Transitioning from the thread about "Bland Canadian Courses", the discussion there made me wonder: given identical sites and all other things being equal, would a typical "new style" course (interpret that any way you want -- i.e. a Graham Cooke or Les Furber mainstream design) have either a disadvantage or an advantage in terms of either construction costs or ongoing maintenance costs versus a more traditional style course? Is there a financial benefit that could be argued one way or the other?
Intuitively it seems to me that an "old style" course would call for less shaping during construction and less maintenance afterwards, but I'm a novice at this. Any thoughts and/or experiences?