JayB
Newbie
Only a small hatchback, nothing out of the ordinary. Unfortuantely street parking isn't an option.
Next Years Subs
- Thread starter Crazyface
- Start date
Doon frae Troon
Ryder Cup Winner
Club loyalty seems to a thing of the past in some parts of the UK
My late brother paid his club subs for 58 years, [greatly reduced after 40 years ]
Last time I asked, his club waiting list was about 6 years
My late brother paid his club subs for 58 years, [greatly reduced after 40 years ]
Last time I asked, his club waiting list was about 6 years
KenL
Tour Rookie
Some clubs are not members clubs but businesses. Why be loyal to them when another in the vicinity offers more for less?
RichA
Well-known member
The club I left a couple of months ago wanted 30% more than last year.
The club I left the previous year had made a 20% increase.
Neither has improved their course. The opposite, if any change at all. They were both relying on people's inertia to take more money.
I'm currently having some time off golf membership and just paying to play when I really want to, rather than feeling a duty to play once or twice a week. So far it's been quite liberating; I'm rediscovering weekend lie-ins, long walks with MrsA, cycling and shooting basketball hoops in the park. My retirement plan no longer includes 3 rounds of golf per week.
Neilds
Assistant Pro
Sad to hear that the clubs are charging more for effectively less. I am lucky as my club has improved greatly in the past couple of years, and is continuing to do so. New bunkers, about 2/3 of the course has the new bunkers, improved drainage, path around the whole course to allow trolleys and buggies in winter, new tee boxes being built on 2 holes, range improved with new bays, top tracer and flood lights (was previously only useable in daylight hours).
We had a big 'slush fund' from the sale of land for an old people's home and the doubters who thought we needed it for a rainy day have changed their minds about spending it after realising that if we can survive the lockdown and closure, maybe the fund doesn't need so much money in it.
doublebogey7
Head Pro
It sounds like your club has invested in the future wisely, with much of that spending reaping benefits in terms of income I am guessing. I have known in the past clubs spending their slush funds on vanity projects that have only served in increase the long term costs, so understand some memebers reticence.
SwingsitlikeHogan
Major Champion
Just out of interest, what sort of project would be considered a vanity project…just want to have some idea so I recognise one when they might pop up at my place.
I see a difference between course improvement projects that the board have the club undertake in consultation with expert course architect and course assessment opinion from outside of the club, and projects that some members, in their own opinion, deem unnecessary and hence refer to as board vanity projects.
Doon frae Troon
Ryder Cup Winner
As a former HGK I have prevented a few 'vanity projects' aka 'Captain's Catastrophe's' in my time.
In the 1960's + the planting of straight line fairway conifer trees seemed to be fine.
Burial grounds for Elephants when a grass mound might stop big hitters driving a green..
Rough grown in across a fairway another.
In the 1960's + the planting of straight line fairway conifer trees seemed to be fine.
Burial grounds for Elephants when a grass mound might stop big hitters driving a green..
Rough grown in across a fairway another.
NearHull
Well-known member
We are looking at low cost solutions ( ie not a major project) to toughen up our course. Presently there is not much thought needed for club choice off the par 4/5 holes - it’s a driver for most. The course was designed and built 50 years ago for a 9 handicap player.
I’d be interested in your suggestions. I appreciate that bringing in the first cut at 200 to 240 yds would help, but I’m really asking about, ditches, bunkers , mounds etc, in terms of initial build but also continuing maintenance expenditure.
Doon frae Troon
Ryder Cup Winner
Bunkers and strategic tree/shrub/heather clump planting are always a cheap option.
I remember toughening up a SI 1 hole by placing a small pot bunker into a hillside on the left hand edge of the fairway at 260 yards.
This cut out the 'safe ' drive and forced golfers further right which gave then a more difficult angle and longer shot into the green
Remember the golden rule.
Once the work is finished it must look like it has been there for 50 years.
BTW I do not think you can specifically build a course for a 9 handicapper.
CountLippe
Active member
Good point. Probably the handicap with the most diverse set of skills.
doublebogey7
Head Pro
A couple of things from 20 or 30 years spring to mind at my own club, where current management are having to spend to put right. Namely, large deep bunkers added to a number of holes and hundreds of tree's of the same species planted in coppices too close together with no thought to future managment.
JonnyGutteridge
Newbie
How does the forum feel about membership levy’s for capex projects?
That's piece of string territory. It depends on the project and the levy. Hard to say without knowing those two things.
Is the project required or is it a vanity project for the committee or certain members on there?
Arthur Wedge
Well-known member
I think as long as the money is spent well and for a worthwhile project then they can work
We put in a levy for our watering system , £100 for 1 year and it worked well
In the past we had to add levys to pay off loans that they made a mess off
I think we need to do a lot of work within the clubhouse next and that may need a a levy
AussieKB
Well-known member
How long is the string 
SwingsitlikeHogan
Major Champion
We had a £60/yr levy (mighty have been £40/yr - memory fails me) for about four years to pay for the complete rebuild of every bunker and moving of a few. All done now generally seen as being worthwhile.
Current big debate at the club is our plans to completely realign the final 200yds of our 465yd 2nd hole and as a result move our chipping ground. Many members (I know not what %) would prefer course presentation issues and a general tidying up (of almost completely non-playing areas) around the course first, plus downward pressure on subs. I'm for investing and improving the challenge that the course presents.
I care little about such things as paths and the edges to paths being untidy, or tee surrounds and areas of rough that look a bit scruffy. If we wait until the course is A1 presentationally before starting something significant, I am of the view that we'll never start as there will always be stuff needing tidied up and fixed - and that 'tidying up' will cost a lot of money - without improving the challenge.
As it happens the club has a program in place to address the 'presentation' aspects that some want sorted first, including extending our irrigation to six areas that can be 'in play' and that get dry and worn. If our course architect and outside assessors tell the club (as they have) that what we plan for our 2nd hole is a distinct improvement over what we have, and given the club's finances are stable and healthy (as they are) then let's get on with it.
In the context of this thread the proposed changes are considered by some to be 'a Board vanity project' and we should do other stuff and keep subs increases to the minimum.
Four things not to be discussed on the golf course...Politics, Football, Religion and the 2nd Hole.
Current big debate at the club is our plans to completely realign the final 200yds of our 465yd 2nd hole and as a result move our chipping ground. Many members (I know not what %) would prefer course presentation issues and a general tidying up (of almost completely non-playing areas) around the course first, plus downward pressure on subs. I'm for investing and improving the challenge that the course presents.
I care little about such things as paths and the edges to paths being untidy, or tee surrounds and areas of rough that look a bit scruffy. If we wait until the course is A1 presentationally before starting something significant, I am of the view that we'll never start as there will always be stuff needing tidied up and fixed - and that 'tidying up' will cost a lot of money - without improving the challenge.
As it happens the club has a program in place to address the 'presentation' aspects that some want sorted first, including extending our irrigation to six areas that can be 'in play' and that get dry and worn. If our course architect and outside assessors tell the club (as they have) that what we plan for our 2nd hole is a distinct improvement over what we have, and given the club's finances are stable and healthy (as they are) then let's get on with it.
In the context of this thread the proposed changes are considered by some to be 'a Board vanity project' and we should do other stuff and keep subs increases to the minimum.
Four things not to be discussed on the golf course...Politics, Football, Religion and the 2nd Hole.
Last edited:
upsidedown
Tour Winner
We voted in a £50 levy per member for the next 4 years to cover complete bunker renovation program and other course projects
JonnyGutteridge
Newbie
It’s for irrigation and seems needed, the cost is eye watering
Is it eye watering per member or just overall? If it's per member then I'd be asking about staggering the project if possible.
If not, do you think you might lose members over it?
