[J_ Crisham]

I think Mark Fine is correct.

Location and demographics, not architecture are the primary causes.

Pat,   You nailed it with respect to the Chicago clubs I mentioned. Areas that were affluent 50 yrs ago that have since cratered.

Each closed course has a unique story.  Nonetheless, of the courses that have closed in your area, how many would you classify as having well designed golf courses.  How many are poor?

In my area, the comparison is not close.  Most of the courses that have closed have been poor

Jason,   
         The clubs that I am speaking of are not bad golf courses- in fact one of them is very good- top 10 or 12 in Chicago easy. Another is pretty good, the last one is decent but was altered due to a highway expansion back in the 60's . These are courses you would enjoy playing- very walkable, good conditioning , nice group of gregarious members etc. - unfortunately they are not in an affluent area. For them to attract members from downtown you are looking at least 50 - 60 minutes each way with no traffic. My hope is that should 2 of them go down the remaining members will head to the 3rd club and strengthen it because it's a real dandy and a course I always suggest to any out of towner as a must see.

[BCowan]

I think Mark Fine is correct.

Location and demographics, not architecture are the primary causes.

Pat,   You nailed it with respect to the Chicago clubs I mentioned. Areas that were affluent 50 yrs ago that have since cratered.

Each closed course has a unique story.  Nonetheless, of the courses that have closed in your area, how many would you classify as having well designed golf courses.  How many are poor?

In my area, the comparison is not close.  Most of the courses that have closed have been poor

Jason,  
         The clubs that I am speaking of are not bad golf courses- in fact one of them is very good- top 10 or 12 in Chicago easy. Another is pretty good, the last one is decent but was altered due to a highway expansion back in the 60's . These are courses you would enjoy playing- very walkable, good conditioning , nice group of gregarious members etc. - unfortunately they are not in an affluent area. For them to attract members from downtown you are looking at least 50 - 60 minutes each way with no traffic. My hope is that should 2 of them go down the remaining members will head to the 3rd club and strengthen it because it's a real dandy and a course I always suggest to any out of towner as a must see.

Jack,

   We have a couple in the declining burbs of Detroit that are the same boat.  However IMO the Country Clubs could be very healthy if they turned into golf clubs.  Your $300 a month slam i take offense too.  Or would be that the club waited too long to implement it, and didn't do any aggressive advertising, instead created masses amount of debt.  Some of the affluent clubs in Detroit metro are starting to close the clubhouses down in the winter months which saves lots of money and put money into the GOLF COURSE with success.  I think i know the name of the course you cited earlier.  Did history prove that putting money into the clubhouse was a poor decision instead of in the golf course?  Also two of the hurting clubs in Metro Detroit (one of them hosted a major) don't allow carrying your bag till after 4pm.  Is keeping rules started 50+ years ago worth it vs keeping membership levels higher with allowing people to carry their clubs?   Now the younger generation 25-35 living in the city, why aren't they joining golden age courses in the declining burbs/City of Chitown??  I'm not expecting people in their 40's and 50's living in the north burbs to make a 60 min drive.  I have friends in Metro Detroit that drive an Hour to play at the course i play at.  That is the biggest compliment a course can have.  $1800 a YEAR fees.  Our HP who makes his money on the practice tee, "Oh my old school'' and a clubhouse that doesn't serve food.  We have a waiting list and 750 members.  Another private club with a good course 6 miles away has only 200 members.  So my question to you is why do clubs let their membership age get so old and not care about attracting new blood?  Why aren't they aware of their surroundings and make adjustments?  Yes a good location can get 600-1000 month dues, but a good course in bad location should make it on 300 a month dues, providing they cut unneeded services.  

[J_ Crisham]

I think Mark Fine is correct.

Location and demographics, not architecture are the primary causes.

Pat,   You nailed it with respect to the Chicago clubs I mentioned. Areas that were affluent 50 yrs ago that have since cratered.

Each closed course has a unique story.  Nonetheless, of the courses that have closed in your area, how many would you classify as having well designed golf courses.  How many are poor?

In my area, the comparison is not close.  Most of the courses that have closed have been poor

Jason,  
         The clubs that I am speaking of are not bad golf courses- in fact one of them is very good- top 10 or 12 in Chicago easy. Another is pretty good, the last one is decent but was altered due to a highway expansion back in the 60's . These are courses you would enjoy playing- very walkable, good conditioning , nice group of gregarious members etc. - unfortunately they are not in an affluent area. For them to attract members from downtown you are looking at least 50 - 60 minutes each way with no traffic. My hope is that should 2 of them go down the remaining members will head to the 3rd club and strengthen it because it's a real dandy and a course I always suggest to any out of towner as a must see.

Jack,

   We have a couple in the declining burbs of Detroit that are the same boat.  However IMO the Country Clubs could be very healthy if they turned into golf clubs.  Your $300 a month slam i take offense too.  Or would be that the club waited too long to implement it, and didn't do any aggressive advertising, instead created masses amount of debt.  Some of the affluent clubs in Detroit metro are starting to close the clubhouses down in the winter months which saves lots of money and put money into the GOLF COURSE with success.  I think i know the name of the course you cited earlier.  Did history prove that putting money into the clubhouse was a poor decision instead of in the golf course?  Also two of the hurting clubs in Metro Detroit (one of them hosted a major) don't allow carrying your bag till after 4pm.  Is keeping rules started 50+ years ago worth it vs keeping membership levels higher with allowing people to carry their clubs?   Now the younger generation 25-35 living in the city, why aren't they joining golden age courses in the declining burbs/City of Chitown??  I'm not expecting people in their 40's and 50's living in the north burbs to make a 60 min drive.  I have friends in Metro Detroit that drive an Hour to play at the course i play at.  That is the biggest compliment a course can have.  $1800 a YEAR fees.  Our HP who makes his money on the practice tee, "Oh my old school'' and a clubhouse that doesn't serve food.  We have a waiting list and 750 members.  Another private club with a good course 6 miles away has only 200 members.  So my question to you is why do clubs let their membership age get so old and not care about attracting new blood?  Why aren't they aware of their surroundings and make adjustments?  Yes a good location can get 600-1000 month dues, but a good course in bad location should make it on 300 a month dues, providing they cut unneeded services.  

My $300 a month slam? Feel free to take offense if you wish- I'm simply stating a fact- they tried to cut dues by 50% to gain members - it didn't work - they are in the death spiral. It's wonderful that your club has 750 members , must be easy getting a teetime on Sunday morning at 9am.

[Tom_Doak]

It's all and only about supply and demand based upon price point/elasticity.

Even conditioning trumps design.

Doak leads the pack on modern NLE's.  I rest my case.

Bogey

Although - Doak's NLEs seem to me to involve long shot business models -either owners with thin financials or locations that were very remote. Bay of Dreams involved a winding, long drive from Cabo, Hi-Pointe was in a saturated area with an owner that did not keep the architectural features intact, Apache Stronghold suffersfrom management issues, location and colder temperatures during prime tourist season. 

Apache Stronghold is still open ... and doing better these days, from recent reports.

My other NLE, Beechtree, was a mile off I-95 in the New York - Washington DC corridor!  That was just a case of the owner deciding he could make more money doing something else with the land. 

Most closings are about local golf markets, and most of all location.  High Pointe and Lochenheath in Traverse City both closed at the same time, and there was only enough demand to support one of them to reopen.  Lochenheath was the one to reopen, because there were about 50 homeowners in there who supported it so their property values wouldn't take a dive.  High Pointe just had an owner [the son of my original client] who didn't care much whether it reopened or not.

[BCowan]

I think Mark Fine is correct.

Location and demographics, not architecture are the primary causes.

Pat,   You nailed it with respect to the Chicago clubs I mentioned. Areas that were affluent 50 yrs ago that have since cratered.

Each closed course has a unique story.  Nonetheless, of the courses that have closed in your area, how many would you classify as having well designed golf courses.  How many are poor?

In my area, the comparison is not close.  Most of the courses that have closed have been poor

Jason,  
         The clubs that I am speaking of are not bad golf courses- in fact one of them is very good- top 10 or 12 in Chicago easy. Another is pretty good, the last one is decent but was altered due to a highway expansion back in the 60's . These are courses you would enjoy playing- very walkable, good conditioning , nice group of gregarious members etc. - unfortunately they are not in an affluent area. For them to attract members from downtown you are looking at least 50 - 60 minutes each way with no traffic. My hope is that should 2 of them go down the remaining members will head to the 3rd club and strengthen it because it's a real dandy and a course I always suggest to any out of towner as a must see.

Jack,

   We have a couple in the declining burbs of Detroit that are the same boat.  However IMO the Country Clubs could be very healthy if they turned into golf clubs.  Your $300 a month slam i take offense too.  Or would be that the club waited too long to implement it, and didn't do any aggressive advertising, instead created masses amount of debt.  Some of the affluent clubs in Detroit metro are starting to close the clubhouses down in the winter months which saves lots of money and put money into the GOLF COURSE with success.  I think i know the name of the course you cited earlier.  Did history prove that putting money into the clubhouse was a poor decision instead of in the golf course?  Also two of the hurting clubs in Metro Detroit (one of them hosted a major) don't allow carrying your bag till after 4pm.  Is keeping rules started 50+ years ago worth it vs keeping membership levels higher with allowing people to carry their clubs?   Now the younger generation 25-35 living in the city, why aren't they joining golden age courses in the declining burbs/City of Chitown??  I'm not expecting people in their 40's and 50's living in the north burbs to make a 60 min drive.  I have friends in Metro Detroit that drive an Hour to play at the course i play at.  That is the biggest compliment a course can have.  $1800 a YEAR fees.  Our HP who makes his money on the practice tee, "Oh my old school'' and a clubhouse that doesn't serve food.  We have a waiting list and 750 members.  Another private club with a good course 6 miles away has only 200 members.  So my question to you is why do clubs let their membership age get so old and not care about attracting new blood?  Why aren't they aware of their surroundings and make adjustments?  Yes a good location can get 600-1000 month dues, but a good course in bad location should make it on 300 a month dues, providing they cut unneeded services.  

''My $300 a month slam? Feel free to take offense if you wish- I'm simply stating a fact- they tried to cut dues by 50% to gain members - it didn't work - they are in the death spiral. It's wonderful that your club has 750 members , must be easy getting a teetime on Sunday morning at 9am.''


   You are being very disingenuous and I feel as though you didn't state all the facts.  You zero'd in on cutting dues by 50% for new members (and existing?).  Usually clubs that are hurting, wait to long to implement much needed transformations.  Was any cuts made in the expense debt?  Was the clubhouse closed down in the winter months to save money?  A lot of clubs have a 325-350 limit for an active membership model which is basically a family membership.  When you have 750 individual members, you enable the guy who's family doesn't play golf to justify paying for a membership, thus you greatly increase the pool of potential members.  You also enable people to join your club as a 2nd club.  It's isn't too hard getting a 9am tee time on Sunday at my home course assuming you play in 4 or less.  Later tee times are a hint from the pro that you take too long.  The ''empty parking lot'' theory some genius on here cheer for isn't working out too good for the great golden age tracks in declining burbs.  Paying $5000-10,000 to focus on weekend 7am-9am tee time slots is very narrow minded.  So do members not play your course after 9am on the weekend?  

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()