State of Irish Golf Membership

thewobbler · 25-07-2014 10:01AM

PARlance wrote: »

I think that's the short-medium term problem in a nutshell.

The longer term problem, and a bigger problem in my eyes, is the problem represented by Fix's bar.... Sad/morbid enough thought, but fast forward 20 years and those guys in the bar won't be members and I really can't see that chunk of golfers being replaced, in the same numbers, by younger generations.
A club like that could lose half it's members over a relatively short period of time.

It may be a long way down the line but I would class it as a immediate problem.
That bar needs to be packed with Fanta filled f*ckers at summer camps etc for the next few decades to ensure enough will progress to sipping pints there one day.

I'd point out that this isn't actually a golfing problem, so much as a change in Irish society. People just aren't drinking in pubs the way they used to, and apart from a few city centre pubs, it takes an occasion for a pub to drag in a crowd in now. The will of the people is now in drinking Tesco special offers in front of the TV, while live tweeting. Not meeting people for a few pints.

Any golf club that is factoring a profitable or rejuvenated social club into their financial projections is, sadly, living in the past.

GreeBo · 25-07-2014 10:09AM

Russman wrote: »

True enough, but golf clubs historically always had that as an issue, and by and large, got by. Granted this was pre the virtual abolishment of entrance fees for almost all but the perceived prestigious clubs. Not saying it should be ignored or anything like that, the more juniors the better, but I reckon that unless your mother or father play golf, a kid is very unlikely to take the game up. That's the barrier that needs to come down somehow, and IMO that will almost 100% come down to location - clubs in good locations with big catchment areas and practice facilities. Ironically these are the clubs that are very difficult or expensive to join.

If a course, like my own, is basically only accessable by car, it will always struggle. Mum or dad generally are not inclined to make a 45 minute detour on their way to and from work to drop little Seve up to the club. And as soon as little Seve shows any potential, a higher profile club will poach him anyway.

I dont think a club has to be prestigious to charge an entrance fee, its supply and demand. A club in a populated location is always going to have more bodies trying to join that one in the middle of nowhere, regardless of the quality of the course really. Sure there are some that charge huge sums of cash because of what they are, but I think thats the vast minority.

Accessibility is always going to be the determining factor imo. If you cant get there enough to make it worthwhlie then you arent going to join.

alxmorgan wrote: »

Do golf clubs go into schools at all I wonder ?
Just thinking if you went into a group of 10-12 year olds and offered them a free day at the club. Some practice and tuition in the morning and then a 6 hole scramble in the afternoon you would surely hook a decent portion of them into it. If I'm anything to go by all they need to do is hit one good shot and they're hooked !!

I think most clubs target children of existing members. We have ~100 juveniles I reckon in my club and probably ~40 juniors. They have a couple of competitions per week and are generally always around the course.
And thats in a perceived stuffy, pretentious club.
I think its perfectly acceptable to not go after anyone with a pulse in an effort to grow numbers. You can easily erode what it was that made your club a club by going down that route.

PARlance · 25-07-2014 10:12AM

Russman wrote: »

True enough, but golf clubs historically always had that as an issue, and by and large, got by. Granted this was pre the virtual abolishment of entrance fees for almost all but the perceived prestigious clubs. Not saying it should be ignored or anything like that, the more juniors the better, but I reckon that unless your mother or father play golf, a kid is very unlikely to take the game up. That's the barrier that needs to come down somehow, and IMO that will almost 100% come down to location - clubs in good locations with big catchment areas and practice facilities. Ironically these are the clubs that are very difficult or expensive to join.

If a course, like my own, is basically only accessable by car, it will always struggle. Mum or dad generally are not inclined to make a 45 minute detour on their way to and from work to drop little Seve up to the club. And as soon as little Seve shows any potential, a higher profile club will poach him anyway.

Historically it worked out ok, but if you you go back to historical figures for club & membership numbers then it's scary.

2013: 170,000 - 428 clubs
1997: 170,000 - 367 clubs
1987: 95,000 - 262 clubs

I don't think it's a crazy thought that membership (unless there's a massive change in focus on youth) could go back to 95,000 over the next 10 years or so.
That'd leave an oversupply of 166 clubs over today's levels.
I don't think it'll get that bad, but in terms of the state of Irish golf, I do think the last few years will be nothing compared to what's coming down the line.

Edit: here's the link for GUI stats for anyone interested: http://www.gui.ie/home/general-documents/membership-stats-2013.aspx

alxmorgan · 25-07-2014 10:20AM

GreeBo wrote: »

I think most clubs target children of existing members. We have ~100 juveniles I reckon in my club and probably ~40 juniors. They have a couple of competitions per week and are generally always around the course.
And thats in a perceived stuffy, pretentious club.

That may be fine for some clubs but very limiting for others. By definition you are limiting yourself taking this approach. You are limited to members children and only a portion will take it up. Of this a portion will drop out to play other sports etc

An example is a member of my club I met the other day. He was quite happy for his kids not to bother with golf while they are young as he thinks they get more from team sports and it is hard to disagree with him.

GreeBo wrote: »

I think its perfectly acceptable to not go after anyone with a pulse in an effort to grow numbers. You can easily erode what it was that made your club a club by going down that route.

This statement could be perceived to be part of the problem. It's like a closed club. Child of member you are in. Not then off you go. The GAA, rugby and soccer do not take this approach at all and it is what leads to golf being seen as stuffy and elitist by some.

I don't see how introducing youngsters to the game regardless of who their parents are is eroding the club - whatever that means

Russman · 25-07-2014 10:23AM

PARlance wrote: »

Historically it worked out ok, but if you you go back to historical figures for club & membership numbers then it's scary.

2013: 170,000 - 428 clubs
1997: 170,000 - 367 clubs
1987: 95,000 - 262 clubs

I don't think it's a crazy thought that membership (unless there's a massive change in focus on youth) could go back to 95,000 over the next 10 years or so.
That'd leave an oversupply of 166 clubs over today's levels.
I don't think it'll get that bad, but in terms of the state of Irish golf, I do think the last few years will be nothing compared to what's coming down the line.

Edit: here's the link for GUI stats for anyone interested: http://www.gui.ie/home/general-documents/membership-stats-2013.aspx

Totally agree, especially with the bolded part.
Unfortunately its happening in a kind of drip, drip, death by a thousand cuts kind of way. All clubs cutting, cutting, cutting costs before yet another one goes bang. I think clubs can actually cut so much in an effort to survive, that it almost prevents survival as they can't do anything. Part of me would prefer to bring it all to a head but that's totally impractical, and how would you pick the 50 clubs that are needed to go ??

PARlance · 25-07-2014 10:24AM

thewobbler wrote: »

I'd point out that this isn't actually a golfing problem, so much as a change in Irish society. People just aren't drinking in pubs the way they used to, and apart from a few city centre pubs, it takes an occasion for a pub to drag in a crowd in now. The will of the people is now in drinking Tesco special offers in front of the TV, while live tweeting. Not meeting people for a few pints.

Any golf club that is factoring a profitable or rejuvenated social club into their financial projections is, sadly, living in the past.

True, I was just using a bar as an example of the general demographics of the club and I think it's fairly representative. The majority of members in that club, and most, are grey, greying, going, soon to be gone. That's the issue IMO.

GreeBo · 25-07-2014 10:31AM

alxmorgan wrote: »

That may be fine for some clubs but very limiting for others. By definition you are limiting yourself taking this approach. You are limited to members children and only a portion will take it up. Of this a portion will drop out to play other sports etc

An example is a member of my club I met the other day. He was quite happy for his kids not to bother with golf while they are young as he thinks they get more from team sports and it is hard to disagree with him.

This statement could be perceived to be part of the problem. It's like a closed club. Child of member you are in. Not then off you go. The GAA, rugby and soccer do not take this approach at all and it is what leads to golf being seen as stuffy and elitist by some.

I don't see how introducing youngsters to the game regardless of who their parents are is eroding the club - whatever that means

Children of golfers are far more likely to play golf than those whose parents dont play. I dont have stats but its true for every sport.

I dont see it as that limiting at all, in reality how many kids are you going to let in?
Even if we get 1 kid for every 2 members that would be ~500...we couldnt support that even if we wanted to. There is only so much playing time available.

It is a closed club though, by definition, its for members. Unless you join you dont get in.

Taking in anyone who wants to get in means that you get all sorts. A club has to be able to choose who it wants in if it is to have any control over the future direct and state of the club.
Just look at any public course and compare it to a private members course.
I know which I want to be part of.

PARlance · 25-07-2014 10:44AM

GreeBo wrote: »

I think most clubs target children of existing members. We have ~100 juveniles I reckon in my club and probably ~40 juniors. They have a couple of competitions per week and are generally always around the course.
And thats in a perceived stuffy, pretentious club.
I think its perfectly acceptable to not go after anyone with a pulse in an effort to grow numbers. You can easily erode what it was that made your club a club by going down that route.

Very fair point for your club but I think your club is in a very unique position.
Maybe only 10-15 clubs in the country would have such a strong position.
It's based in a densely populated and extremely affluent area and is seen as having more importance than just a golf club.
There's a high entrance fee that I can never see the need to be eliminated.

With that, I think the parents of kids are always going to be more inclined to get the kids out of bed and playing until they're full members. It's much sought after, I'm guessing a lot of the parents feel responsible/pressure to keep their kids in the club to "do right by them".

I know a member of Castle and he's cut back on everything, cars, holidays, etc etc but couldn't even contemplate letting his golf membership slip.
The joining fee being a big reason, the "embarrassment" that would result amongst his social clique, denying his son the opportunity to get in being the main factors.

As I said, an incredibly strong position for a club to be in.
Edit: Talking about your club is almost "off topic"

golfwallah · 25-07-2014 11:05AM

PARlance wrote: »

The elephant in the room as I see it.

Membership levels today are at 1997 levels.
However, in 1997, there were 50 less golf clubs than there are now.
All this talk about adjusting price plans and the GUI giving financial advice assistance (not sure how much they actually do on the ground tbh) is a short - medium term thing.
The end result, as I see it, has to be that a lot more clubs will close over the short-medium term. Sad but true imo.
The GUI don't seem to address this point (50 more clubs, same membership levels) in the article. Head in sand?

Making golf cheaper and a stabilising of the economy may see a small increase in members over the next 10 years, but the unfortunate reality is that there are just too many clubs at present.

The big danger I see is that clubs will spend the next 10 or so years struggling to survive without really looking beyond that.

I'd love to know the age demographic of the 170,000 golfers at present.
How many are 50+, 55+, 60+, 65+?
I would guess a very high %, would half a clubs members be over 50 years old?
I would guess they are.
So, what's going to happen in 15, 20, 25 years when these guys stop playing en masse!
I certainly don't think that there'll be the youngsters there to replace them.
That's not a problem that can be solved by adjusting prices etc.
The GUI are talking a game about attracting youth... I can't see a lot going on.

There are some research results online re membership numbers and age profiles, etc., for example:

Leinster Golf Survey as reported 25/03/2014 in Irish Independent:

AGE CATEGORY

Under 10: 0.7pc

10-18: 2pc

19-23: 0.8pc

24-29: 2pc

30-39: 11pc

40-49: 20.5pc

50-65: 44pc

66+: 19pc

From "Promoting Golf Club Membership" (GUI / ILGU / PGA) in 2009:

Age Profile
According to the GUI Club Survey 2008 the average age of male members of affiliated clubs is 49 and according to the ILGU the average age of female members is closer to 55. These surveys and others around the world reveal almost a “lost generation” of 25 – 44 year olds in terms of club membership. What these surveys have also identified is that a majority of nomadic or casual golfers are actually in this same 25 – 44 age group. In other words clubs as currently structured have failed to create any added value relative to the perceived value of limited time availability and the cost of casual green fees for these casual golfers.

thewobbler · 25-07-2014 11:08AM

When people wonder why the profile of golf club members is so old, it's simply (in my mind), because the majority of people like me - the next generation(s) - are too busy to play the game. You can target youngsters and students all you like, but they will all mostly go through the hectic passage of life that involves field sports, family life and stressful careers - and, apart from the golfing diehards, will need to put golf on the back burner for a long time.

I imagine this idea has been floated already on this thread, but there's too much to read back upon, so apologies if it's repetition.

---

My case study is I'm 37, run a business, help out with a football team and - most importantly - have 4 toddler kids. I'll be lucky to play golf 15 times this year, and most of those will be social outings with old friends or colleagues, wherever takes our fancy.

There's absolutely no way I can justify paying the £900 (including £100 bar sub) a year sub to my local club, when I'm unlikely to play more than 5-6 times at that course. That's not even a third cousin of value for money. Or as my wife would put it, that's a lot of nappies.

I like being a member: it's the "right" way to golf in my opinion, to do things legit in terms of handicap, and to help turn the wheels of the golfing economy. But I'd imagine that it could be 5+ years before I'll be able to pick up my playing availability to the 20+ times a year needed to make it a viable option. And because the days of entrance fees and waiting lists have long since left my club, there is no extenuating circumstance whereby I can justify the payment.

What I personally need is an associate membership. A much reduced annual fee that provides me a GUI card, and a sense of belonging, and in return I make a commitment to play in X competitions (say 5), and won't be allowed to enter more than Y competitions (say, 10). Any social golf I play at the club would require me paying a reduced green fee for the privilege. I'd be quite happy to get access to the online timesheet one day after full members get the best tee times. And to keep everyone's interest I can maintain this for associate membership for no more than 5 years.

golfwallah · 25-07-2014 11:09AM

Russman wrote: »

Totally agree, especially with the bolded part.
Unfortunately its happening in a kind of drip, drip, death by a thousand cuts kind of way. All clubs cutting, cutting, cutting costs before yet another one goes bang. I think clubs can actually cut so much in an effort to survive, that it almost prevents survival as they can't do anything. Part of me would prefer to bring it all to a head but that's totally impractical, and how would you pick the 50 clubs that are needed to go ??

No need to pick the clubs that need to go - they will select themselves by doing the least in terms for giving customers good value for money now and planning how to continue doing so in the future.

Dealerz · 25-07-2014 11:21AM

golfwallah wrote: »

No need to pick the clubs that need to go - they will select themselves by doing the least in terms for giving customers good value for money now and planning how to continue doing so in the future.

Is location also a factor?

mike12 · 25-07-2014 11:23AM

PARlance wrote: »

Historically it worked out ok, but if you you go back to historical figures for club & membership numbers then it's scary.

2013: 170,000 - 428 clubs
1997: 170,000 - 367 clubs
1987: 95,000 - 262 clubs

I don't think it's a crazy thought that membership (unless there's a massive change in focus on youth) could go back to 95,000 over the next 10 years or so.
That'd leave an oversupply of 166 clubs over today's levels.
I don't think it'll get that bad, but in terms of the state of Irish golf, I do think the last few years will be nothing compared to what's coming down the line.

Edit: here's the link for GUI stats for anyone interested: http://www.gui.ie/home/general-documents/membership-stats-2013.aspx

That would be an average of almost 400 members per club. I would have thought that 400 members would be enough to keep most clubs afloat. in the 170,000 remains the same then we would only need to loose 24/5 clubs to get to around 500 members per club. if a club cannot survive with that many members it must be very poorly run.

The courses that have closed already and that will close are ones that will not be missed.
Turvey is the only one to close in NCD so far and it was the worse course so no coincidence there.
it is simple enough maths our break even costs are x. We need x amount of members paying x plus x amount in green fees. It is either reduce costs or increase revenue most times reducing costs is the easy option.

GreeBo · 25-07-2014 11:26AM

golfwallah wrote: »

There are some research results online re membership numbers and age profiles, etc., for example:

Leinster Golf Survey as reported 25/03/2014 in Irish Independent:

From "Promoting Golf Club Membership" (GUI / ILGU / PGA) in 2009:

These figures appear startling, but unless we have something to compare them to what do they actually mean?

I would guess that clubs *always* have most of their population in the late 40's early 50's range, thats when people have most disposable income and more free time (kids grown up etc)
I know when I was growing up that was the dominant age range at the club.

I think its totally unrealistic to think we will ever get to the point where the majority are mid 30's for example.

PARlance · 25-07-2014 11:47AM

Dealerz wrote: »

Is location also a factor?

100%, At home there's one club for an average sized town. I could never see that folding, in fact, I don't think membership fees have dropped any significant amount.
There isn't a club within 30mins and there's a nice population to keep it going.

golfwallah · 25-07-2014 11:53AM

Dealerz wrote: »

Is location also a factor?

Sure ... there are a lot of factors ..... as well as ideas for how to survive and prosper in the much more competitive new world facing golf clubs.

Exchange of quick, of-the-top-of-the-head quips on a forum like this does help stimulate debate and more considered gathering / analysis of relevant facts but the real solution is for clubs to empower a few experienced / qualified people (e.g. on a membership sub-committee) to tackle the issue and come up with possible ways forward.

If existing activity to stimulate more revenue for a club is not working - something needs to change for things to get better.

Here's a recent suggested approach from Facebook page for CGI (confederation of Golf in Ireland - the organisation set up by GUI / ILGI / PGA to help clubs deal with membership issues):
http://www.cgigolf.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Membership-Recruitment-and-Retainment-Examples1.pdf

Russman · 25-07-2014 12:05PM

mike12 wrote: »

That would be an average of almost 400 members per club. I would have thought that 400 members would be enough to keep most clubs afloat. in the 170,000 remains the same then we would only need to loose 24/5 clubs to get to around 500 members per club. if a club cannot survive with that many members it must be very poorly run.

The courses that have closed already and that will close are ones that will not be missed.
Turvey is the only one to close in NCD so far and it was the worse course so no coincidence there.
it is simple enough maths our break even costs are x. We need x amount of members paying x plus x amount in green fees. It is either reduce costs or increase revenue most times reducing costs is the easy option.

1) That's a little bit unfair IMO.
2) Sometimes its the only option. eg your run of the mill member owned course generally can't compete with NAMA subsidised "resort type" courses when it comes to offering cheap green fees. If you're a group of 10 or 12 guys looking for a game and you can choose between some high end course for €15 or €20 versus a normal member course for the same or more, its a no brainer.

thewobbler · 25-07-2014 12:10PM

golfwallah wrote: »

Sure ... there are a lot of factors ..... as well as ideas for how to survive and prosper in the much more competitive new world facing golf clubs.

Exchange of quick, of-the-top-of-the-head quips on a forum like this does help stimulate debate and more considered gathering / analysis of relevant facts but the real solution is for clubs to empower a few experienced / qualified people (e.g. on a membership sub-committee) to tackle the issue and come up with possible ways forward.

If existing activity to stimulate more revenue for a club is not working - something needs to change for things to get better.

Here's a recent suggested approach from Facebook page for CGI (confederation of Golf in Ireland - the organisation set up by GUI / ILGI / PGA to help clubs deal with membership issues):
http://www.cgigolf.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Membership-Recruitment-and-Retainment-Examples1.pdf

I'm not sure about this.

I would suggest that those people who are so physically and emotionally attached to golf that they give up their own time to drive their club forwards, are less likely to be able to communicate with or understand the needs of people who don't give golf importance in their life.

Being able to slip into the shoes of your target markets is one of the most important skills in marketing, and a dyed-in-the-wool club member who lives, eats and drinks golf, needs to make a major detachment from themselves in order to assume those shoes.

GreeBo · 25-07-2014 12:13PM

PARlance wrote: »

100%, At home there's one club for an average sized town. I could never see that folding, in fact, I don't think membership fees have dropped any significant amount.
There isn't a club within 30mins and there's a nice population to keep it going.

While that is certainly positive for your club, are there enough people within that 30 minutes who want to join a club?
Lack of golfers inthe vicinity will be the deciding factor in the quality of the club/course you are able to maintain and then it can become self-deating or self-fulfilling even; more people = more cash = better course = more people.

However it does mean that if you strike the balance you get a bunch of people happy to pay for the existing facilities and thus it can all continue, notimpacted by whats going on around (well 31 mins away!)

GreeBo · 25-07-2014 12:17PM

thewobbler wrote: »

I'm not sure about this.

I would suggest that those people who are so physically and emotionally attached to golf that they give up their own time to drive their club forwards, are less likely to be able to communicate with or understand the needs of people who don't give golf importance in their life.

Being able to slip into the shoes of your target markets is one of the most important skills in marketing, and a dyed-in-the-wool club member who lives, eats and drinks golf, needs to make a major detachment from themselves in order to assume those shoes.

Maybe, but not if they are looking for other dyed in the wool type people
Isnt that really what clubs need to keep going?
If everyone just turns up, puts their shoes on in the carpark, plays 18 and heads home then you dont have a club, you have a nice field.

wally79 · 25-07-2014 12:20PM

GreeBo wrote: »

Taking in anyone who wants to get in means that you get all sorts.

Define all sorts for me

GreeBo · 25-07-2014 12:21PM

golfwallah wrote: »

Sure ... there are a lot of factors ..... as well as ideas for how to survive and prosper in the much more competitive new world facing golf clubs.

Exchange of quick, of-the-top-of-the-head quips on a forum like this does help stimulate debate and more considered gathering / analysis of relevant facts but the real solution is for clubs to empower a few experienced / qualified people (e.g. on a membership sub-committee) to tackle the issue and come up with possible ways forward.

If existing activity to stimulate more revenue for a club is not working - something needs to change for things to get better.

Here's a recent suggested approach from Facebook page for CGI (confederation of Golf in Ireland - the organisation set up by GUI / ILGI / PGA to help clubs deal with membership issues):
http://www.cgigolf.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Membership-Recruitment-and-Retainment-Examples1.pdf

I think that "drive" ignores the fact of over-supply of courses and under-supply of golfers.
Frankly they arent likely to admit that some courses/clubs need to fold for the sake of the game, but thats the startk reality of the situation. The numbers alone prove that beyond all doubt.
The only thing that can help, other than the above, is a massive boom of golfers. Thats not likely, it hasnt really happened before, outside of an economic boom. Unless you get a natural population boom the numbers playing golf will stay the same.

Golf, by necessity is an expensive sport to run ?& thus to play.
You have a field, many times the size of any other sports pitch that has to be mancured every single day. Only X people can play on it per day/at a time.
Those people *have* to pay to keep it in the condition they want it. The cost of keeping it in condition hasnt dropped yet income has.

Its a no brainer, clubs need to close.

Wichita Lineman · 25-07-2014 12:21PM

Mike12 said - "The courses that have closed already and that will close are ones that will not be missed."

What rubbish. What you mean is the "casual ramblers" wont miss them but I can guarantee that the loyal members will miss any course that closes - at a minimum it means that they have to find somewhere else to play on a permanent basis.

GreeBo · 25-07-2014 12:22PM

wally79 wrote: »

Define all sorts for me

The types of people that you dont want in your club.

GreeBo · 25-07-2014 12:24PM

Andy Dunne11 wrote: »

Mike12 said - "The courses that have closed already and that will close are ones that will not be missed."

What rubbish. What you mean is the "casual ramblers" wont miss them but I can guarantee that the loyal members will miss any course that closes - at a minimum it means that they have to find somewhere else to play on a permanent basis.

Depends on how you define not be missed too.

The problem with letting them fail organically is that you will loose some strong ones along with some weak ones, purely through timing.

If it was a supermarket chain thenmanagement would close the weak ones to protect the strong, we dont get that lucury and so there is a touch of randomness.
SouthCounty anyone?

thewobbler · 25-07-2014 12:31PM

GreeBo wrote: »

Maybe, but not if they are looking for other dyed in the wool type people
Isnt that really what clubs need to keep going?
If everyone just turns up, puts their shoes on in the carpark, plays 18 and heads home then you dont have a club, you have a nice field.

Yep Greebo, agreed. If your club believes (or even better, has proof) that it can sustain itself with dyed-in-wool golfers alone, then this is the ideal scenario. Your committee's responsibility to its members is then to ensure that the right level of people (the physical numbers, and without try to sound curt "real golfers" only) are interested, so that retirees are replaced in a likeminded way. Many golf clubs have prospered on this model for many years, and for those clubs, long may it continue.

But if a club has had to take actual steps to artificially drum up membership, then this decision has ultimately got to be related to a lack of sustainability in their current model. So it needs to evolve, and look at different sorts of member and different types of membership. And I don't personally believe that a golfing die-hard is the right person to lead this sort of drive. As golf is a cornerstone of their happiness, they just won't be able to relate to people who think differently. What clubs need in this scenario is someone to convince their die-hard membership that they can and will co-exist on the same club grounds with less-focused golfers. Then empower someone else to attract those players.

wally79 · 25-07-2014 12:32PM

GreeBo wrote: »

The types of people that you dont want in your club.

And how do you decide that?

GreeBo · 25-07-2014 12:37PM

thewobbler wrote: »

Yep Greebo, agreed. If your club believes (or even better, has proof) that it can sustain itself with dyed-in-wool golfers alone, then this is the ideal scenario. Your committee's responsibility to its members is then to ensure that the right level of people (the physical numbers, and without try to sound curt "real golfers" only) are interested, so that retirees are replaced in a likeminded way. Many golf clubs have prospered on this model for many years, and for those clubs, long may it continue.

But if a club has had to take actual steps to artificially drum up membership, then this decision has ultimately got to be related to a lack of sustainability in their current model. So it needs to evolve, and look at different sorts of member and different types of membership. And I don't personally believe that a golfing die-hard is the right person to lead this sort of drive. As golf is a cornerstone of their happiness, they just won't be able to relate to people who think differently. What clubs need in this scenario is someone to convince their die-hard membership that they can and will co-exist on the same club grounds with less-focused golfers. Then empower someone else to attract those players.

Agreed, in the second situation you need PR, Marketing etc
though you also need to be prepared for the fact that, for the sake of survival, the thing you are trying to save may not survive the journey.
e.g. private members club ends up resembling pay as you play course.

wally79 wrote: »

And how do you decide that?

You only let people in that are known to existing members as being the sort of people you want. (proposers, seconders etc)

alxmorgan · 25-07-2014 12:38PM

GreeBo wrote: »

Agreed, in the second situation you need PR, Marketing etc
though you also need to be prepared for the fact that, for the sake of survival, the thing you are trying to save may not survive the journey.
e.g. private members club ends up resembling pay as you play course.

You only let people in that are known to existing members as being the sort of people you want. (proposers, seconders etc)

What about children of members who turn out to be the sort you don't want in your club ?

GreeBo · 25-07-2014 12:41PM

alxmorgan wrote: »

What about children of members who turn out to be the sort you don't want in your club ?

That typically doesnt happen if the parents are the type you do want.
If it did arise they would be asked to leave, membership not renewed I guess.

State of Irish Golf Membership

Comments