Could this happen in Nebraska?

« **on:** July 11, 2005, 05:12:03 PM »

The debate about whether private clubs in the US should (or shouldn't) behave like UK clubs regarding visitor access has been discussed many times on here. But those were almost always related to clubs in major cities, where tee-times are already scarce. But what about any area that has the potential to have world-class golf, but has a greater population of cattle than people?

Mike Keiser, in his Feature Interview, wrote that "sand hills of Nebraska. 50 courses will pop up in the next 30 years."

But unless you're lucky enough to be part of the GCA-8 or are driving across I-80, the odds of you experiencing these great links aren't that great because of the difficulty of travel (6hrs to Mullen from Denver or Omaha, not to metion the time to get to those cities).

But what if there were 10-20 courses that you could visit?? While it's possible that many of those "50 courses in the sand hills" could be private, I would suspect that many of them will often have plenty of empty tee-times. Would golfers make the trip to the sand hills instead of going to the UK or Bandon if they had the occasional chance to play a Sand Hills, or Prairie Dunes, or Dismal River or another private club?

Would it not be something for the private clubs in the NE sand hills to consider? Obviously it could be limited to any number of tee-times per day/week. But consider the potential financial upside to these clubs, as well as the state of Nebraska. Would the state ever supplement (or financially encourage) this type of behavior? Maybe Colorado would be interested in a partnership like this as well??

What amount of visitor income might pursuade those NE clubs to embrace this idea for the overall enjoyment of golf in the region? What reasonable incentives might the state of NE be able to make for those clubs (existing or future) to consider being part of something like that?

« **Reply #1 on:** July 11, 2005, 05:26:26 PM »

If these Clubs wanted every Tom, Dick, and Harry gouging up their fairways they would have set themselves up as such. They are private clubs. I would love the opportunity to play Sand Hills one day but it will not be because I take a road trip thru Nebraska and show up at the front door with my $200 bucks looking for a game.

« **Reply #2 on:** July 11, 2005, 05:33:02 PM »

Scott - You don't understand the proposition Brian is making here. It's not like you could show up and play. We would talk (just like the UK as he states) that you would write a formal letter to their club, have a valid handicap, etc. before being allowed to play.

Trust me 90% of the golfers in Nebraska would rather play in the cow pasture at Mullen or Hyannis that to spend the money to play SH once.

« **Reply #3 on:** July 11, 2005, 05:44:04 PM »

Tony,

I understand the proposition and think it would be a great idea but it's pie-in-the-sky stuff. Private clubs are private - nuff said. There are hundreds of brilliant courses throughout America that sit empty day after day after day. There are thousands of us golfers that would pay to play these courses in a heartbeat but we will never get that chance because they are private clubs.

Mike Keiser could very well be correct in saying that here will be 50+ courses built in the NE sand hills. With his business acumen he could very well create another Bandon out there with 4 or 5 great new courses we can all enjoy for a daily fee.

Sand Hills will remain private because that is the way it's founders/members want it to be. That is the American way.

« **Reply #4 on:** July 11, 2005, 05:45:43 PM »

Brian -

I raised this issue on an earlier thread (maybe one about Ballyneal).

Given the overwhelming success of Bandon/Pacific Dunes as a daily fee venue, why aren't any of the Nebraska/South Dakota dunes course pursuing that business model?

Tom Doak gave a pretty good answer to that question:

1) If your private club is successful getting off the ground and you sell 300 memberships (say at $30,000 per) within the first year or two of operation, the developer collects $9,000,000, more or less upfront. This allows the developer to recover most (if not all) of his capital investment in a relatively short time.
2) If you operate as a daily-fee course, you are in the resort business on an ongoing basis. You have to advertise, promote and staff your business accordingly. The payback on your investment could take a decade or two, instead of a year or two.

Could these facilities operate successfully as 'semi-private'
facilities? The question there is whether enough high-rollers, who spring for a large initiation fee, would be willing to do so knowing that they could access the course any time they wanted to on a daily fee basis. My guess is that anyone who joins one of these clubs is paying (through their initiation fee) for the privilege of knowing that the 1st tee will be empty whenever they show up to play. Most of these people are probably not interested in belonging to a semi-private club.

Remember, the availablitiy of golf at private clubs in GB&I to non-members is driven by the revenue it brings in to the clubs, which allows the clubs to keep the cost of initiation/annual dues very modest for their members.

For better or worse, there are plenty of golfers in the US willing to pay for their privacy and with the money to do so. Whether there are enough of these people to join all these new 'sandbelt' clubs in the US remains to be seen.

It will be interesting to see if a golf resort similar to Bandon/Pacific Duners emerges in the Nebraska region. The relatively short golfing season not much more than 6 months) may make it unlikely.

DT

« **Reply #5 on:** July 11, 2005, 05:47:55 PM »

Sandbox

I do think you have something jelling. At present, I am not sure a "Muirfield" (which has a terrific blend for the members) could be created because of so few courses in the area. If there were a load more high quality (and especially public) courses, it could work. But for the moment, Scott is probably right. Only hardcore players are going to shell out the bucks for SH if they ever decided to allow visitors. Nebraska doesn't have the tourist appeal of East Lothian. I know many keen players that will go to East Lothian and not bother with Muirfield. It is too expensive (not in the sense that it isn't affordable, just that they think Muirfield is taking the piss) for many Brits, especially when one considers that there is plenty of good golf to be had without Muirfield. At the moment, Nebraska cannot claim title to this sort of standing (as can be said for most US destinations). Personally, I would like to see moves made in this direction by all private clubs in the US, but then some do call me an idealist!

Ciao

Sean

« **Reply #6 on:** July 11, 2005, 07:49:15 PM »

Quote from: David_Tepper on July 11, 2005, 05:45:43 PM

Could these facilities operate successfully as 'semi-private'
facilities? The question there is whether enough high-rollers, who spring for a large initiation fee, would be willing to do so knowing that they could access the course any time they wanted to on a daily fee basis. My guess is that anyone who joins one of these clubs is paying (through their initiation fee) for the privilege of knowing that the 1st tee will be empty whenever they show up to play. Most of these people are probably not interested in belonging to a semi-private club.

David,

You make a very valid point. However, could those high initiation fees be cut substantially from the added revenue generated by daily-fee play. That might make some more willing to shell out the dough to guarantee unlimited access. I wonder what the members of Pasatiempo think of their semi-private arrangment?

TK

« **Reply #7 on:** July 11, 2005, 08:18:11 PM »

If a lot of courses do spring up in the area, I just hope that it doesnt become the next Myrtle Beach.. So much great land, I hope we see courses challenging Sand Hills for the "best of the belt" title.
I'd be dissapointed to go down there and play a poorly visioned jerry matthews course while looking at pictures of sand hills.

Time will tell.. Until then, Thanks for the pictures from Sand Hills

« **Reply #8 on:** July 11, 2005, 08:39:41 PM »

Cuba used to have a heck of a golf trail, then some guy decided to tinker with admission policies. I don't think the conditioning is so good anymore...

« **Reply #9 on:** July 11, 2005, 09:12:22 PM »

Quote from: Scott Coan on July 11, 2005, 08:39:41 PM

Cuba used to have a heck of a golf trail, then some guy decided to tinker with admission policies. I don't think the conditioning is so good anymore...

I'm sure it's been discussed on this site.. But Cuba already has resort infrastructure in place.. Additionally, there is a lot of undeveloped coastal land on which I am sure we will see some courses developed.

Playing 18 with a cohibia, sitting after to a bit of havanna club while watching the waves roll in.

« **Reply #10 on:** July 11, 2005, 09:49:14 PM »

Brian Gracelly,

You may want to read the ADA and understand it's potential applications before touting your proposal.

Public Access could cause the disfiguring of the architecture

« **Reply #11 on:** July 11, 2005, 10:15:27 PM »

Brian Gracely,

Why did you delete your post ?

They could be coming soon.

It's a distinct impediment to going public.

It is a very real concern to developers who are considering whether to go private or public. In fact, I had this very same discussion with a fellow who was a developer of golf courses while I was in Nebraska.

Read the ADA, then comment.

ADA is not a State Law, it's the Federal Law and as such supercedes State Law. You could work with the State of Nebraska and work out what you perceive to be all of your problems, only to have the effort go for naught with one case.

Are you familiar with the pending case at BPB ?

The UK has historically enjoyed a different legal environment, one that permits things that we'd like to see happen over here. The reality is, our legal environment discourages same.

« **Reply #12 on:** July 11, 2005, 10:42:09 PM »

Quote from: Patrick_Mucci on July 11, 2005, 10:15:27 PM

Why did you delete your post ?

Because golfers and lawyers don't mix. No point in having further discussion.

« **Reply #13 on:** July 11, 2005, 10:50:16 PM »

Quote from: Sandbox_Gracely on July 11, 2005, 10:42:09 PM

Quote from: Patrick_Mucci on July 11, 2005, 10:15:27 PM

Why did you delete your post ?

Because golfers and lawyers don't mix. No point in having further discussion.

# 1 I'm not a lawyer

# 2 How would Robert Tyre (Bobby) Jones, Jr. feel about
your statement and position ?[/color]

« **Reply #14 on:** July 12, 2005, 07:06:59 AM »

Quote from: Sandbox_Gracely on July 11, 2005, 05:12:03 PM

But unless you're lucky enough to be part of the GCA-8 or are driving across I-80, the odds of you experiencing these great links aren't that great because of the difficulty of travel (6hrs to Mullen from Denver or Omaha, not to metion the time to get to those cities).

A little birdie tells us that you will be in Mullen this September,so let us know what you think after your visit. Personally a big part of the fun of retreat golf for me is parking your car and not touching it for three or four days.

« **Reply #15 on:** July 15, 2005, 07:27:46 PM »

Sorry I missed this post earlier.

I know the private club accessibility question comes up quite a bit, (especially here in Nebraska) but I think what you will see is several more semi-private facilities pop up as well. IE the Wild Horse model would not be very hard to emulate in places such as Sidney, Scottsbluffs, Alliance, Chadron etc. There are a lot more towns that are larger, more golf starved and better sand hills terrain than WH. Get your base of members, limit surrounding county play and charge “big city” prices for out of town guests. ($36 at WH).

Jason

« **Reply #16 on:** July 15, 2005, 08:14:40 PM »

Quote

Get your base of members, limit surrounding county play and charge “big city” prices for out of town guests. ($36 at WH).

Jason, I'm not sure I'm getting your drift. Are you saying an active effort ought to be made to limit local resident play? Why? $36 is a fair price to market in my humble opinion. How many locals play more than 12-15 rounds a year? That is the cost of an unlimitted membership at WH. Yet, without that local play, cart fees (though I loathe them and the need for them at WH in principle) I don't think that they could charge even $36. I don't think they do much more than 30K rounds a year. Most of them on that low membership cost. They need outside play for sure, but they must have the locals. But, the locals are not like those conoscenti on GCA.com. They play there because they like it the way it is. They may not come and opt for something more economical if fees were higher.

Part of the charm is they don't gouge outsiders or feriners.

That makes them an attractive and unique experience. If they started charging "big city" prices, it would leave a bad taste in everyone's mouth, including many of us loyal non-residents. There is a reason beyond just the design of the golf course that WH is unique. It is a retreat to a 'kinder and gentler' corner of our country where humble is a pie that tastes good.

« **Reply #17 on:** July 15, 2005, 08:38:18 PM »

To continue, Pat I really think that you are making too much of this ADA stuff as a factor to developing a golf venue like Brian is talking about. Why there are so many private clubs organised as they are is a function of our tax and corporate laws more than anything else. Tom Doak has given us real reasons for why founders, shakers and movers like Keiser view the capitalization method as they do.

You know that I personally favor the GB&I traditional models for clubs, organization, non-member access, etc. But, we don't have a set of laws that allow that to be the case, or else by some process of natural market efficiency or things ultimately working out to their best use and practice, we would have that GB&I model here.

It still seems to work out here that those passionate enough about experiencing these otherwise isolated or very limitted access clubs, find a way, or receive the kindness of strangers or kindred spirits to be invited.

I have a question for you Pat. Is there any ratio or relationship in the chances a non-member enthusiast has to be invited to a venerable club to experience the great golf course and the cost of that membership? Anotherwords, as the price of the memberships go up (some say 250K for some of the elite) does the number of invitations to folk outside that economic-social strata go down? Are the more moderately priced and less pretentious more inviting to a wider cross section of people. Why is that? (spoken in Andy Rooney's voice

)

« **Reply #18 on:** July 15, 2005, 09:23:11 PM »

Quote from: RJ_Daley on July 15, 2005, 08:38:18 PM

To continue, Pat I really think that you are making too much of this ADA stuff as a factor to developing a golf venue like Brian is talking about.

In a discussion about and with developers of golf courses in Nebraska this was a very real concern. Consider my post as coming from the "horse's mouth".[/color]

Why there are so many private clubs organised as they are is a function of our tax and corporate laws more than anything else.

I disagree, I think it's market demand.
Tax and corporate laws have very little to do with determining the ultimate user, the consumer does.[/color]

Tom Doak has given us real reasons for why founders, shakers and movers like Keiser view the capitalization method as they do.

I'm unfamiliar with "the real reasons" as espoused by Tom Doak. Could you familiarize me.[/color]

You know that I personally favor the GB&I traditional models for clubs, organization, non-member access, etc. But, we don't have a set of laws that allow that to be the case, or else by some process of natural market efficiency or things ultimately working out to their best use and practice, we would have that GB&I model here.

Our legal system is the greatest impediment to employing the policies used in the UK.[/color]

It still seems to work out here that those passionate enough about experiencing these otherwise isolated or very limitted access clubs, find a way, or receive the kindness of strangers or kindred spirits to be invited.

I have a question for you Pat.
Is there any ratio or relationship in the chances a non-member enthusiast has to be invited to a venerable club to experience the great golf course and the cost of that membership?

Yes, but, it's cultural and/or socially oriented.[/color]

Anotherwords, as the price of the memberships go up (some say 250K for some of the elite) does the number of invitations to folk outside that economic-social strata go down?
Probably.

Did the "average Joe" get invited to Trump's wedding ?[/color]

Are the more moderately priced and less pretentious more inviting to a wider cross section of people.

NO.

In those cases it's cultural and social as well.
There are plenty of moderately priced, less pretentious clubs that are very exclusive.

Money isn't the sole determining factor or line of demarcation.
It's cultural and social.[/color]

Why is that? (spoken in Andy Rooney's voice )

That's just the way it is.

Do you socialize with homeless, transient and criminal elements in society ? [/color]

« **Reply #19 on:** July 15, 2005, 10:40:12 PM »

Dick,

$36 is a big city price in G-burg, in their eyes, they are already doing it. At one time, most local clubs in Nebraska limited rounds per year of local play so they join.

My point of the post was that G-burg's model should not and will not be unique.

Jason

« **Reply #20 on:** July 15, 2005, 11:35:50 PM »

As a native Nebraskan, I certainly hope that the Wild Horse model is replicated in some of the larger sand hills towns. However, it will be much more difficult to bring in "out-of-town" play in those western NE towns (e.g. Alliance, Scottsbluff).

I certainly don't know the specific economics of WH's business, but Gothenburg is on I-80 and is still relatively close to Nebraska's "urban" centers of Kearney and Grand Island. Going to Gothenburg for 36 holes of great golf is very doable as far east as Lincoln. That is not so when you go much further west.

Now, if there were enough courses and buzz to make it a destination, then the economics might be there for public facilities to be successful. However, it would require some serious buzz to get people to western NE. Given the number of "why Oregon" questions I got when I was going to Bandon, I can only imagine the befuddled looks I'd get when I told people I was going to Nebraska for my golf vacation. While purists will go anywhere for great golf, a lot of golfers need something more. At least Oregon has the ocean to draw normal golfers.

« **Reply #21 on:** July 15, 2005, 11:45:42 PM »

Alan,

Recently I played golf in Nebraska. The warm up for Sand Hills was Wild Horse. If this place was in California you would have golfers lined up at six in the morning to play it at $100.00 a round. It was a revelation. A superb test and thoroughly enjoyable to boot.

Sand Hills was nirvana.

Apart from the courses, the beauty of the country and the genuine kindness of most Nebraskans was an eyeopener. I hope to return as often as I can.

« **Reply #22 on:** July 16, 2005, 12:02:01 AM »

Bob

I think the comparator to WH already exists in California, and near a major population center. Rustic Canyon.

« **Reply #23 on:** July 16, 2005, 09:09:08 AM »

Welcome Alan,

We play 36 driving from Omaha all the time in G-burg, not to mention Bayside. The farther west you go the closer to Denver you get. But to be honest, I don't what % you would need of out of town play, but those farther western towns have a larger base for membership.

If Mike Keiser is correct and I do believe he is, those 50 new courses are not going to all be private. Just don't make them 5 hours per round with fountains and golf carts.

Jason

« **Reply #24 on:** July 18, 2005, 08:01:30 AM »

Jason,

Keiser's been right about a few things in his life, so I won't argue with you there. I would gladly plan my 2015 golf trip to NE even if it did involve a little driving to get from course to course.

Bob,

Glad you enjoyed your trip to NE. I have since moved away but it was a great place to grow up. Glad to hear the home folks are still making outsiders feel welcome.

I've not played Sand Hills but have no doubt that it is in fact Nirvana. I played Wild Horse last year and was very impressed. At least that day, it really rewarded my good shots but really punished my bad ones. It definitely earned repeat business (I hope to make a return trip when I'm home for Labor Day).

Alan

News:

Brian_Gracely

Scott Coan

Tony_Chapman

Scott Coan

David_Tepper

Sean_A

Tyler Kearns

Jfaspen

Scott Coan

Jfaspen

Patrick_Mucci

Patrick_Mucci

Brian_Gracely

Patrick_Mucci

Mike_Sweeney

Jason Hines

RJ_Daley

RJ_Daley

Patrick_Mucci

Jason Hines

Alan Gard

Bob_Huntley

corey miller

Jason Hines

Alan Gard