One of the interesting things I noticed on my recent Fazio trail, was the drainage. It was superb. It also costs and arm and a leg. One aspect that affordable golf can likely not provide, unless it's naturally well draining.

Stevenson ranch comes to mind as one such place that has adequate drainage without the lien on your wallet.

Here is a story of someone doing a good deed :

from www.aztrib.com


Scottsdale News
Disabled kids get their own golf spot  
By Ryan Gabrielson, Tribune
December 21, 2004
The Villa Monterey Golf Course, closed since May because of financial problems, has been sold to private investors to be transformed into a new-look course with instruction for children.
 
Harvey and Carol Ann Mackay, Minnesota residents who own a home in Paradise Valley, are finalizing the course’s purchase from the Arizona Golf Association, a nonprofit that owned and operated Villa Monterey, for an undisclosed sum.

Assistant city manager Neal Shearer confirmed the city was aware of the Mackays’ purchase, but emphasized Scottsdale is not involved.

"It sounds very encouraging and very positive, but the city obviously is not in the middle of discussions," Shearer said.

The nine-hole course, located at 8100 E. Camelback Road, is expected to be redesigned as a "garden golf course," said Ed Gowan, the association’s executive director. "(The plan) is what we wanted it to be five years ago when we got involved."

While the course will be open to the public, Jerry Graham, the association presi- dent, said its focus will be on teaching children, particularly those with physical or mental disabilities.

The Mackays have already hired architects to redesign the course so it is as much a beautiful landscape as a place to practice putting, Graham said. "It’s going to be the best looking piece of property along Hayden (Road). Those ponds will be glittering with water irises."

Gowan said the course is scheduled to reopen in the fall.

In recent months, the association has fielded offers from about five parties interested in taking over cash-strapped Villa Monterey, Graham said.

Harvey Mackay is the owner of a Minnesota envelope company, best-selling author of business strategy books and a syndicated columnist. His first book, "How to Swim With the Sharks Without Being Eaten Alive," topped The New York Times best-seller list.

He has been written about in Forbes magazine and is partially credited with keeping the Minnesota Twins and Minnesota Timberwolves from moving to other markets. According to reports in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, Harvey Mackay also helped spearhead a fund-raising effort that spared the University of Minnesota’s golf program from budget cuts.

The Mackays serve on several boards of charitable organizations, Graham said. In Arizona, the couple are honorary chairmen for Scratch & Sniff, dedicated to raising awareness of the need to spay, neuter and care for pets.

Carol Ann Mackay declined comment Monday from their home in Aspen, Colo. Harvey Mackay was undergoing an all-day physical in Minnesota and unavailable for comment, said Greg Bailey, Mackay’s spokesman.

Villa Monterey was operated for years as an executive course with inexpensive greens fees. It was also known for its financial difficulties, first closing temporarily in 2000, until more than $80,000 was donated by individuals, and then again in the spring.

The golf association asked Scottsdale for assistance, but was turned down.

Mayor Mary Manross said it was proper for the city to wait for a buyer such as the Mackays to take over Villa Monterey.

"I think it behooves any government agency to try to get private investment," Manross said.

Here's my solution for cheap golf.
All golfers take 2005 off.  All golf courses go bankrupt and they can be purchased for the change in your pocket.  You lower rates to $20, and the problem is solved.  

brother SBusch

sorry but i've already purchased ($100) my "coupons" from Greg Norman / WCI to play Naples area courses (ie Tiburon, Raptor, Colony etc) and new courses like Parkland - for cart fee only $25 or $32

it has come to my "groups" opinion that instead of "joining" a single club to buy property or availability from a developer with "reciprocal" arangements among many upscale courses

as for the "old" courses an option you've omitted is that a local municipality purchase and operate the course - such as i've see in S FL at the biltmore (donald ross / coral gables) etc

Adam,

When the ground conditions (soil & undulations) are not ideal for natural drainage to suffice - it can certainly be an expensive undertaking. However, it will save money in the long run, plus the club will generate more revenue during inclement times because they do not need to stay closed at all or as often. Drainage is the #1 priority when designing a golf course - a great design cannot be experienced without it - therefore, can it really be called great.

TK

Did the city buy the Biltmore?  

brother SBusch

yes the biltmore golf course only, the biltmore hotel is owned by a syndication

as far a soaking taxpayers - i don't know (in FLA it seems we prefer to soak the "visiting" taxpayers (tourists))

as for S FLA in general to make land available for development the municipality MUST maintain a certain percentage of the total land as "green" space to be in STATE compliance for funding as it regards the state's comprehensive land use master plan - this is why you see the road medians landscaped (maintained as lineal parks! with irrigation installed!) instead of paved (no maintenance required)

so for the municipality to allow commercial or residential development it must add a "green" parcel to maintain the required percentage "green" - and apparently a golf course fits the legalities required

i didn't realize that this was a bad idea

elsewhere municipalities have purchased and operated courses - wouldn't your PROPERTY VALUES increase ?

how about lake isle in eastchester NY ? that was purchased by the town many years ago - i've never heard any resident "taxpayer" say the costs outweighed the benefits OR any of the Westchester County NY courses ? certainly nowhere in the US are property values (especially the contiguous acres required for a course) more expensive that there (yes i know most of them were acquired some forty plus years ago)

in the future - IMHO affordable golf may only be available on municipal courses - which is why i raised the point

One of the biggest issues that dovetails with the idea of affordable golf is when privately owned daily-fee courses become outraged that taxpayer-owned jurisdictions (city, county, or state) jump into the golf development business.

I thought America was theland of competition -- not in their mind it is.

No less than some of the leading figures within my home state have come out and said very directly that competing against government in such an industry is really not their purpose in the first place.

What's amusing is that the private side of the aisle has not demonstrated any hesitation in charging higher feess -- as an FYI -- according to the NGF 2003 assessment of fees charges -- NJ is the 8th most expensive place to play golf.

Under their rationale -- it would be far better for Joe Sixpack and Mary Wineglass to simply have their golf provided by these robber barons.

Taxpayer-owned facilities are likely the only way to provide low cost golf to the masses -- especially in areas of heavy congestion such as the NY / NJ metro area, to name just one.

The privately-owned daily fee will simply grab the highest dollar it can charge. For all the talk about "growing the game" the reality is often more about "upping the rate" without really providing any meaningful incentive for the average player to keep on playing at these "country club" for a day places.

Steve:

You need to help me out -- what "apparent financial failure" are you referring to? Billy Casper Golf manages the facility for the township and from what I have heard things have proceeded well although turf issues have been inconsistent.

The issue is that a number of the privately owned daily fee layouts in the area and in the state have made it a point to state that taxpayer-owned facilities have no business competing with them.

One of the biggest issues that dovetails with the idea of affordable golf is when privately owned daily-fee courses become outraged that taxpayer-owned jurisdictions (city, county, or state) jump into the golf development business.

I thought America was theland of competition -- not in their mind it is.

No less than some of the leading figures within my home state have come out and said very directly that competing against government in such an industry is really not their purpose in the first place.

What's amusing is that the private side of the aisle has not demonstrated any hesitation in charging higher feess -- as an FYI -- according to the NGF 2003 assessment of fees charges -- NJ is the 8th most expensive place to play golf.

Under their rationale -- it would be far better for Joe Sixpack and Mary Wineglass to simply have their golf provided by these robber barons.

Taxpayer-owned facilities are likely the only way to provide low cost golf to the masses -- especially in areas of heavy congestion such as the NY / NJ metro area, to name just one.

The privately-owned daily fee will simply grab the highest dollar it can charge. For all the talk about "growing the game" the reality is often more about "upping the rate" without really providing any meaningful incentive for the average player to keep on playing at these "country club" for a day places.

Matt

I'm astounded that you have no grasp that a municipality has an unfair advantage in business:

Tax breaks, or even tax free
Lower cost, if not free utilities if owned by same municipality
Advertising dollars are often taxpayer dollars

And so on......

Joe

Matt,

Why does the muni model fail only when held up against a CCFAD? Doesn't competition also occur at the entry level? I'm missing your point....

I also felt your generalization that course owners are "robber barrons" because they show no "hesitation to raise fees" is out of line. Well golly gee, Matt.....I keep getting notices that fertilizer prices are going up 8-12%, taxes keep going up, insurance keeps going up, fuel, labor.....What do you think they should do? Maybe by trying to keep the doors open they are more interested in affordable golf than you understand.

The cost of golf is rising...and it's across the board.

Joe

Matt,

Oh for you to walk a mile in an operators shoes...

The impact of gov't subsidized competition is immense and "munis" are not the only players.  The impact of a muni on the local mom and pop course is extremely direct competition.  If you were to consider Joe Hancock's course you would see he is at a great disadvantage against the muni when they both compete for the same market.  I'm pretty sure Joe would gladly take a refund just on his property taxes and could give you a very good list of improvements to made in the next few years with those funds.  The mom and pops do it with great efficiency and high levels of personal service.

Don't forget the impact of university courses that provide high end conditions for mid end rates, putting a real hurt on the 40-50 dollar operation.  If subsidized courses are only seeking local markets why do so many advertise in regional and statewide publication?  I know of several university courses and munis that market in state wide and regional publications.  I'd say they are directly marketing more than a local cliental.

Many players are not golfers like we are.  They rather go out to enjoy the sun with a few pops and play chase the white ball regardless of the layout or architecture.  Munis are not the only parties who entertain them and those who seek their business should not be considered lesser entities in the golf business.  The mom and pops as well as the muni system are where the future players of the game are nurtured and developed.  I would dare say that, in my experience, I would rather have players visit my facility who were developed at local mom and pops than munis as the respect the course rather than see it as an entitlement.

Your analogy of public to private schools is absolutely backwards.  The privates don't compete against publics for the lower dollar.  The privates are the private clubs, and ccfads not the smaller operator.  Your analogy is not even close to an apples to apples comparison.  In areas were munis had not existed and small courses carried the local low fee players, new munis are brutal.  I think you need to consider areas where population densities are just beginning to grow at the rates major municipalities have in the last twenty years.

Cheers!

JT

Matt,

Now that I know where, geographically, I understand your conclusions.  I don't know what you do for a living, but you may want to move west and enjoy the numerous small time mom and pop classic courses that provide great service and genuine hospitality at very affordable rates!  You probably like their classic playing conditions as well.

Population density has led to many developers over saturating markets and trying to make the most they can in the present.  It is a shame they are not partnering with the developmental courses to facilitate the future players of the game.  Regrettably many are motivated only by greed.

I would assume the reason the private sector is not providing affordable golf in your area is property values, land acquisition, and property taxes.

A side note on the NGF data.  In our market it is rarely accurate as it is so skewed by the setting of greater density courses.

I've said this before, so I apologize for the broken record, but architects have basically NO control over the affordability of golf.

Whether I spent $1 million building High Pointe or $5 million, what the owners can [and will] charge for playing it is based on the price of other courses in the area, and on what people in that area can afford.

If I spend $1 million building the same product, obviously, the owners are less likely to go bankrupt when they find out what the market will bear ... and obviously I have an interest in that, too.  But the price of a green fee will eventually find its own level no matter what the cost of construction was.

My own public designs include Quail Crossing at US$17 green fees and Cape Kidnappers at NZ$400.  The land cost of the two properties was way different, but the construction cost of the two golf courses was fairly comparable.