Golf in Scotland is sinking fast

[Brian_Ewen]

https://www.scotsman.com/sport/golf/golf-in-scotland-is-sinking-fast-delegates-told-1-4629560



Golf in Scotland is sinking fast, delegates told
MARTIN DEMPSTER
Saturday 02 December 2017


It was easily the soundbite that made the biggest impact during a four-and-a-half hour discussion about the future of golf in Scotland. “We are all on the Titanic if we choose not to do anything,” around 500 delegates were told at the first Scottish Golf national conference at the Edinburgh International Conference Centre.


When he was subsequently accused by one delegate of being responsible for “a lot of negativity” about the state of the game in its birthplace by delivering that message, Stewart Darling, a Scottish Golf board member, stuck firmly to his guns. “It’s not negativity – it’s reality,” he said in response.


Eleanor Cannon, the Scottish Golf chair, kicked off the day’s proceedings in the capital by asking a wide cross section of the game to “suspend disbelief” following recent negativity towards the governing body on the back of a controversial proposed new strategy being put on hold as some keynote speakers addressed the audience and, with all due respect to the others, it was Darling who definitely made the strongest impression in the hall.


He highlighted that Scottish clubs had been losing roughly 5,000 full members every year in the last 10 years. He warned that the consequence of not doing anything to try and address that situation was an average annual subscription of £478 rising by 34 per cent in five years’ time and to be 84 per cent higher in 10 years’ time. “That is a fairly challenging prognosis in any walk of life,” he said.


One of many illuminating graphics Darling, the CEO of Vianet Group, a strategic insight and cloud based technology business, used to get his message across highlighted golf’s demographic being its biggest problem. Over 55s make up more than 100,000 of golf club members whereas 24 and unders provide just more than 10,000.


He also pointed out that it used to take 20 rounds per year in 2007 for someone to justify their subscription fee and now it is 40. He revealed, too, that only 47 per cent of members submit enough cards (three) to retain a handicap while just 53 per cent play in a formal competition. Having too many courses is one of the game’s problems. “We can’t sustain 600 clubs in 10 years’ time,” he warned.


Darling’s strongest message, though, about what needs to change more than anything was about getting more women into the game. That is based on the fact that women currently make up less than 14 per cent of membership in Scotland. “There is going to have to be a fundamental re-think,” he said. “We need to think very clearly about the future and how we get women in. It is a big opportunity if we accept this to be the case. Some clubs are not welcoming to women and children - that is a fundamental issue.


“Also, we are not connected as a golfing community and need to harness the power of that. Data is the new oil and new water. The power of it is massive for golf. At the moment, we have so little data on our game. We can have power if that changes and that is really important.”


At the moment, only 6 per cent of Scottish Golf’s income is from a commercial source. Roz Cushieri, another board member, agreed when that situation was described as “absolutely disgraceful” by a delegate. “But we need to make sure what we are offering the long list of companies we are engaging with is attractive in terms of inclusivity and other things,” she said before another delegate revealed that one company looking to invest a seven-figure sum in golf had said “no” to Scotland because it felt the game in this country wasn’t “family friendly”.


One of the proposals in that new strategy was to raise the affiliation fee paid by every club member from £11.25 of to £24. Asked if that could still be on the table at the agm in March, board member Malcolm Kpedekpo hinted it might. “This is the start of a process and, if we think £24 is the right price when we look at the strategy, then it would be wrong not to put it forward.”


Cannon, who was delighted with the success of an event that brought the most club administrators, club committee members and professionals under the same roof in Scotland, said she hoped a new chief executive to replace Blane Dodds will be in place early in the New Year. “We had a tremendous response to the advert and will be holding interviews in December but, as part of the consultation process, we thought it was maybe wise to slow things down a bit to get feedback from today,” she said.

[Duncan Cheslett]

He highlighted that Scottish clubs had been losing roughly 5,000 full members every year in the last 10 years. He warned that the consequence of not doing anything to try and address that situation was an average annual subscription of £478 rising by 34 per cent in five years’ time and to be 84 per cent higher in 10 years’ time. “That is a fairly challenging prognosis in any walk of life,” he said.

If the average annual subscription at a golf club in Scotland is £478 then price alone cannot be the reason for the decline in membership. £478 is very cheap - around half the cost of an annual membership you would expect to pay at an average club in England. Increases in price are clearly always unpopular however low the base price, and will inevitably lead to a loss of customers on the margins. It is clear to the outsider however, that one needs to look deeper than the simple cost to explain the decline in demand for golf club membership.

One of many illuminating graphics Darling, the CEO of Vianet Group, a strategic insight and cloud based technology business, used to get his message across highlighted golf’s demographic being its biggest problem. Over 55s make up more than 100,000 of golf club members whereas 24 and unders provide just more than 10,000.

When I was growing up in the 1970s, both my grandfathers were avid golfers, and I spent many wonderful days with them at their respective clubs. Both of them took up golf in their 50s and the game continued to be at the centre of their lives well into their 70s and 80s. It was the defining activity of their retirements.

After this early introduction to golf you might have expected me to be a life-long devotee. But no - life gets in the way. A busy business life, two marriages, and four children put paid to that! It was only when I turned 50 that I was in a position to take up golf in earnest - after a break of 35 years.

My experience is an extreme example of a typical pattern. Ask avid golf club members about their golfing history and the most common story you will hear is that they played football/rugby/cricket/lacrosse/tennis/squash into their 30s or early 40s and then took up golf as a "replacement activity" once they were forced into sporting retirement.

Golf is a sport for the middle-aged and older. One of the greatest joys of the game is that it can be enjoyed competitively well beyond the age that can by other sports. While obviously it is also a young person's game, those with family and work commitments in their 20s, 30s, and 40s increasingly find it impossible to justify the cost of club membership, both in terms of money and time.

The demographics of most golf clubs - not just those in Scotland - are inevitable. Yet they are seen as a problem.  We are constantly told that the game needs to attract more young people, yet all initiatives fail. The demographics of golf clubs are not a problem so long as sufficient new members in their 40s and 50s are recruited to replace those dying off or giving up the game due to ill health.

Golf needs to sell itself as the perfect activity for a healthy middle and old age.

He also pointed out that it used to take 20 rounds per year in 2007 for someone to justify their subscription fee and now it is 40. He revealed, too, that only 47 per cent of members submit enough cards (three) to retain a handicap while just 53 per cent play in a formal competition. Having too many courses is one of the game’s problems. “We can’t sustain 600 clubs in 10 years’ time,” he warned.

The first point is surely a function of falling green fee prices at most run-of-the-mill golf courses. It used to be that membership was the cheapest way to play golf regularly. Now the non-affiliated golfer can play a plethora of second and third tier courses at less than £15 per round on almost any day other than a Saturday. Very many will be less than £10. This is completely unsustainable. Golf clubs have conspired with TeeOffTimes to bring this disaster upon themselves.

As for the low rate of competitive play, this is a situation I simply don't recognise. The culture among most golfers I know centres around regular qualifying competitions. If only half of golfers in Scotland play regularly in competitions then a very different culture pertains than that I am familiar with.

Darling’s strongest message, though, about what needs to change more than anything was about getting more women into the game. That is based on the fact that women currently make up less than 14 per cent of membership in Scotland. “There is going to have to be a fundamental re-think,” he said. “We need to think very clearly about the future and how we get women in. It is a big opportunity if we accept this to be the case. Some clubs are not welcoming to women and children - that is a fundamental issue.

At Reddish Vale in 1912 we had 110 lady members and 142 men

Now we have 12 ladies and 320 men.

Retaining our male members while restoring the balance to that in Edwardian times would revolutionise the finances of our club. I suspect that we are not atypical.

[Jim Nugent]

One of many illuminating graphics Darling, the CEO of Vianet Group, a strategic insight and cloud based technology business, used to get his message across highlighted golf’s demographic being its biggest problem. Over 55s make up more than 100,000 of golf club members whereas 24 and unders provide just more than 10,000.

Scottish women have an average of about 1.5 babies each over their lifetime.  I believe the number needed to maintain population at its current level is around 2.1 children per woman.  i.e. demographics are probably going to make things much worse.   

[Mark Chaplin]

It’s interesting the administrators cite “high” fees as an inhibitor plus their inability to attract corporate funding, the solution - more than double the subscription fee from their dwindling membership!

[Jon Wiggett]

What a waste of time. Lots of figures and facts but very few ideas as to solutions and no ideas on implementation. Basically, we the governing bodies are telling you our members what is wrong but have no desire to help in the solution. Where is the leadership from golf governing bodies in Scotland? No plans, no vision, no action.


Mark,


they came across as believing being in possession of lots of data was what was important. They presented no action plan and yes ironically after saying clubs were charging too much then thought doubling their own fees was still okay. Any other company's board who presided over such a mismanagement would be thrown/forced out but instead it was the members who got the blame.


Jon

[Ally Mcintosh]

Jim,


Scottish population is due to continue rising for at least another 30 years but I'm sure the average age profile of a golfer will continue to get older.


Whilst I think Duncan is right that a lot of people take up the game in their late 40's / early 50's, I would think that relying solely on this demographic is a sure fire loser.


I think I played around 12 rounds of golf this year, only 5 at my home club. Lucky for me I don't try and justify my subscription fees by the number of rounds I play.

P.S. I wasn't there but can fully believe it was merely a talking shop as Jon indicates.

Ally

[Thomas Dai]

I would be interested to see some figures for the age profile for golfers over several decades. Not sure it’s ever changed that much.....middle aged/elderly folks, who these days are living longer, plus juniors/younger folks who play, then give up for a few years and then come back to the game.
It would be nice to have more ladies involved in the game though.


As to club membership, look at the number of courses within say a 30 min circle around where you play. Where I am there were only 3 in the late 1970’s, now there are 8. A greater than 50% increase, so it shouldn’t be any wonder that players are spread around more.
Atb


PS - was the game stronger before we had National bodies and CEO’s and HQ’s with staff and seminar’s like the one described above? How much ££ do they take out of the game?

[Jon Wiggett]

Thomas,


a big part of the problem is that the governing bodies seem to believe that by having facts and figures they have addressed the problem which is not the case. We had very impressive presentations from several people most of whom lost their clarity in to much detail. In the end it was there are too few people coming into golf, we need to attract more people and ladies seem to be unrepresented so maybe start there.


A committee of a golf club does not need to know what the facts and figures are nor what the problem is nor even what the solution might be. They need to know how to implement that solution.


There was no how nor did I get the impression that any of the bodies thought it was their problem just the clubs' problem. I at no point ever got a feeling of a 'we' during the day and have now more than ever of the opinion that the governing bodies are irrelevant to the day to day concerns of their member clubs.


Booking system?? Kind of sums it up


Jon

[Sean_A]

Jon

It is rather self evident that the solution and implementation of a plan must come from individual clubs.  You don't honestly expect an outside agency to solve the problem(s) at £11.50 per member...do you?  The bottom line is in the go-go years too many courses were built.  Sustaining this imaginary level of growth was never in the cards.  So it is dog eat eat dog these days as nobody has a solution which will save 100% of courses.  It is down to each membership to best figure out how they will move forward or if they will move forward.  Sure, it is worthwhile for these types of gatherings, but one shouldn't expect salvation, just info. 

Ciao

[Niall C]

I agree with Dai in that I suspect the demographics for club membership probably hasn't changed that much over the years. Its a sport people tend to come to later in life and I think that is the beauty of it. Once you've finished getting lumps kicked out of you on the football or rugby pitch its great to take up a sport where you can have the camaraderie and competition without the physical trauma (rotator cuffs, dodgy knees and bad backs excepted).


And when they say clubs are losing 5,000 members a year that doesn't mean the game is losing 5,000 players it probably means they are joining the ever increasing ranks of golfers who aren't a member of a club, which is what I'm about to do. I'm doing so because I can't justify the cost of membership. Admittedly I'm at a club whose subs are at the high end of the spectrum of the traditional club scene in Scotland, but even so the thinking is the same. I'm not sure I get value for money and I play a lot more golf than someone like Ally.


Then when Duncan says £484 is cheap in comparison to down south, I think he's missing the point slightly. The average is probably brought down by rural clubs where average wages aren't as high as the cities, and wages tend to be lower in rural economies. However the question every member asks themselves at some point is "is it worth it ?". Especially when a lot of clubs are their own worst enemy in giving away visitor rounds at ridiculously cheap prices. That's a race to the bottom as Adrian Stiff has been saying for years.


Now if I was in the SGU I would be concentrating on advising clubs and how to offer better value to their members. Reduce costs and go back to basics. For inland clubs I try and prolong the playing season by concentrating on things like drainage, tree and scrub removal etc. Encourage them to increase visitor fees, and reduce guest fees. Try and make the members fell they aren't associated to some glorified pay and play establishment and have a membership that is worth something.


Niall 

[Jon Wiggett]

Jon

It is rather self evident that the solution and implementation of a plan must come from individual clubs.  You don't honestly expect an outside agency to solve the problem(s) at £11.50 per member...do you?  The bottom line is in the go-go years too many courses were built.  Sustaining this imaginary level of growth was never in the cards.  So it is dog eat eat dog these days as nobody has a solution which will save 100% of courses.  It is down to each membership to best figure out how they will move forward or if they will move forward.  Sure, it is worthwhile for these types of gatherings, but one shouldn't expect salvation, just info. 

Ciao

Sean,


as the SGU is there to represent the best interests of its members so of course I would expect them to do this. The membership fee they charge adds up to a pretty penny when it is all totted up and if you look at what the wages are I would expect more from them. However, it is true that in the good times the golf sector forgot to look to the future and this is the reward we are getting.


The big thing for the future is who will implement a workable solution. I certainly hope it is not your vision of the future,


Jon

[Rich Goodale]

I have been involved with the SGU intermittently in the past 25 years, due to my positions of Finance Convener and Match and Handicap Convener at my local club.  The SGU tries hard, but they are largely clueless about the brave new world that we are all experiencing.  A HUGE amount of their annual "income" is devoted to funding elite "amateur" golfers, in the hope that they will become professional ambassadors for Scottish golf.  As far as I can see, this has been a disaster.


Rich

[Simon Holt]

I'm sure some of you read the proposal before Blane Dodds resigned.


We couldn't find a club in East Lothian that was willing to support it but our worry (club pals round a table) was that SG members in other parts of the country may be in a worse state than us, with nothing to lose, and would say "yes".


The jump in fees was not necessarily the concern but more so the lack of clarity on what would happen with the money.  It all seemed to be smoke and mirrors, with the only conclusion we could come up with being a data gathering exercise by creating the centralised system.  With the data then farmed out to fund Scottish Golf?


Any clubs saying "no" would effectively be ostracised by Scottish Golf and their home members would cease to have recognised handicaps.  Nice.

[David_Tepper]

 "A HUGE amount of their annual "income" is devoted to funding elite "amateur" golfers, in the hope that they will become professional ambassadors for Scottish golf.  As far as I can see, this has been a disaster."

At the risk of going further off topic, can anyone account for why this is? Currently Russell Knox is the only Scot in the men's top 100 of the world rankings and there are no Scots in the women's top 100. Over the past 10-20 years, the Scandinavian countries (with far fewer courses & golfers) have been way more successful producing world-class golfers than has Scotland. 

(but let's not even get into the state of Scottish football )

[Rich Goodale]

Well said, David.


As far as I know, Russell Knox and Martin Laird and even oor Jimmy Gunn got very little of the SGU dosh that we paid for with our subs.   Neither did Jimmy Miller of Brora who was the best golfer in Scotland in the 1960-1990 period (and yes, I include Colin Montgomerie ,Sam Torrance, etc.).


j-j p

[Tom_Doak]

By coincidence I'm at the home of England Golf the next three days so I will ask if they see the situation being as dire.  Like the SGU their primary focus seems to be on competitive teams, but at least they are fixing up Woodhall Spa.

[Simon Holt]

SG say they need to double the fee in an effort to better support the elite players amongst other initiatives. 


Yet apparently England is the one country in Europe that has lower fees than Scotland and is churning out top level golfers.  That shouldn't be the only measure but at least the English kids have homegrown stars to aspire to.

[Norbert P]

  Must admit . . . by the title, I thought this was a thread about Global Warming.   


  I hope everything works out . . .  on all counts.

[David_Tepper]

Norbert -

Scotland may not be sinking, but sea levels are certainly rising. If half of what is written about in this new book comes true over the next 50-100 years, links golf may become a thing of the past.

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-water-will-come-jeff-goodell-sea-level-rise-2017-10

DT

[Jon Wiggett]

I'm sure some of you read the proposal before Blane Dodds resigned.


We couldn't find a club in East Lothian that was willing to support it but our worry (club pals round a table) was that SG members in other parts of the country may be in a worse state than us, with nothing to lose, and would say "yes".


The jump in fees was not necessarily the concern but more so the lack of clarity on what would happen with the money.  It all seemed to be smoke and mirrors, with the only conclusion we could come up with being a data gathering exercise by creating the centralised system.  With the data then farmed out to fund Scottish Golf?


Any clubs saying "no" would effectively be ostracised by Scottish Golf and their home members would cease to have recognised handicaps.  Nice.

Simon,


there is no plan really. The SGU boffins are great at gathering data and reaching conclusions. They have no idea about solutions or implementation. In fact, I get the impression they don't even consider doing the last two.


Also, compared to England there is no real junior or youth scene up here once you drop below the top level. That is one big reason Scotland does not produce many world class golfers.


The SGU need to look for committee and management from within the golfing world. The last head man has shown up the reason why you should not employ someone with no real interest in the game whose heart lies elsewhere. Back to basics is the way to rebuild but that means gutting the present setup.
Jon

[Thomas Dai]

I wonder what the salary for Mr Dodds replacement is likely to be and how much ££ p/a is spent on the ‘data gatherers’, consultants and the like.
Central sporting organisations do like spending money.....other people’s mainly, and feathering nests is not an unknown occurrence.
Atb

[Tony_Muldoon]

Golf needs to sell itself as the perfect activity for a healthy middle and old age.

Agree 100%.   Can't understand why none of the governing bodies seem to though?
There is already a deal of information about this, but dont bother looking on offical golf websites for it.

[Adrian_Stiff]

I have always been big on collecting data and understanding the trending patterns associated with it.


There is a pattern about how people play golf as a regular member and then give up the game that I have noticed, somebody can be quite happy with once a week golf and then an intruption from either their own circumstances or their playing partners circumstance can see them quitting. People play golf in pairs or packs, if the leader wants to move club the others often do the same. There is a pattern wherby people stop playing in competitions because their handicaps are too low and they can't win or they know they can't get better. The most obvious pattern is the junior to 40 year old, where he is mad keen at 15 and then discovers girls, when settled he plays a bit, when a child comes along time becomes the biggest enemy and its a 15 year enemy for many people that can't justify the time or money versus a family. At 40 many come back to the game, but realistically it is difficult to retain members from 16-40 and likely always will be, they may still consider themselves golfers with a few outings per year.



Going back to ABC stuff the first thing is to understand why numbers are falling in the game and no one really has the definitive reason why this has happened in the UK. I don't know if their is a nice answer to the problem other than the market has shrunk and some golf courses don't need to be golf courses. The 'there used to be 3 golf courses within 30 minutes of me and now there are 8' is pretty common. We really need 25% of golf courses to close in the UK, the problem is not just Scotland it is just seeing the effects of death spiral earlier because membership is at its cheapest there if £478 is the middle marker for annual membership, in the South we are nearer £1000.


It has become a rat race with some clubs looking to grab a few shillings for an empty space. Those clubs just don't hurt themselves, they pull down other good business's too. More than half of golf clubs still don't know or understand the relevance to pricing their product, if you have 500 members and a set annual fee what is good value to one person is not good value to another because one person may play 100 times and another just 20 times. Processing the data over the years, more than 50% played less than 25 times, for 50% it was cheaper to pay a green fee....so was born the flexible friend the membership that you pay a fee to retain that feeling of still being a member with a smaller green fee back ended. It will save some members but not all. The real problem I think is .... it just takes too long to play and peoples free time is less than it was in yesteryear with other attractions to do and enjoy that were not available 15-20-25-30 years ago.


I wish I had a nice answer but I don't, the only real benefit from golf is the walking and exercise it provides. You will live 5-10 years longer if you play golf once a week is perhaps our trump card and as mentioned earlier is something that our governing bodies need to harness as our big play.


I have little faith in our governing bodies and have found them mainly to be among the most stupid of people that are very slow to react and cocooned in their minor opinions, many of our members object each year to paying the £21 fees for what largely supports the elite few and the tail grabbers.


It would not surprise me if those at Woodhall Spa thought the problem was just confined to Scotland. I will be interested in the reply that Tom Doak gets.

[Jon Wiggett]

Golf needs to sell itself as the perfect activity for a healthy middle and old age.

Agree 100%.   Can't understand why none of the governing bodies seem to though?
There is already a deal of information about this, but dont bother looking on offical golf websites for it.

Tony,


this is because the general attitude of the SGU is that golf has too many courses, that the number of participants is shrinking and clubs need to accept this as a situation that cannot be altered. If any business executive were to spout such tripe their feet would not touch the floor as they were slung out of the room. I know for a fact that the SGU were actively turning away new members a few years ago so it is no surprise they are incapable of growing the game.




Adrian,


absolutely spot on!!!


Jon

[Thomas Dai]

Excellent post above by Adrian. Hits numerous nails on the head.
Atb