[Steve Sayers]

What has been the experience at your club regarding membership before and after a restoration / improvement plan?  I have heard a statistic that on average clubs typically pick up a net 14% increase in membership within two years of completing a major restoration / improvement plan.

[TEPaul]

Two what Steve?

A really good restoration I heard of picked up a 14% net increase in membership two minutes after completing a really good restoration!

I've been holding this one as a last ditch attempt to explain to Pat Mucci that the reason this happened was only because the architect wasn't just any old architect who was told exactly what to do by the club.

I'm not having any luck getting through to Pat's brain or his understanding of restoration architecture so I figure maybe I'll try to get through to his sense of money this time!

[Steve Sayers]

Tom:

Two years – the above has been modified – thanks.

[Lester George]

I recently finished a major restoration at Cavalier Golf & Yacht Club in VA Beach (Banks 1929), they have sold 50+ new golf memberships since shutting down in June and expect to sell another 50 - 60 before re-opening in May.  Although I do not know the total "net" increase, I can tell you that the club is extremeley pleased with the outlook for the future.  

This is generally what we see with our projects, not sure what everyone else is accustomed to.

Lester

[Jim_Kennedy]

Lester,
Any before/after photos you'd be willing to share??

[Brad Klein]

There are many good reasons for attempting a restoration. Economics and the ability to lure new members (and their initiation fees) rank among them. A good project, once fully implemented, should be expected to draw new members because the facility is improved, better conditioned and more competitive. But I can assure you there are no such industry standards or averages for such ventures, and any statistical claims about success rates (notice there's never any evidence to attest to failure) are purely anecdotal, incomplete, and circumstantial.

That doesn't mean you should avoid restoration. It does mean you should mistrust statistics.

[Craig_Rokke]

Aren't the majority of private clubs fully enrolled as it is, independent of any restoration projects?

[Mike_Cirba]

Craig;

Not really.  

Yes, most of the prominent clubs have waiting lists that can be daunting, but there are many "mid-level" clubs in the mid-Atlantic region that are looking to fill membership rosters.  

Demographically, you also have an aging population and trends would suggest that many of the clubs that are currently "full" will not necessarily be so in the next 10-20 years.  

[Patrick_Mucci]

Steve Sayers,

I think any facility has to re-invest in itself in order to attract new and retain existing members.

But, membership is often dependent upon the market that the club resides in.

As Brad Klein indicated, I would mistrust any general statement with respect to a restoration improving membership ranks.

[Steve Sayers]

Pat;

That is precisely what we are attempting to do at Lu Lu.  The membership for the most part recognizes that in order to attract new members we need to invest in the club.  The problem is where to start – pool, clubhouse, locker facility, pro shop etc.  This is a multifaceted issue, but at the heart of the matter is the course and that is where I think we should focus our efforts – build it (or restore it in this case) and they will come.  Unfortunately not all the members have the same priority.  That is what prompted the initial question in an effort to find support for the thought that investing in the course is the best way to attract and retain members.

[Bryan_Pennington]

Steve,

Two points I will make.  Be careful of how much you decide to improve.  An example in North Carolina is Raleigh Country Club.  RCC is a Donald Ross course that was renovated in the early-mid 90's.  The course was completely restored including new greens (Crenshaw Bent), restored bunkers, reseeded fairways, restored tee boxes and a new irrigation system.  The results were fantastic and the membership was very pleased.  The course hosted the Buy.Com Carolina Classic prior to the TPC course at Wakefield and the Pro's really enjoyed the classic course.  

Keeping in mind that RCC is a "golf club" with little emphasis on social (pool, clubhouse, etc.) ammenities, RCC embarked on a complete facility upgrade in 2000.  The upgrade included a new clubhouse, pool, pool house, lockers, 19th hole, the works.  Immediately RCC lost 40+ members when the facility assessment was mailed.  Combine cost overruns with the current state of the economy and RCC has lost (best guess) another 40+ members over the past 2 years.  Now that construction of the facilities is finished (and it is very nice), the club is facing enormous financial difficulties (might be forced out of business).  

My point being, recoginize the type of club you have (golf verses social) and prioritize your improvements to your membership.  Second, do not make improvements on the "Field of Dreams" business plan (build it, and they will come), and recognize you might actually lose some members in the short run if assessments are required to start the project.  

[Patrick_Mucci]

Steve Sayers,

I think Bryan makes some good points,

You have to evaluate what brings the broad range of your membership to the club.  What has attracted recent members?

Is it the chicken salad sandwhiches ?
The Pool ?
The Tennis Court ?
The social setting ?
The Golf course ?
Is it family oriented ?

Once you can identify the needs, keeping in mind the competitive market you're in, then you can focus on that area, spending the necessary funds for capital improvements or operations.

It's not an easy task.

[Sbusch (Guest)]

Excellent advice from all.  Large investment projects are filled with risk, and it is important to understand that there are no "15% increase" rules out there.  RCC is a large and very visible example of that, but member owned clubs go bankrupt all the time, and 90% of the time it is because of large capital projects. It's called the "death spiral".  Higher costs drive off members, leaving fewer members to pay the bills.  Yet higher bills drive off yet more members, which leads to fewer members.  Pretty soon, you've got a beautiful course/clubhouse, and 100 devoted members who can't pay the skyrocketing costs.  Didn't Ashbourne go through this a few years ago?  They had to sell the club and were a public course for a time.  Talk to some people first.

[TEPaul]

There's one club around here (who will remain nameless) that's partaking of this spend money and up membership scenario that's damn bizarre to me.

This club has a good golf course and a membership that's been dwindling and a financial outlook that's been getting worse and worse. Apparently one recent attempt was to sell the club. But apparently when potential buyers realized the  present membership came with the purchase of the club they weren't interested.

So this club that's apparently hanging on by its fingernails financially decided to redesign a perfectly good golf course to the tune of about $5 million!

Trying to spend your way out of financial trouble to that extent will be damn fascinating to watch!

[Mike_Cirba]

Tom;

The interesting thing is that the golf course that existed was pretty decent, as you mentioned.  I would hardly think that the course was somehow viewed as a negative by the membership, in any case.  

Of greater interest to me is to see what Bobby Weed will come up with there.  I think he's certainly one of the most creative architects practicing today and the property out there should have some potential.  I understand that 100s of trees are being removed, and that's probably a really good necessary first step (the original course really got pretty overgrown), but i understand that it will be a completely new course when all is said and done, as you mentioned.

Of course, whether the course will be so good as to drive new memberships and retain old ones is another question entirely!

[Brad Klein]

The point of all the above (sage) advice should be that in golf, restoration is a business, not a fad. Don't tinker with the golf course unless it's agronomicaly broken. Don't just indulge in some fanciful dreams for a restoration for its own sake.

But once you do need to go down the root of renovation for the sake of agronomics, chosing a pure restoration route is good marketing sense by virtue of its appeal as a niche, a label, and a unique traditional identity. It also comes with the added benefit of being very sound both agronomically and strategically. But even there, cost contaiment is vital.

Beware of doing more than fixing broken stuff in the clubhouse or parking lot. Building some empty wedding barn is a disaster. Clubhouse expansion is the no. 1 cause of bad club finances. Separate it from the restoration. I can't tell you how many clubs I've seen spend (i.e. waste) $5 million on their clubhouse before they expend $1 on their golf course. Yet last I saw, most folks join a club and are drawn to it for the golf, not the locker room.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()