[Lynn_Shackelford]

It seems to me that Crosby and Shivas have good points.
But isn't golf working with that new golfer's concept?  Instead of building simple, easy and fast playing courses, they are giving the golfer, what he wants, waterfalls, smooth cart paths, beverage cart girls, so that he and his buddies will enjoy their once every 90 day round of golf for $150.  In addition homes are being built around the fairways so that buyers think they are on to the elitist life style.  But these fairways must have bunkers with white sand and some ponds with fountains.
In other words the industry is following and not leading.  The 20/20 crowd are some of the worse culprits.
This is why I see the men's play retreat courses (Sand Hills, Ballyneal) as something that is okay.  Men go there, pure golf, simple clubhouse, and go back to the family and catch-up on the AYSO.

[Craig Sweet]

Out here in Montana the "experts" have reconsidered the type of retiree moving into the state....the "experts" now claim the average retiree is no longer looking south to Florida or Arizona, but is now looking at states like Montana where crime is low, the cost of living is lower, the environment is clean, and the population is low...

The new retiree has more money....

Here in Montana all the significant new golf courses built in the last 5 years are very private, exclusive living communities...not public, nor accessible to the public...

I often like to compare the ski area industry with the golf industry....the big change in skiing occurred years ago...ski areas determined that they could not be "stand alone" operations and needed a housing development component to survive...now days skiing in most states is a rich mans sport...

[Jason Connor]

Peter beat me to my point.

It seems a lot of clubs are aging and a lot of clubs are recruiting retirees with disposable incomes.

More men have working wives and studies show men are doing a larger and larger fraction of childcare and housework.  That's just less time for golf.  And less time to make a huge upfront cost of joining a club.

For that reason, as Lynne stated, I think many men are happy playing a visually pleasing courses a few times a summer, perhaps only even on vacation or company paid events, than being a regular weekend golfer.

I see a lot of young people, including the stay at home mom's on the Dye course I live on.  So I suppose it makes sense for mid-range clubs  to focus.  And family centric is one such way to justify memberships.

[Jason Hines]

You guys are hitting the nail on the head.  I recently moved to the KC area and joined a club begging for younger members 25 miles away.  In the few months I have been there, it seems the old guard gets a leg up on everyone else with respect to the earlier and tee time preference.  This can be a massive hindrance for where I am in life.

Two kids under 3, travel for work and wife that stays home.  I need to tee off early and get home before noon.  I need and want to be at home on the weekends.  I would trade GCA for ease and convenience.  Needless to say, my rounds per year are going down and public golf is non existent anymore.

Private clubs never will pencil out per round, they are there for the convenience.  I don’t even bother with public golf in KC, I do not have 5 hours to play.  

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

Is Gil Hanse's Rustic Canyon an example of the way out of this dilema?

NO.

I believe the land is owned by a governmental agency and thus there were no acquisition costs.

Creating a private, member owned golf club/course is what I believe TD is referencing.

The cost of land and development is so high that it might preclude survivability.

[Kyle Henderson]

Marc,

Here is the answer Tom is referring to...

Pacific Dunes, Wild Horse, Sand Hills, Black Mesa...
Courses built inexpensively.
I hope to do the same.

He is also referring to standard irrigation budgets over $2MM, Maint budgets over $1MM and Maint equip over $1-2MM.
Golf doesn't work for those that don't know what golf can be...

My poorly informed opinion as a complete outsider:
Pacific Dunes isn't exactly affordable for many golfers. Certainly not Sand Hills. A course like Wild Horse or Black Mesa wouldn't be affordable if they were built on pricier land such as would be found near any of the larger markets (e.g. California, New York, Florida).

Cheaper construction and maintenance is part of the issue, but land itself is simply too expensive in many regions. Wealthy investors are the only ones who can really sink their teeth in, and they have much more profitable options than golf course construction.

The rich are getting richer and golf is becoming their exclusive domain (again).

[Doug Wright]

I was looking for something else and came across this thread. I think there are some good points regarding the state of the industry on here, and it's apropos given the news regarding Beechtree et al.

[Greg Tallman]

This thread made me mentally tally the primary courses I have been involved with in the past several years and ;

1] Public Resort Course/ 6mil/ 125$ to 175$?/ doing well in a very competitive market.
2] Public Play only/ 1.3mil/ 30$ wo cart/ they called yesterday to say the are paving their gravel parking lot as they have the cash.
3] Private Members Resort Course/ 8mil/ 250$ plus/ must be doing well as the resort is in the top 10 nationally and golf is probably a loss leader but who cares when you do 300 mil+ in R/estate sales annually.
4] Private Members Club/ 3mil/ modest club membership fees with 650 members/ foreign ownership seems pleased, it hosts a Tour event.
5] Semi-Private Resort Course/ 3.5mil/ 12,000$ down, modest annual fees/ sales driven but doing very well.

The sky is not falling for any of the above and our future work looks similar....maybe we are just lucky and/or fortunate.

...but it does concern me that Trophy Course Collecting Membership play is down....that's the real canary in the mine .

Paul, what is the ballpark for your course down here? 7.5?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom Doak,

I haven't read any of the replies recently, but, with the cost of land, the environmental and permiting issues and the cost to construct, a new golf course has to have a Patron Saint willing to bear the freight, in order for the course to survive.

Many courses are a labor of love or a living legacy for the founder.

Without his munificence, survival would be difficult if not impossible.

Another factor is the demographics.

You can design/build a great course, but, it the demographics aren't sufficient, survival comes into question.

In order to work I think you have to have numerous elements converge.

Demographics, cheap land (a capital contribution to the partnership), a generous owner (managing/general partner), the co-operation of the permiting agencies, lack of local opposition (private and public) and luck.

That's a pretty difficult order to fill, but, it could happen.

Bandon did it without the demographics, as a destionation resort.
I don't know that other destination courses will survive over the next 5 or 10 years.

I certainly hope they do because the quality of many of them is outstanding.

[Carl Rogers]

After reading the 'Confidential Guide ...', I postulate perhaps our golfing friends in the UK have it about right about the golf and the business model of golf. 

An interesting routing, a few simple and thoughtful hazards, modest clubhouse that pays its way, one mowing height and no pre-occupation with 'perfect conditioning' all the time.

It seems to me that many of those courses have been around a long time with all of the ups and downs of the world at large and they are still there.  The Nazis never had a chance to bomb the USA!

[Dan Herrmann]

Will the courses of guys like Jim Blaukovitch be golf's life preserver?

[Brad Huff]

Tom,

I need an assistant coach!  Although it might be a wee bit of a pay cut...

Brad

[Garland Bayley]

Interesting that this thread popped up as I have been thinking about it since my understanding is that Tom's Wicked Pony has only 9 holes and the other 9 are on indefinite hold.

[Eric Smith]

Eric:

We do have one such project in the works -- our redesign for the Colorado Golf Association.  It's a $3.5 million project, because you need a lot of irrigation for a golf course in Denver; it would be a $2.5 million project in a less dry climate.

I don't mean to put Tom on the spot, but this is the stuff I think about all the time when trying to convey to my family my belief that we could build a golf course on our farm for much less than the $4.5M (NGF numbers) provided to us about 5 years ago.  

I've had conversations with folks who have done it and believe it could be done for that 2.5 # (or even less) that Tom mentions above.   I am not saying that I would expect Renaissance to do my golf course at cost +, that's crazy.   However, it does deflate me to read that even the 3.5M budget mentioned a year and a half ago turned into a 4.8M budget, while the project is hailed in the media, and on here for keeping the cost low.  That's real money.  There probably is a really good reason for the budget increase and I would love to learn more, as I do have a very real interest in this particular subject.

[Charlie Goerges]

You're not the only one Eric.

[Jason Topp]

Tom,

In my opinion, the current Bush administration has adjusted the tax policies to benefit wealthy Americans, and there are lots of wealthy Americans to build fancy golf courses for.  The supply of expensive golf courses may still exceed the demand for memberships, though.

Do all of the architects here build expensive, complex golf courses?

Golf architecture is largely tied to the country's economic prosperity.  The last 10-15 years have arguably been the most prosperous period in the country's history.  Coincidentally, the last 10-15 years has seen a second Golden Age of architecture.  There are a lot of great new golf courses out there.

I happen to think that a great deal of America's recent prosperity is a mirage, fueled by increased government spending and masked by deceptive economic reporting.  The country has some serious economic problems, such as national debt and rising energy costs, which will have to reckoned with.    

The first Golden Age of architecture peaked in the economic heyday of the 1920s and early 1930s, then ended as America battled with the Great Depression and then the second World War.  Are we in the process of watching history repeat itself?

A big thanks and good luck to all the architects who participate here.  I believe competition for choice jobs will get tougher in the next 20 years, and some great courses will be forced out of existence.  I still think it's more important to make the course fun to play, at some additional maintenance cost.  People will pay for fun, and greens fees and maintenance costs will fall, if that's what it takes to have fun golfing.

It's sort of like following the stock market, where Fazio and Nicklaus represent the ExxonMobils and General Electrics of the world.  Which one of you will become the next Google of golf architecture, a true innovator who built a better, cheaper product?

Mostly coherent rant is over.

Couldn't have a much more accurate prediction of the future than this one

[Mike Hendren]

Kirk is no slouch.

[PThomas]

Tom,

In my opinion, the current Bush administration has adjusted the tax policies to benefit wealthy Americans, and there are lots of wealthy Americans to build fancy golf courses for.  The supply of expensive golf courses may still exceed the demand for memberships, though.

Do all of the architects here build expensive, complex golf courses?

Golf architecture is largely tied to the country's economic prosperity.  The last 10-15 years have arguably been the most prosperous period in the country's history.  Coincidentally, the last 10-15 years has seen a second Golden Age of architecture.  There are a lot of great new golf courses out there.

I happen to think that a great deal of America's recent prosperity is a mirage, fueled by increased government spending and masked by deceptive economic reporting.  The country has some serious economic problems, such as national debt and rising energy costs, which will have to reckoned with.    

The first Golden Age of architecture peaked in the economic heyday of the 1920s and early 1930s, then ended as America battled with the Great Depression and then the second World War.  Are we in the process of watching history repeat itself?

A big thanks and good luck to all the architects who participate here.  I believe competition for choice jobs will get tougher in the next 20 years, and some great courses will be forced out of existence.  I still think it's more important to make the course fun to play, at some additional maintenance cost.  People will pay for fun, and greens fees and maintenance costs will fall, if that's what it takes to have fun golfing.

It's sort of like following the stock market, where Fazio and Nicklaus represent the ExxonMobils and General Electrics of the world.  Which one of you will become the next Google of golf architecture, a true innovator who built a better, cheaper product?

Mostly coherent rant is over.

Couldn't have a much more accurate prediction of the future than this one

John brings up one of my big concerns:  our debt....dont taxes HAVE to be raised eventually to pay for it?  i dont like paying taxes but we have to pay for things eventually

[Dan_Callahan]

John brings up one of my big concerns:  our debt....dont taxes HAVE to be raised eventually to pay for it?  i dont like paying taxes but we have to pay for things eventually

Of course taxes have to go up, and we will probably start printing money at a frenzied pace and see interest rates soar.

I try not to be political, I'm not even close to being an economist, and I voted for Obama, but I don't understand how anyone with kids can possibly approve of what is going on. This mess is our fault. We need to suffer some hardships and fix it. At my age, in my mid 30s, I look at many of the problems my parents' generation refused to clean up ... social security, health care, etc. ... and instead kept putting it off and putting it off in favor of current gratification and benefit.

I absolutely hate the idea of racking up impossible amounts of debt to temporarily solve our current crisis. Dumb-ass, irresponsible decisions were made for many years, and no one did anything to stop it until houses were being foreclosed on and companies were going bankrupt. Those are the risks that come with capitalism. Better to suffer a 2nd great depression, deal with it, and move on than pass these problems on to our kids. And maybe a 2nd great depression would teach all of us a thing or two about responsible spending and being more thoughtful about our priorities.

End of rant ...

[Craig Sweet]

Dan...Surprise!!!!   We have been printing money at a furious rate....but NOT the government...the government can't print money...only the FED...and the Fed is essentially a dozen big banks...

How much money has the FED printed in the last 10 months? No one knows for sure and the FED isn't saying...or at least they won't tell Congress...but I have heard that it could be has high has $9 TRILLION dollars!  This money has gone to banks in off balance sheet loans...do a little Google search and you will see what I'm talking about...

How long before that money causes hyper inflation?

As for taxes....you can say whatever you want, but Bush's tax cuts have cost us over $1.2 TRILLION in revenue over the last 4 years...and of course he did some real wild spending on his little war in Iraq....considering all that money "remaining in the pockets" of those who earned it, I'd say it did the economy little good at all...merely added "soap" for the bubble! 

[Joe Hancock]

In other words, how dare anyone say anything negative about the current goings on.....

I don't understand using historically bad judgment to justify current bad judgment.

Joe

[Craig Sweet]

Joe....I bet there was a similar out cry about selling out the future etc. etc. when Roosevelt and the Democrats enacted the New Deal...what is happening now..well, you can find many economist that think we need to spend more to stimulate the economy.

My biggest fear is that nothing has been done to eliminate the sort of "investing" instruments that got us into this mess in the first place...Wall Street continues to trade these derivatives and other crazy schemes...

It's too bad we don't have the same manufacturing capacity that we had back in 1939! 

[Dan_Callahan]

Joe....I bet there was a similar out cry about selling out the future etc. etc. when Roosevelt and the Democrats enacted the New Deal...what is happening now..well, you can find many economist that think we need to spend more to stimulate the economy.

In 1995, economist Robert Whaples of Wake Forest University published a survey of academic economists that asked them if they agreed with the statement, "Taken as a whole, government policies of the New Deal served to lengthen and deepen the Great Depression." Fifty-one percent disagreed, and 49 percent agreed.

-from US News and World Report

[TEPaul]

"Kirk is no slouch."


Actually he is a slouch. He's bright as hell but he slouches. Every time I see him I try all kinds of ways to get him to stand up straight. I've told him to throw his shoulders back; I've told him to get the very tippee top of his head as high as he can and it works for a little while but then he seems to lose concentration----I guess he starts thinking of how to save the world economy or something---and he's right back to slouching again.

[Mike_Young]

This cold hard truth is NOT a cold, hard truth.  The truth is that our standards for construction and maintenance have become so costly that THEY don't work ... not the game of golf itself.  Yet there are 200 courses being built right now in America, and about 175 of them are being built to a standard that makes no sense.

If we don't come to our senses soon, we deserve to all go out of business.

Well.....what do we do now....
The problem is that some have known this and when promoted such...been chastised by the supts and construction companies that wanted the state of the art standard....for example...cartpaths-cut them in half....greens construction-non USGA-no subair....landscaping..do it over 10 years....maintenance equipment- use ground driven reels and triplex greens....bunkers- use half and use local sand....and on and on....
And the sad thing is that even today...saying the above there will be professionals whether supts, contractors, architects saying you can't compromise such...we all know how to do it to the utmost specs and standards but why always sell such to someplace that can't afford it.......BUT I know one supt that when it came time to have his own place did about as I described..t was his money.....

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()