Getting back to Tom and the investors..
Is there any reason not to simply encourage players to return to the main Rosapena Clubhouse?
Is anyone skipping a round at St Pat's because they lack a clubhouse?
Can't think of a good reason to build one-surely no one thinks the clubhouse is a profit center, especially when you back out the low hanging fruit available anyway(Guinness in the fridge [size=78%])[/size]
Those same dollars can be captured at the existing common clubhouse with minimal additional overhead.
If there is no compelling reason to stop in the big clubhouse after playing St Pat's I would kick on and not bother. Once folks are in the car there is a high risk of losing their wallet. If you just played St Pat's, are you driving to the clubhouse or a place in town etc? It's a bit like an online shop, ya don't provide a link for the customer to leave your site.
Ciao
There is a segment that's headed for the car either way
There is a segment that once in the car, will go to town (but this won't include those staying AT the resort)
There is of course a segemnet who would prefer to stay right at St Pats, if given that option.
There's a also a segment that love activity back at the main ski lodge, comparing stories about their runs(courses in this case)
At the end of the day, you've already laid out extensive capital for a restaurant bar at the main resort.
Why operate both at far less than capacity for most of the year?
I've been to Rosapena in every month but July and August. It's a large facility and I've rarely seen it packed for post apres golf drinks.I'm sure they rock in summer.
Overhead makes many facilities slaves to it. Pretty soon the cart is put before the horse.
At the end of the day are the investors willing to take on the expense of an additional restaurant, with such a desired destination course?
And conversely, is the main resort willing to part with the revenue lost at the main hotel going to St Pats?
A tricky arrangement