He highlighted that Scottish clubs had been losing roughly 5,000 full members every year in the last 10 years. He warned that the consequence of not doing anything to try and address that situation was an average annual subscription of £478 rising by 34 per cent in five years’ time and to be 84 per cent higher in 10 years’ time. “That is a fairly challenging prognosis in any walk of life,” he said.
One of many illuminating graphics Darling, the CEO of Vianet Group, a strategic insight and cloud based technology business, used to get his message across highlighted golf’s demographic being its biggest problem. Over 55s make up more than 100,000 of golf club members whereas 24 and unders provide just more than 10,000.
He also pointed out that it used to take 20 rounds per year in 2007 for someone to justify their subscription fee and now it is 40. He revealed, too, that only 47 per cent of members submit enough cards (three) to retain a handicap while just 53 per cent play in a formal competition. Having too many courses is one of the game’s problems. “We can’t sustain 600 clubs in 10 years’ time,” he warned.
Darling’s strongest message, though, about what needs to change more than anything was about getting more women into the game. That is based on the fact that women currently make up less than 14 per cent of membership in Scotland. “There is going to have to be a fundamental re-think,” he said. “We need to think very clearly about the future and how we get women in. It is a big opportunity if we accept this to be the case. Some clubs are not welcoming to women and children - that is a fundamental issue.
One of many illuminating graphics Darling, the CEO of Vianet Group, a strategic insight and cloud based technology business, used to get his message across highlighted golf’s demographic being its biggest problem. Over 55s make up more than 100,000 of golf club members whereas 24 and unders provide just more than 10,000.
Jon
It is rather self evident that the solution and implementation of a plan must come from individual clubs. You don't honestly expect an outside agency to solve the problem(s) at £11.50 per member...do you? The bottom line is in the go-go years too many courses were built. Sustaining this imaginary level of growth was never in the cards. So it is dog eat eat dog these days as nobody has a solution which will save 100% of courses. It is down to each membership to best figure out how they will move forward or if they will move forward. Sure, it is worthwhile for these types of gatherings, but one shouldn't expect salvation, just info.
Ciao
I'm sure some of you read the proposal before Blane Dodds resigned.
We couldn't find a club in East Lothian that was willing to support it but our worry (club pals round a table) was that SG members in other parts of the country may be in a worse state than us, with nothing to lose, and would say "yes".
The jump in fees was not necessarily the concern but more so the lack of clarity on what would happen with the money. It all seemed to be smoke and mirrors, with the only conclusion we could come up with being a data gathering exercise by creating the centralised system. With the data then farmed out to fund Scottish Golf?
Any clubs saying "no" would effectively be ostracised by Scottish Golf and their home members would cease to have recognised handicaps. Nice.
Golf needs to sell itself as the perfect activity for a healthy middle and old age.
Golf needs to sell itself as the perfect activity for a healthy middle and old age.
Agree 100%. Can't understand why none of the governing bodies seem to though?
There is already a deal of information about this, but dont bother looking on offical golf websites for it.
Golf needs to sell itself as the perfect activity for a healthy middle and old age.
Agree 100%. Can't understand why none of the governing bodies seem to though?
There is already a deal of information about this, but dont bother looking on offical golf websites for it.
Of course you're quite right Jerry.
However, wives and girlfriends in the 21st century are very different beasts to those in most of of the 20th century.
All in all, it is undoubtedly a good thing that fathers today generally play a far greater hands-on role with their kids at weekends than in the past.
It's not good for participation in golf, though.
It reiterates my theory that the main target market for golf should be guys retiring from other sports such as football or rugby. If hubby has had a free pass for 10 years to play football on a Saturday it is not a great leap to transfer this goodwill to golf.
There is a small window of opportunity though. Leave it for six months after quitting football and you'll never get out on a Saturday alone again!
Yet apparently England is the one country in Europe that has lower fees than Scotland and is churning out top level golfers. That shouldn't be the only measure but at least the English kids have homegrown stars to aspire to.
Do the authorities governing lawn bowls get as frantic as the golf authorities about youth participation? Bit like golf was the next choice after my hamstrings said no to rugby and cricket, I've always assumed that once I can't swing a club, the bowling green will be blessed with my presence. After that, they can scatter my ashes on the 17th tee at Rye in the hope that, if enough of us do it, it'll be higher and turn into a better hole.The authorities are mainly interested in elite golfers and junior golfers yes. I think only 3 or 4 of the 40 or so regional bodies contributed to the funding of the Vat argument with the HMRC.
Yes probably nearly three times as many but we currently pay £21 for EGU membership & our local Gloucestershire county fees per member, a lot more than Scotland if that current price quoted is right.
Yet apparently England is the one country in Europe that has lower fees than Scotland and is churning out top level golfers. That shouldn't be the only measure but at least the English kids have homegrown stars to aspire to.
Well I assume England has something like two or three times the number of participant clubs contributing to the fund to field exactly the same number of players on their team as on the Scots team. That's a pretty big advantage.
Given that much of the county/national body £ involved allegedly goes to supporting the best juniors and county, regional, national, elite amateur players it does make one wonder the appropriateness of the spend when only a tiny proportion of those aided end up regularly on our TV screens. The other question is to what extent those who are helped ever help-back, either in kind or financially, in return?
But then again taking Adrian’s figure, £21 ea cumulative does buy a lot of blazers and Galvin Green clothing and trips to warm climates for the ‘helpers’.
Atb
Do the authorities governing lawn bowls get as frantic as the golf authorities about youth participation?
Like Adrian, I think the issue is clear, too many clubs and courses built upon unsustainable math (not at all unusual). There isn't a solution to keep all the Scottish courses viable.
Ciao
Sean,
taken over several years yes millions. The Scottish golf is run not by a cosy little group of golf club members who leave their clubs now and again to do a good deed but by paid employees who purport to have some expertise in which ever field they are taken on to do. As I am sure you are aware the main employee has just done a bunk back to tennis the sport he truly loves begging the question why was he involved in golf?
So what do you suppose a body set up to represent the best interests of its members ought to do if not look after the best interests of its members?
I am of the same opinion as Niall in that golfers are choosing to give up membership and play on the cheap greenfees you can now get. Sites such as Golf Now are the main reason for this and the SGU should have realised this a long time ago. I disagree with the idea there are too many courses if the issues are addressed properly. As to possible solutions. Maybe getting a workshop together to discuss this would be a good start.
Jon
Of course you're quite right Jerry.
However, wives and girlfriends in the 21st century are very different beasts to those in most of of the 20th century.
All in all, it is undoubtedly a good thing that fathers today generally play a far greater hands-on role with their kids at weekends than in the past.
It's not good for participation in golf, though.
It reiterates my theory that the main target market for golf should be guys retiring from other sports such as football or rugby. If hubby has had a free pass for 10 years to play football on a Saturday it is not a great leap to transfer this goodwill to golf.
There is a small window of opportunity though. Leave it for six months after quitting football and you'll never get out on a Saturday alone again!
From a few discussions I've been party to I reckon there are quite a few wives/partners who would be happy for their husbands/partners, especially when they're retired, to spend more time at the golf course......gets them out of the house and away from under their feet! :) Some have even suggested they'd be happy if their other-half's golf subscriptions were even higher, maybe a lot higher,......just get them out the house!
atb
Sean,
as a golf club owner I can assure you that I am not sitting on my ass waiting for a magical country-wide solution however that does not take away from the fact that the SGU are failing its members. Of course as you believe there is no hope your conclusions are not surprising.
Jon
One of many illuminating graphics Darling, the CEO of Vianet Group, a strategic insight and cloud based technology business, used to get his message across highlighted golf’s demographic being its biggest problem. Over 55s make up more than 100,000 of golf club members whereas 24 and unders provide just more than 10,000.
Scottish women have an average of about 1.5 babies each over their lifetime. I believe the number needed to maintain population at its current level is around 2.1 children per woman. i.e. demographics are probably going to make things much worse.
Just as an aside as we have discussed bringing new players to the game in their 40s and 50s, I am watching the Golf Channel and Greg Norman is on and he was asked about his golf game. His reply was that he played 5 times last year and maybe 8 times this year. He was then asked if he missed the game at all and his answer was a simple "no." Seems hard for most of us to understand how someone who could play the game so well would not have any interest in playing anymore. I am sure we could give any number of reasons for this but it is still hard for us who have never played at a very high level and love the game could imagine giving the game up, and especially so if we could play it really well.The reason I expect is from the same thought pattern as the people I described as semi-quitting.....they don't enjoy it as much because they are not as good as they were and there is an annoyance factor hitting bad shots. There is another trending pattern that as soon as you are working or involved with golf, it is not the same sort relaxer that it was. For professional golfers there is a trending pattern as soon as they start designing courses the quality of their golf goes downhill, happened with Tiger although it is usual that golfpro designers design at the end of their careers.
On my recent non-golfing trip to St Andrews we took a taxi from Leuchers Station into the town. Our driver was a keen golfer and waxed lyrically about the various courses.
More interesting however, was his sadness that young people in St Andrews are just not interested in golf any more. Even though they can play for next to nothing, participation among locals has apparently declined precipitously.
If St Andrews is struggling to get people into golf, what chance does anyone else have? Or is it just that the perennial sight of fat middle-aged American tourists in unpleasant trousers detracts irretrievably from any coolness the game might once have had?
;D
Duncan's comment may have been over the line but there's a hint of truth in it. St Andrews now reeks of a lot of what is worst about golf. Hugely expensive equipment and clothing and tiers of privilege, much of it now bought by money. In the 25 years since I first visited as a golfer it has changed, and not for the better.On my recent non-golfing trip to St Andrews we took a taxi from Leuchers Station into the town. Our driver was a keen golfer and waxed lyrically about the various courses.
More interesting however, was his sadness that young people in St Andrews are just not interested in golf any more. Even though they can play for next to nothing, participation among locals has apparently declined precipitously.
If St Andrews is struggling to get people into golf, what chance does anyone else have? Or is it just that the perennial sight of fat middle-aged American tourists in unpleasant trousers detracts irretrievably from any coolness the game might once have had?
;D
Or is it just that the perennial sight of fat middle-aged American tourists in unpleasant trousers detracts irretrievably from any coolness the game might once have had?
Really? Come on Duncan, no need for that for that sort of comment.
Or is it just that the perennial sight of fat middle-aged American tourists in unpleasant trousers detracts irretrievably from any coolness the game might once have had?
Really? Come on Duncan, no need for that for that sort of comment.
Wow. :o .....as tongue in cheek as this might have been intended some things are better left unsaid. It is a public course even for yanks and the UK does allow Americans visa free entry last I checked.
If St Andrews is struggling to get people into golf, what chance does anyone else have? Or is it just that the perennial sight of fat middle-aged American tourists in unpleasant trousers detracts irretrievably from any coolness the game might once have had?
;D
The main aim of the Scottish Golf App will be to get the so-called nomads – a group that currently makes up around 80 per cent of Scotland’s total golfing population – to book their pay-and-play rounds directly with the clubs rather than going through an outside booking website.
The main aim of the Scottish Golf App will be to get the so-called nomads – a group that currently makes up around 80 per cent of Scotland’s total golfing population – to book their pay-and-play rounds directly with the clubs rather than going through an outside booking website.
Surely the main aim, as discussed at length elsewhere on here, is to entice these nomads to become club members somewhere. Surely this is having the opposite effect.
Niall
The simple issue in Scotland is golf is too cheap, clubs struggle to stay solvent charging £400-£700 a year membership and only a small percentage get the high end visitor golf.
The simple issue in Scotland is golf is too cheap, clubs struggle to stay solvent charging £400-£700 a year membership and only a small percentage get the high end visitor golf.
Golf is struggling in the UK generally because the home unions took their eye of the ball and forgot to do what was right by their membership.
Jon
I find it incredible that anyone could blame a golf organisation for the downturn in membership...its nonsense. By the same token its nonsense to expect a golf organisation to "solve" a golf membership problem for a country. That's akin to believing a government can right an economy. Its pass the buck talk that will solve very little.
Ciao
The simple issue in Scotland is golf is too cheap, clubs struggle to stay solvent charging £400-£700 a year membership and only a small percentage get the high end visitor golf.
A government's responsibility is to look after the best interests of its citizens.
Jon
The biggest issue facing golf clubs is declining membership, and that is driven largely by two factors; less people playing golf overall, and cheap green fees making the commitment of club membership a less attractive proposition.I can see some merit in a National booking system from the point of view that you don't pay teeofftimes or golfnow the 20% TAX!!! so clubs would have more/all the money but it is still the anti of 'promoting golf membership' as clubs sadly would just undercut each other. It is still providing that VILE go compare situation and mostly the visitors of those sites choose LOWEST PRICE.
Clubs cannot do very much about the former, but potentially can about the latter if they work together.
This is where the national and county unions can come in. Encouraging clubs in any particular area to maintain viable green fees and not to compete agressively with each other would benefit all clubs and the game as a whole.
Yet insead they are talking about cutting GolfNow out of the equation but offering the same kind of ruinous service.
Or is it just that the perennial sight of fat middle-aged American tourists in unpleasant trousers detracts irretrievably from any coolness the game might once have had?
;D
The simple issue in Scotland is golf is too cheap, clubs struggle to stay solvent charging £400-£700 a year membership and only a small percentage get the high end visitor golf.
I'm not going to rehash the arguments in this thread but let me say that architecturally, Mount Ellen is no big loss. It is however a loss to a hardcore of members who no longer have a club. I hope they decide on the of the several nearby clubs instead.The good news is that it makes other clubs stronger, as the former members drift to the neighbours.
Niall
I'm not going to rehash the arguments in this thread but let me say that architecturally, Mount Ellen is no big loss. It is however a loss to a hardcore of members who no longer have a club. I hope they decide on the of the several nearby clubs instead.The good news is that it makes other clubs stronger, as the former members drift to the neighbours.
Niall
I forgot you knew what you were talking about.I'm not going to rehash the arguments in this thread but let me say that architecturally, Mount Ellen is no big loss. It is however a loss to a hardcore of members who no longer have a club. I hope they decide on the of the several nearby clubs instead.The good news is that it makes other clubs stronger, as the former members drift to the neighbours.
Niall
Adrian,
if only that were true. Most just become nomads.
I forgot you knew what you were talking about.I'm not going to rehash the arguments in this thread but let me say that architecturally, Mount Ellen is no big loss. It is however a loss to a hardcore of members who no longer have a club. I hope they decide on the of the several nearby clubs instead.The good news is that it makes other clubs stronger, as the former members drift to the neighbours.
Niall
Adrian,
if only that were true. Most just become nomads.
At the risk of being morbid, how many are closing due to members passing away or unable to play anymore...with few younger types to fill in the gaps?I think the normal UK golf club had a membership level of 500-600 about 15 years and further back. Gradually in that time the price has elevated so it is not such good value, easy ways to play nomadic, people die or too fragile to play and clubs lose around 10% per year. With less people interested in the game and especially in the younger sectors maybe the replacement for fresh members is only 30 new ones, so there is an averaged 20 deficit per year...over 15 years a lot of clubs are now running on a membership number of 300, I reckon I could guess the numbers at most of the clubs local to me, most are over 500, with a few strugglers. There comes a point where the club just has to realise it can't afford its place, certainly getting hard less than 300 for an 18 hole course to survive as a good facility. This pattern is probably at its strongest in Scotland as there are more closures probably lniked to the density of golf courses although the Drink Driving Laws are tighter and that has impacted the clubhouses to point where they can't break even. In yesteryear the clubhouse may have subsidised the fees instead of a drain.
Perhaps the club model is dying with the older generations. Would be fascinating to see a breakdown of aggregate members across all clubs in the UK by age: 20-30, 30-40, etc.
Clubhouses are often seen as places that don’t ‘make’ money for golf clubs or even break-even, indeed they are often perceived as the opposite.It does affect Membership Levels and the price you can charge. Definetly some people are golf only full stop no frills required probably happy with the saving and some would leave and join a course with a clubhouse. It is a model that might work going forward a clubhouseless golf club and the tradmodel. The quality of the architecture would have even less importance!
I wonder threrefore what the implications would be of closing/selling Clubhouses and having a cheap pavilion/shed type facilities instead given that this ought to cut costs quite bit and thus permit lower subscriptions?
Would it effect membership levels though?
Would some members carry on playing because their subs would be less?
Would members leave because there’s no smart/posh Clubhouse to hold social functions and generally hang-out in?
Just curious
Atb
Clubhouses are often seen as places that don’t ‘make’ money for golf clubs or even break-even, indeed they are often perceived as the opposite.
I wonder threrefore what the implications would be of closing/selling Clubhouses and having a cheap pavilion/shed type facilities instead given that this ought to cut costs quite bit and thus permit lower subscriptions?
Would it effect membership levels though?
Would some members carry on playing because their subs would be less?
Would members leave because there’s no smart/posh Clubhouse to hold social functions and generally hang-out in?
Just curious
Atb
Duncan,
True, but i'd rather have a fine meal in a basement restaurant over a mediocre meal in one with a view... any day of the week.. ;)
I suppose a bit depends on how remote it is too and whether there are enough locals to keep it going...
Duncan,
True, but i'd rather have a fine meal in a basement restaurant over a mediocre meal in one with a view... any day of the week.. ;)
Nothing we don't really know. We have almost ALL agreed that the traditional UK membership packages are shrinking and golfers that were members are now still golfers but just pay and play and play less. The reason mainly is there are attractive cost saving options elsewhere by paying and playing. Lowest price is the key driver.
There will always be a few that give up and few new ones that take up.
What really needs to happen is golfers play more.
The reason mainly is there are attractive cost saving options elsewhere by paying and playing. Lowest price is the key driver.As an American looking at UK yearly member fees, which are lower by a multiple of 10 or more for nicer clubs, how much lower can they get? If people aren't playing golf because they want lower priced golf, is it even realistic to run a club on such a small amount of membership funds? Inflation typically is ....... upwards, so golf fees should go in the same direction.
The reason mainly is there are attractive cost saving options elsewhere by paying and playing. Lowest price is the key driver.As an American looking at UK yearly member fees, which are lower by a multiple of 10 or more for nicer clubs, how much lower can they get? If people aren't playing golf because they want lower priced golf, is it even realistic to run a club on such a small amount of membership funds? Inflation typically is ....... upwards, so golf fees should go in the same direction.
As an American looking at UK yearly member fees, which are lower by a multiple of 10 or more for nicer clubs, how much lower can they get? If people aren't playing golf because they want lower priced golf, is it even realistic to run a club on such a small amount of membership funds? Inflation typically is ....... upwards, so golf fees should go in the same direction.
Jon praise the lord for that indeed. What good comes from the yanks anyway right?The reason mainly is there are attractive cost saving options elsewhere by paying and playing. Lowest price is the key driver.As an American looking at UK yearly member fees, which are lower by a multiple of 10 or more for nicer clubs, how much lower can they get? If people aren't playing golf because they want lower priced golf, is it even realistic to run a club on such a small amount of membership funds? Inflation typically is ....... upwards, so golf fees should go in the same direction.
Jeff,
if the UK golf followed the US model it would be dead. Thankfully this is not the case.
Scotland saw a drop of 7,521 registered golfers, a 4% loss, between 2017-2018. There are now 180,281 golfers registered to Scottish golf clubs compared to 187,802 in 2017.
Ireland remained largely static, with just a 0.58% decline. The Emerald Isle lost 1,063 registered golfers to take its participation rate to 182,398 in 2018.
Jon praise the lord for that indeed. What good comes from the yanks anyway right?The reason mainly is there are attractive cost saving options elsewhere by paying and playing. Lowest price is the key driver.As an American looking at UK yearly member fees, which are lower by a multiple of 10 or more for nicer clubs, how much lower can they get? If people aren't playing golf because they want lower priced golf, is it even realistic to run a club on such a small amount of membership funds? Inflation typically is ....... upwards, so golf fees should go in the same direction.
Jeff,
if the UK golf followed the US model it would be dead. Thankfully this is not the case.
However, I have read participation (by member numbers) is down almost 10% in the last 5 years in the UK. The income statement/balance sheet at these clubs are probably shared with the membership, so unless there is some embezzlement happening the clubs are spending what they take in. From what I have read it is falling short and clubs are in jeopardy, thus what is the answer?
The US model depends on a population of affluent golfers that care a great deal about privacy, status and exclusivity. It would seem the golfing population in U.K. doesn’t share that mindset. The US model keeps chugging along at those clubs that share those characteristics. Not saying that is good or bad. Just different.The UK model is kinda based around the principle of two five handicappers competing in a team match. One of the 5 handicappers is a 49 year bank manager, his partner is a 15 year old school boy. The 15 year old boy is not thinking his partner earns £100k per year. The bank manager wishes he was as supple as his partner. It is that sort of integration the feeds the UK Model. Both are just thinking golf.
More and more these days I get the impression that even for £20 folks expect Augusta like conditioning year round and are disappointed, even won’t play, if they don’t get it.
Long gone the days of folks having only a few mis-matched clubs in a scruffy old bag with socks as head-covers and accepting course conditions as they come.
Atb
More and more these days I get the impression that even for £20 folks expect Augusta like conditioning year round and are disappointed, even won’t play, if they don’t get it.
Long gone the days of folks having only a few mis-matched clubs in a scruffy old bag with socks as head-covers and accepting course conditions as they come.
Atb
Yep, TV coverage of the PGA Tour has a lot to answer for.
Brian
Thank you for bringing this to my attention. It is a course that I've been meaning to play for a while and not just because I've driven by it hundreds of times and wondered at some of the holes as they play over and around the hill. I'm also interested because it's a Willie Fernie design which I assume hasn't been buggered about with.
Anyone else up for a gca clan outing to Craigie Hill in the spring ?
Niall
Littlehill, Lethamhill, Linn Park, Ruchill and Alexandra Park courses are all under threat.
Niall:
Which of the Glasgow courses would you most like saved, if only one?
I know we've talked about this in person, but would any be worth playing before they close for good, if they indeed do?
Cheers.
Niall:
Which of the Glasgow courses would you most like saved, if only one?
I know we've talked about this in person, but would any be worth playing before they close for good, if they indeed do?
Cheers.
Clyde
Architecture wise I'd plump for Littlehill. Emotionally I'm tempted to go for Alexandria Park but that is kind of tempered by the fact that what is there is of no real great merit architecture wise even though it does serve a function of sorts. For you, the one you'd want to see would be Littlehill. It won't necessarily blow you away but I think you'd appreciate the design.
I'll caveat all that by saying I haven't seen Linn Park or indeed Ruchill (well I kind of have through the fence).
Niall
To check out this thesis, today I stopped in at a small town club in Scotland which I'd never seen in my travels. (I had only got to about 10km away before.)
They have nine holes of rugged links terrain with a few houses about. The locker room had 14 lockers; the handicap sheet indicated about 20 full members and 40 seniors. The honesty tray of used golf balls for 20p was a clear indicator.
I fear its time is short and the local golfers will have to drive to the next town 10 minutes up the road to play. A shame really as it is a lovely wee course, and once it's gone, the kids who grow up there will be much less likely to take up golf. The primary school is right next to the clubhouse. Perhaps they will keep two or three holes even if the club folds? One can hope.
I wish I had been there on a busier day to meet some of the members and hear what it means to them.
I have hardened up to the fact it is no longer sad that a golf course is closing.
There are too many so some must close.
Those closing make the others around it stronger.
I have hardened up to the fact it is no longer sad that a golf course is closing.
There are too many so some must close.
Those closing make the others around it stronger.
Not when golfers continue to give the game up.
I have hardened up to the fact it is no longer sad that a golf course is closing.
There are too many so some must close.
Those closing make the others around it stronger.
Not when golfers continue to give the game up.
I recall reading figures recently that showed the number of active golfers in Scotland had remained stable with just a small reduction in numbers compared to the previous year but that the fall in golfers who were club members continued showing there was no switch across. In England the number of golfers had actually increased which surprised me.
I’d take their stats with a pinch of salt. They have no way of knowing. The only semblance of any reliability is membership numbers.
To check out this thesis, today I stopped in at a small town club in Scotland which I'd never seen in my travels. (I had only got to about 10km away before.)
They have nine holes of rugged links terrain with a few houses about. The locker room had 14 lockers; the handicap sheet indicated about 20 full members and 40 seniors. The honesty tray of used golf balls for 20p was a clear indicator.
I fear its time is short and the local golfers will have to drive to the next town 10 minutes up the road to play. A shame really as it is a lovely wee course, and once it's gone, the kids who grow up there will be much less likely to take up golf. The primary school is right next to the clubhouse. Perhaps they will keep two or three holes even if the club folds? One can hope.
I wish I had been there on a busier day to meet some of the members and hear what it means to them.
We played Shiskine followed by two or three very basic 9-holers which exuded plenty of rustic charm and not a little quirk. We encountered a few members at each - none of whom appeared to be under the age of 75. The lady selling green fees at the 18 hole 4000 yard Whiting Bay GC told us that she had been doing the job for 60 years but had yet to climb the steep 1st hole for a proper look at the course, never mind play it!
Such clubs and courses are in a time warp. One feels as if one is stepping back to the 1950s. Of course, in a busy tourist area such as Arran this is a selling point to golf nerds like those of us on this site and survival is conceivable. In less touristy areas of the mainland I am sure it is another story.
Much as I enjoyed the little clubs and courses on Arran if I was a resident of the island or a regular visitor the only club I would consider joining is Shiskine - even if it meant a 30 minute journey every time I wanted to play golf. I suspect therein lies much of the problem. Increased mobility has expanded the catchment areas of the better quality courses, leaving the rustic local courses struggling for business.
I can't imagine any keen Arran golfer in his 30s, 40s or 50s being happy playing his regular golf at Corrie or Whiting Bay when Shiskine is a shortish drive away. This mindset does not bode well for smaller shoestring clubs anywhere.
I think it is back to the how many rounds do you have to play to be a golfer and of course there is no definitive.I have hardened up to the fact it is no longer sad that a golf course is closing.
There are too many so some must close.
Those closing make the others around it stronger.
Not when golfers continue to give the game up.
I recall reading figures recently that showed the number of active golfers in Scotland had remained stable with just a small reduction in numbers compared to the previous year but that the fall in golfers who were club members continued showing there was no switch across. In England the number of golfers had actually increased which surprised me.
To check out this thesis, today I stopped in at a small town club in Scotland which I'd never seen in my travels. (I had only got to about 10km away before.)
They have nine holes of rugged links terrain with a few houses about. The locker room had 14 lockers; the handicap sheet indicated about 20 full members and 40 seniors. The honesty tray of used golf balls for 20p was a clear indicator.
I fear its time is short and the local golfers will have to drive to the next town 10 minutes up the road to play. A shame really as it is a lovely wee course, and once it's gone, the kids who grow up there will be much less likely to take up golf. The primary school is right next to the clubhouse. Perhaps they will keep two or three holes even if the club folds? One can hope.
I wish I had been there on a busier day to meet some of the members and hear what it means to them.
I believe the threshold was once a month for non member golfers.I don't think there is any rule as such. I consider myself a golfer and I play about 8 times a year, I got lots of mates than play perhaps twice a year they say they play golf.
I think it is back to the how many rounds do you have to play to be a golfer and of course there is no definitive.
There is a distinct pattern though from
eager player to give up/rarely play
= a member of a golf club
play for x years get better/ decent handicap/ win competitions
THEN COMES AN EVENT that changes your lifestyle...say a baby but it could be moving jobs, location lots of different reasons non golfing. YOU FIND THAT YOU ARE NOT ABLE TO PLAY AS MUCH so you stop being a member.
When you play you dont play as well so you dont enjoy it and if you dont enjoy it you dont crave further golf.
YOU ARE STILL A GOLFER BUT you might only play once a year.
STILL AS MANY GOLFERS but distortion of the amount of rounds golfers once played and deep down that is the important figure.
I believe the threshold was once a month for non member golfers.I don't think there is any rule as such.
Tom- In the UK golf is still very cheap as you know, but time is the big killer. If you have a young family its very hard to justify the time to golf as a member (weekly golfer). Most golfers at some stage end up with young families. I don't think its the price in the UK but there also are a lot more distractions these days than in the 70s or 80s. SKY TV eats a lot of some peoples time, internet, a lot more have weekend breaks and all eat into those 52 weekends which dont make membership golf so appealing. A round is 4hrs 15 mins, it used to be 3 hours. Quite a big factor.
I think it is back to the how many rounds do you have to play to be a golfer and of course there is no definitive.
There is a distinct pattern though from
eager player to give up/rarely play
= a member of a golf club
play for x years get better/ decent handicap/ win competitions
THEN COMES AN EVENT that changes your lifestyle...say a baby but it could be moving jobs, location lots of different reasons non golfing. YOU FIND THAT YOU ARE NOT ABLE TO PLAY AS MUCH so you stop being a member.
When you play you dont play as well so you dont enjoy it and if you dont enjoy it you dont crave further golf.
YOU ARE STILL A GOLFER BUT you might only play once a year.
STILL AS MANY GOLFERS but distortion of the amount of rounds golfers once played and deep down that is the important figure.
For many, the EVENT is that they can no longer afford to play so much.
The problem is, too many in the golf business don't care about that. The business-focused goal is to increase total revenue, but they don't care how. They don't care if they drive away a lot of lifelong golfers, as long as there are enough people who will pay 3x as much that they come out ahead. This may be good for their bottom line, but it is killing the sport.
P.S. to Niall: I hope you are right about the little course I saw. I tried to think through the numbers and could not see how it would work except on a purely volunteer-labor maintenance operation, but I'm told they actually still have a greenkeeper, at least part-time. Bless him for fighting the good fight.
In the UK golf is still very cheap as you know, but time is the big killer. If you have a young family its very hard to justify the time to golf as a member (weekly golfer). Most golfers at some stage end up with young families. I don't think its the price in the UK but there also are a lot more distractions these days than in the 70s or 80s. SKY TV eats a lot of some peoples time, internet, a lot more have weekend breaks and all eat into those 52 weekends which dont make membership golf so appealing. A round is 4hrs 15 mins, it used to be 3 hours. Quite a big factor.
Time to play isn’t just a factor for the younger generations either.
I regularly see older folks not want to spend 4+ hrs walking, especially if it’s cold or very warm, the more so if the pace of play is slow. 3+ hrs often seems to be enough for them, and they’ll walk in irrespective of how many holes they’ve played.
Atb
In the UK golf is still very cheap as you know
In the UK golf is still very cheap as you know
I just do not understand how anyone could call golf in the UK cheap .... baffling.
You obviously struggle with basic maths and business sense. The Scots pay about £500 a year for golf. In England it is nearer £1000 for similar standard annual membership golf. The minimum wage is £8.72 in both places from April 1st this year. The cost of fuel is the same, the cost of machines is the same, the chemicals cost the same....So in ABC terms the Scots have priced their product too cheaply and now reap what they have sown... Scottish Clubs are closing fastest.In the UK golf is still very cheap as you know
I just do not understand how anyone could call golf in the UK cheap .... baffling.
I've just looked at the Golf Now chart. These are certainly great prices and I suppose they prove that golf clubs have a huge profit margin at regular prices, if they can go so low without losing money. Certainly, in most countries many would take up the game at those prices.
Ulrich
I've just looked at the Golf Now chart. These are certainly great prices and I suppose they prove that golf clubs have a huge profit margin at regular prices, if they can go so low without losing money. Certainly, in most countries many would take up the game at those prices.Well said Mr W. and it does need to be said because their are a lot on here with their heads burried. If we have unsustainable rates on shops we will have no shops. If we tax beer too high we will have no pubs. The world is full of idiots and many are still in government.
Ulrich
No Ulrich,
what it shows is that many running clubs have as little grasp about the cost of running a golf course as you do. I am sorry if this upsets you but it had to be said.
I've just looked at the Golf Now chart. These are certainly great prices and I suppose they prove that golf clubs have a huge profit margin at regular prices, if they can go so low without losing money. Certainly, in most countries many would take up the game at those prices.
Ulrich
No Ulrich,
what it shows is that many running clubs have as little grasp about the cost of running a golf course as you do. I am sorry if this upsets you but it had to be said.
A basic/simplistic question for the Scots:
Is golf now, and/or has it ever been, Scotland's 'national sport' - or even close to it in any meaningful sense?
Growing up in Toronto/Canada, and from what I can tell still to this day, the reality of hockey being our 'national sport' is expressed constantly and in various ways:
Homemade ice rinks in backyards and local parks; pick up games with old & young and experts & beginners joining in, and with a couple of sets of water bottles serving as goal posts; every new/used sports equipment store chock-full of skates and sticks and pads and helmets; many many leagues (for different skill levels) available to join, and every second friend playing competitively in one of those leagues; hundreds and thousands of broken down 40 and 50 year olds trudging out late at night to local arenas with hockey bags over the shoulders for their weekly men's league (or women's league, or mixed league, or musicians' league) game, which they take very seriously; and most strikingly, street hockey games on dead ends and suburban neighbourhouds all over town -- and throughout the entire year: played in boots during the winter, in running shoes or roller blades during the summer and fall.
Hockey is (or can be, if played seriously and competitively) an expensive sport, and participation rates (from what I read) are indeed dropping, as kids play more soccer and basketball etc. BUT: the 'infrastructure' (rinks and leagues and volunteers etc) is so strong, and the love of the game and its history in (and meaning for) Canadian kids is so well established, that hockey is alive and well here, and I suppose can still be considered our 'national sport'.
Is that something akin to (or instead not at all like) golf in Scotland?
Thanks for any insights. I've often wondered about that but never asked it before.
It's difficult to knock it from their point of view but it doesn't help the traditional golf club model.
To inject a new (and possibly obtuse ;) ) angle to this discussion, I wonder if the failure of Scotland to produce a golfer (either man or woman) in the past 20 years capable of competing at the very highest level of the game has contributed in some way to the decline of golf there.
It's difficult to knock it from their point of view but it doesn't help the traditional golf club model.
But its also the price of clubs, balls etc etc.
Against other sports, its way out of kilter.
So some say golf in Scotland too expensive for the average citizen. Others say golf is too inexpensive for the clubs to sustain themselves. Can both be true?
Not sure on the equipment side. My twins are decent cricketers. One good enough to still harbour ambitions to play professionally. By the time he's fully kitted out, the price isn't far short of the cost of his recently acquired set of clubs. Memberships are less, obviously but after match fees I'm not convinced we spend less on him playing cricket than we do on his golf (he's a U25 member at Crail). I know racket sports and sports like athletics etc may be different but golf is not alone in being expensive.It's difficult to knock it from their point of view but it doesn't help the traditional golf club model.
But its also the price of clubs, balls etc etc.
Against other sports, its way out of kilter.
Mark, as Duncan says there is no need to buy expensive clubs, but I think there is huge pressure on Golfers (especially young golfers) nowadays to conform, from Manufacturers, TV, Magazines etc.Times change. I went to school 15 miles away on a bus when I was 7. Our School Holidays we had no one look after us, we had the key to the house that was all...today it would be bad parenting.
How many times have I heard, that if a Pro. is not playing it, then neither should you?
You now have drivers on the market that cost more than your annual membership!
The days that I grew up with, of cut down clubs and howking for golf balls are well and truly over.
I think the never ending cost of playing golf does make it different.
Compared to the price of ,coffee, cinema, Crossfit,smoking, a few frames of snooker, hiring a five a side football court, it’s great value.
Mark, as Duncan says there is no need to buy expensive clubs, but I think there is huge pressure on Golfers (especially young golfers) nowadays to conform, from Manufacturers, TV, Magazines etc.For his 21st we bought one of our twins a new set of clubs. We did the right thing and got him custom fitted. And he ended up with a reasonably expensive set of clubs. As I mentioned above, he's a decent sportsman and competitive. At no point in the entire process did he ask who played what, or give any indication that he cared at all which pros played which clubs. He was fascinated by the launch monitor data, which is another story but I think we can and often do over-emphasise the power of the brand. To be quite honest I think the membership of this board probably worries more about what Tiger or Dustbin are playing than the average 20 year old.
How many times have I heard, that if a Pro. is not playing it, then neither should you?
Jon,
to me it sounds slightly over-reaching to stipulate that all Scottish clubs that offer greenfee discounts have no clue about their running costs.
Peter Pollotta hits the nail on the head when he says "junior golf is a major ingredient in gtowth"!
Team sports today command the market for the game, whatever it is, in my opinion. Yet golf is not a "team sport" in Scotland, to my knowledge.
Get going Scotland !
As a father of sons who have played, variously, cricket, football, rugby and (field) hockey, I'm afraid to say that team sports in the UK are struggling with participation numbers, too.CRB checking has played a fair role in reducing youngsters participation in sport. The lovely dads that carted me and my friends around are now frightened that a 13 year old will say "you touched me".
It strikes me that team sports are actually struggling more than individual pursuits. The growth areas in sport are cycling and park runs.
People don’t seems to feel the need to “join” things so much these days.
There is sadly also a lot of truth in Adrian’s comment. Junior sport relies on volunteer coaches, referees, and organisers. In today’s world fewer are prepared to get involved.
Running in the park is considered a sport?
Before you judge the current generation too harshly, try to put yourself in thier shoes.
Go wander around outside or engage in one of the nearly countless technological diversions?
I too was a kid before Cable TV, Internet, and Computer games and it was a constant search to find something to keep you occupied, because staying home with Mom and staring at the ceiling was only gonna get you chores and the like.
Did you pass your fees on or did you decide to keep them in your pocket? Asking for a friend.
There was an interview on BBC Radio Scotland yesterday with Eleanor Cannon and she came across really badly. No comment on the lack of progress in the last two years. She lamented that the Scottish Golf organisation was suffering financially because clubs were not passing on the fees they should. She also refused to answer any questions about why they were trying to find the fourth chief executive during the time she has been the chair or why not only had the chief executive had left but also a further two key personnel had resigned.
It is plain to see why there is such disarray.
Did you pass your fees on or did you decide to keep them in your pocket? Asking for a friend.
Did you pass your fees on or did you decide to keep them in your pocket? Asking for a friend.
There was an interview on BBC Radio Scotland yesterday with Eleanor Cannon and she came across really badly. No comment on the lack of progress in the last two years. She lamented that the Scottish Golf organisation was suffering financially because clubs were not passing on the fees they should. She also refused to answer any questions about why they were trying to find the fourth chief executive during the time she has been the chair or why not only had the chief executive had left but also a further two key personnel had resigned.
It is plain to see why there is such disarray.
Jon
There was meant to be an annoucement on Monday gone but it did not happen. Monday May 11th is the date I heard for golf to recommence of golf for England, I have also heard 15th May. Fishing will be the same time along with Bowls and I think Tennis.
Confirmed that if you live or work on a golf course you can play on it.
They cited (after 3 days) that golf is currently not to be played in England under Section 2 schedule of the Covid 19 legislation passed 26th march.(i think)
Social golf only of course with safe distancing.
Are you likely to be making any announcements about your plans for 2020 or 2021?
Crowdfunding and donations and the like brings up another related issue ... membership subscription levels.
Say a Club through the generosity of others (ie non-members) raises £20,000 and say the Club has 400 members.
That £20,000 is the equivalent of £50 per member, or £1 per member per week for a year, which doesn't seem a lot.
Seems like something maybe isn't right with the basis behind the Club subscription levels if this kind of outside funding is required. Even, in the above example, if the Club only had 200 members then £20,000 is only £2 per member per week, which still isn't much.
Just saying.
atb
Sean,
that is because golf clubs in the UK are historically member's clubs and that is how member's clubs are usually operated regardless of whether it is golf, football, model railways, etc.... The price is where the product and market dictate it should be.
I would think old fashioned competitive forces kept prices down as well. Why pay double for the place across town when the one nearby is both more convenient and half the price.
Seems to me, this is just a one-off scenario that few clubs could have reasonably predicted. Perhaps the onus is on the members to understand how cheap they've had it over the years and dig deeper now to keep the club a going concern. Then when business as normal is restored, they can go back to fleecing the yanks...
I would think old fashioned competitive forces kept prices down as well. Why pay double for the place across town when the one nearby is both more convenient and half the price.
Ok, I didn't advocate double the dues 🙄. Just 50 quid a year for each member over 20 years adds up for small clubs. Instead, it's been a hand to mouth approach.
Ciao
Most 18 hole Golf Courses in the UK are run as proper business's now and they understand that there needs to be a cash reserve. I like to run at £300,000 in the bank in the summer, the winters can wipe you out though. It is not easy to build up a reserve some years and tough competition from other clubs pricing can dictate what you charge.
This winter was obviously one of the worst ever so many clubs funds would have been wiped out. Many clubs would have lost members because of the winter. Funds will be at a low level atm.
Northern Clubs are much worse off than the Southern ones, prices are often 60% of the South, yet the run cost with min wage can't be significant cheaper because of government rules.
Basically, we still have too many golf courses. Casualties will be sky high now unless there is a government bail out. Our projected losses are £389,000 for the year to March 2021. We will run out of money between October and December.
Most 18 hole Golf Courses in the UK are run as proper business's now and they understand that there needs to be a cash reserve. I like to run at £300,000 in the bank in the summer, the winters can wipe you out though. It is not easy to build up a reserve some years and tough competition from other clubs pricing can dictate what you charge.
This winter was obviously one of the worst ever so many clubs funds would have been wiped out. Many clubs would have lost members because of the winter. Funds will be at a low level atm.
Northern Clubs are much worse off than the Southern ones, prices are often 60% of the South, yet the run cost with min wage can't be significant cheaper because of government rules.
Basically, we still have too many golf courses. Casualties will be sky high now unless there is a government bail out. Our projected losses are £389,000 for the year to March 2021. We will run out of money between October and December.
Clubs are certainly being run in a more businesslike manner than in days gone by when the Hon Sec came in to sort through correspondence a couple of mornings a week.
Building up reserves is an unrealistic dream for most at the moment though. Minimizing losses and survival are the main concerns.
I do not see any possibility of a government bailout for golf clubs. I am sure that the government will take the view that if a club goes bust the course will still be there, and that another owner will take it over, therefore preserving both the facility and most of the jobs involved. A consortium of affluent members phoenixing the club minus its debts is a likely phenomenon.
If no new owner steps forward to take over the golf course, useful potential building land and/or a public green space will be released. I can see a lot of third tier members' clubs in suburban areas selling up to a developer before the liquidator arrives - whether or not planning permission is in place.
It makes no political or financial sense for the government to bail out loss making golf clubs, whether they be member owned or proprietary.
At Cavendish we would have run out of money in July. Hence the immediate regime change and the launch of the crowdfunding appeal. It seems to be working. Halfway through the appeal we have achieved our initial target and donations continue to flood in. With the rewards on offer many of these are in effect advance payments on green fees or new memberships, but what the heck? :)
Reserves, as Sean noted, should be part of any budget for anyone and everything just about. Unfortunately what happens if not done religiously, is that you find your club will need to take on debt. Now, not only does it make it harder to squirrel away money for reserves to pay down the debt, but you are doing so with interest on top of that.Most 18 hole Golf Courses in the UK are run as proper business's now and they understand that there needs to be a cash reserve. I like to run at £300,000 in the bank in the summer, the winters can wipe you out though. It is not easy to build up a reserve some years and tough competition from other clubs pricing can dictate what you charge.
This winter was obviously one of the worst ever so many clubs funds would have been wiped out. Many clubs would have lost members because of the winter. Funds will be at a low level atm.
Northern Clubs are much worse off than the Southern ones, prices are often 60% of the South, yet the run cost with min wage can't be significant cheaper because of government rules.
Basically, we still have too many golf courses. Casualties will be sky high now unless there is a government bail out. Our projected losses are £389,000 for the year to March 2021. We will run out of money between October and December.
Clubs are certainly being run in a more businesslike manner than in days gone by when the Hon Sec came in to sort through correspondence a couple of mornings a week.
Building up reserves is an unrealistic dream for most at the moment though. Minimizing losses and survival are the main concerns.
I do not see any possibility of a government bailout for golf clubs. I am sure that the government will take the view that if a club goes bust the course will still be there, and that another owner will take it over, therefore preserving both the facility and most of the jobs involved. A consortium of affluent members phoenixing the club minus its debts is a likely phenomenon.
If no new owner steps forward to take over the golf course, useful potential building land and/or a public green space will be released. I can see a lot of third tier members' clubs in suburban areas selling up to a developer before the liquidator arrives - whether or not planning permission is in place.
It makes no political or financial sense for the government to bail out loss making golf clubs, whether they be member owned or proprietary.
At Cavendish we would have run out of money in July. Hence the immediate regime change and the launch of the crowdfunding appeal. It seems to be working. Halfway through the appeal we have achieved our initial target and donations continue to flood in. With the rewards on offer many of these are in effect advance payments on green fees or new memberships, but what the heck? :)
Duncan
Again, a policy of building reserves should have happened during the fat years of waiting lists. I was in the UK at the time and vividly recall members at AGMs being shouted down for such a suggestion. Of course, it makes complete sense. When times are good money should get put away for the long term health of a club. I still maintain that even now, when budgets are debated, the idea of reserves should be on the table to at least discuss.
Ciao
Jeff- That is not really the 'English Way' clubs don't take on debt unless they hold some strong assetts ie the land. Most courses are on rented land and many clubs operate as break even. Hardly anyone makes donations in sizeable amounts to golf clubs.Reserves, as Sean noted, should be part of any budget for anyone and everything just about. Unfortunately what happens if not done religiously, is that you find your club will need to take on debt. Now, not only does it make it harder to squirrel away money for reserves to pay down the debt, but you are doing so with interest on top of that.Most 18 hole Golf Courses in the UK are run as proper business's now and they understand that there needs to be a cash reserve. I like to run at £300,000 in the bank in the summer, the winters can wipe you out though. It is not easy to build up a reserve some years and tough competition from other clubs pricing can dictate what you charge.
This winter was obviously one of the worst ever so many clubs funds would have been wiped out. Many clubs would have lost members because of the winter. Funds will be at a low level atm.
Northern Clubs are much worse off than the Southern ones, prices are often 60% of the South, yet the run cost with min wage can't be significant cheaper because of government rules.
Basically, we still have too many golf courses. Casualties will be sky high now unless there is a government bail out. Our projected losses are £389,000 for the year to March 2021. We will run out of money between October and December.
Clubs are certainly being run in a more businesslike manner than in days gone by when the Hon Sec came in to sort through correspondence a couple of mornings a week.
Building up reserves is an unrealistic dream for most at the moment though. Minimizing losses and survival are the main concerns.
I do not see any possibility of a government bailout for golf clubs. I am sure that the government will take the view that if a club goes bust the course will still be there, and that another owner will take it over, therefore preserving both the facility and most of the jobs involved. A consortium of affluent members phoenixing the club minus its debts is a likely phenomenon.
If no new owner steps forward to take over the golf course, useful potential building land and/or a public green space will be released. I can see a lot of third tier members' clubs in suburban areas selling up to a developer before the liquidator arrives - whether or not planning permission is in place.
It makes no political or financial sense for the government to bail out loss making golf clubs, whether they be member owned or proprietary.
At Cavendish we would have run out of money in July. Hence the immediate regime change and the launch of the crowdfunding appeal. It seems to be working. Halfway through the appeal we have achieved our initial target and donations continue to flood in. With the rewards on offer many of these are in effect advance payments on green fees or new memberships, but what the heck? :)
Duncan
Again, a policy of building reserves should have happened during the fat years of waiting lists. I was in the UK at the time and vividly recall members at AGMs being shouted down for such a suggestion. Of course, it makes complete sense. When times are good money should get put away for the long term health of a club. I still maintain that even now, when budgets are debated, the idea of reserves should be on the table to at least discuss.
Ciao
Debt for many private clubs in the US is typical and will be moreso probably in the next couple years. If initiation fees are used properly, for capital projects while gaining a modest return while deposited, then debt won't be a necessity for capital projects.
I have no idea of the tax laws in the UK, but here is a question please.........Do you have the allowance for tax deductible donations from your yearly taxes to charities? If so can a club be designated as a national historic landmark, create a non-profit charity to support it's preservation and historical significance? Then the donations made to such entity would have the additional benefit of helping individuals with lowering their own taxable income, while helping a historic club.
They have traditionally kept subscriptions low, because locals can't afford to play the high fees that visitors cheerfully fork over. So they end up in a double bind- because country or foreign members almost always pay nearly the same subscription as locals, when they visit they generate food, beverage and shop revenue but no golf fees.This is nonsense, except in the case of, perhaps, the top 10% of clubs. I belong to three UK clubs. At Crail, they do encourage and benefit from plenty of overseas (and other UK) visitors. They also have a very large membership, encouraged by a low subscription. Of the 1500 members, more than half don't live within an hour's drive and very many are overseas (paying the same regular subscription (around £400) as the locals). The Golf House Club also does well out of overseas visitors (and even better since the course became better known thanks to, among others, the No Laying Up crowd). Membership is strong and more than half the membership is, again, not local. Most, though (like us) are regular visitors to Fife. Visitor numbers are lower in peak season as the course is very busy with member play. Subs are about twice what I pay at Crail.
I'd be really interested to hear what proportion of the income at great clubs such as Hollinwell (it's going to be hard to call Notts that), Cavendish and Silloth comes from overseas visitors and non-local visitors. I suspect very little, even in those cases.
At £428 for full local membership the club have clearly had zero contingency for loss of visitor income. More fool people paying £10k to sponsor cheap golf for the locals.
I'd be really interested to hear what proportion of the income at great clubs such as Hollinwell (it's going to be hard to call Notts that), Cavendish and Silloth comes from overseas visitors and non-local visitors. I suspect very little, even in those cases.
I guess it depends how you define "non-local".
Cavendish and Silloth are both highly dependent on visitor income to supplement a relatively low membership base from their immediate area.
Nearly half of Cavendish's income is from green fees - the bulk of that involving visiting societies from within an hour or so's driving distance, a potential market of 5 million people. "Local" in Buxton means 10 minutes driving distance!
I don't yet know the figures at Silloth but I imagine that the situation reflects that at other remote links courses whereby a small local membership paying a low annual subscription is made sustainable by a large number of visitors paying a green fee that is high in proportion to the annual subs. Silloth's realistic catchment area for visitors is far wider than Cavendish's - up to two and a half hours drive, making up a market of some 20 million people.
Silloth and Cavendish have distinct similarities in that they are each seen as possibly the best quality "affordable" course for visiting parties within their respective catchments. Both are nudging up their green fees slowly but surely after years of being "too cheap". I suspect that the more they go up (within reason) the more visitors will be attracted. Membership at both meanwhile, is an absolute bargain. 8)
Hollinwell is a different beast entirely. A high-end club with a magnificent course financed principally by members paying a high annual subscription for their golfing oasis relatively close to their homes and professional lives in the East Midlands. I am sure that visitor income is a very welcome boost to the coffers at Hollinwell, but I am equally sure that if push came to shove they could manage perfectly well without it. That Hollinwell too are nudging up their green fee has not gone unnoticed. It's now £110!
International money tends to go to specific areas such as Surrey, Kent, Lancashire, Ayrshire, Lothian, Fife, and Dornoch. The three clubs mentioned will pick up bits and pieces, but are not on the main trial.
This is a thread about Scottish golf, but I suspect that the varying models of these three English clubs are recognisable in Scotland too. There are almost as many models as there are golf clubs!
Which tends to support my earlier assertion that while jolly handy, visitor income is not essential to a club such as Hollinwell.
The same would be true of the more elite clubs around all major cities. Not all have particularly noteworthy golf courses.
Clubs such as Silloth, Cavendish, Harlech, Machrihanish and Dornoch however, are absolutely reliant on visitor income. There are simply not enough chimney pots in the immediate vicinity to support such a golf club via membership subs alone.
Most of those clubs will have more than 240 members, though, won't they? And they'd almost certainly make some cuts, too. But your point is good, £240k is pretty significant for a business turning over £1.3m.Which tends to support my earlier assertion that while jolly handy, visitor income is not essential to a club such as Hollinwell.
The same would be true of the more elite clubs around all major cities. Not all have particularly noteworthy golf courses.
Clubs such as Silloth, Cavendish, Harlech, Machrihanish and Dornoch however, are absolutely reliant on visitor income. There are simply not enough chimney pots in the immediate vicinity to support such a golf club via membership subs alone.
Albeit they would show a deficit of £240k If you took away the visitor income. (Plus F&B, Minus admin).
I’m sure they would be fine but it would mean an additional £1k on the annual subs. I’m sure they’d have no shortage of takers, but Clubs in their position can have the best of both worlds, low prices for members, high end quality.
https://www.scotsman.com/sport/golf/scottish-golf-clubs-urged-be-accurate-membership-numbers-2994476
Scottish golf clubs urged to be 'accurate' with membership numbers
By Martin Dempster
Tuesday, 6th October 2020
The plea has been made by Scottish Golf's chief operating officer, Karin Sharp, as the deadline looms for affiliated clubs to report annual membership figures to the governing body.
That figure determines how much Scottish Golf is due by each club through the £14.50 affiliation fee paid by club golfers as part of their annual subscription.
A number of clubs around the country have enjoyed a rise in membership this year, including Moray Golf Club in Lossiemouth, where over 300 new members have been signed up.
That boost alone should see an additional £4,000 go into Scottish Golf's coffers, with Sharp stressing the importance of "accurate" recording in an email to clubs.
"As we use the information to inform progress against investment targets and to track membership in golf clubs, it is important that the return is accurate and includes all adult members with playing rights, irrespective of how often they access the club and/or whether they have an official handicap," she said.
"Whilst the per capita fee does not apply to your junior members or social members, we do ask for accurate data on both these categories as we use this for other purposes, most significantly in applications we make to external funders for support of the junior game.
"We are aware that there have previously been incidences of clubs failing to submit accurate or consistent data which has a direct impact on our ability to invest in the game across Scotland.
"Therefore, we ask that you ensure the accuracy of your return and please be aware that we will be checking returns against those previously submitted and other publicly available data.
"We are not looking to penalise past errors in submission, but we are looking to ensure accuracy in these and future returns. Tracking and understanding the membership landscape across Scotland is critical at a time when we are working hard to position the importance of the industry to the economy."
After golf clubs went into lockdown earlier in the year, Scottish Golf came up with a support package worth more than £575,000 by way of a refund or a rebate on affiliation fees for last year.
Now the governing body is considering offering further help to clubs hit by Covid-19 through "extended" payment plans for this year.
"Whilst we know that a number of clubs have benefitted from increased membership following the easing of lockdown, we are also acutely aware of the perilous financial situation a large number of clubs are still facing with the continued uncertainty caused by Covid-19," added Sharp.
"Therefore, we are providing all clubs with the option to spread payments over a longer-term than previously has been offered."
“To assist clubs with planning and potentially to access extended payment plan terms, we are looking for all club data to be returned no later than 14 October 2020.
"Payment plans will be offered once the returns have been validated and the invoice issued, which will commence from November 2020 if the submission deadline has been met."
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/18882508.glasgow-golf-course-become-urban-farm/ (https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/18882508.glasgow-golf-course-become-urban-farm/)
But perhaps the most visible sign of the re-greening of Glasgow could be the city’s first urban farm. GCFN and its partner organisations want to use some of the National Lottery money to convert one of the five municipal golf courses currently under threat of closure to realise this. They are Linn Park, Lethamhill, Littlehill, Alexandra Park and Ruchill.
“We urgently need to upscale urban food production in the city and localise our food systems,” said Mordin. “If we can persuade Glasgow City Council to release one of the surplus golf courses it would be just amazing because it would enable large-scale urban agriculture and vegetable growing, facilitate training and apprenticeships in animal husbandry, beekeeping, vegetable growing and so forth. How exciting if – ahead of COP26 – the city can boast that it has its first urban farm.”
Sad to see Letham Grange go.
Have many good memories of that place. It really was the “Augusta” of Scotland for us when it opened. Seems very choked by trees now, though.
Ben
I was a member there for a couple of years. The second 18 was nothing to write home about, but the Old Course was very fine of its type. I first played it back in 1987 and it was the most exciting course I had yet seen in my young life (17 then). The 'Augusta of Scotland' tag was well earned and the stretch of holes from 8-10 through the rhododendron groves and over the lakes was purposely built to mimic Augusta in style.
I enjoyed my time there, especially the long hazy summer evenings, when I would play by myself until the dusk descended. I never thought that the last time I drove out of the gates would be the last time I played there. It was always a course I wanted to go back to. I'm very sad to hear it is now consigned to history. It deserves better than that, but suffered from having a complete wanker for an owner. I'd like to slap him hard.
When they built the new course, they commandeered the old 9th and 10th through the trees and built a new 16 & 17 for The Old Course... I liked the original routing best.
Tax Payer bailing out Gleneagles with £5 million of furlough money ... WOW!Of which £3.9m was as part of the Covid job retention scheme, so went to employees who would otherwise have been redundant. I'm not sure there's any "Wow" to this news, which surely replicates the sort of amount paid to any large hospitality business with similar numbers of employees as Gleneagles.
I agree, it will be pretty standard for anything based on making its money via overseas visitors. 2021 will be difficult as well as many people find it difficult to make overseas travel plans the dry side of October. The furlough scheme is great for the employee but generally companies have not been given much. Overall I would say the government have done pretty good in keeping things alive, the only thing that really seems to have gone bust is the retail shops, which were on a knife edge before with the impact of online shopping.Tax Payer bailing out Gleneagles with £5 million of furlough money ... WOW!Of which £3.9m was as part of the Covid job retention scheme, so went to employees who would otherwise have been redundant. I'm not sure there's any "Wow" to this news, which surely replicates the sort of amount paid to any large hospitality business with similar numbers of employees as Gleneagles.
Of which £3.9m was as part of the Covid job retention scheme, so went to employees who would otherwise have been redundant. I'm not sure there's any "Wow" to this news, which surely replicates the sort of amount paid to any large hospitality business with similar numbers of employees as Gleneagles.
Of which £3.9m was as part of the Covid job retention scheme, so went to employees who would otherwise have been redundant. I'm not sure there's any "Wow" to this news, which surely replicates the sort of amount paid to any large hospitality business with similar numbers of employees as Gleneagles.
I still read it as £5 million for furloughing.
I guess its all down to personal circumstances, and I am not a believer in furloughing, and certainly not to bail out places like Gleneagles.
Will soon need to change the thread title to Scotland is sinking fast.
And of course, lets not forget the £4.6m paid out in dividends during this period.
WOW
Of which £3.9m was as part of the Covid job retention scheme, so went to employees who would otherwise have been redundant. I'm not sure there's any "Wow" to this news, which surely replicates the sort of amount paid to any large hospitality business with similar numbers of employees as Gleneagles.
I still read it as £5 million for furloughing.
I guess its all down to personal circumstances, and I am not a believer in furloughing, and certainly not to bail out places like Gleneagles.
Will soon need to change the thread title to Scotland is sinking fast.
To be honest, I'm surprised to find anyone who thinks the furlough scheme was a bad idea.Mark fully agree. Let us not forget what the alternative would have been. Some projections in the US had unemployment as high as 30% without the paycheck protection program. It was successful in keeping employees from separating from their jobs and then going on unemployment. Yes it was costly, but such are interventions to address once in a 100 year pandemics. Pay now and figure out the finances later.
https://www.scotsman.com/sport/golf/eastwood-golf-club-on-brink-of-closure-1-4925360 (https://www.scotsman.com/sport/golf/eastwood-golf-club-on-brink-of-closure-1-4925360)
Eastwood Golf Club on brink of closure
MARTIN DEMPSTER
Saturday 11 May 2019
Eastwood Golf Club on the outskirts of Glasgow is close to becoming the latest Scottish club to be forced to shut its doors due to dwindling membership.