The Future of Golf?

[Ian Andrew]

The thread began as the Future of Golf Design, which this initial post below is about,but has evolved into The Future of Golf.



“I think we’ll get back to 30 firms or so, there never was a place for so many firms.”

This was part of a quote from Ron Whitten used by Lorne Rubenstein in an article called Changing Times in Golf Course Design.

This quote reminded me about when I was researching Charles Banks a few years back. When Raynor died he found himself overwhelmed by a dozen projects. The Market Crash of 1929 slowed his business dramatically but there was work for a few years. With-in a few years there was no new work and Banks was known to be bitter about his fate.


The Black Swan Event – Fall of 2008

The Black Swan is an unforeseen and unpredictable event that has an enormous impact on society. There is no way to predict the coming of a black swan event, but history has shown us again and again that these events occur with regularity.

The Banking Crisis of 2008 is considered a Black Swan Event. The repercussions are still being felt even to this day. It ended the ability to access cheap money with very little collateral which essentially killed the North American real estate bubble which was driving golf course building.

The other reason I bring this up is one of the interesting ideas that goes along with the Black Swan Event is the notion of collective blindness leading up to the event. I personally think that to a large degree we have seen collective blindness as a contributing factor to why we had the financial crisis. Everybody enjoyed the endless growth, but nobody was willing to step back far enough and ask whether it was sustainable and what would happen when the music stopped.

The same can be said for golf course designers. This was one of the greatest building booms in history and it lasted close to 20 years! The profession seemed to believe/hope that the good times would last forever. And yet all we had to do was look back 20 years and find that almost no courses were being built!


In early 2009 a friend of mine asked me how I could possibly have no work after being so busy for the best part of a decade. I said that when everyone on the greens committee begins to wonder if they will have a job next week and whether they could pay their mortgage with one salary, it’s logical for them to get nervous about the situation of the other members at the club and wonder what would happen if they quit.

I said, “They have stopped all capitol spending.”

“So what will you do?” I was asked.

“I wait for them to become optimistic about the future…”


Death of the Big Firm

Last year I wrote a piece called The Death of the Big Firm. When the real estate bubble popped, real estate based golf development was done and this was almost exclusively the domain of the big firms with famous names. This meant that overnight the celebrity designer had too much overhead and too many people on staff. So with-in a single year three quarters of the staff were out on their own.

I would estimate that by the end of 2009 the number of design firms had effectively doubled as many opened their own businesses and planned to go it alone. Interestingly at the same time the available work had halved. I would guess the initial crisis drove10% of all full time architects out of the workforce.


China supplied a remarkable cushion to what could have been a nasty fall for the profession. There was a growing real estate bubble in China. This one was based upon the premise of building new courses in order to secure large private land holdings for future development. There were only two problems with this, golf does not seem to appeal to the average Chinese person and the construction of golf courses is illegal in all but Hainen Island.

But the turnaround domestically that most hoped for never came.

I would estimate that by the end of 2010 the larger firms realized things might have changed for the long run. They downsized again. The senior designer who survived the first cut became the secondary casualties since they were now expendable. Interestingly the survivor was the junior designer with CAD experience and a low salary.

I would estimate that by the end of 2010 the number of firms had grown another 50%. The architects who were no longer practicing was likely up to 25%.


Death of the Small Firm

I’ll be the first to admit I didn’t see this one coming.

What all of the above created was far more pressure on the small firms. There is so much more competition out with big firms now chasing work that was up until recently too small, too limited or with too low a fee structure to catch their interest. The small firm is getting crushed by the expense of competing against them as more clubs interview larger number of architects and expect more from submissions.

The remaining small firms are largely niche players who have a specific skill set, highly touted reputation, a language advantage or a large client list of clubs built over time.

In my estimation the end of this year will see the number of firms drop by 25% as a number of single person businesses or small firms are not t finding enough work to sustain a business. I would estimate there are now approximately 30% of the golf architects from 2008 completely out of the industry.


Another Black Swan Event?

I don’t think the crisis has run its course yet for golf architecture. I think there will still be a few more casualties in golf design.

The broader issue we face is stagnation in the world economy. I’m not a believer that there is another looming crisis or a double dip recession ahead. I think the worst is behind us. But I also think that economic growth will not return until we pay some of the bills we accumulated over the last twenty years of “living well beyond our means.”

So as an architect is there another possible Black Swan Event?

If the Chinese economy went into recession or the Chinese government decided to enforce the ban on golf courses a lot of architecture firms would find themselves on the precipice. The impact would be felt at home too since the competition would rise.

Before you say it will never happen, consider this comment from Jack Nicklaus recently (unfortunately can’t find the source) ….

"China, for example, is shut down right now golf-wise. We were over there about a month ago with a course two weeks from being finished that was shut down. They put a satellite up to monitor it to see that nobody was working."

That would be a second Black Swan Event for golf design since half the firms are dependent upon that area of the world.

But I’m not quite that pessimistic. I’ll stick with my prediction from two years ago.

“This decade will see only a handful of well financed, well thought out, realistic business models getting built.”

There were a lot of awful golf courses built in the last 20 years. While I don’t expect many new ones to be built in the next 10 years, I do expect quite a few of the bad ones in really great locations to eventually get bought. I see a new type of golf course owner who seeks only distressed facilities on great sites. They buy at discount, avoid the complications of the approval process, extract small development parcels to provide equity for the project and rebuild the golf course in the process.



I'd be curious to hear other people's prespectives on the last few years and what will come over the next decade.

[Don_Mahaffey]

Ian,
IMO, your last paragraph is on the mark.
there are a ton of golf courses out there that are poorly operated (usually some sort of "investemnt" by a group of absentee owners) and on a downhill slide toward failure or restructure. The old golf numbers do not work.

I was looking at a property the other day and the broker kept spouting a selling price based on multiples of gross revenue and EBITA and such. My simple reply was the folks I work with want a return and you can not get a return with the price you are asking no matter how well we operate. If a business doesn't have positive cash flow, and the land has contraints that render a golf course the highest and best use, how much is that course worth if it loses money? And how much investment is required to fix deferred maintenance and poor design? We are still a long way from the bottom of the golf course market. When people have 5M invested, its a hard pill to swallow when the only way to make 10%+ is if you have debt service of 500K or less. Its not sexy to own a golf course anymore.

But, there are some deals that could work, and I agree that a poor course on a good site with good demographics can be a decent business if done right. Specializing in renovating poorly designed courses into something that can be a succedful business in not a bad idea, but it requires architects and contracters to understand the numbers, and I don't think most are there yet. 

[George Pazin]

self edit. Not really the time or place.

Good luck everyone.

I think as any industry matures, it becomes less fun and more business. The people that succeed are the best businessmen, not the dreamers. Think lean and mean sales people. It's not fun for most.

[Don_Mahaffey]

George,
I don't know about the less fun stuff. Will it weed people out, you bet it will. I think its great fun to look at a course and figure out how to make it work. I think its great fun to look at a construction project and figure out if the cost/benefit works for the business. I don't believe less work means the work will be less inspired, its just not going to be based on pie in the sky formulas.

[Jud_T]

Is there any reason to believe that what work there is, aside from being more economically responsible, will be better from a design point of view?

[Chris Johnston]

Ian

The future of golf design is tied to people who want to join and play.  As long as demand is stagnant, opportunities will be shelved.  Simple supply and demand.  The real estate based courses (e.g. Desert Mountain?) are having a hard time.  Just read that NAR overstated real estate sales since 2007, by maybe 20%, by double counting sales.

As mentioned last year to great criticism from some here, the cost to become a member of a great club has decreased, by a lot.  Clubs with large debt are "in the trap" - little debt and offering value for a member are, today, very important.  Like a lot of other industries, the market has, and is, naturally correcting.  Overcapacity impacts everyone.

Don is correct, from an operations perspective, efficiency is important but the project must pencil.  The days of range attendants and free this or that don't work.  Look at the absolutely great clubs that are reportedly "in the trap" today, Ballyneal and Windsong Farm among others?  Wonderful courses, sophisticated and passionate members, great experiences.  The problem?  Debt, and lack of volume to carry them.  Dues increases don't do it.  Its a very tough business today and not for the faint of heart.  No matter the passion, the business must work.  Efficiency in operations, and infrastructure can help.  

For one, I believe consolidation can save some places, but welcoming change is hard.  In selected cases, efficiency is key as is good, solid, hands on operations.  As a starting point, who wants to personally guarantee a loan on a course today in this market?  Who wants to carry losses?

Future design opportunities will be based on two things...demand and capital.  We are lucky, we have demand.  Today, capital is seletive and chases opportunity with real yield.  Special and/or beautiful alone don't pay the rent and that will inhibit the future.  Design fees will be affected by more people chasing far fewer opportunities, and the natural and painful weed out is well underway.  I look for a lot more course closures and a far fewer new courses, lasting 10 or so years minimum.  The herd chased China but golf in China is a bubble, just like we had here at home.

[Tom_Doak]

This is why there have been eight design firms in Rio de Janeiro the past two days ... at least in part, because it is THE ONLY golf course development project IN THE WORLD that is certain to happen in 2012-13.

So, for all those who pooh-pooh the Olympics, please remember that it is one of the few obvious possibilities by which to promote the game of golf in new countries, and to reignite interest in some of the old-guard countries.

On the other hand, as someone said yesterday, in the U.S.A. it is documented that as many as three million people a year decide to try and take up golf.  The problem is that four million quit, for various reasons.  What we really need to do is a better job of encouraging them to play and giving them affordable opportunities to play.  [And I do NOT mean building new courses when I say that.]

As for new course development, the only niche that's left in America for the time being, is the true believers who want to build a course that's cooler than the one across the road.  They will succeed only to the extent that they take business away from others -- or build something cool enough that it inspires more people to play.

[Tim Nugent]

To mary a few of the responses, it seems that those who don't study history are apt to repeat it.  Most of the architets that weathered the cratering of the golf market in the early 70's are retired and those nearing that age were probably lowly draftsmen back then.  If they have saved enough from the glory years, they could continue as a hobby, just for something to do.  While I was too young to work at the time, I distinctly remember my Dad saying "thank God yoour Mom teaches school, so we can eat".  Yes, there were many a month when Dad (and Ken Killian) couldn't take a check just so they could make payroll.  Today the environment has changed.  The cost of having employees has skyrocketed and employee/employor loyalty has cratered. And you simply don't need employees anymore thanks to the evolution of technology.  What used to require a secretary and several draftsmen can now be done by 1 person, the architect. And he can take his office anywhere in the world at a moments notice (and even accomplish work on the way there).  In the 90's we were grossing over a million a year in fees but after all the expenses, netted zilch.  We were just working for wages and the wages of our staffs, scammbling to take on more and more work just to feed the beast.

Those who were too young to remember the 70's are the same ones who Ian refered to as thinking it would never end.  However, there were others that took a different path and, like me, downsized.  As luck would have it, I can't claim a crystal ball, rather a series of events took me down the path at an opportune time, the late 90's.  For the next decade, I learned how to function as a one man show with no overhead.  What I found was I was still making out about as well before but with more freedom and less headaches.  And have zero debt!

That freedom allowed me to re-evaluate what would still be needed even if things ground to a halt and what I determined was the only ones who would survive another shake-out would those who could "do it all", ie develop, design (all facits) without any sub consultants, and build anything you design - by yourself.

So, Ian, I feel that those who can't do it all and are willing to travel to wherever the job may take you for extended periods of time will be slowly culled from the herd.  Solo Design-Build will be the way of the future.  The flip-side will be if a few of the large golf course contractors (who can also make a living doing other types of construction) hire their own arhitect whom they can also put on a machine in off periods, and sell a comprhensive turn -key approach.  While things may not get built, entropy dictates that they will need to be fixed from time-to-time.

[Adrian_Stiff]

Its pretty much all been said in these posts but I concurr that the secret to curing the problem is to get 4 million new customers and lose 3 million, not the way it is presently. Tiger Woods brought life to the sport over the last 10-15 years people like TW are worth a lot of money to us in the golf industry. His demise has not been good, the young blood need to embrace the Ian Poulters and the glamour bits about the sport and make golf cool, it needs things that make them what to play real golf and not on Wii or Playstations. If the Koreans get better and threaten the mens game we might see a bigger downward trend.

The cost needs to come down, your USA model defies gravity, ours has got very expensive too, mostly fuel and red tapey stuff, but we have all looked over the fence seen Augusta and thats what we want, but we cant really afford it. The low cost courses will be the most resilient, the better courses are likely to face the biggest problems.

New Golf Courses will be very rare in the UK over the next 10 years IMO.

[Peter Pallotta]

Very few of us, I think, took up and fell in love with the game on high-quality golf courses, however you want to define that. Courses that carry no debt, that keep it simple, that offer value for the money, and that are in good locations will capture/entice their share of new golfers, ie those just taking up the game.  Course that carry no debt, that keep it simple, that offer value for the money, that are in good locations, and that offer/can be made to offer through renovations high-quality architecture will capture/entice their share of new golfers and capture/divert established golfers away from other, nearby courses that don't offer the same package of goods.  

Peter

[Shane Wright]

On the other hand, as someone said yesterday, in the U.S.A. it is documented that as many as three million people a year decide to try and take up golf.  The problem is that four million quit, for various reasons.  What we really need to do is a better job of encouraging them to play and giving them affordable opportunities to play.  [And I do NOT mean building new courses when I say that.]

Tom,  IMHO, the golf industry needs market better to women and children. It ain't that flippin hard to market to me and the bevy of golf dorks on here (in addition to the industry folks).  Getting more women and children bought into the culture of playing and spending time at the course (and I don't mean private courses only) is a huge key to the future, especially in the U.S.    The baby boomers who play, play. The boomers who don't play, probably aren't going to pick it up much now.  Women have much more power and decision making influence today than even just a couple of decades ago.  They are going to be making many decisions in the future, such as, where and when their kids spend their time.  They need to better understand the value and enjoyment that they and their children will be receiving from the game of golf.

[George Pazin]

George,
I don't know about the less fun stuff. Will it weed people out, you bet it will. I think its great fun to look at a course and figure out how to make it work. I think its great fun to look at a construction project and figure out if the cost/benefit works for the business. I don't believe less work means the work will be less inspired, its just not going to be based on pie in the sky formulas.

It's probably just my own personal view of fun. In my business, I've enjoyed the creative side, but don't particularly care for the business side. Which is likely why I struggle year in and year out...

[Tim Nugent]

Shane, you have a good point in the dynamics of demographics. I just saw that the average age 1st time marriages is a record high of 28 for men and 26 for women in the States.  Clearly this goes to their not wanting to commit in a time of economic uncertainty.  This will have a chilling effect not only in the near-term mindset but also the long-term demographic make-up of society.  What would be really interesting is to see a break down of the age vs educational level.  Because those who are marrying earlier will begin to have families earlier.  This could skew the demographics for an entire generation.  So much for that Hope and Change.

[Niall C]

Its pretty much all been said in these posts but I concurr that the secret to curing the problem is to get 4 million new customers and lose 3 million, not the way it is presently. Tiger Woods brought life to the sport over the last 10-15 years people like TW are worth a lot of money to us in the golf industry. His demise has not been good, the young blood need to embrace the Ian Poulters and the glamour bits about the sport and make golf cool, it needs things that make them what to play real golf and not on Wii or Playstations. If the Koreans get better and threaten the mens game we might see a bigger downward trend.

The cost needs to come down, your USA model defies gravity, ours has got very expensive too, mostly fuel and red tapey stuff, but we have all looked over the fence seen Augusta and thats what we want, but we cant really afford it. The low cost courses will be the most resilient, the better courses are likely to face the biggest problems.

New Golf Courses will be very rare in the UK over the next 10 years IMO.

Adrian

Going off the main topic a bit here but completely disagree with your ascertion on Tiger keeping the game going. Tiger just happened to be the main man when golf went through its greatest growth spurt in decades. Even if he hadn't been caught out with his infidelities, and his knee had stayed in shape, and his putting etc.,the western world economy was still going pear shaped in a major way. Think of it this way, if Tiger had never existed, and the top player was say Michelson, do you not think someone like Phil wouldn't get the masses excited about playing the game ? People played the game because the could afford to, now they can't, and that has nothing to do with Tiger.

Niall

[Adrian_Stiff]

Niall - I think that certain people have that ability to be the X Factor. People want/wanted to see Tiger, if you have/had Tiger in your field your gate receipts rose something like 600%. John Daly has a big pull power still, even now he is someone you want in the field to attract spectators, Zach Johnson over here probably wouldn't add a person. Phil Mickleson I would say less than John Daly but I could be wrong, Phil is certainly up there. Nick Faldo was a big influence and Ian Woosnam in the lates 80s-90s for igniting golf generally here.....So I think there is something in there to kinda put in the mix. In principle UK winners and Ryder Cups are great for TV exposure and fuel the want to play golf. The economy going tits up is another thing and lack of money is not good fuel for wanting to play golf. I am not blaming the downturn in TW for the future of golf course design, but certain people get good press for the sport and some dont. I started in the early 70s and there was a programme early on a Saturday Morning I think called Play Better Golf with John Jacobs, that and Tony Jacklin was my stimulus. Finding Stimulants that excite new potential golfers is what we need to find as well as reducing the amount of people we are losing to the game and identyfying why we lose golfers is important. I would put TIME over money, but money is right up there.

[Mike_Young]

A few things:
Tim is dead on in his post #7.
This Andy Rooney quote defines much of the golf business for me right now:  " to ignore the facts does not change the facts"
I have often asked myself what is the "norm" for the business of golf course design.  I think we have been well above the norm for quite a while.  Ian says we might need 30 firms.  I think that might be high if those firms are not as Tim describes them where they can do the entire project.  It has always been a made-up business.  All that ever mattered was the final product where the game was played whether it was championship, resort, private or the average town muni.  ASGCA has done their best for what I think around 60 years to promote GCA as a profession.  It will be interesting now to see what happens there.  Obviously no new members will be out there meeting their requirements ( last year I think it was a golf pro that was the only entry) and I know a few of the members that don't practice anymore but still pay dues.  How long will guys pay $1500 a year when they have no work.  Of course efforts are already out there to tell clubs why they need to use a member.  For some interesting play with numbers read the article on page 12&13 here:  http://europe.nxtbook.com/nxteu/tudorrose/bydesign_2011fall/index.php#/12  Look at the "averages".  Yet when all the hype is on the table so many of the guys have never had their name on a scorecard or even sold a job, I don't even think the last few presidents were heads of their firms. 
And then the guys you really have to feel for are the builders.  Architects can slow down and just work from a computer in their living room but if you have been a general contractor of size for a few years you most likely have a stable of equipment and other operating expenses that keep moving and if you decide to stop then most likely you have a ton of depreciation to capture from equipment depreciation over the last few years.  It's like trying to turn an aircraft carrier for these guys.  And yet again, you have the GCBAA.  This is another association supported by dues and members have to be dwindling.  I wonder how many "certified" builders will exist in three years.
Then we have the retail end of the golf business that has spent millions if not billions on marketing to "ride" this golf wave.  New drivers every six months.  A hundred different balls, shoes and clothing. 
The first thing that will happen when these guys leave the industry will be the associations "easing" entry requirements.  And then the Industry sponsors of all the associations will begin to back off because those of us that are not in those groups wil refuse to buy from them.  For example:  I keep no Titleist product in the pro shop because they give the PGA pro a "retirement" deal that is not available to non PGA members.
The industry has been ignoring the facts but they haven't changed.
I think all of you can agree that your small local courses where the majority play each and every day will continue.  And they will be operated for a profit and will make it.  They will not be out a some NGCOA meeting standing up and telling every spanker how they do it.  AND the national audience wil never hear of them because all they need to promote is within 20 miles of their first tee.
OH..and this First TEE BS will fade also.....that's another scam for another time.
In the end the good thing about he golf business is that it is an uregulated business even though associations have tried their best to change that and because it is a raw free enterprise it will survive...

Tim,
Re your post #12....the biggest problem is reproduction.  The 15 year old girl having three kids out of wedlock is reproducing much faster now than our kids waiting until they are 28 to marry.  And they vote.  So it's just a matter of numbers and we are in trouble.

[Don_Mahaffey]

Based on most of the responses to this thread, the title should be changed from "the future of golf course design" to "the future of the golf course designer".

[Kye Goalby]

 I know Mike and Tim have made this point before ( Mike a lot!), and as someone doing what they describe for a  good while I was not really seeing the action or really believing it would go that way. Over the past 12 months or so I have, however,  had a lot more people, from places previously not interested, become more interested in my ability to design and build. So maybe  the trend you guys saw is beginning to manifest?   I know I won't go out and start spending money thinking I got it going on though!

Tim,
Re your post #12....the biggest problem is reproduction.  The 15 year old girl having three kids out of wedlock is reproducing much faster now than our kids waiting until they are 28 to marry.  And they vote.  So it's just a matter of numbers and we are in trouble.


Mike, your quote above reminds me of the movie Idiocracy by Mike Judge (creator of Beavis and Butthead).  You seen it?

[Mike_Young]

Hey Kye,
I just read about the Movie and downloaded it from itunes...looks like my type of show...
You doing ok?

[Mac Plumart]

I don't know jack about the ins and outs of the design business.  But I'm sure it is a struggle right now.  But I do know that the greatest of the great do things because they love them. 

Ben Graham was one of the greatest minds in financial history.  His greatest works/breakthroughs were done during The Great Depression.  Talk about a crap time to be working in the financial world.  But that is where his love and passions lie, so he did what he loved.  And had a tremendous impact on the financial world and his impact and breakthroughs are still being used to this day.

Maybe being a financial guy during The Great Depression is akin to what the golf architecture business is like right now.  If so, my point is that great work can be done and the work can be so good as to have long lasting impacts.

[Mike_Young]

Mac,
You could be right....

Which was a greater work, the Honda Accord or the Lamborghini?

[Mike Nuzzo]

Mike
As to the Accord vs. Lamborghini - I think you are asking for a preference.
Which was a greater business is a completely different question.

It has always been my ideal to provide a Lamborghini for the price of an Accord (now an Escort).
Cheers

[Ben Sims]

I think Ian and Mike both nail it in the OP and post #15.  I wrote in another thread a few weeks ago about Eisenhower's farewell address in 1961 and the military-industrial complex.  

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military-industrial_complex  

Golf has now become a commodity and is marketed as such by various corporations and professional organizations.  But golf is a deregulated business, and has no true qualifications other than experience and ability.  Inflating the golf world over the past twenty years is the issue at hand.  It's the self-licking ice cream cone.  Once the infrastructure of the "complex" sprang up around golf, it was doomed.  It collapsed under it's own weight.

There is no solution really.  It's only about survival for most designers and builders.  The dreamers will always be there, and guys like Tom Doak, Bill Coore, and a handful of others will always get a dreamer a year with some liquidity and a great piece of land.  Even those firms still have to pay bills with resto's and reno's.  As successful and epic as their work is, there isn't room in the golf design/construction world for more than a half dozen firms like those.  

Ian squares the issue in his last paragraph.  The guy (owners) that are willing to take a good property, pay 20 cents on the dollar for it, tweak a few things and run it efficiently will be the guys that come out on top.  As for the architects, it'll be interesting to see if there becomes market for a single-man firm that travels to recently purchased, distressed facilities and "consults" for a week.  That guy will never get his name on a card, and he'll never get into Golf Magazine, but his expertise will be well worth the 2K or so he gets paid for that week.  Those guys could have a huge impact on the golf world by bringing many of the design values that the "dreamer" firms have to more modest courses.  Imagine a guy that is a freelancer.  He works for the "dreamer" firms once or twice a year for 4-5 weeks at a stint.  When he's not doing that he consults at golf courses looking to survive.  That's the architect that's going to make it AND have an impact on golf architecture.

[Mike_Young]

Mike
As to the Accord vs. Lamborghini - I think you are asking for a preference.
Which was a greater business is a completely different question.

It has always been my ideal to provide a Lamborghini for the price of an Accord (now an Escort).
Cheers

Nope.  I wasn't asking for a preference.  I was asking which was better for the automobile drivers of the world.
I think it is very noble to say that your ideal is to build a Lamborghini for the price of an Escort.  I think most in the business have the same ideal but Ideals are a luxury in a realist world.  This site might "goo-goo" all over the ideal and feel that those that spout the realism are not as "talented" or whatever but that's idealism.  Realism says there is no golf design business.  When only one or two firms can actually allow for a few people to make a living from nothing but design then that is not a business.  Most every guy I know that says he is a golf designer has either a wife working, "mailbox" money coming in, or has other offerings within his businesses.  I know I do.  There will continue to be a few guys walking around saying they are golf architects and if you totaled the volume of what they produce in a year it wouldn't pay a car note.  The BS is over.

Ben,
I think your thoughts are good but I don't think there will be even a "half-dozen" firms getting the dream jobs.  You got to remember that all the glitter that came to surround this business was not from golf but from developers wanting to  promote their RE and using the "names" of architects as an avenue for such.  That advertising money is gone.  Guys are going to go underground, get their projects, start building their projects before they tell anyone.  As for the freelancers.....could be but I don't know.  Reality is that a lot of owners, pros and supts feel as though they can handle everything they would hire an architect for.  The only time they go "goo-goo " is when a JN or AP or someone discusses these things with them.  The other reality that most architects may not like is that these guys are probably right on 95% of the issues they face.  So many of the guys in this business were "drafters" and spec writers and did not get ot a site but once or twice a month os they don't have the daily construction experience of some supts and owners and pros.  The guys I think will do the freelance will be the contractors. 

[Jud_T]

Mike
As to the Accord vs. Lamborghini - I think you are asking for a preference.
Which was a greater business is a completely different question.

It has always been my ideal to provide a Lamborghini for the price of an Accord (now an Escort).
Cheers

Nope.  I wasn't asking for a preference.  I was asking which was better for the automobile drivers of the world.

Neither is better.  They both serve a completely different market.  Better in what sense?  For society?  For driving pleasure? For picking up chicks? For fuel economy? The military/oil complex? Stockholders?