Golf Memberships

BOB81

mike12 wrote: »

How many NAMA courses are there? Can only think of 3 or 4. Think Portmarnock was for a while but they never droped their prices.
Is moyvalley re opened as a private course.
New Forrest is another i think.

Moyvalley back in private ownership since last-year, bought by a consortium in first half of 2014 and re-opened as a private course in June 2014

Rikand

mike12 wrote: »

How many NAMA courses are there? Can only think of 3 or 4. Think Portmarnock was for a while but they never droped their prices.
Is moyvalley re opened as a private course.
New Forrest is another i think.

Here's a topic that Kevin Markham started here a few years ago. Not sure how relevant it still is ? http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056341847

here's a Document I found online. 3 years old now though, so obviously there could be errors in here :: http://namawinelake.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/namaenforcement.pdf

Fota Island
Sheephaven bay, Donegal
Portmarnock
Moyvalley
The Heritage
New Forest
Tulfarris.



Not as many as you might think, especially with all the giving out that's done about them

First Up

Rikand wrote: »

Here's a topic that Kevin Markham started here a few years ago. Not sure how relevant it still is ? http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056341847

here's a Document I found online. 3 years old now though, so obviously there could be errors in here :: http://namawinelake.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/namaenforcement.pdf

Fota Island
Sheephaven bay, Donegal
Portmarnock
Moyvalley
The Heritage
New Forest
Tulfarris.



Not as many as you might think, especially with all the giving out that's done about them

I think that list is missing a few of those that are or were in NAMA; Blarney, Killerig, Castlemartyr, Brook Lodge/Macreddin, Citywest, Dundalk Park Inn, Slieve Russell, Kilkea Castle -that's just from memory and a quick scan.

Still not an enormous number but they do play their part in the chain reaction. Tulfarris (a fine course) offers give away rates; Rathsallagh (even better course) gets into trouble. Meanwhile (as evidenced in this thread) Blessington Lakes uses Tulfarris as a justification for flogging distance memberships to survive, others are forced to drop rates to compete and downwards it goes.

I'm sure Portmarnock Links has taken business from other clubs in North County Dublin and Palmerstown House was a very popular green fee destination while NAMA ran the show.

Anatom

First Up wrote: »

and Palmerstown House was a very popular green fee destination while NAMA ran the show.

It really wasn't you know. Empty most of the time. I live pretty close by.

First Up

Anatom wrote: »

It really wasn't you know. Empty most of the time. I live pretty close by.

Not sure that many courses without a club could be expected to be all that busy but based on reading various threads here, it was popular with many "itinerant" golfers and I recall several posts where it was quoted as a reason why somebody wouldn't join a club.

shabalala

First Up wrote: »

Not sure that many courses without a club could be expected to be all that busy but based on reading various threads here, it was popular with many "itinerant" golfers and I recall several posts where it was quoted as a reason why somebody wouldn't join a club.

What is an "itinerant" golfer? Honest question

Unglika Norse

First Up wrote: »

I think that list is missing a few of those that are or were in NAMA; Blarney, Killerig, Castlemartyr, Brook Lodge/Macreddin, Citywest, Dundalk Park Inn, Slieve Russell, Kilkea Castle -that's just from memory and a quick scan.

Still not an enormous number but they do play their part in the chain reaction. Tulfarris (a fine course) offers give away rates; Rathsallagh (even better course) gets into trouble. Meanwhile (as evidenced in this thread) Blessington Lakes uses Tulfarris as a justification for flogging distance memberships to survive, others are forced to drop rates to compete and downwards it goes.

I'm sure Portmarnock Links has taken business from other clubs in North County Dublin and Palmerstown House was a very popular green fee destination while NAMA ran the show.

New Forest subsidised for 5 years by NAMA at an anecdotal cost of e2m , privately bought for e1.1m, now selling membership at e500, takes members from all traditional members clubs around and in effect causes Mullingar to have to reduce their annual sub to match it, or lose even more members.

Moyvalley I believe had a similar effect on Kilcock, Edenederry, Knockanally.

First Up

shabalala wrote: »

What is an "itinerant" golfer? Honest question

Those without a home course as their playing base.

slave1

Unglika Norse wrote: »

...New Forest subsidised for 5 years by NAMA at an anecdotal cost of e2m , privately bought for e1.1m, now selling membership at e500...

Those figures are simply wrong, and no I am not going to provide the correct figures but I know two of them for certain

Kingswood Rover

First Up wrote: »

Those without a home course as their playing base.

Where is your home course First up

FixdePitchmark

First Up wrote: »

Those without a home course as their playing base.

First up - you've made great points on the thread, but some of the expressions used for non traditional golfers are funny at best.

There was always other ways of playing golf outside the traditional way - it has been shown that some of these derided methods are small to say the least. Yes, they could/will grow.

Distance membership ("country membership") has been around , what 30 years ?
Other types of membership - 5 day , artisan , what, up to 100 years ?
Society golf has been around, what 40 - 50 years ?

What name would you put on a corporate member - an international pirate golfer ?

There is now what is called a lifestyle member. This is going to be a new feature of golf.

Again - nobody on this thread has come up with some of these ideas.

The game - R&A , the game in England and Wales are reviewing the game.

Some of these features are going to be around a long long time , so we may as well come up with less derogatory expressions. I'm not overly offended or anything , but at what stage do we all move on ?

First Up

My use of the term itinerant had no derogatory intent and your comment says more about you than me. I am simply using the word in its literal meaning; you seem to have other issues.

FixdePitchmark

First Up wrote: »

My use of the term itinerant had no derogatory intent and your comment says more about you than me. I am simply using the word in its literal meaning; you seem to have other issues.

Well fair enough - I just have never , ever heard it spoke about.

FixdePitchmark

And to clarify the new linguistics of Irish golf.

Has an Itinerant golfer a GUI ?

mafc

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

And to clarify the new linguistics of Irish golf.

Has an Itinerant golfer a GUI ?

lol

First Up

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

And to clarify the new linguistics of Irish golf.

Has an Itinerant golfer a GUI ?

Some do - those who are distance members of somewhere they never or rarely play. It is hardly "new linguistics". This and other threads have been discussing this for yonks. It isn't my problem if you don't know what itinerant means.

Keano

Trolling will not be tolerated.

It stops now.

First Up

Keano wrote: »

Trolling will not be tolerated.

It stops now.

Is that referring to me? If so, please explain how I am trolling?

downthemiddle

golfwallah wrote: »

You are making some fair points here, but to be honest, I don't think there is any such thing as a solution that will work perfectly across the board for everybody.

All I'm trying to do is to ask people to start thinking about alternatives to the limited range of membership offerings available in most clubs - particularly when these are demonstrably resulting in lower membership numbers and lots of clubs struggling financially.

There has to be a better way!

And by the way, these 4 options are not mine - they are straight from the England Golf paper on "Alternative Membership Categories" from their website (attached again below). This document is well worth a quick read - you will see that it puts forward the arguments for and against, some of which have been mentioned by other posters as well.

Look - situations vary from club to club. Maybe your club is packed to the gills on Saturday and Sunday afternoons - mine isn't and I expect the same applies in many clubs. We also have quite a few 5 day members. Info on timeslot usage is readily available from your club's BRS system - only takes a small amount of time to extract it (I've done it quite often myself - quite simple to do).

In situations of difficulty, we all look at ways to achieve better solutions - all it takes is a bit of effort. The hard bit is to rid ourselves of our own pre-conceived ideas, our likes, dislikes, etc. That said, I remain optimistic about the future of golf in Ireland.

To quote Churchill, who overcame many difficulties, far greater than we are facing in golf:

“The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.”

“Attitude is a little thing that makes a big difference.”

“I am an optimist. It does not seem too much use being anything else.”

“I never worry about action, but only about inaction.”

So to summarise, the English Golfing Union recommend pay and play as a viable membership option. A small number of posters on Boards.ie, in their infinite wisdom, are vehemently opposed to it.
I know whose judgement on the game I would prefer to trust.

First Up

downthemiddle wrote: »

So to summarise, the English Golfing Union recommend pay and play as a viable membership option. A small number of posters on Boards.ie, in their infinite wisdom, are vehemently opposed to it.
I know whose judgement on the game I would prefer to trust.

Pay and play is perfectly fine as a membership option. What I am opposed to is discounted pay and play by means of a spurious distance membership.

downthemiddle

First Up wrote: »

Pay and play is perfectly fine as a membership option. What I am opposed to is discounted pay and play by means of a spurious distance membership.

"They are not choosing membership, they are buying a discounted handicap in order to play courses paid for by others. If you can only afford a basic club, then join it and help make it better. The "exclusive" clubs didn't build themselves."

Not quite what you said here.

P.S. I see someone ran the sheriff out of town.

First Up

downthemiddle wrote: »

"They are not choosing membership, they are buying a discounted handicap in order to play courses paid for by others. If you can only afford a basic club, then join it and help make it better. The "exclusive" clubs didn't build themselves."

Not quite what you said here.

P.S. I see someone ran the sheriff out of town.

Don't follow your point. If you are a member of a club, that should be your club. Becoming a distance member of a club you never see is not "joining" the club; it is hitching a ride on their GUI affiliation in order to play cheap golf elsewhere.
Some clubs have a membership category that charges a modest annual fee but then you pay a reduced green fee each time you play, or after a stipulated number of rounds. That is a different thing and that form of "flexible" membership works fine, as long as the club can balance the books. But the member is playing his own course, not other peoples.

Keano

First Up wrote: »

Is that referring to me? If so, please explain how I am trolling?

Do not respond to a mod warning in a thread, you know this

downthemiddle

First Up wrote: »

Don't follow your point. If you are a member of a club, that should be your club. Becoming a distance member of a club you never see is not "joining" the club; it is hitching a ride on their GUI affiliation in order to play cheap golf elsewhere.
Some clubs have a membership category that charges a modest annual fee but then you pay a reduced green fee each time you play, or after a stipulated number of rounds. That is a different thing and that form of "flexible" membership works fine, as long as the club can balance the books. But the member is playing his own course, not other peoples.

I'm glad you clarified that as previously you appeared to be lumping distance and pay and play membership in together.

Unglika Norse

slave1 wrote: »

Those figures are simply wrong, and no I am not going to provide the correct figures but I know two of them for certain

In explanation of the quoted figures. the anecdotal evidence was the the group running New Forest at the time were given e400,000 per year to run and maintain the facility, over a 5 year period. The figure of e1.1m was widely expressed as the sale price at the time of sale, In the Golf Business News issue Published in October 2013 it was stated that the price achieved for the property was reported to be close to the asking price of e1.25m, which would lend itself to saying that the e1.1m was accurate figure. As for the membership fee I know of two people who have recently joined at e500, althought the club website (which is down at the moment) states that tha annual sub is e550, they may have got a bit of a discount on account of 2 of them joining together. If however you disagree with the above figures I would be prepared to bow to your perhaps better inside knowledge. I just reply to show that I am not trying to make a spurious statement or claim.

cairny

[quote="FixdePitchmark;93747885"

Distance membership ("country membership") has been around , what 30 years?[/quote]

Please stop confusing country membership and distance membership. In order to get country membership you must hold membership in another club.

By definition those with country memberships are joined more than one club and are arguably the polar opposite of distance club memberships.

Unglika Norse

cairny wrote: »

Please stop confusing country membership and distance membership. In order to get country membership you must hold membership in another club.

By definition those with country memberships are joined more than one club and are arguably the polar opposite of distance club memberships.

Not quite right, it depends on the constitution of each club as to what defines country their membership requirements. For example if my memory is right, back in the good old days you qualified for country membership of Headfort, if you lived more than 6 miles from the club. Times have changed.

FixdePitchmark

Unglika Norse wrote: »

Not quite right, it depends on the constitution of each club as to what defines country their membership requirements. For example if my memory is right, back in the good old days you qualified for country membership of Headfort, if you lived more than 6 miles from the club. Times have changed.

So - I'm not that confused after all.

If I'm going to be confused as I am many a time - can I be at least confused about something I should be confused about.

Anyway - the point I'm making is - being a member of say County Sligo and playing nearly all your golf in Dublin is not a new idea - it is around - what, 30 years ?

cairny

Unglika Norse wrote: »

Not quite right, it depends on the constitution of each club as to what defines country their membership requirements. For example if my memory is right, back in the good old days you qualified for country membership of Headfort, if you lived more than 6 miles from the club. Times have changed.

But that's Distance Membership then surely? It's true that Country requires that you live X miles from club and club can set whatever distance it like in its Const. but if that club is your main club and managing your handicap then you're not a Country Member.

As I understood it this is why the distance membership category had to be created by the distance clubs as the Country Membership category wouldn't have let them manage the handicaps. (This is based on what the manager of the club I am a Country Member at tells me).

cairny

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

So - I'm not that confused after all.

If I'm going to be confused as I am many a time - can I be at least confused about something I should be confused about.

Anyway - the point I'm making is - being a member of say County Sligo and playing nearly all your golf in Dublin is not a new idea - it is around - what, 30 years ?

I think it's a relatively new idea. Country membership was used traditionally either to play at a club where you're from but moved away from or to play a course where you spend holiday time at.

If you equate Counrty and Distance then yeah it's been around for yonks but they are very different imo.

FixdePitchmark

cairny wrote: »

I think it's a relatively new idea. Country membership was used traditionally either to play at a club where you're from but moved away from or to play a course where you spend holiday time at.

If you equate Counrty and Distance then yeah it's been around for yonks but they are very different imo.

well that is your opinion.

I'd say we will find a member of the forum here , who was a "country member" - that was not in any other club.

cairny

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

well that is your opinion.

I'd say we will find a member of the forum here , who was a "country member" - that was not in any other club.

Maybe but even if we do they shouldn't be used as inter changeable terms because they describe very different things.

I'm less concerned about the effect Distance membership is having than I was at the start of this thread as it appears to be far less widespread than I thought but calling them country members is wrong.....in my opinion :-P

golfwallah

cairny wrote: »

But that's Distance Membership then surely? It's true that Country requires that you live X miles from club and club can set whatever distance it like in its Const. but if that club is your main club and managing your handicap then you're not a Country Member.

As I understood it this is why the distance membership category had to be created by the distance clubs as the Country Membership category wouldn't have let them manage the handicaps. (This is based on what the manager of the club I am a Country Member at tells me).

As far as I know, concepts like "country" and "distance" membership are defined at club level only and, in effect, are merely marketing terms.

By that, I mean they are not terms defined by the GUI or in the commonly used competition software, "Club2000". From what I remember, under "Player Details", Club2000 requires a "Home Club" or "Other Club" to be defined. The player's handicap is managed by the home club on their installed copy of the Club2000 software.

Hope this helps - the software requires a "home club" for handicapping purposes and will allow for "other clubs" to be added. But you have to have a "home club" - you cannot just have an "away club".

I may be mistaken on this, but that's my take on the situation.

PARlance

golfwallah wrote: »

As far as I know, concepts like "country" and "distance" membership are defined at club level only and, in effect, are merely marketing terms.

By that, I mean they are not terms defined by the GUI or in the commonly used competition software, "Club2000". From what I remember, under "Player Details", Club2000 requires a "Home Club" or "Other Club" to be defined. The player's handicap is managed by the home club on their installed copy of the Club2000 software.

Hope this helps - the software requires a "home club" for handicapping purposes and will allow for "other clubs" to be added. But you have to have a "home club" - you cannot just have an "away club".

I may be mistaken on this, but that's my take on the situation.

In the GUI stats for the breakdown of their total membership they classify "Country" as a type, alongside the other main forms.

However, they don't list "Distance" in the breakdown. There is an "Other" section in which this may sit but I couldn't be sure.

They may not have a strict definition of "Country" but they do classify it seperately.

golfwallah

First Up wrote: »

Pay and play is perfectly fine as a membership option. What I am opposed to is discounted pay and play by means of a spurious distance membership.

There you go, then!

So it is possible to find better ways of offering value for money golf from the customer's perspective. And variants on the "pay and play" theme are just some.

There are more ways to compete with other clubs than just offering "distance membership" and "cheap golf"!

What matters in the final analysis is the average cost per round that a golfer has to pay. Most people understand and accept that the less you play, the more you should have to pay per round. There has to be some price premium for flexibility and reward for people who commit to an annual fixed sub. But not everyone has to pay the fixed annual cost of membership for golf clubs to survive and prosper!

There are ways to compete by understanding the needs and wants of different customers and tailoring packages of benefits more suited to those needs. This can result in people paying a far lower fixed membership fee and "pay and play" rates for premium times thereafter. Result = "win / win" for clubs and golfers.

Call it what you want but all people really want is golf they can afford and that suits their pocket and the time they have available to play. They also want a handicap and not to be treated as second class golfers, consigned to pay green fees, as some people have been suggesting.

Really, that's all I have been saying all along (echoing what is being said by the Golfing Unions, here and abroad) and I think more and more people are seeing the value of this approach as time goes on.

First Up

golfwallah wrote: »

There you go, then!

So it is possible to find better ways of offering value for money golf from the customer's perspective. And variants on the "pay and play" theme are just some.

There are more ways to compete with other clubs than just offering "distance membership" and "cheap golf"!

What matters in the final analysis is the average cost per round that a golfer has to pay. Most people understand and accept that the less you play, the more you should have to pay per round. There has to be some price premium for flexibility and reward for people who commit to an annual fixed sub. But not everyone has to pay the fixed annual cost of membership for golf clubs to survive and prosper!

There are ways to compete by understanding the needs and wants of different customers and tailoring packages of benefits more suited to those needs. This can result in people paying a far lower fixed membership fee and "pay and play" rates for premium times thereafter. Result = "win / win" for clubs and golfers.

Call it what you want but all people really want is golf they can afford and that suits their pocket and the time they have available to play. They also want a handicap and not to be treated as second class golfers, consigned to pay green fees, as some people have been suggesting.

Really, that's all I have been saying all along (echoing what is being said by the Golfing Unions, here and abroad) and I think more and more people are seeing the value of this approach as time goes on.

What matters in the final analysis is that clubs have enough income to stay afloat.

Russman

golfwallah wrote: »

There you go, then!

So it is possible to find better ways of offering value for money golf from the customer's perspective. And variants on the "pay and play" theme are just some.

There are more ways to compete with other clubs than just offering "distance membership" and "cheap golf"!

What matters in the final analysis is the average cost per round that a golfer has to pay. Most people understand and accept that the less you play, the more you should have to pay per round. There has to be some price premium for flexibility and reward for people who commit to an annual fixed sub. But not everyone has to pay the fixed annual cost of membership for golf clubs to survive and prosper!

There are ways to compete by understanding the needs and wants of different customers and tailoring packages of benefits more suited to those needs. This can result in people paying a far lower fixed membership fee and "pay and play" rates for premium times thereafter. Result = "win / win" for clubs and golfers.

Call it what you want but all people really want is golf they can afford and that suits their pocket and the time they have available to play. They also want a handicap and not to be treated as second class golfers, consigned to pay green fees, as some people have been suggesting.

Really, that's all I have been saying all along (echoing what is being said by the Golfing Unions, here and abroad) and I think more and more people are seeing the value of this approach as time goes on.

We all want something.

I agree with a lot of your points, but just because someone wants, doesn't mean they get. Everybody wants the above, but ultimately someone has to pay for "it" being provided. If the cost isn't spread out, it means that some group are bearing a disproportionate cost to others. Now obviously in reality, its never going to be fully equal and there always have been and always will be different types of memberships, no issues with that at all, its getting the right balance that's the key IMO. Totally agree that some/lots of clubs need to change what they offer, but that's going to be club driven - a club in survival mode will offer a lot more and tend to become more like a gym type arrangement than a club that is stable.

I'd also slightly disagree with average cost per round being what matters most. That's not across the board IMHO. I know for myself, it certainly doesn't and I'm not a member of any elite leafy suburb type club. I like being a member of the club I'm in and if I play 20 times a year or 120 times a year I don't scientifically work out what each round costs me. I'm a member not a customer. How do you value 6 quick holes at 9pm on a July evening ? Or playing interclub ?

golfwallah

First Up wrote: »

What matters in the final analysis is that clubs have enough income to stay afloat.

And that will happen once clubs start to put existing and prospective new members back into the centre of their operations.

Most member clubs started because a number of committed people wanted a place where they could play golf. They banded together to get those facilities and improved as time went on.

Unfortunately, many clubs have lost their way in looking at the world from a customer perspective. I've no problem with well positioned / resourced clubs charging what the market will bear, getting it and being able to improve facilities as they are doing. They are fortunate to be in the position they are in. But other less well off clubs are struggling with the "received wisdom" of limited membership formats and need to adapt to changed customer requirements to get the income they need to stay afloat.

I believe that more imaginative membership formats, such as those I and others have been talking about, will help to bring in the much needed members and income to help clubs in that regard.

golfwallah

Russman wrote: »

We all want something.

I agree with a lot of your points, but just because someone wants, doesn't mean they get. Everybody wants the above, but ultimately someone has to pay for "it" being provided. If the cost isn't spread out, it means that some group are bearing a disproportionate cost to others. Now obviously in reality, its never going to be fully equal and there always have been and always will be different types of memberships, no issues with that at all, its getting the right balance that's the key IMO. Totally agree that some/lots of clubs need to change what they offer, but that's going to be club driven - a club in survival mode will offer a lot more and tend to become more like a gym type arrangement than a club that is stable.

I'd also slightly disagree with average cost per round being what matters most. That's not across the board IMHO. I know for myself, it certainly doesn't and I'm not a member of any elite leafy suburb type club. I like being a member of the club I'm in and if I play 20 times a year or 120 times a year I don't scientifically work out what each round costs me. I'm a member not a customer. How do you value 6 quick holes at 9pm on a July evening ? Or playing interclub ?

I think we're on the same wavelength on most issues. Of course I value all the "non financial" benefits of membership that you mention. They are all valuable as part of the overall package and should also be made more widely known to prospective members.

Would love to be able to cover every aspect of the argument in the short posts that one can expect people to read on boards.ie - but this would simply require a lot more time and space. Moreover, people just wouldn't read posts that are too long or too complicated.

It also points to clubs needing to put a lot more time and effort into business and market planning. Balancing the books to stay afloat is a very important part of running a club. In many clubs much more attention is given to business as usual "as we've been doing for years", rather than understanding, planning and acting in different ways to meet changed market and economic needs. Some clubs simply don't have the necessary business skills - hence the need for training and help as being provided by the golfing unions.

Business planning / marketing and governance are just as important as maintaining / developing the course and facilities. They won't do themselves or happen automatically - they need time, effort and resourcing just as much (and possibly more) than all the other day to day operational activities.

charlieIRL

We've discussed this before, the pay and play membership in a club doesn't work unless the club has a full time ranger employed.

I've seen it first hand with a club where you paid a reduced sub and then €5 per round after that. You got a different coloured sticker on your bag tag to indicate you were a P&P member (can't remember how they named it, think it was associate member or something). In theory it was a great idea for golfers who wanted to remain at the club through difficult financial times and only played a few rounds in a year. But what happened was lads were not paying the €5 before heading out and with no ranger on the course or anyone to check them, they were getting away with it.

The deal was scrapped the following year AFAIR.

mike12

The problem with the play and pay option is a lot of clubs down the country you have to stick your €20 in an envelope before you head out to play Joe turning up on a quite tuesday to an empty course is he going to bother it he has a membership tag on his bag. Plus it will be abused during the summer when the Pro or who ever is collecting the cash heads off at 6 in the evening.
I like the 400 for year 1 500 for year 2 up to full membership the club get a reasonable fee and will only need a % of those people to stay on.
Maybe it is time for clubs to get rid of the bars that all seem to be loosing money and stick to just golf. How many pay €50 to €150 on top of your subs to support the bar?
Think around Dublin there are plenty of pay and play options and they are a super place to start and most are decent quality.

PARlance

charlieIRL wrote: »

We've discussed this before, the pay and play membership in a club doesn't work unless the club has a full time ranger employed.

I've seen it first hand with a club where you paid a reduced sub and then €5 per round after that. You got a different coloured sticker on your bag tag to indicate you were a P&P member (can't remember how they named it, think it was associate member or something). In theory it was a great idea for golfers who wanted to remain at the club through difficult financial times and only played a few rounds in a year. But what happened was lads were not paying the €5 before heading out and with no ranger on the course or anyone to check them, they were getting away with it.

The deal was scrapped the following year AFAIR.

I don't think a full time ranger is required at all Charlie tbh.
I know you mentioned that example of abusing the system before but I would say that happened because of poor management rather than the need to go to an extreme of hiring a full time ranger.

Poor Management:
Everyone should have to check in with the pro.
If caught not paying, revoke their membership.
I'm guessing the club in that example may have adopted the "ara you're fine" approach a few too many times?
If there's no pro in evenings, or an envelop system in place etc then a ranger could/should be sent out at random a few times a month.

If the penalty for non paying is severe enough, and implemented, then it would take a silly golfer to risk the public embarrassment of getting caught and having to leave the club.

Russman

charlieIRL wrote: »

We've discussed this before, the pay and play membership in a club doesn't work unless the club has a full time ranger employed.

I've seen it first hand with a club where you paid a reduced sub and then €5 per round after that. You got a different coloured sticker on your bag tag to indicate you were a P&P member (can't remember how they named it, think it was associate member or something). In theory it was a great idea for golfers who wanted to remain at the club through difficult financial times and only played a few rounds in a year. But what happened was lads were not paying the €5 before heading out and with no ranger on the course or anyone to check them, they were getting away with it.

The deal was scrapped the following year AFAIR.

I think that's a really good point. I know in my own club we've had problems with random people arriving up in the summer evenings and playing holes after the pro shop closes at 6pm or whatever. Luckily no damage or messing, just seems to be chancers. And that's without any class of membership that is required to pay an amount before playing.

Russman

mike12 wrote: »

The problem with the play and pay option is a lot of clubs down the country you have to stick your €20 in an envelope before you head out to play Joe turning up on a quite tuesday to an empty course is he going to bother it he has a membership tag on his bag. Plus it will be abused during the summer when the Pro or who ever is collecting the cash heads off at 6 in the evening.
I like the 400 for year 1 500 for year 2 up to full membership the club get a reasonable fee and will only need a % of those people to stay on.
Maybe it is time for clubs to get rid of the bars that all seem to be loosing money and stick to just golf. How many pay €50 to €150 on top of your subs to support the bar?
Think around Dublin there are plenty of pay and play options and they are a super place to start and most are decent quality.

The graduated subs option is interesting alright. It might work better than pure pay and play. And it might alleviate the need for a ranger. It might be controversial to say this, but I suspect the honour system of leaving money in an envelope might work better down the country than in Dublin (no offence to anyone). I can remember playing in opens years ago outside of Dublin, and it was often just leave the money in an envelope and play, if you were one of the early starters on the sheet.
We'll know in my club how it works as we've just introduced hopefully a good version of it, starting at something like €275 for 23 year olds, going up by something like €100 every year or every two years, until you're paying full subs when you get to 35 years of age. If you join at 27 you start of at whatever that age rate is. Not sure of the exact amounts, but it'll be interesting to see how it plays out, if people take it up, if they stay etc. But I guess if you're in mid 20s/early 30s looking for cheap golf, its good idea.

mike12

My club does this which i think it a super way to get Kids thru to full members.
■Junior (up until age 18) – subscription €150
■Student (up until age 23) – subscription €300
■Step 1 Full member (age 23 – age 26) – subscription €500
■Step 2 Full member (age 27 – age 30) – subscription €800
■From age 31 onward – full Membership and full subscription.

Juniors can be accepted at junior or student level but Step 1 and Step 2 only apply to members who have come through from student level.

They also do a Thursday membership for €250 full GUI but you can only play on a Thursday and the organise a comp on that day you can only have this membership for 1 year and you pay a fee each time you play.

moycullen14

Russman wrote: »

I think that's a really good point. I know in my own club we've had problems with random people arriving up in the summer evenings and playing holes after the pro shop closes at 6pm or whatever. Luckily no damage or messing, just seems to be chancers. And that's without any class of membership that is required to pay an amount before playing.

I would agree completely. Exactly the same with us.

The problem is that pay and play members are by definition price sensitive so the temptation to get away with it would be quite high, especially if the chance of getting caught was small

golfwallah

charlieIRL wrote: »

We've discussed this before, the pay and play membership in a club doesn't work unless the club has a full time ranger employed.

I've seen it first hand with a club where you paid a reduced sub and then €5 per round after that. You got a different coloured sticker on your bag tag to indicate you were a P&P member (can't remember how they named it, think it was associate member or something). In theory it was a great idea for golfers who wanted to remain at the club through difficult financial times and only played a few rounds in a year. But what happened was lads were not paying the €5 before heading out and with no ranger on the course or anyone to check them, they were getting away with it.

The deal was scrapped the following year AFAIR.

I don't think anyone is suggesting just go and implement new membership categories based on a few boards posts, without good planning and management!

Even without flexible offerings, there is already an element of people evading payment on courses, particularly after the pro shop closes. That said, I don't believe avoiding payment is a major problem for most clubs.

It can never be eliminated altogether - but clubs can plan for it and take steps to mitigate against it, as with any new project (it's called "project management" - see also points about management outlined in post by Parlance). These kind of things are part and parcel of the expected risks and issues that will come with anything new that is tried.

There's plenty of help out there for those worried about changes and any downside risks associated with it. But it does take a bit of work and open communications with members to get as many people as possible on board for any new ideas and with helping to make them work effectively.:)

golfwallah

moycullen14 wrote: »

I would agree completely. Exactly the same with us.

The problem is that pay and play members are by definition price sensitive so the temptation to get away with it would be quite high, especially if the chance of getting caught was small

That's why the penalty for getting caught should be high as outlined by Parlance. But it's up to each club to figure out the best way for them and the help on offer from GUI, etc., will be of great help here.

Personally, I think there is more likelihood of non members avoiding payment as the embarrassment and consequences for members would be quite high.

But, without being prescriptive, it shouldn't be beyond the wit of clubs to deal with this issue effectively. Nobody is talking about perfection - no matter what you do!

charlieIRL

It could have been poor management at the time alright PARlance. At first you didn't even need to pass the pro shop to get to the first tee from the car park. After a while this route was blocked off. Unfortunately the club didn't have a pro to keep an eye on things either but the lady in the shop kept an eye on things.

I also think the deal where your initial sub starts off at "X" and increases yearly up to the full amount is a good idea. As a lot of golfers - like myself that didn't start as juniors and only took up the game in my 30's, the junior, student, step 1 etc like mike12 mentioned above doesn't attract new golfers over a certain age whereas the reduced sub would.

PARlance

charlieIRL wrote: »

It could have been poor management at the time alright PARlance. At first you didn't even need to pass the pro shop to get to the first tee from the car park. After a while this route was blocked off. Unfortunately the club didn't have a pro to keep an eye on things either but the lady in the shop kept an eye on things.

I also think the deal where your initial sub starts off at "X" and increases yearly up to the full amount is a good idea. As a lot of golfers - like myself that didn't start as juniors and only took up the game in my 30's, the junior, student, step 1 etc like mike12 mentioned above doesn't attract new golfers over a certain age whereas the reduced sub would.

Yip, I really like the concept of that too.
The only major problem I see with it is that if it's done like that, there's nothing really stopping people for hopping around from club to club.
Maybe not as big of an issue outside of the Pale as it would be in the country. But up here you could switch clubs every few years without running out of a place to play.

If the "discount" was given in latter years it might solve that somewhat.
It would be earned in the first 2 years but stored for following years.
Ie instead of paying say €300 in total less in Year 1 & 2 as you may normally under the above arrangement. You could pay the same as standard rates and then be "rewarded" by a €100 discount in years 3,4 & 5.
So you're being rewarded for becoming a new member when you prove you're in it for an extended period.