Golf clubs low on membership

[Deleted member 21258]

Over the course of a whole year I would definitely miss the variety of playing a host of different courses. No matter how good my home course was. It's like, I love pizza, but I wouldn't want pizza for dinner every day for a year would I?

I can understand this completely and really enjoyed playing different courses, have done since starting golf. Could never imagine playing only one course for a whole year, even if that meant I just play the local council course for £8 just for a change. I like variety.

EDIT got nothing to do with quality of golf course

 

[chellie]

Do you ever play away courses?

Yes. To name a few: Royal Lytham, Trump Aberdeen, Turnberry, Carnasty, Castle Stewart, Dornoch, Nairn, Sunningdale (both), New Zealand, Alwoodley, Formby, Silloth

 

[chellie]

Oh and both times at Royal have been FOC as once was a club match and the other was a Daily Mail Foursomes match

 

[Blue in Munich]

club logoed shirts are damned expensive though!

Curiously our club don't insist on a club shirt for matches, one of the few things I disagree with at my club.

 

[Papas1982]

Yes. To name a few: Royal Lytham, Trump Aberdeen, Turnberry, Carnasty, Castle Stewart, Dornoch, Nairn, Sunningdale (both), New Zealand, Alwoodley, Formby, Silloth

Was your course closed on those days?

Purely playing devils advocate and said in jest mainly, but to claim you would happily play yours everyday. Would suggest you don’t feel the urge to play elsewhere (like Orikoru). Granted I doubt very much if the courses he plays have quite the same allure as the ones you list (quality names drops btw)!

I think refusing to buy one club shirt has been jumped on too easily now. Nomads are a part of golf and clubs (maybe not exclusive ones) need them to survive. There’s now shame in being one imo.

 

[Jacko_G]

It's easy for people to mock from the safety of their keyboards.

 

[Blue in Munich]

I can understand this completely and really enjoyed playing different courses, have done since starting golf. Could never imagine playing only one course for a whole year, even if that meant I just play the local council course for £8 just for a change. I like variety.

EDIT got nothing to do with quality of golf course

Not for me, thank you; more than happy to play other courses but I'd always look for something at least as good if not better than my home course if I'm choosing to go away & pay a green fee.

 

[patricks148]

Still can't comprehend. I could play our course every day of the year and not get bored with it.

Same here, my course gives you something different every time you play. there are plenty of guys at the club that play no where else.. I didn't feel that way at a couple of other parkland courses I have been a member of.

I get to play a fair few different courses throughout the year

 

[chellie]

Was your course closed on those days?

Purely playing devils advocate and said in jest mainly, but to claim you would happily play yours everyday. Would suggest you don’t feel the urge to play elsewhere (like Orikoru). Granted I doubt very much if the courses he plays have quite the same allure as the ones you list (quality names drops btw)!

I think refusing to buy one club shirt has been jumped on too easily now. Nomads are a part of golf and clubs (maybe not exclusive ones) need them to survive. There’s now shame in being one imo.

I would still happily play ours everyday. Had the opportunity to play those courses I listed through the forum meets.

Still don't get the clubs need nomads to survive argument and never will. A guaranteed income stream is needed to run a club. That is what a membership provide.

 

[Wolf]

Still don't get the clubs need nomads to survive argument and never will. A guaranteed income stream is needed to run a club. That is what a membership provide.

I agree with you on this the argument for survival will surely always be guaranteed income from membership and in club spend, then followed up by smart marketing to bring in x amount of society days or run Open competitons then any nomadic fees would be used as extra profit. To run a business hoping a certain amount of nomads will just come through the door always seems odd to me as to many variables to predict a number of how many you'll get.

 

[Papas1982]

I would still happily play ours everyday. Had the opportunity to play those courses I listed through the forum meets.

Still don't get the clubs need nomads to survive argument and never will. A guaranteed income stream is needed to run a club. That is what a membership provide.

Good clubs will always survive off of of just their membership because they can charge top fee's and will be oversubscribed i'd imagine.

Obviously in an ideal world all clubs would be full of members and not have space left for nomads, but i would imagine that 80% of clubs open their bookings to the public. I doubt very much they do that to "grow the game", they do it for money.

 

[robinthehood]

A huge proportion of golfer are nomads,possibly never more so. it would be a mistake to not tap into that market.

 

[Papas1982]

I agree with you on this the argument for survival will surely always be guaranteed income from membership and in club spend, then followed up by smart marketing to bring in x amount of society days or run Open competitons then any nomadic fees would be used as extra profit. To run a business hoping a certain amount of nomads will just come through the door always seems odd to me as to many variables to predict a number of how many you'll get.

I don't think clubs "hope" a certain amount visit. I'm sure clubs can use years of data t predict average numbers and work it into a business plan. Not many clubs will right off the opportunity to earn extra from nomads. They're a supplementary income, and a mainstay of golf now. Imo, if any club that doesn't currently have a waiting list decided to go it alone for a year. Simply members only and society days they'd be writing loads of money off, that imo is a far riskier business plan than accepting you'll get nomads visit.

 

[Wolf]

I don't think clubs "hope" a certain amount visit. I'm sure clubs can use years of data t predict average numbers and work it into a business plan. Not many clubs will right off the opportunity to earn extra from nomads. They're a supplementary income, and a mainstay of golf now. Imo, if any club that doesn't currently have a waiting list decided to go it alone for a year. Simply members only and society days they'd be writing loads of money off, that imo is a far riskier business plan than accepting you'll get nomads visit.

I don't disagree that they are supplementary income and agree its a good revenue stream but to try to forecast using year on year figures imo isn't something a golf club can use accurately to predict or estimate a % income for a club based on nomadic Green fees. When you factor in weather changes, people having other choice etc it leaves far to many variables to predict income from these just because a certain amount was achieved in previous years.

I've always thought smart business would be allocate costs according to current membership and revenue then use these extras to supplement and make improvements. To rely on green fees to form a part of clubs daily revenue streams seems a risky strategy to me.

 

[Doon frae Troon]

I think in an interview situation you would have to say something pretty bad or express something not in the clubs interest to be rejected. I think there is a need for interviews and if people don't want to attend a 15 minute interview they really can't be very serious about joining

I know a couple of clubs where a tattooed forehead or the wrong sort of handshake is frowned upon.

 

[Papas1982]

I don't disagree that they are supplementary income and agree its a good revenue stream but to try to forecast using year on year figures imo isn't something a golf club can use accurately to predict or estimate a % income for a club based on nomadic Green fees. When you factor in weather changes, people having other choice etc it leaves far to many variables to predict income from these just because a certain amount was achieved in previous years.

I've always thought smart business would be allocate costs according to current membership and revenue then use these extras to supplement and make improvements. To rely on green fees to form a part of clubs daily revenue streams seems a risky strategy to me.

I agree entirely, I don't know if many will consider them as a fixed income. Some will of course and the'll likely be the one's that hit the wall in tough times. That said, i reckon most clubs run on pretty tight margins and so whilst they may survive with just their membership revenue, for them to grow and thrive they need to make them self appeal to nomads and societies. As to weather affecting visitors, i'm sure seasonal variations can be accounted for, historical averages based on years of data will be used my all manner of businesses. All good businesses will have profit forecasts for good, bad and indifferent years. Ideally you'll make a profit on a bad year and then have plans how best to improve with the added finance of a good year.

I'll be honest, i'm not sure why society members seem to be regarded higher than nomads by some?

 

[Wolf]

I agree entirely, I don't know if many will consider them as a fixed income. Some will of course and the'll likely be the one's that hit the wall in tough times. That said, i reckon most clubs run on pretty tight margins and so whilst they may survive with just their membership revenue, for them to grow and thrive they need to make them self appeal to nomads and societies. As to weather affecting visitors, i'm sure seasonal variations can be accounted for, historical averages based on years of data will be used my all manner of businesses. All good businesses will have profit forecasts for good, bad and indifferent years. Ideally you'll make a profit on a bad year and then have plans how best to improve with the added finance of a good year.

I'll be honest, i'm not sure why society members seem to be regarded higher than nomads by some?

I'd hazard a guess they put more regard on them from a business point in that they probably get a lot of repeat bookings at similar times of year so can factor this in to budgets.

From a golfer perspective of why they regard them higher I can only imagine that people do so because they assume all nomads are choppers who have no idea of how to play, etiquette, rules etc. If this is the case then sadly that says a lot more about the average club golfers assumption of outsiders even though they were once one themselves.

 

[patricks148]

I don't disagree that they are supplementary income and agree its a good revenue stream but to try to forecast using year on year figures imo isn't something a golf club can use accurately to predict or estimate a % income for a club based on nomadic Green fees. When you factor in weather changes, people having other choice etc it leaves far to many variables to predict income from these just because a certain amount was achieved in previous years.

I've always thought smart business would be allocate costs according to current membership and revenue then use these extras to supplement and make improvements. To rely on green fees to form a part of clubs daily revenue streams seems a risky strategy to me.

yes all true, but as had been discussed many, many times on here, the raise in nomad golf isn't the answer for golf clubs that's for sure.

offering cheap golf to non members starts the slippery slope, all of a sudden guys who played less frequently get to thinking why pay membership when I can play when I like where ever I like for less than a membership. its a difficult one to balance for clubs and nomad golf isn't an option in some parts of the country.. I'd imagine there are not many nomads up my way, but then membership isn't excessive cost wise and it would be cheaper up here to be a member than a nomad if you play regularly. In the home counties ( well some of them) id imagine its easy and cheaper to not be a member, especially if you are not interested in competitive golf and having a handicap. I'd imagine there won't be many clubs that are offering £25 green fee will be doing that well and will be the ones struggling..... IMO of course

 

[User2021]

I love going and playing new courses.

However, would happily play the course I am a member of every day.
I feel the course is a good test to most abilities.
It hosts amateur events and doesn't get ripped up.
The course changes dramatically with the seasons and the weather etc etc.

Its in a wonderful setting, tee'd off yesterday at 7.45 as the sun came up. The place was magical, hundreds of deer wandering around, all sorts of different species of birds etc etc. Cold, crisp but lovely bright winter sunshine - what more could you want.

Only been a member a year, but can honestly say I now have made several hundred new friends, of which probably 50 are now very good friends. And that to me is what the "club" is about.
I can play when I like, play with some great people, go and use the range as I like or the short game area and best of all always grab a pint and a chat with like minded people.

 

[mikejohnchapman]

Could start by lowering the prices.

One of the difficulties with this is a golf club acts like a fixed cost business. Whether you have 10 or 100 players a day the cost of staff, greenkeeping, pro. etc is the same. So a bit like hotels or airlines which have a similar model you need to make a choice. Either go for volume on the basis that any extra are all profit (visitors, societies or members) or go for exclusivity and attract enough people who are willing to pay the price. Getting caught in the middle is the problem.

The are lots of clubs that can make the latter model work and many that can make the former work but as recent press articles show both can go badly wrong. As a member you have to decide which you want and can afford. I think the choice will get less over time as courses continue to close.