Under 30s Membership

Dr_Colossus

Interested to get people’s views on under 30’s membership. Is has come up briefly in other threads in terms of discount offers but no real discussion as to its merits. Is it a good or bad approach or does it alienate full ordinary members and dissuade potential new members from joining? Are the age related discounts too extreme essentially for having youth on your side?

The question arises from a pursuit of greener pastures for 2014 and in particular to Black Bush Golf Club which was the target of my future membership outlay. Full ordinary membership is advertised at €960 per annum but their under 30s membership is an impressive €590 (38.5% discount). Having contacted the club recently I was advised that their under 30s membership deal offers full playing rights and is no different to their ordinary membership despite the additional €370 required.

Having now surpassed the 30 mark by a few years I was at first I was a bit miffed that someone could obtain the same membership for such a discount solely based on age especially since these deals are a recent addition and weren’t available a few years ago when I would have qualified. I find the age related discount above too extreme especially since there are not any restrictions such as ineligibility to win the captain’s prize, presidents prize, golfer of the year or other such larger competitions as you generally get with junior and student membership deals. When I questioned the reasoning for the membership offer I was advised by the club it was probably as a means of reducing the average age of the club. Ok, if that’s the objective should there not be a sliding scale of membership rather than a significant jump once you reach a certain age not to mention the whole concept a bit discriminatory?

Generally it’s easier keep an existing member than attract a new one so occasionally clubs have introductory offers and discounts for your first year’s membership. I was advised this was not the case with Black Bush and instead they had good offers since they no longer had entry fees (finally a thing of the past for the majority of clubs in pursuit of members). I questioned whether they could cut me a deal of having my first year’s membership at the under 30’s rate of €590 and subsequent years at the then full ordinary members rate but they were unwilling to compromise in the efforts of obtaining a long standing member.

As it stands so I’m now less inclined to join Black Bush solely because they offer such a discount for under 30s as I perceive myself to be levied and subsiding this reduced rate certain players receive. I realise a number of other clubs such as Killeen Castle, Dun Laoghaire etc offer similar large discounts to under 30s so I’m wondering have others any views on the matter and whether there is any point in writing to the club with my views.

PARlance

I think it's a good idea and that more clubs should be offering it. (I'm 30)
Ya, it's a bit annoying if you miss out, but I'd like to think that we would all benefit from getting more players involved in golf in the long run.

The sliding scale is a good idea but there'll always be a cut off point that will annoy people.

IMO it's the only real offer to attract younger people, the Student offer doesn't really bring many players into the game. It may retain some existing players/juveniles but that's about it.
I.e I don't think many non golfers look to golf as a sport when they are in college.
So I see the Student offering as a Retention Tool (and that has it's place but lets face it, it's only retaining a relatively small pool of teenagers that actually play) but the Under 30's offer is an Acquisition Tool, and one that is really needed from what I can see.

I think the 25-30 year old range is the key area to be attracted.
They are young enough to take up the game but old enough to have played other sports (and may be coming to the end with them/thinking of giving up etc)
This age range will (hopefully) start to see the odd rise in salary during this period to enable them to take up golf...the costs, the need for a car etc.

Russman

I think these age related deals will become more and more common over the coming years. In my own club we have recently introduced an under 35s deal, but its 6 day membership as opposed to full, for I think, €595. Saturday is obviously the "7th" day. I think its a good idea and might attract, say, regular green fee payers who might like to put down roots in a club but can't justify the full fee.

I suppose anything that gets people playing is a good idea, and essentially, in my humble opinion, clubs aren't really looking to alter age profiles or anything as fancy as that, its about getting cash in to survive, pure and simple. I'm sure there are some exceptions, but I don't recall many age deals in the boom years.

For Paws

Remember that the lifetime income from a member who joins in his / her 20's (even at a discounted rate) is still going to be greater than from someone who joins in their 30's.

Getting members (& income) in early is crucial.

I wonder what the average 'age at joining' is ?

Probably a thread in itself ; maybe posters on this thread would like to include that info in their replies ?

(I was 28)

mike12

I'm guessing that people in their 20's are the floating golfers who play a good bit but are not members of courses and so they are who clubs are targeting. A lot of 30+ year olds are members so you may be just getting guys who are moving clubs rather than new members to the game.
I'm Suprised that a club that are offering a reduced rate for this group wouldn't give the rate for 1 year to get someone else in. The chances of both staying are much the same maybe even more so forthe older person as they may have a home in the area where a lot of younger people may be renting or living at home.
With no joining fees I can see a large amount of golfers moving club to club following the cheap fees.

sydneybound

To start with good topic however to slightly contradict myself not sure why we are even having this conversation of sorts as I think it's only common sense to offer a cheaper rate to those under 30 or even 35.

When a student member leaves college and therefore starts his/her working life they transfer over to full membership. This many times in Dublin is €1,500 or €1,000 to €800 in other parts of the country. Bearing in mind first proper jobs are not greatly paid how are these people in their 20's able to afford such steep membership fees? Many in their 20's can't get work at the moment so paying full membership on their own would be near impossible unless their parents are paying for them.

Therefore to bridge the gap between student membership which is sometimes only a token fee of €200 a year to fully blown full membership there should be an immediate membership group in every club.

If you look at the age profile in most clubs they normally have a striving juvenile section when every young fella in the town takes up the game at some point however come college they drift away a little but still play a bit in the summer however when they start work full membership is too much to be forking out for. 

When looking at my own club I sometimes see the 23 - 35 age group bracket as the lost generation. I feel clubs badly need to reach out to this group further as the general age profile in normal clubs is very high, mine is 61! A general statement I know but after the age of 35 people are settled and in better paid employment able to afford full fees.

In short incentives should be offered to keep this age group members of clubs and to not losing them from the game.

Dr_Colossus

All good points and feedback above, thanks. The transition from student to full membership is indeed steep so the introduction of under 30s offers does make sense in terms of attracting and then attempting to keep golfers that are starting to settle down to club golf.
I'm currently in my third year of membership having joined at 31. Having played a bit of golf in my teens I was previously interested in joining a club but excessive fees and other barriers to entry during the boom resulted in me shelving the game entirely during my 20s. It's only in the last couple of years that these under 30s deals are becoming popular as clubs now fight for membership numbers.

Russman wrote: »

In my own club we have recently introduced an under 35s deal, but its 6 day membership as opposed to full, for I think, €595. Saturday is obviously the "7th" day.

This I can understand and makes more sense than full ordinary membership at a significant discount. It gives a significant discount with slightly reduced playing rights which in turn gives new younger members a sense of the club atmosphere and set up without disgruntling the existing and loyal membership base.

mike12 wrote: »

I'm Suprised that a club that are offering a reduced rate for this group wouldn't give the rate for 1 year to get someone else in. The chances of both staying are much the same maybe even more so for the older person as they may have a home in the area where a lot of younger people may be renting or living at home.

Exactly, and this is what I was more surprised with following my conversation and attempted membership negotiation with BlackBush. It doesn't make much sense to me turning away a potential life long member while offering the same deal to someone else that few years younger. I might still write to the club asking for clemency as the person I spoke to may have been singing from the hymn sheet without the authorisation to deviate from it but it shouldn't be this difficult to spend money in a supposed recession.

PARlance

Dr_Colossus wrote: »

Exactly, and this is what I was more surprised with following my conversation and attempted membership negotiation with BlackBush. It doesn't make much sense to me turning away a potential life long member while offering the same deal to someone else that few years younger. I might still write to the club asking for clemency as the person I spoke to may have been singing from the hymn sheet without the authorisation to deviate from it but it shouldn't be this difficult to spend money in a supposed recession.

And if they give you the discount do they then give it to all new members?

That's a vicious circle, you may intend to repay them by being a lifelong member, but if clubs start giving reduced rates for Yr 1 to new members then it will only encourage club hopping.

dan_ep82

PARlance wrote: »

And if they give you the discount do they then give it to all new members?

That's a vicious circle, you may intend to repay them by being a lifelong member, but if clubs start giving reduced rates for Yr 1 to new members then it will only encourage club hopping.

From what I've seen most who offer reduced rates for Yr1 is for someone new to any golf membership.

PARlance

dan_ep82 wrote: »

From what I've seen most who offer reduced rates for Yr1 is for someone new to any golf membership.

That's a decent idea to encourage people into the game.

ForeRight

I'm not sure about all clubs but anywhere I've been the age bracket of under 30 was definitely the minority in the club.
Clubs need to attract people in their 20's to join with the view of staying for life but it's difficult to get them at that stage.

They are the years of college studies maybe even just settling down getting married, buying a house, having first children etc etc therefore clubs need to offer a very attractive package in order to get them in as members.

With recent recession problems clubs may need to bump this to am under 35 offer to maintain a membership base for the future.

PhlegmyMoses

I got the under 30s membership from Donabate this year. €600 for a lovely club house and all-you-can-eat golf at a decent, 27 hole parkland course. When you look around the clubhouse, it's all grey hair and the course is full of motorised trolleys. They need to try to get my age group invested in the club in order to replace a membership that will dwindle if they don't do something about it. The club captain introduced himself when we played our first comp and said as much to us.

golf247

Actually calling out to Donabate GC today as I fall into the 20-30 bracket. Do you know have many new members in the 20-30 age taken up this offer?? I currently have a Blessington Lakes membership online deal at 150euro which is great but looking for some more routine saturday morning golf comps for 2014

ssbob

This doesn't seem to be common at all in Cork, my own club only introduced a student offer this year but are limiting it to 19-23 year olds which is a bit stupid I guess! I am currently 28 and considering moving to a cheaper course but if my own club were to offer under 30's that's ideally where I want to stay.

I guess from a club point of view, they should take note of how banks get you to sign up as young as possible, that way you are tied to a certain bank and couldn't be bothered changing so I think as suggested above a tiered membership should be in place.

Jimmymcnulty86

What clubs around north dublin/Meath do under 30s membership discount?? ( apart from donabate)

golf247

I only know of Black Bush in Dunshaughlin doing a deal for 20-30s at 590 for the yr. 600 in donabate

PARlance

Jimmymcnulty86 wrote: »

What clubs around north dublin/Meath do under 30s membership discount?? ( apart from donabate)

Pretty sure that Kileen Castle do an U-30 deal for 1k.

Jimmymcnulty86

Will be taking a trip out to black bush to see what it's like, good price that, 27 holes aswel. Thanks

MisterAnarchy

My own club passed a motion to abolish all discounted membership rates lately.
No more discounts for under 30's and no reduction for over 65's either .
Reason given for the above motion was reduced subs for senior members was costing the club too much money because of the clubs age profile and was nonviable.

I'd have preferred if the club had tried to cut its operating costs instead of trying to get more money out of its older members ,many of whom have reduced incomes and all of the neighboring clubs have heavily discounted senior rates.
Abolishing the under 30's discount scheme only a few years after its introduction seems strange too especially considering how few under age 40 members in most courses .

I dont understand how neighboring clubs with much smaller memberships can have lower subscription fees and a similar course standard.

golfwallah

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

My own club passed a motion to abolish all discounted membership rates lately.
No more discounts for under 30's and no reduction for over 65's either .
Reason given for the above motion was reduced subs for senior members was costing the club too much money because of the clubs age profile and was nonviable.

I'd have preferred if the club had tried to cut its operating costs instead of trying to get more money out of its older members ,many of whom have reduced incomes and all of the neighboring clubs have heavily discounted senior rates.
Abolishing the under 30's discount scheme only a few years after its introduction seems strange too especially considering how few under age 40 members in most courses .

I dont understand how neighboring clubs with much smaller memberships can have lower subscription fees and a similar course standard.

Will be interesting to see how many over 65s and under 30s you will retain & attract next year!

Also, if there is no understanding of how neighbouring clubs have lower fees and similar course standards, I wonder if the motion passed was based on informed, fact supported, debate about the options or purely based on emotional desire of existing members for equity.

I'd be more comfortable about club decisions like this being made in the context of a well researched long-term plan, circulated to the members in advance of a general meeting, than on foot of a motion that could put your club out of business.

But hey, that's democracy! The market, on the other hand, doesn't care about internal concepts of equity - only about value for money as between competing clubs. And there's lots of competition out there right now. That's capitalism!

MisterAnarchy

golfwallah wrote: »

Will be interesting to see how many over 65s and under 30s you will retain & attract next year!

I cant see any under 30's joining next year ,far better options locally .

I'd be more comfortable about club decisions like this being made in the context of a well researched long-term plan, circulated to the members in advance of a general meeting, than on foot of a motion that could put your club out of business.

They had been talking about removing the discounted membership rates for a few years due to the older age profile of the club and it wasn't taken lightly.

By removing the discount for over 65's they hope to use part of the extra income to lower the standard membership rate so it will be a lower universal rate.

With a lower subscription rate they preposterously think this will be an enticement for new members and former members but I cant see a 10% reduction in the membership fee being much of an enticement .

They seem obsessed with bringing in new members ,something that is very difficult in these financial times .
They are biting the hand that feeds them I fear with the decision to increase the fees for retired people ,most of whom have reduced incomes .
Every other golf course in the vicinity has greatly reduced fees for over 65's .

Also, if there is no understanding of how neighbouring clubs have lower fees and similar course standards, I wonder if the motion passed was based on informed, fact supported, debate about the options or purely based on emotional desire of existing members for equity.

The members are repeatably being told that costs are being cut to the bone but there is plenty of fat yet to be trimmed from what I can see .
Too much still being spent on wages ,especially course staff ,most of whom are twiddling their thumbs at this time of year.

My favourite line from the board of management was that the membership is great value for money but the subscription is just a bit too high
If they said the sky was falling there would probably be a stampede for the door .

Felexicon

I'll be joining Donabate GC again this year. Really hard to argue with €600 for the year for under 30s. It gives you full playing rights but you can't win Captains or Presidents prize which seems fair enough to me.

Obviously I think the special offers for under 30s are great but the reality is without the discount I wouldn't be a member anywhere as I couldn't justify that outlay at this time in my life. I've just bought a house and am planning a wedding.

alxmorgan

Felexicon wrote: »

I'll be joining Donabate GC again this year. Really hard to argue with €600 for the year for under 30s. It gives you full playing rights but you can't win Captains or Presidents prize which seems fair enough to me.

Obviously I think the special offers for under 30s are great but the reality is without the discount I wouldn't be a member anywhere as I couldn't justify that outlay at this time in my life. I've just bought a house and am planning a wedding.

I wonder will they give me a discount in my club cause I can't win these either...for different reasons of course :rolleyes:

TrapperChamonix

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

They seem obsessed with bringing in new members ,something that is very difficult in these financial times .
They are biting the hand that feeds them I fear with the decision to increase the fees for retired people ,most of whom have reduced incomes .
Every other golf course in the vicinity has greatly reduced fees for over 65's .

I'm not commenting on your own club specifically, nor their actions but the over 65 discount is an issue that all clubs need to face in the very near future. As with Pensions, the change in demographics has changed so much that it is not sustainable to maintain the current arrangements. People live longer and play golf longer. Most clubs are facing a demographic shift to a higher % of members being over 65 and therefore a lower annual sub income with the same number of members (and we know most have declining members).
The way to deal with this are
1. Eliminate / reduce the over 65 discount.
2. Increase the age limit for it to kick in.
3. Target increase of younger members.
4. Decrease spend within the club.
5. Increase the green fee income.

In truth most clubs have already targeted 4 & 5 and will have to look at 1 to 3 in the coming years.

Russman

TrapperChamonix wrote: »

I'm not commenting on your own club specifically, nor their actions but the over 65 discount is an issue that all clubs need to face in the very near future. As with Pensions, the change in demographics has changed so much that it is not sustainable to maintain the current arrangements. People live longer and play golf longer. Most clubs are facing a demographic shift to a higher % of members being over 65 and therefore a lower annual sub income with the same number of members (and we know most have declining members).
The way to deal with this are
1. Eliminate / reduce the over 65 discount.
2. Increase the age limit for it to kick in.
3. Target increase of younger members.
4. Decrease spend within the club.
5. Increase the green fee income.

In truth most clubs have already targeted 4 & 5 and will have to look at 1 to 3 in the coming years.

Very true.
But, in an awful lot of clubs, the over 65s are the ones keeping the place on its feet, playing in comps 3/4 times a week, using the bar etc etc. A lot of "younger" members, myself included, don't/can't play as often as the seniors can. Not saying its right or wrong to have a senior discount, but if you alienate a huge chunk of golfers/members, no good can come of it.

Increasing the age limit, might work, the way we do it, is that to avail of the discount you need to have been a member for 20 years.

There just isn't the numbers of younger members taking up the sport anymore and there's too many clubs. I've often wondered if changing the membership year of a club might help retain younger players. Its very difficult for someone, say in their 30s with a young family, to tell their other half, the month after Christmas, that he/she needs to spend a grand on golf club subs, while possibly not seeing the place until March because of the weather. If clubs ran their year from summer to summer, it might help. Then again it might not, just something I've wondered.

PARlance

TrapperChamonix wrote: »

I'm not commenting on your own club specifically, nor their actions but the over 65 discount is an issue that all clubs need to face in the very near future. As with Pensions, the change in demographics has changed so much that it is not sustainable to maintain the current arrangements. People live longer and play golf longer. Most clubs are facing a demographic shift to a higher % of members being over 65 and therefore a lower annual sub income with the same number of members (and we know most have declining members).
The way to deal with this are
1. Eliminate / reduce the over 65 discount.
2. Increase the age limit for it to kick in.
3. Target increase of younger members.
4. Decrease spend within the club.
5. Increase the green fee income.

In truth most clubs have already targeted 4 & 5 and will have to look at 1 to 3 in the coming years.

I would have thought it's the opposite (or dissimilar at least) to Pensions.
As long as people over 65 aren't causing membership to be at full capacity, then the fact the people are living and playing golf longer should be a positive thing for a club. Yes, they are getting a discounted rate for it but they should be getting this rate for more years than they would have done.

golfwallah

TrapperChamonix wrote: »

I'm not commenting on your own club specifically, nor their actions but the over 65 discount is an issue that all clubs need to face in the very near future. As with Pensions, the change in demographics has changed so much that it is not sustainable to maintain the current arrangements. People live longer and play golf longer. Most clubs are facing a demographic shift to a higher % of members being over 65 and therefore a lower annual sub income with the same number of members (and we know most have declining members).
The way to deal with this are
1. Eliminate / reduce the over 65 discount.
2. Increase the age limit for it to kick in.
3. Target increase of younger members.
4. Decrease spend within the club.
5. Increase the green fee income.

In truth most clubs have already targeted 4 & 5 and will have to look at 1 to 3 in the coming years.

I'd agree with proposals 3 - 5 above, provided the reduced spend doesn't impact too much on quality.

However, I'd take issue with proposals 1 & 2, which at first glance appear as if they would improve revenues but, in reality, are more likely to be financially damaging. I'm saying this out of experience of proposing something similar in my own club a few years ago and getting feedback that numbers of existing seniors would leave and join as seniors closer to their homes. Plus there is the negative impact on those coming up to senior membership, who would regard it as unfairly changing the rules mid stream.

I think it would be better if clubs took a more strategic approach to the current economic crisis. This could be by way of formal strategic planning (e.g. starting with SWOT Analysis - Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities & Threats) and coming up with a workable plan to increase revenues and reduce costs. Pointers on this approach are contained in the GUI/ PGA / ILGU booklet "Promoting Golf Club Membership", published in 2009 (can be found by googling this term).

TrapperChamonix

PARlance wrote: »

I would have thought it's the opposite (or dissimilar at least) to Pensions.
As long as people over 65 aren't causing membership to be at full capacity, then the fact the people are living and playing golf longer should be a positive thing for a club. Yes, they are getting a discounted rate for it but they should be getting this rate for more years than they would have done.

Parlance, the similarity to pension is that the discount structures generally were put in place some time ago when the % of members over 65 was much less. As this changes it becomes more and more unaffordable. I take your point about it having less of an impact until you have full membership. But this is a short, medium and long term issue that clubs will need to tackle.

Russman, I would never under estimate the contribution that the over 65s contribute to the running of the club, membership of committees, money spent in the bar, restaurant and pro shop etc, running competitions and junior programs. Additionally they bring a wealth of experience in the form of how to run a golf club as a sporting entity as well as the commercial end of the club.

golfwallah

Here's a link to the EnglandGolf Site on retaining membership (site also contains information on marketing, etc.): http://www.englandgolf.org/page.aspx?sitesectionid=330

I believe it wiser to take a research based considered approach than a purely reactive one, based on limited perceptions about the particular market segment you are or are not in.

TrapperChamonix

golfwallah wrote: »

I'd agree with proposals 3 - 5 above, provided the reduced spend doesn't impact too much on quality.

However, I'd take issue with proposals 1 & 2, which at first glance appear as if they would improve revenues but, in reality, are more likely to be financially damaging. I'm saying this out of experience of proposing something similar in my own club a few years ago and getting feedback that numbers of existing seniors would leave and join as seniors closer to their homes. Plus there is the negative impact on those coming up to senior membership, who would regard it as unfairly changing the rules mid stream.

I think it would be better if clubs took a more strategic approach to the current economic crisis. This could be by way of formal strategic planning (e.g. starting with SWOT Analysis - Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities & Threats) and coming up with a workable plan to increase revenues and reduce costs. Pointers on this approach are contained in the GUI/ PGA / ILGU booklet "Promoting Golf Club Membership", published in 2009 (can be found by googling this term).

We'd all like to target 3,4 & 5 but on their own it is unlikely that this will fix the overall demographic shift that is taking place.

PARlance

TrapperChamonix wrote: »

We'd all like to target 3,4 & 5 but on their own it is unlikely that this will fix the overall demographic shift that is taking place.

What is the OAP discount in your club Trapper?
It's less than 10% in mine, but the average (from a quick glance of sites) is about 20%?

golfwallah

TrapperChamonix wrote: »

We'd all like to target 3,4 & 5 but on their own it is unlikely that this will fix the overall demographic shift that is taking place.

Agreed!

That's why clubs need to think about the problem in its entirety rather than just picking on one particular group (who may be contributing the lion's share of their club's income).

My experience with electronic systems in our club is that there's loads of data available on course usage, member age profile, etc. Take a bit of time to analyse as would a survey or focus group to determine what members actually want.

Quick fixes like picking on the older members can rebound in the long term - hence the need for a professional, long term approach such as suggested in GUI/ PGA / ILGU booklet "Promoting Golf Club Membership" or on the link on the Englishgolf site that I posted above.

golfwallah

PARlance wrote: »

What is the OAP discount in your club Trapper?
It's less than 10% in mine, but the average (from a quick glance of sites) is about 20%?

For the sake of clarity, there's a big difference between an OAP Discount (perhaps 10% - 20% with no long membership requirement) and a senior member Rate (between 25% - 50% with an age and long membership requirement).

It also needs to be borne in mind that older members play a lot more frequently and so support competitions, restaurant, bar a lot more because they have the time to do it.

ssbob

I think a simple financial analysis would suffice in this scenario, it drives me mad when "committees" come up with ideas without doing the numbers. For example:

Say we have 100 members who are over 65, the full sub for the year is €1,200 and they are getting a 20% discount so have a saving of €240. On average the over 65's play one additional comp per week over normal members contributing an extra €5pp. On average the over 65's spend an additional €5 per week over normal members. Quick maths-

• Cost of OAP membership €24,000
• Additonal Comp Fee's €25,000
• Additonal Restraunt Receipts €25,000
• Net additional income to the club €26,000

Say now that it was proposed to abolish this discount altogether and the club would lose 65 members:

• Cost of OAP membership €0
• Additonal Comp Fee's €8,750
• Additonal Restraunt Receipts €8,750
• Net additional income to the club €17,500

So it's a great way of reducing your costs but also a great way of reducing your surplus income. All I am saying is an analysis should be set in front of the members.

PARlance

ssbob wrote: »

I think a simple financial analysis would suffice in this scenario, it drives me mad when "committees" come up with ideas without doing the numbers. For example:

Say we have 100 members who are over 65, the full sub for the year is €1,200 and they are getting a 20% discount so have a saving of €240. On average the over 65's play one additional comp per week over normal members contributing an extra €5pp. On average the over 65's spend an additional €5 per week over normal members. Quick maths-

• Cost of OAP membership (€24,000)
• Additonal Comp Fee's +€25,000
• Additonal Restraunt Receipts +€25,000
• Net additional income to the club €26,000

Say now that it was proposed to abolish this discount altogether and the club would lose 65 members:

• Cost of OAP membership (€0)
• Additonal Comp Fee's +€8,750
• Additonal Restraunt Receipts +€8,750
• Net additional income to the club €17,500

So it's a great way of reducing your costs but also a great way of reducing your surplus income. All I am saying is an analysis should be set in front of the members.

There's nothing simple about that, it took me a few mins to figure out what you were doing there
An auld ( ) for a minus and + for a positive wouldn't have gone astray

I wouldn't go about it in that way, the "cost" of OAP membership isn't an actual cost, it's a discount.
And if you are assuming that 65 members will drop off (which I think is very high) as a result of the withdrawal of the discount, then you've missed out a major item, that being the loss of their yearly sub in your calculations.

I think it would be best to assume the average spend by a normal member is €5 per comp and restaurant. So an over 65 is spending €10 (an additional €5 as per above)

Current: 100 over 65's (based on your assumptions)
100 members at (1200-240) = 96,000
Total Comps Fees (100 members * €10 * 50 weeks) = 50,000
Total Bar & Rest (100 members * €10 * 50 weeks) = 50,000

Total Revenue from over 65's = €196,000

Changed: 35 members over 65's (at 1200 instead of discounted 960)
35 members at (1200) = 42,000
Total Comps Fees (35 members * €10 * 50 weeks) = 17,500
Total Bar & Rest = 17,500

Total Revenue from over 65's = € 77,000

I wouldn't agree with the assumption that you would lose 65% of the members. I think that's way too high.

Out of interest, the break-even point for this, if they got rid of the discount, would be if they lost about 11 members

Break-even with Change:
89 members at €1200 = 106,800
Comps (89m* €10 * 50 weeks) = 44,500
Rest (89m* €10 * 50 weeks) = 44,500

Total Revenue from over 65's = €195,800

ssbob

PARlance - Loving the way you "sexed" up my "back of the envelope calc's"! If I had been using Excel it would have been perfectly formatted for you my friend:D

As for your argument about the discount, I think in any analysis this has to be treated as an opportunity cost just like a marketing ploy using Groupon discounts etc.......

I used 65% to emphasise the point but depending on the location of the club it's not unreasonable to think members would move to a club they feel they would be more appreciated.

:oI did forget the membership lost:o

PARlance

ssbob wrote: »

PARlance - Loving the way you "sexed" up my "back of the envelope calc's"! If I had been using Excel it would have been perfectly formatted for you my friend:D

As for your argument about the discount, I think in any analysis this has to be treated as an opportunity cost just like a marketing ploy using Groupon discounts etc.......

I used 65% to emphasise the point but depending on the location of the club it's not unreasonable to think members would move to a club they feel they would be more appreciated.

:oI did forget the membership lost:o

Maybe 65% isn't that high so, depends on the competition as you say. I was looking at it purely in the sense of a 20% increase, your "appreciation" point would probably be the bigger factor though.
I was struggling to see nearly two thirds leaving over a 20% increase (i.e Purely financial)... but if they seen the move as a kick in the (false)teeth then there could be a mass exodus at a moderate to brisk pace

Ara it was only €62,400 worth of an omission

Russman

I think the mistake a lot of committees make when trying to "deal" with the issue of senior discounts/reductions etc, is they, for whatever reason, assume that all the existing seniors will simply stump up the cash and they don't consider the numbers that will leave. In a lot of cases its cutting off your nose to spite your face. They see, say 100 members paying €200 less and think its €20k they're missing out on - not the case IMO. In a theoretical mathematics exercise, it is, but clubs aren't like that. If they bump up the fees they might find they're missing out on €20k of real money, as opposed to "not getting" €20k of notional income.

That's why I think the full value of the "discount" can't really be counted as an opportunity cost, or even as lost revenue - there's no way there's any certainty about it IMO.

ssbob

Russman wrote: »

That's why I think the full value of the "discount" can't really be counted as an opportunity cost, or even as lost revenue - there's no way there's any certainty about it IMO.

But when you do a Groupon deal, you have an opportunity cost of the discount percentage, that doesn't mean you were guaranteed that income but by selling at the discounted price you are giving up the "opportunity" of selling at that price as that place is now gone.

I totally agree with your point though.

Russman

ssbob wrote: »

But when you do a Groupon deal, you have an opportunity cost of the discount percentage, that doesn't mean you were guaranteed that income but by selling at the discounted price you are giving up the "opportunity" of selling at that price as that place is now gone.

I totally agree with your point though.

True, I should probably have said that opportunity cost shouldn't really come into the equation for struggling clubs, as nothing is guaranteed (or even highly likely).

PARlance

ssbob wrote: »

But when you do a Groupon deal, you have an opportunity cost of the discount percentage, that doesn't mean you were guaranteed that income but by selling at the discounted price you are giving up the "opportunity" of selling at that price as that place is now gone.

I totally agree with your point though.

It's certainly not an opportunity cost anyway lads, as that deals with the buyer/golfer. The opportunity cost of joining X club is that he could have joined Y club.

The Groupon offer example is a bad one imo, it would be more like a club doing a deal to recruit new members.
A retailer sees groupon as a means of attracting a new audience/customer base, it's not a means of rewarding the existing loyal customer base which an over 65 discount really does.

I'd think most retailers would look at it as getting 60% of additional revenue that they were very unlikely to receive instead of looking at it as losing the 40% in a "missed opportunity".
(Whether the retailer makes any money and is happy with Groupon is another story... Groupon is a disaster of a business model imo, it'll be looked back on as a another bubble disaster. 17 billion for a company that's losing a billion a year, figure that one out)

Ssbob, I think the "opportunity" only comes into it if you have a case where a club has a full membership, and someone is getting in ahead at a cheaper rate than someone paying a full sub. It's not a missed opportunity in my eyes unless we are dealing with clubs turning people away.

ssbob

PARlance wrote: »

It's certainly not an opportunity cost anyway lads, as that deals with the buyer/golfer. The opportunity cost of joining X club is that he could have joined Y club.

The Groupon offer example is a bad one imo, it would be more like a club doing a deal to recruit new members.
A retailer sees groupon as a means of attracting a new audience/customer base, it's not a means of rewarding the existing loyal customer base which an over 65 discount really does.

I'd think most retailers would look at it as getting 60% of additional revenue that they were very unlikely to receive instead of looking at it as losing the 40% in a "missed opportunity".
(Whether the retailer makes any money and is happy with Groupon is another story... Groupon is a disaster of a business model imo, it'll be looked back on as a another bubble disaster. 17 billion for a company that's losing a billion a year, figure that one out)

Ssbob, I think the "opportunity" only comes into it if you have a case where a club has a full membership, and someone is getting in ahead at a cheaper rate than someone paying a full sub. It's not a missed opportunity in my eyes unless we are dealing with clubs turning people away.

Again agreed on the Groupon business model, it makes no sense and is a complete race to the bottom. It is neither good for consumers or retailers in the long term!

I understand that most on the over 65's rate might be lifelong members but there may also be some who are chasing the deal.

I think you are wrong in your analysis however as if you take a hotel for example, rarely are they operating at full capacity(maybe some in the capital have good occupancy rates) so they decide to do a Groupon deal to sell more beds, then they have an opportunity lost. The same goes for senior membership, your still losing the opportunity to sell that membership at the full cost.

Anyway lets agree to disagree and we'll fight it out over a bottle of SMA next year:D

Russman

ssbob wrote: »

Again agreed on the Groupon business model, it makes no sense and is a complete race to the bottom. It is neither good for consumers or retailers in the long term!

I understand that most on the over 65's rate might be lifelong members but there may also be some who are chasing the deal.

I think you are wrong in your analysis however as if you take a hotel for example, rarely are they operating at full capacity(maybe some in the capital have good occupancy rates) so they decide to do a Groupon deal to sell more beds, then they have an opportunity lost. The same goes for senior membership, your still losing the opportunity to sell that membership at the full cost.

Anyway lets agree to disagree and we'll fight it out over a bottle of SMA next year:D

Are there clubs that have a senior discount for new members ? Genuinely asking, because in my place, to avail of it, you need to have been a member for 20 years.

PARlance

Russman wrote: »

Are there clubs that have a senior discount for new members ? Genuinely asking, because in my place, to avail of it, you need to have been a member for 20 years.

I'm fcuked if I'm going chasing around for deals on golf membership when I'm 65

I'll be dipping into the kids inheritance rather than being in that position

ssbob

Russman wrote: »

Are there clubs that have a senior discount for new members ? Genuinely asking, because in my place, to avail of it, you need to have been a member for 20 years.

I honestly don't know but what your club is doing seems fair, as to be honest by 45 you should be in a reasonable position financially to afford full membership.

kieran.

Russman wrote: »

Are there clubs that have a senior discount for new members ? Genuinely asking, because in my place, to avail of it, you need to have been a member for 20 years.

Yup, my club had a 50% discount for all over 65's, his increased to 75% in the AGM last week. Since the announcement out of about 10 over 65's I know 3 are leaving the club and all been in the club 10 years +.

Russman

kieran. wrote: »

Yup, my club had a 50% discount for all over 65's, his increased to 75% in the AGM last week. Since the announcement out of about 10 over 65's I know 3 are leaving the club and all been in the club 10 years +.

Assume you mean they now have to pay a 75% fee, as opposed to the discount increased to 75% ?:)

kieran.

Correct 50% discount has been reduced to a 25% discount off the full membership rate, in line with the under 30's deal with the club.

MisterAnarchy

Some excellent discussion here on the matter of discounts for senior members .

The discount in my own club @65 was 1.5% discount per year of membership up to a maximum of 30% (i.e 20 years membership)
This has now been abolished and everyone under 72 will now pay the same amount which has yet to be decided .
At age 72 a 70% discount is applied for 35 years membership.
This is the carrot that may keep hold of senior members but I have no doubt that by the time most members in the 60-67 year bracket reach 72 the 70% discount will have been hugely reduced .

I think the club have cut their throat on this .
I read this posted on the clubs Facebook page and it sums up how out of touch the club are.

While it is no secret that golf clubs all over the country are struggling financially in the current climate, the mood in the club was very positive at the EGM. There was a tremendous sense of optimism and support from all the attendees to the board of management’s plans for the club, which should lead to the club, yet again, becoming one of the most desirable golf clubs in the province.

It is the deluded nonsense in bold that makes me angry.
To say the club would be the best club within a 20 mile radius may be debatable ,to say it would be the best club in the county is preposterous,its arguably top 10, but to say it ever was or ever would be one of the most desirable clubs in the province smacks of just how out of touch the club really are.
A club needs to know its true worth and standing if it is to have any chance of being successful.
It was these false notions of grandeur that brought the club and many more to its knees.

The main priority should have been cutting costs instead of putting the knife into the clubs longest and most loyal serving members many of who served the club in committees and did trojan voluntary work through the years that prudently grew the club only to see it deteriorate under recent self serving and reckless management.

One nearby course in particular has half the number of members and a substantially lower adult sub and a senior sub less than half of that in my current club yet they seem to be maintaining their course well on a vastly lower income base yet I am expected to believe costs in my club are cut to the bone.
There was plenty of fat left on the bone that could have been cut instead of putting the knife into the older members of the club,many of whom I fear will leave the club with resentment like so many other members in recent times.

Dr_Colossus

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

Some excellent discussion here on the matter of discounts for senior members .

The discount in my own club @65 was 1.5% discount per year of membership up to a maximum of 30% (i.e 20 years membership)
This has now been abolished and everyone under 72 will now pay the same amount which has yet to be decided .
At age 72 a 70% discount is applied for 35 years membership.
This is the carrot that may keep hold of senior members but I have no doubt that by the time most members in the 60-67 year bracket reach 72 the 70% discount will have been hugely reduced .

Some very good discussions indeed, I wasn't previously aware of reductions for senior members as any clubs I've looked at to date never mentioned them and I suppose since they don't directly affect me yet I never inquired. That said I think they're a very good idea and especially when based on tenure in the club so the above 1.5% discount per year of membership is the best and fairest I've heard. I think it's sad that clubs are now abandoning these senior discounts for long standing members when instead their loyalty should be rewarded and as said in previous posts they are generally high spenders in competition entry fees, bar and restaurant.

In comparison to under 30s membership deals I think it's more important clubs maintain their senior discounts rather than introduce under 30s deals. Senior members are usually settled in their locality and established in the club with many friends so unlikely to move so this is what clubs appear to be unfairly capitalising on. Under 30s on the other hand are still very mobile setting up base so chances are they will take advantage of the under 30s deals and move on as opportunities with work and life progress so it's not like the clubs are baiting life long members with their deals. Sure they promote golf in general and encourage younger players to take up the sport but from an individual clubs financial position it amazes me some of the discounts being offered for seemingly no reduction in playing rights in a lot of cases.

golfwallah

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

Some excellent discussion here on the matter of discounts for senior members .

The discount in my own club @65 was 1.5% discount per year of membership up to a maximum of 30% (i.e 20 years membership)
This has now been abolished and everyone under 72 will now pay the same amount which has yet to be decided .
At age 72 a 70% discount is applied for 35 years membership.
This is the carrot that may keep hold of senior members but I have no doubt that by the time most members in the 60-67 year bracket reach 72 the 70% discount will have been hugely reduced .

I think the club have cut their throat on this .
I read this posted on the clubs Facebook page and it sums up how out of touch the club are.

"While it is no secret that golf clubs all over the country are struggling financially in the current climate, the mood in the club was very positive at the EGM. There was a tremendous sense of optimism and support from all the attendees to the board of management’s plans for the club, which should lead to the club, yet again, becoming one of the most desirable golf clubs in the province".

It is the deluded nonsense in bold that makes me angry.

Unfortunately, what poses as an understanding of a club's needs may be based on limited anecdotal evidence. And the mood of the membership at a partially attended EGM may not fully represent that of the entire membership, either.

So the cure could end up worse than the disease for the club, through losing a significant portion of membership that contributes most to their finances.

According to the England Golf site, clubs lose an average of 10% of members every year. There's no need to add to this problem by actions not supported by reliable research on your own member needs and wants.

Both this site, which has a "toolkit", and that of the Scottish Golfing Union provide a lot of information on a more professional approach to golf club management, planning, marketing, etc:

http://www.englandgolf.org/RRLanding.aspx?sitesectionid=600&sitesectiontitle=Recruitment+%26+Retention+Toolkit

http://www.scottishgolf.org/club-services/

GUI (together with PGA & ILGU) also published a booklet on the subject in 2009 called "Promoting Golf Club Membership".

So there is no shortage of suggestions around - only, perhaps, the willingness to read up on the subject and implement a more professional approach.

But, then again, I guess its all a bit of a learning curve and many clubs are destined to learn the hard way.