Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Golf Memberships
Options
Comments
-
Any one any information on kilcock golf club , what's it like to get out early on Sunday morning and is it a busy club at weekends.
Also is it possible to just turn up on a summers evening after work and just go out and play or do you need to book in advance . Any information about the club would be great .
Thanks
Can't answer your specific questions but its a course I always enjoyed. Not the longest but always in good nick and tricky greens. I would imagine getting out on a summer evening would be no problem, given the semi-rural location. If I lived that side of town I would definitely consider it.0 -
It's just ok, easy track, as a low man once said to me one day after coming off it 3 under "hen run" very wet from October to May, rathcore or moyvalley far better courses, greens use to be very slow but always in good shape but slow, they were faster this year, depends what u want from ur golf, I'd say no hassle getting out on the evenings, members comps Saturday an Sunday morningsAny one any information on kilcock golf club , what's it like to get out early on Sunday morning and is it a busy club at weekends.
Also is it possible to just turn up on a summers evening after work and just go out and play or do you need to book in advance . Any information about the club would be great .
Thanks0 -
It's just ok, easy track, as a low man once said to me one day after coming off it 3 under "hen run" very wet from October to May, rathcore or moyvalley far better courses, greens use to be very slow but always in good shape but slow, they were faster this year, depends what u want from ur golf, I'd say no hassle getting out on the evenings, members comps Saturday an Sunday mornings
Interesting
Played Rathcore a couple of times and found it pretty soggy. No recollection of similar problem at Kilcock but maybe I only played it in summer.0 -
Any one any information on kilcock golf club , what's it like to get out early on Sunday morning and is it a busy club at weekends.
Also is it possible to just turn up on a summers evening after work and just go out and play or do you need to book in advance . Any information about the club would be great .
Thanks
Hi as a member here I can ensure you it is easy enough to get out on Sunday or Saturday mornings .Time sheets can fill up especially in the winter but there is a waiting list from which I have never failed to get a slot as other guys pull out.
There is no problem just turning up in the summer evenings ...very rare to be overly busy in the evenings and you can book online easily.
Regarding the course since the new drainage and greens were done a few years ago the course holds up pretty well in the winter. There are a few soggy areas off the fairways but most courses have this and the fairways are good and firm bar if there is a horrid weather spell. Main problem in the winter is leaves which can make finding the ball a problem if you are wild off the tee. Greens can be a bit inconsistant speed wise but were a lot better this summer and are normally in good condition.
Not the longest of courses compared to some but unless you are a long straight hitter tough enough to get a good score on.The rough can be cruel if you miss the fairways.
The members are very friendly and the pros are good guys.
Any more questions just ask.0 -
Righthammer wrote: »Hi as a member here I can ensure you it is easy enough to get out on Sunday or Saturday mornings .Time sheets can fill up especially in the winter but there is a waiting list from which I have never failed to get a slot as other guys pull out.
There is no problem just turning up in the summer evenings ...very rare to be overly busy in the evenings and you can book online easily.
Regarding the course since the new drainage and greens were done a few years ago the course holds up pretty well in the winter. There are a few soggy areas off the fairways but most courses have this and the fairways are good and firm bar if there is a horrid weather spell. Main problem in the winter is leaves which can make finding the ball a problem if you are wild off the tee. Greens can be a bit inconsistant speed wise but were a lot better this summer and are normally in good condition.
Not the longest of courses compared to some but unless you are a long straight hitter tough enough to get a good score on.The rough can be cruel if you miss the fairways.
The members are very friendly and the pros are good guys.
Any more questions just ask.
Well done on the drainage - the best investment any club can make in its course and a lot more sensible than building mega clubhouses.
With our climate seemingly getting wetter by the year, this is an issue a lot of clubs are going to face sooner or later. This kind of investment costs money and clubs that are keeping their heads above water (pun intended) on day to day income are just not equipped to handle this kind of capital expenditure.
Its another reason why the clubs flogging distance membership on the "golf for the masses" excuse should be treated with contempt. They facilitate people who want golf on the cheap in playing courses maintained at other people's expense. It isn't fair and I really hope the GUI can get it sorted.
Meanwhile good luck to Kilcock for doing it right.0 -
Advertisement
-
Meanwhile good luck to Kilcock for doing it right.[/quote]
Don't mislead people, kilcock is very soft in the winter, the drainage would not be classed as good0 -
Meanwhile good luck to Kilcock for doing it right.
Don't mislead people, kilcock is very soft in the winter, the drainage would not be classed as good[/QUOTE]
I don't have first hand experience to comment. I was responding to the member above who said they had invested in it.
You previously recommended Rathcore, which I found very soft so I'm not sure what standards we are applying here.0 -
Well done on the drainage - the best investment any club can make in its course and a lot more sensible than building mega clubhouses.
With our climate seemingly getting wetter by the year, this is an issue a lot of clubs are going to face sooner or later. This kind of investment costs money and clubs that are keeping their heads above water (pun intended) on day to day income are just not equipped to handle this kind of capital expenditure.
Its another reason why the clubs flogging distance membership on the "golf for the masses" excuse should be treated with contempt. They facilitate people who want golf on the cheap in playing courses maintained at other people's expense. It isn't fair and I really hope the GUI can get it sorted.
Meanwhile good luck to Kilcock for doing it right.
Other way round imo Distance members subsidise the running costs of clubs so that full members have a course and club they can be proud off. Distance members, no voting rights, having to pay a green fee each time they play facilitate us, the full members in having a decent club and course. Hope the "GUI get it sorted", get a grip, more people playing the game is what the union want not the Dinosaur thinking expressed in your post. i wager that a significat proportion of "distance members" have taken full membership options at various clubs countrywide in the last 5 years. To me it would be the most obvious place from where potential new full members to clubs come from.
Every club should also be linking in to their local secondary schools and offering free junior memberships in an effort to bring the game to kids who have had no exposure golf because none of their family played the game before.0 -
+1. great Idea for the secondary schools! I was a late starter into the game as no one played in my house and there was no courses near me.. now I'm obsessed..
0 -
Kingswood Rover wrote: »Other way round imo Distance members subsidise the running costs of clubs so that full members have a course and club they can be proud off. Distance members, no voting rights, having to pay a green fee each time they play facilitate us, the full members in having a decent club and course. Hope the "GUI get it sorted", get a grip, more people playing the game is what the union want not the Dinosaur thinking expressed in your post. i wager that a significat proportion of "distance members" have taken full membership options at various clubs countrywide in the last 5 years. To me it would be the most obvious place from where potential new full members to clubs come from.
Every club should also be linking in to their local secondary schools and offering free junior memberships in an effort to bring the game to kids who have had no exposure golf because none of their family played the game before.
Oh the benefits to the club flogging the distance memberships are obvious. Money for nothing. However that isn't why the distance members join and I wonder how many such members bother to ever visit the place, never mind become full members.
They do it to get a cheap GUI card so they can play open compeitions at subsidised rates at courses they like and that are convenient to them. Courses that are funded and maintained by their members at full cost.
Your rationale just confirms the totally self centred attitude of the scammer clubs and you effort to dress it up as somehow promoting the game is just pathetic. Clubs can -and do - promote the game through junior programmes etc without resorting to abusing their GUI affiliation.0 -
Advertisement
-
Kingswood Rover wrote: »[QUOTE=bailey99;93429445
Advertising memberships for 120 or 150 a year is a disgrace, get a grip man, the club i am in have 600 minor members at 159 a pop and only for them our club would not exist and a good percentage of our minor members would not get to play competitive golf, This elitist claptrap is one of the reasons golf is falling to win the heart and minds of enough kids to make the longterm future of the number of clubs in the country a bit more secure.
Well, it's a dog eat dog world.
What distance membership clubs are doing is no better than predatory pricing. I have no issue withe the 'quality' of members of these clubs and whether they are or are not bandits. What I do have a problem with is how they are damaging existing clubs and freeloading off other clubs.
Memberships are down but more worrying for clubs like mine is the itinerant golfer. One year here, one year there, constantly changing membership looking for the best 'deal'. This makes planning extremely difficult and I would say anyone who is cycling their membership through a number of clubs is damaging all of them. More than anything what clubs need is a stable membership - that way they can plan and develop a sustainable business model. As with most clubs our revenue is down nearly 50% from the peak but costs have been slashed too. We are sustainable at this level but what if we lose another 10% of the members - even if it's only churn.
I have no problem with clubs competing with each other for members or people deciding on club A over club B. What I have a huge problem with is clubs attracting members that will never play their course whose business model is predicated on their members playing other courses.
Say a club needs membership revenue of 300K to break even. 500 members with average playing profiles at 600 each gets you there. Now say some bright spark decides that we'll have 1500 members at 200 each. Doesn't work because there isn't the capacity for 1500 members to play. The only way it works is for the bulk of the 1500 members to play their golf elsewhere. Who subsidies that? The members of clubs that are being destroyed by the distance clubs, that's who.
You have the right to join any club. Any club has the right to price its membership whatever way it sees fit. Just don't expect the rest of us to like it and accept it.
The other thing that grinds my gears is the complete unwillingness of these itinerant golfers to do even the most basic cost analysis on their decision.
All they do is compare the membership of club A with club B. No account is taken of travel time and cost, the extra golf you can play if the course is nearby, the ease of just rolling up and playing at the weekend vs the almost military precision needed to organise 4 golfers to play a course 40-50 kilometers away at a given time. It's a peculiar form of stubbornness (dare I say stupidity).
Why do I care? Because it affects me by threatening the future of a club and resource that I value.0 -
It is your attitude that is pathetic, Clubs like to see their open competitions well supported even by distance members whose comp entry fee is used by the club holding the competition to help balance the books. "self centred attitude of Scammer clubs" Mods please..... Junior programmes that are largely based within the Full membership of the club and do not generally go out and look at getting kids with no background in the sport involved. I played golf recently with 2 members at another club and they moaned incessantly about some 14 year olds playing ahead of us. They did not hold us up but the fact that they were on the course really annoyed them, that attitude is a major turn off for anyone continuing with the game. the game needs to go out and embrace the whole population saying here is a game for life, one that keeps you fit and will make you many lifelong friends. Until the sport shakes off the moneyed/elitist tag that many people give it and perpetuated by a significant number of people playing the game then we are at nothing.Oh the benefits to the club flogging the distance memberships are obvious. Money for nothing. However that isn't why the distance members join and I wonder how many such members bother to ever visit the place, never mind become full members.
They do it to get a cheap GUI card so they can play open compeitions at courses they like and that are convenient to them. Courses that are funded and maintained by their members at full cost.
Your rationale just confirms the totally self centred attitude of the scammer clubs and you effort to dress it up as somehow promoting the game is just pathetic. Clubs can -and do - promote the game through junior programmes etc without resorting to abusing their GUI affiliation.0 -
moycullen14 wrote: »
There is a lot there Moycullen, not sure about using the term itinerant to describe a group of people with whom you have an issue with. Distance memberships are here to stay and they have come about due to clubs trying stay alive. Distance members spend the competition entry fees at other clubs, yours and mine.The basic tennant of my arguement is that the sport has not been active enough in the non golf playing population in persuading people to take up the sport and that if had been it may have meant less predatory pricing and less need of the membership category loved by some and hated by others.Kingswood Rover wrote: »
Well, it's a dog eat dog world.
What distance membership clubs are doing is no better than predatory pricing. I have no issue withe the 'quality' of members of these clubs and whether they are or are not bandits. What I do have a problem with is how they are damaging existing clubs and freeloading off other clubs.
Memberships are down but more worrying for clubs like mine is the itinerant golfer. One year here, one year there, constantly changing membership looking for the best 'deal'. This makes planning extremely difficult and I would say anyone who is cycling their membership through a number of clubs is damaging all of them. More than anything what clubs need is a stable membership - that way they can plan and develop a sustainable business model. As with most clubs our revenue is down nearly 50% from the peak but costs have been slashed too. We are sustainable at this level but what if we lose another 10% of the members - even if it's only churn.
I have no problem with clubs competing with each other for members or people deciding on club A over club B. What I have a huge problem with is clubs attracting members that will never play their course whose business model is predicated on their members playing other courses.
Say a club needs membership revenue of 300K to break even. 500 members with average playing profiles at 600 each gets you there. Now say some bright spark decides that we'll have 1500 members at 200 each. Doesn't work because there isn't the capacity for 1500 members to play. The only way it works is for the bulk of the 1500 members to play their golf elsewhere. Who subsidies that? The members of clubs that are being destroyed by the distance clubs, that's who.
You have the right to join any club. Any club has the right to price its membership whatever way it sees fit. Just don't expect the rest of us to like it and accept it.
The other thing that grinds my gears is the complete unwillingness of these itinerant golfers to do even the most basic cost analysis on their decision.
All they do is compare the membership of club A with club B. No account is taken of travel time and cost, the extra golf you can play if the course is nearby, the ease of just rolling up and playing at the weekend vs the almost military precision needed to organise 4 golfers to play a course 40-50 kilometers away at a given time. It's a peculiar form of stubbornness (dare I say stupidity).
Why do I care? Because it affects me by threatening the future of a club and resource that I value.0 -
Kingswood Rover wrote: »It is your attitude that is pathetic, Clubs like to see their open competitions well supported even by distance members whose comp entry fee is used by the club holding the competition to help balance the books. "self centred attitude of Scammer clubs" Mods please..... Junior programmes that are largely based within the Full membership of the club and do not generally go out and look at getting kids with no background in the sport involved. I played golf recently with 2 members at another club and they moaned incessantly about some 14 year olds playing ahead of us. They did not hold us up but the fact that they were on the course really annoyed them, that attitude is a major turn off for anyone continuing with the game. the game needs to go out and embrace the whole population saying here is a game for life, one that keeps you fit and will make you many lifelong friends. Until the sport shakes off the moneyed/elitist tag that many people give it and perpetuated by a significant number of people playing the game then we are at nothing.
Please don't try to change the subject.
There is a cost associated with building and maintaining golf courses. That cost has to be meet from somewhere and the only reliable source is the people who play them. Traditionally this has been through club membership, with a few pay and play operations at both ends of the quality scale. Golf is not intrinsically "elitist". It is just expensive.
By your own admission, your club is not sustained by its playing patrons and members. Instead of trimming costs (and maybe your unrealistic expectations) you abuse the system by what in any other business would be below cost selling.
If you want to sell below cost golf at your own club, that's your business. But you have no right to legitimise and impose below cost golf on other clubs, which is in effect what dolling out cheap GUI cards is.
In another thread I described those engaged in this practice as parasites and that remains an accurate analogy.0 -
Don't mislead people, kilcock is very soft in the winter, the drainage would not be classed as good
I don't have first hand experience to comment. I was responding to the member above who said they had invested in it.
You previously recommended Rathcore, which I found very soft so I'm not sure what standards we are applying here.[/quote]
when u do have first hand experience, maybe u should make ur mind up then, rathcore is a better course that kilcock, that's what I said, if u disagree with that, then ur the one with questionable standards0 -
I don't have first hand experience to comment. I was responding to the member above who said they had invested in it.
You previously recommended Rathcore, which I found very soft so I'm not sure what standards we are applying here.
when u do have first hand experience, maybe u should make ur mind up then, rathcore is a better course that kilcock, that's what I said, if u disagree with that, then ur the one with questionable standards[/QUOTE]
I would agree that Rathcore is a better (certainly more interesting) course. I was simply noting that you described Kilcock as being soggy, whereas in my experience, Rathcore was the soggier of the two. I don't recall if I played them both around the same time, hence the reference to first hand experience.
Perhaps you have played them both around the same time so I am asking if you are applying the same standards to their respective drainage systems.
I have no issue with either course by the way.0 -
If golf clubs object to distance members why not scrap open competitions? This is facilitating cheap memberships; it's almost hypocritical.
All the GUI has to do is offer gui cards to full members only.0 -
I've been reading this thread for a while and just want to give my two cents.
A few people here seem to be very black and white about distance membership but I don't think it's that clear. I was a full member of local course, picked up a back injury and was out of golf for over 2 years. When I started to make a comeback I joined a club as a distance member since I wasn't sure if I was going to be able to play much due to injury (no point in forking out big bucks and not play). Now that my injury has cleared up I'm going to join a local club as a full member again this year.
I know many people who are distance members of various clubs because they only play 4 - 6 times a year. They don't go around playing open comps everywhere. And a few more who are only taking up the game and are using the distance membership as a stepping stone onto full membership. These people that I know are not going around cleaning up open comps, they usually just play social golf. If the distance membership wasn't an option they simply wouldn't join anywhere.
If this is such an issue and normal clubs despise these distance members then why don't they remove their open day comps?
I think the distance membership is only being abused by a very small minority of people. I don't think it's cost effective to be a distance member and play regular golf.0 -
You won't be at that crack next summer. I'll be on the look out for you sneaking over the dunes.Montgolfier wrote: »If golf clubs object to distance members why not scrap open competitions? This is facilitating cheap memberships; it's almost hypocritical.
All the GUI has to do is offer gui cards to full members only.
Or make opens available only to full members.0 -
doublecross wrote: »I've been reading this thread for a while and just want to give my two cents.
A few people here seem to be very black and white about distance membership but I don't think it's that clear. I was a full member of local course, picked up a back injury and was out of golf for over 2 years. When I started to make a comeback I joined a club as a distance member since I wasn't sure if I was going to be able to play much due to injury (no point in forking out big bucks and not play). Now that my injury has cleared up I'm going to join a local club as a full member again this year.
I know many people who are distance members of various clubs because they only play 4 - 6 times a year. They don't go around playing open comps everywhere. And a few more who are only taking up the game and are using the distance membership as a stepping stone onto full membership. These people that I know are not going around cleaning up open comps, they usually just play social golf. If the distance membership wasn't an option they simply wouldn't join anywhere.
If this is such an issue and normal clubs despise these distance members then why don't they remove their open day comps?
I think the distance membership is only being abused by a very small minority of people. I don't think it's cost effective to be a distance member and play regular golf.
Well if there are clubs that are notorious for generating a significant part of their income from such members, there must be some people who find it cost effective.
The abuse could be eliminated by reducing the GUI status of country members to something below that of full members - on the basis that full members contribute to the upkeep of the game to a greater degree and thereby earn reciprocal rights like entry to opens at preferential rates.
That isn't "elitism". It is called getting what you pay for.0 -
Advertisement
-
Well if there are clubs that are notorious for generating a significant part of their income from such members, there must be some people who find it cost effective.
The abuse could be eliminated by reducing the GUI status of country members to something below that of full members - on the basis that full members contribute to the upkeep of the game to a greater degree and thereby earn reciprocal rights like entry to opens at preferential rates.
That isn't "elitism". It is called getting what you pay for.
Don't think that would work, you can join courses around the country (Ring of Kerry) as a full member for €150.
I think distance membership has a place but I can understand that it's frustrating if you're a full member and your neighbour is a distance member but regularly plays your course at discounted rate.
I don't think removing distance membership will cause a full membership jump, if anything you'll probably just notice a revenue drop at your open days.
One solution is that a golfers GUI number stays with them for life. Each golf should only be allowed maybe 5 years as a distance member. This would still allow golfers new to the game get there distance membership and not scare them away.0 -
doublecross wrote: »Don't think that would work, you can join courses around the country (Ring of Kerry) as a full member for €150.
I think distance membership has a place but I can understand that it's frustrating if you're a full member and your neighbour is a distance member but regularly plays your course at discounted rate.
I don't think removing distance membership will cause a full membership jump, if anything you'll probably just notice a revenue drop at your open days.
One solution is that a golfers GUI number stays with them for life. Each golf should only be allowed maybe 5 years as a distance member. This would still allow golfers new to the game get there distance membership and not scare them away.
I think ROK is €225 but I take your point.
The (planned) requirement of a minimum 3 qualifying rounds to keep your club handicap is a step in the right direction. As with the distance member specialist clubs, it will be interesting to see how many of ROK's full members comply.
Its hard to know if a crack down would stimulate more full members. I think it would but I don't think that's the point. Golf is expensive to provide and those playing it should pay their way. If people are "associate" members of clubs (which is what country members are) then they can have associate membership of the GUI.0 -
I think ROK is €225 but I take your point.
The (planned) requirement of a minimum 3 qualifying rounds to keep your club handicap is a step in the right direction. As with the distance member specialist clubs, it will be interesting to see how many of ROK's full members comply.
Its hard to know if a crack down would stimulate more full members. I think it would but I don't think that's the point. Golf is expensive to provide and those playing it should pay their way. If people are "associate" members of clubs (which is what country members are) then they can have associate membership of the GUI.
Ya, I think ROK was €150 last year if you joined with a friend, might be gone this year.
A non GUI golfer can walk into any club and play. Should we ban them also. If you think distance members are not paying their fair share then why don't clubs charge more for guests in open singles. I'm guessing it's because they don't want to scare them away.
Distance membership is was got me into golf (I didn't start as a junior), remove it and you'll be removing potential future golfers. All clubs have to do is charge guests more at open comps and that should compensate full members.
I think the 3 qualifying rounds at home club is a good thing, if anybody is serious about their golf that shouldn't be a problem. From talking to people involved in my local club, they're not sure if it will be enforced.
I'm probably starting to repeating the same point so I'll leave it at that!0 -
doublecross wrote: »Ya, I think ROK was €150 last year if you joined with a friend, might be gone this year.
A non GUI golfer can walk into any club and play. Should we ban them also. If you think distance members are not paying their fair share then why don't clubs charge more for guests in open singles. I'm guessing it's because they don't want to scare them away.
Distance membership is was got me into golf (I didn't start as a junior), remove it and you'll be removing potential future golfers. All clubs have to do is charge guests more at open comps and that should compensate full members.
I think the 3 qualifying rounds at home club is a good thing, if anybody is serious about their golf that shouldn't be a problem. From talking to people involved in my local club, they're not sure if it will be enforced.
I'm probably starting to repeating the same point so I'll leave it at that!
I'm interested to know what you mean by distance membership "got you into" golf. I assume you didn't take out a membership somewhere far away before deciding if you liked it?
Regular green fees are higher than entry fees for opens - that's the point. Opens are (or were) intended to be a means for members of clubs to share each others facilities, on the basis that - as club and GUI members - they were all putting something into the game. Entry to opens requires players to sign in with their GUI number, hence the value of a "cheapo" GUI card.
I know many perfectly legit distance members but let's not pretend that the typical distance bandit is interested in anything more than getting his golf as cheap as possible and let someone else worry about keeping clubs and courses alive.
The systems are there to enforce the three card requirement, even if some clubs want to drag their heels on it. The GUI is going into this with it's eyes open - they know the game.0 -
I'm interested to know what you mean by distance membership "got you into" golf. I assume you didn't take out a membership somewhere far away before deciding if you liked it?
Regular green fees are higher than entry fees for opens - that's the point. Opens are (or were) intended to be a means for members of clubs to share each others facilities, on the basis that - as club and GUI members - they were all putting something into the game. Entry to opens requires players to sign in with their GUI number, hence the value of a "cheapo" GUI card.
When I started playing (over 10 years ago) my local club was full and not taking new members, next nearest club was over 30km and I'd no car. Only option was distance membership and travel with friends to clubs holding open weeks. Got the bug and following year got car and joined club. If I'd never joined as distance member I'd probably never got into golf. Hence I'm not such an extremist against the idea of distance membership. Luck enough never had anybody look down on me when I played at there club and they never refused my money.
I don't agree that the purpose of opens every week is "clubs to share each others facilities". Not so long ago clubs only had an open week once a year which was for that purpose. A lot of clubs also have reciprocal deals with local clubs of reduced green fees (the kerry card comes to mind). The main reason for clubs have so many opens is Revenue.0 -
doublecross wrote: »When I started playing (over 10 years ago) my local club was full and not taking new members, next nearest club was over 30km and I'd no car. Only option was distance membership and travel with friends to clubs holding open weeks. Got the bug and following year got car and joined club. If I'd never joined as distance member I'd probably never got into golf. Hence I'm not such an extremist against the idea of distance membership. Luck enough never had anybody look down on me when I played at there club and they never refused my money.
I don't agree that the purpose of opens every week is "clubs to share each others facilities". Not so long ago clubs only had an open week once a year which was for that purpose. A lot of clubs also have reciprocal deals with local clubs of reduced green fees (the kerry card comes to mind). The main reason for clubs have so many opens is Revenue.
If opens are only for revenue (the equivalent of a sale in a shop), then why restrict them to GUI members? If there was no such restriction, the whole distance membership business would collapse.
In the days when golf demand exceeded supply, many people took the same distance membership route as you and that was perfectly understandable. No such justification exists now.0 -
I know many perfectly legit distance members but let's not pretend that the typical distance bandit is interested in anything more than getting his golf as cheap as possible and let someone else worry about keeping clubs and courses alive.
I think this point is key tbh. Its a huge dilemma facing clubs and golfers. Whether we like it or not, keeping a golf club afloat is expensive (no matter what level of course it is).
I've no idea what the correct balance is, on one hand you have golfers who no longer have the means (recession, unemployment, kids etc) to stay a member of their club but still want to play some golf, and distance membership suits them until such a time as they can rejoin their local club.
On the other hand you've guys who simply want all the upside without paying for it, they want to get the "benefit" of playing opens all round without significantly contributing to the upkeep of any course.
Its a tricky one, maybe the GUI should put a limit on the number of consecutive years someone can avail of "distance" category in any club ? Although some clubs would probably come up with a different name for their distance category.
Maybe there should be an asterix after their handicap or a "d" and anyone with a distance handicap can only play x amount of opens or something like that, I'm sure the software could easily be adjusted for something like that.0 -
If opens are only for revenue (the equivalent of a sale in a shop), then why restrict them to GUI members? If there was no such restriction, the whole distance membership business would collapse.
In the days when golf demand exceeded supply, many people took the same distance membership route as you and that was perfectly understandable. No such justification exists now.
Clubs don't limit opens to GUI members. Many allow non GUI to play open comps at the reduced rate (but not eligible to win prize). I think I read on the links thread (but not sure) that The Europen Club allow non GUI to play in Open Comps. I've played in open comps with people who have no handicap but get the reduced rate. I'm not going to judge the club for doing it, it's their decision. I'm guessing it must be a common practice.0 -
I think this point is key tbh. Its a huge dilemma facing clubs and golfers. Whether we like it or not, keeping a golf club afloat is expensive (no matter what level of course it is).
I've no idea what the correct balance is, on one hand you have golfers who no longer have the means (recession, unemployment, kids etc) to stay a member of their club but still want to play some golf, and distance membership suits them until such a time as they can rejoin their local club.
On the other hand you've guys who simply want all the upside without paying for it, they want to get the "benefit" of playing opens all round without significantly contributing to the upkeep of any course.
Its a tricky one, maybe the GUI should put a limit on the number of consecutive years someone can avail of "distance" category in any club ? Although some clubs would probably come up with a different name for their distance category.
Maybe there should be an asterix after their handicap or a "d" and anyone with a distance handicap can only play x amount of opens or something like that, I'm sure the software could easily be adjusted for something like that.
I earlier suggested a category of "associate" GUI membership, which would be consistent with the status that distance members enjoy at their "home" club.
Yes, the software could handle anything like that, the same as it will be able to monitor the 3 qualifying round requirement.0 -
Advertisement
-
doublecross wrote: »Clubs don't limit opens to GUI members. Many allow non GUI to play open comps at the reduced rate (but not eligible to win prize). I think I read on the links thread (but not sure) that The Europen Club allow non GUI to play in Open Comps. I've played in open comps with people who have no handicap but get the reduced rate. I'm not going to judge the club for doing it, it's their decision. I'm guessing it must be a common practice.
That is absolutely their right. The European is not the cheapest under any circumstances so it is probably not high on the list for many of the distance member brigade.
I don't know how many clubs do that - I don't play that many opens but I have always been asked to sign in properly with my GUI card. If Opens became fully "open" it would reduce the attraction - or need - for distance membership for those who just want to play.
The ineligibility to win prizes is a different matter, as according to another thread there is reportedly a contingent of "bandits" out there who are cleaning up, especially in team events. They would still need their GUI numbers to do that. We'll see how it goes.0
Advertisement