ANGC-2 questions-maintenance $ per year & rounds per year?

[Carl Rogers]

sorry if covered previously.
are there good guesses out here?

[Kalen Braley]

Here's a realistic guess...

[Patrick_Mucci]

Understanding the significance and substance of the Masters and the revenues derived from it, their annual budget is irrelevant.

[Carl Rogers]

Understanding the significance and substance of the Masters and the revenues derived from it, their annual budget is irrelevant.

The point of these 2 questions is to demonstrate how much of a world of fantasy ANGC is relative to the reality of golf for the rest of us.

Believe it or not, I do think that such examples in the world of golf or elsewhere should and do exist.  But there is a need to understand the rarefied air they breathe.

[Paul Jones]

Understanding the significance and substance of the Masters and the revenues derived from it, their annual budget is irrelevant.

Patrick,

I have a good friend who is the Head Superintendent at an old club.  He joined this group of other Supers from high end clubs that share their budgets with each other.  When he goes to a meeting and one of the board members say, "I just played this course and they had.... why don't we?"  - he will look up the budget for that club (he has been fortunate that most of the couses have been on the list) for comparison along with iniatiation fee and rounds per year if available.

These questions always comes up after the Masters :-) - then he mentions that Masters have an unlimited budget and the course is closed from middle of May to October.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Understanding the significance and substance of the Masters and the revenues derived from it, their annual budget is irrelevant.

Patrick,

I have a good friend who is the Head Superintendent at an old club.  He joined this group of other Supers from high end clubs that share their budgets with each other.  When he goes to a meeting and one of the board members say, "I just played this course and they had.... why don't we?"  - he will look up the budget for that club (he has been fortunate that most of the couses have been on the list) for comparison along with iniatiation fee and rounds per year if available.

There's high end clubs and then there's Augusta.
And, there is NO comparison when it comes to Augusta.

As to those surveys, we ran the same peer/local club surveys on an annual basis.
The problem was that absolute comparisons were difficult due to the differing ways that each club categorized expenses.

These questions always comes up after the Masters :-) - then he mentions that Masters have an unlimited budget and the course is closed from middle of May to October.

You can't compare Augusta to any other club when it comes to budgets.
Their revenue source transcends the membership

[Anthony_Nysse]

 I would be very comfortable to say that ANGC does not have black and red numbers on their budgets. The level of conditioning, attention to detail, equipment and personnel is so far and above when can be accomplished anywhere else. As perfect at Oakmont was for the Open, as good as Shinnecock, Dallas National, Kinloch, Atlantic and Sage Valley are with aesthetics and conditioning, they’re not even close to ANGC.
  Augusta generates so much money from the Masters, that their funds are nearly unlimited. And they know that they are going to generate this money every year because there are 1000’s of people like II was this year that spent a ton of money are tickets and merchandise for a chance to see what is the holy grail of golf.
  We generated “X” amount of dollars during the tournament at Colonial, with the most coming the year of Annika. A portion of that money went into the operating budget to prepare the golf course for the tournament and clean up after. And as big at the budget was at Colonial, I would guess that it’s only a small percentage of what is spent at ANGC, judging by the work and mass number of people needed to complete it.
  I have always heard that Shadow Creek has unlimited funds because it’s a write off for the casino, as it needs to be when golfers are paying that kind of money, the course has bentgrass greens, tees and approaches and overseeds to the extent that SC does, not to mention all the people and fine details they present. SC isn’t even close to ANGC.
  Most high end courses that are open year rounds are going to be north of $1.5m. And numerous clubs in the north have numbers close to this in a much shorter growing season. (More fungicides, bentgrass costs and labor, to name a few)  Even though Augusta is closed in the summer, they still have to sod, transition the ryegrass, manage bentgrass and make all the slight changes that they do. I think that the maintenance budget number is far greater than were ready to get our heads around.

[John Kavanaugh]

Did Ben Sims get paid for his work at Augusta?

[Ben Sims]

Did Ben Sims get paid for his work at Augusta?

I'd be happy to answer, but first I want to know why you ask. 

[Kalen Braley]

I think John asks a good question...but I'll expand it

Does any of the "temporary" onsite personel get paid for the week, so as we don't single out Ben.

I was speaking to a guy a few nights ago who has a house down there and a couple of badges.  According to him, some volunteers are paid with being able to play the course at some point before it closes for the season.  I would think that would be fair compensation.

[John Kavanaugh]

Did Ben Sims get paid for his work at Augusta?

I'd be happy to answer, but first I want to know why you ask. 

The reason I ask is because it is important when making a budget to know if you have to pay your help.  I would imagine that Augusta can also get a better deal on equipment than most clubs. 

In my business I run into the same thing concerning the Indianapolis 500 racetrack.  It would be so cool to work there that a guy would give it away just for the privilege.  I promise you that the equipment companies would donate their time and expertise just for the advertising.

I ask to show why studying the budget of ANGC is not relevant.

[Ben Sims]

Carl,

Despite your feelings otherwise, there is really no need to understand the "rarified air" that ANGC breathes.  This is problem I have with the many opinions on the "Augusta syndrome" or the facebook and twitter feeds talking about ANGC and sustainability in the same sentence.  It's not relevant!  Remember the quote from Kill Bill II about comparing swords?

If you're gonna compare a Hanzo sword...you compare it to every other sword ever made--wasn't made--by Hattori Hanzo.

That's essentially what I am getting at.  There is no basis for comparison nor should there be.  Clifford Roberts had a quote that I'll try to remember, "Everything about The Masters had to be the best, and if it wasn't, it had to be improved upon every year until it was."  So, with the influence and financial means that ANGC possesses, and a commitment to that mantra, what else does anyone expect? 

John,

I was a tournament hire.  The numbers aren't relevant, but roughly a third of the golf course crew was permanent staff, a third tournament hires, and a third volunteers.  I have no idea about the other departments such as grounds or gallery.   

[John Kavanaugh]

Ben,

So then I take it that you were paid.  Good for you.

[Ben Sims]

Ben,

So then I take it that you were paid.  Good for you.

Yes.  But don't stop there.  Tie it in to your statement that "I ask to show why studying the budget of ANGC is not relevant."

[John Kavanaugh]

Ben,

I am not interested in how much you were paid.  I am sure that you are not privy to their work comp and liability rates.  Having a bunch of glassy eyed nimrods working around the clock must lead to many an injury that never see the light of day.  It's been my experience that volunteers and interns are more trouble than they are worth.  Mow, tweet, repeat is not a safe workplace.

[Ben Sims]

Ben,

I am not interested in how much you were paid.  I am sure that you are not privy to their work comp and liability rates.  Having a bunch of glassy eyed nimrods working around the clock must lead to many an injury that never see the light of day.  It's been my experience that volunteers and interns are more trouble than they are worth.  Mow, tweet, repeat is not a safe workplace.

John,

I can't for the life of me connect your last post to your first one on this thread.  

[John Kavanaugh]

The connection is that Augusta budget numbers are indecipherable.  Your hourly rate is not a real number so it need not be known.

[Ben Sims]

The connection is that Augusta budget numbers are indecipherable.  Your hourly rate is not a real number so it need not be known.

Agreed.  That's what I've been getting at.  ANGC is not comparable, so essentially, it doesn't matter what the budget or circumstances behind it are.

[Kalen Braley]

I'm sorry, and I promise I'm not attacking you personally Ben...

.. but I'm calling BS on the whole "ANGC is incomparable thing"

ANGC does indeed have a budget number and they obviously know what it is.  If its too embarrassing for that number to see the light of day, then so be it.  They could likely feed an entire small country on their annual budget and they do whatever they gotta do to justify that so they can sleep at night. But I'm not buying into this "inexplicable" bullocks nonsense that's been going around a few of the ANGC threads.

[Ben Sims]

I'm sorry, and I promise I'm not attacking you personally Ben...

.. but I'm calling BS on the whole "ANGC is incomparable thing"

ANGC does indeed have a budget number and they obviously know what it is.  If its too embarrassing for that number to see the light of day, then so be it.  They could likely feed an entire small country on their annual budget and they do whatever they gotta do to justify that so they can sleep at night. But I'm not buying into this "inexplicable" bullocks nonsense that's been going around a few of the ANGC threads.

Kalen,

You can call BS or not buy in all you want.  But neither you, or I, or anyone on this board will ever know that number.  It is inconsequential to anyone outside those gates.  They are willing to do whatever it takes to be perfect.  The greater world doesn't need to know what it takes to be perfect.  From a maintenance standpoint, I actually think ANGC is doing a favor to golf by not divulging their practices or budgets. 

[Joel_Stewart]

My guess they have a budget but also break out Fazio fees and course modifications into a separate category.   As an example, the cost for them to modify the 16th green this past year was probably $50,000.

I just played a Top 100 course with a limited membership.  They have a crew of 17 and the budget is around $1.5 million.  My guess is ANGC is about double that but it's only a guess (for fun) based on the new equipment (they might get that for free) and I'm told they have a full time arborist and other specialists.  I heard long ago that their water bill was enormous and even though they are closed in summer their electricty bill could run as high as $25,000 per month.

[John Kirk]

The largest maintenance budget I ever heard quoted is from a prestigious desert club, which spent as much as $3.2 million per year, as of 5-6 years ago.  My guess is they have reduced the budget since, as even they are having trouble maintaining a full membership.

It would be tough to separate yearly maintenance from the constant modifications, but I have to believe maintenance has to run in the $2-4M ballpark.  Also, Pat Mucci has played there a few times, and always says the course is typically less groomed than we see during Masters week.  Gosh good tournament this year.

[Patrick_Mucci]

JAKAB & Kalen,

ANGC's budget is irrelevant because the product they produce is unlike any other product in all of golf, by multiples.

There's simply no basis for comparison.

As to the general public being privileged to the budget, my educated guess is that the members aren't privileged to the budget.

[Kalen Braley]

I'm sorry, and I promise I'm not attacking you personally Ben...

.. but I'm calling BS on the whole "ANGC is incomparable thing"

ANGC does indeed have a budget number and they obviously know what it is.  If its too embarrassing for that number to see the light of day, then so be it.  They could likely feed an entire small country on their annual budget and they do whatever they gotta do to justify that so they can sleep at night. But I'm not buying into this "inexplicable" bullocks nonsense that's been going around a few of the ANGC threads.

Kalen,

You can call BS or not buy in all you want.  But neither you, or I, or anyone on this board will ever know that number.  It is inconsequential to anyone outside those gates.  They are willing to do whatever it takes to be perfect.  The greater world doesn't need to know what it takes to be perfect.  From a maintenance standpoint, I actually think ANGC is doing a favor to golf by not divulging their practices or budgets. 

Ben,

I actually partially agree with you on that last statement of doing everyone a favor by not divulging their practices.

But would you also agree that they come from a deeply hypocritical viewpoint when they chastize someone like Tiger for not being a good role model, when they themselves are such a poor role model?  Whether ANGC likes it or not, they are one of the ultimate role models in golf, yet don't seem to be concerned in the slightest with real accountability on several levels.  To have the gall to call the best player on the planet to the carpet for doing the same is beyond belief.

[Ben Sims]

Ben,

I actually partially agree with you on that last statement of doing everyone a favor by not divulging their practices.

But would you also agree that they come from a deeply hypocritical viewpoint when they chastize someone like Tiger for not being a good role model, when they themselves are such a poor role model?  Whether ANGC likes it or not, they are one of the ultimate role models in golf, yet don't seem to be concerned in the slightest with real accountability on several levels.  To have the gall to call the best player on the planet to the carpet for doing the same is beyond belief.

Kalen,

You're equating their budget to Tiger's club kicking?  That's a bit of a reach isn't it?  Where is is popularly viewed that ANGC's maintenance procedures and budget are comparably unfavorable as Tiger's on course lack of manners?

And how is ANGC a poor role model?  They put on the best run sporting event on the planet.  I am saying they are incomparable because they aren't simply a high end golf club.  Do you honestly think ANGC should be mowing fairways with two gang units a couple triplexes and a staff of 10 because that's how mom and pop courses get it done?

The problem is that people aren't smart enough to seperate what ANGC does and what they or other courses do.  I am smart enough that I can attend a day at Disneyland and not expect the traveling carnival in the JC Penney parking lot to be the same.  Why aren't golfers as astute when it comes to watching The Masters?

[Tags:]

Tags: