[Jim_Kennedy]

Carl,

So the $1.50 trail fee really should be seen as what it is, another revenue enhancer, period.

[Roger Wolfe]

Carl,

So the $1.50 trail fee really should be seen as what it is, another revenue enhancer, period.

Every club has a bucket.  Dues, carts, guest fees, locker fees, storage fees, F&B revenue all go in the bucket... payroll and operating expenses all come out.  At the end of the year you hope the bucket has just a few bucks left over.  The challenge is to figure out how much each member has to put in the bucket !!

Like Mucci said to me a long time ago... the best clubs are dictatorships where you just divide the bucket up at the end of the year by the number of members.  The trick is to get enough members to agree to this system.

PS.  Of course this assumes you are lucky like we are and your entry fees can go into a capital account... independent of operations.

[Brent Hutto]

At our club the "usage fee" serves two purposes. It generates $3 times how many ever walking rounds are played in a year of annual revenue (so I'd ballpark well over $40,000 dollars/year) and it slightly placates the members who seldom play golf and who resent the frequent golfers who they feel insufficient "support" the dining and ballroom. Doesn't shut 'em up though.

For my part, it costs me a couple hundred bucks a years which is a nearly insignificant part of my total expenditures. Looked at another way, I pay about $10-$20/month more than members who seldom play golf but I pay $30-$50 less per month than the retired guys who play every day. That seems perfectly fair to me but I realize by the standards of this forum that makes me some sort of pinko lefty godless commie or something.

[Garland Bayley]

...I think the free cart fee is the future of our industry... not
the "walkers fee."  Anything you do to punish the heavy users of your facility is a bad thing... service charges
on food... cart fees... trail fees.  The additional fees simply give your members another reason NOT to
come out and enjoy the club.

Do you realize how many golfers silently boycott golf courses where the "cart is free"?
 

The problem is that the "CART FEE" exists or existed in the first place.  You open a NEW club and tell everyone carts are included... there will be absolutely no fuss.  Noone will ever notice.  Don't you think?

Maybe I'm not following what you mean, but certainly all the golfers that will not ever consider joining such a club noticed when they ruled it out.

[Jamey Bryan]

With all respect, Garland is way out of line on this.  Many years ago, my club examined the dues/"trail fee"/cart fee issue fairly comprehensively.  Our situation may not be typical.....  we have a large number of "seasonal" members who play frequently when in town but who live primarily some distance away.....

Our analysis started with the "required revenue" (fixed cost, debt service, and basic maintenance).  The first reduction was then cart revenue (calculated at 25% return over fully burdened cost), then dues.  The "service" or "trail" fee was then calculated to cover the difference.

In no way can it be assumed that "Cartballers" are subsidizing walkers (or vice versa).  In our situation, the cart users are paying a very good return to the club for the use of a cart.!  A nominal fee per round to cover the cost of fixing ball marks, working bunkers, filling divots, etc. is not out of line for playing a round of golf.

Jamey

[Bill_McBride]

Roger's point was correct.

If a club leases 40 carts for a 10 month season it's going to cost them about $70.00 per month, less fuel, ins., etc.., but let's round it up to $1,000 per cart per season, or 40k. Divide that by 10 months, and it's 4k per month, or 133.33 a day. If there are as many riders as some people say then that number should be a piece of cake for most clubs to handle.

Cart Assessment
134 members - $1.00 each per day during the season
268     "        -     .50  "

Giving the carts away should be a no-brainer at a private club, even in a 6 month season.   

You mean if there is offsetting revenue, right? 

I for one would object to an across the board increase to subsidize the people who ride all the time when I walk 75% of the time during the course of a 12 month year.  Why should I accept that kind of inequity?

[Lou_Duran]

Why is it that a pricing system that has a relationship to the use of something is so totally unacceptable?  Should the guy who plays 100 times a year be subsidized by the guy who only plays five times a year by charging him the same price?  Apparently so.

Maybe clubs should take the food minimum all the way and charge food minimums of $5,000 a year and then you can eat and drink all you want and never get a bill.  I'd like that pricing system because I'd never leave the bar and drink some darn nice scotch all night every night.  And I'd eat a lot of steak.  And a big thank you to the people who don't drink and are vegetarian.  If the argument is that there is a high fixed cost for the course, I'd bet when you figure in all of the fixed costs of running a F&B facility, it's probably not as far off from the course as you think.

Scott,

When a club is running close to capacity, the member who never visits but still pays dues is highly valued.  One of our regulars (120+ rounds per year) went from creating maintenance videos for a national company to starting his own production business with his former employer becoming a major client.  He was so busy that he stopped playing golf, but his facility was a few doors down so he used the club to have lunch a few times each week.  His accountant paid all the bills and he was making money in baskets, so who cared.  More clubs should have a couple hundred of such members.

BTW, have you been consulting with the current administration? Your F & B strategy sure sounds like the new socialized medical scheme being sold to the unwashed, except the details about costs are obfuscated, and, if you believe the marketing, it ain't most of us who are going to pay for the scotch and the steak.  Want to bet that we won't soon be standing in line for 2 oz. soyburgers and watered-down Kool-aid?

Jamey,

You are absolutely right.  I've been involved in too many "average the bill and pass the hat" situations.  Though dues are supposed to cover the lion's share of running the club, I have no trouble at all with spreading the cost to those who incur it.  For clubs that do not have a profit motive, I would be for pricing carts to break-even and raising dues accordingly.  And I prefer to walk nearly always.  A per round charge to make it "fairer" for the under-consumers would be fine with me.  Unfortunately, balance is nearly impossible to achieve.   

[Roger Wolfe]

...I think the free cart fee is the future of our industry... not
the "walkers fee."  Anything you do to punish the heavy users of your facility is a bad thing... service charges
on food... cart fees... trail fees.  The additional fees simply give your members another reason NOT to
come out and enjoy the club.

Do you realize how many golfers silently boycott golf courses where the "cart is free"?
 

The problem is that the "CART FEE" exists or existed in the first place.  You open a NEW club and tell everyone carts are included... there will be absolutely no fuss.  Noone will ever notice.  Don't you think?

Maybe I'm not following what you mean, but certainly all the golfers that will not ever consider joining such a club noticed when they ruled it out.

Garland... you and I agree on one thing... from my earlier post... "Finding enough members to agree to join a club where you just split things up at the end of the year is tough to do."  Must be the "silent boycotters" syndrome.

My point earlier was that if carts had always been free... there would never be a fuss about NOT paying for them now. 

Just like paying for luggage on airlines.  It was always free before... now it isn't.  If you always had to pay for it... instead of the cost of baggage handlers, additional fuel for additional weight, baggage claim expenses being evened out among ALL travelers... we wouldn't be having this discussion.

100 years of golf pros owning the cart concession... that is why we have the system we have today.  Courses cannot exist without walkers... courses cannot exist without carts.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Sbusch,
I went on a week's long trip to Myrtle with a couple of friends and a few guys from Taconic GC. One of the fellows from TGC was a retired General (a tank man) and he and his old adjutant ran the show. He collected $200.00 each on the first day, bought everyone a bottle of their favorite liquor, and used the rest as an expense account. At lunch on the second day one of the guys told the General that he thought the whole idea was unfair because he (the guy) liked to have a salad at lunch while everyone else was ordering steak sandwiches, etc.. Without missing a chew the General told him "learn to like steak", and that was the end of that.

My kinda guy.


Bill McBride,
I was just trying to use those numbers as an example. Some folks were blaming riders for the sinful extortion of the $1.50 'trail fee' and I don't see it that way.

[Bill_McBride]

Sbusch,
I went on a week's long trip to Myrtle with a couple of friends and a few guys from Taconic GC. One of the fellows from TGC was a retired General (a tank man) and he and his old adjutant ran the show. He collected $200.00 each on the first day, bought everyone a bottle of their favorite liquor, and used the rest as an expense account. At lunch on the second day one of the guys told the General that he thought the whole idea was unfair because he (the guy) liked to have a salad at lunch while everyone else was ordering steak sandwiches, etc.. Without missing a chew the General told him "learn to like steak", and that was the end of that.

My kinda guy.


Bill McBride,
I was just trying to use those numbers as an example. Some folks were blaming riders for the sinful extortion of the $1.50 'trail fee' and I don't see it that way.

Jim, I wasn't reacting to the numbers but to the principle.  To me there's no way the carts should be "free" if use is disproportionate.

[Carl Nichols]

Sbusch,
I went on a week's long trip to Myrtle with a couple of friends and a few guys from Taconic GC. One of the fellows from TGC was a retired General (a tank man) and he and his old adjutant ran the show. He collected $200.00 each on the first day, bought everyone a bottle of their favorite liquor, and used the rest as an expense account. At lunch on the second day one of the guys told the General that he thought the whole idea was unfair because he (the guy) liked to have a salad at lunch while everyone else was ordering steak sandwiches, etc.. Without missing a chew the General told him "learn to like steak", and that was the end of that.

My kinda guy.


Bill McBride,
I was just trying to use those numbers as an example. Some folks were blaming riders for the sinful extortion of the $1.50 'trail fee' and I don't see it that way.

Jim, I wasn't reacting to the numbers but to the principle.  To me there's no way the carts should be "free" if use is disproportionate.

Bill:
Why are carts different from the course itself, the use of which is surely disproportionate (indeed, I would suspect highly disproportionate)s? 

[Bill_McBride]

Use of the course is not optional.  The use of a cart is not.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Bill,
The club outlays XXX dollars to lease or buy carts and the members who use those carts pay for them. Some of those members may be need to use a cart, but that's another question.
As the season progresses the club doesn't stop charging for carts once it recoups it investment, or all of its other costs related to those carts. So if, as Jamey suggested was the case at his club, there is a 25% return to the club, then who reaps that benefit? In essence you, the walker, are required to take less money out of your pocket on a yearly basis because the riders are generating a profit center for the club. Of course, by renting the cart they may be saving themselves from a year-end assessment too, but I think you get my point. 

Asking the walker to pay $1.50 seems fair, doesn't it?   

[Carl Nichols]

Use of the course is not optional.  The use of a cart is not.

But the amount of use is entirely optional.  At every dues-only club the guys who play once a month (or less frequently) are subsidizing the guys who play daily, just like walkers would be subsidizing cart-ballers under the Wolfe/Evensky plans. 

[Bill_McBride]

Use of the course is not optional.  The use of a cart is not.

But the amount of use is entirely optional.  At every dues-only club the guys who play once a month (or less frequently) are subsidizing the guys who play daily, just like walkers would be subsidizing cart-ballers under the Wolfe/Evensky plans. 

That's okay, your monthly dues give you unlimited use of the course.  If you want to add a cart to that, you pay "a la carte."  No pun intended.

At a public access course, the a la carte menu starts with the green fee.

Two different business models.

[Bill_McBride]

Bill,
The club outlays XXX dollars to lease or buy carts and the members who use those carts pay for them. Some of those members may be need to use a cart, but that's another question.
As the season progresses the club doesn't stop charging for carts once it recoups it investment, or all of its other costs related to those carts. So if, as Jamey suggested was the case at his club, there is a 25% return to the club, then who reaps that benefit? In essence you, the walker, are required to take less money out of your pocket on a yearly basis because the riders are generating a profit center for the club. Of course, by renting the cart they may be saving themselves from a year-end assessment too, but I think you get my point. 

Asking the walker to pay $1.50 seems fair, doesn't it?   

I just want the club to break even or build reserves.  I don't want to get any more nickled-and-dimed than I already am.  I would prefer to pay an additional $xx a month in dues than pay $1.50 to walk. 

Is it $0.75 to walk nine holes?

[Carl Nichols]

Use of the course is not optional.  The use of a cart is not.

But the amount of use is entirely optional.  At every dues-only club the guys who play once a month (or less frequently) are subsidizing the guys who play daily, just like walkers would be subsidizing cart-ballers under the Wolfe/Evensky plans. 

That's okay, your monthly dues give you unlimited use of the course.  If you want to add a cart to that, you pay "a la carte."  No pun intended.

Sure, but you could just as easily create a system (the Wolfe/Evansky plan) where your monthly dues give you unlimited use of the course and carts.  You object to that because walkers would be subsidizing cart riders, but the monthly dues system is already one in which there's heavy subsidization.  What is it about adding carts to the mix that makes it objectionable?

[Bill_McBride]

Use of the course is not optional.  The use of a cart is not.

But the amount of use is entirely optional.  At every dues-only club the guys who play once a month (or less frequently) are subsidizing the guys who play daily, just like walkers would be subsidizing cart-ballers under the Wolfe/Evensky plans.  

That's okay, your monthly dues give you unlimited use of the course.  If you want to add a cart to that, you pay "a la carte."  No pun intended.

Sure, but you could just as easily create a system (the Wolfe/Evansky plan) where your monthly dues give you unlimited use of the course and carts.  You object to that because walkers would be subsidizing cart riders, but the monthly dues system is already one in which there's heavy subsidization.  What is it about adding carts to the mix that makes it objectionable?

Why would I want a fee structure that has a higher monthly cost so that I can subsidize players who want to ride?  That doesn't make any sense to me at all.  I think that just increases cart use which increases wear and tear on the golf course, and, with a nod to Melvyn, helps deteriorate the traditional golf that we here on GCA.com profess to love.

My monthly dues provide for unlimited rounds of golf for me and my wife too.

Carts are optional, the fees should be too.

Please understand this is just my personal opinion as a private club member who likes to walk whenever possible on our extremely walkable course.  Repeated hammering is not going to change my opinion!

Waterboarding might! 

[Carl Nichols]

Bill:
I'm not trying to change your mind about what you'd prefer, given your situation!  I'm just pointing out that your argument is the same argument that could be made about most, if not all, activities/amenities that a club offers.  Put another way, if you're starting a club from scratch and deciding what things at a club will be covered by monthly dues vs. those that will be a la carte, I don't think that just stating something is optional means it has to be in the a la carte bucket (or vice versa).  After all, members at a lot of UK clubs pay for each round of golf they play, and even at some U.S. clubs, you have to pay for each bucket you hit on the range. 

I think you're right that such a system would increase cart use [and I agree that would be a negative], but Roger seems to think the opposite.   

[Bill_McBride]

Bill:
I'm not trying to change your mind about what you'd prefer, given your situation!  I'm just pointing out that your argument is the same argument that could be made about most, if not all, activities/amenities that a club offers.  Put another way, if you're starting a club from scratch and deciding what things at a club will be covered by monthly dues vs. those that will be a la carte, I don't think that just stating something is optional means it has to be in the a la carte bucket (or vice versa).  After all, members at a lot of UK clubs pay for each round of golf they play, and even at some U.S. clubs, you have to pay for each bucket you hit on the range.  

I think you're right that such a system would increase cart use [and I agree that would be a negative], but Roger seems to think the opposite.  

I don't think UK clubs charge by the round.  You pay a ridiculously low annual subscription and that's it.  You do pay a few quid to rent a trolley although most seem to have their own.

We all pay a flat fee per month that provides unlimited range balls and handicapping service.  I belonged to a club in Northern Virginia where we paid by the bag for range balls and that pissed me off too.

We pay by the month for our lockers, which are optional.  Since we initially paid several hundred dollars for our lockers when they were new, I assume the monthly fee pays for the clubhouse attendant, toiletries, etc.  There's another example where those who choose to use a locker subsidize those who don't.   Shoe service is optional.

I think it's the fairest way to do things.  I'm not on the board anymore (thank God) so don't know how the alternative fee structures might affect our bottom line.  The one thing I know for sure is I'm not in favor of subsidizing the cart riders, particularly if that incentivizes some to ride who might otherwise walk.

[Garland Bayley]

With all respect, Garland is way out of line on this.  Many years ago, my club examined the dues/"trail fee"/cart fee issue fairly comprehensively.  ...

What am I out of line on? Perhaps trail fee has a different meaning in different parts of the country. Around here whenever I have seen mention of it, it was a fee exclusively applied to carts. Your sentence above seems to separate it from cart fees. What does trail fee mean to you? Why don't you mention green fees?

[Garland Bayley]

...
Bill:
Why are carts different from the course itself, the use of which is surely disproportionate (indeed, I would suspect highly disproportionate)s? 

I'm not Bill, but carts are different than the course itself, because carts do a huge amount of damage to the course. You guys can talk about the cost to the club to rent the carts all you want. But you are not talking about the true cost of carts.

The USGA says that practically everyone in the golf business far underestimates the cost of carts.

[Matthew Hunt]

I may just me coming from Ireland, yet this is close to the most ridiculous idea I ever seen on this site. Carts, range balls and food are all secondary products at a golf club (or they shouldn’t be), but I play my dues to access the clubs core product which is golf. You don’t pay your fees to put the clubs name on your resume and then think about the golf  as an afterthought. Should to I really have to pay again for the privilege of using my own two feet?

[Ryan Admussen]

Haven't run into any "trail fees" in my area, wouldn't be overly impressed if I was charged for walking at my home course or any other course for that matter.

[Jerry Kluger]

Someone who rides all the time mentioned this to me at my club and I just couldn't believe it.  Walking is an essential part of the game - if we insist that players ride when the course is very walkable then we are really destroying the game.  It does wind up with golf being nothing more than a reason to screw around and drink beer - and people wonder why the game is losing its luster.  Golf carts make money but so do $6 beers - do I have to pay a liquor bill if I don't drink - yes, we all have to eat so a food minimum is okay but this is getting out of hand.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()