[Duncan Cheslett]

Duncan,

if your club finds too many players wanting to play on Saturday with just 350 members then it has had a very poor strategy with its membership playing demographics. If you have more than 1/3 of the membership wanting to play at the same time on a regular basis then something is wrong. A club should handle 600 members no problem and a 9 holer 350 members.

Jon

Interesting statements.

We do not currently have a problem with Saturday play but we are getting near to capacity, particularly for board comps. If we were to attract another 30 members from other clubs all wanting to compete in the Saturday  competition we would have a problem.

Many clubs are oversubscribed in this way and are forced to have ballots for Saturday  comps, and qualifying criteria for board comps. I am keen to avoid this scenario and intend to plan our marketing strategy accordingly.

We have many senior members who are no longer competitive,  yet still play every Saturday from the back tees. Encouraging them to play at quieter times instead is an obvious way forward.

As it hasn't been an issue for many years no one  has given this any thought.  As we make a real effort to expand our membership a strategy needs to be in place to obviate the problem before it arises.

[Jon Wiggett]

Duncan,

in the summer you should get in excess of 200 players round in a competition which aught to mean no need for a ballot. However, I stand by what I said and would suggest that a club with an over subscription problem on a particular day have failed to realise a problem and so not dealt with it. Should you get 30 new members then either they need to not want to play on a Saturday or others need to make way or you need to raise the number of players you get round.

Please note, I am not trying to be flippant with my remarks.

Jon

[Adrian_Stiff]

Duncan,

in the summer you should get in excess of 200 players round in a competition which aught to mean no need for a ballot. However, I stand by what I said and would suggest that a club with an over subscription problem on a particular day have failed to realise a problem and so not dealt with it. Should you get 30 new members then either they need to not want to play on a Saturday or others need to make way or you need to raise the number of players you get round.

Please note, I am not trying to be flippant with my remarks.

Jon

I think one of the things that has happened is that clubs have lost members mainly because those people simply play less and can't see it as value. I think the Saturday morning people are the keenest golfers and so Saturdays have remained very busy. We certainly fit the category where all the tee times are taken up from 0700 to 1300 on a Saturday. Midweek certainly in the winter we are dead.

[Duncan Cheslett]

Jon,

I am very grateful for your comments; it is easy to get insular and blinkered in one's thinking and external input is very useful.

200 in a comp seems a tad optimistic but I am happy to accept that 180 should be doable in 3-balls at 8 minute intervals between 7.30am and 3.30pm.

I've just checked, and we currently have 224 7 day members, of whom at least two thirds would be expected to play each Saturday in the season. For board comps the turnout is greater as members plan their holidays around the major competitions. Clearly we do not have much growth potential in 7 day memberships.

Meanwhile we have only 20 6-day and 14 5-day members. Clearly, we need to encourage these categories - they offer much more potential for growth.

Far from being flippant, your comments are immensely helpful.

[Jon Wiggett]

Duncan,

when I was at Howley Hall GC, Morley we used to get 230 round in the bigger comps in the summer. Yes, it meant starting at 6.30 and last off after 6pm but it was more than possible. However, I do appreciate it depends on the course and the bottlenecks that might or might not exist. Also, I remember we had to ensure certain players did not end up in the same group to ensure pace of play was kept. I also remember the last group was round in about 3.5 hours typically.

An interesting comment on people playing from the back tees. Have you not thought that maybe on certain holes the back tees might be used for daily play and a forward tee used for competitions thus shortening the course and speeding up play getting more players round.

In the end I suppose you need to know why members are so keen to play on a particular day and then work out a way of spreading the demand.

Adrian,

I agree with your assessment of the situation.

Jon

[Duncan Cheslett]

I think one of the things that has happened is that clubs have lost members mainly because those people simply play less and can't see it as value. I think the Saturday morning people are the keenest golfers and so Saturdays have remained very busy. We certainly fit the category where all the tee times are taken up from 0700 to 1300 on a Saturday. Midweek certainly in the winter we are dead.

I agree Adrian.

Because clubs generally play most if not all of their qualifying competitions on a Saturday, club golf has become very Saturday-centric. Unfortunately, there is only one Saturday per week and it is only so long!

The law of supply and demand suggests that the differential in fees between 7-day and 5-day membership should be a lot greater in order to spread play across the week. At most clubs, the differential is derisory - a couple of hundred quid per year at most - certainly not enough to encourage large numbers of 5-day members.

Yet most courses are dead through the week - particularly late in the afternoon. I'm beginning to think that a CASC compliant off-peak membership category at a cheap rate could be a big success even disregarding the CASC implications. Particularly if a qualifying competition was laid on at a suitable time.

[Duncan Cheslett]

when I was at Howley Hall GC, Morley we used to get 230 round in the bigger comps in the summer. Yes, it meant starting at 6.30 and last off after 6pm but it was more than possible.

Unfortunately, we are restricted to starting no earlier than 7.30 due to the proximity of housing to our first three holes. They also happen to be the holes that elicit the most full-bloodied roars of "FORE!!" on a regular basis. Perhaps this could add to the many good arguments for re-jigging the course to start at the current 6th...


... that way early starters at 6.30 would not reach the current first hole until 8.30 at the earliest.


Hmmm...

[Ryan Coles]

Duncan

Incentivise those who've already played 3 times that week by introducing a 6 day membership and move more comps to Sunday.

Are you members only on Saturday? 

[Duncan Cheslett]

Ryan,

We already have around 20 6-day members - mainly guys who play only on a Sunday. There is a non-qualifying competition organised by the Pro every Sunday. Making this a qualifier for handicap purposes at least once per month if not every week is on the cards.

Sundays - particularly Sunday mornings - are almost as busy as Saturdays. We have probably 60 members who routinely play every Saturday AND Sunday.

Sunday afternoons are the only time at a weekend that we can accommodate visitors. The longer this thread goes on the more I realise just how concentrated our member play is into a day and a half per week.

The received wisdom at the club is that we could do with another 50 members. The truth is that 100 new members paying half price subs but only playing at off-peak times would actually be easier to accommodate and would bring in the same revenue. Taking clubhouse spend into account the revenue would possibly be more.

A balance between the two extremes is probably a sensible place to aim.

[Adrian_Stiff]

Sundays - particularly Sunday mornings - are almost as busy as Saturdays. We have probably 60 members who routinely play every Saturday AND Sunday.

That really is the heart of the financial problem 60 people don't pay enough/play too much. This happens at a lot of UK clubs, these 60 would be the heart of the club, they probably form quite a bit of the committee and quite a lot of the clubhouse spend. BUT their contribution per round of golf is too low. I don't know Reddish Vale's PPR but it is probably £13- £15 a round and if RV is £700 per year they are only paying £7. Factor in juniors and colts not paying full wack it is quite a problem.


What really is fair is £200 per year to be a member of the club and then pay £15 per round. The people that pay 20 times per year pay £500. The people that play 100 times pay £1700. People playing 100 times per year won't see that as fair because of the golf culture and the ability that the next club will do all in for £750. So clubs have to have schemes aimed at lighter play.

[Jon Wiggett]

Adrian,

that is all very fine and good but as you point out possibly half of the committee are amongst those 60. I doubt very much that RV pay even expenses for committee duties let alone a meeting fee. If you expect them to pay more then most will also say why should I give up my spare time for free.

The answer is to get the playing habits of the membership spaced out more evenly over the full week. Yes, you will always have more pressure on the weekend days but it is possible to reduce this and increase play at other times.

Jon

[Neil White]

Duncan,


Out of interest - does Reddish Vale have a tee-time sheet or can as a member can you just turn up and play?

[Ryan Coles]

Adrian,

that is all very fine and good but as you point out possibly half of the committee are amongst those 60. I doubt very much that RV pay even expenses for committee duties let alone a meeting fee. If you expect them to pay more then most will also say why should I give up my spare time for free.

The answer is to get the playing habits of the membership spaced out more evenly over the full week. Yes, you will always have more pressure on the weekend days but it is possible to reduce this and increase play at other times.

Jon

Jon 

What 3 practical steps could RV take?

[Duncan Cheslett]

Sundays - particularly Sunday mornings - are almost as busy as Saturdays. We have probably 60 members who routinely play every Saturday AND Sunday.

That really is the heart of the financial problem 60 people don't pay enough/play too much. This happens at a lot of UK clubs, these 60 would be the heart of the club, they probably form quite a bit of the committee and quite a lot of the clubhouse spend.

We have a very active Wednesday Section with a qualifying competition every week during the season attracting upwards of 100 entrants. 90% of these will also play on Saturdays and about 60 of them on Sundays as well. There are a hard-core half dozen who play virtually every day!

Needless to say you are quite correct in that the committee (or Council) comprises almost entirely of members who play 2 or 3 times a week if not more. Persuading them that it would be "fair" to pay £15 per round would be a task far beyond the abilities of Hercules.

Of course these members' golf is being subsidised by those 7 day members who only play once a week. The counter-argument is that all full members have the right to play every day if they want to - that they choose not to is their decision.

The answer is to get the playing habits of the membership spaced out more evenly over the full week. Yes, you will always have more pressure on the weekend days but it is possible to reduce this and increase play at other times.

You are absolutely right.

 I'd love to hear your suggestions - as I'm sure would many clubs in a similar situation.

Duncan,


Out of interest - does Reddish Vale have a tee-time sheet or can as a member can you just turn up and play?

We use the BRS tee-booking system and encourage all members to use it even for casual play. However, there is nothing to stop members just turning up and going to the first tee if it is free.

[Duncan Cheslett]

The answer is to get the playing habits of the membership spaced out more evenly over the full week. Yes, you will always have more pressure on the weekend days but it is possible to reduce this and increase play at other times.

Jon

I've just had a look at the start sheet for this coming Saturday and estimate that between a quarter and a third of participants are retired guys who don't actually need to play on a Saturday.

Of these, maybe two thirds are still good players who actually stand a good chance of winning something, while the others are old timers with long handicaps still entrenched in the culture of Saturday competition golf.

Maybe if Saturdays became oversubscribed some persuasion could be brought to bear on seniors with 20+ handicaps to step aside in favour of younger, newer members who could be described as the future of the club rather than its past.

I'm going to have to hone up my diplomatic skills...

 

[Jon Wiggett]

Duncan,

I think you have probably already hit upon the most logical solution. In the end, if enough members understand the problem and feel they are able to help by altering their playing habits then that will help. To me, the key is to work with the membership not try to coerce.

Ryan,

it is for RV to decide what is best and I am certainly not going to start saying what they should do or not. I would suggest it is more a matter of how they go about it that will be important.

Jon

[Adrian_Stiff]

Adrian,

that is all very fine and good but as you point out possibly half of the committee are amongst those 60. I doubt very much that RV pay even expenses for committee duties let alone a meeting fee. If you expect them to pay more then most will also say why should I give up my spare time for free.

The answer is to get the playing habits of the membership spaced out more evenly over the full week. Yes, you will always have more pressure on the weekend days but it is possible to reduce this and increase play at other times.

Jon

Your not understanding my post or I have not explained it properly. I am not suggesting there is a nice answer for resolving the issue I am just saying that if everyone acted fairly, fair would be to pay by usage rather than an all you can eat package, wherby some have one plateful and some gorge themselves with befores, afters, seconds and doggy bags and expect everyone to pay the same. As it stands pretty much every members golf club has an 'all you can eat package' and if not, the higher users would seek their golf elsewhere.


Duncan - We have competitions alternately on Saturdays and Sundays (so one every week in the summer) and there is a pattern that Saturday's are quieter if the comp is on the Sunday. Sounds to me in all honesty your best route is a membership for 5 day gold (exc Sat & Sun) and a 6 day like what you are doing. They are good and fair discounts having looked at your website but get rid of the senior membership discount on the full rate at £725.

[Jon Wiggett]

Adrian,

I was not disagreeing with you. What I was pointing out was that those that use the club a lot are also those that put back a lot as well. In principle what you say is correct however the danger of doing that is you turn a private members club into a pay and play thus losing loyalty of the membership.

Jon

[Duncan Cheslett]

Adrian,

The "all you can eat" model is here to stay at members clubs, and I don't think it is generally considered unfair.

Most of the "one platers" will be guys of working age with family commitments who would love to play more and look forward to doing so in the future, while the "gorgers" tend to be semi or newly retired blokes who feel that they have earned the privilege of more golf after a lifetime of toil and supporting the club.

Once the "gorgers" feel time catching up with them, they tend to become "one platers" again.

There are of course exceptions. One of our biggest "gorgers" is 85 years old, plays off 10, and has been retired for 36 years. He's also an honorary member so pays nothing! 

[Adrian_Stiff]

I think we are all agreeing with each other, but if you had 150 members that played every day you can only have 150 members. RV with 350 when it should have 600 is getting near to what is the opposite of Utopia.


If it costs £400,000 to run the course, let's say the clubhouse washes its face. The £400,000 has to be divided.


And as Sean Arble will quite rightly point out that is without saving anything for a rainy day. Ideally you need a £100,000 in the coffers just incase.


The high users might think it is unfair but it is not. High users just look at it from that position because they can vote with their feet, but the problem is growing as clubs membership decline and income shrinks. The pattern that you are experiencing will grow and we will hear more about it.


The over-riding principle is about fairness and whilst it is lovely if 10 people go out for a meal and divide the bill by 10 and if Charlie Foxtrot only has 1 course whilst Marky Parky has 3 courses. What happens after a few meals is Charlie Foxtrot gets fed up and eats on his own, Mark Parky coninues until such time as their is no one to feed him. The situation where CF will continue to eat with MP for an extensive period will not continue (unless they are family).


Every golf club has a PPR. That is the unit cost per round that it costs to run the course. So divide your costs by the number of rounds, quite often £400,000 divided by 28,000 is a good number. ie £14.28.


When you have a £14.28 PPR and a membership fee of £895. High volume play is after 63 rounds per year.

[Sean_A]

Adrian


I don't think the market is that close to sliding predominately over to smaller dues plus a green fee charge with each play.  It seems to me (and I could be wrong) that it is predominately newer clubs which use the pay & play system.  I think there is room in the market for pay & play membership and the traditional approach, plus other approaches. 


From my PoV, the pay & play clubs likely serve as waiting rooms for many golfers hoping to move on to better courses/clubs.  Pay & play really suits the vagabond golfer (like myself) who wants to play away lot, but still retain membership without breaking the bank.  I wouldn't mind that approach if the course is good enough. In my case, the courses I see which use pay & play are not clubs I would wish to join because the courses (mainly newish) are of little interest to me. 


Bottom line, if the club is good enough to attract enough members, most of the time it is far better to get the membership cash up front each year...that is a no brainer.  Why charge less and hope more money comes in during the year?  Thats an unnecessarily risky model.  The pay & play scheme is mainly for clubs which can't make it on the traditional model.


Ciao

[Ryan Coles]

Full membership at all but the elite is sliding. It would have covered 90 - 95% of expenditure in the past. The proportion is now much lower. Clubs are already relying on pay and play for survival, it's just under the greenfee banner rather than flexible membership banner.

The clubs doing well outside of the premier league are those who charge a fair price for all appetites.

[Adrian_Stiff]

Adrian


I don't think the market is that close to sliding predominately over to smaller dues plus a green fee charge with each play.  It seems to me (and I could be wrong) that it is predominately newer clubs which use the pay & play system.  I think there is room in the market for pay & play membership and the traditional approach, plus other approaches. 


From my PoV, the pay & play clubs likely serve as waiting rooms for many golfers hoping to move on to better courses/clubs.  Pay & play really suits the vagabond golfer (like myself) who wants to play away lot, but still retain membership without breaking the bank.  I wouldn't mind that approach if the course is good enough. In my case, the courses I see which use pay & play are not clubs I would wish to join because the courses (mainly newish) are of little interest to me. 


Bottom line, if the club is good enough to attract enough members, most of the time it is far better to get the membership cash up front each year...that is a no brainer.  Why charge less and hope more money comes in during the year?  Thats an unnecessarily risky model.  The pay & play scheme is mainly for clubs which can't make it on the traditional model.


Ciao

You have not understood my post.

[Sean_A]

Adrian


You said the over-riding principle is fairness.  I don't think this is nearly the case across the board.  For many, the over-riding principle is the club and course.  A huge number of golfers are quite happy with the traditional membership model because they are happy with their clubs and courses.  Many wouldn't dream of down-sizing to a lesser club and course for the sake of saving a few hundred quid a year.  Some would of course.  My point is there is room for both models...that is abundantly clear. 


Ciao

[Adrian_Stiff]

Adrian


You said the over-riding principle is fairness.  I don't think this is nearly the case across the board.  For many, the over-riding principle is the club and course.  A huge number of golfers are quite happy with the traditional membership model because they are happy with their clubs and courses.  Many wouldn't dream of down-sizing to a lesser club and course for the sake of saving a few hundred quid a year.  Some would of course.  My point is there is room for both models...that is abundantly clear. 


Ciao

I am not disputing what you say above. I am merely pointing out that fairness is you pay for what you use. The reason most clubs lose members is a section of them simply don't play enough and don't see the value. You don't lose the high users because they see their value. The real truth/fairness is somewhere in the middle and the middle ground really is your PPR, so if x divided by y = 57 rounds. Then if you have too many plus 57 users then ultimately you have less cash.


Duncan is saying that they only have 330 members of which 220 are full 7 day and that 60 play both Saturday and Sunday.


The result is too many high users and it is a pattern that I think is growing and will be a problem perhaps 10 years down that road.


Do you agree or disagree?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()