How do we shrink the game?

[JESII]

Mike and Tom,

It makes sense that the two of you would view the size of the game as measuring golf courses or golf holes...the rest of the world count the number of people playing the game and the number of times they play. That side of the equation is shrinking just fine on its own from what I hear.

[Carl Rogers]

I am clearly an outlier in the game, non-golfing family of moderate means, just about stopped completely when right out of college due to time and availablity problems, only to rediscover the game after moving at the age of 30 or so.  At the age of 58, I am now trying to play as many good courses as I can untill age catches up with me.

My observation is that the mid-tier courses have the biggest and unsolvable hurdles.  High end "special" courses will get play.  Cheaper courses will get play.
Walmart does fine.  Tiffany's does fine.  Liz Caiborne has a shrinking market.

[jeffwarne]

Eric,
That's why there have always been private courses.
In every era there have been a list of rants that drove people to join a club that promoted behaviors they deemed compatible/appropriate.
I don't know of a cheaper membership than Palmetto, yet NONE of the problems(except I wish we had the beverage girl ) you cite above occur there.
the game is fine.....for the discerning consumer

Many of the behaviors I cite are at PRIVATE courses.  

There is a big misperception, that just because people have money and class, at least what they think is class anyway, that the experience at a private club will somehow be superior.  Well, in some cases it might.  But rudeness, slow play, lack of respect for rules,  etc is becoming increasingly universal.  And management won't deal with it, because God forbid someone leaves and you have one less paying customer.   I have played many a 4.5 hour round at private clubs, found cigar butts and other litter on the greens and fairways at private clubs, and have been to many a private club where ball marks are not repaired and sand traps not raked.  I am a member of a private club only because of economics, play over 100 rounds a year with range and unlimited cart if I desire, for around 5K, daily fee this would not be possible .  I do  have to admit that generally conditions I play on are superior to most public tracks, and the pace of play better, but far from optimal.

And it is a shame that one has to even think about migrating to a private club in the hopes that it would be a safe heaven for many of the ills that plague our game.  If people would exercise common decency and respect, the daily fee experience would be every bit as good as the private.

I remember my most earliest days of golf, they were on stricly public courses.  There was respect for the group behind you, there was respect for the facilities, traps were raked, ball marks fixed.  And if you failed to conform, the ranger would let you have it.  I got it more than once myself,  they had nop roblem telling you to pick up and move on.   The ranger now is nothing but a hollow presence and a PR person.  I am so sick of them coming by with stupid expressions like "Sure beats a day in the office".  Cut the cute expressions and customer relations please,  keep the slow groups moving, give me a 4 hour round, and pounce on the clowns who fail to rake the traps and leave big ball marks behind!
[/quote]

Eric,
I am sorry you live in that world.
that hasn't been my experience and I play at least half my golf on public courses, although I have played in a 17some at one.
1 1/2 hours for 9 holes with at least 7 beverage girls stops (she actually was playing with us)
 
The two clubs I belong to are quite affordable and 18 holes over 4 hours in a foursome would be a real unusual occurance.

I do play at off peak times mostly though

[Mike_Young]

Mike Young:

I thought you asked a great "politically incorrect" question although the thread seems to be veering away from the nuts and bolts of what you asked.

Certainly, there are a lot of golf course developments in the US that can't support themselves nowadays.  The homeowners don't want a jungle in the back of their houses, and there are a few people who want to play golf, but not enough to support a real club.  What to do?

To me, it's fairly simple ... you need to get everyone's financial contribution to align with their particular interests.  The homeowner's association should be kicking in for basic course maintenance, if they don't want the value of their homes to decline further.  The golfers should pay to transform the course from "mowed" to "golf shape".  If there aren't enough golfers to support 18 holes, then reduce the main course to nine holes, and let kids play for free on the nine that the homeowners are just mowing down.

Tom,
Agree 100% and think a few are headed that way.  I think many on here don't realize that man yof these places are not allowed tobe converted to homes and have to remain golf only.    I have seen one where 9 holes is being converted to sporting clays and another where they were converting to community gardens but the key to what you say is the homeowner paying his fair share.

[Niall C]

Even the Scots, as cheap as they may be, don't golf for the value.

The hell they don't. What percentage of golf at the 10 most expensive golf courses in Scotland is played by Scots?

I do believe their local memberships are full.

Have you asked Melvyn about the costs of the game?

John/Jim,

I suspect that most clubs in Scotland have a limited amount of memberships available and a smaller percentage will have a waiting list. Thats the ordinarly clubs. The ones we tend to talk about on here with their top courses eg. HCEG, Royal Troon etc still have healthy waiting lists and memberships that are full of Scots. Prestwick I believe has more of an international flavour (counting the lot south of the border as being international  ) but still has a nucleus of Scots.

While these top clubs get a lot of visitors and a fair amount of them will be overseas visitors they will get homegrown golfers as well. I wouldn't necessarily assume though that these guys are what I think you refer to as typical retail golfers but are probably members of clubs elsewhere. That might change as some can't justify ever higher subs and are opting to leave their club. That has become more of an option (an indeed an imperative for some) because they can perceive that they way membership lists are at the moment they can get back in quite readily when the good times return.

Niall

[archie_struthers]

   

There will be less courses.  There certainly will be less facilities, that costs millions to run.

I believe the really good operators of both private and public clubs will thrive over  time, as the supply demand curve moves closer together. It's funny how many people scream about the high price of private golf clubs, when it provides so much social interaction for say 10 k per year all in. For serious fisherman in our area , this is two trips to the canyon in their boats.  

What sport can a fifty year old play  sports competitively ?   Tennis, not really , basketball nope ...bowling (I guess).  Seems like golf is more fun and cheaper than the casino's that so many people frequent, so maybe we shouldn't be so prudish about a little wagering on the game, it sure is more fun than black jack , and the handicap system works better than basic strategy.


If clubs are fun , people will gravitate to them. If the architecture and conditions are good, even better.  


Golf will survive, and  my hope is that the government doesn't decide to really jump in with tax money and pick the winners and losers.  It's my biggest. fear for operators, and would be a deterrent to private investment going forward.

[Terry Lavin]

It seems to me that the genius financial crowd on Wall Street (mortgage backed securities, corrupt rating agencies, completely unregulated credit default swap market) has already expedited the shrinkage.  Wall Street has already righted it's own ship in the main. Nobody else has much disposable income, however, so the courses will close and the land ain't worth much because nobody qualifies for a loan anymore. Merry Christmas from Goldman Sachs and the boys and girls from CNBC.

[Carl Rogers]

Are their courses out there that are so baldy positioned in their market (or too much alike in their market) that only a complete re-work is needed for it to have a chance to be successful?  

Three critical questions (please tell me I am all wrong, I have no feelings to be hurt)?
1.  Can you get it for 20 cents on the dollar?
   --- Are other investors - golfers interested?
2.  Can it be made into something interesting, I mean something that is quite unusual relative to its locale?
    --- The walking only semi-private sporty multiple set-up nine holer with 15 minutes between tee times?
3.  How much $ would it be to rip up and re-do a sprinkler system?
    --- Isn't this the real financial impediment toward wholesale course re-work?

[Mark Chaplin]

Not sure how Scotland has come into the equation. The game is very different compared to the $5k + per annumn US country club.

Remember as I always say less than 50 UK clubs would receive overseas visitors in any numbers so golf is not sponsored by the dollar. Clubs are run tightly and memberships of 500+ members is the norm.

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

keep on biulding mindless courses at 7300 yards plus, with water and huge bunkers everywhere..take all the charm and skill out of building courses, create penal courses for the sake of it....and the allow equipment to get so far out of reality that the man made hazards dont even come into play.

[A.G._Crockett]

I've posted this a million times and nobody ever seems to agree, but here goes:

The golf boom is a creation, like so many other things in our culture, of the Baby Boomers reaching their height of both income and activity.  That boom is over, and it will NOT be sustained or duplicated.  Bottom line?  Golf will return to what it was 30+ years ago; fewer courses, with a clear division between public and private, and far, far fewer CCFAD's.

Golf right now has a terrible demographic picture because of the aging of the Baby Boomers.  Tennis and jogging boomed when the Boomers were in their 20's and 30's, and then golf boomed when the Boomers were in the 40's and 50's and moved away from the tennis courts and jogging trails.  The Boomers are now moving into their 60's, and while time is less of an issue, money is tighter and the body can't do as much.

Meanwhile, there simply are not enough new golfers coming into the game to sustain the industry at the levels we saw in the 90's and first decade of the 21st Century.  That's not because there is anything wrong with golf; it is simple math.  Birth rates are down.  Right now, of course, there are economic issues as well, but those come and go.  The declining birth rate is here to stay.

Many, many tennis facilities have been underused for 15-20 years now; golf will be right behind.  The daily fee courses (many of them munis) that are affordable will survive just as they always have, and the well-run clubs that offer good value will survive just as they always have.  But the courses in the middle are in trouble, and that ain't going away anytime soon.  And by the middle I mean many, if not the majority, of the courses that have been built in the last 20 years and grossly overpaid for land AND badly overbuilt the course and clubhouse.

Mike, that doesn't directly address your question.  But the answer is that "we" don't have to do anything.  The golf version of Freakonomics will take care of everything.

[Mike_Young]

I've posted this a million times and nobody ever seems to agree, but here goes:

The golf boom is a creation, like so many other things in our culture, of the Baby Boomers reaching their height of both income and activity.  That boom is over, and it will NOT be sustained or duplicated.  Bottom line?  Golf will return to what it was 30+ years ago; fewer courses, with a clear division between public and private, and far, far fewer CCFAD's.

Golf right now has a terrible demographic picture because of the aging of the Baby Boomers.  Tennis and jogging boomed when the Boomers were in their 20's and 30's, and then golf boomed when the Boomers were in the 40's and 50's and moved away from the tennis courts and jogging trails.  The Boomers are now moving into their 60's, and while time is less of an issue, money is tighter and the body can't do as much.

Meanwhile, there simply are not enough new golfers coming into the game to sustain the industry at the levels we saw in the 90's and first decade of the 21st Century.  That's not because there is anything wrong with golf; it is simple math.  Birth rates are down.  Right now, of course, there are economic issues as well, but those come and go.  The declining birth rate is here to stay.

Many, many tennis facilities have been underused for 15-20 years now; golf will be right behind.  The daily fee courses (many of them munis) that are affordable will survive just as they always have, and the well-run clubs that offer good value will survive just as they always have.  But the courses in the middle are in trouble, and that ain't going away anytime soon.  And by the middle I mean many, if not the majority, of the courses that have been built in the last 20 years and grossly overpaid for land AND badly overbuilt the course and clubhouse.

Mike, that doesn't directly address your question.  But the answer is that "we" don't have to do anything.  The golf version of Freakonomics will take care of everything.

AG,
I agree .  I was sort of asking how we could help speed it up or correct it sooner.  Places like the SE will actually continue to grow and there will be more absorption than places like Detroit etc where people are leaving.  But even we in the Se need to correct this thing sooner rahter than later.  The big issue I see is banks and developers continuing to keep courses open just because people have homes on a course.  It's just putting off the inevitable.

[Jim Nelson]

I think Andy Rooney said: "To ignore the facts does not change the facts."
Presently there are all types of lightly disguised efforts to "grow the game".  But reality is we can't grow it.  It is too big due to development of the last 25 years that happened not for golf but for home lots.  And now banks and investors are taking over properties that were not financially sound and the fact is they need to close some of the golf holes within these properties.  BUT most have not yet accepted the FACT that we are keeping non functioning golf courses open because people own homes on them.  Eventually that will cease.  Meanwhile we have developed "feel good" programs like First Tee to say we are bringing people to the game.  Doesn't work.  We talk about 12 hole courses and larger holes etc but FACT is weekends make up 50% of golf rounds and now days fathers do not play golf on weekends like they used to.  With two earner families the father doesn't have saturday free.  AND golf should not try to take the place of kid time. 
But the answer is easy: we just need to shrink it and things will fall back in lace and golf will be fine.  So how do we do it?

Mike, I am not sure that "golf will be fine".  I think the game is past its heydey and in a serious decline for the following reasons:

1.  I have a good friend who is a fairly well known instructor,  he told me he has never been so frustrated with not only teaching but the game in general.  He says that appointments are frequently not kept,  and people do not even have the courtesy to call.  Quite often, during a lesson, the student stops to answer the cell phone or send a text.  At $125 an hour, this is unbelievable!     During a lesson, he gives his students things to work on including drills and exercises, it is often clear to him in the following lessons that no effort was taken to do the drills and exercises.  Frustration kicks in early, no one wants to do the work, yet high levels of results are expected.   We all know golf is a tough game, I spend many hours putting, chipping, etc. This new generation especially is not willing to do this.  This means frustration on the course and a very high attrition rate.

2.  The new generation has a very short attention span.  Everything is a tweet or text.  Golf is a long day out, I am not convined that this new generation is willing to invest 4+ hours a round, plus the time coming and going, plus the time to warm up.  

3.  There is no respect for the game anymore.  I don't remember the last time I have played a 4 hour round.   I have had to call the clubhouse at my club more than once, for groups on the greens for over 20 minutes, yes you heard right.  What in the name of God are they  doing out there, for the life of me I cannot figure it all out.   There are so many electronic devices out there, cell phones, GPS, etc, from a purist standpoint this has further contaminated our game.  I have played in tournaments where my team members could not get off their cell phones and spend time worried to death with yardages  marching off the yards and then verifying it with GPS.  HELP!!!!!!!!!!

4.  We have become a matriarchy, women rule.  Yes, they do.   And this profound sociological shift, will affect the volume of rounds played.  Women do love sports of course.  But women put first priority in their nest, thank God for them, because many of the men are sure not doing it.    Women are the storng ones now, they are the ones coming up in management they are running the households, they are doing it all.  It is becoming harder and harder to get a group together for a day out, let alone a long trip, because it seems to be an endless sales job with the wife to get out.  Seems more and more guys won't move without "permission" these days.  And some of them would rather stay home and play video games than get out and play some golf, that takes some work!    Guys have become awfully wimpy and whiny, yes women rule.  And this means less guys out there playing golf.  It used to be a snap to get a group of guys together for the anuual buddy trip.  Have fond memories of 36 hole days for a week at Pinehurst and MB.  Almost impossible now, can't get guys to commit.  They have to consult for hours and days  with their wives, they have to ponder for months before they can make a decison.  I say the buddy trip we have all come to cherish and look forward to is a dying institution.

5.  There is less and less knowledge of the tradiitons of the game and its history.  I am amazed as to how many times I play a course and no one can name the designer.  I am amazed at how many people have no idea where or what Pine Valley is.  I am amazed how many timesI have to hear that links courses are cattle fields.   I am amazed at people just get up and whack the ball and don't take a deep breath to enjoy the wonderful architectural elements and the wonderful nature.  Most golfers out there, especially the new ones, could care less!  And  am amazed at how many times I have to deal with a cart girl during a round, leave me alone. I am amazed at how many times I have to wait because people are buying food/beverage from the cart girl or at the turn.  And I am equally amazed at how a bunch of pot beliied old men, old enough to be the cart girls father or grandfather, feel this need to make flirtacious and sometimes even lewd comments.   And of course the poor girl takes it all, after all she needs the tips and would not dare tell the customer what they really think.    And the god awful, sugar laced fatty crap this food is, any wonder so many golfers out there look the way they do and are on as many prescriptions as they are.  Why can't we just get back to golf, the game, and appreciating the game for what it is.  It is so rich, but who really cares anymore.  

6.  And of course, there are the pure economics.   Clubs are expensive, balls are expensive, I am amazed at all the $200+ shafts out there, who is buying this crap!  I have demoed the best shafts out there and cannot tell the difference from how my offthe shelf OEM performs.   It is very expensive to take a trip for a week, when you have other priorities.  And the courses are not run by busines s people, how many tee time sheets are empty because they refuse to budge on their rates.  Because it might detract from the pereceived quality of the course.  Or GOd forbid, we let riff raff on, we have to preseve the "image".    How silly!  We have to get real about the economics here, everyone has their head in the sand!

The game is dying.   The average age at my course is well over 60.  Many guys over 70, good for them.  We need to replace these people , however, and the volume is just not there.  Many many clubs will be closing in the next 25 years.  I see the OEM equipment folks in for a huge awakening.  How many more years can you say that you clubs are longer and more forgiving than last years model and charge another $100 to justify this.  And why would anyone with half a brain, and I am being generous, who has some capital to invest, do so in a golf course.  .   Given all the costs and uncertainty, surely there are better places that entrprepeneurs will invest .  

A special group here, in this forum.   Such a love and passion for the game.   But this is a microcosm, not reflective of Joe Golfer.  And certintly not reflective of where Joe Golfer is going.  I see the day where golf will be an elitist sport again.  Limited access, for the few that can afford it.  I see sharp drops in demand.  The industry has eternally been optimistic,  i think this is pure foolishness, there is no reason to be optimistic, at least as the future of golf is concerned.  

How do we shrink the game?  By writing and reading posts like this.  How depressing.  I think I'm going to head to the kitchen, take a spoon out of the drawer and gouge my eyes out.  

[Mike Sweeney]

http://www.golfcoursearchitecture.net/Article/Optimism-on-Scottish-golf-tourism/2315/Default.aspx

Some positive news for Scotland.

[Niall C]

Mike

I hate to sound like a total cynic but this sounds like so much window dressing. First off Golf Tourism Scotland is an off shoot (so I believe) of the much derided national tourist organsation. Their modus operandi is to spend huge amounts on consultants to come up with whatever answer they're looking for.

Secondly, there are about 600 hundred clubs/courses in Scotland, the vast majority of which are ordinary members clubs that are so far under the radar as far as tourists are concerned as its possible to be. If they took a representative sample from pro's at these places what are they actually telling them, that thye sold more Mars bars last year than the year before ?

Anyway, golf in Scotland isn't about tourism its about the strength or otherwise of the members clubs that make up the vast majority of golf in Scotland, and there is no doubt in my mind that they are hurting more than they did the year before.

Niall

[Jud_T]

It seems to me that the genius financial crowd on Wall Street (mortgage backed securities, corrupt rating agencies, completely unregulated credit default swap market) has already expedited the shrinkage.  Wall Street has already righted it's own ship in the main. Nobody else has much disposable income, however, so the courses will close and the land ain't worth much because nobody qualifies for a loan anymore. Merry Christmas from Goldman Sachs and the boys and girls from CNBC.

Terry,

The guys who have enough skin in the game, sufficient experience and a solid business plan can get a loan today as they always could.  The guys who leveraged up with OPM and a song and a dance can't get a loan and never should have.

Mike,

Key is for dad to get the kids interested and out on the course on Saturday.  The model of paying $10-20k/year to spend Saturday and Sunday morning away from the wife and kids is dying.  Get mom and the kids to enjoy being out on the course and feel welcome and the game can grow IMO...

[Dan Byrnes]

A couple comments:

First on banking - we actually need more banks not less.  The problem with large banks is the repercussions of them failing may be too catosphrophic.  I argue the best preventative measure for too large to fail is don't let them grow that large.  The benefits are you reduce risk to the country of banks needing bailouts, create more jobs allow banking to go back to community based with community based decisions.  Has anyone experienced decreased banking costs due to super sized banking?  Just the opposite.  Only losers are big bank executives and elected officials who get big money for the money center banks.  

As an aside the first issue might help golf as more local executives would want ties to the local business community and thereby have memberships like they did back when banking was a local business.

Golf got over built on the interest and wealth of baby boomers with homes in golf communities resorts etc.  Unsustainable club budgets subsidized by housing provided a false illusion of stability that has disappeared.  Over time clubs and courses will fail at a rate which will bring balance again to golf and surviving clubs will strengthen albeit in many area there will be far less.

The strong will survive, others fail.  Excess will be deflated.  

IMHO part of the equation flies in the face of what I mostly read here in that to be successful going forward you have to appeal to the entire family not just dad.  Life has changed and it's more that kids activities are all organized so it is that time commitment that keeps dads away.  It has to be a product the entire family buys into.  That of course flys in the face of what many older members want.  Of course the older members tend to have the power but the club has no future with them leading and dictating business plans.  I am now 46 and I am still one of the young guys.  

To me you need family oriented places and cheap golf clubs.  I remain intrigued by how little UK clubs cost but have never played at any to personally see what they are like.  One of my local clubs perhaps the nicest has now topped 10k annually for a North East season while they have a lot of well heeled members they are gone in a generation IMHO as the price is well beyond local incomes.

Dan

[Dan Byrnes]

I don't believe access to any of the major metro clubs has gotten easier as that model is still immune to a large degree.  So elitism will strengthen in the private club community as consolidation happens. 

[Kris Shreiner]

The golf industry is doing a nice job of that already. Heading for 8,500 yd. golf courses, when the rest of the responsible folks on the planet are demanding SMALLER footprints, is a fine blueprint for success in this endeavor.

Total abandonment of properly supporting caddie golf has been another noble goal. When the greatest pipeline of your game's champions and differencemakers is being choked off through ignorance, the end result shouldn't be that surprising. In many emerging golf countries, such as, India, China and Argentina, those from poor or modest means often can only find access to, and develop a life-long fondness for golf, from the caddie dynamic. Look to Scotland and America for what avenue has produced vast numbers of great golf differencemakers; for centuries in the former, and for decades in the case of the latter. Keep reducing that richest vein of differencemakers and golf will be the loser...BIGTIME!

While selling home lots,  having fancy clubhouses, steamed facial towels, cart-only mandates and GPS are wonderful, they don't sustain the game. Human beings playing the game is what sustains golf. It's always been: somewhat expensive to play, tough to master, and subject to the fickleness of weather. It's NOT for everyone.

Take care of the game FIRST, understand the TIMELESS elements that have defined the game when it has been healthiest, focus on strengthening them, and then the sport will re-emerge in a fitter form.

The shrinking...it's happening now. There will be many more casualties. There needs to be. Golf has a lot of mediocrity, everywhere you look. Passion isn't derived from a paycheck. For a sport as difficult as golf is, for so many reasons, those that present and deliver it to the public it must be there to CONTRIBUTE quality to the equation, not just mind the moment, day-by-day, to EXTRACT from it.

Cheers,
Kris

[Jud_T]

I don't believe access to any of the major metro clubs has gotten easier as that model is still immune to a large degree.  So elitism will strengthen in the private club community as consolidation happens.  

Dan,

I disagree.  Many well regarded courses who had waiting lists no longer do and the list of clubs where you have little to no chance of joining has shrunk considerably IMO.

Mike,

The other problem with the RE model aside from the overbuilding is the model itself IMO.  Unless I'm loaded and the course is so good that I simply don't care, I don't know why I'd pay up to live on a course and have guys hitting balls into my yard instead of buying a house in town for 25-50% less and joining a golf club.  Only 5% of the country is developed.  Unless we're talking about Crystal Downs, Shoreacres etc., there's always a couple hundred acres somewhere down the road where the next new thing can go someday...

[Niall C]

Kris

I've absolutely no idea how you define difference maker and neither do I know for certain how things work in the States but you're ascertion about how it works in Scotland strikes me as romanticised fiction. I doubt there's more than half a dozen clubs in Scotland that have fulltime caddies working at their course and I suspect thats been the case since WWII. Furthermore, quite a lot of these guys already played golf before they became caddies and quite a few of them probably never have played golf so to suggest that out of the tiny fraction that is left that are the games greatest pipeline of difference makers is completely far fetched.

Niall

[Lou_Duran]

Take care of the game FIRST, understand the TIMELESS elements that have defined the game when it has been healthiest, focus on strengthening them, and then the sport will re-emerge in a fitter form.

The shrinking...it's happening now. There will be many more casualties. There needs to be. Golf has a lot of mediocrity, everywhere you look. Passion isn't derived from a paycheck. For a sport as difficult as golf is, for so many reasons, those that present and deliver it to the public it must be there to CONTRIBUTE quality to the equation, not just mind the moment, day-by-day, to EXTRACT from it.

Cheers,
Kris

Yes the game is shrinking.  Mr. Crockett has it right.  Mr. Young wants a quicker dive to the bottom so, presumably, the industry can then adjust and re-price to a more sustainable level (lower supply with no change in demand = higher prices, or so would static analysis suggest).  What is good for the industry may not be that simple if the resulting higher prices drive golfers already on the margin from the game.  Me, I prefer letting things happen on their own as owners shed assets, investors re-capitalize, managers fine-tune their operations, and markets determine the “best and highest use”.  Having been through a few real estate cycles, efforts by the government to either slow the rates of foreclosure or accelerate the consolidation of an industry are counterproductive nearly always.

I would be curious to know what taking “care of the game FIRST” entails, what those “TIMELESS elements” are, and the timeframe when “the game (it) has been healthiest”.  I suspect that there is a wide opinion on these things as well.

Regarding mediocrity, why would golf be any different than everything else (see the “Bell Curve”)?  I’ve been playing golf for over 40 years and the level of “mediocrity” I find today is much better than at any time before, and for that, I am thankful.  

[Dan Byrnes]

I don't believe access to any of the major metro clubs has gotten easier as that model is still immune to a large degree.  So elitism will strengthen in the private club community as consolidation happens. 

Dan,

I disagree.  Many well regarded courses who had waiting lists no longer do and the list of clubs where you have little to no chance of joining has shrunk

You may be more aware of it than I am.  There are tons of well regarded courses around but I haven't seen well regarded top level clubs in the NY, NJ metro area looking for membership.  Are there really opportunities to join the top 20 MET section clubs.  Certainly tons of well regarded courses around the country available but I haven't heard of Top clubs in the Met section, Chicago or LA area becoming accessible?  Certainly second tier their may be opportunities in Metro areas and first tier non metro?  I haven't seen any top 100's in major metros I need of membership.  I would be interested in MET section clubs if any one wants to PM me.

Dan

Dan

[Jud_T]

Dan,

I'm not as familiar with the Met Section as I used to be, and I don't think Shinny or National are having a membership drive anytime soon, but anecdotally I can think of several very good courses that are more accessible than they used to be.  In my area, I'd say there's only a couple of clubs that wouldn't be open to potential members who went through the proper channels.  For example, there's one club near me that has a very prestigious history and is well thought of here that used to have a 3 year wait list for a full golf membership that has next to none now.  PM me if you want more color...

[Carl Rogers]

Yes the game is shrinking.  Mr. Crockett has it right.  Mr. Young wants a quicker dive to the bottom so, presumably, the industry can then adjust and re-price to a more sustainable level (lower supply with no change in demand = higher prices, or so would static analysis suggest).  What is good for the industry may not be that simple if the resulting higher prices drive golfers already on the margin from the game.  Me, I prefer letting things Regarding mediocrity, why would golf be any different than everything else (see the “Bell Curve”)?  I’ve been playing golf for over 40 years and the level of “mediocrity” I find today is much better than at any time before, and for that, I am thankful.  

[/quote]

I agree ....
To speak from a purely unvarnished selfish perspective, the game has never been in B E T T E R shape. 
1. I have access to a lot of good to very good courses within 3 hours driving distance
2. I do not have to mortagage the house again to pay for it
3. I play with people I like playing with
4. I am practicing on a very good range, short game area and putting green
5. I am often playing at off times so the rounds are quick