Extending staggered fees for young adults

[Hobbit]

My point was really that it's not as straightforward as some people pay less and therefore cost the club money, because the assumption that they would all continue to be members is not reliable.

If 100 were after the £150 reduction, which I think was the original example, that would be a reduction of £15,000 of revenue. If the deal were not given, (assuming fees of £1,000), it would only take 16 of the 100 leaving to make the club worse off. Who knows whether they would or not? That's pie in the sky. But I very much doubt the real cost of the reduction in fees would be £15,000.

You're not strictly correct in your assumption. Some would leave but, to a certain extent, clubs almost operate a revolving door as some return to golf and some take it up for the first time.

Equally, some clubs have retained their high fees and no age related reductions because they're selling a quality product and/or, maybe, selling it the right way, e.g. a reduced fee for all and a pay and play top up.

 

[Canary_Yellow]

I fully get your point, what I'm saying is if a club pass a discount for lets say 10 members asking for it but have 100 members not asking for it then they'd be giving discount they don't have to, that's where I'm saying a potential shortfall, that's different from 100 members looking to leave because there is no discount for their catagory

I see what you're saying. I suppose I think of it more as people that would never be members in the first place get attracted by the lower fees - that's what happened in my case. I would now continue to be a member on the full rates, but I wouldn't have become a member in the first place without the reduction in fees.

So I'd say I provide incremental revenue rather than being a cost that is subsidised - we have space for more members, so I'm not taking the place of someone that might otherwise be paying full whack.

I doubt there are many that think the solely age based approach works fairly / effectively, but not many clubs offer anything other than full membership to those that wish to play at weekends and in competitions.

Fundamentally, my view is the more members there are the better (assuming the course has capacity). Finding a way that everyone agrees is equitable is very hard.

 

[Canary_Yellow]

You're not strictly correct in your assumption. Some would leave but, to a certain extent, clubs almost operate a revolving door as some return to golf and some take it up for the first time.

Equally, some clubs have retained their high fees and no age related reductions because they're selling a quality product and/or, maybe, selling it the right way, e.g. a reduced fee for all and a pay and play top up.

My view is that we should try and break down as many barriers to people becoming members in the first place as possible. If there are no concessions and no flexible options available then signing up to a £1,000 membership is very daunting - I wouldn't have become a member at my course certainly.

As you say, some courses are in the enviable position of having a full membership and therefore no need to offer concessionary rates, or have members with deep enough pockets not to be concerned by higher subs.

I don't think we disagree on the fundamental issue; age based concessions are not fit for purpose beyond juniors transitioning to adult membership and flexible options work better for a wide variety of ages.

We're just approaching the question of who subsidises who from different angles.

 

[HawkeyeMS]

Actually, I don't think we do all agree they are a good idea. I didn't join a members club until it was financially viable for me to do so and I gave other stuff up to be able to do it. I was 35 at the time and didn't expect any discounts.

That said, I have just benefitted from Blackmoor's new "36 to 40" category which means I only paid £980 instead of what I think would have been £1380. I also didn't have to pay the £500 joining fee. While this was all very welcome as I had just moved house (hence moving clubs too) it does rather make a mockery of, and re-inforce my view from last year's thread on this topic, the whole age related discounts thing.

When I moved house I was and still am a member of RAGC so could easily have just kept driving back there every week but it's a bit far to be viable. Mrs H and I looked into and decided that we could afford for me to join Blackmoor when we moved and I went to the Open Day fully expecting to hand over the £2K it would have cost for joining fee and subs. Granted, I would have asked if there was a payment scheme but the nett result would have been about £2K.

After my round I made it very clear I would like to join and was told that as I was 39 I qualified for the new reduced fee which as I said, was a bonus at the time and paid for some new carpets in the new gaff but I was joining anyway - all the reduction did was make Blackmoor about £1000 worse off. Not only that, but there were 4 other guys the same as me, joining anyway and qualifying for the discount.

Now I don't know the stats of how many people in my age group have joined because of the reduced fee but it dos show that using age as a determining factor for discounts is flawed.

 

[Hobbit]

My view is that we should try and break down as many barriers to people becoming members in the first place as possible. If there are no concessions and no flexible options available then signing up to a £1,000 membership is very daunting - I wouldn't have become a member at my course certainly.

As you say, some courses are in the enviable position of having a full membership and therefore no need to offer concessionary rates, or have members with deep enough pockets not to be concerned by higher subs.

I don't think we disagree on the fundamental issue; age based concessions are not fit for purpose beyond juniors transitioning to adult membership and flexible options work better for a wide variety of ages.

We're just approaching the question of who subsidises who from different angles.

Spot on for me, and I also think capacity wouldn't be an issue at some clubs if membership options were more flexible. There are some clubs who are full to bursting at weekends, and put up the "we are full" signs when in reality they could take more players who may just want midweek or twilight options. Add to that some 9 hole competitions for those that only have limited playing time.

I pay full subs for relatively little golf, whereas some pay 25% less, have no mortgage or kids kicking around and play 3-4 times a week. Their disposable income is actually greater than the 30+'s, yet they pay significantly less.

As you and FD said, age related is a crude and unfair system. But there is the option not to play, which we both wouldn't like to see.

 

[mikepops]

I don't think we disagree on the fundamental issue; age based concessions are not fit for purpose beyond juniors transitioning to adult membership and flexible options work better for a wide variety of ages.

We're just approaching the question of who subsidises who from different angles.

I don't disagree that it's a very crude method. To reiterate, my point was that given that golf clubs seem to have decided that its a method worth pursuing, could they implement it more effectively?!

 

[Canary_Yellow]

I don't disagree that it's a very crude method. To reiterate, my point was that given that golf clubs seem to have decided that its a method worth pursuing, could they implement it more effectively?!

I think the problem is that everyone has different circumstances at different ages, just upping the age to which concessions are offered doesn't help in my opinion. If you don't offer concessions based on age though, what do you offer them based on? Means testing? A psychological assesment of how likely you are to give up your membership?

I don't know what the answer is. That's why I conclude that actually it's not the way forward, and really what is needed is a greater level of flexibility.

 

[DCB]

This thread actually shows how golf has changed over the years. In the good old days, you chose the club you were going to join, you paid your joining fee and first years subs and then, unless you moved away with work, you paid your annual subs until they carried you out in a box.

Nowadays people don't even seem to be able to commit to a club for a whole season (recent thread on here) they are changing clubs after a couple of years or are always looking for the perfect course with a club membership that is acceptable to them. All very well, but it's a game we play. Join a club, get involved, support it, help it grow, have your voice heard and do what you can to help the club move in the right direction. Don't come on here bleating about joining fees, young adult rates, senior rates, winter greens, winter tees, greenkeepers, handicap secretarys etc. There is no such thing as a perfect club, if you think you've found it, don't join it, you'll just spoil it.

It's a game to be played with friends, get into a club and get involved, that's going to come at a price, but, if you really love the game, that's what needs to be done.

Friday Rant over

 

[FairwayDodger]

This thread actually shows how golf has changed over the years. In the good old days, you chose the club you were going to join, you paid your joining fee and first years subs and then, unless you moved away with work, you paid your annual subs until they carried you out in a box.

Nowadays people don't even seem to be able to commit to a club for a whole season (recent thread on here) they are changing clubs after a couple of years or are always looking for the perfect course with a club membership that is acceptable to them. All very well, but it's a game we play. Join a club, get involved, support it, help it grow, have your voice heard and do what you can to help the club move in the right direction. Don't come on here bleating about joining fees, young adult rates, senior rates, winter greens, winter tees, greenkeepers, handicap secretarys etc. There is no such thing as a perfect club, if you think you've found it, don't join it, you'll just spoil it.

It's a game to be played with friends, get into a club and get involved, that's going to come at a price, but, if you really love the game, that's what needs to be done.

Friday Rant over

But, but, what on earth would we talk about!?

 

[Deleted member 16999]

This thread actually shows how golf has changed over the years. In the good old days, you chose the club you were going to join, you paid your joining fee and first years subs and then, unless you moved away with work, you paid your annual subs until they carried you out in a box.

Nowadays people don't even seem to be able to commit to a club for a whole season (recent thread on here) they are changing clubs after a couple of years or are always looking for the perfect course with a club membership that is acceptable to them. All very well, but it's a game we play. Join a club, get involved, support it, help it grow, have your voice heard and do what you can to help the club move in the right direction. Don't come on here bleating about joining fees, young adult rates, senior rates, winter greens, winter tees, greenkeepers, handicap secretarys etc. There is no such thing as a perfect club, if you think you've found it, don't join it, you'll just spoil it.

It's a game to be played with friends, get into a club and get involved, that's going to come at a price, but, if you really love the game, that's what needs to be done.

Friday Rant over

Spot on

 

[Leereed]

I think the cut off point should be 25. The young lads at our place pay a tiny fraction compared to the over 25's.Yet they all turn up in brand new cars and have all the latest clubs/ gear.

 

[upsidedown]

I think the cut off point should be 25. The young lads at our place pay a tiny fraction compared to the over 25's.Yet they all turn up in brand new cars and have all the latest clubs/ gear.

Just the same at ours and we go up to 30 till normal fees kick in.

 

[Deleted member 18588]

:thup:

This thread actually shows how golf has changed over the years. In the good old days, you chose the club you were going to join, you paid your joining fee and first years subs and then, unless you moved away with work, you paid your annual subs until they carried you out in a box.

Nowadays people don't even seem to be able to commit to a club for a whole season (recent thread on here) they are changing clubs after a couple of years or are always looking for the perfect course with a club membership that is acceptable to them. All very well, but it's a game we play. Join a club, get involved, support it, help it grow, have your voice heard and do what you can to help the club move in the right direction. Don't come on here bleating about joining fees, young adult rates, senior rates, winter greens, winter tees, greenkeepers, handicap secretarys etc. There is no such thing as a perfect club, if you think you've found it, don't join it, you'll just spoil it.

It's a game to be played with friends, get into a club and get involved, that's going to come at a price, but, if you really love the game, that's what needs to be done.

Friday Rant over

I don't think I have ever agreed more with any other post.:thup:

 

[SAPCOR1]

A valid question for the OP to air but in my opinion that any discounts should end when you finish school/college/uni up to 24 yo max.

I also don't agree with over 60/65's getting a discount either

 

[Hobbit]

What about the person who has a child @ 30, and whose partner is off work? Are they better deserving of a discount? What about the person whose children go off to Uni, and they're helping with funding? Are they better deserving? what about the person who gets made redundant? Are they better deserving? And yes there are those just starting out, just as there are those who only have a state pension... and then there's the person who who buys heir first house at 28, then moves at 35 and then again at 45, and on each occasion takes out a mortgage.

Who deserves the discount?

 

[HawkeyeMS]

Just the same at ours and we go up to 30 till normal fees kick in.

Ditto at RAGC. Some of the old boys have got the right hump about it.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

Ditto at RAGC. Some of the old boys have got the right hump about it.

The old boys at RAGC always have the hump. Looking at the website though we have an age bracket until 35 http://www.royalascotgolfclub.co.uk/membership/membership-costs.html

 

[HawkeyeMS]

The old boys at RAGC always have the hump. Looking at the website though we have an age bracket until 35 http://www.royalascotgolfclub.co.uk/membership/membership-costs.html

Tha's true enough

 

[Lanark_Golfer]

All I would say to the OP is that I would seriously consider whether £145 difference is really enough to make the difference between staying and going. That ain't going to buy a lot off nappies at today's prices....

 

[mikepops]

I think the problem is that everyone has different circumstances at different ages, just upping the age to which concessions are offered doesn't help in my opinion. If you don't offer concessions based on age though, what do you offer them based on? Means testing? A psychological assesment of how likely you are to give up your membership?

I don't know what the answer is. That's why I conclude that actually it's not the way forward, and really what is needed is a greater level of flexibility.

I think flexible memberships very well might be the answer, and if my club offered it, I'd bite their hand off for it. However they don't, but they do offer staggered membership, which is why I raised the point.

That said flexible memberships are most likely to be taken out by the demographic I'm highlighting - 30-40 year olds with families. From what I hear most flexible members aren't likely to end up paying anywhere near a full subs fee, so would actually end up costing the club more than just extending a staggered fee structure.