Bust

[Sweep]

Buying habits change and I am afraid it is the collective fault of most clubs that they find themselves in this position. Simply put, they have devalued their own product and made the proposition of playing regular golf without a membership far too attractive. Selling cheap tee times to non members is killing member clubs. The non member is getting a better deal than those who support their club year after year. When you treat your best “customers” like that, it’s only going to go one way.
Consider this. In one county union:
In 1990 the average cost of a round without a member at a club was £20.
The average cost of a membership was £250.
In 2012 the average cost of a round without a member at a club was £22.
The average cost of a membership was £1000.
Conclusion: Nomad fees increased 10% in 22 years. Members fees increased 4 fold over the same period. Members are paying the true cost of golf, nomads aren’t. Members are subsidising golf for nomads.
In 1990 the only cost effective way to play golf regularly was to join a club. Today the most cost effective way to play regularly is to become a nomad.

If you are going to adopt that business model, then you have to offer some pretty good incentives away from just playing golf to keep members and that means social aspect, camaraderie, Sky TV, cheap bar, competition golf and reciprocal deals etc.
The question is, how many clubs are doing that and where are the nomads going to play when all the members clubs have gone?

 

[robinthehood]

There are more clubs with less people wanting to play the game. Its pretty simple really.
Its certainly not the fault of golfers if clubs go down the pan.
The nearest club to me wants 1500 a year plus 500 joining fee. That's a 2k outlay for no guarantee of a decent tee time.

 

[Robster59]

When I look at where I live, there are over a dozen golf courses within a 5 mile radius of me, two of which are municipal, the rest Members clubs. When I first moved to Scotland some 14 years ago there were waiting lists at all of the Members clubs. Now they are all looking for new members. You have to wonder how many are sustainable and whether there would be a temptation for some to close given they are positioned on high value housing ground as housing developments have expanded to surround the course. The catchment area is large but the demand on peoples times now are different and they are looking more closely to see if the cost is justifiable.
Clubs have to be ensuring that they have incentives for their members which is something our club has looked at in a great deal of detail over the last few years including reciprocal agreements, deals with golf travel companies, pro-shop discounts, as well as other non-golf related benefits.
I'm not saying they all work but it shows the club is trying to provide a benefit to being a member.

 

[Dasit]

Like everything in life, is it not just supply and demand.

Most golf courses in the UK have been around for a long time, you can't open and close them easily.

If there was a "reset" of the UK and everything was blank, maybe there would only be half the golf courses built, as that is how many would be viable.


As there can't be a "reset" we are stuck with lots of golf courses, which are not at capacity or just not profitable. They carry on going in the hope of changing culture, more people taking up the games etc

 

[robinthehood]

Perhaps if those older courses had been a bit more welcoming and forward thinking they wouldn't find themselves struggling so much now.

 

[Jacko_G]

When I look at where I live, there are over a dozen golf courses within a 5 mile radius of me, two of which are municipal, the rest Members clubs. When I first moved to Scotland some 14 years ago there were waiting lists at all of the Members clubs. Now they are all looking for new members. You have to wonder how many are sustainable and whether there would be a temptation for some to close given they are positioned on high value housing ground as housing developments have expanded to surround the course. The catchment area is large but the demand on peoples times now are different and they are looking more closely to see if the cost is justifiable.
Clubs have to be ensuring that they have incentives for their members which is something our club has looked at in a great deal of detail over the last few years including reciprocal agreements, deals with golf travel companies, pro-shop discounts, as well as other non-golf related benefits.
I'm not saying they all work but it shows the club is trying to provide a benefit to being a member.

And what ones would go to the wall would you think?

Williamwood? Cathcart Castle?

Can't see East Renfrewshire or Whitecraigs going belly up, housing wouldn't be an option as far out as Eastwood or Bonnyton. Are you including Cowglen and Pollok?

Cowglen could go to housing but again I'm unsure as to their financial status. Pollok or Haggs Castle I'd also Imagine are pretty "safe".

 

[Robster59]

I wouldn't and couldn't say. It's all hypothesis and my opinion tbh. I never said any would go to the wall. I simply wondered how long they can all stay substainable and if any would consider selling up. As members course, the members would get a pretty good share of the money generated from the sale. I hope it doesn't happen to any of them as every course and its history means a lot to most of its membership.

 

[User 99]

Its certainly not the fault of golfers if clubs go down the pan.
The nearest club to me wants 1500 a year plus 500 joining fee. That's a 2k outlay for no guarantee of a decent tee time.

Who's fault is t then ?

Members have to support a club for it to survive, I have 3 playing partners who, since I've been a member, 14 months now, have never set foot inside the place, other than their fees, they haven't spent a single penny at the club, not one single penny.

 

[Robster59]

It always amazes me how many members do not spend any of their bar tariff over the year. Some rush in on the last day or so to buy a few bottles of wine but a lot lose it at the end without spending a penny of it.

 

[GB72]

I think much of it depends on the club and the atmosphere. I get on with the people I play with and have a drink after a round but the clubhouse is not the sort of place that I would chose to socialise, I just do not like the atmosphere. As we all live locally, any extended session will move to a local pub. If the club wants me to spend more money, it has to become a place where I want to spend time and money.

 

[robinthehood]

Who's fault is t then ?

Members have to support a club for it to survive, I have 3 playing partners who, since I've been a member, 14 months now, have never set foot inside the place, other than their fees, they haven't spent a single penny at the club, not one single penny.

Sorry clubs have only themselves to blame. If older clubs had made an effort to shake of their restrictive nature and modernise they may not have found them selves in such a crisis.

 

[User 99]

Sorry clubs have only themselves to blame. If older clubs had made an effort to shake of their restrictive nature and modernise they may not have found them selves in such a crisis.

But clubs are the members.

 

[Robster59]

It's not compulsory for members to have a drink but when I joined my club I made a positive effort to sit in the club after I played, talk to people, chill and get to know as many as I could. You can't just blame the clubs, the members need to put some effort in as well.
As above, they are MEMBERS clubs. Or many of them are.

 

[robinthehood]

But clubs are the members.

That makes no sense

 

[robinthehood]

It's not compulsory for members to have a drink but when I joined my club I made a positive effort to sit in the club after I played, talk to people, chill and get to know as many as I could. You can't just blame the clubs, the members need to put some effort in as well.
As above, they are MEMBERS clubs. Or many of them are.

The game lives in the past. I and my golfing friends have no desire to sit in the club house for an hour before or after a game . That's just life, potters bar didn't close because of no one using the bar.

 

[Robster59]

Is that the club or is it you?

 

[robinthehood]

Is that the club or is it you?

Is what?

 

[Robster59]

Is what?

The fact you won't stay in the club. At our club, quite a number of members do. What RandG and I are saying is that if it is a members club, you have an option to do something about it. If you sit back and say "the game lives in the past" (which I would dispute anyway) and then moan about it, then do something about it.
Members clubs can only function by the input of the members themselves. Our has changed its outlook substantially over the last few years, modernised, relaxed dress codes, everyone is welcome, they throw events to try and encourage members to feel more of a part.
Clubs need forward thinking people who can contribute to it.
There are also those who say "not my responsibility" and expect the whole thing just to be there and work. I'm afraid it sounds like you're the latter.

 

[User 99]

That makes no sense

You're taking the mickey

Without it's members there is no club, if you spend nothing you get nothing, the downfall of a members club is due to its members.

 

[robinthehood]

You're taking the mickey

Without it's members there is no club, if you spend nothing you get nothing, the downfall of a members club is due to its members.

Ok I see. Your statement in isolation was meaningless.
Your right that clubs need members. I'd say spending over 1500 a year on fees is far from spending nothing