[Jeff_Brauer]

Tim Bert,

Not always.  In 1994 I got an invitation to speak in Australia, all expenses paid.  All the GM's in Australia were most sympathetic to allowing me to play their courses while there, so in essence, I got to play Royal Melbourne and others in Australia for almost free.  I did have to pay for my own air fare from Sydney to Melbourne, and a few nights at a local B and B, but a few hundred bucks to play several rounds at a world top ten and a few other signifgant courses - that I was very happy with the "value recieved."

In general, I think we calculate the value of playing golf using a lot of factors.  Pebble Beach or Pinehurst once at $500 plus travel (which might be reduced as above for business travelers) is probably seen as decent value (perhaps borderline depending on your finances and passion for golf).  And for most, I would think our "ideal" golf year considering cost, time, etc., might be something like this:

- 25-50 rounds at the home club,
- Guest at another nice club a few times,
- A few rounds at a favorite CCFAD's, perhaps as part of a friends charity fund raiser
- One golf trip to a Hilton Head, or similar
- One side golf trip tied to a business trip that covered most of the expense (i.e., Ballyneal if in Denver, Sand Hills if in Omaha)

That is actually a lot for the middle class, second 10% of income kind of guys like me.  But, it is a realistic ideal for a perfect golf season, no?

[John Kavanaugh]

I sure want affordable golf!

people should start threads with as much detail as possible including pictures if they are fond of such courses

Paul,

You had great affordable golf when you were a member of Ravisloe.  You once posted that you chose to drop that membership and travel around the country playing unaffordable private courses.  I don't get it.

[PThomas]

I sure want affordable golf!

people should start threads with as much detail as possible including pictures if they are fond of such courses

Paul,

You had great affordable golf when you were a member of Ravisloe.  You once posted that you chose to drop that membership and travel around the country playing unaffordable private courses.  I don't get it.

not that its any of your business, but the dues at Ravisloe were doubled

[John Kavanaugh]

Paul,

That is reasonable.  I wish it was as easy to move out of Illinois to avoid our 66% tax increase.

[Carl Rogers]

I like to see people make sacrifices to play the game.  If it be standing in line for a tee time or sending your child to an in state school, a golfer who gives something up to play reaps more rewards than one who is just passing time.

Mr. Kavanaugh,<
For me and perhaps others, the issue has been the golf given up earlier in life because of time, cost, opportunity, work, family etc.

[Carl Rogers]

Isn't value (time, travel, experience, slow play) golf the real issue?

Carl:

I'm not so sure. Some people's view of value (heck, it might be mine) would be a round at Cypress Point -- notwithstanding its cost, or the cost to get there for many -- because it's, you know, Cypress Point!!

I'm pretty certain, although it's just a guess, that some residents of Gothenburg, Neb., think the local club is over-priced and over-run by yahoos from all corners, and would rather play the 9-hole sand-green course down the road, even though the local club is held up time and again by nearly everyone who's played it as the epitome of solid architecture, great conditions, and fair pricing -- maybe the very defnition of high value in the game today.

So much of this discussion depends on your perspective. I'd only suggest that solid, affordable golf -- with quality architecture -- is probably available for nearly everyone (a few major urban areas excepted) if they look hard enough.

For me, there is a big difference between paying up for a once in a life time trip (like next month to Bandon) versus what I am comfortable doing everyday.

This thread is why I have tried to get some of you who travel up and down the east coast to tee it up at Riverfront.  Very very high bang for the buck.

[Phil McDade]

Carl:

Ran's original manifesto knew that a web site devoted to oustanding golf architecture and its history would, by necessity, need to include articles, postings, and membership on this site, of many of the world's top private clubs. In the beginning, that's where nearly all golf (at least in the U.S.) was played. But as Jeff points out, there is a gazeteer-like quality to the site, particularly on the discussion board, because examples of very good architecture can be found most anywhere, public or private, expensive or not.

Do you have pictures of Riverfront? If so, post them! There's no better way to get discussion going about the merits of an under-the-radar course than posting a picture thread.

[Tom_Doak]

Brian:

If you can figure out the formula to provide affordable golf in a new course, please share it with all of us.  The standard of construction for a new course today makes it pretty impractical to achieve affordability [depending on your definition] and still break even or turn a profit on the costs of developing the course.

More importantly, once the course is built, it no longer matters what the costs were ... the price of golf is determined by the owner, and 99% of the time that is set by whatever the market will bear.  If you built the course for $1 million to try and make it affordable, but it was so good and so accessible that they could charge $1,000 per round to play it, then it still wouldn't be affordable. 

On the flip side, most affordable courses are affordable because people won't pay more than $50 to play them due to local demographics.   Most of these are older courses where the cost of construction has long since been retired, either through profits or through selling the property at a loss.  But if you just spent $50 million building the course, and people will only pay $50 to play it, that's the rate that will be charged.  The architect has almost zero control over the ultimate green fee, though our work does determine whether the owner will make money or lose money at that fee.

[Jeff_Brauer]

TDF,

Right on of course, and the affordable model has always included a way to discount the original cost of construction -

Paying off the debt with time
Reducing debt via successively lower sales price (i.e., third owner can make a go of it)
Paying for the course via outside agency, such as resort hotel or housing development to avoid debt

For most of the courses I have been involved in the costs break out like this:

Debt - $600K per year
Maintenance and Ops - $1.25M per year
Profit to Investors at 15% - $250K per year
Cap Investments $150K per year

So, that $2M per year needs to be amortized over 25K rounds, giving a per round cost of $80 per round.

To get to $50 per round, you need to raise rounds while not reducing fee, or eliminate some combo of:

- Debt (reduces cost by $24 per round) 
- Profit (reduces cost by $10 per round)
- Ops Cost  (reduces cost by $10 per round for $250K saved)
- Cap Investments - (total elimination reduces cost by $6 per round temporarily until they are forced upon the course to overcome "deferred maintenance)

Oddly, the ops cost is right about $50 per round, the cut off for "affordable golf" by our definition.

No surprise that debt is the biggest cost.  Many operators who can't reduce debt have cut costs, unwillingly sacrificed profit to meet the current pricing demands of golfers in a competitive market.  But, many still can't make it.

[Carl Rogers]

Carl:
...
Do you have pictures of Riverfront? If so, post them! There's no better way to get discussion going about the merits of an under-the-radar course than posting a picture thread.

See    http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,46892.0.html for discussion of Riverfront No. 4

Riverfront has spoiled me to the golf and the price.

[Jim_Kennedy]

It was nice to read where a few of the posters w/good access are choosing to play an easily accessible,  super affordable and family owned golf course called Penny Branch in Furman. SC.

If you want affordable you need to support it.

[Matt_Ward]

Brian:

No doubt there is an air of elitism on this site.

Some people only want to discuss the inner sanctum of the top tier few courses.

Clearly, for many people such a discussion is a waste because if they can't access it then what's the point.

GCA has had plenty of threads on the topic -- if there's an area of the country that you fancy for more info
just either let people know here or reply offline.

[Adam Clayman]

Sure, this board wants that.  Some on this board may never venture on most of those "affordable" tracks, because they have other options, but I don't think that the whiffs of elitism to which you infer suggest that there's an indifference to the type of golf courses that 95% of people play.  I'd agree with Melvyn's pithy description and say that all of us do (or should) wish for enjoyable golf on fairly priced good courses.  That's not impossible to find, but it surely can be a challenge.  I can say that we are lucky here in Chicago that there is a goodly number of courses that fit that description, even if they aren't in any way architecturally significant. 

Terry, As someone who likes to play Barney, when it comes to Chitwn golf, I'm not so sure that the courses aren't architecturally significant. It's just really hard to tell because of the trees.

In theory, Chicago golf should be some of the best there can be. The subtle nature of the overall terrain, should yield some of the best uses. But, what has happened, imo, is that the ingrained nature of trees and narrow fairways, has precluded Chicago from geting the accolade it might deserve.
Yes, there are plenty of exceptions, like Beverly and Shel's home course, but for the most part, my impression is that without a Stihl saw convention, we will never now. I will qualify my opinion as mostly spec, because I have not seen anywhere near the number of private layouts one should, to make an informed opinion. As you can tell, I have no problem making an uniformed opinion, but at least I have the stones to know it and admit it.

[Peter Pallotta]

The great question that has never been answered, and which I have not yet been able to answer despite my 3 years of research into the golfing soul, is "What does this discussion board really want?"

Dr. Sigmund Freud, PhD, MA, B.Lit
ASGCA

[Jud_T]

Personally I look at quality/$.  i.e. a Doak 7 for $100 is better value to me than a Doak 4 for $50.  It's simply a question of how much utility each of us places on the numerator and denominator.  Of course a Doak 7 for $50 is the holy grail, but they're few and far between.  In other words, it's not simply a function of price.   

[Terry Lavin]

Sure, this board wants that.  Some on this board may never venture on most of those "affordable" tracks, because they have other options, but I don't think that the whiffs of elitism to which you infer suggest that there's an indifference to the type of golf courses that 95% of people play.  I'd agree with Melvyn's pithy description and say that all of us do (or should) wish for enjoyable golf on fairly priced good courses.  That's not impossible to find, but it surely can be a challenge.  I can say that we are lucky here in Chicago that there is a goodly number of courses that fit that description, even if they aren't in any way architecturally significant. 

Terry, As someone who likes to play Barney, when it comes to Chitwn golf, I'm not so sure that the courses aren't architecturally significant. It's just really hard to tell because of the trees.

In theory, Chicago golf should be some of the best there can be. The subtle nature of the overall terrain, should yield some of the best uses. But, what has happened, imo, is that the ingrained nature of trees and narrow fairways, has precluded Chicago from geting the accolade it might deserve.
Yes, there are plenty of exceptions, like Beverly and Shel's home course, but for the most part, my impression is that without a Stihl saw convention, we will never now. I will qualify my opinion as mostly spec, because I have not seen anywhere near the number of private layouts one should, to make an informed opinion. As you can tell, I have no problem making an uniformed opinion, but at least I have the stones to know it and admit it.

Agreed.  Your comment reminds me of the time I took Brad Klein around Flossmoor the first time, after we had played the renovated Olympia North course.  He said, "I'm pretty sure there's a good golf course out here.  There might even be a great golf course out here, but we'll never know until they start cutting down a lot of trees.

That statement probably applies to more than 60% of the good golf courses hereabouts.  Bob O'Link and Sunset Ridge are the poster children, IMHO, because they would be really, really much better if the tree problem were taken care of and an effort was undertaken to restore angles of play through fairway bunker placement and recutting fairway lines that have become bowling lanes over the course of time, mainly due to benign neglect and horizontal tree growth.

[George Pazin]

Much like people tend to make too much of the OT posts on here (if you listen to some, they're 90% of the first page, yet rarely are they in fact more than 10-15%), people also tend to overlook tons of threads on less well known courses and less expensive courses. Sean Arble alone posts an incredible amount of info on less well known UK courses (thanks for that, Sean).

Additionally, as Kyle recently pointed out on his list thread, there is an opportunity cost to golf. For whatever reason - whether it's personal connections or connections made through this site or whatever - most folks on here have the opportunity to play special courses, and if you're traveling far to an area, you will naturally tend to favor the best available options.

There's plenty of people that want affordable golf, on here and off. They just don't focus on it on here, for many different reasons.

[Jud_T]

I'll be doing a detailed writeup, photo thread and archival historical analysis of the subtle architectural features of this gem in coming weeks to assuage the elitist guilt so many of us clearly suffer from....

http://www.laparks.org/golf/cdp_los_feliz.htm

[John Kavanaugh]

I just went to the grocery store and wish food was less affordable.

[DMoriarty]

I factor health and sanity into "cost per round".

How much do shrink, heart meds and/or open heart surgery cost?  

To paraphrase Ben Franklin, golf fees paid are other costs saved.  Speed walking 9 holes at twilight probably costs less than an hour and a half at a health club with a personal trainer, plus half an hour with a shrink.

I also factor happiness (my own, yes, but more importantly, my wife's) into "cost per round".  Question:  What's it worth, in dollar terms, to come home relaxed and happy instead of all wound up and bitter?  Answer:  Half.  

Shivas,

Don't forget to add in shrink costs for your whole family.   Having you home more might not be good for their mental health.  

[Brian Marion]

First, to all, this was merely a topic to generate discussion and learn from others who know more than I. In no way do I consider myself an expert in GCA or construction. In fact, what I know, I basically have learned here. I thank you all.

I'm also not hinting that there are any elitist's here (though I'm sure someone fits the bill :-)) I've played some of the best courses in the country myself and love to remember those places.

My basic premise was to call out that while having "affordable golf" discussions is noble, is it truly attainable? Or should it be? I guess it all depends on each person's definition of affordable. I know some who think $50.00 is too much and other who don't bat an eye at $200.00. Golf has always been a sport of the better off in America, like horses. (don't ask how I know that!)

What concerns me most is that by all accounts, golf is shrinking. If the number of golfers is shrinking, then rounds are down, if rounds are down then courses close and new courses won't be built, at least not as many as in the recent past. If the game is shrinking, doesn't this threaten everyone who has a hand in the game, the architect, the player, the supt, the GM, etc, etc. Shouldn't we be trying to figure out how to build great courses cheaper so that we all can play them?

I agree that the best are that for a reason and that others are mentioned as "hidden gems". Maybe I like the hidden one's better....

Again, I'm here to learn.

[Jud_T]

Brian,

We should figure out how to get more women and children to play golf....

[George Pazin]

Shouldn't we be trying to figure out how to build great courses cheaper so that we all can play them?

[Don't worry about the thread, it's interesting to most, if some choose to vent about elitism, no biggie.]

I'd argue most already know how to do this, at least nuts-and-bolt-wise. (Mike and Don sure know how!) The biggest reasons costs are so high are probably land acquisition and the permitting process - these are pretty immune to any discussions we have on here.

Look on the bright side - John doesn't have to put up with people like me!

[Mac Plumart]

Here are a few good threads on affordable/lesser known courses...


http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,45931.0.html

http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,35435.0.html

http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,46424.0.html

http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,46160.0.html

http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,46654.0.html

There is also a GREAT one started by Wyatt Holiday about the lesser known recommendations that he categorized by state.  Phenomenal stuff!  I suggested in be a sticky topic or some sort of a permenant piece, like an In My Opinion piece, but is hasn't yet.  Could someone find that?  That would be a HUGE value add to the members of this site and its guests.

[Jud_T]

http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,12712.0.html

http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,37022.0.html

http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,2105.0.html

http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,46100.0.html

http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,36985.0.html

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()