News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.

Pages: 1 [2]

RJ_Daley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Depressing Depression Stat- Patronage on courses
« Reply #25 on: January 30, 2009, 11:51:07 PM »
Mike,  you stumped me again.  I had to Google "Equus".   We don't have a strong theater crowd here in G.B.  ::) ;D

Peter, of course the stats are those of the trend for a muni, not just a daily fee public course.  I reckon that in order to consider and factor the info that those Muni courses trend of rounds played over the period of the depression into your plans, you'd better wait about 6-8 more years to hit bottom.  It would be even more interesting if we could find out of the alternative courses list that Pete Pittock posted, which ones went NLE during the depression or just afterwards, and which survived until now.  Given that the Muni's operations don't have a property or income tax nut to crack, the ability to stay open was mitigated compared to the private-public competition. 

I'd ask Peter P., why do you think that Rose City had such a dramatic jump in rounds played and began to exceed Egan's Eastmoreland from 1929 on?  Is Rose City a better course, or just more geographically better situated close to a bigger market of golfers? 
Logged
No actual golf rounds were ruined or delayed, nor golf rules broken, in the taking of any photographs that may be displayed by the above forum user.

Mike_Cirba

Re: Depressing Depression Stat- Patronage on courses
« Reply #26 on: January 30, 2009, 11:55:49 PM »
Quote from: RJ_Daley on January 30, 2009, 11:51:07 PM
Mike,  you stumped me again.  I had to Google "Equus".   We don't have a strong theater crowd here in G.B.  ::) ;D


RJ,

Sorry for the obscure reference.

As it so happens, a friend of Jen's son is staying with us this weekend while his veterinarian mom spends the weekend in NYC. 

They were standing in the kitchen talking while I was on GCA and mentioned that his mom was going to see Equus on Broadway with the kid from Harry Potter starring au natural.   

Given the equine nature of the earlier discussion on this thread, combined with the late hour and a few glasses of St. Francis Zinfadel, I just ran with it.  ;)
Logged

RJ_Daley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Depressing Depression Stat- Patronage on courses
« Reply #27 on: January 31, 2009, 12:01:10 AM »
Quote
...combined with the late hour and a few glasses of St. Francis Zinfadel, I just ran with it.

Not to beat a dead horse, but at what depth in the bottle do you start to trot and whinny?  ;D
Logged
No actual golf rounds were ruined or delayed, nor golf rules broken, in the taking of any photographs that may be displayed by the above forum user.

Pete_Pittock

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Depressing Depression Stat- Patronage on courses New
« Reply #28 on: January 31, 2009, 01:43:25 AM »
RJ,
You can discount West Hills as it was a very hill course, more elevation change than ANGC.
It survived with low play rates until the early 50s when it lost best use status.
Wildwood was just as hilly and was 20 miles from town. It went fallow in the late 50s and was reconstituted.
Ruby's -I have no idea. It doesn't appear on a 1937 Pittmon directory list.
City View- Remained in some form through the 1970s as Top O Scott. Hilly
Monaugh Lea - Same as Ruby's
Mt Hood - 50 miles and two hours away.
Meadowbrook - Renamed Colwood, still there but not listed as a course in 1937.

I think the muni stats do show the loss of rounds played in the industry. Even in the 40s the Portland airport was way pout in the farmland, so land value and construction costs of new golf courses were reasonable and everyone was chasing the golden age bubble and Bobby Jones was a news darling. As far as Rose City is concerned, it was maybe the second best track among the non-privates, but I never saw Inverness or Peninsula.
« Last Edit: January 31, 2009, 02:05:38 PM by Pete_Pittock »
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]
Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back