Club Membership Interveiw.

Free access to the course? Er no we pay the same as everyone else. That inlcudes the annual bar levy etc

But do you put any money behind the bar beyond your levy ?

As has been stated golf clubs need more than just subs to survive.
 
And yet I detect the exact opposite i.e. an attitude of looking down on golfers who don't wear a tie e.g. the comments about car park golfers, not being a full & active member etc. all associated with the wearing of a tie.

I think the tie has been taken out of proportion.

The question is how many would have turned down the society meet yesterday because it involved having to wear a tie and jacket afterwards
 
But do you put any money behind the bar beyond your levy ?

As has been stated golf clubs need more than just subs to survive.

nope not really, Ide be willing to bet that a lot of clubs would struggle massively without thier car park members. As far as I am concerned my subs are to play golf. I am unlikely to go to the club for a drink as it in the middle of nowhere and as I play early I am not going to use the bar thm either.
 
Last edited:
nope not really, Ide be willing to bet that a lot of clubs would struggle massively without thier car park members.

So you dont think clubs need money over the bar ?

If everyone was car park golfers then the subs would be increased to offset the lack of funds going into the club.

So whilst you play golf and then disappear maybe realise that your subs are being kept at that level because other members are putting money behind the bar on a regular occasions.
 
So you dont think clubs need money over the bar ?

If everyone was car park golfers then the subs would be increased to offset the lack of funds going into the club.

So whilst you play golf and then disappear maybe realise that your subs are being kept at that level because other members are putting money behind the bar on a regular occasions.


Close the bar and just have a portacabin and a nice course, I pay to play golf. your tone seems to suggest that members who play and little else are somehow a burden on the club but the reailty is the comlpete opposite. Would you really turn away 20 members and the additional 20,000 a year that it would bring?
 
Last edited:
Close the bar and just have a portacabin and a nice course, I pay to play golf.

And then all the members that are at the golf club for more than just golf will leave - means your membership reduces in numbers and you still need a great deal of money to allow a nice course to survive and your fees increase.

A portacabin only at a course wont attract many members joining.
 
And then all the members that are at the golf club for more than just golf will leave - means your membership reduces in numbers and you still need a great deal of money to allow a nice course to survive and your fees increase.

A portacabin only at a course wont attract many members joining.

While I agree it wouldnt be the most welcoming of courses, I'd be willing to bet a course in top nick but with little in the way of a bar or clubhouse would actually do rather well.
 
While I agree it wouldnt be the most welcoming of courses, I'd be willing to bet a course in top nick but with little in the way of a bar or clubhouse would actually do rather well.

Only if the fees were high enough to allow the course to be kept in top nick
 
Just to add some fuel to the fire and tip some of the arguments on there head...

I play at a private members club with circa 700 members. We have a bar levy of £50 pa and tbf a decent bar and changing rooms serving not bad food with footy on etc.
however the bar and facilities as a stand alone profit centre runs at a loss every year and is picked up out of the membership fees, thus meaning that if we were to shut the bar and just have a cabin, at least in theory our subs would reduce.

However the club makes a surplus each year and so shutting the operation has never been a consideration as it makes a club IMO.
 
As we discussed earlier - its all dependant on what each persons club decides.

if they dont want their club players to wear shirt and tie after matches thats fine

I think what SILH was describing the difference between "car park golfers" and "fully integrated club golfers"

The standard of dress will be different at each club - there is no right or wrong answer

That's what I am saying - and clubs would like all members to be the latter.

All I am suggesting is that one little way that might indicate you are more likely to be integrated would be that you turn up 'conventionally' dressed for an 'interview' rather than dressed-down in what could be perceived to be challenging the traditional norm of club membership. And I am not suggesting for a second that someone who doesn't dress-up won't become a fully integrated member - it's simply perception and showing respect to the club - especially if you don't really know much about the club.

Why is it so hard to simply accept that a golf club interview panel might quite like potential members to make an effort. It shows a willingness to 'become part of' and not an indication of 'I'll do it my way'. Surely in life our default start position should be to show respect and courtesy to others. We all know that some golf clubs might prefer jacket and tie to be worn for an interview - so unless you know otherwise surely it's easier to just take that view.
 
I think this thread has lost its way a bit and has turned into another one about the rights and wrongs of car park members. If you want to join a club and the like to uphold the ways of an interview and expect you to wear a tie and jacket for certain things then so be it. If your not happy with that then join another club.

i really do not see how this has turned into an argument. From what I understand from the OP he was just asking about this old tradition and seeing if other places are still doing it.
 
Top