WSJ ARTICLE TODAY

[Patrick_Mucci]

From my perspective, my points might be aimed a bit more for the future.  I do believe golf is a great 4 hour diversion from the real world and it provides great time with friends and family.  I'm just stating that in the future as the economy continues to tank- and it will, and as the human attention spans becomes smaller and smaller, nine hole courses might be a good solution.

Rick,

9 hole courses might be a good alternative for those whose time won't allow for 18 holes or a day with the boys.

With the economy so bad and no immediate relief in sight, perhaps land that was otherwise too expensive, might be acquired for a 9 hole course.

I don't see 9 hole courses, that are far removed from the population centers, as being "worth the ride"

Still, 50 acres is pretty expensive in areas with populations dense enough to support a 9 hole course.

With the glut of courses described in the article, my thoughts for the future are that those "excess" 18 hole courses will be turned into real estate developments with adjacent 9 hole courses.

I don't know if you've ever been to Commonwealth National, next to the Willow Grove Naval Air Station, but, they took a 36 hole facility, reduced it to 18 holes and developed office buildings on the "excess" land.

I think that concept will resurface with residential development on the "excess" 18 hole courses.