The state of Golf down worldwide

[Benny]

Originally Posted by GPK

So, what about that article or the state of the game in general would you like to discuss?

Well, without rereading it, i was not aware of the big downturn, and the demographics of golfershas skewed up to the rich being a higher % than before as the middleclass has not returned after the recession. That the boomers have not skewed up ,and the millenials also not interested. golf courses closing, and this Topgolf and footgolf were a surprise. My own golfing down due to med conditions,so i am a bit behind. Also, why golf rates dont reduce to get more people to golf. Starters...

[GPK]

Originally Posted by Benny

Well, without rereading it, i was not aware of the big downturn, and the demographics of golfershas skewed up to the rich being a higher % than before as the middleclass has not returned after the recession. That the boomers have not skewed up ,and the millenials also not interested. golf courses closing, and this Topgolf and footgolf were a surprise. My own golfing down due to med conditions,so i am a bit behind. Also, why golf rates dont reduce to get more people to golf. Starters...

Thanks for the response. At the moment, I have a 5yo sweet girl that is wanting some daddy/daughter time. I will have time on my hands tonight and a novel will most likely ensue. This is a very personal matter for me.

[declansharbor]

I'm eager to see what local courses (if any) implement the basketball rim sized holes. Maybe then I'll be able to put my Scotty to good use and sink a damn putt over 10 feet!

[3kings]

Originally Posted by Benny

Well, without rereading it, i was not aware of the big downturn, and the demographics of golfershas skewed up to the rich being a higher % than before as the middleclass has not returned after the recession. That the boomers have not skewed up ,and the millenials also not interested. golf courses closing, and this Topgolf and footgolf were a surprise. My own golfing down due to med conditions,so i am a bit behind. Also, why golf rates dont reduce to get more people to golf. Starters...

I have golfed all my life and the reason I play less is because it takes to long. I don't want to invest the minimum of five hours that it takes on a regular basis. I got out of the habit of playing weekly because I didn't want to miss my son's games on weekends. I don't miss it as much as I thought I would. My idea to make golf more popular is to make it 11 holes. The first hole is practice and than your score is based on your best nine of the next ten.

[GPK]

Condensed version:

#1 Too many, high end, daily fee golf courses. Very few private clubs closing and not too many lower end public courses closing either.
#2 Golf club market is beyond saturated, thanks to 2 companies in particular. I could rant forever about one of them, but I will refrain. Assholes...
#3 Too costly. A great deal of that reverts back to #1. All these high end daily fee courses trying to maintain lush playing conditions have to pass on that cost to the consumer. Hopefully the movement that ClubCorp and Pinehurst resorts started this year during the US Opens will take hold. Less grass, less water, less fertilzer=LESS COST If courses can do that, and cut $75-$100k in expenses, that's a good size nut not being passed on.

I refuse to buy the excuse "the game is too hard." What a crock of sh*t. The game is as easy to play as it has ever been. I would have hated to see some of these people take up the game back when the game was really hard.

I think (and hope) that golf makes a comeback. Some of the things that aren't working and haven't been working will be weeded out. Not sure if the game will return to the heights that it once enjoyed, but I'm convinced that's probably a good thing.

[Heels1989]

Agree with both Tom and Kevin above on all points. When I lived in the DC area, to play a reasonably priced public course usually meant a 30 to 60 min drive outside the beltway. The drive combined with a 5+ hr round essentially meant a full day commitment. And many of these courses were still charging in excess of $75 on the weekend.

Two other points I think are factors:
1. The Tiger effect. When Tiger was at the top, even if you were not a fan, you still would watch golf because you would likely see something amazing. He also had cool commercials which appealed to a wide variety of people which brought greater interest and attention to golf. I believe there is a direct correlation between the down turn in golf interest and his fall from grace off the course and dominance on the course. I know I do not watch golf like I once did and that includes majors which would be must see TV for me in the past

2. Smart phones. There was a time not too long ago you could go to the course to get away from the outside world. Now you hit a shot and likely check your phone for messages, tweets, sports scores, race results etc before you hit your next shot. A lot can happen in the outside world during a 5 hr round. Twitter, Facebook, social media outlets have conditioned us for immediate info updates. Not saying its a bad thing, just the way it is. A modern day element adding to a good walk spoiled.

[GPK]

Originally Posted by Heels1989

Agree with both Tom and Kevin above on all points. When I lived in the DC area, to play a reasonably priced public course usually meant a 30 to 60 min drive outside the beltway. The drive combined with a 5+ hr round essentially meant a full day commitment. And many of these courses were still charging in excess of $75 on the weekend.

Two other points I think are factors:
1. The Tiger effect. When Tiger was at the top, even if you were not a fan, you still would watch golf because you would likely see something amazing. He also had cool commercials which appealed to a wide variety of people which brought greater interest and attention to golf. I believe there is a direct correlation between the down turn in golf interest and his fall from grace off the course and dominance on the course. I know I do not watch golf like I once did and that includes majors which would be must see TV for me in the past

2. Smart phones. There was a time not too long ago you could go to the course to get away from the outside world. Now you hit a shot and likely check your phone for messages, tweets, sports scores, race results etc before you hit your next shot. A lot can happen in the outside world during a 5 hr round. Twitter, Facebook, social media outlets have conditioned us for immediate info updates. Not saying its a bad thing, just the way it is. A modern day element adding to a good walk spoiled.

So, I'm all for leaving our cell phones in the car next round.

[Bigsmc]

For me, it's all about the time investment. I cannot do the 5hr rounds on a regular basis. The pace of play is a huge problem for me. It's nothing new, but as I get older, I can't tolerate it like I could in the past. My typical round is to tee off at first light (zero exaggeration there, I've lost many a stray ball on the first tee because we couldn't see well enough) and get home by 10am. I've turned down many invites to play between 9am and noon. I can't give up a full day for a round of golf.

Living in Florida, the amount of courses within a short drive of my home has driven prices down. The courses that haven't reduced rates, have not survived. So, the cost is not an issue. There are many courses around here subscribing to the less water and chemicals maintenance plan as Kev described. I'm not a huge fan, but have grown used to hitting off rougher fairways and rougher rough as long as the greens aren't skimped upon and putts roll true. I understand that these courses are in full survival mode.

[golfer]

Originally Posted by Bigsmc

For me, it's all about the time investment. I cannot do the 5hr rounds on a regular basis. The pace of play is a huge problem for me. It's nothing new, but as I get older, I can't tolerate it like I could in the past. My typical round is to tee off at first light (zero exaggeration there, I've lost many a stray ball on the first tee because we couldn't see well enough) and get home by 10am. I've turned down many invites to play between 9am and noon. I can't give up a full day for a round of golf.

Living in Florida, the amount of courses within a short drive of my home has driven prices down. The courses that haven't reduced rates, have not survived. So, the cost is not an issue. There are many courses around here subscribing to the less water and chemicals maintenance plan as Kev described. I'm not a huge fan, but have grown used to hitting off rougher fairways and rougher rough as long as the greens aren't skimped upon and putts roll true. I understand that these courses are in full survival mode.

I have basically stopped playing for the last 6 months or so. Cost and pace of play are big factors. For me, $35 to $45 minimum for a round of golf here in Jacksonville is too expensive. I realize that this may seem reasonable to many, but I know for a fact in Kevin's area, golf is plentiful and much cheaper, especially during the weekdays.

As far as pace of play goes, I know a 2 or 3some can tool around 18 holes in 3 to 3.5 hours on a delay-free course. But you certainly are hard pressed to find that on the weekend, anywhere. We have lost a bunch of local courses over the last 5 to 10 years, which is probably a factor in the pace of play issue as well.

It seems to me from where I sit, that golf courses attempt to make up for lost revenue from less play by getting more $ from the people to do come out (this is perception, not necessarily reality). Which isn't a great way of doing business as far as I'm concerned.

It also doesn't help watching a certain kid (who will not be named) out drive you by 50 yards (MINIMUM) on every tee-shot, but that's a problem for me to deal with, and has little to do with the overall topic

[MinnSkinny]

Originally Posted by GPK

Condensed version:

#1 Too many, high end, daily fee golf courses. Very few private clubs closing and not too many lower end public courses closing either.
#2 Golf club market is beyond saturated, thanks to 2 companies in particular. I could rant forever about one of them, but I will refrain. Assholes...
#3 Too costly. A great deal of that reverts back to #1. All these high end daily fee courses trying to maintain lush playing conditions have to pass on that cost to the consumer. Hopefully the movement that ClubCorp and Pinehurst resorts started this year during the US Opens will take hold. Less grass, less water, less fertilzer=LESS COST If courses can do that, and cut $75-$100k in expenses, that's a good size nut not being passed on.

I refuse to buy the excuse "the game is too hard." What a crock of sh*t. The game is as easy to play as it has ever been. I would have hated to see some of these people take up the game back when the game was really hard.

I think (and hope) that golf makes a comeback. Some of the things that aren't working and haven't been working will be weeded out. Not sure if the game will return to the heights that it once enjoyed, but I'm convinced that's probably a good thing.

Kev-
Interesting comment regarding equipment. My guess is Swoosh and TM make your "hole" list. I find TM to be a company who has successfully pulled the wool over a lot of golfers eyes. Swoosh presence in amateur golf is almost nonexistent. But their apparel is crap.
TM uses paint and glitter to force feed the market with latest and greatest and almost prides itself in doing so. And it's hard to imagine what their PGA Tour spend must be. I feel like their products are average at best, and the technology at this time must be at the upper reach of compliance anyhow. Any surviving manufacturer today makes a decent product, so TM's days of milking the public cow are coming to an end. Just my view.

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by MinnSkinny

TM's days of milking the public cow are coming to an end. Just my view.

I've been saying that since the Firesole days

They are wholly-owned by Adidas, and have more than enough cash to over-market their wares.

[GPK]

Originally Posted by MinnSkinny

Kev-
Interesting comment regarding equipment. My guess is Swoosh and TM make your "hole" list. I find TM to be a company who has successfully pulled the wool over a lot of golfers eyes. Swoosh presence in amateur golf is almost nonexistent. But their apparel is crap.
TM uses paint and glitter to force feed the market with latest and greatest and almost prides itself in doing so. And it's hard to imagine what their PGA Tour spend must be. I feel like their products are average at best, and the technology at this time must be at the upper reach of compliance anyhow. Any surviving manufacturer today makes a decent product, so TM's days of milking the public cow are coming to an end. Just my view.

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

I've been saying that since the Firesole days

They are wholly-owned by Adidas, and have more than enough cash to over-market their wares.

T.M. is an amazing marketing company. They remind me of Callaway back in the early-mid 90's, which is when they exploded onto the scene and made a lot of people some serious cash on the market. One thing TM does right is the customer service side of the business. They are second to none. They stand behind their products and there is something to be said for that. That has always been my biggest beef with the swoosh, their customer service sucks. If you are gonna make sh*tty equipment, at least stand by it. Massive fail that turned a lot of people off.
I have never had much luck playing their clubs, but Ping gets it. Slow and steady. Same with Titleist.