beer, locker, a trolley that's not ur's it is extra. Join an Elks club if you wanna drink 5 days a week. We don't have drinking fees, BYOA.
You don't have alcohol at the public course of which you are a season pass holder because alcohol is prohibited on all UM campus property. I wonder if you'd like to amend the above so as to not publicly admit to violating policy.
http://radrick.umich.edu/wp-content/uploads/info-guide-14.pdf
I read through that sincerely hoping that you were wrong. A golf club where alcohol is prohibited! Good God. A sober man should not have to deal with my golf game,
-
Jeff,
User fee totally diminishes one reason for joining a private club.
Why then is there a charge for beer or food or lockers or carts or trollies?
What if I want to drink 5 days a week and you want to play golf?
Why would you charge me a drinking fee while you can play without a user fee?
you pay dues to play Golf at a Golf club. Beer, locker, a trolley that's not ur's it is extra. Join an Elks club if you wanna drink 5 days a week. We don't have drinking fees, BYOA.
You don't have alcohol at the public course of which you are a season pass holder because alcohol is prohibited on all UM campus property. I wonder if you'd like to amend the above so as to not publicly admit to violating policy.
http://radrick.umich.edu/wp-content/uploads/info-guide-14.pdf
I read through that sincerely hoping that you were wrong. A golf club where alcohol is prohibited! Good God. A sober man should not have to deal with my golf game,
Alcohol is not permitted on UM campus?
Do they close their eyes at football games?
-
BCowan; When you first came on this board, you immediately became involved in a series of vitriolic exchanges with a number of members including me. Your propensity to engage in ad hominem attacks has surfaced again. Candidly, I am reluctant to engage in another round because little has ever become of our prior discussions. But because others view the site, I will try once again.
Yes, and many of the comments made by you and others I felt where in very poor taste too. I know a fresh breathe of clean air is good from time to time. It is difficult to on my end engaging in discussions as well.
I am glad you concede that US clubs need carts. Your solution to almost all problems is to increase membership. As a long time professional dealing with economically troubled enterprises, I have learned that the universal answer to fixing a failing enterprise is to increase sales. I have also learned that this "obvious solution" rarely works. In this case, that solution assumes that there are sufficient members to fill the courses and that the elasticity of demand is such that by lowering the cost, membership will grow sufficiently to makeup the loss of revenue per member. It also assumes that cost is the main reason clubs or tee sheets are not full. Finally it assumes that the existing members who have created the model at their clubs, would support the changes. I submit that there is no data to support any of these assumptions. I also suspect that your experience is insufficient to justify reliance on your assertions.
I haven't seen any of your ''walking fees to gain more revenue'' work, mine have. I have many friends in the golf business. If the course is a top golf course and has an empty tee sheet, Cost is a big factor especially non affluent areas. Of course, many members at clubs don't own business and as Mr Mucci's friend and others in the Golf Business say ''members lose their minds and all common sense when they drive through the gates of their golf course''. That don't make much needed changes till it's too late. I also suspect that your experience is insufficient to justify reliance on your assertions another example of an elitist comment. What is that saying about making an assumption? Studies can be vastly flawed and the outcome can yield desired outcomes by the ones doing the collection. I much prefer horse sense, experience, and common sense. I will gander at data.
Interestingly, you suggest that there is no cost to the club for a walker. There is a cost to the club for every round. All overhead, whether it is to maintain the course, the clubhouse, pay the staff or otherwise is borne by the members. If you start with my assumption, that properly priced, cart fees will cover all direct and marginal costs of cart usage and contribute a profit, then cart users contribute more as their dues/greens fees are equal to the walker and the profit goes to the bottom line. Everybody brings costs. Carts add costs but priced correctly, the costs are offset and they even contribute to the bottom line. That said, I don't like them and use them only at facilities where they are required.There is a cost to the member in the 6 months he or she is most likely not using the facility. Your monthly dues go to pay for maint. Cart fees are very high in affluent areas, and add to the bottom line to pay for fu fu and other extra services that aren't basic necessities. The walker who pays his monthly dues is paying for the maint, staff, and necessities. So depending on the club's location and model that varies greatly. Taking a caddy doesn't contribute to the bottom line, other than possible savings in maint.
Similarly, your suggestion to fill in pools and end other services that are unprofitable is poorly reasoned. It assumes that the cost will disappear and that membership will remain constant, or any loss in membership will be made up by those flocking to join the club with fewer amenities but a lower cost. Again, no data. Moreover, if it were that easy, those in control of clubs would have already tried your solution.Filling in pools is an idea shared by many of my friends with common sense. Location, location, location. If the course isn't in a nice burb, wealthy members wives don't drive 30+ mins to drop kids off at the pool. One with good leadership has to determine if the pool is costing you money and a drain on the Golf Course. That main asset is the Golf course. The club i grew up redid their pool 15 years ago and its packed, the social membership is paying for it. location, location, location
Understand, I have no objection to any club that decides it wants to proceed in this way. My entire premise is that there are a variety of ways a club or public course can structure itself. Each club must find a formula that works for its members. I have had a great time at no frills all golf facilities. I have been unimpressed by the golf experience at some high prestige tracks. But I support each membership/owner's right to determine what works for them.I agree with everything, except the last sentence. It is beyond frustrating watching golden age courses close due to repackaging of the same old CC model.
Finally regarding some of your more personal remarks. I may have views about the inevitability of contraction in the market, but I do more than pontificate about it on the internet. I contribute a significant amount of my time as an officer/director of one of the largest Golf Associations in the country where I spend a fair amount of my time working with our member clubs to assist them in remaining viable. I suspect I have had more discussions with decision makers in this area than most and I have seen financials for a few clubs. But I suppose that qualifies me as one who wants contraction in the market. I contribute my time as well, I know what organization ur on. A friend of mine wants me join our organization, he is trying his hardest to change the perception of golf and is doing wonders. People making the same old decision and not listening to the market (potential members like me) is arrogance. I've seen financial too, played uber clubs, and actually worked at uber clubs. Serving on boards and getting paid for advice doesn't mean that someone's ideas actually work in reality. I get feedback from friends in the business that make great gains in memberships in poor markets. Guess what, walking fees for additional income weren't on the list.
Similarly, your dismissal of the charitable contributions of many clubs strikes me as uninformed and ill mannered at best. Caddy programs in Chicago contribute to the Evans Scholar program via contributions from virtually every member. My club has its own scholarship program on top of the Evans for caddies and other employees and their families. Additionally, many clubs, including mine, require applicants to demonstrate a history of charitable giving on the theory that those who are fortunate enough to be able to enjoy a private club should give back. Your suggestion that this is some form of hokum is insulting. What you apparently refuse to recognize is that clubs can be more than a place to play golf. Again, there is nothing wrong with the golf only model if that is what works for a club. But your blanket dismissal of other models reveals a lack of intellectual flexibility and an ignorance of the market.I love the Evans, and spoke very highly of it, so don't twist my words. I said there were other ways to contribute to the Evans without a caddy program. I apologize for my tone, but you make it out to be that you are all saints. The clubs that try and be more than GOLF are hurting, unless protected in an affluent area. I had a nice lunch at a cafe in Deerfield on my way up to WI. I can make a blanket statement and say clubs in declining burbs are struggling trying to keep the 1950's membership model afloat, that is a fact. Metro Chicago and Detroit are no different. I also offered solutions that have been implemented (reality) at top club(s) that are working, which falls on deaf ears!
Finally, and I hesitate to even discuss it, I refer to your suggestion that I am a snob. I have been on this board for a long time. A lot of the folks here have come to know me. I am a lot of things, but one thing I am certain I am not, is a snob. What I am is a stickler for clear thinking and careful research. I am also one who, having made a living for 40 years engaged in argumentation that was more meaningful than idle debates about a mutual interest, insists that arguments be carried on in a respectful manner recognizing that one can only defeat an argument by establishing its weaknesses, not by attacking the proponent. To the extent my remarks here are deemed an attack on you, I apologize. I don't know you. They are intended to be a critique of your arguments and the manner in which they have been made. If that reflects on the proponent, it is an unfortunate byproduct.Your comment was snobbish, doesn't mean you are a snob. I apologize for my tone towards you. I can tell you my suggestions aren't tested. You also are implying that my thinking isn't clear. My opinion is shared by many in the Golf business, the silent majority.
-
Jeff,
User fee totally diminishes one reason for joining a private club.
Why then is there a charge for beer or food or lockers or carts or trollies?
What if I want to drink 5 days a week and you want to play golf?
Why would you charge me a drinking fee while you can play without a user fee?
you pay dues to play Golf at a Golf club. Beer, locker, a trolley that's not ur's it is extra. Join an Elks club if you wanna drink 5 days a week. We don't have drinking fees, BYOA.
You don't have alcohol at the public course of which you are a season pass holder because alcohol is prohibited on all UM campus property. I wonder if you'd like to amend the above so as to not publicly admit to violating policy.
http://radrick.umich.edu/wp-content/uploads/info-guide-14.pdf
I read through that sincerely hoping that you were wrong. A golf club where alcohol is prohibited! Good God. A sober man should not have to deal with my golf game,
Alcohol is not permitted on UM campus?
Do they close their eyes at football games?
They close their eyes at football games because of the product on the field.
-
Jeff,
User fee totally diminishes one reason for joining a private club.
Why then is there a charge for beer or food or lockers or carts or trollies?
What if I want to drink 5 days a week and you want to play golf?
Why would you charge me a drinking fee while you can play without a user fee?
you pay dues to play Golf at a Golf club. Beer, locker, a trolley that's not ur's it is extra. Join an Elks club if you wanna drink 5 days a week. We don't have drinking fees, BYOA.
You don't have alcohol at the public course at which you are a season pass holder because alcohol is prohibited on all UM campus property. I wonder if you'd like to amend the above so as to not publicly admit to violating policy.
http://radrick.umich.edu/wp-content/uploads/info-guide-14.pdf
You sound like the guy who told on his classmates for not doing their homework. We bring our own alcohol and Radrick. That is a fact jack. It isn't a public course. UM is getting a new clubhouse and will have a liquor licenses, again you fail. Failing at thread jacking all the time
-
We are so lucky to be able to learn from such a keen observer of death and dying in Rust Belt golf. Sort of like a blue collar Kubler-Ross talking Donald Ross. In his own parlance, how can one disagree with his sediments? He's hung in there as the private clubs have suffered and, like a decaying building emitting its moldy essence, BC belches on with his pearls of overstated and generally baseless bloviations on how to fix the industry, while enjoying a good craft beer of course! I could go on and on revealing his lack of insight, but we've seen enough purple proof in this single thread.
-
again you fail.
Yoda?
-
We are so lucky to be able to learn from suck a keen observer of death and dying in Rust Belt golf. Sort of like a blue collar Kubla-Ross talking Donald Ross. In his own parlance, how can one disagree with his sediments? He's hung in there as the private clubs have suffered and, like a decaying building emitting its moldy essence, BC belches on with his pearls of overstated and generally baseless bloviations on how to fix the industry, while enjoying a good craft beer of course! I could go on and on revealing his lack of insight, but we've seen enough purple proof in this single thread.
You are the quintessential GCA snob and you know it. Excellent spellers usually lack any vision or common sense. Coming from a guy ''Life's too short to play at crappy courses'', you don't have the slightest clue about average everyday golf. Smails, keep your posts coming you provide so much entertainment for friends. Your talking, but not saying anything of relevance. How are your results Terry? How are those rust belt courses doing? You visit them much?
-
Jeff,
User fee totally diminishes one reason for joining a private club.
Why then is there a charge for beer or food or lockers or carts or trollies?
What if I want to drink 5 days a week and you want to play golf?
Why would you charge me a drinking fee while you can play without a user fee?
you pay dues to play Golf at a Golf club. Beer, locker, a trolley that's not ur's it is extra. Join an Elks club if you wanna drink 5 days a week. We don't have drinking fees, BYOA.
You don't have alcohol at the public course at which you are a season pass holder because alcohol is prohibited on all UM campus property. I wonder if you'd like to amend the above so as to not publicly admit to violating policy.
http://radrick.umich.edu/wp-content/uploads/info-guide-14.pdf
You sound like the guy who told on his classmates for not doing their homework. We bring our own alcohol and Radrick. That is a fact jack. It isn't a public course. UM is getting a new clubhouse and will have a liquor licenses, again you fail. Failing at thread jacking all the time
It is easy for your "club" to have the ideal model when it's "members" do not have to pay for infrastructure improvements such as a new clubhouse.
Also, your point with respect to the future clubhouse and the assertion that there will be an exemption to the campus alcohol policy is immaterial to the point that alcohol consumption is currently not permitted.
Enjoy your Coors Light.
-
Jeff,
User fee totally diminishes one reason for joining a private club.
Why then is there a charge for beer or food or lockers or carts or trollies?
What if I want to drink 5 days a week and you want to play golf?
Why would you charge me a drinking fee while you can play without a user fee?
you pay dues to play Golf at a Golf club. Beer, locker, a trolley that's not ur's it is extra. Join an Elks club if you wanna drink 5 days a week. We don't have drinking fees, BYOA.
You don't have alcohol at the public course at which you are a season pass holder because alcohol is prohibited on all UM campus property. I wonder if you'd like to amend the above so as to not publicly admit to violating policy.
http://radrick.umich.edu/wp-content/uploads/info-guide-14.pdf
You sound like the guy who told on his classmates for not doing their homework. We bring our own alcohol and Radrick. That is a fact jack. It isn't a public course. UM is getting a new clubhouse and will have a liquor licenses, again you fail. Failing at thread jacking all the time
It is easy for your "club" to have the ideal model when it's "members" do not have to pay for infrastructure improvements such as a new clubhouse.
Also, your point with respect to the future clubhouse and the assertion that there will be an exemption to the campus alcohol policy is immaterial to the point that alcohol consumption is currently not permitted.
Enjoy your Coors Light.
our clubhouse is the house of the gentlemen that donated the land to the University. Our members don't use the clubhouse.
That is what management tells me, I'll go with their word over yours.
Child Please, you know nothing about good beer
-
If being a snob in this context means never lowering myself to your company, I'm a snob. And you're a cipher. Here's hoping you have a dictionary app.
-
Phillip,
Sometimes it can depend greatly on who owns the cart concession.
If the pro owns it, chances are good his staff will promote riding.
It would seem to me, if the club owns the concessions, that it would be good to find the correct fee structure that encourages management to
promote walking, as ultimately it wears less on the course, and walking creates more predictable traffic flow (singles and duos in carts can wreak havoc playing through the world)
Makes sense. Is there a standard way this is done or is it does it really vary from course to course? My course is owned by ClubCorp so I'm pretty sure it doesn't go to the pro. However, a corporation will be interested in promoting carts if they think it will bring more revenue.
As it applies to SPGC, does anyone know? I believe it is owned by the Elks Club.
-
Excellent spellers usually lack any vision or common sense.
Gold Bennie Gold!
-
I love the Evans, and spoke very highly of it, so don't twist my words. I said there were other ways to contribute to the Evans without a caddy program.
There may be ways to contribute to the Evans without a caddy program, but without question there would not be an Evans without caddy programs.
-
Excellent spellers usually lack any vision or common sense.
Gold Bennie Gold!
He's sort of our Chauncey Gardner. Eventually, if we are lucky, he'll walk across a fetid pond and disappear beneath a lily pad. No sequel.
-
I have walked that course and yes it might be rolling, but there are many tougher walks than SPGC. It is not even close to the hilliness of other courses in the area. A good example would be Dormey Club, now that is some hills, but a course very much enjoyed when walked. I live in Northwest Georgia, many incredibly hilly tracks. After walking some of these courses, there is not only a better appreciation of the design and connection with nature, but an almost morphine like euphoria when you are done and just sit back to chill. All the tension feels gone, you feel totally disconnected from the lunacy around you. And to add, the positive feeling that you did something good for your body and soul, and maybe postponed for many years an income stream for some cardiologist.
I personally quite enjoyed the walk at SPGC. However, older players might not feel the same. Or they might not even care and want to take carts regardless of how easy or difficult the walk is.
I agree on Dormie, which is why I was disappointed when I played there in December and found many of the tee-to-fairway cut-throughs had been taken out (hopefully temporarily). So we were forced to walk around along the cart paths to get to the fairway. I hope it was because they had recently cut down the natural areas and hadn't replaced the stones that we used to use to walk through those areas.
-
Excellent spellers usually lack any vision or common sense.
Gold Bennie Gold!
He's sort of our Chauncey Gardner. Eventually, if we are lucky, he'll walk across a fetid pond and disappear beneath a lily pad. No sequel.
Dibs on making this my signature, guys.
-
Wow, how harsh this thread has gotten! I am blown away by how people take digs at others. Is the club Ben is a member at the most difficult in Michigan to join, no, but it is still a private club. I called to play and they were very glad I new a member! Other wise I would not of been able to play there. I know many other people have set up and offered to host people on this web site and I thank those people who have hosted me in the past and in the future, but I do not know anyone who has gone out of his way to do this like Ben has. He has done this at least four times last year. Talk about someone trying to get more people playing, which helps all of the golfing community!
Time for a truce, to show all the people who read here as members and guests that we are not all snobs living the dream life.
As it pertains to carts and fees. My home course is a government owed public facility. So public there are no pass holders, but we are allowed to sell beer. On any given day the course can have 200-250 rounds when carts are allowed, on the days that carts are not allowed it drops to maybe 50 players. This is a very flat course with one small hill on both nines and no long walks from tee to green. Most of the players also complain about the cost, last year it was $43 to ride on the weekends and $28 to walk. Very few people walk and the majority of cart rides would rather stay in the club house and drink beer if they can not ride. This is the sad reality that golf has become. These are also the people that play 3-5 days a week and support the majority of public courses.
Luckily there are no extra fees to walk or people would have less money for beer! The domestic variety, cans on the course and draft micro brews on tap.
chris
-
Excellent spellers usually lack any vision or common sense.
Gold Bennie Gold!
He's sort of our Chauncey Gardner. Eventually, if we are lucky, he'll walk across a fetid pond and disappear beneath a lily pad. No sequel.
Dibs on making this my signature, guys.
Shouldn't that be everyone's signature? Let golf's silent majority be heard!
-
our clubhouse is the house of the gentlemen that donated the land to the University. Our members don't use the clubhouse.
That is what management tells me, I'll go with their word over yours.
Child Please, you know nothing about good beer
Ben, I think I've figured out what you're trying to say. I understand now that when you say "the clubhouse" sometimes you are talking about the Radrick clubhouse and sometimes you are talking about the clubhouse for the UM course.
Certainly UM might make the new clubhouse for the UM course one of the permitted facilities to sell alcohol on campus, in fact I acknowledged that in the post of mine you quoted. For more information, see here: http://ogc.umich.edu/frequently-asked-questions/faq-alcohol.html
However, whether they choose to do so has zero relevance on whether alcohol is permitted at Radrick Farms or on campus, generally.
-
Jason,
Yes, Alcohol isn't technically allowed at Radrick. It is kinda of like Jay walking, people do it and management doesn't care. UofM is getting a new clubhouse and somehow is supposedly getting a liquor licenses which i initially thought was against big 10 policies.
-
Jason,
Yes, Alcohol isn't technically not allowed at Radrick. It is kinda of like Jay walking, people do it and management doesn't care. UofM is getting a new clubhouse and somehow is getting a liquor licenses which i initially thought was against big 10 policies.
Each state and school set their own policies. For example, they serve beer at Minnesota's home football games and in certain areas at Wisconsin's stadium.
-
Jason,
Yes, Alcohol isn't technically allowed at Radrick. It is kinda of like Jay walking, people do it and management doesn't care. UofM is getting a new clubhouse and somehow is supposedly getting a liquor licenses which i initially thought was against big 10 policies.
Ben
Which course is getting new clubhouse?
Ciao
-
Ben C.
I read this again and I'll be brief. The model you seem to,favor seems fine , quite sure it would work for me . But to capsulize this whole argument about riders vs walkers, it ain't the same here as it might be there, or there , or there or there . It's really that simple .
-
Archie,
I've been to other regions of the country, and there is more parallels than differences. There are always a few exceptions. I tend to go by results, and all my examples in different areas/markets are extremely successful. It isn't the model i favor, it is a model that works especially for declining areas. taxing people doesn't increase revenue in the long term, however this action could be done in an area with high discretionary income. But the mentality that people who pay monthly dues aren't paying their fair share because they walk is beyond ludicrous. A friend of mine is getting the walking fees eliminated at his NE club. Carts aren't going away in the US, but relying on them for your bottom line is a slippery slope. I know most clubs do. What would behoove you is to look at clubs that have made successful strides in gaining good amounts of members. Often times the ones who put large amounts of money in their clubhouse go bust. I believe every or most course in NW Ohio that built a new clubhouse went belly up. The problem is people don't learn from history, they repeat it. I also don't mention them in name for they are private. I just played a course in Dec. in a town of 15,000 that had valet service for their clubhouse, if that wasn't a red flag there, I don't know what is. You also have to understand that 40 years of age is usually when a member pays full dues, give or take 5 years. The club decisions aren't made by every member, so you have a disconnect. If you can share your success stories of courses gaining members with walking fees, please share. Archie, we can also agree to disagree.
-
Ben , we don't disagree, I'm not for charging walkers , you just aren't listening . For instance the idea carts are the choice of the majority at many places just doesn't resonate .
I'm all for small clubhouses and no frills , pure golf. Love walking , but don't all,the time . No model is a panacea for all . Even your favorite.
8) give peace a chance!
-
''For instance the idea carts are the choice of the majority at many places just doesn't resonate . ''
I agree, but you don't want to piss off the walking sector that possibly is 15% of the membership and they keep you in the black. Mine is 60% walking.
Archie, I play cartballer tracks from time to time. The Donald Ross Memorial is a great course in Northern Michigan.
I'm a non interventionist... ;)