Intermediate Fees

I'll probably be going to social membership at my place, for a couple of reasons.

1. I've got the shanks and still not sorted the problem, which with a couple of injuries meaning I can't practice. Not been able to resolve. I've hated golf this year.

2. Hopefully buying my a flat in the new year so probably won't be able to afford it. I'm in my mid to late 30's.
 
Don't people understand averages?

The average 30 year old earns more than the average 23 year old.

Pointing out how you know exceptions is laughable and against the point.
 
There are all sorts of inequalities in club membership costs but it would be far too complicated to even think of a system that is fair for all.

Simple fact is that the most 'hard done by' is the working golfer. Maybe gets one or 2 rounds in a week but pays the most as this tends to have to be at weekends. Working women golfers probably get an even worse deal as most of their events are arranged on week days. Then you have senior discounts for the people who use the course most.

The only way to be fair to everyone is to charge a flat fee across the board.
 
Personally I don't agree with it.

We introduced it a couple of years ago and its half the normal membership with no joining fee. don't get me wrong it it was just available to Juniors moving up, no problem.

We had a lack of people playing comps, so this was thought would encourage more new members that would then playing the club competition.

The first year, no increase in participation of any comps. all it was used for was lots of signing on of guests and half left after the first year. most of those guys were also still members of another club.

Just cheap membership for a few guys.
 
My club has changed it's intermediate to 18-30, with diminishing differences to full subs as you get closer to the 30 mark. The way I see it is you try and encourage the 20's to continue to play after being a junior you have a better chance of a fuller membership once they are past the 30 mark.

I also don't buy the " it's so hard in my 20's, you 30's and over have it all". It's life, get over it and accept you have youth on your side.
 
Last edited:
Val said:
Our club introduced intermediate fees for 18-24 year olds 2 years agao and gained 40 members, without this catagory that revenue would be lost.
Click to expand...

Same with us

We struggled to attract people between the age of 21-30 because they couldn't afford the full fees - we introduced the intermediate incremental membership fees and the level of 18-30 went from 2/3 members to now over 70 and the waiting list has 30 of them - all have also paid the full joining fee
 
I look at this from a quite different perspective than what has been posted here on this so far. I take the view that if I, as a full member, am happy to pay what I pay, then I should not be that bothered or indeed resentful about what the club asks younger members to pay. Their membership keeps my subs increases down.
 
I'm 29 now and have far less disposable income then I did when I was 23 even though I earn more than double what I did back then. The whole story is far more than just a salary.
 
If the argument is do we bring in 30 intermediates at £500 instead of £1000, but it keeps my subs down because its £15000 into the club that it normally wouldn't bring in I'll take it.

Typically, for every £1000 a club needs to raise its £2 to £3 on your subs. Therefore 30 members coming in on the reduced rate saves me £40 to £60... makes sense to me to take them in.

Everybody wins
 
Hobbit said:
If the argument is do we bring in 30 intermediates at £500 instead of £1000, but it keeps my subs down because its £15000 into the club that it normally wouldn't bring in I'll take it.

Typically, for every £1000 a club needs to raise its £2 to £3 on your subs. Therefore 30 members coming in on the reduced rate saves me £40 to £60... makes sense to me to take them in.

Everybody wins
Click to expand...

+1 with you on this @Hobbit.
 
Fair point, I earn way more now than I did in my early 20s BUT I had more disposable income back then as I didn't have kids/mortgage/bills etc so golf was definitely more affordable for me back then..........and I had time to play..........and my body wasn't fooked.......

I think the young and the old are the only ones that make the most of their memberships, those in the 30-50 range generally can't play as much as they'd like.

However dont mind at all if clubs want to offer cheaper golf for young adults, they're the future for the clubs after all. Golf Clubs I've been a member of haven't offered that reduced fee but as they've been rural Scottish clubs full membership fees have been pretty modest anyway.
 
Members Clubs should do whatever is most beneficial for the long term financial sustainability of the Club in the area in which they operate. But in the context of this, fairness should be a consideration and should be agreed by the membership.

Proprietary clubs do whatever they want in order to maximise profit. But of course, upsetting the "membership" isn't good for business either!

In my view, cheaper subs for younger members makes sense on many levels, most of the reasons are earlier in the thread.
 
It's worth remembering (in the light of the "gay cake" debate) that discrimination based on age is actually contrary to the equality act. Clubs can only offer these discount it they can reasonably show that they are....

"taking positive action to encourage or develop people in an age group that is under-represented or disadvantaged in a role or activity".
The fact that so many clubs have a structured payment model based on age just highlights how slanted golf is towards the over 40's. Anything that can help alter the image of golf being a game for old buffers has to be a good thing!
 
Fyldewhite said:
It's worth remembering (in the light of the "gay cake" debate) that discrimination based on age is actually contrary to the equality act. Clubs can only offer these discount it they can reasonably show that they are....

"taking positive action to encourage or develop people in an age group that is under-represented or disadvantaged in a role or activity".
The fact that so many clubs have a structured payment model based on age just highlights how slanted golf is towards the over 40's. Anything that can help alter the image of golf being a game for old buffers has to be a good thing!
Click to expand...

A bit vague. Just what does this mean? Does a reduction of fees constitute this?
 
Our reduction goes from 18yo to 32yo !!!!:confused:

I brought it up at our agm and the claim was that we don't have many members in this category ( insinuation ...so theirs not many getting it anyway so don't worry your head over it), but that just reinforced my arguement, in my eyes, why then are we offering it then????

OOOOOO, I've had a thought. All those on "intermediate fees", seeing as there isn't many, could be barred from all major comps and teams.

There MUST be an incentive for them to pay the full fees.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

V
Extortionate green fees!
11 12 13
Replies
251
Views
16K
r0wly86
R
J
Correlation between membership fees and green fees
Replies
17
Views
2K
Springveldt
S
G
My golfing journey transition into new club
Replies
4
Views
481
golfoutlaw
G
N
Club specifications
Replies
8
Views
516
Backache
B
Crazyface
Worrying Times
Replies
18
Views
1K
jim8flog
jim8flog
Top