State of Irish Golf Membership

GreeBo

Roger_007 wrote: »

With the demise of the entry fees, transfers are not needed any more. Even so, clubs in different parts of the country could form partnerships which would grant playing privileges to each other's members. Greenore and Ardglass have such an arrangement and I believe it works very well.

So you think club A should give some portion of your joining fee to club B or does club B just suck it up and do without?
How do you determine how the fee is apportioned?

Plenty of clubs still have joining fees.

Dr_Colossus

Roger_007 wrote: »

They should relate cost of membership to the actual use each member makes of the facilities. It is ridiculous that someone who only plays once a month pays the same as someone who plays three times a week.

This already exists to a degree between 5 day and full members in most clubs. Other clubs then have additional options like a notional membership fee plus a pay and play fee each time but this adds additional cost to the club in terms of policing and collecting payment.

Personally the reason I'm a full member is that I want to have the flexibility to play when the opportunity arises and if I had to pay per use it would be a serious disincentive. As a full member the incentive is to use the facilities as much as possible to gain value from your membership fee.

A lot of the current trend with people exiting from the game I suspect is largely due to these once a month members choosing the cheap green fees option. Perhaps if green fee prices were more in line with the cost of membership more people would choose to continue being club members.
GUI members could continue to avail of discounted fees playing neighboring clubs through the use of open competitions instead of the current trend where clubs seemingly allow non GUI members play at the reduced rate regardless further reducing the incentive of maintaining membership.

Clubs need to work more in unison with a long term view rather than the current individualistic approach of grabbing any available cash.

decko11

slave1 wrote: »

It is not just Ireland experiencing the downturn, Dicks Sporting Goods ( a big US sporting chain with a large golf section in store ) has just let go EVERY Pro from all it's shops, that's 524 per a quick news message on The Golf Channel, that's a big hit...

Interesting


I have visited the US regulary over the years .. and whats really noticeable is how driving ranges have lost some much business.

A packed range years ago is now practically empty

Other sports are gaining... golf is in decline

and getting rid of the long putter for us amateurs will only drive more away and more pro's out of business

Also, i have noticed here in Ireland ranges arent near as busy as 10 years ago

Golf is in decline:

- 5hour plus rounds
- cost
- lack of free time

I blame alot on the pro v1 - courses could be a lot shorter - quicker rounds less maintenance costs - in the 80's with the balata ball playing 54 in a day was an option.....

to combat this clubs need more 9 and 12 hole events

decko11

"Every macro-indicator that we've been looking at for the past 20 years -- rounds played, number of minorities playing, women coming into the game -- all of these things that we tracked says that there's less people playing," Mark King, the former president of TaylorMade who was recently named president of adidas North America, told Bryant Gumbel on HBO's "Real Sports" in a segment that will air Tuesday night. "Young people entering the game after high school, 18- to 30-year-olds are down 35 percent in the last 10 years. So I don't like where the game looks like it's going."

ssbob

decko11 wrote: »

I blame alot on the pro v1 - courses could be a lot shorter - quicker rounds less maintenance costs - in the 80's with the balata ball playing 54 in a day was an option.....

to combat this clubs need more 9 and 12 hole events

I personally have no interest in 9/12 hole events, I don't know why but I always am trying to beat my self over 18 holes ie. beat my previous best gross, that's the drive for me to get better,

However I do agree with what your saying in relation to the balls going miles etc, a simple solution would be for the R&A and USGA to increase the size of the golf ball fractionally so it wouldn't fly as far.

I still believe that a club with a good USP in a decent location can continue to do well, lets face it there are literally hundreds of thousands of golfers in Ireland. It would take a lot of work but something I noticed on a recent trip to West Cork was that the GAA complex there also houses sports physios and a public gym. For instance, rather than your standard pro shop what if halpenny of Nevada Bobs operated the Pro Shop while also incorporating the normal duties of the pro?

Anyway as mentioned by me many times, a manager I believe is the way to go.

wally79

I posted this comment on the article the OP linked to but didn't get a response there.

"As someone who plays every week but can’t see the justification in paying thousands of euro for membership can you explain to me “the benefits that follow from club membership”?

On another point, I think “club ethos” and “club spirit” are overvalued as a selling point by existing club members particularly lifelong members. As someone with no connection to the clubs in my area, the spirit and ethos matter less than value and quality in the initial decision making process."

I know over the year I will probably pay more for my golf depending on which club you were to join. But apart from the savings what does club membership give you?

I have the flexibility of playing different courses if I want and with sites like teetimes there is always a fair bit of choice.

I have been considering joining a club but haven't heard a persuasive enough argument for club membership yet.

Any input would be appreciated.

moycullen14

wally79 wrote: »

I posted this comment on the article the OP linked to but didn't get a response there.

"As someone who plays every week but can’t see the justification in paying thousands of euro for membership can you explain to me “the benefits that follow from club membership”?

On another point, I think “club ethos” and “club spirit” are overvalued as a selling point by existing club members particularly lifelong members. As someone with no connection to the clubs in my area, the spirit and ethos matter less than value and quality in the initial decision making process."

I know over the year I will probably pay more for my golf depending on which club you were to join. But apart from the savings what does club membership give you?

I have the flexibility of playing different courses if I want and with sites like teetimes there is always a fair bit of choice.

I have been considering joining a club but haven't heard a persuasive enough argument for club membership yet.

Any input would be appreciated.

For me, the benefits are quite simple:

1. It's very near to home
2. Being able to mosey up for a few holes at 8pm on a summers evening.
3. I've a wife and two kids who play so family membership works out quite reasonable.
4. I get to ndecide when I play, no-one else.
5. I know I would play very little golf if I wasn't a club member

Russman

wally79 wrote: »

I posted this comment on the article the OP linked to but didn't get a response there.

"As someone who plays every week but can’t see the justification in paying thousands of euro for membership can you explain to me “the benefits that follow from club membership”?

On another point, I think “club ethos” and “club spirit” are overvalued as a selling point by existing club members particularly lifelong members. As someone with no connection to the clubs in my area, the spirit and ethos matter less than value and quality in the initial decision making process."

I know over the year I will probably pay more for my golf depending on which club you were to join. But apart from the savings what does club membership give you?

I have the flexibility of playing different courses if I want and with sites like teetimes there is always a fair bit of choice.

I have been considering joining a club but haven't heard a persuasive enough argument for club membership yet.

Any input would be appreciated.

I guess it depends on what you want to get out of the game, but,

Feeling part of something (if that's what you're looking for).
Opportunity to play on teams.
Maybe playing with different people and trying to improve through playing with better players.

All of these will obviously mean nothing if you simply want to play 18 holes with your mates.

wally79

Russman wrote: »

I guess it depends on what you want to get out of the game, but,

Feeling part of something (if that's what you're looking for).
Opportunity to play on teams.
Maybe playing with different people and trying to improve through playing with better players.

All of these will obviously mean nothing if you simply want to play 18 holes with your mates.

Feeling part of something is one of those things I am always doubtful of especially in well established clubs. I am probably incorrect but I always worry that clubs will be full of cliques. Probably just paranoia

Shiraz 4.99

Golf clubs, like pubs before them, have suffered the lost generation once mortgage & kids come along.
Outside of the costs, fathers cannot justify leaving herself stuck at home on a Saturday with 3 kids while he has a 5 hour fourball followed by 5 or 6 pints.
It's been a societal shift as much as a financial decision for many former members.

I am one of the above & can't wait for the young lad to turn 10 so I can bring him out with me with his siblings to follow.
Then I'll be looking into he value of a family membership.

Golf clubs have to factor in that they will loose a large tranche of 30 somethings for a decade but there's nothing they can do about it.

GreeBo

Shiraz 4.99 wrote: »

Golf clubs, like pubs before them, have suffered the lost generation once mortgage & kids come along.
Outside of the costs, fathers cannot justify leaving herself stuck at home on a Saturday with 3 kids while he has a 5 hour fourball followed by 5 or 6 pints.
It's been a societal shift as much as a financial decision for many former members.

I am one of the above & can't wait for the young lad to turn 10 so I can bring him out with me with his siblings to follow.
Then I'll be looking into he value of a family membership.

Golf clubs have to factor in that they will loose a large tranche of 30 somethings for a decade but there's nothing they can do about it.

Very true.
But this is why I think being a member rather than a green fee player is more important.
Twenty somethings are playing golf wherever it suits them, they hit 30, settle down and dont play regularly for 5-8 years.
Then they want to go back to play, all the mates etc have moved on and no one wants to drive 2 hours to play golf.
Thats when the benefits of still being a member of the same local club kick in. You can wander down at any time and get out with a like minded bunch of people, make friends, often lifelong friends.

blackwhite

moycullen14 wrote: »

For me, the benefits are quite simple:

1. It's very near to home
2. Being able to mosey up for a few holes at 8pm on a summers evening.
3. I've a wife and two kids who play so family membership works out quite reasonable.
4. I get to ndecide when I play, no-one else.
5. I know I would play very little golf if I wasn't a club member

To add to the list

Having a proper handicap.
Being able to play in competitions.

Zardoz

Shiraz 4.99 wrote: »

Outside of the costs, fathers cannot justify leaving herself stuck at home on a Saturday with 3 kids while he has a 5 hour fourball followed by 5 or 6 pints.

Just do what my Dad used to do when we were kids ,bring them with you to the practice ground and let them hit a few balls .
Better yet we used to even play a bit of soccer in the corner of the practice ground as well .
Kill 3 birds with one stone.
Ah the good old days .

FixdePitchmark

I'm only a 5 day member.

I like to play a bit of society golf and some other courses at weekends etc. I think it is better for your game in the long run. And when I am off at a weekend - it is a rare enough thing, so I'm tied up with family etc.

Being a 5 day member , you don't get into the full club scene. It probably doesn't help. But have found the club a bit cliquey. In fairness , it is sort of understandable as lads are in the club years and some have known each other for life.

In fact - I've found some members a bit unfriendly , if I'm being honest

Society has changed too - and most golf events you go to , or club events it is lads in their late 50s an 60s. This idea of a lad going off and playing for 4.5 hours and being away for 5-6 hours is not what most lads I know would or could do at a weekend. It could be the only day they have time off with kids and wife. etc.

I find lads my age , have to be big , big into their golf to join a golf club. I've a feeling , during the good years - lads I work with for example, joined clubs as it was the thing to do, even if they were only slightly into golf. These lads are gone - most Irish households have done a full review of household expenses - Golf you only played 30 odd times a year is gone before Sky. Particularly if you were playing in a society too.

The society golf scene is the place these lads are going now. 10 to 12 outings a year , a few pints after and a meal. Also , more fun, less formal and not too serious.

I think on here we look at golf - from a serious point of view - serious golfers, into club teams etc.

I know on here , we/some sort of look down on that sort of golf.

But - I'm beginning to think that we are the 10 %.

I've 12 friends "playing" golf - and for them they are perfectly happy with their lot and would laugh if you told them all about lads chasing buffers.

golfwallah

The number and variety of views on the state of golf membership in Ireland is just one indicator or how segmented the market has become since the end of the Celtic Tiger.

Before that, you could have any type of membership you wanted, provided you paid an entrance fee and prices for membership and green fees weren’t easily affordable either – a sellers market!

Oh how a lot of things have changed - especially as regards time availability and affordability for the “missing golf generation” of 25 - 45 year olds. Yet some things remain the same – e.g. the desire among many existing members that new members should have to pay the same as they did.

The same data on changing market needs will be viewed by different people in different ways, so it is extremely difficult and slow to bring about the changes needed in some clubs – just to remain in business. And other clubs with declining revenues will suffer deterioration in standards or closure (as is already happening).

So what do you do? – wait and see, tweak a bit here and there or take a fundamental look at the market, develop a plan, get member support and implement it.

I believe clubs have more than one option (i.e. there’s nothing we can do except wait for competing clubs to go out of business) and there’s plenty of published material around for those who are interested in giving it a try, e.g. on GUI or English Golfing Union sites.

Shiraz 4.99

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

The society golf scene is the place these lads are going now. 10 to 12 outings a year , a few pints after and a meal. Also , more fun, less formal and not too serious.

Society golf has meets the needs of the casual once a month golfer perfectly.
He's getting to play a different course every outing, the quality of which have really improved as the competition for societies has increased.
Whoever though you'd be playing Palmerstown House or the K-Club for less than 50 quid on a Saturday.

Will the clubs every win back these casual players, it's hard to know.
By creating this nomadic society form of the game have they somehow shot themselves in the foot ?.
I know plenty of guys who are no longer members but actually prefer the green fee model, pay as you play.

Clubs have to cater for both the hardline member & the disloyal bargain hunting green fee player.

Wichita Lineman

Society golf is far from the be all and end all and wouldnt be enough on it's own for me. The society I am in has had an alarming drop off in numbers over the last few years and it's long established and very well organised year after year. Lot's of societies who use Moate have also seen a decline in numbers.

I love being a club member, I'm involved on our committee for the last few years and I even help out in the club shop now and again. I'm willing to put time and effort into keeping our golf club alive. Not everyone is. I appreciate that eveyones economics is different and as far as that goes for myself I'm just an ordinary joe soap money wise. I definitely dont have a lot to splash around but I think continued membership is worth it.

I am worried by the continued trend towards "golf for nothing", the eternal drive to force clubs to slash prices to the bare bone. It's not the way any other business operates so why should golf clubs.

Loire

I think Shiraz nailed it. Men are more involved in the home now and the days of heading off for 5 hours are over for most.

I'm playing on Mon & Fri evenings after work for most of the summer. No compeitions granted but I find it's a great way to get the golf in, esp on the Fri evening as herself puts the kids to bed and opens a bottle of wine and I come back with a take-away.

I would like if a few clubs got together and allowed members to play each other's courses during member's times, perhaps for a small fee. If it was set up so that no one club would be swamped with other club's members it would be an attractive perk to retaining your membership.

Wichita Lineman

It's all a bit one sided really, how about a different idea?

Ask not what your club can do for you, but what you can do for your club.

TheDoc

Our club had a decent system for Junior players.

Your fee entitled you to a five day memebership and entry into the saturday sunday competitions once an adult member was present in the group.

You would move to intermediate for a few years, where your fee went up marginally, but still had the benefits of your normal membership from being junior.

When you went full member, the value of ALL the fees you paid in the years previous was subtracted from the joining fee, making it very manageable.

When they removed the joining fee, it just reverted to the normal pricing, but it was a good way to keep junior golfers in the club, without scaring them off with the massive joining fee.

Although the joining fee is gone now, which to me was one of the most rubbish things in golf. Pay your yearly sub and off you go. It keeps clubs competitive. We lost members last year to Roganstown, we reviewed our pricing to be more enticing, load of members came back.

Avoids clubs feeling their players should be privalaged to be members. Golf is becoming more affordable and hopefully that will increase the numbers, but its becoming less of a "club". They need to realise they need to entice custom, and keep it, Which is a good thing in keeping rates and costs competitive.

I believe our club has moved to limit the "powers" of captains and those sort of positions, and the club being ran by actual experienced business people. Which makes sense, having captains and the likes making decisions with financial impact, with no previous experience of this sort of decision making, and in a role for a year, is mental stuff and why so many clubs are in bits.

moycullen14

TheDoc wrote: »

Although the joining fee is gone now, which to me was one of the most rubbish things in golf. Pay your yearly sub and off you go. It keeps clubs competitive. We lost members last year to Roganstown, we reviewed our pricing to be more enticing, load of members came back.

Avoids clubs feeling their players should be privalaged to be members. Golf is becoming more affordable and hopefully that will increase the numbers, but its becoming less of a "club". They need to realise they need to entice custom, and keep it, Which is a good thing in keeping rates and costs competitive.

I disagree with this. Simple economics was the reason for the joining fee. It was a way of matching demand to supply. Demand too high? Increase the joining fee to the point where the market clears.

The problem now is that the demand is way down, below the point where any joining fee is possible for most clubs. The problem with reducing costs to the point where people will join is that a) it is uneconomic and b) it encourages flipping.

Cheaper and cheaper golf might be available in the short run but not in the long run because courses will be gone.


Members are effectively subsidising the golf of the green-fees only and the serial flippers. A time will come when the subsidising will stop and costs will rise for everybody.

mike12

Hi,
A lot of the posters have said that all their mates are paying green fees so is their not a balance less money from membership but more money from green fees.
Think we will see clubs join together say 3 clubs like St. Margrets, Hollywood lakes and Roganstown had a membership where you can play all 3 courses they save costs on sharing machinery for maintenance.

Wichita Lineman

"Cheaper and cheaper golf might be available in the short run but not in the long run because courses will be gone.


Members are effectively subsidising the golf of the green-fees only and the serial flippers. A time will come when the subsidising will stop and costs will rise for everybody. "


Agree, agree, agree! The members of clubs can sometimes get a raw deal on here but we are still helping keep our clubs open for the 'roamers'. I dont care what anyone thinks - playing somewhere casually once or twice a year is not going to keep it open!

The_Architect

Andy Dunne & Moycullen - Correct

moycullen14

The_Architect wrote: »

Andy Dunne & Moycullen - Correct

It's like the newspaper business. The dynamics have changed because people will no longer pay - at least they'll no longer pay the provider - for content that is available on line for 'free'.

Shouting at the providers to 'change with the times' is not going to work. The new business model when it comes will almost certainly not suit anyone not willing to pay.

We'll be sorry when they're gone.

wally79

moycullen14 wrote: »

Demand too high? Increase the joining fee to the point where the market clears.

Or (in the case of some clubs but not necessarily all) increase the joining fee to 1) milk as much money from people as possible and 2) exclude lower earning sections of society

Then when times get tough wonder why these same people don't fancy joining a club that wouldn't have had them as a member when times were good.

As a relatively new golfer who wasn't looking for a club previously the above is not how I feel but is a point of view I have heard aired by people I have played with.

On another point previous poster also mentioned the stance some members have that because they paid a joining fee then new members should have to.

Is this attitude common in clubs? Does it create animosity?

Russman

wally79 wrote: »

On another point previous poster also mentioned the stance some members have that because they paid a joining fee then new members should have to.

Is this attitude common in clubs? Does it create animosity?

I'm sure there are some that feel like that, but I'd say (or hope) they are in a tiny minority. Its a bit like I paid x amount for my house and the neighbour paid y - no point in getting hung up on it in the real world.
I'm sure members who feel that way weren't complaining when new members were paying double or triple what the existing members paid in previous years.

moycullen14

wally79 wrote: »

Or (in the case of some clubs but not necessarily all) increase the joining fee to 1) milk as much money from people as possible and 2) exclude lower earning sections of society

Then when times get tough wonder why these same people don't fancy joining a club that wouldn't have had them as a member when times were good.

As a relatively new golfer who wasn't looking for a club previously the above is not how I feel but is a point of view I have heard aired by people I have played with.

On another point previous poster also mentioned the stance some members have that because they paid a joining fee then new members should have to.

Is this attitude common in clubs? Does it create animosity?

I'm not so sure people would get that angsty about it.

Douglas in Cork, for example, was notoriously difficult to get into over the years. Yet when they opened their membership recently they were flooded with applicants. Why? Because it suited people.

I think existing members are savvy enough to realise that every new member is saving them money and, more importantly, preserving the club.

You'll always get some gobsh**tes though!

wally79

Yeah you get gobsh**tes in all walks of life unfortunately.

Good to hear that they are in the minority.

Was worried there would be a defensive reaction to that post from golf club members but it's good to see people having a rational discussion on boards for a change

ShivasIrons

ssbob wrote: »

I personally have no interest in 9/12 hole events, I don't know why but I always am trying to beat my self over 18 holes ie. beat my previous best gross, that's the drive for me to get better,

However I do agree with what your saying in relation to the balls going miles etc, a simple solution would be for the R&A and USGA to increase the size of the golf ball fractionally so it wouldn't fly as far.

I still believe that a club with a good USP in a decent location can continue to do well, lets face it there are literally hundreds of thousands of golfers in Ireland. It would take a lot of work but something I noticed on a recent trip to West Cork was that the GAA complex there also houses sports physios and a public gym. For instance, rather than your standard pro shop what if halpenny of Nevada Bobs operated the Pro Shop while also incorporating the normal duties of the pro?

Anyway as mentioned by me many times, a manager I believe is the way to go.

How would Halpenny or Nevada Bobs operating the pro shop instead of the pro be good for the golf club?

wally79

ShivasIrons wrote: »

How would Halpenny or Nevada Bobs operating the pro shop instead of the pro be good for the golf club?

Wouldn't it be similar to clubs outsourcing their catering. Set fee or % of profits with none of the costs

Russman

wally79 wrote: »

Wouldn't it be similar to clubs outsourcing their catering. Set fee or % of profits with none of the costs

From their point of view, why would halpenny or Nevada bobs do it ? Can't imagine many pro shops in clubs turning over enough sales to pay for one or two staff that would be required. Especially in a club that is struggling.

PARlance

The elephant in the room as I see it.

Membership levels today are at 1997 levels.
However, in 1997, there were 50 less golf clubs than there are now.
All this talk about adjusting price plans and the GUI giving financial advice assistance (not sure how much they actually do on the ground tbh) is a short - medium term thing.
The end result, as I see it, has to be that a lot more clubs will close over the short-medium term. Sad but true imo.
The GUI don't seem to address this point (50 more clubs, same membership levels) in the article. Head in sand?

Making golf cheaper and a stabilising of the economy may see a small increase in members over the next 10 years, but the unfortunate reality is that there are just too many clubs at present.

The big danger I see is that clubs will spend the next 10 or so years struggling to survive without really looking beyond that.

I'd love to know the age demographic of the 170,000 golfers at present.
How many are 50+, 55+, 60+, 65+?
I would guess a very high %, would half a clubs members be over 50 years old?
I would guess they are.
So, what's going to happen in 15, 20, 25 years when these guys stop playing en masse!
I certainly don't think that there'll be the youngsters there to replace them.
That's not a problem that can be solved by adjusting prices etc.
The GUI are talking a game about attracting youth... I can't see a lot going on.

Russman

PARlance wrote: »

Membership levels today are at 1997 levels.
However, in 1997, there were 50 less golf clubs than there are now.

That's it in a nutshell, there are simply too many clubs for the market.

Plus there's an element of people's expectations being too high at times, everyone wants their course to be like the K Club because that's what they were used to playing in the good times.

FixdePitchmark

Down in the club this evening - event on, so packed. Great to see.

3 lads under 40.
40 others in bar well over 50 and 60.

It just doesn't add up.

Loire

Russman wrote: »

That's it in a nutshell, there are simply too many clubs for the market.

Plus there's an element of people's expectations being too high at times, everyone wants their course to be like the K Club because that's what they were used to playing in the good times.

+1

I remember reading an interview with Michael Smurfit a number of years ago. He was saying how too many courses were being built at the time. Obviously he has/had a vested interest in keeping the number of courses down, but he was essentially right.

PARlance

Russman wrote: »

That's it in a nutshell, there are simply too many clubs for the market.

Plus there's an element of people's expectations being too high at times, everyone wants their course to be like the K Club because that's what they were used to playing in the good times.

I think that's the short-medium term problem in a nutshell.

The longer term problem, and a bigger problem in my eyes, is the problem represented by Fix's bar.... Sad/morbid enough thought, but fast forward 20 years and those guys in the bar won't be members and I really can't see that chunk of golfers being replaced, in the same numbers, by younger generations.
A club like that could lose half it's members over a relatively short period of time.

It may be a long way down the line but I would class it as a immediate problem.
That bar needs to be packed with Fanta filled f*ckers at summer camps etc for the next few decades to ensure enough will progress to sipping pints there one day.

alxmorgan

Do golf clubs go into schools at all I wonder ?
Just thinking if you went into a group of 10-12 year olds and offered them a free day at the club. Some practice and tuition in the morning and then a 6 hole scramble in the afternoon you would surely hook a decent portion of them into it. If I'm anything to go by all they need to do is hit one good shot and they're hooked !!

Russman

PARlance wrote: »

I think that's the short-medium term problem in a nutshell.

The longer term problem, and a bigger problem in my eyes, is the problem represented by Fix's bar.... Sad/morbid enough thought, but fast forward 20 years and those guys in the bar won't be members and I really can't see that chunk of golfers being replaced, in the same numbers, by younger generations.
A club like that could lose half it's members over a relatively short period of time.

It may be a long way down the line but I would class it as a immediate problem.
That bar needs to be packed with Fanta filled f*ckers at summer camps etc for the next few decades to ensure enough will progress to sipping pints there one day.

True enough, but golf clubs historically always had that as an issue, and by and large, got by. Granted this was pre the virtual abolishment of entrance fees for almost all but the perceived prestigious clubs. Not saying it should be ignored or anything like that, the more juniors the better, but I reckon that unless your mother or father play golf, a kid is very unlikely to take the game up. That's the barrier that needs to come down somehow, and IMO that will almost 100% come down to location - clubs in good locations with big catchment areas and practice facilities. Ironically these are the clubs that are very difficult or expensive to join.

If a course, like my own, is basically only accessable by car, it will always struggle. Mum or dad generally are not inclined to make a 45 minute detour on their way to and from work to drop little Seve up to the club. And as soon as little Seve shows any potential, a higher profile club will poach him anyway.

Russman

alxmorgan wrote: »

Do golf clubs go into schools at all I wonder ?
Just thinking if you went into a group of 10-12 year olds and offered them a free day at the club. Some practice and tuition in the morning and then a 6 hole scramble in the afternoon you would surely hook a decent portion of them into it. If I'm anything to go by all they need to do is hit one good shot and they're hooked !!

I think the GUI, or even better the clubs themselves, should take a look at some other countries and take some (not all) of their ideas on board and see how they could be applied in an Irish context.

I spent a little time at a golf club in Sweden a few years ago and the amount of juniors playing was scary, literally hundreds. It was like a million Jesper Parneviks running around ! Boys and girls mixing freely, playing together, no segregation, all getting coaching/lessons and then heading out for a 9 or 18 hole competition. All properly mannered and well behaved, but non of the stuffiness we can get in many clubs here. A really inclusive atmosphere. We could learn from them.

Unfortunately the GUI, and this might be a little harsh, seem content to bask in the glory of Rory, McDowell etc. and claim they're doing a great job, but beneath the surface things are different.

thewobbler

PARlance wrote: »

I think that's the short-medium term problem in a nutshell.

The longer term problem, and a bigger problem in my eyes, is the problem represented by Fix's bar.... Sad/morbid enough thought, but fast forward 20 years and those guys in the bar won't be members and I really can't see that chunk of golfers being replaced, in the same numbers, by younger generations.
A club like that could lose half it's members over a relatively short period of time.

It may be a long way down the line but I would class it as a immediate problem.
That bar needs to be packed with Fanta filled f*ckers at summer camps etc for the next few decades to ensure enough will progress to sipping pints there one day.

I'd point out that this isn't actually a golfing problem, so much as a change in Irish society. People just aren't drinking in pubs the way they used to, and apart from a few city centre pubs, it takes an occasion for a pub to drag in a crowd in now. The will of the people is now in drinking Tesco special offers in front of the TV, while live tweeting. Not meeting people for a few pints.

Any golf club that is factoring a profitable or rejuvenated social club into their financial projections is, sadly, living in the past.

GreeBo

Russman wrote: »

True enough, but golf clubs historically always had that as an issue, and by and large, got by. Granted this was pre the virtual abolishment of entrance fees for almost all but the perceived prestigious clubs. Not saying it should be ignored or anything like that, the more juniors the better, but I reckon that unless your mother or father play golf, a kid is very unlikely to take the game up. That's the barrier that needs to come down somehow, and IMO that will almost 100% come down to location - clubs in good locations with big catchment areas and practice facilities. Ironically these are the clubs that are very difficult or expensive to join.

If a course, like my own, is basically only accessable by car, it will always struggle. Mum or dad generally are not inclined to make a 45 minute detour on their way to and from work to drop little Seve up to the club. And as soon as little Seve shows any potential, a higher profile club will poach him anyway.

I dont think a club has to be prestigious to charge an entrance fee, its supply and demand. A club in a populated location is always going to have more bodies trying to join that one in the middle of nowhere, regardless of the quality of the course really. Sure there are some that charge huge sums of cash because of what they are, but I think thats the vast minority.

Accessibility is always going to be the determining factor imo. If you cant get there enough to make it worthwhlie then you arent going to join.

alxmorgan wrote: »

Do golf clubs go into schools at all I wonder ?
Just thinking if you went into a group of 10-12 year olds and offered them a free day at the club. Some practice and tuition in the morning and then a 6 hole scramble in the afternoon you would surely hook a decent portion of them into it. If I'm anything to go by all they need to do is hit one good shot and they're hooked !!

I think most clubs target children of existing members. We have ~100 juveniles I reckon in my club and probably ~40 juniors. They have a couple of competitions per week and are generally always around the course.
And thats in a perceived stuffy, pretentious club.
I think its perfectly acceptable to not go after anyone with a pulse in an effort to grow numbers. You can easily erode what it was that made your club a club by going down that route.

PARlance

Russman wrote: »

True enough, but golf clubs historically always had that as an issue, and by and large, got by. Granted this was pre the virtual abolishment of entrance fees for almost all but the perceived prestigious clubs. Not saying it should be ignored or anything like that, the more juniors the better, but I reckon that unless your mother or father play golf, a kid is very unlikely to take the game up. That's the barrier that needs to come down somehow, and IMO that will almost 100% come down to location - clubs in good locations with big catchment areas and practice facilities. Ironically these are the clubs that are very difficult or expensive to join.

If a course, like my own, is basically only accessable by car, it will always struggle. Mum or dad generally are not inclined to make a 45 minute detour on their way to and from work to drop little Seve up to the club. And as soon as little Seve shows any potential, a higher profile club will poach him anyway.

Historically it worked out ok, but if you you go back to historical figures for club & membership numbers then it's scary.

2013: 170,000 - 428 clubs
1997: 170,000 - 367 clubs
1987: 95,000 - 262 clubs

I don't think it's a crazy thought that membership (unless there's a massive change in focus on youth) could go back to 95,000 over the next 10 years or so.
That'd leave an oversupply of 166 clubs over today's levels.
I don't think it'll get that bad, but in terms of the state of Irish golf, I do think the last few years will be nothing compared to what's coming down the line.

Edit: here's the link for GUI stats for anyone interested: http://www.gui.ie/home/general-documents/membership-stats-2013.aspx

alxmorgan

GreeBo wrote: »

I think most clubs target children of existing members. We have ~100 juveniles I reckon in my club and probably ~40 juniors. They have a couple of competitions per week and are generally always around the course.
And thats in a perceived stuffy, pretentious club.

That may be fine for some clubs but very limiting for others. By definition you are limiting yourself taking this approach. You are limited to members children and only a portion will take it up. Of this a portion will drop out to play other sports etc

An example is a member of my club I met the other day. He was quite happy for his kids not to bother with golf while they are young as he thinks they get more from team sports and it is hard to disagree with him.

GreeBo wrote: »

I think its perfectly acceptable to not go after anyone with a pulse in an effort to grow numbers. You can easily erode what it was that made your club a club by going down that route.

This statement could be perceived to be part of the problem. It's like a closed club. Child of member you are in. Not then off you go. The GAA, rugby and soccer do not take this approach at all and it is what leads to golf being seen as stuffy and elitist by some.

I don't see how introducing youngsters to the game regardless of who their parents are is eroding the club - whatever that means

Russman

PARlance wrote: »

Historically it worked out ok, but if you you go back to historical figures for club & membership numbers then it's scary.

2013: 170,000 - 428 clubs
1997: 170,000 - 367 clubs
1987: 95,000 - 262 clubs

I don't think it's a crazy thought that membership (unless there's a massive change in focus on youth) could go back to 95,000 over the next 10 years or so.
That'd leave an oversupply of 166 clubs over today's levels.
I don't think it'll get that bad, but in terms of the state of Irish golf, I do think the last few years will be nothing compared to what's coming down the line.

Edit: here's the link for GUI stats for anyone interested: http://www.gui.ie/home/general-documents/membership-stats-2013.aspx

Totally agree, especially with the bolded part.
Unfortunately its happening in a kind of drip, drip, death by a thousand cuts kind of way. All clubs cutting, cutting, cutting costs before yet another one goes bang. I think clubs can actually cut so much in an effort to survive, that it almost prevents survival as they can't do anything. Part of me would prefer to bring it all to a head but that's totally impractical, and how would you pick the 50 clubs that are needed to go ??

PARlance

thewobbler wrote: »

I'd point out that this isn't actually a golfing problem, so much as a change in Irish society. People just aren't drinking in pubs the way they used to, and apart from a few city centre pubs, it takes an occasion for a pub to drag in a crowd in now. The will of the people is now in drinking Tesco special offers in front of the TV, while live tweeting. Not meeting people for a few pints.

Any golf club that is factoring a profitable or rejuvenated social club into their financial projections is, sadly, living in the past.

True, I was just using a bar as an example of the general demographics of the club and I think it's fairly representative. The majority of members in that club, and most, are grey, greying, going, soon to be gone. That's the issue IMO.

GreeBo

alxmorgan wrote: »

That may be fine for some clubs but very limiting for others. By definition you are limiting yourself taking this approach. You are limited to members children and only a portion will take it up. Of this a portion will drop out to play other sports etc

An example is a member of my club I met the other day. He was quite happy for his kids not to bother with golf while they are young as he thinks they get more from team sports and it is hard to disagree with him.



This statement could be perceived to be part of the problem. It's like a closed club. Child of member you are in. Not then off you go. The GAA, rugby and soccer do not take this approach at all and it is what leads to golf being seen as stuffy and elitist by some.

I don't see how introducing youngsters to the game regardless of who their parents are is eroding the club - whatever that means

Children of golfers are far more likely to play golf than those whose parents dont play. I dont have stats but its true for every sport.

I dont see it as that limiting at all, in reality how many kids are you going to let in?
Even if we get 1 kid for every 2 members that would be ~500...we couldnt support that even if we wanted to. There is only so much playing time available.

It is a closed club though, by definition, its for members. Unless you join you dont get in.

Taking in anyone who wants to get in means that you get all sorts. A club has to be able to choose who it wants in if it is to have any control over the future direct and state of the club.
Just look at any public course and compare it to a private members course.
I know which I want to be part of.

PARlance

GreeBo wrote: »

I think most clubs target children of existing members. We have ~100 juveniles I reckon in my club and probably ~40 juniors. They have a couple of competitions per week and are generally always around the course.
And thats in a perceived stuffy, pretentious club.
I think its perfectly acceptable to not go after anyone with a pulse in an effort to grow numbers. You can easily erode what it was that made your club a club by going down that route.

Very fair point for your club but I think your club is in a very unique position.
Maybe only 10-15 clubs in the country would have such a strong position.
It's based in a densely populated and extremely affluent area and is seen as having more importance than just a golf club.
There's a high entrance fee that I can never see the need to be eliminated.

With that, I think the parents of kids are always going to be more inclined to get the kids out of bed and playing until they're full members. It's much sought after, I'm guessing a lot of the parents feel responsible/pressure to keep their kids in the club to "do right by them".

I know a member of Castle and he's cut back on everything, cars, holidays, etc etc but couldn't even contemplate letting his golf membership slip.
The joining fee being a big reason, the "embarrassment" that would result amongst his social clique, denying his son the opportunity to get in being the main factors.

As I said, an incredibly strong position for a club to be in.
Edit: Talking about your club is almost "off topic"

golfwallah

PARlance wrote: »

The elephant in the room as I see it.

Membership levels today are at 1997 levels.
However, in 1997, there were 50 less golf clubs than there are now.
All this talk about adjusting price plans and the GUI giving financial advice assistance (not sure how much they actually do on the ground tbh) is a short - medium term thing.
The end result, as I see it, has to be that a lot more clubs will close over the short-medium term. Sad but true imo.
The GUI don't seem to address this point (50 more clubs, same membership levels) in the article. Head in sand?

Making golf cheaper and a stabilising of the economy may see a small increase in members over the next 10 years, but the unfortunate reality is that there are just too many clubs at present.

The big danger I see is that clubs will spend the next 10 or so years struggling to survive without really looking beyond that.

I'd love to know the age demographic of the 170,000 golfers at present.
How many are 50+, 55+, 60+, 65+?
I would guess a very high %, would half a clubs members be over 50 years old?
I would guess they are.
So, what's going to happen in 15, 20, 25 years when these guys stop playing en masse!
I certainly don't think that there'll be the youngsters there to replace them.
That's not a problem that can be solved by adjusting prices etc.
The GUI are talking a game about attracting youth... I can't see a lot going on.

There are some research results online re membership numbers and age profiles, etc., for example:

Leinster Golf Survey as reported 25/03/2014 in Irish Independent:

AGE CATEGORY

Under 10: 0.7pc

10-18: 2pc

19-23: 0.8pc

24-29: 2pc

30-39: 11pc

40-49: 20.5pc

50-65: 44pc

66+: 19pc

From "Promoting Golf Club Membership" (GUI / ILGU / PGA) in 2009:

Age Profile
According to the GUI Club Survey 2008 the average age of male members of affiliated clubs is 49 and according to the ILGU the average age of female members is closer to 55. These surveys and others around the world reveal almost a “lost generation” of 25 – 44 year olds in terms of club membership. What these surveys have also identified is that a majority of nomadic or casual golfers are actually in this same 25 – 44 age group. In other words clubs as currently structured have failed to create any added value relative to the perceived value of limited time availability and the cost of casual green fees for these casual golfers.

thewobbler

When people wonder why the profile of golf club members is so old, it's simply (in my mind), because the majority of people like me - the next generation(s) - are too busy to play the game. You can target youngsters and students all you like, but they will all mostly go through the hectic passage of life that involves field sports, family life and stressful careers - and, apart from the golfing diehards, will need to put golf on the back burner for a long time.

I imagine this idea has been floated already on this thread, but there's too much to read back upon, so apologies if it's repetition.


---

My case study is I'm 37, run a business, help out with a football team and - most importantly - have 4 toddler kids. I'll be lucky to play golf 15 times this year, and most of those will be social outings with old friends or colleagues, wherever takes our fancy.

There's absolutely no way I can justify paying the £900 (including £100 bar sub) a year sub to my local club, when I'm unlikely to play more than 5-6 times at that course. That's not even a third cousin of value for money. Or as my wife would put it, that's a lot of nappies.

I like being a member: it's the "right" way to golf in my opinion, to do things legit in terms of handicap, and to help turn the wheels of the golfing economy. But I'd imagine that it could be 5+ years before I'll be able to pick up my playing availability to the 20+ times a year needed to make it a viable option. And because the days of entrance fees and waiting lists have long since left my club, there is no extenuating circumstance whereby I can justify the payment.

What I personally need is an associate membership. A much reduced annual fee that provides me a GUI card, and a sense of belonging, and in return I make a commitment to play in X competitions (say 5), and won't be allowed to enter more than Y competitions (say, 10). Any social golf I play at the club would require me paying a reduced green fee for the privilege. I'd be quite happy to get access to the online timesheet one day after full members get the best tee times. And to keep everyone's interest I can maintain this for associate membership for no more than 5 years.