Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture => Topic started by: Mike_Young on May 14, 2013, 03:09:49 PM
-
I realize that trade association of all types are having difficulties in the present economy and are doing their best to operate at pre 2008 standards. But the ones I am most familiar with are golf related. And it's pretty easy to realize that the last 25 years were not the norm for golf and if any of us try to continue to function as if they were, then we are crazy.
Now, having said this: I am sure State Golf Associations are having their own issues and expect to maintain the same revenues as before but that ain't gonna happen. So...if you were a member club and a state golf association decided to accept sponsorships from businesses such as RTJ Trail and Myrtle Beach Golf in surrounding states and then promote these areas for play, what would you do? Makes no sense to me.... :o
-
Mike- State Golf Associations need to promote golf in their respective states and their member clubs. It would seem contradictory to their mission statement to promote courses in other neighbor states regardless of how much revenue would/could be realized. They need to get creative or do more with less as that dog won't hunt.
-
"if you were a member club and a state golf association decided to accept sponsorships from businesses such as RTJ Trail and Myrtle Beach Golf in surrounding states and then promote these areas for play, what would you do? Makes no sense to me...."
I don't see this as being a problem at all. I am a member of the Northern California Golf Association, which I think is pretty well run. The magazine that is sent to members 4 times a year always had advertising for several golf vacation destinations outside of NorCal. In addition, there are frequently articles on golf travel.
Just today, I got an email from the NCGA promoting golf travel packages in Central Oregon. NCGA members get a discount off the rates quoted.
I fail to see why a member club would have a problem with any of the above.The fact is people travel to play golf.
-
"if you were a member club and a state golf association decided to accept sponsorships from businesses such as RTJ Trail and Myrtle Beach Golf in surrounding states and then promote these areas for play, what would you do? Makes no sense to me...."
I don't see this as being a problem at all. I am a member of the Northern California Golf Association, which I think is pretty well run. The magazine that is sent to members 4 times a year always had advertising for several golf vacation destinations outside of NorCal. In addition, there are frequently articles on golf travel.
Just today, I got an email from the NCGA promoting golf travel packages in Central Oregon. NCGA members get a discount off the rates quoted.
I fail to see why a member club would have a problem with any of the above.The fact is people travel to play golf.
When the RTJ trail is 15 miles from your course you would think differently...
-
Disagree Mike.
The association is there to organize, administrate, promote and operate various aspects of the game of golf to the people of the state.
They are not there to market your property. That is your job.
Your thinking is a bit Pat Robertsonesque.
-
Disagree Mike.
The association is there to organize, administrate, promote and operate various aspects of the game of golf to the people of the state.
They are not there to market your property. That is your job.
Your thinking is a bit Pat Robertsonesque.
Greg,
I disagree. They ask almost 400 courses to pay them an annual fee. True, I should do my own promotions..agree 100%...and so should the rest of the member courses BUT the state assoc should remain neutral on the matter of where to play and should support us not outside the state entities.
-
"They are not there to market your property."
Obviously. But neither should they use their standing among Georgia golfers to do harm to Georgia golf operations.
Bob
-
Location plays a big part in this. The Minnesota Golf Association magazine runs travel stories in its fall edition, and ads for winter destinations, but there's no golf here between December and March. I think the local courses are probably happy to see the game being promoted in the offseason.
-
Disagree Mike.
The association is there to organize, administrate, promote and operate various aspects of the game of golf to the people of the state.
They are not there to market your property. That is your job.
Your thinking is a bit Pat Robertsonesque.
Greg,
I disagree. They ask almost 400 courses to pay them an annual fee. True, I should do my own promotions..agree 100%...and so should the rest of the member courses BUT the state assoc should remain neutral on the matter of where to play and should support us not outside the state entities.
Mike, I certainly understand your position but I simply do not agree with it.
What do you pay to the Assoc and what are you supposed to receive in return? Is this a follow up to an ealrier thread along the same lines?
-
Mike,
I got a call recently from someone representing the Georgia State Golf Association's official magazine. He was wanting to know if I could supply him with a list of advertising contacts at South Carolina golf properties... which I couldn't, by the way! He explained they have a plan of attack to target neighboring states for advertising revenue.
We have exactly the opposite approach in South Carolina. We do not accept advertising in our magazine from golf resorts or courses located in states adjacent to South Carolina. Why? Because we are trying hard to work with our members to keep the business in state. Now, if Bandon Dunes wanted to advertise in our magazine I'm sure we would accept it, but not Reynolds Plantation.
I'm not saying we are right and Georgia is wrong... we just have different priorities.
-
I understand the issue more from what Rick Shefchik said, where the advertising revenue for destination golf for the snow birds is helpful to the bottom line of the State association getting through the winter months.
Also, I'd ask if a concept isn't in play, that promoting golf where ever, even out of State is additive to the industry and participation by all customers? I certainly get where Mike W and Mike Y are coming from, but aren't serious golfers in year around golf States going to seek other travel destinations anyway? What in-state golfer, whether a club member or just frequent player isn't going to seek out-of-state play? So, why not get a buck of revenue for away venue promotion and advertising. I think those frequent golfer readers are going to go someplace else no matter, and when they do, that money is going to go out of state anyway. IMHO.
-
RJ - we take the position that there is a finite golf travel budget available each year within the South Carolina golfing population and we do our best to help our members get the lion's share of that budget. Yes, South Carolinians travel outside the state for golf, but I don't think it is our place to encourage them to do so. The little benefit we might derive from selling a few ads to neighboring resorts would not offset any possible ill will that might result. If a South Carolinian is trying to choose between Pinehurst and Kiawah for their golf buddy trip we want them to choose Kiawah. Obviously, they will sometimes choose Pinehurst, but not because the SC Golf Association provided the motivation to do so.
-
Disagree Mike.
The association is there to organize, administrate, promote and operate various aspects of the game of golf to the people of the state.
They are not there to market your property. That is your job.
Your thinking is a bit Pat Robertsonesque.
Greg,
I disagree. They ask almost 400 courses to pay them an annual fee. True, I should do my own promotions..agree 100%...and so should the rest of the member courses BUT the state assoc should remain neutral on the matter of where to play and should support us not outside the state entities.
Mike, I certainly understand your position but I simply do not agree with it.
What do you pay to the Assoc and what are you supposed to receive in return? Is this a follow up to an ealrier thread along the same lines?
Greg,
I want to support my state golf assoc.and I do as do most clubs I think. Their mission is this:
The mission of the Georgia State Golf Association is to promote and preserve the traditions and integrity of golf in Georgia and to enhance its enjoyment. With that being said I can completely understand courses from other areas or states placing ads and promotions. BUT I don't think they have any business accepting regional golf destinations as "partners" or "sponsors" like the USGA accepted Rolex or Lexus or Amex. That is what has happened and what I am discussing. I'm not concerned with monthly ads. I don't think you would see an association of auto dealers condoning their association partnering with auto dealers in neighboring states. JMO...
As for what we pay. I think we pay $1250 per year to be a member club and that includes 50 handicap fees of $25 per golfer. Now here is my dilemma. The larger courses will have the same dues structure and will have 500 people sign up for handicaps at a fee of probably $50 so they actually make money on being a member. Yet the smaller clubs around the stae that may not be private clubs have a tough time in many cases sellng 50 handicap members. The service also includes a course rating etc every few years.
-
I have a better one for you. WVGA has held the West Virginia Open Championship outside the state on multiple occasions.
-
I have a better one for you. WVGA has held the West Virginia Open Championship outside the state on multiple occasions.
Are you from West Virginia?
A fellow that used to work with me actually won the WV Open a couple of times I think. And if not mistaken I think two holes of fincastle are in Virginia or Tenn. ;D
-
Gents, I'm going to use a hypothetical example. Let's say I'm a redneck golfer living in Centralhatchee, Georgia. I hunt, fish, and play a little golf. I watch the Bulldogs in the fall and own several firearms. I have never used the words "President" and "Obama" in the same sentence. I love Alan Jackson.
I play my golf in LaGrange at The Fields. I like it because it is inexpensive, and the greens roll good. I've never been to Golfclubatlas.com and have no idea that golf architect is actually a career. I pay a small fee and me and my friends get to keep a handicap at The Fields. Every month. I get a magazine that goes straight next to my toilet. In it, I see these airbrushed photos of green green grass, brown pine needles, and mirror smooth water at a place called Grand National. "Well hell, that's just over in Opelika! And they got a deal goin'!" Me and the boys make our twice monthly tee time on the RTJ at Grand National.
Now imagine I'm the pro shop guy at The Fields. I notice we're missing a few regulars. The next week, they show up and I ask where they've been. They say they heard about this good deal over in Opelika. I do a little digging. Find out that they heard about it in the GSGA magazine. So in effect, an association that I pay dues to ran an ad that caused me to lose business!
That's pretty jacked up if you ask me.
-
Gents, I'm going to use a hypothetical example. Let's say I'm a redneck golfer living in Centralhatchee, Georgia. I hunt, fish, and play a little golf. I watch the Bulldogs in the fall and own several firearms. I have never used the words "President" and "Obama" in the same sentence. I love Alan Jackson.
I play my golf in LaGrange at The Fields. I like it because it is inexpensive, and the greens roll good. I've never been to Golfclubatlas.com and have no idea that golf architect is actually a career. I pay a small fee and me and my friends get to keep a handicap at The Fields. Every month. I get a magazine that goes straight next to my toilet. In it, I see these airbrushed photos of green green grass, brown pine needles, and mirror smooth water at a place called Grand National. "Well hell, that's just over in Opelika! And they got a deal goin'!" Me and the boys make our twice monthly tee time on the RTJ at Grand National.
Now imagine I'm the pro shop guy at The Fields. I notice we're missing a few regulars. The next week, they show up and I ask where they've been. They say they heard about this good deal over in Opelika. I do a little digging. Find out that they heard about it in the GSGA magazine. So in effect, an association that I pay dues to ran an ad that caused me to lose business!
That's pretty jacked up if you ask me.
or as they say outside Cenralhatchee, a conflict of interest
-
I wouldn't send them any more momey
-
I have a better one for you. WVGA has held the West Virginia Open Championship outside the state on multiple occasions.
Are you from West Virginia?
A fellow that used to work with me actually won the WV Open a couple of times I think. And if not mistaken I think two holes of fincastle are in Virginia or Tenn. ;D
Yes Finacastle is based in Virginia and I believe it straddles the state lines. Are you referring to Todd Satterfield?
-
Mike,
I agree with you and having once lived in Atlanta/Alpharetta for 7 years, I am disappointed. If it bothers you that much, stop paying.
I wonder what Chris Cupit opinion is since he owns a course.
Paul
-
This seems such a simple question to me. Of course, the GSGA is wrong to pursue and advertise out-of-state golf. How could it be otherwise?
Greg Tallman, think of it this way. If you were a course operator and paid an advertising agency to help you improve your business, would you consider your money to be well-spent if the ad agency wanted to post flyers in YOUR pro shop for courses which were in direct competition with you? I think not; you would realize that golf dollars are in a very small pool, and that dollars that come out of the pool and go to your competitors don't come to you. That's pretty simple.
The GSGA is more than an ad agency of course, but how could promoting golf in Myrtle Beach or the RTJ Trail possibly help Jekyll Island or the other state park courses, or the Lake Oconee area courses, or Callaway Gardens, and so on? Again, this seems simple.
-
This seems such a simple question to me. Of course, the GSGA is wrong to pursue and advertise out-of-state golf. How could it be otherwise?
Greg Tallman, think of it this way. If you were a course operator and paid an advertising agency to help you improve your business, would you consider your money to be well-spent if the ad agency wanted to post flyers in YOUR pro shop for courses which were in direct competition with you? I think not; you would realize that golf dollars are in a very small pool, and that dollars that come out of the pool and go to your competitors don't come to you. That's pretty simple.
The GSGA is more than an ad agency of course, but how could promoting golf in Myrtle Beach or the RTJ Trail possibly help Jekyll Island or the other state park courses, or the Lake Oconee area courses, or Callaway Gardens, and so on? Again, this seems simple.
A.G.
Think of it this way. Does the GGA have a responsibility to the state's clubs or the state's golfing population and, if both, where is the proper balance struck? In favofr of the golfing population in my mind. I think the GGA fails in its charging of the $1250 fee. We (affiliated with the SCGA) pay $100 up front fee and then pay for individual handicaps as necessary.
-
Greg,
Agree regarding how the fee is charged. There is zero reason to charge me such a fee when I will not have that many guys sign up for handicaps. I think it is more of them knowing what they need to operate and charging accordingly than doing as you suggest. IMHO their responsibility lies with the member clubs an the individuals are members of the clubs which are the golf association members. But I often ask myself that question now when it comes to the NGCOA and state golf assoc...how are they helping my bottom line? The assoc is there because of the clubs and they depend on the cubs much more than the clubs depend on them. IMHO
-
This seems such a simple question to me. Of course, the GSGA is wrong to pursue and advertise out-of-state golf. How could it be otherwise?
Greg Tallman, think of it this way. If you were a course operator and paid an advertising agency to help you improve your business, would you consider your money to be well-spent if the ad agency wanted to post flyers in YOUR pro shop for courses which were in direct competition with you? I think not; you would realize that golf dollars are in a very small pool, and that dollars that come out of the pool and go to your competitors don't come to you. That's pretty simple.
The GSGA is more than an ad agency of course, but how could promoting golf in Myrtle Beach or the RTJ Trail possibly help Jekyll Island or the other state park courses, or the Lake Oconee area courses, or Callaway Gardens, and so on? Again, this seems simple.
A.G.
Think of it this way. Does the GGA have a responsibility to the state's clubs or the state's golfing population and, if both, where is the proper balance struck? In favofr of the golfing population in my mind. I think the GGA fails in its charging of the $1250 fee. We (affiliated with the SCGA) pay $100 up front fee and then pay for individual handicaps as necessary.
Clearly, the GSGA has a responsibility to both the clubs and the golfing population, and I suppose that there might be cases where the interests of the two are different. Encouraging and informing the golfing population about opportunities, however, should not be one of those. If the GSGA is going to serve the member clubs, then the information and encouragement should be limited to Georgia courses; the Chamber of Commerce in Alpharetta, where I live, doesn't encourage the residents to shop in other communities or counties, nor should they.
You are correct that it is the course operator's job to market their course, not the job of the GSGA. BUT if the GSGA goes into the business of marketing courses, they should either do so in a way that helps the Georgia operators, or they should change their name, or they should stop charging courses for memberships in the organization.
-
Greg,
Agree regarding how the fee is charged. There is zero reason to charge me such a fee when I will not have that many guys sign up for handicaps. I think it is more of them knowing what they need to operate and charging accordingly than doing as you suggest. IMHO their responsibility lies with the member clubs an the individuals are members of the clubs which are the golf association members. But I often ask myself that question now when it comes to the NGCOA and state golf assoc...how are they helping my bottom line? The assoc is there because of the clubs and they depend on the cubs much more than the clubs depend on them. IMHO
I never looked at a state golf association as an organization that was particularly beneficial to a club/course but rather one that whose real purpose was to privde handicap services along with event organization, promotion and operation.
They view clubs as merely the mechanism through which they conect with the golfing poulation and, to your point, should charge accordingly.
-
Greg,
Agree regarding how the fee is charged. There is zero reason to charge me such a fee when I will not have that many guys sign up for handicaps. I think it is more of them knowing what they need to operate and charging accordingly than doing as you suggest. IMHO their responsibility lies with the member clubs an the individuals are members of the clubs which are the golf association members. But I often ask myself that question now when it comes to the NGCOA and state golf assoc...how are they helping my bottom line? The assoc is there because of the clubs and they depend on the cubs much more than the clubs depend on them. IMHO
I never looked at a state golf association as an organization that was particularly beneficial to a club/course but rather one that whose real purpose was to privde handicap services along with event organization, promotion and operation.
They view clubs as merely the mechanism through which they conect with the golfing poulation and, to your point, should charge accordingly.
Greg,
We agree on all of the above.
I think the next battle we will see is the handicap fee battle. That is the main revenue source for many golf associations and there are now outside ways to obtain a handicap. If one was to take the view that present above and look at the main reason for existence is the individual then watch out. Small public golf courses will not pay the same fee as larger clubs and it will not be long until Golf Now has a handicap system along with teesheet etc. Add the logic of converting to the R&A handicap system on top of this and there will be a battle. We already know that less than 3% the people that hold a handicap use it in competitive events and we know that it is not that critical to many of the guys that play. JMO
-
I am volunteering right now as a rules official (in Florida actually ;)) but my perspective is as a forty one year member course of the GSGA (like Mike I actually write a check to them) and as a Past President of the GSGA (2009-10).
I don't have time to respond right now but I will.
-
Mike - I need to apologize to the GSGA... it was not a representative of their magazine that contacted me about SC advertising leads... it was a rep of Fore Georgia, the magazine of the Georgia Section PGA. It was the pros not the amateurs!
-
The Met Golfer [official magazine of the Metropolitan NY Golf Association] has published articles and advertisements for years about out-of-state courses. Of course, they're a multi-state organization to start with, and many of their members travel to play golf in the winter months, so perhaps that's a different situation than in Georgia.
-
The Met Golfer [official magazine of the Metropolitan NY Golf Association] has published articles and advertisements for years about out-of-state courses. Of course, they're a multi-state organization to start with, and many of their members travel to play golf in the winter months, so perhaps that's a different situation than in Georgia.
Tom,
I see no problem with advertising by out of state courses. I have a problem with the association taking them on as partners just as the USGA does Lexus, Amex etc..
-
OK. I'm back :D
First, I do understand some of the frustrations course owners have with state and regional golf associations in general and the GSGA in particular. I realize that for some owners membership may not be the right decision though I think many people do not understand or appreciate all the state golf association does--certainly some of the blame for not getting the message out regarding all the benefits falls on the GSGA.
I also understand that private courses and daily fee courses have different constituants, wants and needs from the GSGA but again, I think some of the benefits are not being mentioned.
The GSGA charges $25 per member per club. I pay the same per member that you do. There used to be a minimum of 100 members required to be a GSGA member club and as you know, that minimum number was lowered from 100 members to 50 members a couple of years ago in order to help smaller, primarily daily fee courses, like yours. The $1250 you mention is not a flat fee;it represents the minimum number of 50 members multiplied by $25 for a total of $1250.00 If you had 51 members sign up for the service the charge would be $1275. My bill this year because I have a lot of members (men, wives and juniors) was right around $16,000
As a GSGA Member Club the owner gets a number of things:
1. The computers for clubs program puts a Dell computer and printer in every member club. The computer is supposed to be used for the GHIN handicap system though many smaller clubs use those computers as an "extra" or "golf shop" computer/printer.
2. $1 (I think) of the $25 goes to support lobbying for the industry in the state capitol. The GSGA contributes the lion's share among the industry reps (GGCSA, CMAA and PGA) to pay for a lobbyist to represent our interests. Anyone who has followed the water wars in GA and water issues in general should be thankful for the incredible work that has been done on behalf of our industry at the capitol. Frankly, GSGA money plus the efforts of the GGCSA has allowed GA golf courses to retain access at a level exceeded only by the agricultural lobby. GA golf courses have water access that is the envy of many in neighboring states and all owners should thank the GSGA and the GGCSA for their combined efforts.
3. A portion of the dues also support the Yates and Moncreif Scholarship programs. This program is a benefict directly to course owners and member clubs. Under this program any employee or dependent of an employee at a GSGA club is eligible for around $3-4,000 per year in college scholarship money. Employees and dependents of employees at your club Mike could get a four year scholarship worth over $10,000 just because you are part of the GSGA. The program divides scholarship into rising college freshmen, in college students and non traditioinal students (a chef e.g. who goes back to school). This is a HUGE benefit for an employee and a great perk to offer them as a GSGA member club. We also support the Moncreif Turfgrass Program at ABAC and UGA. I think the endowment is now over $3M and I am guessing 75-100 employees at GSGA member clubs are currently receiving aid totaling in the hundreds of thousands of dollars.
4. By 2008-09, the Ga Golf Hall of Fame had lost all of its state funding and frankly, no one knew what may happen to it. Private interests expressed desires to "buy" it from the state and some feared that even holding the annual banquet to induct new Members could be lost. No other group in GA had the resources or frankly, the standing or reputation to take ownership of this state asset. It was the GSGA that steppe up, worked the incredible details out with the state and preserved the independance of the GA Golf Hall of Fame. Again, this was a thankless job and the first two years saw the GSGA absord considerable costs to host the induction ceremonies. This year, I think for the first time ever, the event broke even and the future of the Hall of Fame, as an important asset for GA golf, is in good hands.
(A private club was seriously trying to "buy" the Hall of Fame and use it as a marketing tool frankly--had the GSGA not stepped up, who knows who or what entity would own it today).
5. In addition to providing handicapping services, the GSGA does course ratings and periodic distance measurements for all the clubs. Without a rated course, no handicap system is considered valid by the USGA.
6. The GSGA holds numerous free handicap and TPP seminars for your employees as well as very affordable rules seminars co-hosted with the GA PGA.
7. GA does run many championships and of course numerous qualifiers for the USGA. I have played all the world and I can tell you the level of professionalism at GSGA events is second to none.
For your Members these are their direct benefits:
1. A handicap :) Now, only 2-3% of GSGA members play in competitive scratch events that do require a handicap BUT if you are like many clubs, my members must have a valid handicap of some type to participate in my MGA club events. Handicaps, while not the silver bullet they once were for state golf assoc., are still vital for many more than 3% of "regular" golfers on a daily basis!
2. All GSGA members receive the bi-monthly (and award winning :)) GolfGeorgia Magazine.
3. All GSGA members receive their choice of an annual subscription of either Golf Week or Golf Digest Magazine.
4. All GSGA members are eligible for the GSGA tournaments as well as the nearly twenty (?) or so One Day Member Playdays at courses all over the state.
5. The GSGA runs a Jr. Sectional Program that allows kids to play for just $15 per event--pricing obviously subsidized by overall dues--and it should be. All Junior sectional events have GSGA volunteers just like the "regular" events.
6. There are some other travel and reward programs that I am not as familiar with as I should be too.
All of this is for $25 bucks a year. Yes, a player can get a handicap for free or cheaper somewhere else but GSGA membership is not just about a handicap.
Also, as a club owner you know I mentioned an initiative the GSGA is working on to help member clubs/owners with the whole issue of insurance and those rising costs. The Owners group has never been able to help much and frankly, for the GSGA to take on an issue like this and bring possible relief to smaller member clubs is incredible. I understand they are simply waiting n state approval to proceed.
The GSGA also has spent considerable time trying to understand the needs of all owners and offer solutions to the Golf Now "issue". Honestly, the owners of daily fee courses have no one but themselves to blame for the Faustian bargain they struck with third party tee time aggregators! Golf Now has completely and totally commoditized tee time inventory but only thanks to the willing particiaption of the owners! That is a whole different debate for another time but I promise the GSGA has been talking with many owners about possible alternatives to the Golf Now business model. The issue is that many owners simply can't afford to cut the cord so to speak and may never be able to free themselves from Golf Now's shackles--but that was self imposed.
Going back to the pricing, every club I know charges their members slightly more than the $25 charged to them by the GSGA. For example I charge my members an annual GSGA Membership fee of $8 on top of the GSGA charge for a total of $33. Some larger clubs charge as much as $50-$75 per year and obviously make some money off the "handicap" charge.
Again, the $1250 is NOT a fee and small clubs certainly do NOT pay the same as big clubs--it is a per member charge with a minimum of 50. If you charge a little extra as most clubs do, your "break even" is slightly less than 50 members. What do you charge your guy to join?
Lastly, I kind of understand your gripe about the advertising but what should the GSGA do--turn down advertising dollars? Part of the mission is to bring good value and golf opportunities to all our GSGA members--shouldn't that include possible deals to play golf wherever that may be? I can see the other side but should they not accept PGA Superstore advertising as it competes with PGA pros and the growing number of member clubs that own the golf shop now? No advertising from Titleist, Callaway or other manufacturers since Mizuno is a GA (Norcross) company. OK, kind of a GA company :)
I think it is hard to draw the line but you are welcome to advertise in the magazine too! I have in the past.
Lots of legitimate and important issues to be discussed--I just want the discussion to be balanced ;)
PS FWIW while i have served on the board and am a Past President, I am no longer on the board and am simply a regular volunteer now--I am not speaking officially for the GSGA
-
Also....
The GSGA was the primary funding agent for the Economic Impact Study of Golf in Ga done by Stanford. This document was expensive but will be used by all in the industry to highlight the economic benefits of golf in GA re employment, property taxes, direct economic impact as well as indirect benefits. Just another of the many, behind the scenes things the GSGA does on behalf of all in the industry in our state.
-
Chris,
Thanks for the response.
I tend to agree with you on almost all you say except for the minimum.
I think I have been able to get 28 people to sign up in a little over a year and that was with almost 20,000 rounds. I charge them $35.
Advertising is one thing. Making them one of several partners is another. I don't care if they have partners but IMHO there should be no golf courses as partners including Reynolds which is in the state. The one and only reason they do this is for dollars. Golf companies like Titleist and Toro have specific territories and they sell there only even though the product is sold by others in other states. I'm just not buying the partner thing. I don't know if you recall or not but my wife started the Through the Green Magazine of the GCCSA. Many of her advertising agreements from distributors insisted they be the only one advertising their brand of equipment in the magazine. And that has become much harder today since the national companies cannot control where their used equipment is sold. Therefore a used Toro equipment piece could be sold by a Toro distributor in areas outside his distributorship. But I don't think the trade journals take the ads of the out of state distributors selling their used equipment even still. I also question whether the off course retailers should be brought into the advertising of the association magazine.
So at the end of the day I am all for supporting them but with no minimum and understanding that their goal is to fully support Georgia golf courses. Supporting courses outside of Ga in exchange for advertising dollars is a problem with me.
And I still see it as $1250 minimum not $25 dollars. I know a lot of small places feel the same. When we reach at least 50 and have exceeded the minimum I would still feel the same.
I still have to come se you...maybe when the big one comes to town next month...
-
You and fat boy together? I'm in ;)
-
You and fat boy together? I'm in ;)
Have you seen fat boy doing the diet commercial?
-
I draw the line there!
Question: how many unique golf ears do you think you have out of your 20000 rounds? Do you run any club events? If so, how would you flight or handicap guys without a handicap?
Back to the sponsor thing I thought Sea Island was our only course "partner" but that was several years ago. I am out of the loop now though and am not aware of what courses may be sponsors.
-
As to the minimum, do you feel that there should be no minimum whatsoever in return for member club benefits. Should a five member club get the same benefits as a five hundred? I know that's extreme but where do you draw the line?
-
Chris,
No argument with me as to GSGA and handicap value etc. I would hope that all clubs would strive to have the 50 people wanting a handicap but I don't think there should be a minimum. The benefits you mention are good but are mostly for the individual but the clubs are used as agents for collecting these. That's fine but they bear the burden of paying the difference until they reach 50 people. We will have 50 by next year but I will still be opposed to the minimum because I see so many other clubs that may not ever get 50.
-
The Met Golfer [official magazine of the Metropolitan NY Golf Association] has published articles and advertisements for years about out-of-state courses. Of course, they're a multi-state organization to start with, and many of their members travel to play golf in the winter months, so perhaps that's a different situation than in Georgia.
The equivalent of that would be having Cabot Links or Irish Tourism advertising in the GSGA publication, not a problem for a golfer looking to escape the Georgia summer heat.
Advertising a course 20 miles from Georgia would be quite different, and a problem in my opinion.
-
The Met Golfer [official magazine of the Metropolitan NY Golf Association] has published articles and advertisements for years about out-of-state courses. Of course, they're a multi-state organization to start with, and many of their members travel to play golf in the winter months, so perhaps that's a different situation than in Georgia.
The equivalent of that would be having Cabot Links or Irish Tourism advertising in the GSGA publication, not a problem for a golfer looking to escape the Georgia summer heat.
Advertising a course 20 miles from Georgia would be quite different, and a problem in my opinion.
Jeff,
I agree under the current system of collecting revenues by the state golf association. Now, if I am a magazine like Golf Digest or Golf or Golfweek and I get my subscriptions directly form the consumer then fine. Advertise the course next door all you want. BUT if I am a state golf association magazine which requires that the state courses be members for a minimum amount of money and those individual courses harbor the individual golfer members of those state golf associations then there is a problem. In essence each course is paying a minimum of $1250 to an association that is also seeking partners and advertising from outside sources. No problem with me if member courses advertise.
What is never discussed is that the associations need the courses more than the courses need the associations. That's not meant as adversarial. it's just reality. The bottom line of what the associations need is the approx 85000 handicap fees ( using Ga as example, other states could vary) and the tournament entry fees etc. AND again I am in favor of all of that. The current system just puts the middle man ( course owner) in a bad position.
-
Without any minimum you will have abuse. Imagine this: an owner at a small club with 200 members and therefore about 300 potential association dues paying members decides to have one join for $25 bucks, receives all the benefits I mentioned and then provides handicaps himself to everyone else. It would happen unfortunately and that just wouldn't be fair.
I can't tell you how significant it was to have a seat at the Capitol when water issues were being discussed. That's just one example. Back in 2006-7 at height of drought many were calling for a complete watering ban including greens even if the water was "yours". In GA virtually all water (wells, your lakes, ponds, creeks) falls under the purview of the state and they could literally shut down the entire industry.
A minimum of 50 at a club is very reasonable. There are absolute tangible benefits for the club and individual golfer. Even with just 28 guys at $35 your net you pay to the state golf association is $270. I'd say you get way more bang for your buck with GSGA than annual dues for many other associations! The computer and printer alone are worth something. :)
-
Without any minimum you will have abuse. Imagine this: an owner at a small club with 200 members and therefore about 300 potential association dues paying members decides to have one join for $25 bucks, receives all the benefits I mentioned and then provides handicaps himself to everyone else. It would happen unfortunately and that just wouldn't be fair.
I can't tell you how significant it was to have a seat at the Capitol when water issues were being discussed. That's just one example. Back in 2006-7 at height of drought many were calling for a complete watering ban including greens even if the water was "yours". In GA virtually all water (wells, your lakes, ponds, creeks) falls under the purview of the state and they could literally shut down the entire industry.
A minimum of 50 at a club is very reasonable. There are absolute tangible benefits for the club and individual golfer. Even with just 28 guys at $35 your net you pay to the state golf association is $270. I'd say you get way more bang for your buck with GSGA than annual dues for many other associations! The computer and printer alone are worth something. :)
Chris,
Why not outline the benfits as you do above (I assume they do in some form but obvioulsy not to great effect) and assign a cost to teach for the club? Perhaps the little guy would not feel that he is "getting hosed" as badly.
Computer Lease - $XXX
Printer Lease - $XXX
Golf Lobby Contribution - $XXX
GSGHOF Contribution - $XXX
Yates Scholarship Contribution - $XXX
Moncrief Scholarship Contribution - $XXX
Course Rating Team Contribution - $XXX
Junior Golf Contribution - $XXX
TOTAL - $1250
30 Handicap sign ups at no charge - $25 per thereafter
At these numbers were Mike to charge $30 he would profit $250 if he reached the 50 while perhaps feeling he is getting something for his money and also feeling the Assoc. is working with him.
Creative marketing works a bit better than cramming it down one's throat.
-
The outline of benefits for individual golfers and courses (owners in many cases) could cerrtaiy be explained better but I don't see how voluntary membership in the assoc is "crammed down anyone's throat". Mike asked the GSGA to send a crew (usually three women and three men) to spend a full day measuring and rating his course. I assume he has his computer and printer and I know he was told up front what the minimum was. He didn't reach his number that would allow him to break even or profit and seems to suggest a no minimum picy that would allow his club, his employees and his members to enjoy all the advantages if just one guy from his club signs up.
You can't demand all the benefits of a buffet and expect a la carte pricing. Unbundling services would not allow golf associations, in fact, many businesses, to survive. Sad to think many seem not to care a out the state associations who really do so much to support the game.
-
No one is forced to join. If all Mike wants is a course rating I think the average cost is around $3000. The rating is good for ten years. At the 270 cost I calculated he incurred this year he should stay a member)! But he could do that, give back his equipment and do his own handicapping.
For someone who doesn't seem to see value in the GSGA and who seems to not want to pay anything but the least possible amount I think it's strange to also expect the GSGA to turn away money from supporters/advertisers/sponsors to protect those who seem intent on minimizing their support to every degree possible. Allegiance and support is a two way street.
-
Who is suggesting unbundled a la carte services?
I am simply saying
1. Explain the benefits better
2. Assign a value to each that ties out to the $1250 number they are obviously after.
3. Market it more creatively - I get all that stuff and 30 free handicaps for $1250... what a deal versus "As the little guy I am getting screwed"
-
Who is suggesting unbundled a la carte services?
I am simply saying
1. Explain the benefits better
2. Assign a value to each that ties out to the $1250 number they are obviously after.
3. Market it more creatively - I get all that stuff and 30 free handicaps for $1250... what a deal versus "As the little guy I am getting screwed"
I agreed that we can always do a better job promoting ourselves and mentioned that in my first post. I can tell you that whenever a new course or operator comes into GA, the procedure is for a GSGA employee to personally reach out to contact them and explain what we do and can do.
Most new courses want to be rated and sloped as soon as possible and that is most often the first contact. Martha Kirouac who heads the rating department also was head of the Membership department and has been a great ambassador for the GSGA for a long time. (She is also a GA Golf Hall of Fame Member, former Womaen's Amateur Champion and former Curtis Cup Member and Captain)!
Anyway, I know in Mike's case he has had numerous conversations with Martha and others and is fully aware of all the benefits and costs associated with GSGA. I respect that he may not find value in the Membership and that's OK. I think he is wrong but that's OK, he thinks I am nuts too :)
We sell a service to Member clubs that then re-sell that to the Members at a profit. Not much different than Titleist selling balls to a golf shop and the shop having an inventory they must sell to regain their initial purchase before they make money. I can't order five dozen balls at a time from Titleist and almost any vendor in the world selling anything has some type of minimum. GSGA has really high fixed costs associated with many services and I think 50 is a very reasonable number to ask for. AGAIN, there is not a flat fee of $1250 for anyone and it is wrong to look at it that way.
The actual cost to Mike based on his sale of 28 memberships this year is $270 which I would argue is a terrific value for all he gets as a Member Club.
One other point. The GSGA does not market to golfers in GA individually. You cannot go to the GSGA website and join for $25 directly and thereby cut out a Member Club. If an individual wants to join even on-line they must go through a GSGA Member Club to get their membership. The GSGA does this so as not to "compete" with their Member Clubs and I think this is another example of a good faith attempt to protect those Member Clubs.
However, it is the Member Club that is the ultimate seller of the membership to the golfer. Unfortunately the GSGA is at the mercy of the guy behind the counter--if he makes no effort to sell GSGA then many may never join. I do find it difficult to beleive that with traffic of 20,000 paying rounds, the club could only sell 28 memberships! I volunteered at a PGA Superstore event a few Saturdays ago and in four hours helped half a dozen walk up people get on-line to search for a member club through which they could join the GSGA.
Frankly the club has a responsibility to sell its merchandise and if they know they are on the "hook" for fifty handicaps I think with some small effort it could be done.
I think the little guy is honestly enjoying many of the enormous benefits of being part of the GSGA and is being subsidized/carried by clubs who do a better job promoting GSGA membership. I am a little guy. Literally a mom and pop. My mother, sister and I are the owner/operators. Our course is fully private but with a initiation fee of $500 and very affordable dues. We have supported the state golf association for forty years for many reasons but partly because it is the right thing to do. Given all the GSGA does for golf in GA, it is still a value for me and a "steal" for small clubs!!
-
Chris, You don't have to sell me, I'm suggesting ways you might be able to sell Mike or others like him.
I don't think the "I can't believe you only got 28" route is a good one.
The way it is marketed it is purely a handicap fee driven valuation for the member club.
It is presented poorly with no economic value assigned to things that have monetary benefits for the member club. Why you would not present it as such is curious.
Course should be rated once every ten years - A la carte course rating is $3000 - voilla $300 per year is assigned to that aspect and so on and so forth.
This is what you get and we are giving you XX number of handicap services to help recoup your money... just an easier sell.
The association cannot take the "we provide value damnit" approach while failling to demonstrate that value. Hurting the little guy is not the way this game needs to go.
-
Greg,
My comments do not reflect the GSGA position. I can tell you as a course operator with forty years in the business, 28 out of 20,000 rounds is not good. Period.
The GSGA clearly spells out all the benefits to individuals and clubs and personally contacts the clubs. I know in Mikes situation I have spoken directly to him as have GSGA employees. We have explained what we offer and be has complained about the minimum. If he doesn't see value my personal opinion is he shouldn't join. But don't ask for and receive benefits and then when you don't meet the minimums complaint hat the fee is too high!
Are you in the business? Have you had any experience deciding for a club whether or not to join a state golf assoc?
No product is a good fit for everyone. I feel the GSGA should not try to be all things to all clubs. It can't fulfill its core mission if it tries to please everyone! If you try to please all, you end up pleasing none. I know Mike is aware of what GSGA offers. No "marketing" will change his mind. He wants a fee structure that few in business would recommend.
It's not the end of the world when there is just not a good fit. It happens. The GSGA is healthy and aware of future challenges. They can't however develop a "let's make a deal" pricing plan for every club.
-
Greg,
My comments do not reflect the GSGA position. I can tell you as a course operator with forty years in the business, 28 out of 20,000 rounds is not good. Period.
Very presumptious comment Chris. Perhaps you do so with some knowledge of Mike's operation but I would not assume to have any clue how another item to be marketed and sold to his members/guests might burden his or other smallish operations.
The GSGA clearly spells out all the benefits to individuals and clubs and personally contacts the clubs. I know in Mikes situation I have spoken directly to him as have GSGA employees. We have explained what we offer and be has complained about the minimum. If he doesn't see value my personal opinion is he shouldn't join. But don't ask for and receive benefits and then when you don't meet the minimums complaint hat the fee is too high!
Agreed, all I am suggesting is perhaps a good sales and marketing job on the front end could have help avoid his objections
Are you in the business? Yes
Have you had any experience deciding for a club whether or not to join a state golf assoc? Yes
No product is a good fit for everyone. I feel the GSGA should not try to be all things to all clubs. It can't fulfill its core mission if it tries to please everyone! If you try to please all, you end up pleasing none. I know Mike is aware of what GSGA offers. No "marketing" will change his mind. He wants a fee structure that few in business would recommend.
As noted the SCGA has a 10 person minimum so there is a precedent for his position (and I am not saying he is right)
It's not the end of the world when there is just not a good fit. It happens. The GSGA is healthy and aware of future challenges. They can't however develop a "let's make a deal" pricing plan for every club.
Perhaps Mike has suggested a "let's make a deal" scenario but if you are twisting my comments to suggest I am as well then you should go back through and read them again.
What is it with my suggestion that you do not agree with other than the fact that it suggests things could be done different/better?
-
Greg
I don't think it is presumptuous at all. I am an expert in golf operations and I am confident speaking to the issue.
I am a small operator like Mike and have known Mike for twenty-five years. I have been directly familiar with Mike's issues re: the pricing model of the GSGA and have spoken directly with Mike about his issues. I have acted as an intermediary between Mike and the GSGA staff to make sure they understood his concerns and he understood theirs. I am familiar with small clubs all over the state and have a good idea of their membership levels.
I can confidently say that Mike, while he may not have liked the answers he was getting, was perfectly aware of the fee structure and the fact that the GSGA was not going to lower the minimum member requirement any more. I do not agree that a good "sales and marketing job" could have avoided his objections. Two sides had a position. Two sides understood one another. Mike had a CHOICE to accept the benefits I outlined above for the price described or not.
The precedent you mention is not apples to apples. The precedent is for a product in SC, not GA. If GA had a ten person minimum for some clubs that it did not extend to Mike, I'd be on the front lines defending him..I hope you will accept that GA is a different animal and a one size fits all minimum for our country may not work. Is it not presumptuous of you to assume that the GSGA hadn't thought about all these issues and debated them, discussing the pros and cons at length? I can assure you they have.
Here is what I think is a bit presumptuous
If I agree to pay x for services x,y and z,I think it is wrong to later complain publicly that the company providing x, y and z didn't do it on my terms or that somehow they are now taking advantage of me (assuming of course that he benefits they promised were delivered).
Your suggestion that things could be done "differently" is well, true but so what? Better? Of course. Any organization can improve and I said the GSGA could certainly do things better multiple times. I hate to sound this way but everything you said about marketing and Mike's suggestions for different pricing aren't new and have been examined. I personally think we could improve our marketing and I think it is crucial to dispel the notion that all one gets for a state assoc membership is a handicap!! You are right that they MUST do a better job selling themselves. (All the member benefits I mentioned are on the GSGA website and they describe the benefits to individuals as well as clubs). Also, they do reach out personally to all new clubs and owners to try and explain those benefits.
With Mike, nothing more could have been done to explain the benefits. For some crazy reason, he joined anyway :). I will redouble my efforts as a fellow member club to try and convince him that it is beneficial for him to be a part of the GSGA even if he sells not one more membership and must come out of pocket $270 this year!
Do you know Mike??? Sales and marketing are useless against him!!! They needed a hammer :)
-
Greg, I assure you that the GSGA membership is NOT marketed as a handicap only service. That may be the perception but go look at the website under Membership. Handicapping is but one of many benefits outlined and all the efforts of the last ten years has been to avoid that notion.
-
I'm just a golfer, but, regardless, I'm damn proud of being a GSGA member.
http://www.gsga.org/ (http://www.gsga.org/)
-
Greg,
my last point/comment re: Mike is that I have know him for a long time and I think he is a smart, good golf guy. I don't think he was tricked or bullied into GSGA membership and I think that he made a rational choice that he felt was in his club's best interest to join. I think I am giving him more credit than you may be :)
As to the overall question about whether it is a new day for golf organization I would say that despite association membership rolls being lagging indicators (an oxymoron ?), SRGAs have realized for several years now that things are going to have to change. I believe we saw a sea change after 2001 and 2008 that have fundamentally changed things all across the industry.
Frankly, I get exhausted talking about the golf industry. Until we realize that at its core it is a fun stick and ball game that needs to be affordable, recreation, we will all continue to piss into the wind :(
-
I'm just a golfer, but, regardless, I'm damn proud of being a GSGA member.
http://www.gsga.org/ (http://www.gsga.org/)
Me too! It's a heck of a deal. The one year subscription to Golf Digest or Golfweek alone is worth $25. Of course there is so much more :)
-
Duplicate. Sorry
-
CC, for what it is worth, from my own experience in a few professional associations and organizations over the years, I completely understand and sympathize with the case you are trying to make about the collective strength and benefits of a quality umbrella organization working to the benefit of the many. You are obviously a 'joiner' and one that steps up to serve your collegues in their attempt to advance their professional footprint in an industry, society and economy. While you make it crystal clear your current comments are your own and don't reflect the GASGA, you have been in the trenches and care enough to devote your time to that greater advancement of the whole (compensated or gratis). I completely understand the issues of having a competent lobby to look out for your organization members best interests, based on a structure the organization created to identify and develop a consensus policy and agenda. As long as your organization has an elective or consensus forming fair process to form committees and form policy and goals for the overall profession, you deserve support, not devisive disgruntled snipers.
This whole mentality and issue isn't confined to golf associations and golf professional organizations. It is throughout our society from chambers of commerce to rotary clubs to automobile associations. Wherever there is a guild or group or other manner of profession that identifies themselves by a professional body of practioners or social service community of like economic and social interests- there are organizations of people that draw out the inclinations of the joiners and organizers that put forth great effort to take pride in their place in society and provide a service to their collegues to advance their collective professional standing.
And, as sure as there are god's green apples, there are the critics and those that won't pony up the cost of the service but want all the benefits. Generally, those folk are 'Maytags" - agitators - and disgruntled individuals that won't work within a consensus framework to advance the cause of the profession, because they want it 'just their own way'. They never step up to present themselves for service via running for elective consensus of the rest of those involved in the organization. They just sit back and snipe.
Sorry Mike Young, your attitude is well recognized by just about anyone that has worked in any professional organization to take pride in that profession and wishes to work in a framework that has been created by a majority of participants in that profession to go forward, only to have individuals submarine the efforts. It seems clear that you have the indisputable right to choose not to join the professional organization and don't have to support them in any way. But, it is disheartening to see when people step up to serve and advance the professional status and standing of their collegues (even though competitors in the broader economic context) to be derided and taken on in a forum like this case, for a petty personal inclination of a person that wants to have a big say with a tiny microphone.
BTW, I completely understand that some organizational structures also become ineffective or even corrupt. It is then up to good and decent practioners or members of the organization's body of members to take hold from within and change whatever is going wrong. It is rarely productive to take the in-house grievances to the public at large as a subversive tactic.
-
Thanks RJ. I am pretty sure Mike and I are OK. He is a bit of a rabble rouser but anyone who can put up with Charlie ain't all bad :)
I do wish he saw all the things that the GSGA does on behalf of all the clubs. Even clubs who are not GSGA members benefit from their work. If Mike chooses not to support the GSGA (again, even with just 28 members he would "lose" and have to pay a net of $270) he will still benefit from their work. I am not sure what group he would support (mike is not a "joiner" :)
I think he raises a very good point regarding accepting dollars from out of state interest. No doubt there are legitimate issues raised in this regard. A group the size of GSGA that is as involved in as many different area as it is has to be very careful not to offend the very constituents it tries to support. But I'd do feel Mike is throwing the baby out with the bath water.
I promise the staff and committees struggle to balance all these issues. Some clubs hated the PGA Superstore advertising. Some like Mike don't like out of state advertising. While good and valid points can be made against accepting those dollars I feel any fair and complete review of what the GSGA does for clubs is a no brainer in favor of what they do as a whole.
As a general role though I think that sometimes a business has to be willing to "fire" a customer. Again, NOT speaking for anyone but myself but in a group or club setting sometimes the desires of the individual just can't jive with what is best for the group. This goes against almost every libertarian notion in my body but I come to no other conclusion.
If Mike were sitting in front of me I would try and explain again the minimum policy and the advertising policy. I would try and make the case that even though he hates those two policies, overall, GSGA membership benefits his club, his industry, his members and can even be a tiny profit center. If I can't make the case we will go have a beer and discuss something easier--religion or politics :)
-
It seems clear that you have the indisputable right to choose not to join the professional organization and don't have to support them in any way. But, it is disheartening to see when people step up to serve and advance the professional status and standing of their collegues (even though competitors in the broader economic context) to be derided and taken on in a forum like this case, for a petty personal inclination of a person that wants to have a big say with a tiny microphone.
RJ,
It's hard to piss me off but you have zero idea about this. Read my opening post. I never mentioned any particular organzization. someone else did that later on. This is not a petty personal inclination from someone that wants to have a big say. That type of cpmment really pisses me off.
-
Greg
I don't think it is presumptuous at all. I am an expert in golf operations and I am confident speaking to the issue.
I am a small operator like Mike and have known Mike for twenty-five years. I have been directly familiar with Mike's issues re: the pricing model of the GSGA and have spoken directly with Mike about his issues. I have acted as an intermediary between Mike and the GSGA staff to make sure they understood his concerns and he understood theirs. I am familiar with small clubs all over the state and have a good idea of their membership levels.
Man I come back on here and there is a page of comments takng thi thing to another level.
I was not the one who mentioned a particular state golf association. someone else began that.
Also, I did join on my own and I have no problem with that. As I said earlier I want to support the state assoc.
I can confidently say that Mike, while he may not have liked the answers he was getting, was perfectly aware of the fee structure and the fact that the GSGA was not going to lower the minimum member requirement any more. I do not agree that a good "sales and marketing job" could have avoided his objections. Two sides had a position. Two sides understood one another. Mike had a CHOICE to accept the benefits I outlined above for the price described or not.
I agree BUT I have not requested a rating of the golf course and will not until I get it the way I want it. If you here differently then there is some confusion. also, I was told I had to have the computer and that's fine. I would be glad to pay them a separate fee for the computer.
The precedent you mention is not apples to apples. The precedent is for a product in SC, not GA. If GA had a ten person minimum for some clubs that it did not extend to Mike, I'd be on the front lines defending him..I hope you will accept that GA is a different animal and a one size fits all minimum for our country may not work. Is it not presumptuous of you to assume that the GSGA hadn't thought about all these issues and debated them, discussing the pros and cons at length? I can assure you they have.
Are you sure there have not been exceptions to the rule made?
Here is what I think is a bit presumptuous
If I agree to pay x for services x,y and z,I think it is wrong to later complain publicly that the company providing x, y and z didn't do it on my terms or that somehow they are now taking advantage of me (assuming of course that he benefits they promised were delivered).
Again, it was not be that specifically named an organization and I have never said anyone was taking advantage of me. I complained of "partner" golf courses outside the state and of minimums. And I would assume that the promotional fees of the "partners" are probably going to the magazine and not the association.
Your suggestion that things could be done "differently" is well, true but so what? Better? Of course. Any organization can improve and I said the GSGA could certainly do things better multiple times. I hate to sound this way but everything you said about marketing and Mike's suggestions for different pricing aren't new and have been examined. I personally think we could improve our marketing and I think it is crucial to dispel the notion that all one gets for a state assoc membership is a handicap!! You are right that they MUST do a better job selling themselves. (All the member benefits I mentioned are on the GSGA website and they describe the benefits to individuals as well as clubs). Also, they do reach out personally to all new clubs and owners to try and explain those benefits.
With Mike, nothing more could have been done to explain the benefits. For some crazy reason, he joined anyway :). I will redouble my efforts as a fellow member club to try and convince him that it is beneficial for him to be a part of the GSGA even if he sells not one more membership and must come out of pocket $270 this year!
I joined to show support and they knew that. I told them I thought there should be no minimum and will probably do it again. The fat one agrees with me on all of this and we both agree with you regarding the game basically being entertainment and fun. I think there will be other things coming down the pike regarding the types of issues we are discussing and I don't think I'm the bad guy here nort do I think anyone else is ( that's why RJ pissed me off) but golf is changing and I can't make myself think that I am the only one out there with a small town golf course thinking the way I am thinking. I know I'm not.
Do you know Mike??? Sales and marketing are useless against him!!! They needed a hammer :)
You don't need a hammer...I think Martha and crew are great and do fine selling and marketing the product. I told them I felt a base amount much like the NGCOA or something would fair and then charge for handicaps. That way all are supporting lobby efforts etc. But that's not the way they do it and OK. And I think there will be a day when such a method will be necessary. As you know my consultant in these matters ( Mr. DT himself) also feels it will go that way. ;)
-
The outline of benefits for individual golfers and courses (owners in many cases) could cerrtaiy be explained better but I don't see how voluntary membership in the assoc is "crammed down anyone's throat". Mike asked the GSGA to send a crew (usually three women and three men) to spend a full day measuring and rating his course. I don't think I have asked for this I assume he has his computer and printer and I know he was told up front what the minimum was. yepHe didn't reach his number that would allow him to break even or profit and seems to suggest a no minimum picy that would allow his club, his employees and his members to enjoy all the advantages if just one guy from his club signs up. I didn't say that
You can't demand all the benefits of a buffet and expect a la carte pricing. I never didUnbundling services would not allow golf associations, in fact, many businesses, to survive. Sad to think many seem not to care a out the state associations who really do so much to support the game. I care about the game and it's survival. We may disagree but that doesn't mean I don't care about the associations that support the game.
-
All that red is giving me flashbacks to high school English class :)
I think there is no doubt that SRGAs will be forced to adapt to a changing golf landscape. How they market themselves, price their services and support their member clubs will be very different for sure. One huge challenge is how to be relevant and offer services the daily fee golfer wants without stepping on the toes of the owner/operator.
Your issue illustrates this. Our individual golfer wants other options and deals to play golf at different locations. That "itinerant" golfer is a completely different animal than the private club guy. Do we just ignore him though? GSGA had been criticized for being overly focused on the private club guy and yet, reaching out to the daily fee golfer may be hard without offending the daily fee owner. Our research shows the main things golfers want is access to many different courses at the lowest possible prices and deals on "golf stuff". To try to give that to him or her without stepping on toes.
There are really two markets--the traditional member club that passes along the membership costs to their members a a small profit and the majority who are daily fee golfers not affiliated with any one particular club. They have different needs and wants. Arguably if the goal is simply to grow membership numbers (and no one I know thinks that should be the only or even the primary goal) then GSGA membership should be marketed directly to those golfers. Most agree that would damage the relationship between GSGA, club and member and should be avoided.
As I mentioned on the phone weeks ago, the GSGA is working on a member benefit that will directly help you and your business with health care costs for your employees. It is simply awaiting state approval. Be patient and quit stirring up trouble ;D
-
Now I think you are getting close to the problem...but I don't describe it as much as private vs. daily fee but more of a profit driven club vs. the non profit clubs. Two different animals and one is gaining ground and one is losing ground...
I don't stir up trouble but the comments from RJ really pissed me of as much as anything ever on this site...I'm still not over it... ;)
Did you see that fat boy's record was broken yesterday by Keegan B?
-
Sorry Mike, but you named the thread, you fed it based on your State's association policies and examples and made it a grievance, so I never thought you were bringing the issue up for some guy running a mom and pop course in N. Dakota. For me, it wasn't the particular golf professional association administration issue, it was what I interpreted was the process and tactic.
The two issues themselves seem to have people who see them differently, pro and con. But, if you feel agrieved, and you think you have company in your views within the industry and there are like minded collegues in your STate, why don't you put yourself out there and get elected or submit to the process to get on a committee and represent that other point of view you have? Why are you bringing such an arcane issue to GCA.com? I just have a sense that there are a number of hard working people (just as there are in our State association) who aren't getting rich or anything tawdry like that, who do a hell of a lot of work to promote golf as an industry and profession. Why not take the grievance to your collegues and abide by the collective wisdom and go about changing policies when consensus gathers to change them, rather than this process?
Mike, you have standing to care about many aspects of golf, from professional organization standpoints; from owner-operator, builder, designer, club member, friend of many other golfers, generous host and all around nice guy. I just don't understand why your grievance on various matters you've brought to this forum for discussion can't sustain the frank commentary your frank criticism of aspects and people in these matters has projected.
-
The outline of benefits for individual golfers and courses (owners in many cases) could cerrtaiy be explained better but I don't see how voluntary membership in the assoc is "crammed down anyone's throat". Mike asked the GSGA to send a crew (usually three women and three men) to spend a full day measuring and rating his course. I don't think I have asked for this I assume he has his computer and printer and I know he was told up front what the minimum was. yepHe didn't reach his number that would allow him to break even or profit and seems to suggest a no minimum picy that would allow his club, his employees and his members to enjoy all the advantages if just one guy from his club signs up. I didn't say that
You can't demand all the benefits of a buffet and expect a la carte pricing. I never didUnbundling services would not allow golf associations, in fact, many businesses, to survive. Sad to think many seem not to care a out the state associations who really do so much to support the game. I care about the game and it's survival. We may disagree but that doesn't mean I don't care about the associations that support the game.
The course rating service is a core service. You may not have asked for it but it is part of what GSGA provides and you have been around long enough to know that! Though i know you dont like the way they measure sometimes either :)
Agreed that you didn't say that exactly. I said or was trying to say that your approach of no minimums, logically extended, could lead to abuse. I think I understand you advocate a set minimum fee plus additional costs per handicap. If that is accurate, It is different from what I thought you were suggesting earlier.
My next comment using the buffet analogy was meant as a general statement and I did not mean to direct it specifically at you.
I appreciate that we both love the game and want a healthy game for both noble and selfish reasons. I do think I see more good in SRGAs than you though. :). I also think your "anti establishment" temperament makes you less inclined to support groups and trade orgs.
Greg--sorry if I got abrupt with you. I stand by what I said but I could have been nicer about it.
RJ. I appreciate your comments and insights re trade organizations.
Mac--thank you for your GSGA Membership!
-
My anti- establishment temperament??? ;D Man, that hurts my feelings now I got to go get prescription for some of that anti-depressant medicine that all the little tennis wives take before they get in their suburbans.
Yep, you probably like associaitions more than I do. ;D I hate unions and feel as though many trade associations would like to move that way. Like the PGA ;D ;D And I think the putter situation will be a huge decision for the USGA. I think the question for many will be...can I belong to the NGCOA or the PGA and the USGA....as we discussed in the last post, for profit clubs can function or will find a way to function on their own and associations will have to justify ( not saying any particular one) in order to be accepted by such. IMHO
-
Just received my copy of John Barrett's FOREGeorgia June magazine. As you know, FOREGeorgia is "The Officail Golfers' News Magazine of the Georgia Section PGA".
There are three full page ads in this edition and two are from out of state golf facilities--Fripp Island and the back cover is Dancing Rabbit Golf Club ;)
The magazine is largely advertising space for daily fee golf courses across the state and while it may not be the same as an ad from the Trent Jones Golf trail I am pretty sure he waould accept ads from them as well! Not sure how you would accept some out of state ads but not others?
Obviously I am not as bothered by "Georgia" magazines accpeting ad money from out of state facilities as you are (though I understand the concerns) but it is both the GSGA AND the Georgia Section PGA doing it.
-
OK. I will try and make this my last post as this dog is pretty well dead ;)
The pricing srtucture the GSGA chooses allows smaller clubs to be subsidized by larger clubs. I paid just under $17,000 this year to the state golf association and you joined for a minimum of $1250. Let's look at this for a moment:
We both received the exact same benefits--our courses are rated and sloped, our handicaps are compiled and updated, we each received a Dell computer, screen and printer, we both benefited from the lobbying efforts at the capitol re: water usage and property valuations thanks to to Economic Impact Study from Stanford paid for by the GSGA, we both have employees and their dependents eligible for the Yates and Moncreif Scholarship programs, we both benefit from the TPP, Handicap and Rules seminars and have equal access to call at anytime for help.
As a club the only real difference is a computer program calculates several hundred handicap indexes for me and about 30 for you (I am guessing). That really isn't worth $16,000!?!? I should be the one complaining as it is me, and other big clubs like me, that subsidize your membership! ;) But I am OK with that.
Also, our individual members receive the exact same benefits too--handicap, tournaments for every day play, championships, subscription to GolfGA and their choice of GolfWeek or GolfWorld, travel discounts plus other things I mentioned already.
One last thought--we both mark up and sell at a profit the GSGA Membership. It costs us $25 per Member. I charge my Member $33 so I make $8 per person. Most clubs charge $40-$50 and some (Cherokee I think, bundles it with their range program for $200) charge even more. It is essentially an inventory item you can sell at your club.
Assuming a $40 price, selling GSGA Memberships is more profitible than selling ProV1 balls and you dont have to "carry" any inventory! I wish owners would realize that they are better off encouraging and selling GSGA Membership than the prov1s but it is tough. Also, I promise that in my club, my member who has a GSGA Membership and a handicap is more engaged and less likely to become disengaged with golf and therefore quit. GSGA Membership is another "sticking point" for them and something any owner wants--sticking points to keep your customers/members tied to your facility!