Scottish Golf proposing to allow non-club members handicap

[HankMarvin]

It's hardly pie in the sky. It's what a business would do in that situation. It makes impeccable sense for clubs to explore options like this. And yet, they don't.

Clubs will defend their independence and will struggle on for well beyond what is sensible and have members volunteering to do jobs that should be done by paid for staff. At that point, it is almost impossible to recover and they don't have a plan to do so either.

What clubs ? Do you have any hard facts to back up your theory and what clubs it would have saved or are you just guessing that your ideas would have worked, there is a difference you know

 

[Grant85]

What clubs ? Do you have any hard facts to back up your theory and what clubs it would have saved or are you just guessing that your ideas would have worked, there is a difference you know

Of course it would save money. How could it not?

9 holes fewer to maintain, possible land to sell or lease, 1 clubhouse to maintain rather than 2, fewer staff required etc.

I'm not proposing clubs publicly on here, but there are plenty of clubs (especially around populated areas) that it would work really well for. But pride gets in the way of even exploring it. Many areas are overly served by golf courses and one or two less would actually make far more sense.

 

[HankMarvin]

Of course it would save money. How could it not?

9 holes fewer to maintain, possible land to sell or lease, 1 clubhouse to maintain rather than 2, fewer staff required etc.

I'm not proposing clubs publicly on here, but there are plenty of clubs (especially around populated areas) that it would work really well for. But pride gets in the way of even exploring it. Many areas are overly served by golf courses and one or two less would actually make far more sense.

So how if it were that simple has it not been done by now, I can’t see any club agreeing to taking on a club that is struggling be it 18 holes or nine holes what would be the point in that ? It’s a none starter and can’t ever see it taking off, only the fittest survive

 

[Grant85]

So how if it were that simple has it not been done by now, I can’t see any club agreeing to taking on a club that is struggling be it 18 holes or nine holes what would be the point in that ? It’s a none starter and can’t ever see it taking off, only the fittest survive

Like I say, Pride is the biggest barrier.

No doubt it has been done somewhere, or even just on a basis of sharing resources and allowing members to play both courses.

I wouldn't say it likely to happen when one club is struggling and another doing ok. But more, 2 clubs on similar footing but neither exactly flush.

The point would be is that a merged club can then offer more for your money. You get an 18 hole course, and a 9 hole course and a designated practice area.

I agree clubs won't go for it, even in areas where it makes perfect sense and where both clubs are a cold winter away from running out of members. But that doesn't mean it isn't what should be done or at least explored in many cases.

 

[HankMarvin]

Like I say, Pride is the biggest barrier.

No doubt it has been done somewhere, or even just on a basis of sharing resources and allowing members to play both courses.

I wouldn't say it likely to happen when one club is struggling and another doing ok. But more, 2 clubs on similar footing but neither exactly flush.

The point would be is that a merged club can then offer more for your money. You get an 18 hole course, and a 9 hole course and a designated practice area.

I agree clubs won't go for it, even in areas where it makes perfect sense and where both clubs are a cold winter away from running out of members. But that doesn't mean it isn't what should be done or at least explored in many cases.

Maybe....

Hasn’t Loch Lomond just offloaded Dundonald, if a club as rich as Loch Lomond can’t afford to keep another course with good practice facilities and a portacabin going I can’t see your average club doing it with a nine holer.

 

[Grant85]

Maybe....

Hasn’t Loch Lomond just offloaded Dundonald, if a club as rich as Loch Lomond can’t afford to keep another course with good practice facilities and a portacabin going I can’t see your average club doing it with a nine holer.

Even retaining 36 holes, but operating 1 club house and just having a pavilion at the other will still save thousands a year AND improve the offering to existing and prospective members.

 

[patricks148]

I don't agree, I think that the majority of clubs that are struggling are already down to their "hardcore" membership who will support the club through thick and thin.

I genuinely can't see this type of member giving it up for the sake of SG now being prepared to hold a handicap for them. If they were wanting to do this why not just take out a country membership somewhere else for about £150/200 and play three opens, return the cards and your handicap is secure for another playing season. That would have been the logical answer. Most of these members are members of the club for the social as well as the golfing side.

As I have said earlier it's designed to capture the guys who leave golf for either financial or personal life reasons. The figure I was quoted was 5k per year on average leave golf clubs. This now gives them an avenue to keep golfing, play in opens and social games by paying on or entering an open plus subscribe to SG to keep an active handicap.

Golf clubs get revenue from increased participation from this class of golfer and it allows this class of golfer to "stay in touch" with golf until their circumstances perhaps change. Instead of potentially losing them forever.

I think this is an interesting and positive move. As I said previously I may be wrong but certainly think it's worth exploring and trialing.

You may be right ...or not, but all the SG have come up with is this half arsed plan selling the only thing of note to join a club outside regular golf ,clubs have despite losing 5k of club members per annum..... Just smacks of them doing what's best for them

 

[duncan mackie]

Maybe....

Hasn’t Loch Lomond just offloaded Dundonald, if a club as rich as Loch Lomond can’t afford to keep another course with good practice facilities and a portacabin going I can’t see your average club doing it with a nine holer.

I believe it sold it for £4.5m (which it needed for work on Lomond)
It no longer has the issue of finding capital to develop Dundonald.
It no longer has the maintenance overhead....oh, and it's members have retained playing rights.

 

[duncan mackie]

I'm not sure I agree with number 2. Opens are hosted for a variety of reasons. Mainly to generate revenue in terms of green fees and bar takings. Picking up members midway through a golf season isn't really at the top of any agenda I've seen while engaged in committee work.

What about people out with Scotland? SG isn't offering them a handicap. Also under the new handicap/slope rating/index whatever I was under the impression that your handicap can/would travel anywhere?

Dedicated "nomads" with a handicap operated and held by SG will be entitled to play regardless. I'm also quite confident that such scenario will have been studied and lessons learned.

To completely poo poo (not aimed at you Duncan) something without trying it is nonsense especially when there are many benefits to be explored and captured.

Showcasing isn't about mid year members, it's about next renewal.

My point about non Scots is as much about how can they discriminate? They are starting something new (in offering handicap management for a fee) and as such it's it currently documented with, or without, geographical limits (whatever they mean nowadays!). As to the WHS - it actually makes no difference at all to travelling within CONGU. People do it all the time with their current ones.

 

[User20204]

Is this the same Scottish Golf that allowed any Tom, Dick or Harry to become affiliated to their set up allowing clubs to be formed in any old pub/club up and down the land to the massive determent to golf clubs just so they could get their levy paid by more people ???