[Sean_A]

As you say, it's easy to establish rules to thwart abuse. So why charge guests so much? One of my clubs charges close to 40 quid and the other £10. I don't see why there is such a difference. In any case, my point is that I am surprised clubs target member guests as a revenue source.

Ciao

[jeffwarne]

As you say, it's easy to establish rules to thwart abuse. So why charge guests so much? One of my clubs charges close to 40 quid and the other £10. I don't see why there is such a difference. In any case, my point is that I am surprised clubs target member guests as a revenue source.

Ciao

All a tradeoff.
A club needs a certain amount to operate, and it will either be via member dues or additional revenue gained elsewhere.
Some clubs may end up with more traffic than desireable with low guest fees and therefore the members subsidize their guests play with higher dues, or the costs are born by the members who bring more guests paying higher fees.
So it depends on the desires of the memberships, and unfortunately, often depends on the patterns of those making policy.
Put another way, a course full of multiple guest-one member groups is more likely to move slower(or at least be blamed) than a course full (or less so) of member dominated groups.
All a tradeoff, but I'd like to think that a course full of guests moving more slowly due to volume or unfamiliarity, was at least keeping my dues down.
But, it depends of course on demand and your own personal usage of a club.
Balance as there is merit to both camps.
I prefer personally the UK/Irish model of accompanied guests paying quite a low fee and making up the revenue via visitor fees.
The US, until recently, seems to put the burden on accompanied guests and eschews unaccompanied groups.


Meanwhile, ON Topic
What makes it cheerful
A design with interest, no frills maintenance where unirrigated and /or even patchy fairways are acceptable, where most of the budget goes to greens maintenance presented simply, with perhaps even infrequent every other day mowing.
Tiny clubhouse with minimal staff-no lockerroom or outside staff, generally a one  man(at a time) operation  where golf is the only focus.Zero effort to prove anything or one up the club down the street-just good golf and no frills.
So many clubs in the UK and Ireland come to mind.

[Mike Bodo]

Meanwhile, ON Topic
What makes it cheerful
A design with interest, no frills maintenance where unirrigated and /or even patchy fairways are acceptable, where most of the budget goes to greens maintenance presented simply, with perhaps even infrequent every other day mowing.
Tiny clubhouse with minimal staff-no lockerroom or outside staff, generally a one  man(at a time) operation  where golf is the only focus.Zero effort to prove anything or one up the club down the street-just good golf and no frills.
So many clubs in the UK and Ireland come to mind.

Great questions/comments and I'm glad you called this out. I was having problems wrapping my head around what specifically was meant or intended by the original poster as far as the criteria (if any) for what makes a course or club "cheerful". I mean, that can mean a hundred different things to a hundred different people. I'll add to that being a statesider - what is considered "cheap" by today's standards? Where I typically play golf in Southeast, MI paying $40 - $60 for an 18 hole round is both common and reasonable, in my mind. While I personally don't consider that amount to be "cheap", I don't considering it expensive either. I accept it as the norm. However, when I play more reputable courses in other parts of the state or outside of the state where rounds can be in excess of $100.00, I don't necessarily consider those expensive either. If I can play a twilight round at a Top 200 rated course that normally charges $200.00 for 18 and a cart for say $125.00, that's a great value in my estimation. However, I am just as happy and content when I can find a "hidden gem" of a public course that charges $20 - $25.00 for 18 holes, that may not be in the best of shape, but is in good enough shape and offers plenty of challenge and intrigue, in addition to a decent off-course experience.


In short, everything is relative, as what is considered Cheap and Cheerful by some, may not by others, which I suppose is what makes this thread and topic all the more interesting as opinions vary widely.

[Thomas Dai]

Meanwhile, ON Topic
What makes it cheerful
A design with interest, no frills maintenance where unirrigated and /or even patchy fairways are acceptable, where most of the budget goes to greens maintenance presented simply, with perhaps even infrequent every other day mowing.
Tiny clubhouse with minimal staff-no locker-room or outside staff, generally a one  man(at a time) operation where golf is the only focus.Zero effort to prove anything or one up the club down the street-just good golf and no frills.
So many clubs in the UK and Ireland come to mind.

+1
And I'd venture to add that many more UK Private Members Clubs would still be akin to this if they hadn't over the last few decades gone down the must-be-manicured, green-is-god and flash, big new Clubhouse route.
I wonder when the current vile virus situation has alleviated if some such Clubs may see things from a different perspective. I'm not holding my breath on it however although some may be forced too.
atb

[Ira Fishman]

If memory serves, on the Doak Scale, Brora is a 7, Elie is a 6, and Golspie and Kilspindie are 4s (both too low in my view). None are "cheap" but I doubt that there are many, if any, US courses of comparable quality that are nearly as reasonably priced even adjusting for the cost of living. This leads to one of a couple possible conclusions: the UK is truly far superior in terms of "cheap and cheerful" or the courses are not really all that better than the comparably priced courses in the US but rather they have longer histories and more poetic names.


Ira

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()