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

[Kalen Braley]

Ben,

I'm talking about this, which Billy Payne said of Tiger back in 2010:

"But as he now says himself, he forgot in the process to remember that with fame and fortune comes responsibility, not invisibility. It is not simply the degree of his conduct that is so egregious here; it is the fact that he disappointed all of us, and more importantly, our kids and our grand kids. Our hero did not live up to the expectations of the role model we saw for our children. ... We at Augusta hope and pray that our great champion will begin his new life here tomorrow in a positive, hopeful and constructive manner, but this time, with a significant difference from the past."

http://blog.syracuse.com/sports/2010/04/should_augusta_national_golf_c.html

I can think of few things more hypocritical in light of thier own practices....

Is ANGC not a role model itself to all of us?
Are they not a role model to their own children when it comes to their membership policies concerning women?
Are they not a role model to the golf world for sustainable golf course practices?
Are they beyond remembering "that with fame and fortune comes responsibility, not invisibility"
Are they beyond being a role model to the world for spending their money prudently?
Should they be accountable for their practices instead of hiding behind "what we do is private"?

It goes on and on and on, of how they practice "do what we say, not what we do."

[Tom_Doak]

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.

Anthony:

Most of what you say above is true, but I would disagree with your first paragraph that Augusta is way beyond the other best courses in the country.

I played Augusta a year ago January [with one of my clients] and the conditioning was far from perfect.  Of course, last winter was a much tougher one that this year, but the idea that the course is perfect all the time is a myth -- a myth that's reinforced by the fact that the only time anyone else ever sees the course is the week of the tournament, when everything is peaked to perfection.  And that's really the whole problem with the so-called "Augusta syndrome" ... not just that they have so much more money to spend than others do, but the whole myth that ANY golf course can be conditioned to perfection on a year-round basis.  Nature just doesn't work that way, and no amount of money can change it.

[Ben Sims]

Should they be accountable for their practices instead of hiding behind "what we do is private"?

No.

They are a private club and bet that they--as a club--are accountable to their private membership.  As a private entity, what else do you want?  

Tom,

I forgot where I saw them, but I have seen pictures of ANGC the second week of September.  It looks a bit different than the second week of April.

[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.

Anthony:

Most of what you say above is true, but I would disagree with your first paragraph that Augusta is way beyond the other best courses in the country.

I played Augusta a year ago January [with one of my clients] and the conditioning was far from perfect.  Of course, last winter was a much tougher one that this year, but the idea that the course is perfect all the time is a myth -- a myth that's reinforced by the fact that the only time anyone else ever sees the course is the week of the tournament, when everything is peaked to perfection.  And that's really the whole problem with the so-called "Augusta syndrome" ... not just that they have so much more money to spend than others do, but the whole myth that ANY golf course can be conditioned to perfection on a year-round basis.  Nature just doesn't work that way, and no amount of money can change it.

Tom,
  I didnt say, nor intended imply that it was perfect year round. The timing of the tournament allows for the course to peak that week, abit from some azalas in a warm winter. Anyone that can, may google "Augusta National Summer" and see some photos that are eye opening. A lot of this bermudagrass and dead ryegrass. Time to lay sod, by the truckloads. In fact, our own Chris Tritabaugh wrote the following:

http://northlandgrounds.blogspot.com/#!/2012/04/augusta-syndrome.html

  No doubt, that your view of conditioning is different than that of most americans. Most would see the green grass and be impressed. I would still stand firm that their personnal, amount of equipment (and ability to get access to) and details are second to no one. For most, I cant image that wet, ryegrass in January is exciting. Even in the latest Golfworld, there is an ariticle on how many mudball there was this year. Those 100+ foot pines do not allow for overseed ryegrass to dry down very quickly. The year that Zach Johnson (2007?) won seems to be the firmest the course has played in years.

[Carl Rogers]

No one has ventured an opinion on the number of rounds played per year.  Not counting Masters Week.

3000 rounds per year??? way too high???

[Patrick_Mucci]

No one has ventured an opinion on the number of rounds played per year.  Not counting Masters Week.

3000 rounds per year??? way too high???

Carl,

I would think that a multiple of that number would be appropriate

[Kalen Braley]

Should they be accountable for their practices instead of hiding behind "what we do is private"?

No.

They are a private club and bet that they--as a club--are accountable to their private membership.  As a private entity, what else do you want?  

Ben,

If they were truly private, and held no outside events...that would be an entirely different scenario, and I would agree with you. But this is not the case.  They clearly benefit from the once-per-year event where they gladly take money from Sponsors, TV folks, and "Patrons" alike to pretend that they are something "more"...which they are clearly not.

To any person who is able to process the words coming out of their mouth and compare them to their actions, there is a big disconnect.

A few examples:
They SAY they are private, yet have no trouble ACTING to open up their course once per year and gladly open their pocketbooks to our money.
They SAY others should be a role model, but their ACTIONS clearly show they don't believe that as they have no female members.
They SAY they are good for the game of golf, but their ACTIONS show they are clearly wasteful with their resources.

They want their cake, and they want to eat it too!

[Ben Sims]

Ben,

If they were truly private, and held no outside events...that would be an entirely different scenario, and I would agree with you. But this is not the case.  They clearly benefit from the once-per-year event where they gladly take money from Sponsors, TV folks, and "Patrons" alike to pretend that they are something "more"...which they are clearly not.

To any person who is able to process the words coming out of their mouth and compare them to their actions, there is a big disconnect.

A few examples:
They SAY they are private, yet have no trouble ACTING to open up their course once per year and gladly open their pocketbooks to our money.
They SAY others should be a role model, but their ACTIONS clearly show they don't believe that as they have no female members.
They SAY they are good for the game of golf, but their ACTIONS show they are clearly wasteful with their resources.

They want their cake, and they want to eat it too!

Kalen,

I've spent enough time in Austin, TX and Davis, CA to learn that your argument cannot be appeased.  So I'll bow out now.  It is what it is my friend.  And it is not comparable.  You can be mad at it and take a 60's disestablishmentist's view of it all you want.  But ANGC has demonstrated time and time again that they will do what they please.  You can react to it in whatever way you wish. 

I think it's up to individuals to decide how they feel and how they'll react to the "Augusta syndrome" at their own operations.  I hope they are prudent and can have a certain amount of serenity about it. 

[Mike Benham]

But ANGC has demonstrated time and time again that they will do what they please.  You can react to it in whatever way you wish. 
 

Ben - Kalen's wish is that the powers of ANGC be honest with themselves, be a leader in the industry and build that damn softball field ...

[jeffwarne]

Ben,

I'm talking about this, which Billy Payne said of Tiger back in 2010:

"But as he now says himself, he forgot in the process to remember that with fame and fortune comes responsibility, not invisibility. It is not simply the degree of his conduct that is so egregious here; it is the fact that he disappointed all of us, and more importantly, our kids and our grand kids. Our hero did not live up to the expectations of the role model we saw for our children. ... We at Augusta hope and pray that our great champion will begin his new life here tomorrow in a positive, hopeful and constructive manner, but this time, with a significant difference from the past."

http://blog.syracuse.com/sports/2010/04/should_augusta_national_golf_c.html

I can think of few things more hypocritical in light of thier own practices....

Is ANGC not a role model itself to all of us?
Are they not a role model to their own children when it comes to their membership policies concerning women?
Are they not a role model to the golf world for sustainable golf course practices?
Are they beyond remembering "that with fame and fortune comes responsibility, not invisibility"
Are they beyond being a role model to the world for spending their money prudently?
Should they be accountable for their practices instead of hiding behind "what we do is private"?

It goes on and on and on, of how they practice "do what we say, not what we do."

They run a golf tournament.
You really post a LOT about a tournament you boycott watching.
and if you're boycotting it, it's pretty hard for me to believe you can comment with any degree of accuracy/intelligence about it.

What exactly about Augusta's maintenance practices is wasteful? (at least compared to other clubs)
and how do you know it's wasteful?
What if you found out their budget was less than your club and they were 100% organic?
Would they be OK then"
Why is your pet project (a softball field on a golf course already maintaining x amount of acres) not wasteful?
I give the board a lot of credit for no one posting what most were thinking about that.

You have a really big issue with the fact they're private-Should they go public and take tee times?
Or do you just want them to accept a token woman?
If they choose to remain private, should they cancel the tournament?

and if they did all you ask, what would you bitch about then?

[Kalen Braley]

Jeff,

Its simple really.  Its a personal choice of whether or not one thinks a club like ANGC is being a proper role model given its lofty world position.

In my opinion, its a resounding no!

If they admitted a woman, or even a couple of them, I would probably change my opinion even in light of its other short comings.  Hell no one is perfect, so I'd be a hypocrite to require such.  But for Pete's sake, these guys need to at least catch up with the 20th century, much less the 21st we currently live in....

P.S.  Based on all the conversations, threads, and what we know of Augusta...its pretty safe to say they are easily a "1%er" when it comes to the course budget.  Hell I'd bet my left pinky toe they are no less than in the top 10 for most expensive golf course budgets in the US. 

[Patrick_Mucci]

Kalen,

I've never heard anyone, until you, advocate that private clubs should be role models for anyone or anything.

Since when is that task a responsibility of any private club ?

[JMEvensky]

P.S.  Based on all the conversations, threads, and what we know of Augusta...its pretty safe to say they are easily a "1%er" when it comes to the course budget.  Hell I'd bet my left pinky toe they are no less than in the top 10 for most expensive golf course budgets in the US. 

KB--you're probably correct about ANGC's budget being in the top 1%.But,I'd bet that they're on the opposite end of the scale if you consider their maintenance budget relative to their income.

[jeffwarne]

[quote author=Kalen Braley link=topic=51826.msg1187332#msg1187332 inks up with the 20th century, much less the 21st we currently live in....

P.S.  Based on all the conversations, threads, and what we know of Augusta...its pretty safe to say they are easily a "1%er" when it comes to the course budget.  Hell I'd bet my rleft pinky toe they are no less than in the top 10 for most expensive golf course budgets in the US. 
[/quote]to

Kalen,
Do you think Wimbledon has a larger budget than a private club down the road?
Do you think Yankee stadium would have a larger allocation of funds than your softball field?
Rye grass is green.
It doesn't cost more to keep it green.

This reminds me of the moms who criticize me for driving a suburban,than call to ask if I can drive their child to practice because I have room

[Kalen Braley]

Patrick,

Cmon now, don't play coy on this one.  You know as well as everyone else that ANGC is not just another private club.... its the mother of all clubs certainly in the US, perhaps in the entire world.

JM,

I don't buy the argument that a wasteful practice is "justified" just because there is more money laying around.  Its that kind of reasoning that has cost the taxpayers billions of dollars in wasted money because departments waste money so they don't lose budget fund allocations for the following year.  If ANGC really wanted to be a role model, why wouldn't they create a good looking golf course and then say we did it and only spent X amount of dollars.  That would be truly impressive to innovate how to maintain a course on a limited budget, and they actually could afford to try different methods and still recover if it doesn't work out. Hell most of ANGCs members come from corporate America where they have spent entire careers pinching pennys and cutting costs at every last junction, I'm sure they have plenty of acumen to figure it out.

Jeff,

I know nothing of the budgets of Wimbledon or Yankee stadium, but I thought we were talking about ANGC.   

[jeffwarne]

Kalen,
What evidence do you have that the course engages in wasteful activities,other than the condition of the course?
If it was in poor shape would that be evidence they weren't wasteful?
If your superintendent delivers your course in pristine condition do you assume she is being wasteful?

You state you know nothing of Yankee stadium or wimbledon,yet you feel perfectly qualified to negatively comment on ANGC, despite the fact that your budget knowledge of all three is equal.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Cmon now, don't play coy on this one. 
You know as well as everyone else that ANGC is not just another private club.... its the mother of all clubs certainly in the US, perhaps in the entire world.

But, it is just another private club.

That the members were/are gracious enough to create, nourish and host a tournament, not once every 10-13 years as U.S. Open and PGA courses do, but, every year, is a wonderful contribution to golf, for all of us.

And, through their creative and generous efforts they've managed to produce the absolute best telecast of any golf event, or actually any sporting event, to the general public, while at the same time, while other sports are gouging the fans who attend, ANGC presents an on-site product at a very low cost to the fans.

It's unique to all of golf and all of sports.

[JESII]

I think knowledge of their budget would help put the conversation in perspective when a member asks his superintendent of greens chairman why their course isn't up to Augusta's standard.

Pat you suggested that the total rounds might be a multiple of 3,000...do you think they do more than 10,000 rounds?

[JMEvensky]

I think knowledge of their budget would help put the conversation in perspective when a member asks his superintendent of greens chairman why their course isn't up to Augusta's standard.

Amen.

[Kalen Braley]

JM and Jim,

This is especially so based on the law of diminishing returns.....  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diminishing_returns

Given the stories of the place, which have been confirmed by multiple sources. where not a blade of grass is out of place, nary a weed is to be found, every tree perfectly trimmed, every blade of grass mowed to an exact height, etc, etc....to get to that state of "perfection" takes an incredible amount of resources and time.

I'd bet dollars to donuts they could present a quality product that is just as good as normal PGA Tour event for half of their current budget.

[JMEvensky]

JM and Jim,

This is especially so based on the law of diminishing returns.....  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diminishing_returns

Given the stories of the place, which have been confirmed by multiple sources. where not a blade of grass is out of place, nary a weed is to be found, every tree perfectly trimmed, every blade of grass mowed to an exact height, etc, etc....to get to that state of "perfection" takes an incredible amount of resources and time.

I'd bet dollars to donuts they could present a quality product that is just as good as normal PGA Tour event for half of their current budget.

KB,I can't tell you how much I regret jumping into this thread.But,in for a penny...

You speak like a man who's never tried to explain a maintenance budget to a member--especially one who's sole frames of reference are ANGC, his own club,and his friend's club down the street.

As to whether they could produce PGAT conditions for less,who cares?ANGC chooses to produce a golf course as perfect as they can.That's their business.When you and I become dues paying ANGC members,maybe we'll argue for a different approach.

Personally,I'm glad they push the manicuring envelope.I like seeing what the upper limit looks like.

But,as someone who's had to explain to the slower children why they can't have what ANGC's members can have,I wish their budget was available as a yardstick.

If you get tapped for ANGC membership before I do,see if you can get me a copy.I promise not to tell which member I got it from.

[Kalen Braley]

JM,

I understand what're your saying.....and I find it hard to believe the vast majority of members wouldn't be able to understand why there is a difference in conditioning.

That being said, you are correct, I've never tried to explain such to a member.  But as an analogy, I don't have to smoke crack or shoot up meth to know its bad for me either.  So I think I still have a valid viewpoint on this one.

As for ANGC, i don't disagree that it is their club...

But once again,the quandry remains the same....just because one has the ability to do something, doesn't neccesarily mean they should do it

P.S.  Where is that Wiki-leaks guy when you need him.  I'm guessing he could get his hands on a copy of the annual budget! 

[JESII]

JM,

If ANGC really wanted to be a role model, why wouldn't they create a good looking golf course and then say we did it and only spent X amount of dollars.  That would be truly impressive to innovate how to maintain a course on a limited budget, and they actually could afford to try different methods and still recover if it doesn't work out.

Not to pile on Kalen, but this section is a real head scratcher to me. How is it they would recover if something didn't work out?



Do you mean kick Rommetty out of the club if she gets fired from IBM?

[JMEvensky]

Not to pile on Kalen

Why not?

It's starting to get fun now that he's equated golf course maintenance to smoking crack.

[JESII]

Good point...we could go anywhere now.

[Tags:]

Tags: