New Rule for eligibility to Away Opens

golfwallah wrote: »

Figures I extrapolated a few years ago from publicly available information in relation to the year 2011 for Corballis were:

Based on Published Losses 2007 - 9 (€220,112) €73,371
Add estimated hidden costs:
Rates €22,667
Road signage €2,000
FCC charge (unpaid) for advert sign at Corballis roundabout €1,000
FCC Parks Dept Staff - temporarily diverted €80,000
Capital Injection Fingal (not depreciated) €120,000
Interest on accumulated losses financed from FCC Debt. unknown
Total €299,038

So your extrapolated figures assume that they undertake the same works year on year?

golfwallah wrote: »

The problem is that information on golf spending is not readily available in FCC published accounts, it's aggregated with all other spending. This makes it extremely difficult to get comparative information, unless in answer to specific questions by councillors, which last happened in 2010, AFAIK.

What problem is this causing? Other than to you?

golfwallah wrote: »

All golf clubs have invested in assets, that doesn't mean they will stay in business forever.

Council courses are not in it to make money, they are there to provide a service to the public. I think you are really missing this most basic of points.
Public courses will close when there is no need for them or funding is removed, not because they are not making enough money.

golfwallah

GreeBo wrote: »

So your extrapolated figures assume that they undertake the same works year on year?

No - I said these figures were estimated in relation to 2011. If you want year on year figures, I suggest you do the research yourself.

What problem is this causing? Other than to you?

It's a matter of opinion, really. IMHO, democracy works best when the electorate is in a position to make informed decisions at election time.

Council courses are not in it to make money, they are there to provide a service to the public. I think you are really missing this most basic of points.
Public courses will close when there is no need for them or funding is removed, not because they are not making enough money.

Member courses are not in it to make money either, most were set up by interested golfers to help themselves in the provision of golf facilities - i.e. self help. They too will go out of business if there is no need for them - the difference is they can't keep going on indefinitely like council ones, thanks to government backed borrowings.

golfwallah wrote: »

Figures I extrapolated a few years ago from publicly available information in relation to the year 2011 for Corballis were:

Based on Published Losses 2007 - 9 (€220,112) €73,371
Add estimated hidden costs:
Rates €22,667
Road signage €2,000
FCC charge (unpaid) for advert sign at Corballis roundabout €1,000
FCC Parks Dept Staff - temporarily diverted €80,000
Capital Injection Fingal (not depreciated) €120,000
Interest on accumulated losses financed from FCC Debt. unknown
Total €299,038

Don't know precisely how it works since Carr took over, but Fingal do operate independently of South Dublin, Dun Laoghaire / Rathdown, etc. The problem is that information on golf spending is not readily available in FCC published accounts, it's aggregated with all other spending. This makes it extremely difficult to get comparative information, unless in answer to specific questions by councillors, which last happened in 2010, AFAIK.

All golf clubs have invested in assets, that doesn't mean they will stay in business forever.

So you know that Corballis didn't pay for a road sign at a roundabout 4 years ago but you don't know the general jist of the overall arrangement between Carr and the Council today.
Seems odd.
Seems almost as if today's arrangement may not be something you can complain about.
The sign at the roundabout has been taken down afaik. It's funny because Corballis is probably the worst sign posted course I've been to. The only sign I recall is a sign 10 feet away from the main entrance to it.

It must have been hard working in one of the two courses close by. I'm guessing it was The Island but I can see how two other clubs locally might feel aggrieved by (what seems to be past) public funding.

That's just unfortunate. You're not getting much support your anti public talk. There are pitches, pools, courts etc all being built and maintained by the council. Begrudging a few public courses is narrow minded due to your "close" relationship to/with them.

golfwallah wrote: »

No - I said these figures were estimated in relation to 2011. If you want year on year figures, I suggest you do the research yourself.

I dont, I'm merely pointing out that the numbers you repeat ad nausem include capital expenditure that isnt recurring, so its disingneous to suggest that they are running at 300K deficit year on year.

golfwallah wrote: »

It's a matter of opinion, really. IMHO, democracy works best when the electorate is in a position to make informed decisions at election time.

Yes, ballot papers should also itemise money spent on beer mats in the bar, for transparency sake.

golfwallah wrote: »

Member courses are not in it to make money either, most were set up by interested golfers to help themselves in the provision of golf facilities - i.e. self help. They too will go out of business if there is no need for them - the difference is they can't keep going on indefinitely like council ones, thanks to government backed borrowings.

And private courses aren't in it to provide cheap golf to all and sundry like council courses *must*.
Apples and oranges.

Dublin Spur

I think its a harsh on the country members (like the original poster) who have been forced down this road due to personal circumstances

live and let live

Russman

golfwallah wrote: »

There are obvious advantages to being a company limited by guarantee. It limits the liability of members in the event of a wind up, usually to about €1. But it doesn't limit the liability of directors, who often don't realise that they could be found personally liable if liabilities exceed assets in the event of a wind up. Hasn't happened as yet on the Irish golfing scene but remains a possibility.

And there's nothing to prevent "resort" or any type of golf course charging anything they like for green fees - that's just business!

Agreed. But when such courses are being subsidised and kept afloat by NAMA and then indulging in, what is to all intents and purposes, below cost selling, its distorting the market. Prices are artificially lowered to a level that clubs not being subsidised simply cannot compete with. That cannot be good for the golf scene in Ireland. It might be good in the short term for some individuals, but IMHO it will be disastrous in the long run.

Dublin Spur wrote: »

I think its a harsh on the country members (like the original poster) who have been forced down this road due to personal circumstances

live and let live

Its only harsh if you never set foot in your home club, if so, in this age of non joining fees, why would you stay a member of a club you never play in except to keep a cheap GUI handicap?

GreeBo wrote: »

Its only harsh if you never set foot in your home club, if so, in this age of non joining fees, why would you stay a member of a club you never play in except to keep a cheap GUI handicap?

Because everybody has different economic circumstances. I'm sure you regard your club membership as very good value but not everyone would. There was a time when people regarded forking out 25k entrance fees as value for money also.
However not everyone is in that situation, people who once were able to afford these fees can no longer do so yet they still want to play golf. They will avail of any opportunity afforded to them to do so. Golfers who would otherwise be lost to the game are availing of membership offers so they can continue to play the game on a regular basis.

GreeBo wrote: »

Its only harsh if you never set foot in your home club, if so, in this age of non joining fees, why would you stay a member of a club you never play in except to keep a cheap GUI handicap?

No joining fees doesn't mean it's affordable.
And not all golfers live in Dublin where we're lucky to have pay and play alternatives.
Many small towns have one club whose fees remain out of reach for many.

I think you're stance on this is quite hypocritical.
You've had posters before question / pass remarks on the fact that your club has a hefty joining fee and fairly expensive sub.
I've previously backed you up on the fact that there are many factors to justify that. Location, supply and demand, quality etc.
If you are going to have that attitude (which I completely agree with) then you should also accept that the same should be freely allowed at the bottom of the scale.
The same economic factors are at play, only at the opposite end.

You've mentioned (or agreed to the notion of) some minimal cost per round (I think it was yourself) rational previously. Should there be a maximum cost per round? I know quite a few in your club and down the road and their cost per round is well over €500....
Is that just too much?
Is this taking too much money of an individual for one club?
Should your club distribute this money to other clubs?
Should your club be allowed to do that, or should we all get a little communist and agree on the minimal price per round, and divy up the surpluses evenly?

All that is folly of course.

And if courses want to charge 100 euro then fair game. There's a demand for it and it's meeting that demand. Just like Grange is pricing according to its demand.

You can't have your cake and eat it.
Let the lads have their bread in peace, there's barely any butter on it.

downthemiddle wrote: »

Because everybody has different economic circumstances. I'm sure you regard your club membership as very good value but not everyone would. There was a time when people regarded forking out 25k entrance fees as value for money also.
However not everyone is in that situation, people who once were able to afford these fees can no longer do so yet they still want to play golf. They will avail of any opportunity afforded to them to do so. Golfers who would otherwise be lost to the game are availing of membership offers so they can continue to play the game on a regular basis.

I know not everyone is in that situation, but what that means right now is that these people are getting competition golf for less than it costs to provide it.
What it should mean is that these people dont get competition golf. That may sound harsh and even count intuitive, but long term I think its more sustainable.
Thats how the game used to be, people played casually, played in feeder clubs, joined clubs as members and played golf. Nowadays its nomadic golf that only benefits the player themselves.

PARlance wrote: »

No joining fees doesn't mean it's affordable.
And not all golfers live in Dublin where we're lucky to have pay and play alternatives.
Many small towns have one club whose fees remain out of reach for many.

I think you're stance on this is quite hypocritical.
You've had posters before question / pass remarks on the fact that your club has a hefty joining fee and fairly expensive sub.
I've previously backed you up on the fact that there are many factors to justify that. Location, supply and demand, quality etc.
If you are going to have that attitude (which I completely agree with) then you should also accept that the same should be freely allowed at the bottom of the scale.
The same economic factors are at play, only at the opposite end.

I dont see how its hypocritcal to expect golfers to support and pay for their golf?
Courses should be free to charge as little or as much as they want, thats the open market and is in the bests interests of the game.
Courses selling GUI handicaps is not in the bests interests of the game.

PARlance wrote: »

You've mentioned (or agreed to the notion of) some minimal cost per round (I think it was yourself) rational previously. Should there be a maximum cost per round? I know quite a few in your club and down the road and their cost per round is well over €500....
Is that just too much?
Is this taking too much money of an individual for one club?
Should your club distribute this money to other clubs?
Should your club be allowed to do that, or should we all get a little communist and agree on the minimal price per round, and divy up the surpluses evenly?

All that is folly of course.

And if courses want to charge 100 euro then fair game. There's a demand for it and it's meeting that demand. Just like Grange is pricing according to its demand.

You can't have your cake and eat it.
Let the lads have their bread in peace, there's barely any butter on it.

Why should there be a maximum? If people are willing/able to pay it then whats the problem?
The problem would be if the minimum keeps people from taking up the game, but that wont happen due to feeder clubs and someone somewhere having the ability to make money at the lower levels of the game. What you cant have is someone matching the upper levels for the lower level costs.

I dont see why on earth one club should be giving money to another club, unless perhaps its council run clubs. A private enterprise has no such loyalties or reason to give away money.

I really dont understand at all how you think I want to have my cake and eat it?
Can you explain?

GreeBo wrote: »

I know not everyone is in that situation, but what that means right now is that these people are getting competition golf for less than it costs to provide it.
What it should mean is that these people dont get competition golf. That may sound harsh and even count intuitive, but long term I think its more sustainable.
Thats how the game used to be, people played casually, played in feeder clubs, joined clubs as members and played golf.

Golf used to be a game for the elite. If your approach was adopted that is what it would become again. That is hardly in the best interests of the game.

downthemiddle wrote: »

Golf used to be a game for the elite. If your approach was adopted that is what it would become again. That is hardly in the best interests of the game.

The elite of Deerpark, Leopardstown, Corbalis etc?

Top quality golf was a game for those than can afford top quality courses. What exactly is wrong with that?

Right now we are trying to provide top quality golf for rock bottom prices, problem is no one told the grass to stop growing at top quality rates.

GreeBo wrote: »

I really dont understand at all how you think I want to have my cake and eat it?
Can you explain?

Very easily.
The laws of supply and demand should work for Grange as much as they do for Scarke (or whatever it's called).

PARlance wrote: »

Very easily.
The laws of supply and demand should work for Grange as much as they do for Scarke (or whatever it's called).

And how/why do you think they don't or why do you think I dont want them to?

I have got a bit of sympathy for Golfwallah's position - but I think it is borne out of frustration with his own club's position as opposed to a correct Ideological position.

Back to the point I made earlier - these clubs didn't care one iota about Public golf until recently. Why is this now ?

Should the public have objected to some of the clubhouses and courses that were built and have now ended up as fields and bad debts that they are paying for. In some of these instances you could argue - the state should have controlled irresponsible spending - that they are now exposed to . But instead - we are told , well private individuals and courses made a balls of it - now shut down public courses . (laughable)

Sport is funded and supported in so many ways - Croke Park for example got 110 million euro. Minority sorts like Rugby and athletics get funding and state support.

There are over 400,000 people living in North Dublin.

You will struggle to find somebody on the North Side of Dublin - that didn't benefit from the Public Golf facilities. This is the greatest promoter of golf in Dublin in my view.

I would agree with closing all public golf facilities - if the GUI and golf clubs had a plan for promoting golf. But as long as I've been around golf - rather embarrassing for Golf - The state has done more for Golf than Golf has done for itself. Golf is confused - it is primarily a sport run by individuals for themselves - ultimately it is the cause of the slow death we are experiencing.

So yes - hard to justify investment in any sport - but is Golf able to promote itself - the answer is no.

has golf a social valve - it has for me , but is impossible to establish a value of this across all of society.

Interesting Article on golf in Dublin. Didn't know how much Pat Ruddy did for golf in Dublin - Legend.

http://www.independent.ie/sport/golf/ruddy-a-man-for-all-golf-seasons-26023903.html

GreeBo wrote: »

And how/why do you think they don't or why do you think I dont want them to?

how/why.... Only the usual 30 or so posts.

There is a demand out there from golfers to play minimal membership of €100 and then to play Opens with the rest of their budget.
It's quite clear you are against that demand and the supply offered by Scarke etc. to meet that.

GreeBo wrote: »

The elite of Deerpark, Leopardstown, Corbalis etc?

Top quality golf was a game for those than can afford top quality courses. What exactly is wrong with that?

Right now we are trying to provide top quality golf for rock bottom prices, problem is no one told the grass to stop growing at top quality rates.

Ah the good old days of people queueing from 5.00 a.m in Deer Park to get out on the course by midday because there was a dearth of affordable golf around Dublin and membership in most courses was closed at the time. Golf club membership was for the elite and a failure to recognise that is an admission you don't understand the debate. Newlands was known as the working man's club. A return to the cosy cartel is not in the best interests of golf.

PARlance wrote: »

how/why.... Only the usual 30 or so posts.

There is a demand out there from golfers to play minimal membership of €100 and then to play Opens with the rest of their budget.
It's quite clear you are against that demand and the supply offered by Scarke etc. to meet that.

Yes I am against that as I believe it damages the sustainability of golf in this country. Realistically it makes zero impact to me, but I think its bad for the game and results in members clubs closing.

If the lower end clubs/courses close then you damage the uptake of the game. Novice golfers dont pop over to Rathsallagh to learn how to play.

downthemiddle wrote: »

Ah the good old days of people queueing from 5.00 a.m in Deer Park to get out on the course by midday because there was a dearth of affordable golf around Dublin and membership in most courses was closed at the time. Golf club membership was for the elite and a failure to recognise that is an admission you don't understand the debate. Newlands was known as the working man's club. A return to the cosy cartel is not in the best interests of golf.

Cosy cartel?
Seriously, bitter much?
How exactly is it the fault of private clubs, who were full, that people had to queue to play in public/open clubs?

Golf Club Membership in the highly populated areas was for those who could afford it.
You could pretty much always have joined the like of Dublin Mountain, Slade Valley, etc. I know all about Newlands golf club, whats wrong with it being a working mans club exactly?

Sounds like you want top quality courses for rock bottom prices...and Im the one accused of wanted to have my cake and eat it!

TrapperChamonix

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

There are over 400,000 people living in North Dublin.

You will struggle to find somebody on the North Side of Dublin - that didn't benefit from the Public Golf facilities. This is the greatest promoter of golf in Dublin in my view.

FDP, a couple of points.

1) You are overstating the reach of golf, never mind golf on public courses with that statement

2) I would maintain that the work that clubs put into their junior programs is by far the greatest promoter of golf in Dublin and the wider country. And for clarity, junior programs in my own club (and many if not most others) are open to all kids who turn up, whether they have a relative in the club or not. At an annual membership of €100 and with free lessons and a free meal at every junior competition, clubs and members are subsidising beginners.

Personally, I'm fully in favour of FCC subsidised Corballis and Elm Green etc, because like you I view them as a great way to widen the appeal and reach of Golf, but you are wrong in your assertion that The State does more for Golf that it does for itself, doesn't hold water.

btw nice article about Ruddy. It has always struck me that there can't be many places in the world with a better opportunity to play golf than Donabate. 5 Courses in a village of 9k.

GreeBo wrote: »

Cosy cartel?
Seriously, bitter much?
How exactly is it the fault of private clubs, who were full, that people had to queue to play in public/open clubs?

Golf Club Membership in the highly populated areas was for those who could afford it.
You could pretty much always have joined the like of Dublin Mountain, Slade Valley, etc. I know all about Newlands golf club, whats wrong with it being a working mans club exactly?

Sounds like you want top quality courses for rock bottom prices...and Im the one accused of wanted to have my cake and eat it!

:rolleyes: Comprehension is obviously not a strong point with you or you are deliberating misinterpreting posts for your own reasons. I'm out.

downthemiddle wrote: »

:rolleyes: Comprehension is obviously not a strong point with you or you are deliberating misinterpreting posts for your own reasons. I'm out.

Attack the post not the poster please.
If you cant attack the post then don't post at all.

GreeBo wrote: »

Yes I am against that as I believe it damages the sustainability of golf in this country. Realistically it makes zero impact to me, but I think its bad for the game and results in members clubs closing.

If the lower end clubs/courses close then you damage the uptake of the game. Novice golfers dont pop over to Rathsallagh to learn how to play.

Well then you are against the free market forces that allow your club to command a premium. And that's hyproctical.

GreeBo wrote: »

Attack the post not the poster please.
If you cant attack the post then don't post at all.

I did attack the post as you failed to comprehend the point I was making in your response. Would you care to read it again?

TrapperChamonix wrote: »

FDP, a couple of points.

1) You are overstating the reach of golf, never mind golf on public courses with that statement

2) I would maintain that the work that clubs put into their junior programs is by far the greatest promoter of golf in Dublin and the wider country. And for clarity, junior programs in my own club (and many if not most others) are open to all kids who turn up, whether they have a relative in the club or not. At an annual membership of €100 and with free lessons and a free meal at every junior competition, clubs and members are subsidising beginners.

Personally, I'm fully in favour of FCC subsidised Corballis and Elm Green etc, because like you I view them as a great way to widen the appeal and reach of Golf, but you are wrong in your assertion that The State does more for Golf that it does for itself, doesn't hold water.

Trapper behind everything here , is that the problem. There are too many clubs in that area .

That is a fantastic idea at your club.
But I would honestly think that is radical / new thinking. I'm absolutely delighted to hear about it.

But, the damage has been over the last 20 years , in reality access to golf clubs and junior programs were for members and their families.

I pray and hope what you are saying is the way. I will be overjoyed when I get a flyer through the door from a golf club looking for lads to play golf.
I genuinly feel things are changing , but not enough or fast enough.

A couple of lads that are hanging around corners here , I gave them a few clubs, they went and start playing par 3 in St Annes (public park) - im sort of joking , but they cant rock up to Port. or Clontarf there . (lol).

In all my years around golf / public golf , i have never seen anything to promote golf except from the state.

I would be overjoyed if it happens, but my son can get a cadet program , because I got an email, because I am a member.

There is the pretence of an Open sport and there is the reality. I'm around golf , and it is useless at this versus every other sport in the area.

downthemiddle wrote: »

Ah the good old days of people queueing from 5.00 a.m in Deer Park to get out on the course by midday because there was a dearth of affordable golf around Dublin and membership in most courses was closed at the time. Golf club membership was for the elite and a failure to recognise that is an admission you don't understand the debate. Newlands was known as the working man's club. A return to the cosy cartel is not in the best interests of golf.

They crazy years, after getting a bus and a train, slade valley

does the bus go there.

The Tannoy Calls.
" number 64 for the nine 64 for the nine"

We have 1997 levels of GUI golfers (165,086) and yet just 4 clubs under the peak number (432)
Even then, the peak number of GUI golfers (210,028) were supported by "just" 413 clubs.

A long way to go yet lads.

*2013 figures

pete4pool

Been a couple of days since I checked the forum. Reading all the posts one thing that strikes me clearly is people from Dublin think there is nothing outside the city bounds. "Sure there are cheap membership in blanchardstown"or "sure there are plenty of council golf clubs to join". We all do not have these options.
Then people hijacking the thread to talk about how FCC is handling its golf courses.

OK rant over, will get shot down big time over that too :-) I'm harsh but I have a point. Don't want to turn this in to Dublin Vs rest, but can we keep the topic country wide.

Going back to the initial topic. Distance membership / affordable golf.

So from reading posts about the topic, here is a suggestion. So instead of paying €120 to Scarke to fill out a bit of paper work for me. How about the GUI come up with a Special "holiday/away" handicap. Works the same way as a normal handicap, you pay the GUI the €120 -> €150 and cut out the middle man. They bring in rules to do away with distance membership, so all golfers looking for this option go straight to the GUI. Local clubs then run their opens and they can decided if the opens are open to full members of other clubs or "away" member of GUI. If clubs find too many away member they can close the open or open it up if not enough playing.
GUI can say that you can only play 10 opens a year. So people are not abusing it.

Then €150 x 7,000 away member (supposedly from 1 club ) = €1 million. The GUI can give this money out to clubs who are failing / or have a high number of away members playing.

One person said that people who took up golf in 20's/30's don't like joining as full members. Could be because they were first unable to afford the entry fee and never got the bug of the handicap scores or team competitions. This could be a way to lead them back into it.

Just think the GUI could try something to get the "working man" (more like young family man) back into golf. I along with others have a picture of old rich guys at all of the GUI meeting thinking only of themselves. I know that is wrong, but lets face it most people think the same.

So what ye think of my suggestion? Will ye march with me to the GUI HQ? :-)

Russman

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

They crazy years, after getting a bus and a train, slade valley
does the bus go there.

Oh many's the time I walked to Templeogue, got the old 65 bus, off at the Blue Gardenia and walked up to Slade Valley carrying clubs !!