The End Of An Era At Brora?

[Simon Barrington]

I question the notion that the greens staff are/were the ones driving the change to remove the livestock from the course. It would not surprise me at all if a sizable number of club members have been wanting to do this for many years.

Agreed
(Only time will tell if they were correct)

[Chris Hughes]

I question the notion that the greens staff are/were the ones driving the change to remove the livestock from the course.

Specifically, what have you heard/seen that makes you think this?

[James Boon]

Chris,


In the papers the club put together around this issue ahead of the vote, they mention / remind that in the early 2000s there was a similar vote and the members wanted to remove the livestock then, but for various reasons it was never followed through. I'm not a regular enough visitor to the club to know exactly what the membership feel, but if they wanted to remove the livestock 20 odd years ago, it would surprise me if this recent development was just driven by the greenstaff.


Cheers,


James
 

[Chris Hughes]

Chris,


In the papers the club put together around this issue ahead of the vote, they mention / remind that in the early 2000s there was a similar vote and the members wanted to remove the livestock then, but for various reasons it was never followed through. I'm not a regular enough visitor to the club to know exactly what the membership feel, but if they wanted to remove the livestock 20 odd years ago, it would surprise me if this recent development was just driven by the greenstaff.


Cheers,


James

Interesting, thanks.


Sounds kinda vague, where can we read about that?

[Ben Sims]

Chris,


In the papers the club put together around this issue ahead of the vote, they mention / remind that in the early 2000s there was a similar vote and the members wanted to remove the livestock then, but for various reasons it was never followed through. I'm not a regular enough visitor to the club to know exactly what the membership feel, but if they wanted to remove the livestock 20 odd years ago, it would surprise me if this recent development was just driven by the greenstaff.


Cheers,


James

Interesting, thanks.


Sounds kinda vague, where can we read about that?

The club sent out a detailed information packet to members for both issues presented in the EGM.

[Chris Hughes]

Chris,


In the papers the club put together around this issue ahead of the vote, they mention / remind that in the early 2000s there was a similar vote and the members wanted to remove the livestock then, but for various reasons it was never followed through. I'm not a regular enough visitor to the club to know exactly what the membership feel, but if they wanted to remove the livestock 20 odd years ago, it would surprise me if this recent development was just driven by the greenstaff.


Cheers,


James

Interesting, thanks.


Sounds kinda vague, where can we read about that?

The club sent out a detailed information packet to members for both issues presented in the EGM.

Excellent.


Was there a vote in the "early 2000's" as mentioned above? 


How much will the contractual/legal costs be for executing on the recent ill-advised successful vote?

[Ben Sims]

Chris,


I think it was mentioned in the info packet but I can’t be sure. I’m too busy experimenting with Yorkshire puddings to look it up.


You seem very struck by this decision. I hope your holiday season can make up for the pain you seem to be feeling over Brora’s membership deciding what they think is best for Brora. Merry Christmas.

[Chris Hughes]

Chris,


I think it was mentioned in the info packet but I can’t be sure. I’m too busy experimenting with Yorkshire puddings to look it up.


You seem very struck by this decision. I hope your holiday season can make up for the pain you seem to be feeling over Brora’s membership deciding what they think is best for Brora. Merry Christmas.

@BenMalach, does this constitute an "Ad hominem attack"?!?




 

[Ben Sims]

Chris,


Perhaps you’re right. I didn’t think what I wrote was an attack as much as I thought it was a polite way of saying that 1) you’re not going to get the answer you want and 2) no one here is under an obligation to provide club data to you. I’m sure you understand that when clubs give proprietary information to their members, discretion is to be expected.


Back to your latest. If we’re going to engage in the fun of identifying poster’s logical fallacies, I’d just ask that you weren’t so forceful about shifting the burden of proof to others here that have tried to provide you information. Claiming that staff is driving the bus or round-about insinuating that another poster’s words are vague and so you need more proof is just not productive. People have reasoned with you and because you don’t like the answer, you browbeat. I’m not sure what else to say except that if it matters this much, they will gladly accept your membership application without delay at Brora. They’re great people, it’s a lovely village, and the golf course is pretty good with other courses of interest nearby. But before you jump in though, ask yourself if it’s the sheep or the golf course that attracts and retains members at Brora.

[Matt Schoolfield]

I've stayed quiet in this thread so far because I haven't actually been to Brora, but looking at the conversation, I think we're tiptoeing around a lot of the concerns, so I may try illustrate the two forces I see more clearly.

I think the theme here boils down to general shock (which I'll admit I share) vs "it's up to the members." It being up to the members, however, doesn't have bearing on the prudence of the decision, yet, they do have the most skin in the game, which one should hope strongly associates with prudence.

I think much of the attention here comes from the sudden change in the club's financial position. We have a club that, within five short years, goes from the verge of bankruptcy, to buying their land, with enough money left over to start talking about improving in the rankings. I think the general shock comes from the fact that a club that turned to the good will of the golf community would so quickly start making dramatic changes as soon as their fortunes change. Whether or not it's a good decision, I think it's worthy of a raised eyebrow.

This brings to mind the Lindy effect, which is about institutional survival. That is, the course has survived in its current form since 1923 (I think?) by doing something right, not by doing something wrong. Significant change can be dangerous when you’re a survivor. I just worry that their success came exactly from not being able to compete with Dornoch on status, which meant they were a refreshing change of scenery when people visited.

The relevant question in my mind is whether the good will of the golf community would have done the same for Golspie if the covid financial shock had hit them instead (as was noted to have removed their grazing animals in the late 1980s). I don't know that they would have, but I could be wrong. I do think, however, that a course that exists as a croft offers something unique that does not directly compete on the same lines as the conditioning and architecture of a standard course.

I hope I’m wrong though. I know that the staff and members know vastly more than I do and I obviously want all these courses to succeed. I know if Coul goes through, the entire region will be fighting for the influx of high-end golf tourism, so I do understand the economic incentive to compete for that demo, and it certainly makes sense if the area around the Dornoch Firth suddenly becomes a destination competing with the Forth and Clyde.

I know that I am planning a trip to Scotland specifically to play courses on crofting land, and Brora was at the top of my list. Now it's not even on my list, which is a bummer, but I may head that way regardless.

[Thomas Dai]

The membership vote raises an interesting question.
Who is actually entitled to vote under a Clubs constitution?
At some clubs only certain categories of members can vote on matters. Sometimes it may be only Full Members, ie those who pay the annual full fee and most likely live locally. At other Clubs other categories of membership may be included. At some it might be shareholders only. It can vary considerably. Indeed sometimes it’s only those who turn-up at the required club meeting who are able to vote as the vote may be by show of hands on the night only.
This is important and can have repercussions even potentially unpleasant ones, when say, the locals want one thing and those holding a different category of membership, paying a different subscription or residing elsewhere for whatever reason want something else.
Club constitutions or whatever term you choose to describe them are frequently under appreciated aspects of a Club but they are key to its operation, its history and its ongoing existence. What they say and how they are worded should always be considered very, very carefully. As is frequently the case in many matters the devil is in the detail so best not ignore the small print.
Atb

[Tim Martin]

What kind of legal process will ensue with the crofts?

[Sean_A]

I've stayed quiet in this thread so far because I haven't actually been to Brora, but looking at the conversation, I think we're tiptoeing around a lot of the concerns, so I may try illustrate the two forces I see more clearly.

I think the theme here boils down to general shock (which I'll admit I share) vs "it's up to the members." It being up to the members, however, doesn't have bearing on the prudence of the decision, yet, they do have the most skin in the game, which one should hope strongly associates with prudence.

I think much of the attention here comes from the sudden change in the club's financial position. We have a club that, within five short years, goes from the verge of bankruptcy, to buying their land, with enough money left over to start talking about improving in the rankings. I think the general shock comes from the fact that a club that turned to the good will of the golf community would so quickly start making dramatic changes as soon as their fortunes change. Whether or not it's a good decision, I think it's worthy of a raised eyebrow.

This brings to mind the Lindy effect, which is about institutional survival. That is, the course has survived in its current form since 1923 (I think?) by doing something right, not by doing something wrong. Significant change can be dangerous when you’re a survivor. I just worry that their success came exactly from not being able to compete with Dornoch on status, which meant they were a refreshing change of scenery when people visited.

The relevant question in my mind is whether the good will of the golf community would have done the same for Golspie if the covid financial shock had hit them instead (as was noted to have removed their grazing animals in the late 1980s). I don't know that they would have, but I could be wrong. I do think, however, that a course that exists as a croft offers something unique that does not directly compete on the same lines as the conditioning and architecture of a standard course.

I hope I’m wrong though. I know that the staff and members know vastly more than I do and I obviously want all these courses to succeed. I know if Coul goes through, the entire region will be fighting for the influx of high-end golf tourism, so I do understand the economic incentive to compete for that demo, and it certainly makes sense if the area around the Dornoch Firth suddenly becomes a destination competing with the Forth and Clyde.

I know that I am planning a trip to Scotland specifically to play courses on crofting land, and Brora was at the top of my list. Now it's not even on my list, which is a bummer, but I may head that way regardless.

The sudden good fortune of the club has nothing to do with my opinion. I am happy the club is on sound financial footing. My opinion is based more on turf quality and a more natural course presentation. The powers that be suggest there will be no difference in the quality of the rough and presumably the fairways. I can only take an expert’s opinion at face value. That said, there has been no mention of added cost to retain turf quality or rough height without sheep. There must be cost involved. Furthermore, future committees and green keepers may well choose to go the proverbial championship route and foster higher rough height. I see this as a real danger and if done, it would seriously impact the fun factor of Brora. Time will tell and I wish them well, but I am very much in the camp of trust and verify.

Ciao

[Simon Barrington]

I've stayed quiet in this thread so far because I haven't actually been to Brora, but looking at the conversation, I think we're tiptoeing around a lot of the concerns, so I may try illustrate the two forces I see more clearly.

I think the theme here boils down to general shock (which I'll admit I share) vs "it's up to the members." It being up to the members, however, doesn't have bearing on the prudence of the decision, yet, they do have the most skin in the game, which one should hope strongly associates with prudence.

I think much of the attention here comes from the sudden change in the club's financial position. We have a club that, within five short years, goes from the verge of bankruptcy, to buying their land, with enough money left over to start talking about improving in the rankings. I think the general shock comes from the fact that a club that turned to the good will of the golf community would so quickly start making dramatic changes as soon as their fortunes change. Whether or not it's a good decision, I think it's worthy of a raised eyebrow.

This brings to mind the Lindy effect, which is about institutional survival. That is, the course has survived in its current form since 1923 (I think?) by doing something right, not by doing something wrong. Significant change can be dangerous when you’re a survivor. I just worry that their success came exactly from not being able to compete with Dornoch on status, which meant they were a refreshing change of scenery when people visited.

The relevant question in my mind is whether the good will of the golf community would have done the same for Golspie if the covid financial shock had hit them instead (as was noted to have removed their grazing animals in the late 1980s). I don't know that they would have, but I could be wrong. I do think, however, that a course that exists as a croft offers something unique that does not directly compete on the same lines as the conditioning and architecture of a standard course.

I hope I’m wrong though. I know that the staff and members know vastly more than I do and I obviously want all these courses to succeed. I know if Coul goes through, the entire region will be fighting for the influx of high-end golf tourism, so I do understand the economic incentive to compete for that demo, and it certainly makes sense if the area around the Dornoch Firth suddenly becomes a destination competing with the Forth and Clyde.

I know that I am planning a trip to Scotland specifically to play courses on crofting land, and Brora was at the top of my list. Now it's not even on my list, which is a bummer, but I may head that way regardless.

The sudden good fortune of the club has nothing to do with my opinion. I am happy the club is on sound financial footing. My opinion is based more on turf quality and a more natural course presentation. The powers that be suggest there will be no difference in the quality of the rough and presumably the fairways. I can only take an expert’s opinion at face value. That said, there has been no mention of added cost to retain turf quality or rough height without sheep. There must be cost involved. Furthermore, future committees and green keepers may well choose to go the proverbial championship route and foster higher rough height. I see this as a real danger and if done, it would seriously impact the fun factor of Brora. Time will tell and I wish them well, but I am very much in the camp of trust and verify.

Ciao

Ditto

[Ben Sims]

There is an air of incredulity among non-stakeholders on this thread that seems wholly bizarre to me. There are a considerable number of non-members that have spent more time in Brora and played Brora more than I have just in this thread. And indeed many more that aren’t posters here. But paying a subscription and making a commitment to a club and place has its privileges. One of those at Brora, for Full Playing Members, is a vote.


Having an opinion, and often a vociferous one, on golf matters at private clubs in which posters aren’t members is common in my time on GCA.com. I see no issue with it in most instances. But this thread seems very different from some of those architecturally significant conversations over the years. It seeks collectively to impugn a club for being financially fortunate in a dire time and also to question its managerial decisions that are member-led. To me, this sort of conversation resembles indignation for the GB&I-style private club model we champion on this website. Based on the number and tenor of private messages I am receiving, my opinion on the peculiarity of how this thread has evolved isn’t just my own.


PS—Matt, you really should go to Brora. There’s animals grazing on it until there isn’t. And as of right now, those animals are still there.

[Sean_A]

Ben


There are countless threads regarding private club decision making. This thread is merely countless +1. If we didn’t discuss private club decisions this site wouldn’t exist.


Ciao

[Matt Schoolfield]

But this thread seems very different from some of those architecturally significant conversations over the years. It seeks collectively to impugn a club for being financially fortunate in a dire time and also to question its managerial decisions that are member-led.

I don’t mean any disrespect to the club here. I also don’t want dance around the elephant in the room. You’re curiosity here seems to completely ignore the contiguity of an imminent bankruptcy and these major changes.

Now, I don’t know the details of the last five years, and I don’t know the details of the near bankruptcy, but it stands to reason that the same membership voting in this change was mostly the same as the membership who were at the helm at the brink of disaster. This is why I think the changes are worthy of a raised eyebrow.

Again, I don’t know the details, and can’t and won’t pass judgement, but I’m not one to clutch pearls either. If I’d paid a pretty penny for one of those lifetime(?) memberships, I assume I’d be annoyed, but perhaps I misunderstand the situation.

That said, all the best to the club of course. I certainly know that my views on courses and maintenance stray pretty far from most folks’.

[Ben Sims]

But this thread seems very different from some of those architecturally significant conversations over the years. It seeks collectively to impugn a club for being financially fortunate in a dire time and also to question its managerial decisions that are member-led.

I don’t mean any disrespect to the club here. I also don’t want dance around the elephant in the room. You’re curiosity here seems to completely ignore the contiguity of an imminent bankruptcy and these major changes.

Now, I don’t know the details of the last five years, and I don’t know the details of the near bankruptcy, but it stands to reason that the same membership voting in this change was mostly the same as the membership who were at the helm at the brink of disaster. This is why I think the changes are worthy of a raised eyebrow.

Again, I don’t know the details, and can’t and won’t pass judgement, but I’m not one to clutch pearls either. If I’d paid a pretty penny for one of those lifetime(?) memberships, I assume I’d be annoyed, but perhaps I misunderstand the situation.

That said, all the best to the club of course. I certainly know that my views on courses and maintenance stray pretty far from most folks’.

Matt,


You saying there’s an elephant in the room doesn’t mean there is one. I recognize a windfall, and that an organization—with the blessing of their constituency—is using those funds as they see fit. Nothing more or less.


In the end I think it better to back off from this conversation. As Sean points out, there’s hundreds of examples on this website about people discussing private club matters. Rarely does it pay for anyone with skin in the game to participate.

[David_Tepper]

Sean A. -


With regards to the possible added expense of the greens staff having to mow/maintain the rough in the future, don't forget a good portion of that expense is likely to be offset by the man hours saved shoveling dung and excrement off on and around the course. In addition, the staff will not have to spend man hours repairing bunkers and the walls of the burns that have been damaged by the livestock on the course. Finally, the electrical wires surrounding the greens will no longer have to be serviced/maintained.


Personally, I would be happy to see the rough grown maybe 1/2 inch higher. I think it would give the fairways a little more definition and minimize the "lost in space" feeling I sometimes get playing there.


DT   

[Chris Hughes]

Chris,


Perhaps you’re right. I didn’t think what I wrote was an attack [Ben, I promise I didn't take it as an "attack", if you see  , be assured I am joking.  If anything it was a shot at the "Ad hominem" woke brigade, LOL.] as much as I thought it was a polite way of saying that 1) you’re not going to get the answer you want [$191,000 in "legal fees and compensation to farmers" for breaking the contract] and 2) no one here is under an obligation to provide club data to you [Agreed].  I’m sure you understand that when clubs give proprietary information to their members, discretion is to be expected [Nice thought, HIGHLY unlikely].


Back to your latest. If we’re going to engage in the fun of identifying poster’s logical fallacies, I’d just ask that you weren’t so forceful about shifting the burden of proof to others here that have tried to provide you information [no info has been put forth]. Claiming that staff is driving the bus [it still appears that way to me, tbc] or round-about insinuating that another poster’s words are vague [they were] and so you need more proof is just not productive [the beauty of being an American is we are all entitled to an opinion  ]. People have reasoned with you and because you don’t like the answer, you browbeat [to quote a dolt I know, the scroll button is your friend]. I’m not sure what else to say except that if it matters this much [it really does pain me when an iconic organization takes a chainsaw to the embedded culture/fabric of the place, especially so when the majestic Highland cow is a resultant casualty], they will gladly accept your membership application without delay at Brora. They’re great people, it’s a lovely village, and the golf course is pretty good with other courses of interest nearby. But before you jump in though, ask yourself if it’s the sheep or the golf course that attracts and retains members at Brora [this sea-change isn't about "attracting/retaining members", it's about fleecing baaa tourists].

Ben, I'm told you are a long-tenured U.S. armed forces aviator -- thank you for your service. 

My Dad (Ben!) was a Naval aviator, you guys are bad-asses... 🙌

[Joe_Tucholski]

If I’d paid a pretty penny for one of those lifetime(?) memberships, I assume I’d be annoyed, but perhaps I misunderstand the situation.

Matt, I do agree it's a unique situation where a course is near collapse and in such a short time later is seemingly in an excellent financial situation but have to believe those who joined are quite happy. 

I was seriously considering joining Brora during covid but ultimately went with Carne (another course that received strong backing from social media).  From both an emotional and financial perspective I think those who joined the clubs during that time are very happy.  The emotional satisfaction should be obvious...the courses survived and are thriving.  Financially I think it also turned out to be a pretty good deal.  £5k for the lifetime Brora membership is less than I had previously paid for a year membership in the US.  Up until relatively recently Brora was still advertising the platinum £10k life membership.

I don't care if there is grazing on the course.  Each member of the club should do what they think is in their and the clubs best interest.  What I do care about is the cost to play.  It's clear I'm getting old as I look back on the past fondly.  My first overseas golf trip about 10 years ago consisted of 60+ rounds in 30 days.  Brora was £55 and it's now £160.  A trip like that would be tough for a recent grad on a budget to replicate...even with my increased budget it'd be tough for me to replicate that trip.

[Tony_Muldoon]

Personally, I would be happy to see the rough grown maybe 1/2 inch higher. I think it would give the fairways a little more definition and minimize the "lost in space" feeling I sometimes get playing there.


DT   

 "Lost in space" is a great description of why I (currently) love it there. Vive la difference.

[Sean_A]

Personally, I would be happy to see the rough grown maybe 1/2 inch higher. I think it would give the fairways a little more definition and minimize the "lost in space" feeling I sometimes get playing there.

DT   

 "Lost in space" is a great description of why I (currently) love it there. Vive la difference.

Yes, the lack of definition is a feature of Brora I admire!


Merry Christmas

[John Chilver-Stainer]

Sean A. -


With regards to the possible added expense of the greens staff having to mow/maintain the rough in the future, don't forget a good portion of that expense is likely to be offset by the man hours saved shoveling dung and excrement off on and around the course. In addition, the staff will not have to spend man hours repairing bunkers and the walls of the burns that have been damaged by the livestock on the course. Finally, the electrical wires surrounding the greens will no longer have to be serviced/maintained.


Personally, I would be happy to see the rough grown maybe 1/2 inch higher. I think it would give the fairways a little more definition and minimize the "lost in space" feeling I sometimes get playing there.


DT   

You'll be lucky if the rough is maintained at 1/2 inch in the areas previously grazed.
Hopefully the rough doesn't end up like Golspie or R. Dornoch, where your heart sinks when the ball leaves the fairway.


Even after a slice over the blind rise at Brora's first into noman's land, one strode off the tee confident of finding the ball on a bit of nibbled down turf.


Glad tidings and merriment to all
🌲🎄🤶⛄😁

[David_Tepper]

"Hopefully the rough doesn't end up like Golspie or R. Dornoch, where your heart sinks when the ball leaves the fairway."
[/size][/color]
[/size][/color]
[/size]John C-S:[/color]
[/size][/color]
[/size][/color]
[/size]Really? I have played Golspie & Royal Dornoch close to 600 times total over the last 25 years. My heart rarely sinks when my ball leaves the fairway (and it leaves the fairway often[/color] )[/size].[/color]
[/size][/color]
[/size][/color]
[/size]DT [/color]
[/size][/color]
[/size][/color]
[/size][/color]