The future of golf in Ireland?

14handicap

In 5-10years time how do you see golf and golf clubs in Ireland?
Will golf grow as a sport and pastime or will be see the number of golf courses reduced?

How much will golf cost in 10years time compared to now?
Green fees V memberships?

More and more junior golfers playing now, will they continue?

Will be interesting to look back at the feedback and see how wrong or right we were...!!!

golfwallah

Change, particularly in the types of membership offerings available, is very slow in membership clubs and, perhaps, this is understandable.

In my experience, many existing members feel it unfair to offer more financially attractive "packages" to entice new members into clubs. This causes a conflict between existing members, who have managed to afford the existing fee levels, and the needs of potential new members with much more constraints on their time and budgets, for more affordable fees.

Quite how this problem will be resolved over time remains to be seen. Some change has come about in local authority and resort type courses, where "pay as you go" membership have been available for some time. We are now seeing this approach being adopted in some clubs, presumably those experiencing the most severe financial pressure.

That being said, the economic situation over the last few years has changed and clubs will have to learn to adapt to the new economic realities, IMO, or go out of business.

The real problem is the voluntary nature of committees, their reluctance to change and the lack of a structured approach being provided from "on high" - result = falling numbers of registered golfers.

Hopefully, this issue will begin to be addressed and resolved by the new "Confederation of Golf in Ireland" along the lines of the announcement on the GUI website:

Specifically, there is important work to be done to stop the decline in membership of golf clubs and to start the re-building process after the economic hardships of recent years. The key to this will be to bring a new focus to the game and the business of golf clubs on the island of Ireland.

For link see: http://www.gui.ie/home/news/confederation-of-golf-in-ireland-formed

Wichita Lineman

:eek:"The real problem is the voluntary nature of committees":eek:

The real problem is our economic climate which has forced some golfers to abandon the game altogether and many others to expect top quality facilities for next to nothing.

Many clubs would have already gone to the wall if it wasnt for their hard working 'voluntary committees'! While we all want people to come and play our course paying members are the life source of any club.

FixdePitchmark

It is interesting,

The older member owned clubs have had a structure in place that has worked for a long time - they have no need to change if it continues to work for them. But the younger people playing the game are accustomed to variety and access to many courses at world class level for extraordinary low prices. This variety and experience has spoilt them (In a good way perhaps) - they are use to variety in all other aspect of their lives - holidays - restaurants - lifestyle. The expectations of this new group of golfers is very high. Maybe unrealistically high.

This idea of being connected to one thing when you have choice - has somewhat been left behind. People don't seem to view a golf club in the same way as a GAA team or a Rugby team - I don't know the reason for this - perhaps it is because golf clubs were private establishments within the community as opposed to being in the community.

I think you will see people join a place for a year or 2 and move on much more. You would imagine that people's natural curiosity will die down as they get older. But being older , seems to be much older now too.

So the only model that I can see working well - is pay as you go, or multi club access.

I also feel , people who are into club golf and their (0.1 s) - don't understand that their is a another market out there that is doing very well - offering variety, fun and less formality - That can do for the majority of golfers I know. Society Golf - some tend to look down on this, that it is not real golf. But - of the 15 friends I know that play golf - only 1 of them would be into club golf and their handicap (me) - Even at that , I see the attractions of staying outside of club golf for most - it is cheaper , offers variety and you can control when you play and is far more social.

I think on the forum here - we tend to look at this subject as serious golfers. Are people really into their golf as much as us ? To join a golf club you need to be big into your golf imo. Unless it is ridiculously cheap , some places are ridiculously cheap.

Wichita Lineman

I'd rather play golf than have a couple of pints two or three times a week which would be much more expensive than the golf. Some people have different priorities and are entitled to it. I just think it's quite sad that club loyalty is on the decline and I really feel that many casual golfers honestly dont realise that without the likes of us there wouldnt be half the places for them to enjoy a round of golf.

Members and committees are taken for granted. I'm on a committee and there is work involved in keeping a golf club open.

I have nothing against societies, we love having them come to Moate, I'm in one myself and play an odd time as a visitor with a couple of other ones but they dont beat being a member of Moate and they dont come anywhere near the same value for money in the long run.

I can understand the society route if someone isnt interested in having a proper handicap and can only play a few times a year, if it makes sense good luck to them. It's the guy who wants to play somewhere different every week or even more but "cheap as chips" no matter what the cost to the members that I cant figure out.

FixdePitchmark

Andy Dunne11 wrote: »

I can understand the society route if someone isnt interested in having a proper handicap and can only play a few times a year, if it makes sense good luck to them. It's the guy who wants to play somewhere different every week or even more but "cheap as chips" no matter what the cost to the members that I cant figure out.

Well they are happy with their lot - they don't want a "proper" handicap at all.

And on the 2nd point - it is like saying you don't understand somebody flying off to all the crazy places in Europe for a cheap holiday with Ryanair. Same with LIDL and ALDI.

People are naturally curious, like cheap stuff and are not too concerned about the impact it is having on others - be it companies - staff of cheap manufactured goods and products. If you can't figure this out - or the golf industry - this is where the biggest market will be. The ones who are figuring this out will do well.

I'm not a fan - but it is the reality of the market. Also people who are not a fan - will also fly Ryanair eventually. It is a race to the bottom (sadly).

The reason I say sadly - is I'd rather see the older clubs who did nothing wrong survive, but - when it comes to markets - there is no fair.

Wichita Lineman

Not all airlines are Ryanairs, not all golf clubs should be ............................... (insert as appropriate)

FixdePitchmark

Andy Dunne11 wrote: »

Not all airlines are Ryanairs, not all golf clubs should be ............................... (insert as appropriate)

Yes - but the airlines that were not - lost money hand over fist, till they got a CEO in that did a tailored Ryanair business model.

Not the same - but accepted that the market had changed.

The_Kew_Tour

I started playing Golf when I was 11 back in 1995.

From my whole Secondary school only 4 lads played Golf. We had School team that consisted of 4 players and it picked itself.

Now that same school has over 50 players playing the local club. My brother who is still in secondary school(different to one I went too) plays the game regular with friends. He says about half his class plays golf.

I remember when Golf was seen as a boring sport for fat, or rich people. I came from anything but rich family, just lucky at time there was 9 hole course only mile from me.

Now golf is actually a "in" sport to be in. Which is great. Its a great game. I only started playing more Golf again past few years I gave it up through leaving cert time right through college and for few working years but slowly working back to playing day or two a week with mate.

Its the clubs and technology that have really changed in that time.

Green fees have went down and Golf is accessible to most classes now with competitive green fee and membership rates.

Things are going in the right direction anyway imo.

Russman

Andy Dunne11 wrote: »

I'd rather play golf than have a couple of pints two or three times a week which would be much more expensive than the golf. Some people have different priorities and are entitled to it. I just think it's quite sad that club loyalty is on the decline and I really feel that many casual golfers honestly dont realise that without the likes of us there wouldnt be half the places for them to enjoy a round of golf.

Members and committees are taken for granted. I'm on a committee and there is work involved in keeping a golf club open.

I have nothing against societies, we love having them come to Moate, I'm in one myself and play an odd time as a visitor with a couple of other ones but they dont beat being a member of Moate and they dont come anywhere near the same value for money in the long run.

I can understand the society route if someone isnt interested in having a proper handicap and can only play a few times a year, if it makes sense good luck to them. It's the guy who wants to play somewhere different every week or even more but "cheap as chips" no matter what the cost to the members that I cant figure out.

Totally agree.
There is no loyalty to clubs anymore which is sad IMO. Of course the economic conditions are to blame for a lot of it, but I hate to see golfers working out how much per round their golf costs and deciding to give up a membership because they can play x times in Opens during the summer and it works out cheaper. If that's all you can afford, fair enough, we're all in a different boat than we were 6 years ago, but surely being part of a club has to be worth something, however intangible.

I also think a lot of clubs though are/were so rooted in the past that they lost a lot of potential members. e.g. you'd see the same names on interclub teams year after year and newer guys rarely getting a look in - that only increased the negative perception that may have been out there.

At the same time, guys became used to playing top courses in the boom times and want/expect the same everywhere, it doesn't work like that IMO. I think its great that member owned courses can be unique and a bit quirky, golf would be pretty boring if every course was a K Club stadium style layout.

The_Kew_Tour

Russman wrote: »

At the same time, guys became used to playing top courses in the boom times and want/expect the same everywhere, it doesn't work like that IMO. I think its great that member owned courses can be unique and a bit quirky, golf would be pretty boring if every course was a K Club stadium style layout.

Thats what is so great about Golf. Its variety. Be it in Technology or Golf courses.

You can play different types of Links courses and even Parkland courses.

Some many different aspects to the game. Driving, iron play, short game etc..

stockdam

The current economic situation is not to blame for the mess.

The problem is that many clubs were setup or improved based on the gravy train lasting forever which it clearly wouldn't. Too much money was borrowed for flashy courses and flashy club houses and the tax payer has been left to pick up the pieces. The courses that had no financial viability long term are now under-cutting the clubs that were well managed.

Compare the ridiculous prices several years back with the prices of golf in Northern Ireland and you can clearly see that good financial management went out the door. People were paying €30K plus to join some clubs.........I know of no equivalent in Northern Ireland for the same quality of course.

14handicap

You are missing the question:
Where do you see golf in Ireland in 10years from now?
Number of courses?
Costs to play and join?
Will all the tourist courses survive?

Golfer59

I think it will change, but greens fees will stay the same, but you will see better membership offers, such as the flexible membership that is in place in Kilcock Golf Club, I can see this been the future in Ireland. Has taken off big time in the UK

Russman

14handicap wrote: »

You are missing the question:
Where do you see golf in Ireland in 10years from now?
Number of courses?
Costs to play and join?
Will all the tourist courses survive?

1) vastly different, social golf will become much more prevalent, inter-club (already struggling) will be dying a death, and we'll all be reminiscing about "when people cared".

2) Probably 30 fewer than we have today.

3) Similar to now.

4) No.

golfwallah

Andy Dunne11 wrote: »

:eek:"The real problem is the voluntary nature of committees":eek:

The real problem is our economic climate which has forced some golfers to abandon the game altogether and many others to expect top quality facilities for next to nothing.

Many clubs would have already gone to the wall if it wasnt for their hard working 'voluntary committees'! While we all want people to come and play our course paying members are the life source of any club.

Yes, indeed, I agree that voluntary committees do fantastic work and have taken clubs to the point where we are now (and I was on committee for about 6 years, myself).

But, the problem of the economic climate won't go away. And waiting for the government or time to solve it, will be a little late for many clubs, who are already just hanging on by their fingertips.

We all know the problems - so, what are the solutions that will bring more people to the game and boost revenues for the vast majority of clubs?

GreeBo

I dont see how the costs to play will change that much for "regular" clubs.

Unless something magic happens its still going to cost pretty much the same to keep a course in a certain condition. If we take this as immovable then what else do you have?
People who want to pay less well get less quality or more restrictions on playing rights/times.

I really dont see where else it can go. People got used to paying pittance for top quality courses...that wont last...it cant.

Sure you can play a type of golf where its a different course every week and you get great deals, but to me thats similar to surviving on deals for your gym membership. Each week you go to the cheap gym, some people this suits, others not at all.

golfwallah

GreeBo wrote: »

I dont see how the costs to play will change that much for "regular" clubs.

Unless something magic happens its still going to cost pretty much the same to keep a course in a certain condition. If we take this as immovable then what else do you have?
People who want to pay less well get less quality or more restrictions on playing rights/times.

I really dont see where else it can go. People got used to paying pittance for top quality courses...that wont last...it cant.

Sure you can play a type of golf where its a different course every week and you get great deals, but to me thats similar to surviving on deals for your gym membership. Each week you go to the cheap gym, some people this suits, others not at all.

So, are you saying that nothing can be done to attract more people into the game? Surely there must be alternatives for clubs to think about and try out?

If not, then what is the point of the GUI, ILGU and PGA setting up the "Confederation of Golf in Ireland" to help clubs to attract new and retain existing golf members?

benny79

I know for 1, my club must be the unfriendest I have ever been too this been my third year as a member but played it all of the years! if they changed their attitude they would attrach a lot more members, hense why half my mates wont join

Dr_Colossus

benny79 wrote: »

I know for 1, my club must be the unfriendest I have ever been too this been my third year as a member but played it all of the years! if they changed their attitude they would attrach a lot more members, hense why half my mates wont join

What's the club?

benny79

I'd rather not say as I live in a small town, The only reason I joined is cause its more or less on my door step and is a lovely course. The nearest 1 to it is 20/30 mins away. And as 1 of my mates keeps telling me in the summer you can play a few holes most nites as its so near And dont mind the committee etc it feels like a big click most the members are 40+ and are members years and are business people in the town it was seen as a bit of a posh club back in the day I just feel went I play other clubs there much more friendlier and accommodating.

benny79

Plus my mate who convinced me to join won 2 prizes in weekly comp's over a yealy period and was giving vouchers to a golf shop and when he went to the shop buysomething the chap told him that he cant honour them the girl who run's are comp's owes him a fortune! so he went back and saidtoher,she said he can pick something in the pro shop which hardly has anything! as you can imagine he was highly embarressed by the situation, but he still sticks by the club. I think its a disgrace as you are paying €800 a year + €10 a week for comp's and obviously if you win something you are chuffed + he had to ask numerous times for his prize...

GreeBo

golfwallah wrote: »

So, are you saying that nothing can be done to attract more people into the game? Surely there must be alternatives for clubs to think about and try out?

If not, then what is the point of the GUI, ILGU and PGA setting up the "Confederation of Golf in Ireland" to help clubs to attract new and retain existing golf members?

No, I'm saying that each club is going to keep trying to attract the same types of people that it always has. Its illogical to think that a top end club will be resorting to the same tactics as a bottom end club. They are aiming for different people and have a different product on offer.

What needs to change imo is the expectations of casual golfers. The race to the bottom is due to clubs desperately trying to offer top end golf for a rock bottom price, its unsustainable. Until more clubs go to the wall this will continue to be a problem.

Too many clubs with not enough golfers to keep them all afloat.

The market will find its own balance, it does with everything...when left alone.

Russman

GreeBo wrote: »

Too many clubs with not enough golfers to keep them all afloat.

To be honest, that's about it in a nutshell. All the plans, projections & strategies in the world can't change that.

golfwallah

GreeBo wrote: »

No, I'm saying that each club is going to keep trying to attract the same types of people that it always has. Its illogical to think that a top end club will be resorting to the same tactics as a bottom end club. They are aiming for different people and have a different product on offer.

What needs to change imo is the expectations of casual golfers. The race to the bottom is due to clubs desperately trying to offer top end golf for a rock bottom price, its unsustainable. Until more clubs go to the wall this will continue to be a problem.

Too many clubs with not enough golfers to keep them all afloat.

The market will find its own balance, it does with everything...when left alone.

Russman wrote: »

To be honest, that's about it in a nutshell. All the plans, projections & strategies in the world can't change that.

An examination of the accounts for most member owned golf clubs will show that green fee revenue is tiny compared with that coming from membership. And as regards member income, only a small proportion of golf clubs are located within 6 km of a city centre, established for around 100 years in a built up suburban area, financially secure, with a full membership and an ability to attract new members willing to pay high joining / annual membership fees. These clubs, along with those backed by NAMA, banks or local authorities are in the minority. The vast bulk of clubs have other financial realities to deal with (e.g. is there enough in the kitty to pay the wages after June 2014). Let’s look at some of the facts:
According to the GUI / ILGU / PGA booklet “Promoting Golf Club Membership”:

From 1989 to the beginning of 2009 the total number of affiliated golf clubs increased from 263 to 430 while the total membership rose by 160% from just short of 100,000 to 260,000.

Since 2009, the number of registered golfers has fallen to 135,000 (announced at GUI AGM recently) http://www.independent.ie/sport/golf/confederation-set-up-to-help-aspiring-pros-get-started-30018125.html , whereas only a handful of clubs have closed.

Do the math – I agree that operating costs in golf clubs are relatively fixed. Throughput in the form of members and casual rounds is falling. Result = rising costs per unit. Alternative of increased throughput (through lower priced package offerings) = falling costs per unit. The solution is so obvious that it’s ridiculous. The main issues are recognising that the existing models for membership aren’t providing the member numbers needed, deciding to take a different approach that will attract members and then doing the work required to make it happen

Of course there are opportunities to increase golf membership numbers – maybe not in the same way as before the economic crisis – and making golf more affordable to all will mean changes – but not necessarily to course quality. Clubs are only limited by their imagination and by thinking too long about old forms of membership that no longer work in recessionary times.

Willie Walsh, interviewed this morning on Sky TV about the positive turnaround in British airways, put it down to providing quality service at prices customers wanted. Just about sums it up for the golf industry as well, IMO.

Alexander Graham Bell:

When one door closes, another opens; but we often look so long and so regretfully upon the closed door that we do not see the one which has opened for us.

14handicap

I wonder which golf club is the most profitable from:
1: green-fees
2: membership subs.

Would be very interesting to know.
Somewhere like Portmarnock (The old one) with big green fees and membership but with little loans .

Russman

golfwallah wrote: »

An examination of the accounts for most member owned golf clubs will show that green fee revenue is tiny compared with that coming from membership. And as regards member income, only a small proportion of golf clubs are located within 6 km of a city centre, established for around 100 years in a built up suburban area, financially secure, with a full membership and an ability to attract new members willing to pay high joining / annual membership fees. These clubs, along with those backed by NAMA, banks or local authorities are in the minority. The vast bulk of clubs have other financial realities to deal with (e.g. is there enough in the kitty to pay the wages after June 2014). Let’s look at some of the facts:
According to the GUI / ILGU / PGA booklet “Promoting Golf Club Membership”:

Since 2009, the number of registered golfers has fallen to 135,000 (announced at GUI AGM recently) http://www.independent.ie/sport/golf/confederation-set-up-to-help-aspiring-pros-get-started-30018125.html , whereas only a handful of clubs have closed.

Do the math – I agree that operating costs in golf clubs are relatively fixed. Throughput in the form of members and casual rounds is falling. Result = rising costs per unit. Alternative of increased throughput (through lower priced package offerings) = falling costs per unit. The solution is so obvious that it’s ridiculous. The main issues are recognising that the existing models for membership aren’t providing the member numbers needed, deciding to take a different approach that will attract members and then doing the work required to make it happen

Of course there are opportunities to increase golf membership numbers – maybe not in the same way as before the economic crisis – and making golf more affordable to all will mean changes – but not necessarily to course quality. Clubs are only limited by their imagination and by thinking too long about old forms of membership that no longer work in recessionary times.

Willie Walsh, interviewed this morning on Sky TV about the positive turnaround in British airways, put it down to providing quality service at prices customers wanted. Just about sums it up for the golf industry as well, IMO.

Alexander Graham Bell:

There's definitely some validity to your argument, but two points I'd make straight off would be:
1) The reason only a handful of clubs have closed is IMO because a number are being subsidised and should have been let fail.
2) I agree that the bulk of people not playing or giving up the game is finance related, but there's also a number of people who may have the money but, nowadays, don't have the time, with the pressures of the changed society we have. Working longer if you have a job etc etc.

I'm all in favour of clubs being innovative and at least trying something rather than letting themselves just wither away, but you're right, lots of members are very stuck in an older mentality where certain things just cannot be countenanced.

I'm not 100% convinced that simply slashing prices will bring back the numbers, maybe it will. How a club could survive in year 1 if they did this isn't obvious to me though. Say, a decent established club, who are struggling a little bit but maybe not right at the tipping point, and are at that all too common €1k price point, decided to reduce their subs to €500 in the hope of attracting a really really significant number of members. They will struggle to pay the bills in year 1 IMO and to maintain course standards. There will always be a lag until if and when their numbers catch up. I'd love to see it tried though. But its a fine line between that and simply encouraging a quicker race to the bottom.

The other thing is that a lot golfers nowadays mostly don't give a f--k about club memberships or loyalty, they chase deals year after year and have much less of an issue about changing club to save money. No club can budget with any degree of certainty any more.

mike12

If there are 135,000 golfers in 430 clubs that is a average of 313 golfers per club, when there were 263 clubs and 100000 members it was 380 per club. At the same time Society golf and Casual green fees are much higher now than they were 10 years ago. The clubs that are in real trouble are the ones that built new club houses and are struggling to repay loans. I'd even say a lot of the NAMA courses are actually running at a profit if you took away the debt element.
If the bar isn't loosing money then the cost of maintenace can be kept to a high standard without breaking the bank.

Redzah

On the course side, I believe we will see a lot less bunkers. Many golf clubs are considering or currently undergoing a process of removing/filling in bunkers due to the cost of maintaining them. Once many are removed they will be able to maintain the rest of the golf course to a higher standard with less man hours (and less cost).

Arsenium

Russman wrote: »

2) I agree that the bulk of people not playing or giving up the game is finance related, but there's also a number of people who may have the money but, nowadays, don't have the time, with the pressures of the changed society we have. Working longer if you have a job etc etc.

I also feel that a lot of people took up golf during the good times, and these people really didnt have that huge amount of interest in golf. They bought top of the range irons, drivers, putters, bags, trollies...even buggies. Wouldnt be seen dead hitting anything except a prov ball and they flocked to the newest fanciest clubs that appeared on the market.

If golf was a real passion or interest for them, they would find a way to stay playing. But the interest faded. And as per the stats above, the number of golfers is slashed while the number of clubs has stayed the same, and those with the real interest (and the 10 year old irons) are left.

I'd say the amount of registered race horse owners has slipped a lot aswell. Another luxury people allowed themselves when money was no object, albeit they probably had zero real interest in it.

Russman

mike12 wrote: »

If there are 135,000 golfers in 430 clubs that is a average of 313 golfers per club, when there were 263 clubs and 100000 members it was 380 per club. At the same time Society golf and Casual green fees are much higher now than they were 10 years ago. The clubs that are in real trouble are the ones that built new club houses and are struggling to repay loans. I'd even say a lot of the NAMA courses are actually running at a profit if you took away the debt element.
If the bar isn't loosing money then the cost of maintenace can be kept to a high standard without breaking the bank.

I thought I saw an article somewhere in the last year or so which would broadly back up your stats, but it also mentioned that a rough threshold of 500 members was regarded as being required to keep a club viable. Will try to find it and dig it out.

GreeBo

golfwallah wrote: »

Of course there are opportunities to increase golf membership numbers – maybe not in the same way as before the economic crisis – and making golf more affordable to all will mean changes – but not necessarily to course quality. Clubs are only limited by their imagination and by thinking too long about old forms of membership that no longer work in recessionary times.

Willie Walsh, interviewed this morning on Sky TV about the positive turnaround in British airways, put it down to providing quality service at prices customers wanted. Just about sums it up for the golf industry as well, IMO.

Alexander Graham Bell:

I disagree.
Courses are limited by only having 18 holes and X hours of light in the day.
You cant get economies of scale here unless courses start sharing machinery and group together for some buying power.

You dont get economies of scale when you cant scale your product.

You cant halve the price and try to double the number of customers, its not a bums on seats situation. You have one plane that costs X to run...other people have cheaper planes that cost half x to run. You cant compete with that if you want to keep your own plane, especially if people are only looking at price.

How do you provide a top level service for a mid level price when you cant cut your costs any more?

golfwallah

GreeBo wrote: »

I disagree.
Courses are limited by only having 18 holes and X hours of light in the day.
You cant get economies of scale here unless courses start sharing machinery and group together for some buying power.

You dont get economies of scale when you cant scale your product.

You cant halve the price and try to double the number of customers, its not a bums on seats situation. You have one plane that costs X to run...other people have cheaper planes that cost half x to run. You cant compete with that if you want to keep your own plane, especially if people are only looking at price.

How do you provide a top level service for a mid level price when you cant cut your costs any more?

I never said halve or slash prices. And machinery sharing isn't practicable, from experience at our club.

All I’ve said is take a leaf from the airlines. They have found and keep working on ways to equalise supply and demand efficiently. But it is an ongoing job – not just decided upon at an annual AGM, based on non-existent or inadequately prepared facts and figures. And as the market is constantly changing, they treat this as a very high priority area, throwing considerable resources into filling aircraft and at the same time getting as much revenue for their seats as possible. All seat prices are not the same. They have segmented the market and constantly match customer needs with available capacity to maximise the return for themselves and the value to their customers.

Turning back to golf clubs, most have lost members, there are very few non-playing members remaining, heavy member demand at weekend but there are truckloads of spare course capacity midweek. Usage patterns can be obtained from club computer systems to facilitate a good understanding of what is happening (as opposed to anecdotal evidence).

A bit of market research on the general economy, on existing and potential golf members will provide pointers on what people can afford – not only financially but timewise as well. You can find out a lot about existing members, either through surveys or focus groups and from your membership database. There’s lots of web based marketing data available on potential member wants and needs, if you only go looking for it. There’s also quite a bit (plus ideas on possible new membership offerings) in the GUI, ILGU, PGA study “Promoting Golf Club Membership”, that I referred to earlier. But you do have put a bit of time into all this, including documenting / presenting / communication with members – there are no magic wand solutions.

Would love to work with you a bit to demonstrate how it can be done (i.e. recruiting and retaining members) – did it successfully and profitably myself for 2 years in my own club a few years ago, despite all the naysayers.

Would only spend the time again, if those responsible in a club were open minded enough to go on the journey required to adapt to our changed economic circumstances. The alternatives are to do nothing, hoping others will go bust first, or wait for the new Confederation of Golf in Ireland (CGI) to help. CGI are supposed to come up with ideas for new golfing packages in ways that make it easier for clubs to act on them in a structured, “officially recommended” manner. But that will only put a club into the pack with everyone else, as many more clubs will start much more aggressive selling of new golf membership packages at that stage.

GreeBo

I think you are frankly wrong if you don't think clubs are already doing this and have been for a while.

Also the airline analogy doesn't work with me fit member clubs, airlines don't have members worry about, the lifeblood of a club. A commercial club can act like that, and we them all doing it. But I personally don't want to play on a Ryanair type course, certainly won't pay membership in one...

sydneybound

One small note I wonder why clubs which are clustered together don't share expensive machinery. Surely it would make sense say if three clubs in close proximity say for arguments sake Forrest Little, Roganstown and Corrstown each shared round a type drainage equipment which would be too much of an investment for one club to buy on their own.

Although that idea isn't anything new I feel in clubs need to start thinking outside the box to break even in years to come.

In 10 years time only the real top clubs will have full time general managers. A lot have been got rid of now anyway. That role should only be able getting money into the club, marketing/attracting society's/new members etc and not getting involved with committee matters.

Clubs have started doing this but I think it will become more common in that members have to be out by 10/12 on a Saturday to let society's play in the afternoons. This might have a knock on effect on membership but it's trying to make you the ourse is in use at all times thus bringing in revenue throughout the day without leave parts of the timesheet empty.

Entry fees for courses will never come back into full force in clubs like the headfort, royal tara, blackbush.

golfwallah

GreeBo wrote: »

I think you are frankly wrong if you don't think clubs are already doing this and have been for a while.

Also the airline analogy doesn't work with me fit member clubs, airlines don't have members worry about, the lifeblood of a club. A commercial club can act like that, and we them all doing it. But I personally don't want to play on a Ryanair type course, certainly won't pay membership in one...

You're entitled to your opinion, but I disagree and so do the statistics of falling golf membership and financial realities being faced by many clubs.

Time will tell and so too will the actions of the GUI sponsored CGI as they start to produce suggestions on new golf membership packages geared to boost golf membership and help with club financial survival.

At the end of the day, clubs exist to provide a service at a standard and price that people are prepared to pay for. That's the way of the world in a market economy.

The market as regards golfer wants and needs is not just one amorphous mass. It is segmented, according to different needs of potential and existing members, and the current economic situation is causing yet more segmentation. It is also over-supplied and badly in need of more golfers.

Yes, there will always be an upper end to the market, where there is little or no need to change. But for the vast majority, times have changed and its not necessarily the most expensive or smartest that will survive, but those willing to adapt to the changed market conditions.

Clubs can't change the economy, all they can to is adapt and put in the work needed to survive.

golfwallah

sydneybound wrote: »

One small note I wonder why clubs which are clustered together don't share expensive machinery. Surely it would make sense say if three clubs in close proximity say for arguments sake Forrest Little, Roganstown and Corrstown each shared round a type drainage equipment which would be too much of an investment for one club to buy on their own.

Although that idea isn't anything new I feel in clubs need to start thinking outside the box to break even in years to come.

In 10 years time only the real top clubs will have full time general managers. A lot have been got rid of now anyway. That role should only be able getting money into the club, marketing/attracting society's/new members etc and not getting involved with committee matters.

Clubs have started doing this but I think it will become more common in that members have to be out by 10/12 on a Saturday to let society's play in the afternoons. This might have a knock on effect on membership but it's trying to make you the ourse is in use at all times thus bringing in revenue throughout the day without leave parts of the timesheet empty.

Entry fees for courses will never come back into full force in clubs like the headfort, royal tara, blackbush.

Agree with most of what you said except the bit about sharing equipment, especially between formerly "friendly" neighbouring clubs, who are now in a competitive race for survival.

At first glance, it sounds attractive. However, it would require a lot of management - for instance what happens when expensive machines break down? There are arguments about who broke what and the "Bart Simpson Defence" come out - it was like that when I got it or you'll never prove I did it, etc.

There are also situations (I have experienced) of a neighbouring club proposing equipment sharing, when our club had just replaced all our equipment but the neighbour's equipment was "life expired". So good in theory but not so easy to implement in practice, particularly with the extra management demands it would place on voluntary committees.

FixdePitchmark

golfwallah wrote: »

Yes, there will always be an upper end to the market, where there is little or no need to change. But for the vast majority, times have changed and its not necessarily the most expensive or smartest that will survive, but those willing to adapt to the changed market conditions.

Clubs can't change the economy, all they can to is adapt and put in the work needed to survive.

Golfwallah - it will be interesting to see of the clubs in Dublin - what ones will not change at all. By change I mean a reduction in hello money etc.

I'd imagine there is a band of about 20 clubs in Ireland that will not need to change - The top links etc.

I'm thinking there are only 2 - Royal Dublin and Portmarnock.

I don't know the south side courses that well. But - looking at when the top clubs were in their peak - most members must be over 50 if not 60 now.

Sandwlch

About 30 or 40 courses should close. There are simply too many for the active golfing population here - too many member clubs with debt beyond their means to sustain themselves, and the white elephant hotel development ones that are now selling memberships of greenfees at below cost. The price slashing we have seen in the last few years is unsustainable for the product being served and cannot last. And has exacerbated the situation by making society or Slievnamon/Opens options more financially attractive. But thats just the scramble for the life rafts as clubs panic to get income and stay alive. Any short term income. The club going out of business cannot look to the long term.
Many of the survivors must downgrade their standards and ambitions significantly, but this is already happening. The unions' inititiative is classic, 'we must do something, and if we do something it will fix the situation'. It wont have any effect. Or the natural wastage will improve the situation in time, giving the impression that the action had a positive effect. The best policy at the moment is, do your best to stay alive and hope the neighbouring club folds first. Unpalatable to acknowledge, but true.

golfwallah

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

Golfwallah - it will be interesting to see of the clubs in Dublin - what ones will not change at all. By change I mean a reduction in hello money etc.

I'd imagine there is a band of about 20 clubs in Ireland that will not need to change - The top links etc.

I'm thinking there are only 2 - Royal Dublin and Portmarnock.

I don't know the south side courses that well. But - looking at when the top clubs were in their peak - most members must be over 50 if not 60 now.

Agreed - if you listed all the clubs you could easily pick out the ones that still change hello money. Would take a few hours but I would guess maybe about 12 -15 clubs in Dublin still have "entrance fees" (about 25% - 30%).

I'm thinking of The Island, Malahide, Grange, Sutton, Hermitage, Newlands, Castle, Royal Dublin, Portmarnock and I'm sure there are a few others.

You're quite right about the age profile in clubs - members are an ageing population and new blood is badly needed. Problem is that many potential younger members are saddled with high mortgages / negative equity plus rising taxes and static pay structures. They have neither the time nor the money required to justify the cost of full membership.

Clubs need to react to their needs if they expect to attract numbers from this growing market segment.

Also, statistics from the English Golfing Union (available from their website) point out that average attrition rates (i.e. losses) for member clubs run at about 10% per year. From what I know of Irish clubs, roughly the same percentage applies here. So losing 50 - 60 per annum and replacing them with 10 - 20 is not a sustainable long-term business model.

Changing times, indeed, but I am optimistic that the market will win out in the end - it's adapt or die, like it or not, I'm afraid. But you're also right that many members in clubs are reluctant to change. It's up to club committees to do their research, inform their members of the real facts and give them alternatives - as opposed to hoping things will work out and making all the "right" optimistic sounds (just like our regulator and bankers did before the crash).

FixdePitchmark

Golfwallah

I think the task is very hard.

From joining a club myself - attending AGMs and EGMs. I could see, that there are people who are in the club a long time. Many have paid big hello money. The struggle (understandably), that with a vote this is removed overnight - this can be as much as 15 k , 10 k , 5 k. This disbelief, leads to a sort of head in the sand - lack of inertia. Change is slow , almost impossible at times.

But - I can also understand that too - if a club has been successful for a long time under a particular model - it should be protected from a radical individual trying to be overly assertive . There is a logic to it.

I also found that the same people are in the club (admirably) for say 20 years +, they have an image of golf that to be honest, is very dated. They don't understand or are aware that , I can go on my phone and play 20 course in my area for 15 to 20 euro in the next hour. I was at a meeting and one individual proposed we should increase the green fee rate - I just had to order a drink at that stage.

I've found a massive disconnect from the reality of old Golf Club politics to the energetic and moving cheap and ease of use in the golf market and online golf market.

It is almost like two worlds.

As others have said - the market will find its place.
Initially it was all about cheap golf - but I've also noticed something recently - the places that have opened up , accepted they are going for the cheaper end of the market (more numbers in the door) - they have moved on to another level too, they are dealing with more people - understanding return customers , being friendlier, a better welcome. They have got better at it. There is nothing worse than visiting a reluctant host.

The false , formal arena is gone in these places. And you know what - that creates a certain market too. A large majority of people are more comfortable. Will come back for more.

GreeBo

golfwallah wrote: »

You're entitled to your opinion, but I disagree and so do the statistics of falling golf membership and financial realities being faced by many clubs.

Time will tell and so too will the actions of the GUI sponsored CGI as they start to produce suggestions on new golf membership packages geared to boost golf membership and help with club financial survival.

At the end of the day, clubs exist to provide a service at a standard and price that people are prepared to pay for. That's the way of the world in a market economy.

The market as regards golfer wants and needs is not just one amorphous mass. It is segmented, according to different needs of potential and existing members, and the current economic situation is causing yet more segmentation. It is also over-supplied and badly in need of more golfers.

Yes, there will always be an upper end to the market, where there is little or no need to change. But for the vast majority, times have changed and its not necessarily the most expensive or smartest that will survive, but those willing to adapt to the changed market conditions.

Clubs can't change the economy, all they can to is adapt and put in the work needed to survive.

Sorry but the statistics don't prove that clubs aren't doing anything!
If you have less consumers it doesn't matter what you do, someone losing out...

Clubs are going to fail, no matter what they try to do. The market of golfers can't support the current number and offering of courses...It's impossible for them not to fail. We are agreed that there is a lower limit costs to maintain a course, we are also agreed that there are fewer golfers than the peak....other than some courses closing and their members getting redistributed to the rest, how do you think it's just a matter of effort to ensure all clubs survive?

Clubs exist to provide a service at a standard and price people will pay. If there is too much supply then logically sine have to fail, right?

golfwallah

GreeBo wrote: »

Sorry but the statistics don't prove that clubs aren't doing anything!
If you have less consumers it doesn't matter what you do, someone losing out...

Clubs are going to fail, no matter what they try to do. The market of golfers can't support the current number and offering of courses...It's impossible for them not to fail. We are agreed that there is a lower limit costs to maintain a course, we are also agreed that there are fewer golfers than the peak....other than some courses closing and their members getting redistributed to the rest, how do you think it's just a matter of effort to ensure all clubs survive?

Clubs exist to provide a service at a standard and price people will pay. If there is too much supply then logically sine have to fail, right?

First of all, I never said the statistics prove clubs aren’t doing anything. Nor did I say that it’s just a matter of effort to ensure all clubs survive.

All the statistics show is that clubs are losing members. And, certainly, it’s neither desirable nor possible for all clubs to survive – there are just too many out there.

When it comes to survival, there are no guarantees. We don’t live in a risk free world. And the positions of some clubs are more risky than others. For example, if you are near to major centres of population and have a reasonable quality course, you are better placed to survive than clubs in more remote locations.

But, location and course quality alone are not enough. You also need membership offerings that potential members want and the people you are targeting have to know about these offerings. So if you haven’t the membership packages to sell and don’t know your target market, it will not be possible to meet the latent demand out there.

It’s not exactly rocket science, but I’ve often been taken aback by the number of clubs out there that very few people even know about. Sometimes members assume that just because they know about their club, everybody does and this is often not the case.

I genuinely believe there is still a mismatch between what clubs are offering and what consumers are prepared to pay for. So, contrary to what you say, I don’t believe there are fewer consumers but only that there are fewer consumers for the limited range of full or 5 day membership type offerings currently available in many Irish clubs.

There are big market segments out there for more affordable golf – just like has been demonstrated in the airline business (and by a limited number of golf clubs), if the price and service levels match the demands of those consumers, they will join golf clubs.

All the above being said, there is more widespread evidence of gradual change out there in the last few months – progress is slow but we are getting there. And to increase a club’s chances of survival, IMO, positive action is preferable to the “wait and hope” approach.

Sandwlch

England with declining golfer members for 10 years now. And unable to reverse the trend. Ireland got a greater, faster, and more complicated shock. So no reason to expect it will do any better. Not that the suggestion of jeans and mobiles will have any effect either. http://www.golfclubmanagement.net/2014/03/clubs-urged-to-end-bans-on-mobile-phones/

While no one wants to be the club that bites the dust, in the big picture, the most enlightened thing the GUI/ILGU could do is to identify the best canidates, and assist and promote the closure of some clubs for the long term greater good of golf and golfers.

golfwallah

Sandwlch wrote: »

England with declining golfer members for 10 years now. And unable to reverse the trend. Ireland got a greater, faster, and more complicated shock. So no reason to expect it will do any better. Not that the suggestion of jeans and mobiles will have any effect either. http://www.golfclubmanagement.net/2014/03/clubs-urged-to-end-bans-on-mobile-phones/

While no one wants to be the club that bites the dust, in the big picture, the most enlightened thing the GUI/ILGU could do is to identify the best canidates, and assist and promote the closure of some clubs for the long term greater good of golf and golfers.

Good link - and, you're right, however about the big picture of some clubs needing to close, no one wants to be the club that suffers that fate.

If you look at the England Golf report this article is based on, "Membership Recruitment and Retention, Key Themes For Implementation", you will note that the 55 clubs interviewed, who were successful in recruiting and retaining members:

all placed emphasis on:

• Flexible membership packages - these recognised that one package no longer fits all and that the member who plays occasionally is still a member worth having. These schemes particularly target the younger golfer, aged up to 40.

• Friendliness – a friendly, convivial environment, where it is easy to socialise and find people to have a round of golf with, was found to be hugely important in attracting new members. Some relaxing of the rules, for example concerning jeans, trainers and mobile phones, was common.

• Low-cost ways to get into golf – clubs sought ways to help people try golf without a big initial expense. These include ‘have a go’ days, involving existing members and offering an opportunity to enjoy the facilities, and trial memberships.

Not so sure about your suggestion that the GUI / ILGU should assist in some club closures - you would need to look at their constitutions to see if they have the power to do stuff like that. From my experience, their main role is promoting the game of golf, rather than the business side of things. Anyway, you can imagine the furore, if clubs' representative bodies got involved in promoting member closures.

They have, however, (after 7 years of recession) set up the Confederation of Golf in Ireland (CGI) to promote golf more widely in Ireland and to put forward ideas on how clubs might better retain and recruit members.

Maybe this will help - better late than never, I suppose!

neckedit

golfwallah wrote: »

Good link - and, you're right, however about the big picture of some clubs needing to close, no one wants to be the club that suffers that fate.

If you look at the England Golf report this article is based on, "Membership Recruitment and Retention, Key Themes For Implementation", you will note that the 55 clubs interviewed, who were successful in recruiting and retaining members:


Not so sure about your suggestion that the GUI / ILGU should assist in some club closures - you would need to look at their constitutions to see if they have the power to do stuff like that. From my experience, their main role is promoting the game of golf, rather than the business side of things. Anyway, you can imagine the furore, if clubs' representative bodies got involved in promoting member closures.

They have, however, (after 7 years of recession) set up the Confederation of Golf in Ireland (CGI) to promote golf more widely in Ireland and to put forward ideas on how clubs might better retain and recruit members.

Maybe this will help - better late than never, I suppose!

The Flexible packages are a must for the Club that is struggling or for a club that simply want to maintain membership levels, and the feed back from customers across the counter is that they are being very well received by the younger end of the market, those that have young families, need the weekends off to be with the nippers etc, Those that work in retail who work a lot of weekends yet have the luxury of time during the week, are taking up the chance and are no longer having to pay a premium to join the club when they don't use the facilities at premium times. I think its a breath of fresh air to hear people talking about memberships in a positive light. The older established courses have little to fear as they will always have the membership base through family and prime locations, the golf industry will survive with fresh approaches to drive interest in the game.

mike12

golfwallah wrote: »

Agree with most of what you said except the bit about sharing equipment, especially between formerly "friendly" neighbouring clubs, who are now in a competitive race for survival.

At first glance, it sounds attractive. However, it would require a lot of management - for instance what happens when expensive machines break down? There are arguments about who broke what and the "Bart Simpson Defence" come out - it was like that when I got it or you'll never prove I did it, etc.

There are also situations (I have experienced) of a neighbouring club proposing equipment sharing, when our club had just replaced all our equipment but the neighbour's equipment was "life expired". So good in theory but not so easy to implement in practice, particularly with the extra management demands it would place on voluntary committees.

I think we could see golf course maintenance being done by an outside company. As far as i know Corballis, Elm Green, Navan are all done by a contractor. The machinery for 1 club could easily look after 10/12 clubs bar green/tee cutting nothing else really needs to be done every day.

golfwallah

mike12 wrote: »

I think we could see golf course maintenance being done by an outside company. As far as i know Corballis, Elm Green, Navan are all done by a contractor. The machinery for 1 club could easily look after 10/12 clubs bar green/tee cutting nothing else really needs to be done every day.

Agreed, outsourcing course maintenance is certainly an option to be considered.

I think Ashbourne is another club that do it.

And economic realities are that more and more clubs will go that way.

However, there are pros and cons and it's up to each club to find a model that best suits their needs.