Dodds goes at SGU / Fee increase abandoned

[HughJars]

Surely that wasn't the whole reason... if it was, wow!

Some will move away, but we've been largely averse to the oil slump, because our club is very localised, and largely made up of people in the farming and local estate community. A lot of our members are only members because it's so cheap, playing half a dozen times a year or less.

 

[williamalex1]

We have a guests only club, no visitors. The last time I queued to get on the tee was in the 80s, what would we have needed the compulsory BRS system for?

Our club basically breaks even every year, our adult fees range from £110-£190, our seniors about 30% less. Not only was this being backdated and therefore would have entailed a loss on the year that wasn't budgeted for, but the rise was OVER 10% of annual fees for many of our members.

A lot of clubs in the north-east are struggling badly right now, ANY rise is utterly ridiculous.

Our full fees are £670 including the SGU fee of approx £11 . We already have a computerised system but no BRS.
With over 400 members it can sometimes be difficult getting a suitable tee time.
Having a BRS system would help, and also allow non members book online and pay for tee times.
Adding another £11 would give me liability insurance .
ATM I pay £32 for comprehensive golf insurance, I would happily cancel that and pay the SGU £11 just for the liability cover alone, saving in me £21.

 

[FairwayDodger]

I think this shows the difficulty Scottish golf have (the SGU no longer exists) getting agreement on the way forward. With so many diverse clubs it’s hard to find something that will suit them all.

Hugh’s club sounds pretty unusual and I don’t think many will have 5 memberships like hank.

Not saying what's been proposed is right or wrong, just that what’s in the best interests of the game long term isn’t necessarily going to be the best thing right now for all clubs and all members.

 

[Jacko_G]

SGU are out of touch and out or reality.

The proposed increase isn't so much about the cost with me, its the inadequate way in which they have mismanaged funds for years and offered very little back into Scottish Golf as a whole. I'd love to knew a true figure of how much the SGU lost on the failed Drumoig nonsense. That was truly a white elephant and the SGU already increased subs by 100% co cover that when it went belly up.

In theory a Drumoig style facility should have and could have worked well but they went against advice and built it in a crazy location away from the large population base.

I have two primary school aged children and not once have I ever experienced or seen any evidence of golf on the school curriculum. This is grass roots, this is where we are potentially missing out on hundreds, possibly thousands of new fresh blood. Instead the SGU sit back and hope that mums and dads, aunts, uncles, friends etc will introduce kids to golf. 100% wrong, this is where they need to act and act now. Clubgolf, where is this within the local schools????

If I want to be selfish, what do I get out of the SGU? Absolutely nowt.
What have the SGU achieved in recent years with Scotland's "elite golfers"? Nowt.

90+% of golf clubs in Scotland will get nothing from a national online booking system. Royal Troon, Royal Dornoch, Turnberry, etc may get additional bookings but it gives the remainder zero benefit that I can see.

 

[FairwayDodger]

90+% of golf clubs in Scotland will get nothing from a national online booking system. Royal Troon, Royal Dornoch, Turnberry, etc may get additional bookings but it gives the remainder zero benefit that I can see.

It’s all speculation but I actually think the reverse is true. The established marquee courses who are already slick at dealing with visitors won’t get much benefit but the wee clubs who don’t currently have online booking will. The other main beneficiaries are the golfers who will find it easier to get tee times on these courses.

 

[patricks148]

It’s all speculation but I actually think the reverse is true. The established marquee courses who are already slick at dealing with visitors won’t get much benefit but the wee clubs who don’t currently have online booking will. The other main beneficiaries are the golfers who will find it easier to get tee times on these courses.

You right there about the main visitor courses.

 

[Jacko_G]

It’s all speculation but I actually think the reverse is true. The established marquee courses who are already slick at dealing with visitors won’t get much benefit but the wee clubs who don’t currently have online booking will. The other main beneficiaries are the golfers who will find it easier to get tee times on these courses.

Disagree with you here.

A lot of the American guys I talk too say that they pay a travel company to do the bookings for them as they can't be bothered individually contacting all the courses and arranging tee times and dates. If its all available on one site it takes far less time and effort.

If I want to go and play Mar Hall for example I would just phone I wouldn't bother looking at the SGU website, finding Mar Hall and then clicking to see what availability it has. Likewise will a club like Caldwell or Erskine gain anything from a centralised booking system which they will have to pay to be part of regardless. I would suggest not however if I am proven to be wrong I will hold my hands up.

I can only see real benefit for big clubs who already get the lion share of the visiting money as its easier to book it all in one place now for overseas golfers.

 

[FairwayDodger]

You might phone but somebody else might prefer online booking and, of course, it would be a single site in which you could book all the courses for a trip. I actually think this particular initiative would be great for clubs and much cheaper than setting up and maintaining their own websites. Great opportunity to leverage some economies of scale and drip down some benefits to the smaller clubs.

I’d imagine during the booking process it would recommend other courses in the area, possibly ones visitors hadn’t considered, and make it easy to view those courses and book times there.

 

[Jacko_G]

You might phone but somebody else might prefer online booking and, of course, it would be a single site in which you could book all the courses for a trip. I actually think this particular initiative would be great for clubs and much cheaper than setting up and maintaining their own websites. Great opportunity to leverage some economies of scale and drip down some benefits to the smaller clubs.

I’d imagine during the booking process it would recommend other courses in the area, possibly ones visitors hadn’t considered, and make it easy to view those courses and book times there.

How many pay and play visitors does a members club like Caldwell and Erskine (the two examples I already used) get? I'd suggest very little and what they do get they get through discounted golf sites that they are already paying to be members of Teeofftimes, Greenfree etc already give you the chance to attend "lesser" members clubs and play them at vastly reduced rates for a 4 ball or however many want to play.

SGU have come to the party late.

 

[Doon frae Troon]

I was involved in the early planning of Clubgolf.
The Scottish Government and the schools really embraced the idea.
It was the SGU/SLGU/County Unions and a fair chunk of clubs that really let the side down. They did not pick up the baton.

It was funded by Scottish Government money pledged for the Gleneagles Ryder Cup and from an Scottish Golf position it turned into a 'box ticked' farce.

 

[Jacko_G]

I was involved in the early planning of Clubgolf.
The Scottish Government and the schools really embraced the idea.
It was the SGU/SLGU/County Unions and a fair chunk of clubs that really let the side down. They did not pick up the baton.

It was funded by Scottish Government money pledged for the Gleneagles Ryder Cup and from an Scottish Golf position it turned into a 'box ticked' farce.

Shock horror!

Am I surprised, not one bit.

 

[FairwayDodger]

How many pay and play visitors does a members club like Caldwell and Erskine (the two examples I already used) get? I'd suggest very little and what they do get they get through discounted golf sites that they are already paying to be members of Teeofftimes, Greenfree etc already give you the chance to attend "lesser" members clubs and play them at vastly reduced rates for a 4 ball or however many want to play.

SGU have come to the party late.

I actually think you're just making the case for the Scottish Golf website. Provided, of course, it's available to clubs at more preferential rates than Teeofftimes etc. It's these websites that should feel threatened rather than the clubs.

It seems that there is a great deal of resistance to change and resentment of Scottish Golf based on the failings of the old SGU. It's a new era - we keep talking about what can be done to boost the game and then are up in arms when that turns out to be doing something different than currently.

 

[patricks148]

I think a fair chunk goes on the elite squad at Age group and all the coaches that these guys use. I know the two SGU coaches up here both get a Retainer and there are other guys going on Jollies parading around in new waterproofs and clothing with SGU logo all this costs. all the money from the SGU winter booking goes straight into the elite pot as well. so all those 4 ball rounds Muirfield, Troon and Prestick donate which must be a nice amount as well

 

[Jacko_G]

I actually think you're just making the case for the Scottish Golf website. Provided, of course, it's available to clubs at more preferential rates than Teeofftimes etc. It's these websites that should feel threatened rather than the clubs.

It seems that there is a great deal of resistance to change and resentment of Scottish Golf based on the failings of the old SGU. It's a new era - we keep talking about what can be done to boost the game and then are up in arms when that turns out to be doing something different than currently.

No resentment to change at all and as I stated first off the money is not an issue. Its just another bail out to the SGU that I can see.

Those discount websites have nothing to worry about from the SGU, if anything the SGU have more to worry about from them. There are more schemes coming to the market shortly which will cause the SGU and clubs more head scratching. I've also already stated what needs to be done to boost golf but you have chosen to ignore that and instead disagree with me on online bookings. Where is golf within schools?

Failings of the Old SGU? There is no new SGU, its the same SGU that wasted 4.6 million of Scottish Golf's money on Drumoig then shut it after suffering more massive losses and sacked staff into the bargain, its the same SGU that doubled fees to pay for the failed Drumoig. The same SGU who were told through consultation that Drumoig was in the wrong location but they blindly forged ahead with it.

The SGU has no right to just blindly expect golfers to pay and not question what they are getting in return. They have a proven record of mismanagement so I think as a golf club member I (as you do to disagree with me) have the right to question where this money is going and what benefit I and my club will get from yet another large increase in fees.

 

[FairwayDodger]

No resentment to change at all and as I stated first off the money is not an issue. Its just another bail out to the SGU that I can see.

Those discount websites have nothing to worry about from the SGU, if anything the SGU have more to worry about from them. There are more schemes coming to the market shortly which will cause the SGU and clubs more head scratching. I've also already stated what needs to be done to boost golf but you have chosen to ignore that and instead disagree with me on online bookings. Where is golf within schools?

Failings of the Old SGU? There is no new SGU, its the same SGU that wasted 4.6 million of Scottish Golf's money on Drumoig then shut it after suffering more massive losses and sacked staff into the bargain, its the same SGU that doubled fees to pay for the failed Drumoig. The same SGU who were told through consultation that Drumoig was in the wrong location but they blindly forged ahead with it.

The SGU has no right to just blindly expect golfers to pay and not question what they are getting in return. They have a proven record of mismanagement so I think as a golf club member I (as you do to disagree with me) have the right to question where this money if going and what benefit I and my club will get from yet another large increase in fees.

Not debating golf in schools etc as I agree with you on that. I also have reservations about many aspects of Scottish Golf's proposal, I just think the centralised online booking system is a great idea. And, of course, I could be wrong!

But let's at least get one thing clear - there is no such organisation as the SGU any more. It is defunct, merged, dead it is an ex-organisation. It's a brave new world out there and I think "Scottish Golf" should be given a chance rather than being damned because one of the organisations it replaces failed. They haven't covered themselves in glory in many ways but have been addressing issues and the jury is still out as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Jacko_G]

Not debating golf in schools etc as I agree with you on that. I also have reservations about many aspects of Scottish Golf's proposal, I just think the centralised online booking system is a great idea. And, of course, I could be wrong!

But let's at least get one thing clear - there is no such organisation as the SGU any more. It is defunct, merged, dead it is an ex-organisation. It's a brave new world out there and I think "Scottish Golf" should be given a chance rather than being damned because one of the organisations it replaces failed. They haven't covered themselves in glory in many ways but have been addressing issues and the jury is still out as far as I'm concerned.

Same organisation, different name. Bit like a defunct Glasgow Football team, same failings under a different umbrella.

Hopefully I'm wrong and we won't be facing another 100% rise in fees in a few years.

 

[FairwayDodger]

Same organisation, different name. Bit like a defunct Glasgow Football team, same failings under a different umbrella.

Hopefully I'm wrong and we won't be facing another 100% rise in fees in a few years.

Time will tell how different it is - it should be very different as the game modernises - and there will be more growing pains I don't doubt!

Are Third Lanark making a comeback?

I do agree the 100% fee hike is excessive, but finances are in a perilous state with the drop in membership and cuts from Sport Scotland. Which is why it's not easy for them.

Nothing I've said should be taken as an unequivocal defence of Scottish Golf, all I'm saying is give them a chance rather than writing them off based on your negative perception of the old SGU.

 

[Jacko_G]

Slightly more substance than "perception" I would suggest.

:thup:

 

[Jacko_G]

I "believe" that these plans have been shelved and common sense to the uproar plus fears of club closures has made Scottish Golf sit up, take notice and back down.

Social media has it's uses. Not sure that they could handle all the negative opinions and criticism.

 

[FairwayDodger]

And the SGM has been cancelled with the consultation extended to March.