Dunmurry Springs GC closed 12.11.19

DaveyLad

brick tamland wrote: »

I imagine the land Seapoint is on, is much more valuable as a golf course than anything else. It wouldn’t be in anyone’s interest to close it down. Its different from Dunmurry springs in that way.

That's not different from Dunmurry, the course, club and land are worth approximately twice the outstanding debt which is why the fund were so happy to take it off the banks hands, there's loads of equity and they'll be able to move it on

Kingswood Rover

DaveyLad wrote: »

That's not different from Dunmurry, the course, club and land are worth approximately twice the outstanding debt which is why the fund were so happy to take it off the banks hands, there's loads of equity and they'll be able to move it on

Are there any moves by the members to keep it running even on an interim basis

GreeBo

DaveyLad wrote: »

That's not different from Dunmurry, the course, club and land are worth approximately twice the outstanding debt which is why the fund were so happy to take it off the banks hands, there's loads of equity and they'll be able to move it on

How are they valuing the land ? What zone, agri or residential?

DaveyLad

GreeBo wrote: »

How are they valuing the land ? What zone, agri or residential?

There's approx 160 acres secured by around €1.2mil in debt so no matter how it's zoned with land prices in Kildare there are no equity issues, the land was originally a dairy farm so I'd imagine that's how it's zoned but there have been changes in the area since the course opened

Ollieboy

DaveyLad wrote: »

There's approx 160 acres secured by around €1.2mil in debt so no matter how it's zoned with land prices in Kildare there are no equity issues, the land was originally a dairy farm so I'd imagine that's how it's zoned but there have been changes in the area since the course opened

160 less about 30 to 40 for lakes etc leaves 120 and its worth at best €10,000 to €12,000 a acre. I would go with the lower price. It’s not an ideal location for housing and it’s not ideal for high quality farming.

I reckon with that membership and income they weren’t servicing the debt, hence why it’s closed.

Depending on what the fund bought it for, they might let it go for a fair price to the members who to me, would be the only interested buyers.

200 members put up 5k each and they could own the place and 1k a year subs and get it up and running again, but it needs to happen fast.

Seapoint will be interesting, it’s described as a links course but not everyone agrees with that comment and it’s an ideal location for housing at the top end of the market. The debt would be nearly 200k a year without capital payments. So it needs a deal of some sort to stay alive.

They also bought the debt of two other clubs but no details provide which usually means they are doing deals or assessing it.

DaveyLad

Kingswood Rover wrote: »

Are there any moves by the members to keep it running even on an interim basis

Yes we're opening this weekend for a members comp, and are in discussions to do the same for the next few weekends (weather permitting) until we know what the future is

xgronkjabv6pcl

Ollieboy wrote: »

160 less about 30 to 40 for lakes etc leaves 120 and its worth at best €10,000 to €12,000 a acre. I would go with the lower price. It’s not an ideal location for housing and it’s not ideal for high quality farming.

This is not quite accurate for the area though I admit it's not likely to be too far away. I own a piece of agricultural land approx 1 mile from Dunmurray Springs, along the same road and recently had a per acre valuation substantially more than figures you have quoted.

The land which Dunmurray is on may not be quite as desirable given lakes and alike as you suggested. I also agree that a 2x valuation of the land over and above the €1.2m in debt is a tad unrealistic but based upon the numbers I have been quoted in the past 6 months, I suspect the value of the land covers the debt rather comfortably.

Additionally having read the thread, I am somewhat bewildered that the closure came at such a shock to members given the feedback I heard about the club during the summer. It's disappointing as I was a member there at one point, it's a fine course but unfortunately I think it will continue to struggle to be profitable.

moycullen14

Are there any examples of clubs that went into receivership and were bought out by the members and continued to operate successfully?

Looking at my own club, I find it hard to imagine it being done. We can't agree on anything :-)

The best thing to do with most rural clubs (financially) would be to replace the golfers with cows? Can't see how the vast majority of rural clubs make any money at all ... and there's a lot of effort required to run a golf course.

londonred

prawnsambo wrote: »

Yeah. Even little Leitrim has twice that. :eek:

I thought Ballinamore was the only Golf course in Leitrim?

doublecross

moycullen14 wrote: »

Are there any examples of clubs that went into receivership and were bought out by the members and continued to operate successfully?

Ballyneety. It was closed for a year or two before reopening. Members put a lot of work in to get it back in shape.

xgronkjabv6pcl

Unfortunately members clubs are facing a substantial uphill battle to remain open.
This trend will continue as has been shown in the UK and Ireland.

Can't link but: .irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/sport/golf/golf-in-over-the-last-decade-a-changing-landscape-for-better--and-for-worse-869703.html

Article suggests a 20% decline in paid GUI members in 2018 while a 6% closure in courses. I suspect both numbers will more closely align over time. 9 courses in the UK closed last month alone out of approx 1800. 0.5% of courses may seem like a small number but it's quite worrying imo.

moycullen14

doublecross wrote: »

Ballyneety. It was closed for a year or two before reopening. Members put a lot of work in to get it back in shape.

So it is possible.

I'd guess you'd need to have a very large potential membership. Lots of members will vote with their feet if there is an alternative nearby. Hard to blame them.

Rikand

londonred wrote: »

I thought Ballinamore was the only Golf course in Leitrim?

I think you're right because Carrick on shannon golf course is actually in county roscommon

GreeBo

Ollieboy wrote: »

200 members put up 5k each and they could own the place and 1k a year subs and get it up and running again, but it needs to happen fast.

Its not going to be much of a club if they only have 200K a year to run it.

Thats only 5 salaries at the average industrial wage and not a machine bought or serviced.

prawnsambo

GreeBo wrote: »

Its not going to be much of a club if they only have 200K a year to run it.

Thats only 5 salaries at the average industrial wage and not a machine bought or serviced.

Society golf and green fees would have to be factored in too I'd imagine.

brick tamland

I cant imagine all 200 would stump up 5k anyway. Too much choice locally.

GreeBo

prawnsambo wrote: »

Society golf and green fees would have to be factored in too I'd imagine.

If there was enough of that coming in then they probably wouldnt have closed though!

davegilly

Clubs really need to look at different membership options to encourage younger people to join. The days of the husband disappearing to the golf club for the day while the Mrs minded the kids at home is long gone.

Flexible Memberships, Lifestyle Memberships whatever you want to call them is a great way of getting younger guys and gals who are time poor as members. If it's priced right then you should get good numbers signing up - going by my own place.

For someone like myself with two young kids and a wife working, it's impossible to justify full membership anywhere - I can't be disappearing for half a day Saturday with all the kids sports etc to be looked after. However a flexi membership with 10 or 12 weekend competition rounds is perfect for me and lads like me. I know from speaking to friends that they would sign up to something like this no bother, but it's not really available - even though clubs locally are on their last legs? I'm a flexi member currently where I am and entitled to about 18 weekend rounds a year but I've only played 10 this year and it was similar last year! Doesn't bother me as the price wasn't exhorbitant but it was enough to stop most full members moving over to flexi.

Another membership option that I've not seen anywhere is a summer or 6 month membership. April to September at 2/3 or 3/4 the price of full membership - this would suit younger people who could play a round after work midweek. Get a GUI and play in home club opens in the evenings during the summer.

I think the problem mainly is that most club committees are populated by oul lads with little to no knowledge of the modern way of life.

slave1

Clubs also need to offer non GUI membership, so no GUI card and you can’t play in any comps, plenty out there with no interest in comps

Ollieboy

slave1 wrote: »

Clubs also need to offer non GUI membership, so no GUI card and you can’t play in any comps, plenty out there with no interest in comps

Every club offers this option, you don’t need to take up GUI membership

mike12

I'm not sure there are that many more to close.
If they have survived the past 10 years unless like Hollystown they are on prime development land there isn't a lot of value returning them to farm land.
For me this is the first one on the list that I'm sorry to see close always enjoyed playing it.
Surprised Seapoint is in trouble it always seems busy and any open I have ever played there has been full.

prawnsambo

Ollieboy wrote: »

Every club offers this option, you don’t need to take up GUI membership

It's only around €25 anyway. Hardly a deal breaker. And for that, you get to play in open competitions pretty much anywhere you want at highly discounted rates. Like Enniscrone for €35 instead of a green fee over €100.

Ollieboy

davegilly wrote: »

Clubs really need to look at different membership options to encourage younger people to join. The days of the husband disappearing to the golf club for the day while the Mrs minded the kids at home is long gone.

Flexible Memberships, Lifestyle Memberships whatever you want to call them is a great way of getting younger guys and gals who are time poor as members. If it's priced right then you should get good numbers signing up - going by my own place.

For someone like myself with two young kids and a wife working, it's impossible to justify full membership anywhere - I can't be disappearing for half a day Saturday with all the kids sports etc to be looked after. However a flexi membership with 10 or 12 weekend competition rounds is perfect for me and lads like me. I know from speaking to friends that they would sign up to something like this no bother, but it's not really available - even though clubs locally are on their last legs? I'm a flexi member currently where I am and entitled to about 18 weekend rounds a year but I've only played 10 this year and it was similar last year! Doesn't bother me as the price wasn't exhorbitant but it was enough to stop most full members moving over to flexi.

Another membership option that I've not seen anywhere is a summer or 6 month membership. April to September at 2/3 or 3/4 the price of full membership - this would suit younger people who could play a round after work midweek. Get a GUI and play in home club opens in the evenings during the summer.

I think the problem mainly is that most club committees are populated by oul lads with little to no knowledge of the modern way of life.

To be honest, your been selfish here in your comment and what the ideal membership that suits you and don’t worry about the club and it’s future as a business.

I actually look at the options you mentioned and here is some of the reasons it won’t work and the comment oul ones is very unfair.

To offer 6 months membership you will nearly need to charge the full rate, we can’t just tell staff they don’t get paid or work during the winter
Clubs only have so many spots on a Saturday morning at peak time, so these spots will go to loyal members and not the seasonal golfer.
Clubs need to plan and make sure they have finance available for years, so the membership model is the best model for this business.
The golf membership model as been around for over 100 years and now it’s broken?
Your comment as always been a problem for the average working family, hence why golf clubs were usually made up of people in there 40 plus age bracket with money and time.

The problem clubs have is over supply and we are starting to see a end to it now as members are joining the stronger clubs and the weaker clubs are going to make tough decisions.

The model of membership you want, might be available in the short term but not in the long term as clubs recover.

This year we’ve grown by 18% in membership and about 15% in green fees. This is our 4th year of strong growth and we are nearly back to full and looking at entrance fees again. When I started on committee 5 years ago we had 4 people under 30 and we now have a package for that age group and have 150 members under 35.

But if we adopt the membership style you want, we would need double the number of membership and on good weather Saturday you would be moaning that only regulars get out to play etc, so it’s very hard to make those type of membership work in a club and that’s why we have green fees.

As for the number of clubs in Ireland, a lot are going to be sold for housing in the next few years and that will solve the problem. There is not enough money in golf to use 150 acres for golf when you can make millions in housing.

So I would nearly bet in 5 years time, the most common post on this forum will be, I can’t get into a club, or how to join a club, or we need more clubs. Change is coming and it’s coming very fast and fees are increasing for members already. This will mainly be in the areas that have demand for housing.

Ollieboy

GreeBo wrote: »

Its not going to be much of a club if they only have 200K a year to run it.

Thats only 5 salaries at the average industrial wage and not a machine bought or serviced.

Totally agree, they have got away with it this long and without paying debt you might just keep the lights on and grass cut, but it doesn’t allows for investment and in the long term it won’t work.

But if they can keep the doors open until membership grow! That will be the thinking, but that’s based on people won’t pay more elsewhere for a better product. Because without investments including staff, your product won’t be good and they will need to spend on marketing instead of course.

People want to believe they can keep it going, but the honest truth, it’s pie in the sky stuff and if a farmer wants that land or anyone else, they will out bid them.

Out of the current 180 members, you’ll find most have already decided to move elsewhere and were only still there due to value and loyalty

ShivasIrons

mike12 wrote: »

Surprised Seapoint is in trouble it always seems busy and any open I have ever played there has been full.

Seapoint is not in trouble. Their loan with one financial institution was bought by another financial institution. There is no mention anywhere that it’s in trouble. If they continue to repay the loan they will never be in trouble.

charlieIRL

Guys, please refrain from posting that a club "might" be in trouble unless theres concrete evidence. Last thing we want to be doing is turning off existing and potential members from joining / renewing membership just cause they read the course might be in trouble on the internet.

Barnaboy

A couple of points very well made by ollieboy. Maintaining a decent quality golf course is very expensive and for that reason alone I cannot see it surviving. That said I think Rathcore have beaten the odds by staying open as long as they have.

And on Seapoint... Only played it once and I was desperately disappointed with it. Quite simply it is not a links course. In fact you can only see the sea on two holes? I personally would not be in a rush to return. Am I the only one?

slave1

Seapoint, holes 1-2, 16-18 links, remainder bland enough average parkland, lovely clubhouse.
Overrated and overpriced

Bottle

I have played Seapoint a couple of times a year in open competitions, really enjoyed it. It probably doesn't play like a dunes type links course but is still very good. Think we paid €25 a head for the comp, fantastic value.

mike12

https://migrantgolfer.com/the-true-links-courses-of-the-world/

Seems that it is a links course, there are a couple of the open venues Lytham I'm sure of that the nearest point of the course is 500 yards from the sea.

GreeBo

davegilly wrote: »

Clubs really need to look at different membership options to encourage younger people to join. The days of the husband disappearing to the golf club for the day while the Mrs minded the kids at home is long gone.

Flexible Memberships, Lifestyle Memberships whatever you want to call them is a great way of getting younger guys and gals who are time poor as members. If it's priced right then you should get good numbers signing up - going by my own place.

For someone like myself with two young kids and a wife working, it's impossible to justify full membership anywhere - I can't be disappearing for half a day Saturday with all the kids sports etc to be looked after. However a flexi membership with 10 or 12 weekend competition rounds is perfect for me and lads like me. I know from speaking to friends that they would sign up to something like this no bother, but it's not really available - even though clubs locally are on their last legs? I'm a flexi member currently where I am and entitled to about 18 weekend rounds a year but I've only played 10 this year and it was similar last year! Doesn't bother me as the price wasn't exhorbitant but it was enough to stop most full members moving over to flexi.

Another membership option that I've not seen anywhere is a summer or 6 month membership. April to September at 2/3 or 3/4 the price of full membership - this would suit younger people who could play a round after work midweek. Get a GUI and play in home club opens in the evenings during the summer.

I think the problem mainly is that most club committees are populated by oul lads with little to no knowledge of the modern way of life.

It's pie in the sky stuff to think you are going to pay 75% for the best part of the golfing year tbh.
Sure why would anyone pay full whack if that was on offer?

You are also missing the point that you would be taking up the space that a full member could occupy.
Would be financial madness.

mjsc1970

slave1 wrote: »

Seapoint, holes 1-2, 16-18 links, remainder bland enough average parkland, lovely clubhouse.
Overrated and overpriced

You must have very high standards

Russman

davegilly wrote: »

I think the problem mainly is that most club committees are populated by oul lads with little to no knowledge of the modern way of life.

Couldn't disagree more with this statement tbh. Might have been true 30 years ago, certainly not now.

slave1

mjsc1970 wrote: »

You must have very high standards

Nope, but I like to balance the course versus it's fees/reputation and what I thought it was actually like.
As I said, lovely clubhouse and food, great links holes for 5 holes but the day I played it a lot of the parkland holes were a boggy mess with muck balls aplenty.

Don't get me wrong, it's a nice course but I (personally) would not consider it a links course for 18holes and way overpriced for what it is (again, just my personal opinion).

If it sold itself as a part parkland with some links holes and dropped it's price then fair enough, I remember playing Arklow the same day and what a contrast in terms of value and links playability.
Just comparing the rack rates of the two (Seapoint do not advertise their GUI rates) Arklow is €45 this Saturday morning, Seapoint €100-€120, even if Seapoint halved their green fee I'd choose Arklow

First Up

slave1 wrote:

If it sold itself as a part parkland with some links holes and dropped it's price then fair enough, I remember playing Arklow the same day and what a contrast in terms of value and links playability. Just comparing the rack rates of the two (Seapoint do not advertise their GUI rates) Arklow is €45 this Saturday morning, Seapoint €100-€120, even if Seapoint halved their green fee I'd choose Arklow

Seapoint and Arklow on the same day? Did you take a bet?

Agree fully about the relative value. Arklow has its weaknesses (holes crossing and mountain goat terrain in places) but more fun and much better value.

paulanthony

Ollieboy wrote: »

To be honest, your been selfish here in your comment and what the ideal membership that suits you and don’t worry about the club and it’s future as a business.

I actually look at the options you mentioned and here is some of the reasons it won’t work and the comment oul ones is very unfair.

To offer 6 months membership you will nearly need to charge the full rate, we can’t just tell staff they don’t get paid or work during the winter
Clubs only have so many spots on a Saturday morning at peak time, so these spots will go to loyal members and not the seasonal golfer.
Clubs need to plan and make sure they have finance available for years, so the membership model is the best model for this business.
The golf membership model as been around for over 100 years and now it’s broken?
Your comment as always been a problem for the average working family, hence why golf clubs were usually made up of people in there 40 plus age bracket with money and time.

The problem clubs have is over supply and we are starting to see a end to it now as members are joining the stronger clubs and the weaker clubs are going to make tough decisions.

The model of membership you want, might be available in the short term but not in the long term as clubs recover.

This year we’ve grown by 18% in membership and about 15% in green fees. This is our 4th year of strong growth and we are nearly back to full and looking at entrance fees again. When I started on committee 5 years ago we had 4 people under 30 and we now have a package for that age group and have 150 members under 35.

But if we adopt the membership style you want, we would need double the number of membership and on good weather Saturday you would be moaning that only regulars get out to play etc, so it’s very hard to make those type of membership work in a club and that’s why we have green fees.

As for the number of clubs in Ireland, a lot are going to be sold for housing in the next few years and that will solve the problem. There is not enough money in golf to use 150 acres for golf when you can make millions in housing.

So I would nearly bet in 5 years time, the most common post on this forum will be, I can’t get into a club, or how to join a club, or we need more clubs. Change is coming and it’s coming very fast and fees are increasing for members already. This will mainly be in the areas that have demand for housing.

I don't think he is trying to be selfish - I think he is just offering some potentially creative solutions (which in the end may or may not work) for clubs which are clearly in financial difficulty and struggling to keep going. It is clearly a cashflow issue in the main and generating an extra 60 or 70k a year (or less) could be the difference between staying open or not. I agree if I was a full (traditional style) member of a club the concept of flexible/lifestyle memberships might annoy me, but probably not as much as arriving to the course one day with a chain on the gates!

When things improve / debt is paid down it may be possible to phase out these schemes and hope some of the lifestyle members will transition to full membership.

I accept that there may be an oversupply and that it will probably result in some closures, but that is looking at the overall picture. If you are looking at it from the perspective of each individual club they will of course wish to survive and (like any business) do what is needed to keep going. The reality is that in a hypothetical town where there are two golf clubs and not enough revenue to keep either going, the closure of one will probably result in the ensured survival of the other (or of 2-3 others). Eg where Knockanally, Woodlands have closed in the recent past, this is undoubtedly a financial boost to surrounding clubs like Kilcock, Millicent, Rathcore. If one of these had gone first and some members had moved to Knockanally then it may well be thriving now. Obviously not nice to be thinking about being in competition with your neighbours but from a business perspective this is the reality.

I agree that the point above about "oul lads" running clubs in unfair (and inaccurate). I think a more relevant point would be that committees and committee members running clubs will vary hugely in their ability to run a golf club and its finances as a business. This is true of any voluntary organisation, charity, business or even government...but the reality is that many people in positions of responsibility will often not (in reality) have the experience of running a business and making smart decisions to ensure future financial health. This equally applies to making smart decisions in good times - many committees are probably doing brilliant jobs at the moment against the odds because of the situation they inherited from guys who decided to borrow €2 million in 2006 to build a new clubhouse, restaurant, changing rooms etc because they lost the run of themselves thinking their club should look like the K Club.

Scott Tenorman

Ollieboy wrote: »

To be honest, your been selfish here in your comment and what the ideal membership that suits you and don’t worry about the club and it’s future as a business.

I actually look at the options you mentioned and here is some of the reasons it won’t work and the comment oul ones is very unfair.

To offer 6 months membership you will nearly need to charge the full rate, we can’t just tell staff they don’t get paid or work during the winter
Clubs only have so many spots on a Saturday morning at peak time, so these spots will go to loyal members and not the seasonal golfer.
Clubs need to plan and make sure they have finance available for years, so the membership model is the best model for this business.
The golf membership model as been around for over 100 years and now it’s broken?
Your comment as always been a problem for the average working family, hence why golf clubs were usually made up of people in there 40 plus age bracket with money and time.

The problem clubs have is over supply and we are starting to see a end to it now as members are joining the stronger clubs and the weaker clubs are going to make tough decisions.

The model of membership you want, might be available in the short term but not in the long term as clubs recover.

This year we’ve grown by 18% in membership and about 15% in green fees. This is our 4th year of strong growth and we are nearly back to full and looking at entrance fees again. When I started on committee 5 years ago we had 4 people under 30 and we now have a package for that age group and have 150 members under 35.

But if we adopt the membership style you want, we would need double the number of membership and on good weather Saturday you would be moaning that only regulars get out to play etc, so it’s very hard to make those type of membership work in a club and that’s why we have green fees.

As for the number of clubs in Ireland, a lot are going to be sold for housing in the next few years and that will solve the problem. There is not enough money in golf to use 150 acres for golf when you can make millions in housing.

So I would nearly bet in 5 years time, the most common post on this forum will be, I can’t get into a club, or how to join a club, or we need more clubs. Change is coming and it’s coming very fast and fees are increasing for members already. This will mainly be in the areas that have demand for housing.

Why would you be looking to bring back entrance fees?

prawnsambo

Scott Tenorman wrote: »

Why would you be looking to bring back entrance fees?

Clubs that are almost full membership wise, usually bring in entrance fees, partly to keep membership from getting out of control (sub increases would penalise existing members unfairly) and obviously raise more funds.

Scott Tenorman

prawnsambo wrote: »

Clubs that are almost full membership wise, usually bring in entrance fees, partly to keep membership from getting out of control (sub increases would penalise existing members unfairly) and obviously raise more funds.

How would raising subs for everyone be unfair?
And why would they have to shoot up at all, especially if close to full membership?

It is just going back to then greedy old days

prawnsambo

Scott Tenorman wrote: »

How would raising subs for everyone be unfair?
And why would they have to shoot up at all, especially if close to full membership?

It is just going back to then greedy old days

The purpose is to throttle back on new memberships. Make it a bit more expensive and they'll go elsewhere. So either subs or entrance fees. Entrance fees don't impact existing members, so that's why they come in. Subs increases would. Did you not read the post you quoted? I thought I made it perfectly clear.

BrandNewMedium

prawnsambo wrote: »

The purpose is to throttle back on new memberships. Make it a bit more expensive and they'll go elsewhere. So either subs or entrance fees. Entrance fees don't impact existing members, so that's why they come in. Subs increases would. Did you not read the post you quoted? I thought I made it perfectly clear.

Why not just close for new membership entirely? If the club is full then it’s full, if it’s not then it’s not.

An entrance fee suggests the club is not full but the club sense an opportunity to generate revenue for zero additional value, not a very positive behaviour.

prawnsambo

BrandNewMedium wrote: »

Why not just close for new membership entirely? If the club is full then it’s full, if it’s not then it’s not.

An entrance fee suggests the club is not full but the club sense an opportunity to generate revenue for zero additional value, not a very positive behaviour.

You don't want to do that. Membership numbers go up and down. Club says it's closed for membership and people just stay away. Adding an entrance fee, slows down applications, doesn't stop them entirely. That's the desired outcome.

Scott Tenorman

prawnsambo wrote: »

The purpose is to throttle back on new memberships. Make it a bit more expensive and they'll go elsewhere. So either subs or entrance fees. Entrance fees don't impact existing members, so that's why they come in. Subs increases would. Did you not read the post you quoted? I thought I made it perfectly clear.

I read it, i just disagree with it but thanks for the condescension :cool:.
I had hoped the gouging days were over.

First Up

Scott Tenorman wrote:

I read it, i just disagree with it but thanks for the condescension . I had hoped the gouging days were over.

I don't see it as gouging at all. Somebody joining a club is benefitting from all the investment and work put in by those who built the place. Why shouldn't they contribute?

The traditional member owned club model offered what was in effect a share in the club and that still applies in many older clubs. In proprietor owned clubs it is still reasonable to ask new members to recognise and commit to the work of their fellow members.

Ollieboy

Scott Tenorman wrote: »

Why would you be looking to bring back entrance fees?

When you join a members club you get a share of the assets of that club.

So why would a business allow you to buy in for free and give you a asset worth thousand for nothing? Call it goodwill but I don’t see why you think a business gives it equity away for nothing.

If a club closes down which I accepted is rare with no debt, you would be in line for a investment return.

If the members bought Dumurry for 1 million, say 200 at 5k each and in 3 years they decide they can’t make a go of it and they can sell it. So let’s say they get 3 million, is it fair you would get that equity if you didn’t contribute? But If you paid a entrance fee you would be entitled to a share.

The problem with the question and your not alone, is people don’t understand the membership model.

The Island, Grange, Clontarf, Royal Dublin, Malahide and many more have entrance fees, do you not ask why? It’s not because they are the top end of golf, it’s because they have millions in the bank and when you become a member you get ownership of that equity as a member.

Lucan golf club which isn’t at that end as a entrance fee because of the same reason.

I hope that makes sense... I know it’s hard to get your ahead around it because people don’t want to pay it so argue without understanding the model.

A easier option might be to have equity share and non equity share but someone with a non equity share can’t be on the management committee and have a say in the business. I suppose that’s a model that keeps both sides happy.

prawnsambo

Scott Tenorman wrote: »

I read it, i just disagree with it but thanks for the condescension :cool:.
I had hoped the gouging days were over.

All the information was in my first post. Yet somehow I had to say the same thing two more times. I'd say not so much condescension as exasperation.

And as First Up says, it's not gouging. And you have choices. 388 clubs in Ireland. Most counties have at least six or seven. Many have multiples of that.

GreeBo

If it's gouging, who exactly do you think is benefiting from this gouging in a members club?
There are no profits remember...

Scott Tenorman

Ollieboy wrote: »

When you join a members club you get a share of the assets of that club.

So why would a business allow you to buy in for free and give you a asset worth thousand for nothing? Call it goodwill but I don’t see why you think a business gives it equity away for nothing.

If a club closes down which I accepted is rare with no debt, you would be in line for a investment return.

If the members bought Dumurry for 1 million, say 200 at 5k each and in 3 years they decide they can’t make a go of it and they can sell it. So let’s say they get 3 million, is it fair you would get that equity if you didn’t contribute? But If you paid a entrance fee you would be entitled to a share.

The problem with the question and your not alone, is people don’t understand the membership model.

The Island, Grange, Clontarf, Royal Dublin, Malahide and many more have entrance fees, do you not ask why? It’s not because they are the top end of golf, it’s because they have millions in the bank and when you become a member you get ownership of that equity as a member.

Lucan golf club which isn’t at that end as a entrance fee because of the same reason.

I hope that makes sense... I know it’s hard to get your ahead around it because people don’t want to pay it so argue without understanding the model.

A easier option might be to have equity share and non equity share but someone with a non equity share can’t be on the management committee and have a say in the business. I suppose that’s a model that keeps both sides happy.

If your club feels that way why didn’t it retain the entrance fee? And why reintroduce it now?

prawnsambo

Scott Tenorman wrote: »

If your club feels that way why didn’t it retain the entrance fee? And why reintroduce it now?

This is pretty much the same question that I answered three times. I don't think I'll bother with a fourth. :rolleyes:

Scott Tenorman

prawnsambo wrote: »

This is pretty much the same question that I answered three times. I don't think I'll bother with a fourth. :rolleyes:

That’s super as I wasn’t asking you anyway