New Rule for eligibility to Away Opens

First Up

Redzah wrote: »

The reason why clubs don't necessary bank profits is because they are CLUBS. As you may notice in most club financial statements Income and Costs are extremely closely aligned. Adding to profits to reserves on a yearly basis is not in the ethos of the club model. The Club finance committees focus is on ensuring they have enough income to meet their costs. Any excess income is utilised either by opening up the purse strings for club teams or through capital projects over the coming years (which results in a depreciation charge to the P&L and thus minimises book profit).

Shareholder value is created in clubs by utilising excess income and spending this excess income to augment the product given to its members. This is very different to a business who's shareholder value lies in the fact that a shareholder now has a share of an increased shareholder funds balance or is paid a dividend out of excess profits at the year end.

No club will consistently show huge profits year on year as it is not what the club is set out to do.

Unless there is a regular surplus of income over expenditure AND unless some of that expenditure is on "vanity" projects, then accusations of fees being "too high" are unfounded. Of course in an ideal world, prudent financial management would include building funds for future capital expenditure. But few clubs have that luxury and most capital outlay is funded through bank loans, or in some cases, member levies.

Just about every club is put to the pin of its collar to meet fixed costs and proposals for even modest increases in subs usually creates uproar.

There is good value golf out there. People just need to be realistic about what maintaing a golf course involves.

First Up

Kingswood Rover wrote: »

As a matter of interest how many members owned clubs have closed in the last 5 years. I know Rathsallagh, Glencullen and Dublin City golf clubs have all closed recently but they were not members owned.

A more pertinent question would be how many clubs have levied members in order to stave off closure.

First Up

Redzah wrote: »

The commitment to cash of others as you say is one way of saying that these are full paying members who are enjoying the benefits of full membership in their local course. This is a premium product with a premium price, you pay more or commit cash as you say and you get back more benefits!!!!

You then talk about distance members exploiting playing opens in their courses but you don't talk at all about any exploitation of the club hosting the open of its own members (or cash cows ). For the record, I don't think there is much exploitation on either side, it is merely just the general business of using your product (the course and facilities) to generate multiple revenue steams (e.g. membership income and visitor income).

While your marginal income model above works for the courses that use golfnow and other such sites by selling last minute teetimes at a discounted rate for an otherwise unused slot, it is not as relevant to Opens which is the topic of this discussion. These opens are planned months in advance when the yearly scheduling is done. The only thought process that goes into them is that there are held on a less desireable day to not piss off the members too much, after that its all about income generation. This income generation also extends to visitors eating and drinking in the bar and making purchases in the pro shop (as members also do) which in turn means more cash to utilise to maintain the standards of the course of which is used by its members 90% of the time, the members win too!!!!

Without the open income, some clubs would not be able to keep up the facilities to a high standard for its members or would have to increase membership income to account for the lost open income, both are a negative.

Well my club is proprietor owned and we are enforcing the new stricter conditions for playing in opens. So not everyone just thinks of the money.

The only issue here is people taking a lot more out of golf than they are putting in. If you see all this as a zero sum battle of wits, to see who can squeeze the most out of the other every time you play, then you will find nothing wrong with distance membership flogging and all that goes with it.

That is simply neither what golf clubs and golf membership should be about, nor a sustainable basis for the future of the game. I will welcome any moves to curtail it and I am happy to be a member of a club that is enforcing the new rule.

Kingswood Rover

First Up wrote: »

A more pertinent question would be how many clubs have levied members in order to stave off closure.

Ah jaysus, First up thought you would give me the heads up and our club levied us a few years ago to keep going but a brilliant business plan re minor membership by our Captain and Committee the following year has made us financially secure since.

golfwallah

First Up wrote: »

Marginal income - based on marginal costing - is a well understood and well used business principle. The same way as an airline is better off selling an otherwise empty seat for anything, on the basis that once the doors close, the seat is worthless. In golfing terms, an empty course brings in no revenue, so why not get something?

The problem is the way it distorts the market. If an airline sells all its seats at below cost, before too long the plane won't fly. For a golf club, marginal costing through cheap opens is grand - as long as it constitutes extra income. You see that in action all the time with discounting websites like Golf Now, Tee Times.ie and a host of others. Clubs use these sites by looking at their bookings and deciding on a day by day basis what to offer the casual, or last minute "shopper". Many clubs get green fee business like this. Hotels adopt a similar approach through the various discounting websites.

However the airline, hotel or golf club still has to pay its way to survive and most clubs derive the vast majority of their income from members subscriptions. Clubs are mutual societies, with members contributing to costs as well as giving some business to the pro shop, catering facilities etc. The distance open specialists are essentially availing of the commitment and cash of others to provide them with nice places to play and the clubs flogging distance memberships are knowingly and cynically exploiting this.

We have had numerous examples here of people who are happy to admit that they take the distance route as an alternative to supporting a club. That's grand, as long as the clubs they like to play can afford to stay open to accommodate them and they won't do that if they are reduced to taking discounted green fees from people who are only interested in getting the cheapest deal they can.

We also have people here defending the practice of flogging distance memberships as a source of income, in the full knowledge they are exploiting other clubs. Personally I don't think requiring these "members" to play just three competitions is enough. Ten would be a more realistic definition of a "member" and such a stipulation would sharply dis-incentivise the "have card will travel" brigade. Gosh, some of them might even be persuaded to really join a club.

You’re choosing to ignore a lot of inconvenient realities that don’t support your case against “distance memberships” and/or aren't in support of stricter eligibility rules for playing in open competitions.

For example, the vast majority of clubs, i.e. excluding well established ones in built up areas, have a choice between closure or using basic common sense to boost revenue and reduce cost. They have to find ways to better match supply and demand in a changed economic environment of massive excess capacity, falling membership and falling numbers of golfers playing either opens or casual golf. Added to this is the not inconsiderable impact of competition.

As for marginal costing – this is a red herring as no club, business or airline could stay in existence for very long using marginal costs or pricing only, in the extreme manner you have described.

The ones that are successful have found ways to match supply and demand effectively and also to manage competition. You simply pay more for the best service offering package level and progressively less for reduced levels of service offering in the product / service package range. You also have to be competitive on price and quality of service offering.

It’s not simply a matter of marginal costing or fairness – clubs have to deal with economic reality!

For example, on Ryanair you can get cheaper airfares by booking earlier. You can also get free reserved seats by checking in online within 7 days of travel. Other charges can be avoided by doing everything online. The telephone and piped TV companies have myriads of service package offerings. There is considerable migration between packages and service providers (“churn”). That’s modern, competitive business life – the one in which potential customers have to live in their day to day lives. It’s no different for any service – including golf – get used to it!

Golf clubs need a range of service offerings (for memberships, casual golf, opens, etc.) at prices targeted to attract and retain the needs and wants of different people in different market segments. Like any business, they need to supply what customers want at prices those customers can afford. The alternative is for a lot more clubs to go out of business, leaving far fewer clubs charging higher prices to fewer and wealthier golfers. The so called “distance clubs” are merely filling a gap in the market at the moment.

More clubs need to stop moaning, wake up and compete. It’s a competitive world out there – not the ideal one you describe of members willing to pay through the nose for unnecessarily overpriced service levels – be they for open competitions, membership or otherwise.

Redzah

First Up wrote: »

Well my club is proprietor owned and we are enforcing the new stricter conditions for playing in opens. So not everyone just thinks of the money.

The only issue here is people taking a lot more out of golf than they are putting in. If you see all this as a zero sum battle of wits, to see who can squeeze the most out of the other every time you play, then you will find nothing wrong with distance membership flogging and all that goes with it.

That is simply neither what golf clubs and golf membership should be about, nor a sustainable basis for the future of the game. I will welcome any moves to curtail it and I am happy to be a member of a club that is enforcing the new rule.

Not really, the reality is People are putting in less are getting out a lessor product and others are putting in more are taking out more of a premium product.

What are your clubs stricter criteria for opens? If your club is proprietor owned then there is no we in a proprietor ownership, there is he (owner) and you (members). He is enforcing the stricter conditions and utilising you (members) to assist with ideas (for free). I assume that this club must be both desireable to play and financially secure and furthermore as he and his accountant ran through the figures, he weighed up the brand damage of reduced open competition fees and high volume of players (and higher maintenance costs and course damage) versus lower volume of players (and less maintenance and better conditioned course) at a higher rate for green fees. It would be extremely naïve of you to believe that this move is not profit driven and purely in the misguided belief that it is for the greater good.

Unglika Norse

Part of the so called problem with so called distance memberships lies in the clubs that are offering them.

If you check the clubs out, you will have a few, although I would imagine the minority and mainly in the west of the country, are members owned clubs who will do what they have to do to try and make enough funds to keep their members courses going on a non profit making basis.I don't have any problem with that at all. These are members owned clubs run by members for members, in the best way they seem fit. Adding the 3 card rule may well impact on them in a far greater way.

On the other hand you have "clubs" that are propriotory, whose sole aim, understandably is to make a profit for themselves.

These are the "clubs" with the large membership numbers ranging mainly down the east coast from county Dublin to County Tipperary. I would go as far as to say that in my opinion, these "clubs" are only clubs by loose definition and are in fact nothing more than glorified societys as in effect they have no say in the running of the club, have little or no input in to fees charged, green fees tee times etc.

I would imagine that the majority of these clubs do not care about nor will they enforce the 3 card rule as it may reduce their income levels significantly to do so.

First Up

Kingswood Rover wrote: »

As a matter of interest how many members owned clubs have closed in the last 5 years. I know Rathsallagh, Glencullen and Dublin City golf clubs have all closed recently but they were not members owned.

Redzah wrote: »

Not really, the reality is People are putting in less are getting out a lessor product and others are putting in more are taking out more of a premium product.

What are your clubs stricter criteria for opens? If your club is proprietor owned then there is no we in a proprietor ownership, there is he (owner) and you (members). He is enforcing the stricter conditions and utilising you (members) to assist with ideas (for free). I assume that this club must be both desireable to play and financially secure and furthermore as he and his accountant ran through the figures, he weighed up the brand damage of reduced open competition fees and high volume of players (and higher maintenance costs and course damage) versus lower volume of players (and less maintenance and better conditioned course) at a higher rate for green fees. It would be extremely naïve of you to believe that this move is not profit driven and purely in the misguided belief that it is for the greater good.

Nothing like that. The club has a constructive and mutually respectful relationship with the proprietors. Both recognise the interests and needs of the other. Plenty of hard headed negotiaton but the relationship is the polar opposite of the transactional (at best) or adversarial (at worst) attitude of many here.

First Up

Unglika Norse wrote: »

Part of the so called problem with so called distance memberships lies in the clubs that are offering them.

If you check the clubs out, you will have a few, although I would imagine the minority and mainly in the west of the country, are members owned clubs who will do what they have to do to try and make enough funds to keep their members courses going on a non profit making basis.I don't have any problem with that at all. These are members owned clubs run by members for members, in the best way they seem fit. Adding the 3 card rule may well impact on them in a far greater way.

On the other hand you have "clubs" that are propriotory, whose sole aim, understandably is to make a profit for themselves.

These are the "clubs" with the large membership numbers ranging mainly down the east coast from county Dublin to County Tipperary. I would go as far as to say that in my opinion, these "clubs" are only clubs by loose definition and are in fact nothing more than glorified societys as in effect they have no say in the running of the club, have little or no input in to fees charged, green fees tee times etc.

I would imagine that the majority of these clubs do not care about nor will they enforce the 3 card rule as it may reduce their income levels significantly to do so.

Which exactly why the new rules -and the technology to facilitate them - are necessary and welcome.

First Up

golfwallah wrote: »

You’re choosing to ignore a lot of inconvenient realities that don’t support your case against “distance memberships” and/or aren't in support of stricter eligibility rules for playing in open competitions.

For example, the vast majority of clubs, i.e. excluding well established ones in built up areas, have a choice between closure or using basic common sense to boost revenue and reduce cost. They have to find ways to better match supply and demand in a changed economic environment of massive excess capacity, falling membership and falling numbers of golfers playing either opens or casual golf. Added to this is the not inconsiderable impact of competition.

As for marginal costing – this is a red herring as no club, business or airline could stay in existence for very long using marginal costs or pricing only, in the extreme manner you have described.

The ones that are successful have found ways to match supply and demand effectively and also to manage competition. You simply pay more for the best service offering package level and progressively less for reduced levels of service offering in the product / service package range. You also have to be competitive on price and quality of service offering.

It’s not simply a matter of marginal costing or fairness – clubs have to deal with economic reality!

For example, on Ryanair you can get cheaper airfares by booking earlier. You can also get free reserved seats by checking in online within 7 days of travel. Other charges can be avoided by doing everything online. The telephone and piped TV companies have myriads of service package offerings. There is considerable migration between packages and service providers (“churn”). That’s modern, competitive business life – the one in which potential customers have to live in their day to day lives. It’s no different for any service – including golf – get used to it!

Golf clubs need a range of service offerings (for memberships, casual golf, opens, etc.) at prices targeted to attract and retain the needs and wants of different people in different market segments. Like any business, they need to supply what customers want at prices those customers can afford. The alternative is for a lot more clubs to go out of business, leaving far fewer clubs charging higher prices to fewer and wealthier golfers. The so called “distance clubs” are merely filling a gap in the market at the moment.

More clubs need to stop moaning, wake up and compete. It’s a competitive world out there – not the ideal one you describe of members willing to pay through the nose for unnecessarily overpriced service levels – be they for open competitions, membership or otherwise.

I'm sure the lecture and advice will be appreciated by the committees and officials of clubs all over the country who devote their evenings and weekends to their clubs' survival. It obviously never occured to them to wake up and compete so they owe you a debt of gratitude.

Seeing as it is such a competitive world, how would you feel about clubs getting together and deciding that they will no longer maintain the pretence that the distance "members" who turn up every week (replete with smirk) are entitled to avail of discounted rates?

bobster453

Unglika Norse wrote: »

These are the "clubs" with the large membership numbers ranging mainly down the east coast from county Dublin to County Tipperary. I would go as far as to say that in my opinion, these "clubs" are only clubs by loose definition and are in fact nothing more than glorified societys as in effect they have no say in the running of the club, have little or no input in to fees charged, green fees tee times etc.

I would imagine that the majority of these clubs do not care about nor will they enforce the 3 card rule as it may reduce their income levels significantly to do so.

Actually as regards Tipperary you are very much wrong.

I would like to know your definition of large membership numbers and see if you come ballpark close to the actual member count we currently have, dont believe any hype, and it is a long time since that newspaper article that stated we had the largest membership in the country...Go on, give it a shot, I will honestly let you know.

There is a Mens Club, Ladies Club and Management Committee consisting of the owners, Trustees, both Captains, Vice Captains and Secretaries that meet very regularly throughout the year, discuss a broad range of issues including all the above.Any issues discussed are brought back to the relevant Club committees for further discussion, ratification or clarification.Yes it is a proprietor owned Club, founded at a time when the ordinary Joe Soap had no place looking to join a Golf Club, unlike nowadays, and our ethos has always been, and will always be, to provide the best facilities we can for all our members, distance or otherwise.

As regards the 3 card rule, we have absolutely no issue with enforcing it, the issue is that this was an ill thought out motion due primarily to the fact that here we are, well over a year after it was brought in and still there has been absolutely no communication from the GUI regarding the mechanisms to be used to ensure compliance, to say the new swipe cards will sort it all out is not true, they are only as good as the information gathered and nowhere have I seen anything to make me believe the new cards have that compliance functionality.

As regards handicapping etc, it should be noted that we were publicly lauded at the Munster Branch AGM last year for our strict application of rules and regulations re Handicapping and indeed we have hosted Officers from and have visited other clubs in Munster to guide them in all the changes that have occurred over the previous few years.

While we have no issue with any motion that is passed,our only concern with this one is that was not brought in for the reason stated, and was instead brought in at the behest of, and for the benefit of, clubs in Leinster who feel aggrieved that a business model we initiated a decade ago is unjustifiably, given the numbers concerned, viewed by them as somehow diminishing their revenue stream, something that never occurred to them obviously when the Celtic Tiger was roaring and they could charge exorbitant rates to their captive audience members, allowed themselves to be saddled with massive debts and are now belatedly crying wolf.

Indeed it is my belief that far from decrying the current situation, they should be grateful that this business model lessened to a large extent those who for whatever reason, mostly not of their own, could no longer afford to pay the exorbitant rates expected and decided, quite rightly, to go down a different route so they could continue playing rather than be lost to the game of golf forever.

And also, our figures and exit notices that are completed for all members who leave us, distance or otherwise,indicate overwhelmingly that distance members leave when they are financially able to afford the rates charged by their local club, something that would most likely not happen if they had been lost to the game altogether through financial considerations..

golfwallah

First Up wrote: »

I'm sure the lecture and advice will be appreciated by the committees and officials of clubs all over the country who devote their evenings and weekends to their clubs' survival. It obviously never occured to them to wake up and compete so they owe you a debt of gratitude.

Seeing as it is such a competitive world, how would you feel about clubs getting together and deciding that they will no longer maintain the pretence that the distance "members" who turn up every week (replete with smirk) are entitled to avail of discounted rates?

The distance membership "problem" (if it is one) wouldn't exist at all if a lot more local Dublin clubs had service offerings that better matched the needs of golfers who don't want full membership, have only limited the time available to play and also want an official handicap. This whole issue is all about the cost per round - from a potential member's perspective - not from the club's perspective.

You can't seriously expect, from example, guys in the 30 - 45 age range, with young families, big mortgages and limited time availability to pay €1,000 - €1,400, when they can only play 10 to 14 times a year. This works out at about €100 per round, whereas for someone who plays twice a week for the same cost, it works out at around €9.60 - €13.40 per round.

It's as basic as that, really!

The simple reality is that not enough clubs that are close to Dublin are coming up with "lifestyle" membership options that people can afford - hence some people in this segment of the market are attracted to the "distance" option. Unfortunately, many others in this segment are giving up golf altogether, which is certainly not in the interest of the game.

A small number are successfully doing it, for example, Swords Open, Corballis, Elm Green, Castleknock, Hollywood Lakes, Kilcock, Hollystown and a few others. I would like to see a lot more offering affordable golf (in terms of cost per round) as I believe it would result in bringing and retaining a lot more people to golf. A friend of mine who is a member of one of these clubs that brought in a lifestyle membership option last year told me that of about 96 that took it up, 83% transferred to full membership this year. This is the softly / softly approach that is more likely to work than the blunt, unworkable instrument being brought in to restrict eligibility to opens.

As regards your impression that distance members playing cheaply in opens is a major problem - have you any statistics to support this?

My observation over the years at my own club and in other club opens is that the majority playing in opens are members of the home club or full members from other clubs. Members from "distance clubs" playing in these competitions are few and far between.

I think you are making a mountain out of a molehill, TBH.:)

bobster453

First Up wrote: »

Seeing as it is such a competitive world, how would you feel about clubs getting together and deciding that they will no longer maintain the pretence that the distance "members" who turn up every week (replete with smirk) are entitled to avail of discounted rates?

Be an interesting one alright, to see how many clubs would be suspended for preventing eligible members of the GUI from playing an open competition on their course.

First Up

bobster453 wrote: »

Be an interesting one alright, to see how many clubs would be suspended for preventing eligible members of the GUI from playing an open competition on their course.

Any club can set its own terms for its competitions. Some already do.

First Up

golfwallah wrote: »

The distance membership "problem" (if it is one) wouldn't exist at all if a lot more local Dublin clubs had service offerings that better matched the needs of golfers who don't want full membership, have only limited the time available to play and also want an official handicap. This whole issue is all about the cost per round - from a potential member's perspective - not from the club's perspective.

You can't seriously expect, from example, guys in the 30 - 45 age range, with young families, big mortgages and limited time availability to pay €1,000 - €1,400, when they can only play 10 to 14 times a year. This works out at about €100 per round, whereas for someone who plays twice a week for the same cost, it works out at around €9.60 - €13.40 per round.

It's as basic as that, really!

The simple reality is that not enough clubs that are close to Dublin are coming up with "lifestyle" membership options that people can afford - hence some people in this segment of the market are attracted to the "distance" option. Unfortunately, many others in this segment are giving up golf altogether, which is certainly not in the interest of the game.

A small number are successfully doing it, for example, Swords Open, Corballis, Elm Green, Castleknock, Hollywood Lakes, Kilcock, Hollystown and a few others. I would like to see a lot more offering affordable golf (in terms of cost per round) as I believe it would result in bringing and retaining a lot more people to golf. A friend of mine who is a member of one of these clubs that brought in a lifestyle membership option last year told me that of about 96 that took it up, 83% transferred to full membership this year. This is the softly / softly approach that is more likely to work than the blunt, unworkable instrument being brought in to restrict eligibility to opens.

As regards your impression that distance members playing cheaply in opens is a major problem - have you any statistics to support this?

My observation over the years at my own club and in other club opens is that the majority playing in opens are members of the home club or full members from other clubs. Members from "distance clubs" playing in these competitions are few and far between.

I think you are making a mountain out of a molehill, TBH.:)

The number of distance members playing opens is one way of viewing it. Another is the number of clubs whose continued existence depends on the income they derive from flogging GUI cards. We all know there are too many courses and clubs. Some will inevitably go and it would be plain wrong for any genuine club to go before any of these parasites.

Putt it there

First Up wrote: »

The number of distance members playing opens is one way of viewing it. Another is the number of clubs whose continued existence depends on the income they derive from flogging GUI cards. We all know there are too many courses and clubs. Some will inevitably go and it would be plain wrong for any genuine club to go before any of these parasites.

Oh the view from that pedestal must be glorious !!

First Up

Putt it there wrote: »

Oh the view from that pedestal must be glorious !!

Pedestal my arse. Try sitting in on a few club committee meetings.

Putt it there

This whole thing regurgitates every now and then on here , basically its the same story every time , a few folk from in and around dublin/leinster get the hairs on their neck up about some getting cheap golf through distance membership.

They always seem to crow the loudest and throw out ultra insulting personal comments lime "parasites" and i believe the term "itinerant golfers" were used once also . Lads just because you dont like something diesnt mean its practice will or should stop. Its a 100% free market and I for one will use my own will to choose whatever means of golf suits both myself and my family budgets.

Sorry if this offends but having played a few open comps in various courses and having not noticed any change at all in rules n regs this is how it will stay for me and im sure the many others here who are deemed a sickness to the game by a loudmouth few

bobster453

First Up wrote: »

Any club can set its own terms for its competitions. Some already do.

How much do you pay for affiliation to the GUI?
Yep thats right, the exact same as every distance member from any club.
Therefore, irrespective of what any club actually charges for fees, everybody, due to paying the same affiliation fee, is entitled to the same rights under the constitution of the GUI.
Attempting therefore to prevent one group of golfers from having the same rights as all others is discrimination
I would not like to try to defend that tactic, be on a loser straight away.

bobster453

First Up wrote: »

Some will inevitably go and it would be plain wrong for any genuine club to go before any of these parasites.

And this mentality is what was wrong with golf for too long, keep the little man out and lets have a closed shop where those of us that are the elite can gel with our own without having to see or smell the great unwashed. LaDeDa Golfer Mentality

What an utterly ridiculous,childish,unbelievably archaic comment, and then you bemoan the fact that clubs are closing, thank God your mentality is limited to a population of 1 or there would be a lot more gone the same way.

Well, guess what,"If you always do what you always did, you will always get what you always got".

Good luck with the whole sticking your head in the sand and hope they go away mentality.

golfwallah

First Up wrote: »

The number of distance members playing opens is one way of viewing it. Another is the number of clubs whose continued existence depends on the income they derive from flogging GUI cards. We all know there are too many courses and clubs. Some will inevitably go and it would be plain wrong for any genuine club to go before any of these parasites.

To get a handicap in Ireland (and as far as I know England, Scotland or Wales), you must join a club.

You can't get a handicap directly from the GUI, who manage the administration of the CONGU handicapping system through the golf clubs.

So people who want a handicap have no choice other than to join a club.

I spoke to a Spanish guy in Murcia just over a week ago, who told me he had a handicap without being a member of a club. According to him, people in Spain only had to do an exam to get their handicap and thereafter had to return their cards to the association, whenever they played in any of the many competitions approved by the association.

In Spain, the handicapping system operates under the EGA, from whose rules this is an extract:

EUROPEAN GOLF ASSOCIATION (EGA) Handicap System Amended Edition, 1 January 2012:
HANDICAPPING AUTHORITY
The “handicapping authority” for a player is his home club or his national association. For players who are not members of an affiliated club, the national association or area authority may assume the responsibility as handicapping authority as directed by the national association.

When you look at the whole spectrum of how golf handicaps work in other countries, you could conclude that Irish clubs and the GUI are operating a cartel, whereby handicaps can only be acquired through clubs.

And we all know that cartels can be successful some of the time but don't really work in the long term ..... hence the emergence of so called "distance clubs" in an oversupplied market.

I don't expect us to change to an EGA type of handicapping arrangement, but the best way to sort this out, IMO, is through market forces rather than yet more restrictive cartel type rules & regulations. But, I guess, the debate will continue for more time to come until the market eventually helps re-balance supply and demand.

First Up

Putt it there wrote: »

This whole thing regurgitates every now and then on here , basically its the same story every time , a few folk from in and around dublin/leinster get the hairs on their neck up about some getting cheap golf through distance membership.

They always seem to crow the loudest and throw out ultra insulting personal comments lime "parasites" and i believe the term "itinerant golfers" were used once also . Lads just because you dont like something diesnt mean its practice will or should stop. Its a 100% free market and I for one will use my own will to choose whatever means of golf suits both myself and my family budgets.

Sorry if this offends but having played a few open comps in various courses and having not noticed any change at all in rules n regs this is how it will stay for me and im sure the many others here who are deemed a sickness to the game by a loudmouth few

Yes, I used the term itinerant golfers but it is only people who don't fully understand English who have a problem with it.

First Up

bobster453 wrote: »

And this mentality is what was wrong with golf for too long, keep the little man out and lets have a closed shop where those of us that are the elite can gel with our own without having to see or smell the great unwashed. LaDeDa Golfer Mentality

What an utterly ridiculous,childish,unbelievably archaic comment, and then you bemoan the fact that clubs are closing, thank God your mentality is limited to a population of 1 or there would be a lot more gone the same way.

Well, guess what,"If you always do what you always did, you will always get what you always got".

Good luck with the whole sticking your head in the sand and hope they go away mentality.

In other words, don't expect me to pay for something if I can find a way to get someone else to pay it for me. It has nothing to do with "elites"; just people prepared to put their money and time into something. The only "little man" in this is the one who thinks people who support their clubs are awful eejits to be taken advantage of.

Putt it there

First Up wrote: »

Yes, I used the term itinerant golfers but it is only people who don't fully understand English who have a problem with it.

Thank you for confirming you level of ignorance publicly when you fall from your pedestal i hope it knocks a bit of respect and intelligence into you

As for me i will be playing an open comp somewhere as a distance member , who knows maybe in your club one day

First Up

Putt it there wrote: »

Thank you for confirming you level of ignorance publicly when you fall from your pedestal i hope it knocks a bit of respect and intelligence into you

As for me i will be playing an open comp somewhere as a distance member , who knows maybe in your club one day

No dictionary in your house? Or are you just too lazy to look it up?

And if you are coming to our club, better have your "home" club rounds in the system because we DO enforce it.

SaveOurLyric

golfwallah wrote: »

The distance membership "problem" (if it is one) wouldn't exist at all if a lot more local Dublin clubs had service offerings that better matched the needs of golfers who don't want full membership, have only limited the time available to play and also want an official handicap. This whole issue is all about the cost per round - from a potential member's perspective - not from the club's perspective.

You can't seriously expect, from example, guys in the 30 - 45 age range, with young families, big mortgages and limited time availability to pay €1,000 - €1,400, when they can only play 10 to 14 times a year. This works out at about €100 per round, whereas for someone who plays twice a week for the same cost, it works out at around €9.60 - €13.40 per round.

This golfer is already catered for. He can pay greenfees. Or he can joint a society with its loose application of handicaps - which are fine for society golfer.

But if he can only play 10-14 times per year, then whatever about his ability to afford it, for me, he is simply not a handicap golfer and should not have one. A GUI handicap should reflect the current playing level of a player which is the basis of handicapped competition. So I see no problem excluding him from that status. It is not la-di-da superiority or class discrimination, or Dublin v country bias. Simply a golfing justification.
However, I dont blame exclusively the 'distance' clubs for this situation. The clubs running the opens are as much or more to blame. There are far too many opens, and a far too low prices. As in the scramble for members in a shrinking market, clubs have lowered their entry fees below a true market value to play their courses - therby tipping the equation of distance membership+opens = much better value than full membership locally for the less frequent golfer.

SaveOurLyric

bobster453 wrote: »

How much do you pay for affiliation to the GUI?
Yep thats right, the exact same as every distance member from any club.
Therefore, irrespective of what any club actually charges for fees, everybody, due to paying the same affiliation fee, is entitled to the same rights under the constitution of the GUI.
Attempting therefore to prevent one group of golfers from having the same rights as all others is discrimination
I would not like to try to defend that tactic, be on a loser straight away.

I would defend it without hesitation. See above. These golfers are not golfers in the manner that GUI golfers with official handicaps were conceived to be. And it is our right to make the rules as we wish. And I would take any action that is practical if it inhibits their 'buy a handicap' + play opens tendency. They are 'society' golfers eally, who just want the cache of having the semblance of having a real handicap. Which for me they dont.

SaveOurLyric

bobster453 wrote: »

And this mentality is what was wrong with golf for too long, keep the little man out and lets have a closed shop where those of us that are the elite can gel with our own without having to see or smell the great unwashed. LaDeDa Golfer Mentality

What an utterly ridiculous,childish,unbelievably archaic comment, and then you bemoan the fact that clubs are closing, thank God your mentality is limited to a population of 1 or there would be a lot more gone the same way.

Well, guess what,"If you always do what you always did, you will always get what you always got".

Good luck with the whole sticking your head in the sand and hope they go away mentality.

I havent check all points in all posts, but Firstup is not a minoruty of 1. I would be pretty much in agreement.

CLubs are closing because enough of the golfers playing are not paying enough for the golf they get. If they were paying a sustainable fee, then courses wouldnt be closing !


Bit of a chip there on the little-man, la-di-da, elite, attitude btw. That does not exist in golf in Ireland.

SaveOurLyric

golfwallah wrote: »

To get a handicap in Ireland (and as far as I know England, Scotland or Wales), you must join a club.

You can't get a handicap directly from the GUI, who manage the administration of the CONGU handicapping system through the golf clubs.

So people who want a handicap have no choice other than to join a club.

I spoke to a Spanish guy in Murcia just over a week ago, who told me he had a handicap without being a member of a club. According to him, people in Spain only had to do an exam to get their handicap and thereafter had to return their cards to the association, whenever they played in any of the many competitions approved by the association.

In Spain, the handicapping system operates under the EGA, from whose rules this is an extract:


When you look at the whole spectrum of how golf handicaps work in other countries, you could conclude that Irish clubs and the GUI are operating a cartel, whereby handicaps can only be acquired through clubs.

And we all know that cartels can be successful some of the time but don't really work in the long term ..... hence the emergence of so called "distance clubs" in an oversupplied market.

I don't expect us to change to an EGA type of handicapping arrangement, but the best way to sort this out, IMO, is through market forces rather than yet more restrictive cartel type rules & regulations. But, I guess, the debate will continue for more time to come until the market eventually helps re-balance supply and demand.

Yes and no. Only a GUI handicap can only be acquired through a club. You can form any golf society you wish, or form your own of 1 and give yourself any handicap you like. There is no cartel. Only the rules of one particular union which is entitled to make any rules it likes. And to the majority of those who are members, we are perfectly happy with it that way. If you dont like it, dont join. But dont moan about how it isnt the way you want it to be.

Putt it there

First Up wrote: »

No dictionary in your house? Or are you just too lazy to look it up?

And if you are coming to our club, better have your "home" club rounds in the system because we DO enforce it.

You really are the gift that keeps on giving