Sebonack Membership Fees

[Phil Benedict]

Evidently Sebonack has made it to the top in at least one category.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/sports/top.html

[rgkeller]

And no valet parking

[Jerry Kluger]

I've heard that Liberty National and Bayonne GC may be in this price league.

[Scott_Burroughs]

Cherokee Plantation has been reported to be ~$1Mil by a source that I consider extremely reliable, but I personally do not know for certain.  That person posts regularly here and may choose to confirm (or not) how reliable this number is.

According to this (one of de Savary's club's web site), Cherokee's initiation is up to $1.9M now, from the original $1M:

http://www.carnegieabbeyclub.com/news/news-exec-golfer.html

"Cherokee is among America’s most elite private retreats where initial memberships started at $1 million. Today, it’s $1.9 million."

I should have gotten out the checkbook at $1M, it was a steal, then.

[Matt MacIver]

[quote
I've heard that Liberty National and Bayonne GC may be in this price league.

Think I saw Liberty in the $500k range but Bayonne is the value play at $150k....

[Steve Lapper]

Guys,

    Yes, Sebonack is expensive by any historic measure.

    It is also highly likely to distinguish itself as peerless among those other high-priced clubs. Obviously the integrity and wonder of the course will help a great deal but the general character of this very special place appears to handily seperate it from many also-rans (The Bridge, Liberty National, Hamilton Farms, etc...). Mike Pascucci has the right idea in his unpretentious approach. Right now, the club only has 60 members and is putting every interested party on a "waiting list." I'm told that list will eventually be culled to admit only a handful every few months max. My same source informs me that Mike wants a true nationwide membership and isn't particularly interested in catering to the NYC/Hamptons high $$$ crowd (I hear the exact same things from two existing members). For the sake of having this club reach it's absolute potential, I hope he stays that course.

  As for Liberty National and Bayonne GC, the former was brought to market at $500k per but has since begun discounting that figure significantly. Bayonne, on the other hand, has considerable success with initial memberships sold at $150k and is now scheduled to raise that # shortly. I'll be playing there this week and have already heard from multiple members that the course is "gloriou, magnificant, tough, fun, and very different(than most other local tracks)."

  My unabashed predicition is that Bayonne GC becomes an absolute success and big hit in the Met Section. As for the others, ....well time will tell.

   

[Michael Moore]

Slapper -

How does a true nationwide membership help the club reach its absolute potential?

How does catering to the New York City/Hamptons demographic prevent the club from reaching its potential?

[Dan Kelly]

Hemingway: "Yes, they belong to Sebonack."

[Scott_Burroughs]

In regards to Cherokee's fees being higher, the author of the Bloomberg article was referring to golf-only clubs (Cherokee has hunting and other activities), although it isn't entirely obvious in the article.

[John_Cullum]

Mike Pascucci has the right idea in his unpretentious approach. Right now, the club only has 60 members and is putting every interested party on a "waiting list." I'm told that list will eventually be culled to admit only a handful every few months max. My same source informs me that Mike wants a true nationwide membership and isn't particularly interested in catering to the NYC/Hamptons high $$$ crowd (I hear the exact same things from two existing members). For the sake of having this club reach it's absolute potential, I hope he stays that course.

 

I don't understand much of this statement. Can you please expand on this?

[Mike Hendren]

Sarge,

I interpret it thusly: You're out.

BTW, congrats in advance for being Low-Hillbilly at this week's KPV.  I trust you will experience a meaningful cultural exchange.

Mike

[John_Cullum]

Bogey

That's a shame. A club cannot reach it's full potential without some Hillbilly participation.

[Mike Hendren]

Tell it to Milburn Drysdale.



Mike

[Jim Nugent]

Evidently Sebonack has made it to the top in at least one category.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/sports/top.html

Phil, the link you posted leads to a very interesting article -- how Lance Armstrong has been exonerated of taking performance drugs -- but I can't find anything there about Sebonack.  

[Scott_Burroughs]

Jim,

That link is for Bloomberg's "top sports stories", and apparently, the Sebonack article no longer fits the bill (it formerly was available on that link, they must rotate stories there).  Here's the new link to the article:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/sports/business.html

[Steve Lapper]

Slapper -

How does a true nationwide membership help the club reach its absolute potential?

How does catering to the New York City/Hamptons demographic prevent the club from reaching its potential?

I'll answer the first in public (and the 2nd by Private message). The idea behind seeking a true nationwide membership is founded on the precepts that people coming from farther distances will: 1) Add Diversity; 2) Play in less-congested periods; 3) Stay at the club, thus building real and deeper-than-usual camaraderie; 4) Cause lesser wear on a newer turf and course; 5) Help to build a national reputation that doesn't focus on local comparisons.

All of this is very healthy over the long-haul and,if the club doesn't need a quick return on it's invested capital, quite sustainable. I laud Mike Pascucci for his passion, perserverence and devotion to success that is not predicated on commercial viability.

[Mike_Sweeney]

Steve,

I think the one challenge that Sebonack and any new big ticket club has on the way to becoming a "great golf club", is finding very good players. There just are not that many 2 handicaps with $XYZ in the bank.

My suggestion would be to establish a small category where better club players are able to join.

Ps. I am not lobbying to join with my growing handicap.

[Tim Pitner]

Mike,

Why does a "great golf club" need to find very good players?  Bragging rights?  It seems like the two don't necessarily go hand in hand.  Of course, you wouldn't want a club full of complete hacks either.

[Mike_Sweeney]

Mike,

Why does a "great golf club" need to find very good players?  Bragging rights?  It seems like the two don't necessarily go hand in hand.  Of course, you wouldn't want a club full of complete hacks either.

Tim,

Name me a "great golf club" that does not have very good amateur players.

[Tim Pitner]

Mike, I honestly don't know which clubs have very good amateurs and which ones don't.  Are clubs like Sand Hills and Kingsley Club known for having good amateurs?  My definition of a great golf club is one to which I would want to belong, and whether it has top amateurs or not isn't particularly high on my list.  I was hoping to get your thinking on the subject.

[George Pazin]

Tim, Mike's just trying to keep me out....

In all seriousness, other things being equal, who doesn't prefer playing with a better golfer? It makes competition easier, as well, if you aren't trying to figure out handicap differentials between golfers that really aren't even in the same ball park.

I've always assumed that the prestigious clubs would want to also attract better golfers, just seems natural.

[Mike_Sweeney]

Tim,

I play my best with better players. Huck can slap me around a golf course, and I play better when I play with Huck. I believe that Tom Huckaby would not consider himself a great player, but he is a very good player.

Back in my former basketball playing days, you learned to find out where the good players played in the summer, and that was where we went. Playing against guys ranging from Larry Bird (@ BC's gym), Gene Banks (Philly's Baker League) Avalon, NJ 8th Street courts, Ocean City NJ courts, 4th Street in Greenwich Village made me a better player.

Same with golf, this architecture stuff is fun as an observer, but I like and wish I could play better competitive golf over architecture. Thus, my belief that great golf clubs have great courses and great memberships which also have very good players in the mix.

[Steve Lapper]

Mike,

   I have to agree with Tim that the definition of a "great club" doesn't rest on having a well-sized group of better players. Yes, solid players with a love of the game are essential, however plenty of very good clubs aren't known for their low-single digit members. Would Cypress Point, San Francisco GC, Shoreacres, The Valley Club, or a Myopia Hunt Club be, in any part, defined by their percentage of low-hcp'ers?

  Many great clubs may have some great players but quite often, they were great players long before joining or may have been offerred admission in order to carry the club's competitive mantle in competition.

  My thought is that Sebonack will pick and choose it's members with playing ability as but only one of it's pre-conditions for entry. Greater weight should be given to character and ease of interaction among their peers.


PS....Given your last post, why didn't you elevate your game with me last year at SHCC?

[rgkeller]

A majority of the rounds at Sebonack will have some relationship to the business of the member.

The number of foursomes each year consisting of all members will be very very small.

[Mike_Sweeney]

Would Cypress Point, San Francisco GC, Shoreacres, The Valley Club, or a Myopia Hunt Club be, in any part, defined by their percentage of low-hcp'ers?

 

Steve,

Can you pick a few a little closer to home, where I have a chance to argue the point. I find it hard to believe that Sandy Tatum played alone at SFGC and Cypress ? His book certainly referenced some epic matches.

Myopia, as you know is on my very very short list to play, but is it a great golf club? Sounds like a terrific country club with a great historic course similar to Fishers and Maidstone.

I know nothing about The Valley Club or Shoreacres.