[TEPaul]

Mr. MacWood:

Get on with it then and tell us what you know about Lloyd and HDC that we don't. You said on this thread there is evidence out there somewhere about his part in the syndicate. What is that evidence and how does it pertain to what MCC did with their golf course and the move to Ardmore? You're right this is a discussion group, so discuss Lloyd and his part in the syndicate that you're aware of instead of just mentioning he had some part in the syndicate. Did you think that was a new discovery? We've known that for years.

[Thomas MacWood]

TE
My mistake, as I said I'm sure you know more about HDC than I do.

It pertains to the question I have asked you four times now, which you have ignored. If you knew Lloyd was a part of HDC, why then did you object to the newspaper article that stated Lloyd had the site inspected by Barker and Macdonald? The article appears to be completed accurate with all its facts and figures, and it also contains inside information that could have had only come from one of the principals, like Barker's description/assessment of the site and the precise date HDC got wind Merion had to find a new home, and the details about HDC's immediate reaction to that news, which was securing more land at Haverford.

Did Connell play golf in Philadelphia? As a non-golfer how would he know where to get expert architectural advice.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Did the feud between the Hatfields and McCoys get going over the architectural attribution of some course in W Virginia?   I don't know my history well enough to know if Wayne-TePaul is the Hatfields, and DM and TMac are the McCoy's or is it the other way around?

I doubt it matters....in the next century (when this feud will still be going, I presume) American history will replace those guys with the famous golf club atlas feud of 1999-3XXX.

Is there anyway the 4 main participants can figure to agree to disagree, not mention Merion here, stop asking questions that are either obvious or already been answered (we need a judge in here - in fact, why not take this to Judge Judy?) and generally tweaking the other party?

Maybe we could simply number the responses.....1 if you mean to say "You're a pompous ass" 2 if you mean "I disagree", 3 if you mean.....etc.

At least the posts would be shortened to something like:

Dear Mr. MacWood,

In response to post 9,394, I say to thee the following:

7,3,11,4, 25 and finally - a big whopping 69!

Sincerely,

TEPaul.

Just a thought over morning coffee........

[Mike_Cirba]

Jeff,

1 + 2

Thanks
Mike. 

[Mike Sweeney]

Did the feud between the Hatfields and McCoys get going over the architectural attribution of some course in W Virginia?   I don't know my history well enough to know if Wayne-TePaul is the Hatfields, and DM and TMac are the McCoy's or is it the other way around?

Jeff,

It is hard for outsiders to really understand Philly. I mentioned the 1844 Nativism Riots on the other thread but let me fast forward to 2008.

My brother-in-law is from upstate Pennsylvania, went to Villanova and married my sister roughly 25 years ago. By all accounts he is a great guy.

We were playing Hidden Creek last month (you know that course built by Roger Hansen with help from two bozos from Texas  ), and he was kidding how he was still hoping to some day be considered a "Philadelphian" but due to the insular nature of the beast he was not betting on it. In summary he stated, "Philadelphia is like West Virginia but with better teeth!"

Hey if Mike Golden is allowed to do Uncle Leo jokes from Seinfeld, then I am allowed to make a few Philly cracks on GCA. 

NO, NO, NO, Moriarity and MacWood are neither Hatfield's nor McCoy's, they are Outsiders.

[Mike_Cirba]

Mike

I'm an outsider too.

I wouldn't care if M+M were from Ardmore, insularity has nothing to do with this disagreement.

They're just wrong.  :

[Jeff_Brauer]

Mike C,

Priceless.

Mike S,

Thanks for that explanation.  Texas is kind of like that. It took me years to get work in the state when I moved here in 1984.  Luckily for me, but not for native Texans, a lot more damn Yankees like me started moving here and I got more mainstream.

Back on topic, it does strike me that the only reason the argument goes on is because of the nature of the participants.  The closest thing we have had here as an attribution fight is the whole Bethpage-Burbeck thing.  While argument was passionate, it died away in slightly longer than the average thread and only resurfaced occaisionally.

This Merion thread reminds me of the end of Blazing Saddles when the movie starts crashing into other sets in the studio! (And you thought I was going to mention the fart scene!!)

Both sides are to blame.  DM seems to be trying to be civil.  TMac is passive agressive - never actually flipping his lid but always jabbing just under the surface. Wayne is civil, with a few outbursts.  TePaul is steadfast in not allowing any mention of Merion going by without response. 

The real question is, does any of this matter? As an innocent bystander (and outsider) the facts keep getting churned, and most of what happened is actually not in dispute, but its simply a matter of opinion.  Its not that CBM didn't do anything for Merion, its simply a debate about whether he did enough to get more than a slap on the back.

Until someone devises an industry wide system for attribution, and everyone agrees to it, Merion gets the final call on that, although, DM has every right to keep digging, whether an outsider or not.  It is a free country. 

History is messy business!

[TEPaul]

"If you knew Lloyd was a part of HDC, why then did you object to the newspaper article that stated Lloyd had the site inspected by Barker and Macdonald?"

First, because I do not know if Lloyd had any part in HDC in June 1910 or if he did what the extent of it was at that point. Do you? Lloyd may've spoken to Connell at that point about land for MCC's course but if he had little idea in June 1910 if MCC was interested in that land I wonder why he'd be a part of HDC then. On the other hand, perhaps Lloyd was interested in HDC simply to develop the real estate they held there as a residential development. That may be possible as it seems Lloyd bought the first 25 acres at some point in 1910 of what would be his Allsgate which was accross Coopertown Rd from what was or would be HDC land.

Second, the MCC Search Committee report of June 1910 to the MCC Board mentions H.H. Barker was gotten on the account of Connell, not MCC. If Lloyd had gotten Barker the report probably would have said so as the same report mentions Griscom got Macdonald.

The newspaper article that was written later apparently got this fact wrong and stated Lloyd got Barker when the MCC report says Connell did.

And I have no idea if Connell played golf. If he was a competent real estate developer and he wanted to promote some of his land as a golf course, I'm quite sure he was capable of finding a golf architect. If not he wouldn't be much of a real estate developer, would he? Barker may've even been around Philly at that time as the US Open was shortly to be played in Philadelphia in June 1910.

[TEPaul]

Mike Sweeney:

To show you how some Philadelphians used to be toward outsiders, here is a famous exchange between a great aunt of mine, the indomitable Julia Biddle Henry who was said to be the best dressed woman in the world back then (and who my father used to call Uncle Julia to her constant annoyance).

Aunt Julia had just been introduced by her beautiful daughter Isabel to her new beau (and outsider).

Aunt Julia Henry:

"Where do you come from young man?"

Beau:

"I'm from Syracuse, Mrs. Henry."

Aunt Julia Henry:

"Syracuse? Really? I didn't know anyone actually lived there."

[Lester George]

Mike Cirba,

I am not sure I have time to elaborate on my response but by your definition,  the one who does the planning and draws the hole features is the architect. 

If I follow that definition, I would get credit for at least four other golf courses that I routed, preliminarily designed and defined for clients who eventually took those plans, hired someone else, used my plans and put some other architects name on the final product. 

This may be a little off your point, but it happens in this business every day. 

Any practicing professional golf course architect that has accomplished anything has had this happen to them.

Lester

[Mike_Cirba]

Lester,

By my definition or any reasonable definition I can think of, you clearly SHOULD get design attribution or at least co-design attribution for those courses if they used your plans to build the course.

No question about it!

[Lester George]

Mike,

I agree I should, but in every one of those cases, I have never even sought collaborative credit because once a client does that, I no longer want to add credibility of my name to the final outcome. 

Not trying to sound arrogant, but that is the position I have to take.  Maybe I failed to convince the client why I was the right choice, but most of the cases I mentioned were clients who thought they needed a "bigger" name than mine.

In one case, that "bigger" name did not even care enough about his work to do the drawings.  The client contracted me to "ghost" design because Mr. Big Name had no time or interest.  Sad but true.  I took the job knowing I would never get credit, but I know Mr. Big Name always regretted it because the course was very popular with the patrons, raters and media and he knew he didn't deserve the accolades. 

Lester

[Mike_Cirba]

Lester,

I won't ask you to name the course, but if you really, really want to tell me (via IM), I won't refuse to read it. 

I do understand you wanting to disavow once you have no control of the result or oversight of the particulars, certainly.

[TEPaul]

How about you Mr. Moriarty, are you willing to have a discussion about the details of HDC and Lloyd's part in it at any particular time or are you worried about something to do with the subject as apparently Mr. MacWood is?

[Thomas MacWood]

"If you knew Lloyd was a part of HDC, why then did you object to the newspaper article that stated Lloyd had the site inspected by Barker and Macdonald?"

First, because I do not know if Lloyd had any part in HDC in June 1910 or if he did what the extent of it was at that point. Do you? Lloyd may've spoken to Connell at that point about land for MCC's course but if he had little idea in June 1910 if MCC was interested in that land I wonder why he'd be a part of HDC then. On the other hand, perhaps Lloyd was interested in HDC simply to develop the real estate they held there as a residential development. That may be possible as it seems Lloyd bought the first 25 acres at some point in 1910 of what would be his Allsgate which was accross Coopertown Rd from what was or would be HDC land.

Second, the MCC Search Committee report of June 1910 to the MCC Board mentions H.H. Barker was gotten on the account of Connell, not MCC. If Lloyd had gotten Barker the report probably would have said so as the same report mentions Griscom got Macdonald.

The newspaper article that was written later apparently got this fact wrong and stated Lloyd got Barker when the MCC report says Connell did.

And I have no idea if Connell played golf. If he was a competent real estate developer and he wanted to promote some of his land as a golf course, I'm quite sure he was capable of finding a golf architect. If not he wouldn't be much of a real estate developer, would he? Barker may've even been around Philly at that time as the US Open was shortly to be played in Philadelphia in June 1910.

According to the newspaper report the syndicate learned that Merion was going to move around July 1909, and proceded to secure another 200 acres. That is a pretty bold speculation. It sounds to me like the syndicate had some inside info.

I suspect those inside sources also helped connect the non-golfing Connell with Barker. Regarding Connell's golfing knowledge based on being a competitent real estate developer, how many golfing/real estate developments were there in Philadelphia in 1909?

Macdonald addressed his June letter to Lloyd, and Barker's letter addressed to Connell found its way immediately to the Committee and was attached to Lloyd's November letter to the membership of MCC. I see no reason to doubt the accuracy of the newspaper report.

[TEPaul]

"According to the newspaper report the syndicate learned that Merion was going to move around July 1909, and proceded to secure another 200 acres. That is a pretty bold speculation. It sounds to me like the syndicate had some inside info."


Mr. MacWood:

That indeed would be a bold speculation on the part of the real estate developers if they proceded to procure another 200 acres if they had no idea of MCC's intention to move to Ardmore or perhaps Lloyd's intentions to act the part of the angel for the move of his club's course and perhaps as an angel with a contiguous residential real estate development that might interest MCC members and enhance the future course or have the future course enhance a potential residential real estate devolopment immediately to its west.

What we do not know and may never know is if Lloyd may've been in some way behind or the motivator of that July 1909 land contract that brought HDC into basically it's 1910 form real estate holding-wise. (Isn't it interesting how Mr. Moriarty thinks we were so wrong for assuming Lloyd was behind that 1909 contract for MCC ,which we have?).

"I suspect those inside sources also helped connect the non-golfing Connell with Barker. Regarding Connell's golfing knowledge based on being a competitent real estate developer, how many golfing/real estate developments were there in Philadelphia in 1909?"

It is not that much of a stretch to deduce that if a golf course might enhance the residual real estate of a land developer in 1910 he could find a golf course architect on his own. Do you think, Mr. MacWood, that residential real estate developers in 1910 had the mentality of cavemen? Apparently, you have that impression of another time like that and it would probably explain why you and Moriarty think a Wilson or a Leeds at that to be such novices in golf architecture back then that somehow they had to find someone else to do it for them like a Barker or Campbell. 

"Macdonald addressed his June letter to Lloyd, and Barker's letter addressed to Connell found its way immediately to the Committee and was attached to Lloyd's November letter to the membership of MCC. I see no reason to doubt the accuracy of the newspaper report."

Yes, Macdonald certainly did address his letter to Lloyd and not to Griscom that the MCC Search Committee mentioned contacted Macdonald in the first place or to Robert Lesley who was the chairman of the MCC Search committee.

What that means is very hard to say at this point. Does it mean Lloyd was basically in control of both sides of the fence as an over-all angel and did not want to appear to be at that time or does it mean something else? It's hard to say but the MCC Search Committee report does say what it says about Barker being engaged and paid by Connell and we certainly do need to carefully consider that.

But the point is, MCC was pretty comprehensive about recording what was taking place with the club in the Ardmore project, and come 1911 when Wilson and his committee really got down to work routing and designing a number of plans for the future East Course Barker's name was never mentioned again. If Wilson and committee took the time in the winter and spring doing "multiple courses" one wonders why they spent all that time and effort doing that if they were basically using Barker's self-admitted "rough drawing" as the routing they took to the board and had approved.

Maybe you think that's not of much consequence but I do. 

[Thomas MacWood]

TE
Do you think the Barker plan was attached to his letter that was attached to the report? I'm curious why the Barker letter was attached to the report to the membership but not the Macdonald letter.

I'm sure MCC was pretty comprehensive about recording things too. Its ashame none of the routings survived.

[Thomas MacWood]

What that means is very hard to say at this point. Does it mean Lloyd was basically in control of both sides of the fence as an over-all angel and did not want to appear to be at that time or does it mean something else?
 

If that was the case...would that be crossing the line of ethical or legal behavior?

[TEPaul]

"TE
Do you think the Barker plan was attached to his letter that was attached to the report? I'm curious why the Barker letter was attached to the report to the membership but not the Macdonald letter."

Mr. MacWood:

I'm quite sure Barker's plan was included with Barker's letter to Connell and it seems like Barker's letter and "rough drawing" plan was sent by Connell to the MCC Search Committee that mentioned and recorded Barker's letter in its June 29 report to the MCC board .

I am not aware that Barker's letter was included in MCC's letter to its membership, though, which was sent out approximately five months later in November 1910.  

[TEPaul]

"If that was the case...would that be crossing the line of ethical or legal behavior? "


Well, Mr. MacWood, that's an interesting question, isn't it?

We do have all the numbers, I believe---eg we do basically know what HDC paid for the 338 acres it bought as real estate developers. We know that HDC agreed to sell MCC a part of their holdings which was basically the Johnson Farm for about half the average cost to HDC of their total 338 acre holding. We know that Lloyd recapitalized HDC to the tune of $300,000 by a stock offering for what he called roads and development cost. We know he offered his membership through HDC about 200 acres of land to the west of the proposed course for residential devlopment for $2,500 an acre in stock or cash. I doubt the real estate developer, Joseph Connell and his original four HDC partners would agree to that deal without making a profit on their investment on the 338 acres. Does it sound to you like Lloyd did something unethical or illegal or even tried to make a financial profit himself?

Don't forget, Horatio Gates Lloyd had bought 25 acres in 1910 of an estate for himself that he would expand into a famous 75 acre estate (Allsgate) just across Cooperstown Road from this HDC land. It seems like what he got was what we in real estate call "quiet enjoyment" in the area surrounding his estate and not a financial gain upfront. And in the process he created a profit for an independent real estate developer as well as a great golf course for his MCC membership at a helluva good purchase price for the land.

[Thomas MacWood]

"If that was the case...would that be crossing the line of ethical or legal behavior? "


Well, Mr. MacWood, that's an interesting question, isn't it?

We do have all the numbers---eg we do basically know what HDC paid for the 338 acres it bought as real estate developers. We know that HDC agreed to sell MCC a part of their holdings which was basically the Johnson Farm for about half the average cost to HDC of their total 338 acre holding. We know that Lloyd recapitalized HDC to the tune of $300,000 by a stock offering for what he called roads and infastructure. We know he offered his membership through HDC about 200 acres of land to the west of the proposed course for residential devlopment for $2,500 an acre in stock or cash. I doubt the real estate developer, Joseph Connell and his original HDC would agree to that deal without making a profit on their investment in the 338 acres. Does it sound to you like Lloyd did something unethical or illegal or even tried to make a financial profit himself?

The success of the real estate venture was heavily dependent on Merion building a golf course. Lloyd was on the search committee that recommended the site, and as a result he and HDC obviously made a very nice profit. That is ethical?

[TEPaul]

"The success of the real estate venture was heavily dependent on Merion building a golf course. Lloyd was on the search committee that recommended the site, and as a result he and HDC obviously made a very nice profit. That is ethical?"


Mr. MacWood:

Reread my post above (I expanded it and added to it) as many times as you feel you might need to understand it and what Lloyd very likely did for Connell and his original HDC partners as well as for MCC and its membership. You might also try reading Lloyd's HDC solicitation letter to the MCC memberhip and what he said about his initial MCC members' investment in HDC or HDC land about trying to make a profit at the expense of solicited MCC purchasers of HDC stock or land. 

[Mike_Cirba]

Ahem... 

I don't have time to look it up this morning, but I believe I postulated this Lloyd playing both sides of the fence with the idea of creating his own little slice of heaven, a profit, and his club all next door to each other way back when in one of the threads.

I even included a nice little aerial of his crib.   

At the time, I think everyone pooh-poohed this idea a little bit, but nice to see everyone coming around. 

Does anyone know where Lloyd's papers are archived, or Robert Lesley's??

I'm beginning to think those might be invaluable if ever located.

[Thomas MacWood]

TE
HDC would have built the infrastructure one way or the other, based on what you're saying it appears Lloyd found a very clever way of financing it through a stock offering. Wasn't a major landscaping effort included with this project, and I believe it involved MCC and their land as well.  

From what I understand Merion bought their 100+ acres for $726/acre or half the going value. After the course was built you said Lloyd offered to sell the remaining 200 acres to the membership for $2500/acre, presumably for the members individual home sites. (The newspaper article said HDC was subdividing the remaining 200+ acres into 10 acre and less tracts).  I believe Hugh Wilson built home. The members must not have bought all the land because within a year or two HDC was selling land for $6000/acre. Based on your angel scenerio it would appear Lloyd and his HDC associates profitted very handsomely from the search committee's decision. No?

Perhaps it was a different era and business was conducted in a different way. Today I would think Lloyd, and any other search committee member involved with HDC, would have had to disclose their connection to the real estate venture, and quite possibly step down because of a conflict of interest.

[Thomas MacWood]

Wasn't Lloyd the only member of the search committee who was also on the construction committee?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()