Butler and women members?

[Howard Riefs]

Chicago Tribune reports that "Butler National Golf Club is strongly considering opening its doors to women."

The club is "conducting a study that will analyze how many women would be invited for membership and the facilities it would need to build. ... Butler National is in contact with officials from the USGA and PGA of America regarding whether the club can be a future site for events such as the U.S. Open, PGA Championship and Ryder Cup."

"If those governing bodies say yes — and industry sources believe they will — then the club's board would make a recommendation and be poised to take a vote among its members. A strong majority, believed to be three-quarters, would have to approve the change."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/golf/ct-spt-0209-butler-national-golf-20120209,0,7361889.story

[Jud_T]

Wow,

Smart move in terms of getting Tour events and bolstering the club's image, but I don't know how many women have both the game and the cash to enjoy the place on a regular basis...

[Mike Nuzzo]

[sarcasm] I'm sure the women look forward to being welcomed with open arms. [/sarcasm]

[PCCraig]

I'm guessing a US Open is the club's ultimate goal. Personally I'd rather see a return trip to Olympia Fields first, but Butler has many logistical advantages to hosting major golf events and could bring the Open back to Chicago via the USGA by admitting women.  

[Bill Seitz]

Had they moved a little quicker, they may have been able to get the BMW/Western back. 

Can someone explain this?

"The male-only policy at Black Sheep was really a marketing decision," Vince Salano Sr., Black Sheep's founder, told the Tribune in 2010. "It's just a fact that very few women would spend the money ($85,000 initiation fee) to join a club that focuses only on golf."

There's a difference between not marketing to women and not allowing women.  Is he saying that they felt they could better market the club to potential members by excluding women?  That's the only way it makes sense to me.  If you don't think women are going to want to pay $85k for a golf only club, that's fine.  I wouldn't throw a lot of money at a campaign to attract people that you don't think you can get to buy in.  But from a marketing perspective, this only makes sense if the exclusion of women makes the place more attractive to potential male members.  If I made a product that I thought a certain segment of society wasn't going to buy, I wouldn't waste any effort marketing to that segment.  But I wouldn't flat out exclude them from buying my product if they so desired. 

[Jud_T]

Bill,

Their argument is that women need and want additional facilities.  This way the club doesn't have to build an additional locker room and hire an additional locker room attendant.  As it stands the club just offers premade sandwiches and a full bar and their feeling is most women would want more substantial dining facilities and the associated costs and they want to put all the money into 27 holes of great golf.  Not saying I agree with it on a number of levels, but that's their argument.

[Bill Seitz]

Bill,

Their argument is that women need and want additional facilities.  This way the club doesn't have to build an additional locker room and hire an additional locker room attendant.  As it stands the club just offers premade sandwiches and a full bar and their feeling is most women would want more substantial dining facilities and the associated costs and they want to put all the money into 27 holes of great golf.  Not saying I agree with it on a number o levels, but that's their argument.

I suppose so.  I guess I don't see the marketing angle to that, though the logistical angle is clear.  Unless the idea is "we keep the dues lower by limiting the overhead". 

[Sven Nilsen]

Unless they change the open air aspect of the locker-room and lounge, they're going to need an extensive system of double doors to keep site-lines down.

[K. Krahenbuhl]

Doesn't this article get run about once a year?

[Jud_T]

Yes it does.  For the record I believe Black Sheep's dues are about 30-40% less than an equivalent full-service country club in the area.  I'd be somewhat surprised if Butler can get 75% of the membership to agree.  I hear it's more like 50-50, but it ain't cheap to belong so $5mm for an Open may be tough to turn down these days...

[PCCraig]

Doesn't this article get run about once a year?

My thoughts exactly!

[J_ Crisham]

Doesn't this article get run about once a year?

+1-   Not sure the tour players want to head back to Butler on a regular basis-very tough on the ego. Requires a few different shots than Torrey Pines or Doral. Hit a few tee shots last year from the new championship tees and for instance #9 is as tough a tee shot you will find in Chicago-and then comes #10!

[Jeff Shelman]

I don't know anything about the situation, so I'm clearly talking out of my backside....

But do you think this is about adding women? Or could this be about expanding the number of men they can attract? There are certainly guys who don't feel comfortable with the idea of dropping that much cash when their wife and potentially daughters can't even come out for dinner.

[George Freeman]

Jeff - I'm pretty sure it is about getting a US Open, PGA Championship, and/or Ryder Cup...

[George Freeman]

I'm guessing a US Open is the club's ultimate goal. Personally I'd rather see a return trip to Olympia Fields first, but Butler has many logistical advantages to hosting major golf events and could bring the Open back to Chicago via the USGA by admitting women.  

Seems much more like a "PGA Championship course" than a US Open course, IMO.

[PCCraig]

I'm guessing a US Open is the club's ultimate goal. Personally I'd rather see a return trip to Olympia Fields first, but Butler has many logistical advantages to hosting major golf events and could bring the Open back to Chicago via the USGA by admitting women.  

Seems much more like a "PGA Championship course" than a US Open course, IMO.

Yes...it has a more modern look. But it can also be set up to play really, really, really hard. So if the USGA wants to defend par it's a good option IMO.

[George Freeman]

Yes...it has a more modern look. But it can also be set up to play really, really, really hard. So if the USGA wants to defend par it's a good option IMO.

Well, based on the current trend of the US Open and future venues, it seems like the USGA is heading to more 'elastic' designs to allow for more variety in setting up the courses vs the old "fairways & greens or DIE!" moto they had for so long.  I hope they keep it up!

[Terry Lavin]

It's going to happen.  The natural mission of Butler National is to host professional golf, whether a tour stop or a national championship, and the only impediment is the men only nature of the membership.  I am confident that the club will get rid of that restriction, which I think is holding the club back members-wise.  If it gets a US Open, they will get a ton of new members, right away, even if only one or two of them happens to be of the fairer sex.

[JR Potts]

I 100% disagree with the esteemed Justice Lavin.  No way this get passed.  The infrastructure cost to provide the same level of service as they do for the men (which they would have to do to attract a female member to drop that kind of coin on a membership) would be astronomical.  While Butler's membership certainly isn't hurting, it's not thriving either.  They have seen their share of defections/drop-outs.  I 100% agree with Mr. Shelman - this is about attracting members - and that's it.

While there might be a serious and legitimate club-wide debate/vote about adding women members in the much distant future, I would be absolutely shocked if it were happening now or happened in the next few decades.

[Mark Johnson]

Agree with JR..   $5 million probably wouldn't cover the change in infrastructure and operating costs to make this happen. 

If you have ever been to butler, you realize that this isn't about retrofitting existing space, it would pretty much mean building another wing (not that there is even a logical place to do so.)

[SL_Solow]

Can't say I have any isnsight into the membership's proclivities.  However, Butler used to be a big "corporate" type of club and I believe it retains some of that cachet notwithstanding the changes to the tax code.  Query whether that might create impetus toward opening the membership given some of the changes in culture at large companies that are concerned about public scrutiny?

[Kalen Braley]

It would also mean they would have to spruce up thier entry sign to attract a femine presence!! 




P.S.  Looking at the aerial...it looks like something could be added to the North East side of the complex...

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Butler+National+Country+Club,+Oak+Brook,+IL&hl=en&ll=41.840862,-87.9332&spn=0.001531,0.002908&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=52.77044,95.273438&oq=butler+nat&hq=Butler+National+Country+Club,&hnear=Oak+Brook,+DuPage,+Illinois&t=h&z=19

[Carl Nichols]

Agree with JR..   $5 million probably wouldn't cover the change in infrastructure and operating costs to make this happen. 

If you have ever been to butler, you realize that this isn't about retrofitting existing space, it would pretty much mean building another wing (not that there is even a logical place to do so.)

I'm no architect or contractor, but this seems high to me.  I've only been there four times, but it seems like the entrance, dining area [including kitchen, which is usually a big number], and pro shop could basically all stay the same.  They'd obviously need to enclose the men's locker room and add a women's locker room somewhere--perhaps by adding a wing--but I just don't see how that work gets you near $5 million. 

Some of the comments also suggest that the place doesn't have a real kitchen or dining facilities.  ("As it stands the club just offers premade sandwiches and a full bar.") That hasn't been my experience; in fact, every time I've been there, I've been told to "order whatever you want and they'll make it," and they have. 

Ultimately, though, does anyone really think this is about actually attracting women members -- rather than simply eliminating a prohibition against having them, thereby allowing them both to host tour events and to get the influx of guys whose wives don't like male only clubs?  For co-ed golf-only clubs where there's no pool, tennis court, or anything like that, and where each spouse has to join individually, what percentage of members are women?  I bet it's low. 

[Tim_Cronin]

If they wanted to do it inexpensively, they could make the tennis building the women's locker room. Of course, the bathroom there never worked when it was the Western Open press room, so maybe that's not such a good idea. How much would it cost for 17 ladies tees and a port-a-jane?

Carl, I think the premade sandwich reference was to Black Sheep. There's an excellent dining room at Butler National.

[Carl Nichols]

Tim,
You're probably right; thanks.