The decline of the country club

[Pepperturbo]

> @"North Butte" said:

> It's always tricky to know what people consider "money". For me saying someone is "new money" or "old money" probably implies they live in a house twice as big as mine and have either salaries twice as much as mine or enough family money that their salary doesn't matter.

>

> But I'm sure there are some people who think a person like me represents "money" because I can spend a few thousand dollars a year on golf, drive a fairly new car (Civic!) and don't have any debts beside a mortgage. I remember once I hosted a round at my club for a guy I knew from the public course I learned to play at. He said something like, "So this is how rich people live" or similar. Geez I work 40 hours/week at a fairly mundane office job and the other guys we played with that day included a self-employed plumbing contractor and a real estate agent. Not really any "money" represented there by my standards but "rich people" by his.

 

What people consider wealthy is so subjective it has no significance to the actual measure of wealth. New money is when in someone's lifetime they earn a great deal of money through sound investments, profession or build a national company. Example, a semi-retired friend owns 30 apartment/commercial strip centers, half of them outright, owns two 1.5-2.5M homes and twenty vintage cars, plus huge investments. Wealthy is when all home(s) and cars are owned outright and someone pay's cash or pays the CC off every month, for most of everything in life, never touching investment principles. Old money is inheriting wealth from a family member. A friend just inherited all the controlling stock of a 2 Billion company his amazing Dad built from scratch, plus large real estate and investment holdings, and mom & dad's 22k sq ft home on the ocean. Those are family's I have known for years. When someone looks at what we pay for property here in SOCA it's amazing them compared to elsewhere. Then there are CA people that live in big costly homes but with two earners, and still, live paycheck to paycheck and don't have a remote possibility of being mortgage and car loan or lease free because they spend so much monthly. They look wealthy but to me, they are not even close. Having no CC bills, buy what ya want within reason, still have a mortgage and car loan, and work for a living, that's just comfortable.

[airjammer]

It’s not necessarily the main things “housing, cars, clothes etc” that are costing so much more it’s all the subscriptions and services that we once didn’t need but feel we need now that take all your money.

 

Not totally accurate for myself but most people I know have all or most of these.

 

Cell phone service payments

Home internet payment

Home security

Some sort of tv subscription

Trash service

Pest service

Amazon memberships

Costco/Sams club

Lawn service

Car insurance

House insurance

 

All of that adds up to a big chunk of money every month. Even without stupid high health insurance costs I couldn’t retire if I wanted to even thou I don’t owe anyone a dime.

 

 

I don’t belong to a club anymore because I have a 3 year old and her mother doesn’t work but doesn’t think it’s her job to stay with our daughter all the time. So I spend $400 a month on 2 mother’s day out and $100 a month on dance...$200 monthly suzuki piano lessons starting soon. My 83 year old father’s who probably only spent $1000 a year on me and my sister a year, nearly has a heart attack every time I mention all the costs to raise a kid in this high pressure society.

[burnsniper]

> @ImagineThat said:

> Unless the club you belong to has a reciprocal agreement with other nearby clubs where you can play golf at different courses, one of the disadvantages of club membership is you are compelled to always play the same course all the time...unless you choose to pay and play somewhere else. Some golfers like the idea of always playing the same course or playing the same 2 or 3 courses if their club has a reciprocal arrangement with other local clubs, but many golfers much prefer to play numerous different courses instead of the same one (or 2-3) all the time.

>

> No doubt it's dependent where you live, but for example in the Dallas area alone there are around 50 quality golf courses nearby that a golfer can choose to play, all of which are characteristically different in layout, looks, grasses, greens and degree of difficulty.

 

It’s counter intuitive, however clubs with no reciprocity actually allow you more opportunity to play other exclusive courses due to the perceived exclusivity. My club has a “no reciprocity policy” and is able to get me on numerous top 100 private clubs (including several top 25 clubs) whenever I travel for work (and I travel a lot) - to the point where I almost never play publics any more unless it’s a top resort/course (I do realize how pretentious that sounds but it’s the truth).

[Hilltopper413]

> @burnsniper said:

> > @ImagineThat said:

> > Unless the club you belong to has a reciprocal agreement with other nearby clubs where you can play golf at different courses, one of the disadvantages of club membership is you are compelled to always play the same course all the time...unless you choose to pay and play somewhere else. Some golfers like the idea of always playing the same course or playing the same 2 or 3 courses if their club has a reciprocal arrangement with other local clubs, but many golfers much prefer to play numerous different courses instead of the same one (or 2-3) all the time.

> >

> > No doubt it's dependent where you live, but for example in the Dallas area alone there are around 50 quality golf courses nearby that a golfer can choose to play, all of which are characteristically different in layout, looks, grasses, greens and degree of difficulty.

>

> It’s counter intuitive, however clubs with no reciprocity actually allow you more opportunity to play other exclusive courses due to the perceived exclusivity. My club has a “no reciprocity policy” and is able to get me on numerous top 100 private clubs (including several top 25 clubs) whenever I travel for work (and I travel a lot) - to the point where I almost never play publics any more unless it’s a top resort/course (I do realize how pretentious that sounds but it’s the truth).

 

This. Being a member of a private club opens the doors to golf courses you would never be able to step foot on otherwise. I actually play more courses as a private member than I did when I was on the public circuit. And they are higher caliber courses to boot.

[Enduro59]

Just finished reading the Courses,Memberships,etc Southeast section thread titled "Atlanta area memberships"then jumped back over to this thread that I have been following..At least in the Atlanta area the answer to the OP's question is no .I realize this thread has already established that country club health is regional but I couldn't find one post in the Atlanta thread to indicate any decline at all there .Wait lists at 70k initiation and 700 a month does not seem like a decline of the country club in Atlanta at least. Maybe some of the more seasoned WRXr's could read the Atlanta thread and weigh in.

[raynorfan1]

 

> @Enduro59 said:

> Just finished reading the Courses,Memberships,etc Southeast section thread titled "Atlanta area memberships"then jumped back over to this thread that I have been following..At least in the Atlanta area the answer to the OP's question is no .I realize this thread has already established that country club health is regional but I couldn't find one post in the Atlanta thread to indicate any decline at all there .Wait lists at 70k initiation and 700 a month does not seem like a decline of the country club in Atlanta at least. Maybe some of the more seasoned WRXr's could read the Atlanta thread and weigh in.

 

I actually think Atlanta is a pretty good microcosm of the macro conditions for Country Clubs. ClubCorp has hoovered up a huge segment of the market, leaving only the higher-end as "true" private country clubs.

[ImagineThat]

> @raynorfan1 said:

>

> > @Enduro59 said:

> > Just finished reading the Courses,Memberships,etc Southeast section thread titled "Atlanta area memberships"then jumped back over to this thread that I have been following..At least in the Atlanta area the answer to the OP's question is no .I realize this thread has already established that country club health is regional but I couldn't find one post in the Atlanta thread to indicate any decline at all there .Wait lists at 70k initiation and 700 a month does not seem like a decline of the country club in Atlanta at least. Maybe some of the more seasoned WRXr's could read the Atlanta thread and weigh in.

>

> I actually think Atlanta is a pretty good microcosm of the macro conditions for Country Clubs. ClubCorp has hoovered up a huge segment of the market, leaving only the higher-end as "true" private country clubs.

 

I think you're right. The higher-end 'true' private clubs remain in good shape.

 

ClubCorp is based here in Dallas, and I knew ClubCorp's previous General Counsel. The company acquired a lot of golf clubs, especially over the last half-dozen years (too many in fact because they were looking at certain bankruptcy until Apollo bought them at a bargain price and took them private, but kept the ClubCorp name). All of the private and semi-private clubs that ClubCorp acquired are considered middle and low-end clubs. These clubs are usually the ones that have reciprocal agreements with other sister [ClubCorp owned] clubs. ClubCorp really went after increasing memberships at the clubs they own that I'm familiar with by offering special deals, reduced fees and dues, etc. to the point where some existing members got upset and left.

[Pepperturbo]

> @ImagineThat said:

> > @raynorfan1 said:

> >

> > > @Enduro59 said:

> > > Just finished reading the Courses,Memberships,etc Southeast section thread titled "Atlanta area memberships"then jumped back over to this thread that I have been following..At least in the Atlanta area the answer to the OP's question is no .I realize this thread has already established that country club health is regional but I couldn't find one post in the Atlanta thread to indicate any decline at all there .Wait lists at 70k initiation and 700 a month does not seem like a decline of the country club in Atlanta at least. Maybe some of the more seasoned WRXr's could read the Atlanta thread and weigh in.

> >

> > I actually think Atlanta is a pretty good microcosm of the macro conditions for Country Clubs. ClubCorp has hoovered up a huge segment of the market, leaving only the higher-end as "true" private country clubs.

>

> I think you're right. The higher-end 'true' private clubs remain in good shape.

>

> ClubCorp is based here in Dallas, and I knew ClubCorp's previous General Counsel. The company acquired a lot of golf clubs, especially over the last half-dozen years (too many in fact because they were looking at certain bankruptcy until Apollo bought them at a bargain price and took them private, but kept the ClubCorp name). All of the private and semi-private clubs that ClubCorp acquired are considered middle and low-end clubs. These clubs are usually the ones that have reciprocal agreements with other sister [ClubCorp owned] clubs. ClubCorp really went after increasing memberships at the clubs they own that I'm familiar with by offering special deals, reduced fees and dues, etc. to the point where some existing members got upset and left.

 

High-end clubs are fiscally fine from what we're seeing. They are Equity or managed by Troon or a benevolent well-off Owner that limits ownership to one maybe two high-end courses, like Kemper Sports and PGA West which was sold to an equity firm in the east. Over the last fifteen years American Golf, Club Corp and Troon Management have acquired and or taken over management of a large number of courses, nationally. Casper Management & Kemper Sports have been growing too but go about it more strategic. A lot of growth has come from buying RE Developer owned courses. Troon has most of the upper-end public and private club's. The higher listed companies like Troon, CC, and Casper and Kemper do an above average job of P&L and development management, but those further down the list like AGC not so good. Except for the most exclusive private clubs the companies I listed above offer reciprocal agreements as it an attraction.

[King_Slender]

Not a member, but have several friends at a what I'd call a middle/low end club and despite the criticisms of ClubCorp, non-ClubCorp clubs that are not top end seem to always have issues managing the finances effectively. As an outsider, one of the big problems I see is that if you're at a club with a good chunk of legacy members who are paying nominal monthly fees, it creates a death spiral to keep up the facilities and the course.

[Pepperturbo]

> @King_Slender said:

> Not a member, but have several friends at a what I'd call a middle/low end club and despite the criticisms of ClubCorp, **non-ClubCorp clubs that are not top end seem to always have issues managing the finances effectively**. As an outsider, one of the big problems I see is that if you're at a club with a good chunk of legacy members who are paying nominal monthly fees, it creates a death spiral to keep up the facilities and the course.

 

You hit the nail on the head.

 

Middle of the road private clubs and their members are often divided. It's between those that are fiscally responsible maybe with limited spending budgets and those with more money than they know what to do with (mostly inherited), and not a lick of P&L or common sense and doesn't care about costs.

 

The key with ANY size club is when talking to the membership committee or person, ask to meet the BOD or those in charge of the club, even have dinner with him or them and a round of golf. You can find out a great deal about the clubs kept secrets and who really drives the club. Sometimes, those thought in leadership are not leading at all but guided by select people in the background.

[North Butte]

> @Pepperturbo said:> The key with ANY size club is when talking to the membership committee or person, ask to meet the BOD or those in charge of the club, even have dinner with him or them and a round of golf. You can find out a great deal about the clubs kept secrets and who really drives the club. Sometimes, those thought in leadership are not leading at all but guided by select people in the background.

 

Of if you live in an area with few decent clubs to choose from, you pick one whose golf course is of sufficient quality to justify what it costs to be a member, you pay your money and you take what you get. I'm pretty sure not a single country club within an hour's drive of my house passes any rational criterion of fiscal responsibility.

 

If I were only willing to join clubs that lived within their means and were prudent for setting aside money for future capital expenses...well, I guess I'd need to move across the country somewhere.

 

One of my occasional playing companions says, when it comes to country clubs, if you give them a dollar they'll spend a dollar ten and assess the members for the balance and if you give them ten million they'll spend eleven and assess the members for the balance.

[raynorfan1]

> @"North Butte" said:

> If I were only willing to join clubs that lived within their means and were prudent for setting aside money for future capital expenses...well, I guess I'd need to move across the country somewhere.

 

I'll give you the flipside. I belong to a club that runs about a 10% surplus every year (after covering all costs, including facility depreciation). Puts it in the bank. Every five years or so the board of governors has a grand old time deciding what "improvement" to spend a couple million dollars on. Said "improvement" increases operating costs, so dues (and initiation fees) go up and it all happens again.

 

There is one point of view that it is fiscally "prudent", but the reality has been that the club used to be a place for all people who love the sport, now it's a place for wealthy people who like the game.

[North Butte]

> @raynorfan1 said:

> > @"North Butte" said:

> > If I were only willing to join clubs that lived within their means and were prudent for setting aside money for future capital expenses...well, I guess I'd need to move across the country somewhere.

>

> I'll give you the flipside. I belong to a club that runs about a 10% surplus every year (after covering all costs, including facility depreciation). Puts it in the bank. Every five years or so the board of governors has a grand old time deciding what "improvement" to spend a couple million dollars on. Said "improvement" increases operating costs, so dues (and initiation fees) go up and it all happens again.

>

> There is one point of view that it is fiscally "prudent", but the reality has been that the club used to be a place for all people who love the sport, now it's a place for wealthy people who like the game.

 

Let me just say...

 

Yikes!

[duffer987]

> @raynorfan1 said:

> > @"North Butte" said:

> > If I were only willing to join clubs that lived within their means and were prudent for setting aside money for future capital expenses...well, I guess I'd need to move across the country somewhere.

>

> I'll give you the flipside. I belong to a club that runs about a 10% surplus every year (after covering all costs, including facility depreciation). Puts it in the bank. Every five years or so the board of governors has a grand old time deciding what "improvement" to spend a couple million dollars on. Said "improvement" increases operating costs, so dues (and initiation fees) go up and it all happens again.

>

> There is one point of view that it is fiscally "prudent", but the reality has been that the club used to be a place for all people who love the sport, now it's a place for wealthy people who like the game.

 

I have no idea how it works, but can your course get 'free' upgrades - out of USGA/PGA of America coffers - as part of agreeing to host major competitions?

So those said "improvements" typically end up being to the facilities, as opposed to the course?

[Pepperturbo]

> @"North Butte" said:

> > @Pepperturbo said:> The key with ANY size club is when talking to the membership committee or person, ask to meet the BOD or those in charge of the club, even have dinner with him or them and a round of golf. You can find out a great deal about the clubs kept secrets and who really drives the club. Sometimes, those thought in leadership are not leading at all but guided by select people in the background.

>

> Of if you live in an area with few decent clubs to choose from, you pick one whose golf course is of sufficient quality to justify what it costs to be a member, you pay your money and you take what you get. I'm pretty sure not a single country club within an hour's drive of my house passes any rational criterion of fiscal responsibility.

>

> If I were only willing to join clubs that lived within their means and were prudent for setting aside money for future capital expenses...well, I guess I'd need to move across the country somewhere.

>

> One of my occasional playing companions says, when it comes to country clubs, if you give them a dollar they'll spend a dollar ten and assess the members for the balance and if you give them ten million they'll spend eleven and assess the members for the balance.

 

That's totally up to you. I don't think that way. It took me forty plus years of hard work to build a sound company. Though your friend's comment has some merit, doesn't mean members should tolerate misuse of funds and or poor management. It doesn't matter how much wealth a person has anyone that is fiscally responsible isn't going to set back and let others piddle money away and send them a bill. Golf clubs are NOT the government even if it's a 502. Though I can spend more than most on monthly golf, club costs and initiation fee, I want a club to be reasonably responsible regarding spending and provide value for my investment.

 

When someone works a lifetime to gain wealth they don't align with people that irresponsibly piddle money away and ask for more. What you and others do is your business. When I put up a large sum of money for initiation fee that isn't typically fully refundable and may take upwards of 1-4 years to sell or recoup the balance after transfer costs, join a club and my family builds a social network in that club, having people poorly management the club is wrong and I want no part of it. I don't need to join a club bad enough to be irresponsible.

[North Butte]

I'm glad you have the means the location to be that selective in the company you keep and the golf courses you play. I do not. I've not accumulated any wealth to speak of nor do I feel any desire to distance myself from people who get together and fail to live up to my expectations for prudence and restraint.

 

I just found the one golf course in town I'd care to play 130 times a year, made sure it had a good core of like-minded golfers to play with and I'll keep paying my dues until I'm too old to play or until some Board gets elected who bankrupt the club.

 

If there were another very good course across town which was also within my means but which was on a solid, healthy long term financial footing I'd rather be a member there. No such club exists.

[raynorfan1]

> @duffer987 said:

> I have know idea how it works, but can your course get 'free' upgrades - out of USGA/PGA of America coffers - as part of agreeing to host major competitions?

> So those said "improvements" typically end up being to the facilities, as opposed to the course?

 

Whole different set of problems/solutions. But with the exception of the muni courses (Bethpage, TP, etc.) the USGA and PGAA are not in the business of fronting cash to get improvements to the golf course. The clubs pay for the improvements and hope to make it back on the event. Realistically, improvements to the facilities probably have even higher returns because the club makes most of its dollars on events surrounding the actual tournament.

[duffer987]

> @raynorfan1 said:

> > @duffer987 said:

> > I have know idea how it works, but can your course get 'free' upgrades - out of USGA/PGA of America coffers - as part of agreeing to host major competitions?

> > So those said "improvements" typically end up being to the facilities, as opposed to the course?

>

> Whole different set of problems/solutions. But with the exception of the muni courses (Bethpage, TP, etc.) the USGA and PGAA are not in the business of fronting cash to get improvements to the golf course. The clubs pay for the improvements and hope to make it back on the event. Realistically, improvements to the facilities probably have even higher returns because the club makes most of its dollars on events surrounding the actual tournament.

 

Makes sense. Thanks for the info.

[raynorfan1]

> @"North Butte" said:

> Let me just say...

>

> Yikes!

 

Yes, but the board prides itself on delivering these improvements without assessments...

 

I strongly prefer the model where we run at a breakeven and have knock-down-drag-out membership fights about the most modest capital expenses.

[smashdn]

> @Pepperturbo said:

> You hit the nail on the head.

>

> Middle of the road private clubs and their members are often divided. It's between those that are fiscally responsible maybe with limited spending budgets and those with more money than they know what to do with (mostly inherited), and not a lick of P&L or common sense and doesn't care about costs.

>

> The key with ANY size club is when talking to the membership committee or person, ask to meet the BOD or those in charge of the club, even have dinner with him or them and a round of golf. You can find out a great deal about the clubs kept secrets and who really drives the club. Sometimes, those thought in leadership are not leading at all but guided by select people in the background.

 

Sounds very New World Order-esque. But also pretty accurate I bet.

[ChipNRun]

A couple of additional factors which contribute to the pruning out of **green grass** country clubs landscape.:

1. Golf entertainment centers such as Top Golf, and new rivals Golf Shack, 4ORE! and REALiTEE offer a new golf culture niche. The theme combines golf with a night club and family zone, with selected shot contests reminiscent of the Big Break TV show. [golfincmagazine.com/content/topgolf-imitators-opening-texas-florida](http://www.golfincmagazine.com/content/topgolf-imitators-opening-texas-florida "golfincmagazine.com/content/topgolf-imitators-opening-texas-florida")

Topgolf even cut a deal with Callaway Golf to make TG golf clubs, drawing from the once-popular X20 designs. You don't even need to bring your own clubs.

2. Indoor golf year-round. Improvements in electronics have made golf simulators a versatile system: You can use them for instruction, clubfitting, and to play simulator golf rounds. In Asian golf hotbed South Korea, indoor golfers now exceed the number of green grass, outdoor golfers. South Korean bars and coffee shops often have a golf simulator or two in a largely fragmented industry model. Closer to home, getting golf simulator time in St. Louis area requires advanced planning - even when it's 90 degrees outside in June.

[ImagineThat]

Here's an interesting question, which likely only happens now-and-again with some of the more elite clubs...

 

What do you think an elite country club with a 2 year wait list time and a ~$100k initiation fee should do if they are offered an 'extra' $100k cash upfront by an approved 'member-in waiting' to reduce the wait time down to 3 months or less? Should the country club find a way to quietly work around their stated policy, or should the country club stick firmly to their policy that whoever has waited the longest becomes the newest member and forgo the extra money - whether the money is actually needed, or not?

 

Also, should such a decision be elevated to the club's Board for them to decide? Or, should the decision be made at a lower level by someone at the membership administration level?

[Shilgy]

> @ImagineThat said:

> What do you think an elite country club with a 2 year wait list time and a ~$100k initiation fee should do if they were offered an 'extra' $100k cash upfront by an approved 'member-in waiting' to reduce the wait time down to 3 months or less? Should such a country club find a way to quietly work around their stated policy, or should the country club stick firmly to their policy that whoever has waited the longest becomes the newest member and forgo the extra money - whether the money is actually needed or not?

 

Keep to their policy. Of some guy said he'd post $1m that would likely get a different answer from me.

If they are getting $100k initiation AND have a two year wait list the extra $100k would not make that much difference.

[raynorfan1]

> @ImagineThat said:

> Here's an interesting question, which likely only happens now-and-again with some of the more elite clubs...

>

> What do you think an elite country club with a 2 year wait list time and a ~$100k initiation fee should do if they are offered an 'extra' $100k cash upfront by an approved 'member-in waiting' to reduce the wait time down to 3 months or less? Should the country club find a way to quietly work around their stated policy, or should the country club stick firmly to their policy that whoever has waited the longest becomes the newest member and forgo the extra money - whether the money is actually needed, or not?

>

> Also, should such a decision be elevated to the club's Board for them to decide? Or, should the decision be made at a lower level by someone at the membership administration level?

 

Not that I'm a member of an "elite" club, but I'm 100% sure that if somebody made that proposal to our admission committee / board, they would get off the waitlist immediately. And not in the way that they intended.

[BNGL]

> @ImagineThat said:

> Here's an interesting question, which likely only happens now-and-again with some of the more elite clubs...

>

> What do you think an elite country club with a 2 year wait list time and a ~$100k initiation fee should do if they are offered an 'extra' $100k cash upfront by an approved 'member-in waiting' to reduce the wait time down to 3 months or less? Should the country club find a way to quietly work around their stated policy, or should the country club stick firmly to their policy that whoever has waited the longest becomes the newest member and forgo the extra money - whether the money is actually needed, or not?

>

> Also, should such a decision be elevated to the club's Board for them to decide? Or, should the decision be made at a lower level by someone at the membership administration level?

 

Club will stick with the policy and the member in waiting will more than likely be taken off the list. That was the story with Adena in Ocala. I had heard from the sup who was in our chapter that the owner (former owner now as the course is closed) wanted to be a member at Augusta offered to buy his way in, club said you’ll never be a member here. He gave them double fingers bought a bunch of land or already owned it poached the senior assistant of ANGC and a mechanic (I had thought a mechanic came along too) and built a fabulous course that he wanted to rival ANGC.

 

 

 

 

[ImagineThat]

> @raynorfan1 said:

> > @ImagineThat said:

> > Here's an interesting question, which likely only happens now-and-again with some of the more elite clubs...

> >

> > What do you think an elite country club with a 2 year wait list time and a ~$100k initiation fee should do if they are offered an 'extra' $100k cash upfront by an approved 'member-in waiting' to reduce the wait time down to 3 months or less? Should the country club find a way to quietly work around their stated policy, or should the country club stick firmly to their policy that whoever has waited the longest becomes the newest member and forgo the extra money - whether the money is actually needed, or not?

> >

> > Also, should such a decision be elevated to the club's Board for them to decide? Or, should the decision be made at a lower level by someone at the membership administration level?

>

> Not that I'm a member of an "elite" club, but I'm 100% sure that if somebody made that proposal to our admission committee / board, they would get off the waitlist immediately. And not in the way that they intended.

 

The offer would only be a polite suggestion of possible acceptance. I don't understand why such an offer would cause the type of resentment or passion you think with 100% certainty would happen. I think you may have misunderstood the situation...

[BNGL]

> @ImagineThat said:

> > @raynorfan1 said:

> > > @ImagineThat said:

> > > Here's an interesting question, which likely only happens now-and-again with some of the more elite clubs...

> > >

> > > What do you think an elite country club with a 2 year wait list time and a ~$100k initiation fee should do if they are offered an 'extra' $100k cash upfront by an approved 'member-in waiting' to reduce the wait time down to 3 months or less? Should the country club find a way to quietly work around their stated policy, or should the country club stick firmly to their policy that whoever has waited the longest becomes the newest member and forgo the extra money - whether the money is actually needed, or not?

> > >

> > > Also, should such a decision be elevated to the club's Board for them to decide? Or, should the decision be made at a lower level by someone at the membership administration level?

> >

> > Not that I'm a member of an "elite" club, but I'm 100% sure that if somebody made that proposal to our admission committee / board, they would get off the waitlist immediately. And not in the way that they intended.

>

> The offer would only be a polite suggestion of possible acceptance. I don't understand why such an offer would cause the type of resentment or passion you think with 100% certainty would happen. I think you may have misunderstood the situation...

 

Nah raynors right here. I interned at a perennial top 10, then went public back to private that was host of a PGA Tour Invitational, then a Platinum Club of America (elite private in Hobe Sound area) now I’m at another top 100 private club. That’s how it works. You don’t join, you’re accepted on the timeline that is dictated by the club. Now every club is different obviously but generally (more than 85 percent of the time I’d reckon) you’re not going to get in.

 

Finishing reading your question as to who would handle it; three options in my opinion the membership or a representative would address the person, the GM/Owner, or nothing would happen, in that your app would just disappear.

 

 

[driveandputtmachine]

> @Enduro59 said:

> Just finished reading the Courses,Memberships,etc Southeast section thread titled "Atlanta area memberships"then jumped back over to this thread that I have been following..At least in the Atlanta area the answer to the OP's question is no .I realize this thread has already established that country club health is regional but I couldn't find one post in the Atlanta thread to indicate any decline at all there .Wait lists at 70k initiation and 700 a month does not seem like a decline of the country club in Atlanta at least. Maybe some of the more seasoned WRXr's could read the Atlanta thread and weigh in.

 

So there is a decline in Atlanta, but only in the middle range clubs or clubs just below the high end line, depending upon location. Cherokee Town, PDC, Capital City, Peachtree, AAC are all still wait listed. Some others like Druid, and others may be as well, but I do not know for sure. The clubs that need members are the Roswell CC, Rivermont, Pinetree(although almost full), Manor, Indian Hills, Govenors, Atlanta National, White Columns, St. Marlo, Standard. I hear Horseshoe, Dunwoody, CC of South are all open, but do not need members, however I may be hearing complete crap about the last three. I know someone at each of the high ends and they are wait listed. For some crazy reason Marietta CC is wait listed too(location), 27 holes and maybe 15 total good holes. Great clubhouse and pretty good practice facility.

[raynorfan1]

> @ImagineThat said:

> The offer would only be a polite suggestion of possible acceptance. I don't understand why such an offer would cause the type of resentment or passion you think with 100% certainty would happen. I think you may have misunderstood the situation...

 

You've seen Caddyshack, yes?

 

It's not healthy to have guys who believe that throwing money around absolves themselves of playing by the rules, and many clubs try to avoid these guys if they can.

[mocokid]

> @dlygrisse said:

> > @MtlJeff said:

> > The clubs that have done well around where I am are the ones that are either the very top end ones (there are still plenty of rich people), or are the ones that got rid of the "country club" mentality and focused less on amenities and more on providing golf at a good price.

> >

> > Btw in regards to wealth, I have heard some people mention it and I think it's worth discussing too....we seem to have WAY more things than we used to . So sometimes I'll see someone who is 35 or whatever and they'll say they have no savings, but they have 2 cars, all their kids have iPads, they're subscribed to 2-3 different streaming services, the dad has a "man cave" with 20000$ worth of electronics etc....

> >

> > Growing up my dad did pretty well but we had one car we all shared and one TV, and personal electronics didn't exist. Some of the "cost of living" stuff is true, but some of it is pretty murky. How much stuff we have now do we really "need" vs 25 years ago, or are they more "wants" that everyone just gets without thinking about it.

>

> This is so true. This website is a prime example. Some people spend big money on clubs, shafts, clothes, shoes, bags, and other golf related things yearly. I remember pretty wealthy people who played the same sticks for many years, because those were their clubs and they liked them. They spent their money on the membership, not trying to always have the latest and greatest toys.

>

> I fall victim of this way of thinking myself. It’s the consumer driven marketing we get hammered with daily.

>

 

Very true about the clubs used for many years, also drove cars, not always the shiniest, many years.