The decline of the country club

[raynorfan1]

Then there's this:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/18/style/make-golf-cool.html?action=click&module=Editors%20Picks&pgtype=Homepage

[MelloYello]

My world runs on Coke Zero. Greatest invention mankind ever had right there.

 

And yeah, there was like a week where I drank MelloYello.

[BNGL]

I have been trying to figure out how to word this since I had a couple awful experiences at the same club over multiple days when we were visiting in Fort Wayne. I don’t want it to sound like a complaint of this particular club but I think it could be representative of a larger problem; the decline of customer service. Fort Wayne as I understood from some friends had experienced some course closures etc and now there were fewer good options. I don’t expect to be called Mr. so and so all the time but I also don’t expect to be a number and once my card is charged and clears to be thrown away. Greatest lesson of this was in Orlando at Falcons Fire, not the best club but pretty much always in great shape usually slow but it never had houses or a resort attached to it so it was just golf which is nice (rare?) in Orlando. We always took customer service to the next level, part of that was Marriotts Policy (our management company) and we all just felt that if you were paying 170 bucks peak season you deserved the red carpet. Valet, locker room (small but still there multiple showers), scented towels at the turn, a great lunch with a fine view and attentive crew. We bought into the the experience...now it’s severely lacking. In some instances and that isn’t good. Not saying that would turn things around but if your course is marginal but everything else is fantastic I’ll still frequent it. Maybe we’ll see it deep into private’s or country clubs I hope it doesn’t.

[smashdn]

Apples (tree apples not my apples) in an ice bath at the turn are a nice touch. Can't cost a ton but made a difference to me.

[GolfChannel]

> @smashdn said:

> I did the dew.

 

Agreed. Finally 2 years of being off that sauce.

[GolfChannel]

> @BNGL said:

> I have been trying to figure out how to word this since I had a couple awful experiences at the same club over multiple days when we were visiting in Fort Wayne. I don’t want it to sound like a complaint of this particular club but I think it could be representative of a larger problem; the decline of customer service. Fort Wayne as I understood from some friends had experienced some course closures etc and now there were fewer good options. I don’t expect to be called Mr. so and so all the time but I also don’t expect to be a number and once my card is charged and clears to be thrown away. Greatest lesson of this was in Orlando at Falcons Fire, not the best club but pretty much always in great shape usually slow but it never had houses or a resort attached to it so it was just golf which is nice (rare?) in Orlando. We always took customer service to the next level, part of that was Marriotts Policy (our management company) and we all just felt that if you were paying 170 bucks peak season you deserved the red carpet. Valet, locker room (small but still there multiple showers), scented towels at the turn, a great lunch with a fine view and attentive crew. We bought into the the experience...now it’s severely lacking. In some instances and that isn’t good. Not saying that would turn things around but if your course is marginal but everything else is fantastic I’ll still frequent it. Maybe we’ll see it deep into private’s or country clubs I hope it doesn’t.

 

Normal depending on the area you are golfing in Central Florida. In the City proper expect houses everywhere. Edges of the City it’s basically 50/50 between courses that are just golf and courses which are resort/housing based.

 

[PappyVanWinkle53]

> @GolfChannel said:

 

>

> "Don’t even get me started on many of my fellow veterans who expect the world for their service but could care little about the needs of anyone else or what their entitlement means for the country’s well being."

>

>

>

This is a bit of a cheap shot, don't you think? How can you, in good conscience, suggest that "many of my fellow veterans" don't care about the needs of anyone else????

 

[Pepperturbo]

> @"Crazy About Golf" said:

> > @GolfChannel said:

>

> >

> > "Don’t even get me started on many of my fellow veterans who expect the world for their service but could care little about the needs of anyone else or what their entitlement means for the country’s well being."

> >

> >

> >

> This is a bit of a cheap shot, don't you think? How can you, in good conscience, suggest that "many of my fellow veterans" don't care about the needs of anyone else????

>

 

NOT a cheap shot but spot on regarding human nature. Fact, good motivated men (let's call them Boy Scouts) that serve our country, in any capacity, care more about serving than themselves.

 

Wanting acknowledgment and or wanting something for themselves is not part of their motivation or life. Acknowledging service is a good thing but we don't always know what motivates a person. There are a great many veterans even active service personnel that entered the military to get something for themselves; giving was NOT their major intention. That's not to say they don't learn to give, it's to say, they didn't start with the best of intentions.

 

In my travels, I encountered people that signed up just to get away from home and or personal problems or get an education or housing discount. Their motive had nothing to do with actually serving our country or our way of life. Some learn to give, others not so much and call it a temporary job.

[PappyVanWinkle53]

> @Pepperturbo said:

> > @"Crazy About Golf" said:

> > > @GolfChannel said:

> >

> > >

> > > "Don’t even get me started on many of my fellow veterans who expect the world for their service but could care little about the needs of anyone else or what their entitlement means for the country’s well being."

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > This is a bit of a cheap shot, don't you think? How can you, in good conscience, suggest that "many of my fellow veterans" don't care about the needs of anyone else????

> >

>

> NOT a cheap shot but spot on regarding human nature. Fact, good motivated men (let's call them Boy Scouts) that serve our country, in any capacity, care more about serving than themselves.

>

> Wanting acknowledgment and or wanting something for themselves is not part of their motivation or life. Acknowledging service is a good thing but we don't always know what motivates a person. There are a great many veterans even active service personnel that entered the military to get something for themselves; giving was NOT their major intention. That's not to say they don't learn to give, it's to say, they didn't start with the best of intentions.

>

> In my travels, I encountered people that signed up just to get away from home and or personal problems or get an education or housing discount. Their motive had nothing to do with actually serving our country or our way of life. Some learn to give, others not so much and call it a temporary job.

 

A couple things:

(1) You bring up some good points about not always knowing what motivates a person. And I agree with you that folks elect to serve their country for a host of reasons. But at the end of the day, in a nation full of opportunity, they CHOSE to serve; so we'd be remiss to discount that.

 

(2) More to the point, this particular post by @GolfChannel is not a discussion about "human nature" or why young men and women enlist.....rather, it was about how the current generation is no more "lazy and entitled" than the previous generation.......and I believe he's correct in that assertion. However, it's a bit reckless of him to paint with such a wide brush by suggesting that "many veterans" care little for others. Not sure how that little barb added any value to the discussion. So, yes, it was definitely a cheap shot.

[Pepperturbo]

> @"Crazy About Golf" said:

> > @Pepperturbo said:

> > > @"Crazy About Golf" said:

> > > > @GolfChannel said:

> > >

> > > >

> > > > "Don’t even get me started on many of my fellow veterans who expect the world for their service but could care little about the needs of anyone else or what their entitlement means for the country’s well being."

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > This is a bit of a cheap shot, don't you think? How can you, in good conscience, suggest that "many of my fellow veterans" don't care about the needs of anyone else????

> > >

> >

> > NOT a cheap shot but spot on regarding human nature. Fact, good motivated men (let's call them Boy Scouts) that serve our country, in any capacity, care more about serving than themselves.

> >

> > Wanting acknowledgment and or wanting something for themselves is not part of their motivation or life. Acknowledging service is a good thing but we don't always know what motivates a person. There are a great many veterans even active service personnel that entered the military to get something for themselves; giving was NOT their major intention. That's not to say they don't learn to give, it's to say, they didn't start with the best of intentions.

> >

> > In my travels, I encountered people that signed up just to get away from home and or personal problems or get an education or housing discount. Their motive had nothing to do with actually serving our country or our way of life. Some learn to give, others not so much and call it a temporary job.

>

> A couple things:

> (1) You bring up some good points about not always knowing what motivates a person. And I agree with you that folks elect to serve their country for a host of reasons. But at the end of the day, in a nation full of opportunity, they CHOSE to serve; so we'd be remiss to discount that.

>

> (2) More to the point, this particular post by @GolfChannel is not a discussion about "human nature" or why young men and women enlist.....rather, it was about how the current generation is no more "lazy and entitled" than the previous generation.......and I believe he's correct in that assertion. However, it's a bit reckless of him to paint with such a wide brush by suggesting that "many veterans" care little for others. Not sure how that little barb added any value to the discussion. So, yes, it was definitely a cheap shot.

 

Sorry, but human nature is not generation based but inclusive of all, so you can't take human nature out of the equation to make a position argument. Moreover, it's only a cheap shot if YOU served and took it personally. It was evident to me, he was making a generalized statement that wasn't targeting anyone, least of all on the DB. If you didn't serve than your assumption of a barb is as broad as that which you disagree with. Have a good day.

[GolfChannel]

> @"Crazy About Golf" said:

> > @Pepperturbo said:

> > > @"Crazy About Golf" said:

> > > > @GolfChannel said:

> > >

> > > >

> > > > "Don’t even get me started on many of my fellow veterans who expect the world for their service but could care little about the needs of anyone else or what their entitlement means for the country’s well being."

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > This is a bit of a cheap shot, don't you think? How can you, in good conscience, suggest that "many of my fellow veterans" don't care about the needs of anyone else????

> > >

> >

> > NOT a cheap shot but spot on regarding human nature. Fact, good motivated men (let's call them Boy Scouts) that serve our country, in any capacity, care more about serving than themselves.

> >

> > Wanting acknowledgment and or wanting something for themselves is not part of their motivation or life. Acknowledging service is a good thing but we don't always know what motivates a person. There are a great many veterans even active service personnel that entered the military to get something for themselves; giving was NOT their major intention. That's not to say they don't learn to give, it's to say, they didn't start with the best of intentions.

> >

> > In my travels, I encountered people that signed up just to get away from home and or personal problems or get an education or housing discount. Their motive had nothing to do with actually serving our country or our way of life. Some learn to give, others not so much and call it a temporary job.

>

> A couple things:

> (1) You bring up some good points about not always knowing what motivates a person. And I agree with you that folks elect to serve their country for a host of reasons. But at the end of the day, in a nation full of opportunity, they CHOSE to serve; so we'd be remiss to discount that.

>

> (2) More to the point, this particular post by @GolfChannel is not a discussion about "human nature" or why young men and women enlist.....rather, it was about how the current generation is no more "lazy and entitled" than the previous generation.......and I believe he's correct in that assertion. However, it's a bit reckless of him to paint with such a wide brush by suggesting that "many veterans" care little for others. Not sure how that little barb added any value to the discussion. So, yes, it was definitely a cheap shot.

 

My Grandfather ran the VA here in Orlando before he passed away. While it is only a microcosm of all veterans, I have seen thousands upon thousands of veterans walk through those doors from my days as a volunteer when I was in Middle School to my time as a veteran myself. I also care for my Father who is a 100% disabled veteran (all of his injuries service related). Ultimately, as the other gentlemen stated above, it is a discussion of human nature and also one of entitlement. I don’t have a problem with personal self interest, but I have a problem when it’s clothed in hypocrisy even when they are adamant no hypocrisy exists. I served because it was my choice fully understanding the risk involved, and while I appreciate some of the benefits, it was ultimately my choice. So, no one, owes me anything. If the benefits were taken away tomorrow I wouldn’t notice they were even gone.

[Pepperturbo]

> @GolfChannel said:

> > @"Crazy About Golf" said:

> > > @Pepperturbo said:

> > > > @"Crazy About Golf" said:

> > > > > @GolfChannel said:

> > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > "Don’t even get me started on many of my fellow veterans who expect the world for their service but could care little about the needs of anyone else or what their entitlement means for the country’s well being."

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > This is a bit of a cheap shot, don't you think? How can you, in good conscience, suggest that "many of my fellow veterans" don't care about the needs of anyone else????

> > > >

> > >

> > > NOT a cheap shot but spot on regarding human nature. Fact, good motivated men (let's call them Boy Scouts) that serve our country, in any capacity, care more about serving than themselves.

> > >

> > > Wanting acknowledgment and or wanting something for themselves is not part of their motivation or life. Acknowledging service is a good thing but we don't always know what motivates a person. There are a great many veterans even active service personnel that entered the military to get something for themselves; giving was NOT their major intention. That's not to say they don't learn to give, it's to say, they didn't start with the best of intentions.

> > >

> > > In my travels, I encountered people that signed up just to get away from home and or personal problems or get an education or housing discount. Their motive had nothing to do with actually serving our country or our way of life. Some learn to give, others not so much and call it a temporary job.

> >

> > A couple things:

> > (1) You bring up some good points about not always knowing what motivates a person. And I agree with you that folks elect to serve their country for a host of reasons. But at the end of the day, in a nation full of opportunity, they CHOSE to serve; so we'd be remiss to discount that.

> >

> > (2) More to the point, this particular post by @GolfChannel is not a discussion about "human nature" or why young men and women enlist.....rather, it was about how the current generation is no more "lazy and entitled" than the previous generation.......and I believe he's correct in that assertion. However, it's a bit reckless of him to paint with such a wide brush by suggesting that "many veterans" care little for others. Not sure how that little barb added any value to the discussion. So, yes, it was definitely a cheap shot.

>

> My Grandfather ran the VA here in Orlando before he passed away. While it is only a microcosm of all veterans, I have seen thousands upon thousands of veterans walk through those doors from my days as a volunteer when I was in Middle School to my time as a veteran myself. I also care for my Father who is a 100% disabled veteran (all of his injuries service related). Ultimately, as the other gentlemen stated above, it is a discussion of human nature and also one of entitlement. I don’t have a problem with personal self interest, but I have a problem when it’s clothed in hypocrisy even when they are adamant no hypocrisy exists. I served because it was my choice fully understanding the risk involved, and while I appreciate some of the benefits, it was ultimately my choice. So, no one, owes me anything. If the benefits were taken away tomorrow I wouldn’t notice they were even gone.

 

Understand and agree. I didn't serve in the military, but another way by taking skills that I had in my early days, in-country. Met many good military men and women, and non-military men like me there for a greater purpose, all knowing the risks. The common thread was knowing we were there for the right reasons, and if I were able, do it again. Sadly, like you, I have seen the ultimate sacrifice that good men willingly make for the right reasons. Don't see it nearly as often with youth, today.

[MelloYello]

Those gosh darn youths...

[PappyVanWinkle53]

> @Pepperturbo said:

> > @"Crazy About Golf" said:

> > > @Pepperturbo said:

> > > > @"Crazy About Golf" said:

> > > > > @GolfChannel said:

> > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > "Don’t even get me started on many of my fellow veterans who expect the world for their service but could care little about the needs of anyone else or what their entitlement means for the country’s well being."

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > This is a bit of a cheap shot, don't you think? How can you, in good conscience, suggest that "many of my fellow veterans" don't care about the needs of anyone else????

> > > >

> > >

> > > NOT a cheap shot but spot on regarding human nature. Fact, good motivated men (let's call them Boy Scouts) that serve our country, in any capacity, care more about serving than themselves.

> > >

> > > Wanting acknowledgment and or wanting something for themselves is not part of their motivation or life. Acknowledging service is a good thing but we don't always know what motivates a person. There are a great many veterans even active service personnel that entered the military to get something for themselves; giving was NOT their major intention. That's not to say they don't learn to give, it's to say, they didn't start with the best of intentions.

> > >

> > > In my travels, I encountered people that signed up just to get away from home and or personal problems or get an education or housing discount. Their motive had nothing to do with actually serving our country or our way of life. Some learn to give, others not so much and call it a temporary job.

> >

> > A couple things:

> > (1) You bring up some good points about not always knowing what motivates a person. And I agree with you that folks elect to serve their country for a host of reasons. But at the end of the day, in a nation full of opportunity, they CHOSE to serve; so we'd be remiss to discount that.

> >

> > (2) More to the point, this particular post by @GolfChannel is not a discussion about "human nature" or why young men and women enlist.....rather, it was about how the current generation is no more "lazy and entitled" than the previous generation.......and I believe he's correct in that assertion. However, it's a bit reckless of him to paint with such a wide brush by suggesting that "many veterans" care little for others. Not sure how that little barb added any value to the discussion. So, yes, it was definitely a cheap shot.

>

> Sorry, but human nature is not generation based but inclusive of all, so you can't take human nature out of the equation to make a position argument. Moreover, it's only a cheap shot if YOU served and took it personally. It was evident to me, he was making a generalized statement that wasn't targeting anyone, least of all on the DB. If you didn't serve than your assumption of a barb is as broad as that which you disagree with. Have a good day.

 

Where in my posts did I say human nature is generation based? If anything, I support > @GolfChannel said:

> > @"Crazy About Golf" said:

> > > @Pepperturbo said:

> > > > @"Crazy About Golf" said:

> > > > > @GolfChannel said:

> > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > "Don’t even get me started on many of my fellow veterans who expect the world for their service but could care little about the needs of anyone else or what their entitlement means for the country’s well being."

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > This is a bit of a cheap shot, don't you think? How can you, in good conscience, suggest that "many of my fellow veterans" don't care about the needs of anyone else????

> > > >

> > >

> > > NOT a cheap shot but spot on regarding human nature. Fact, good motivated men (let's call them Boy Scouts) that serve our country, in any capacity, care more about serving than themselves.

> > >

> > > Wanting acknowledgment and or wanting something for themselves is not part of their motivation or life. Acknowledging service is a good thing but we don't always know what motivates a person. There are a great many veterans even active service personnel that entered the military to get something for themselves; giving was NOT their major intention. That's not to say they don't learn to give, it's to say, they didn't start with the best of intentions.

> > >

> > > In my travels, I encountered people that signed up just to get away from home and or personal problems or get an education or housing discount. Their motive had nothing to do with actually serving our country or our way of life. Some learn to give, others not so much and call it a temporary job.

> >

> > A couple things:

> > (1) You bring up some good points about not always knowing what motivates a person. And I agree with you that folks elect to serve their country for a host of reasons. But at the end of the day, in a nation full of opportunity, they CHOSE to serve; so we'd be remiss to discount that.

> >

> > (2) More to the point, this particular post by @GolfChannel is not a discussion about "human nature" or why young men and women enlist.....rather, it was about how the current generation is no more "lazy and entitled" than the previous generation.......and I believe he's correct in that assertion. However, it's a bit reckless of him to paint with such a wide brush by suggesting that "many veterans" care little for others. Not sure how that little barb added any value to the discussion. So, yes, it was definitely a cheap shot.

>

> My Grandfather ran the VA here in Orlando before he passed away. While it is only a microcosm of all veterans, I have seen thousands upon thousands of veterans walk through those doors from my days as a volunteer when I was in Middle School to my time as a veteran myself. I also care for my Father who is a 100% disabled veteran (all of his injuries service related). Ultimately, as the other gentlemen stated above, it is a discussion of human nature and also one of entitlement. I don’t have a problem with personal self interest, but I have a problem when it’s clothed in hypocrisy even when they are adamant no hypocrisy exists. I served because it was my choice fully understanding the risk involved, and while I appreciate some of the benefits, it was ultimately my choice. So, no one, owes me anything. If the benefits were taken away tomorrow I wouldn’t notice they were even gone.

 

I guess I'm still puzzled as to why you'd take a swipe at veterans.....regardless of whether or not you and your family served. Did you have a bad experience with some while working at the VA hospital? Not trying to be difficult here.....I legitimately want to know.

[GolfChannel]

> @"Crazy About Golf" said:

> > @Pepperturbo said:

> > > @"Crazy About Golf" said:

> > > > @Pepperturbo said:

> > > > > @"Crazy About Golf" said:

> > > > > > @GolfChannel said:

> > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > "Don’t even get me started on many of my fellow veterans who expect the world for their service but could care little about the needs of anyone else or what their entitlement means for the country’s well being."

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > This is a bit of a cheap shot, don't you think? How can you, in good conscience, suggest that "many of my fellow veterans" don't care about the needs of anyone else????

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > NOT a cheap shot but spot on regarding human nature. Fact, good motivated men (let's call them Boy Scouts) that serve our country, in any capacity, care more about serving than themselves.

> > > >

> > > > Wanting acknowledgment and or wanting something for themselves is not part of their motivation or life. Acknowledging service is a good thing but we don't always know what motivates a person. There are a great many veterans even active service personnel that entered the military to get something for themselves; giving was NOT their major intention. That's not to say they don't learn to give, it's to say, they didn't start with the best of intentions.

> > > >

> > > > In my travels, I encountered people that signed up just to get away from home and or personal problems or get an education or housing discount. Their motive had nothing to do with actually serving our country or our way of life. Some learn to give, others not so much and call it a temporary job.

> > >

> > > A couple things:

> > > (1) You bring up some good points about not always knowing what motivates a person. And I agree with you that folks elect to serve their country for a host of reasons. But at the end of the day, in a nation full of opportunity, they CHOSE to serve; so we'd be remiss to discount that.

> > >

> > > (2) More to the point, this particular post by @GolfChannel is not a discussion about "human nature" or why young men and women enlist.....rather, it was about how the current generation is no more "lazy and entitled" than the previous generation.......and I believe he's correct in that assertion. However, it's a bit reckless of him to paint with such a wide brush by suggesting that "many veterans" care little for others. Not sure how that little barb added any value to the discussion. So, yes, it was definitely a cheap shot.

> >

> > Sorry, but human nature is not generation based but inclusive of all, so you can't take human nature out of the equation to make a position argument. Moreover, it's only a cheap shot if YOU served and took it personally. It was evident to me, he was making a generalized statement that wasn't targeting anyone, least of all on the DB. If you didn't serve than your assumption of a barb is as broad as that which you disagree with. Have a good day.

>

> Where in my posts did I say human nature is generation based? If anything, I support > @GolfChannel said:

> > > @"Crazy About Golf" said:

> > > > @Pepperturbo said:

> > > > > @"Crazy About Golf" said:

> > > > > > @GolfChannel said:

> > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > "Don’t even get me started on many of my fellow veterans who expect the world for their service but could care little about the needs of anyone else or what their entitlement means for the country’s well being."

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > This is a bit of a cheap shot, don't you think? How can you, in good conscience, suggest that "many of my fellow veterans" don't care about the needs of anyone else????

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > NOT a cheap shot but spot on regarding human nature. Fact, good motivated men (let's call them Boy Scouts) that serve our country, in any capacity, care more about serving than themselves.

> > > >

> > > > Wanting acknowledgment and or wanting something for themselves is not part of their motivation or life. Acknowledging service is a good thing but we don't always know what motivates a person. There are a great many veterans even active service personnel that entered the military to get something for themselves; giving was NOT their major intention. That's not to say they don't learn to give, it's to say, they didn't start with the best of intentions.

> > > >

> > > > In my travels, I encountered people that signed up just to get away from home and or personal problems or get an education or housing discount. Their motive had nothing to do with actually serving our country or our way of life. Some learn to give, others not so much and call it a temporary job.

> > >

> > > A couple things:

> > > (1) You bring up some good points about not always knowing what motivates a person. And I agree with you that folks elect to serve their country for a host of reasons. But at the end of the day, in a nation full of opportunity, they CHOSE to serve; so we'd be remiss to discount that.

> > >

> > > (2) More to the point, this particular post by @GolfChannel is not a discussion about "human nature" or why young men and women enlist.....rather, it was about how the current generation is no more "lazy and entitled" than the previous generation.......and I believe he's correct in that assertion. However, it's a bit reckless of him to paint with such a wide brush by suggesting that "many veterans" care little for others. Not sure how that little barb added any value to the discussion. So, yes, it was definitely a cheap shot.

> >

> > My Grandfather ran the VA here in Orlando before he passed away. While it is only a microcosm of all veterans, I have seen thousands upon thousands of veterans walk through those doors from my days as a volunteer when I was in Middle School to my time as a veteran myself. I also care for my Father who is a 100% disabled veteran (all of his injuries service related). Ultimately, as the other gentlemen stated above, it is a discussion of human nature and also one of entitlement. I don’t have a problem with personal self interest, but I have a problem when it’s clothed in hypocrisy even when they are adamant no hypocrisy exists. I served because it was my choice fully understanding the risk involved, and while I appreciate some of the benefits, it was ultimately my choice. So, no one, owes me anything. If the benefits were taken away tomorrow I wouldn’t notice they were even gone.

>

> I guess I'm still puzzled as to why you'd take a swipe at veterans.....regardless of whether or not you and your family served. Did you have a bad experience with some while working at the VA hospital? Not trying to be difficult here.....I legitimately want to know.

 

Yes, many bad experiences. The thing that kept me coming were those amazing men and women who signed up because of a deep sense of honor and service. I could sit around and talk to people like that all day and when I was a kid that’s all I really did when I would “volunteer”.

[Pepperturbo]

> @"Crazy About Golf" said:

> > @Pepperturbo said:

> > > @"Crazy About Golf" said:

> > > > @Pepperturbo said:

> > > > > @"Crazy About Golf" said:

> > > > > > @GolfChannel said:

> > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > "Don’t even get me started on many of my fellow veterans who expect the world for their service but could care little about the needs of anyone else or what their entitlement means for the country’s well being."

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > This is a bit of a cheap shot, don't you think? How can you, in good conscience, suggest that "many of my fellow veterans" don't care about the needs of anyone else????

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > NOT a cheap shot but spot on regarding human nature. Fact, good motivated men (let's call them Boy Scouts) that serve our country, in any capacity, care more about serving than themselves.

> > > >

> > > > Wanting acknowledgment and or wanting something for themselves is not part of their motivation or life. Acknowledging service is a good thing but we don't always know what motivates a person. There are a great many veterans even active service personnel that entered the military to get something for themselves; giving was NOT their major intention. That's not to say they don't learn to give, it's to say, they didn't start with the best of intentions.

> > > >

> > > > In my travels, I encountered people that signed up just to get away from home and or personal problems or get an education or housing discount. Their motive had nothing to do with actually serving our country or our way of life. Some learn to give, others not so much and call it a temporary job.

> > >

> > > A couple things:

> > > (1) You bring up some good points about not always knowing what motivates a person. And I agree with you that folks elect to serve their country for a host of reasons. But at the end of the day, in a nation full of opportunity, they CHOSE to serve; so we'd be remiss to discount that.

> > >

> > > (2) More to the point, this particular post by @GolfChannel is not a discussion about "human nature" or why young men and women enlist.....rather, it was about how the current generation is no more "lazy and entitled" than the previous generation.......and I believe he's correct in that assertion. However, it's a bit reckless of him to paint with such a wide brush by suggesting that "many veterans" care little for others. Not sure how that little barb added any value to the discussion. So, yes, it was definitely a cheap shot.

> >

> > Sorry, but human nature is not generation based but inclusive of all, so you can't take human nature out of the equation to make a position argument. Moreover, it's only a cheap shot if YOU served and took it personally. It was evident to me, he was making a generalized statement that wasn't targeting anyone, least of all on the DB. If you didn't serve than your assumption of a barb is as broad as that which you disagree with. Have a good day.

>

> Where in my posts did I say human nature is generation based? If anything, I support > @GolfChannel said:

> > > @"Crazy About Golf" said:

> > > > @Pepperturbo said:

> > > > > @"Crazy About Golf" said:

> > > > > > @GolfChannel said:

> > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > "Don’t even get me started on many of my fellow veterans who expect the world for their service but could care little about the needs of anyone else or what their entitlement means for the country’s well being."

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > This is a bit of a cheap shot, don't you think? How can you, in good conscience, suggest that "many of my fellow veterans" don't care about the needs of anyone else????

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > NOT a cheap shot but spot on regarding human nature. Fact, good motivated men (let's call them Boy Scouts) that serve our country, in any capacity, care more about serving than themselves.

> > > >

> > > > Wanting acknowledgment and or wanting something for themselves is not part of their motivation or life. Acknowledging service is a good thing but we don't always know what motivates a person. There are a great many veterans even active service personnel that entered the military to get something for themselves; giving was NOT their major intention. That's not to say they don't learn to give, it's to say, they didn't start with the best of intentions.

> > > >

> > > > In my travels, I encountered people that signed up just to get away from home and or personal problems or get an education or housing discount. Their motive had nothing to do with actually serving our country or our way of life. Some learn to give, others not so much and call it a temporary job.

> > >

> > > A couple things:

> > > (1) You bring up some good points about not always knowing what motivates a person. And I agree with you that folks elect to serve their country for a host of reasons. But at the end of the day, in a nation full of opportunity, they CHOSE to serve; so we'd be remiss to discount that.

> > >

> > > (2) More to the point, this particular post by @GolfChannel is not a discussion about "human nature" or why young men and women enlist.....rather, it was about how the current generation is no more "lazy and entitled" than the previous generation.......and I believe he's correct in that assertion. However, it's a bit reckless of him to paint with such a wide brush by suggesting that "many veterans" care little for others. Not sure how that little barb added any value to the discussion. So, yes, it was definitely a cheap shot.

> >

> > My Grandfather ran the VA here in Orlando before he passed away. While it is only a microcosm of all veterans, I have seen thousands upon thousands of veterans walk through those doors from my days as a volunteer when I was in Middle School to my time as a veteran myself. I also care for my Father who is a 100% disabled veteran (all of his injuries service related). Ultimately, as the other gentlemen stated above, it is a discussion of human nature and also one of entitlement. I don’t have a problem with personal self interest, but I have a problem when it’s clothed in hypocrisy even when they are adamant no hypocrisy exists. I served because it was my choice fully understanding the risk involved, and while I appreciate some of the benefits, it was ultimately my choice. So, no one, owes me anything. If the benefits were taken away tomorrow I wouldn’t notice they were even gone.

>

> I guess I'm still puzzled as to why you'd take a swipe at veterans.....regardless of whether or not you and your family served. Did you have a bad experience with some while working at the VA hospital? Not trying to be difficult here.....I legitimately want to know.

 

I read his post to question the motives of younger veterans. Meaning people from Gen Z or Millennials, or others. I've seen it in the media and on various military sites, etc. To good and honorable service members and vets hearing brothers deplore the military or superiors, or come off as entitled because they served is wrong and embarrassing, and I agree.

[GolfChannel]

> @Pepperturbo said:

> > @"Crazy About Golf" said:

> > > @Pepperturbo said:

> > > > @"Crazy About Golf" said:

> > > > > @Pepperturbo said:

> > > > > > @"Crazy About Golf" said:

> > > > > > > @GolfChannel said:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > "Don’t even get me started on many of my fellow veterans who expect the world for their service but could care little about the needs of anyone else or what their entitlement means for the country’s well being."

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > This is a bit of a cheap shot, don't you think? How can you, in good conscience, suggest that "many of my fellow veterans" don't care about the needs of anyone else????

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > NOT a cheap shot but spot on regarding human nature. Fact, good motivated men (let's call them Boy Scouts) that serve our country, in any capacity, care more about serving than themselves.

> > > > >

> > > > > Wanting acknowledgment and or wanting something for themselves is not part of their motivation or life. Acknowledging service is a good thing but we don't always know what motivates a person. There are a great many veterans even active service personnel that entered the military to get something for themselves; giving was NOT their major intention. That's not to say they don't learn to give, it's to say, they didn't start with the best of intentions.

> > > > >

> > > > > In my travels, I encountered people that signed up just to get away from home and or personal problems or get an education or housing discount. Their motive had nothing to do with actually serving our country or our way of life. Some learn to give, others not so much and call it a temporary job.

> > > >

> > > > A couple things:

> > > > (1) You bring up some good points about not always knowing what motivates a person. And I agree with you that folks elect to serve their country for a host of reasons. But at the end of the day, in a nation full of opportunity, they CHOSE to serve; so we'd be remiss to discount that.

> > > >

> > > > (2) More to the point, this particular post by @GolfChannel is not a discussion about "human nature" or why young men and women enlist.....rather, it was about how the current generation is no more "lazy and entitled" than the previous generation.......and I believe he's correct in that assertion. However, it's a bit reckless of him to paint with such a wide brush by suggesting that "many veterans" care little for others. Not sure how that little barb added any value to the discussion. So, yes, it was definitely a cheap shot.

> > >

> > > Sorry, but human nature is not generation based but inclusive of all, so you can't take human nature out of the equation to make a position argument. Moreover, it's only a cheap shot if YOU served and took it personally. It was evident to me, he was making a generalized statement that wasn't targeting anyone, least of all on the DB. If you didn't serve than your assumption of a barb is as broad as that which you disagree with. Have a good day.

> >

> > Where in my posts did I say human nature is generation based? If anything, I support > @GolfChannel said:

> > > > @"Crazy About Golf" said:

> > > > > @Pepperturbo said:

> > > > > > @"Crazy About Golf" said:

> > > > > > > @GolfChannel said:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > "Don’t even get me started on many of my fellow veterans who expect the world for their service but could care little about the needs of anyone else or what their entitlement means for the country’s well being."

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > This is a bit of a cheap shot, don't you think? How can you, in good conscience, suggest that "many of my fellow veterans" don't care about the needs of anyone else????

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > NOT a cheap shot but spot on regarding human nature. Fact, good motivated men (let's call them Boy Scouts) that serve our country, in any capacity, care more about serving than themselves.

> > > > >

> > > > > Wanting acknowledgment and or wanting something for themselves is not part of their motivation or life. Acknowledging service is a good thing but we don't always know what motivates a person. There are a great many veterans even active service personnel that entered the military to get something for themselves; giving was NOT their major intention. That's not to say they don't learn to give, it's to say, they didn't start with the best of intentions.

> > > > >

> > > > > In my travels, I encountered people that signed up just to get away from home and or personal problems or get an education or housing discount. Their motive had nothing to do with actually serving our country or our way of life. Some learn to give, others not so much and call it a temporary job.

> > > >

> > > > A couple things:

> > > > (1) You bring up some good points about not always knowing what motivates a person. And I agree with you that folks elect to serve their country for a host of reasons. But at the end of the day, in a nation full of opportunity, they CHOSE to serve; so we'd be remiss to discount that.

> > > >

> > > > (2) More to the point, this particular post by @GolfChannel is not a discussion about "human nature" or why young men and women enlist.....rather, it was about how the current generation is no more "lazy and entitled" than the previous generation.......and I believe he's correct in that assertion. However, it's a bit reckless of him to paint with such a wide brush by suggesting that "many veterans" care little for others. Not sure how that little barb added any value to the discussion. So, yes, it was definitely a cheap shot.

> > >

> > > My Grandfather ran the VA here in Orlando before he passed away. While it is only a microcosm of all veterans, I have seen thousands upon thousands of veterans walk through those doors from my days as a volunteer when I was in Middle School to my time as a veteran myself. I also care for my Father who is a 100% disabled veteran (all of his injuries service related). Ultimately, as the other gentlemen stated above, it is a discussion of human nature and also one of entitlement. I don’t have a problem with personal self interest, but I have a problem when it’s clothed in hypocrisy even when they are adamant no hypocrisy exists. I served because it was my choice fully understanding the risk involved, and while I appreciate some of the benefits, it was ultimately my choice. So, no one, owes me anything. If the benefits were taken away tomorrow I wouldn’t notice they were even gone.

> >

> > I guess I'm still puzzled as to why you'd take a swipe at veterans.....regardless of whether or not you and your family served. Did you have a bad experience with some while working at the VA hospital? Not trying to be difficult here.....I legitimately want to know.

>

> I read his post to question the motives of younger veterans. Meaning people from Gen Z or Millennials, or others. I've seen it in the media and on various military sites, etc. To good and honorable service members and vets hearing brothers deplore the military or superiors, or come off as entitled because they served is wrong and embarrassing, and I agree.

 

I meant all generations.

[BNGL]

As with any topic seemingly on here it always devolves into another issue...but in the interest of steering it back, I spoke with our club manager yesterday during our Invitational welcome dinner about this and he actually pointed me in a helpful direction with some research done by the CMAA.

 

Here’s a link.

 

https://www.cmaa.org/millennials/

[MelloYello]

> @BNGL said:

> As with any topic seemingly on here it always devolves into another issue...but in the interest of steering it back, I spoke with our club manager yesterday during our Invitational welcome dinner about this and he actually pointed me in a helpful direction with some research done by the CMAA.

>

> Here’s a link.

>

> https://www.cmaa.org/millennials/

 

Good info.

 

I would agree that finances aren't as big a hurdle as some make out. By it's nature, membership at a club is only going to appeal to someone with a chunk of disposable income. That's always been true.

 

Yes, finances certainly are worse now than ever before. We can show that wages are going down in relation to the cost of living here in the U.S. And yes, there are a lot of millennials burdened by college debt and the soaring costs of housing (particularly within major urban areas where they have to go for work). But there's also a lot of millennials in tech fields who are doing rather well financially and who are really bringing home the bacon. Now entering their mid-30s, these particular individuals whose household income is well over $100k might be apt to join a club if they can see the value in it.

 

So if you look at Millennials who are doing rather well (and plenty of them are!) you can see that they're absolutely willing to spend that extra money on _something_, but they're not just going to give it away like a Boomer would. Based on my experience, Millennials are all about practicality. Their question is predictable..._what will joining a private club do for me?_

 

For the record, that is a perfectly reasonable question. Some call that selfish. I call it practical. Whereas I see tons of Boomers looking like New Money going around town dropping large sums on outlandish stuff they clearly don't need, Millennials are more picky about when and where they commit themselves.

 

But to that end, I really don't know what joining a club will do that isn't golf related. Where I live, private clubs are mostly golf-driven.

[GolfNuts4]

I think it is a few things, time is a big factor. Taking approximately 6 hours (travel and golf) to play does not appeal to many of the younger generation. They have many other interests. Geographical location is another. Most of the younger generation I know, live in urban settings. Many don't even own a vehicle and just Uber or take public transit. Finally, many of the younger generation simply have not been exposed to golf at a young age. It's a difficult game to get interested in when you are in your 20's and 30's. It's simply a hard game and if you only "dabble" in it, the frustration usually overrides the enjoyment. You really have to commit until you find the joy in it.

[MaineMariner]

> @BNGL said:

> As with any topic seemingly on here it always devolves into another issue...but in the interest of steering it back, I spoke with our club manager yesterday during our Invitational welcome dinner about this and he actually pointed me in a helpful direction with some research done by the CMAA.

>

> Here’s a link.

>

> https://www.cmaa.org/millennials/

 

I'm not going to dispute any of the findings of this study, because I tend to agree with many of the issues raised. Especially the note about convenience to home/work being a huge issues with more younger people headed towards urban centers and not away from cities. But man is the research methodology suspect.

 

First of all, I can't help but note that they're defining Millennials as starting with a birth year of 1977, which is definitely earlier than the typical definition that I'm aware of (1981 or so). But that's not a huge difference, so whatever.

 

More importantly, their conclusions are based on a survey administered to adults ages 22 to 70 (!) who are either "currently club members or express interest in joining a membership club in the next 5 years." That's a wildly self-selecting sample. It's not clear how many of the respondents are even Millennials, and they were polling people who were already in a club or interested in joining a club. Wouldn't it be more informative to hear from the people who are NOT interested in joining a country club?

[PappyVanWinkle53]

> @MelloYello said:

> > @BNGL said:

> > As with any topic seemingly on here it always devolves into another issue...but in the interest of steering it back, I spoke with our club manager yesterday during our Invitational welcome dinner about this and he actually pointed me in a helpful direction with some research done by the CMAA.

> >

> > Here’s a link.

> >

> > https://www.cmaa.org/millennials/

>

> Good info.

>

> I would agree that finances aren't as big a hurdle as some make out. By it's nature, membership at a club is only going to appeal to someone with a chunk of disposable income. That's always been true.

>

> Yes, finances certainly are worse now than ever before. We can show that wages are going down in relation to the cost of living here in the U.S. And yes, there are a lot of millennials burdened by college debt and the soaring costs of housing (particularly within major urban areas where they have to go for work). But there's also a lot of millennials in tech fields who are doing rather well financially and who are really bringing home the bacon. Now entering their mid-30s, these particular individuals whose household income is well over $100k might be apt to join a club if they can see the value in it.

>

> So if you look at Millennials who are doing rather well (and plenty of them are!) you can see that they're absolutely willing to spend that extra money on _something_, but they're not just going to give it away like a Boomer would. Based on my experience, Millennials are all about practicality. Their question is predictable..._what will joining a private club do for me?_

>

> For the record, that is a perfectly reasonable question. Some call that selfish. I call it practical. Whereas I see tons of Boomers looking like New Money going around town dropping large sums on outlandish stuff they clearly don't need, Millennials are more picky about when and where they commit themselves.

>

> But to that end, I really don't know what joining a club will do that isn't golf related. Where I live, private clubs are mostly golf-driven.

 

Clubs will either adapt to the current environment or risk going under....just like any business. The top tier clubs, with huge waitlists and bountiful amenities, can continue to operate as they always have. As has been previously stated, it's the mid to lower tier country clubs that are really under the gun. The club my family and I joined last year after moving to VA has really adapted to the environment. What used to be a bit of a more traditional, stuffy club (from what I understand it was) has become a very reasonably priced, highly social, family friendly place for us to enjoy. It's no frills and the service isn't waiting on you hand and foot.....but it certainly is good and meets our needs. The club has a pool that's open daily and a swim team for the kids that competes against other clubs.....it is quite the social scene under the huge tented area that's adjacent to the pool. The restaurant has good food, does a ton of events throughout the year and has weekly specials. It's nestled into a neighborhood that's connected with handful of other neighborhoods, obviating the need to jump on the main road to get there....My family and I can ride our bikes there for Burger Night on Friday evenings and be there in 4-5 mins.........oh, and there's also a pretty decent golf course that I can play whenever I want! This is all to say, it's a matter of adapting to the surrounding environment. My neighborhood (and the surrounding ones) is turning over quite a bit, with tons of young families moving in....and the club has done a good job of leveraging its proximity and tailoring services to accommodate younger folks.

[MelloYello]

> @MaineMariner said:

> > @BNGL said:

> > As with any topic seemingly on here it always devolves into another issue...but in the interest of steering it back, I spoke with our club manager yesterday during our Invitational welcome dinner about this and he actually pointed me in a helpful direction with some research done by the CMAA.

> >

> > Here’s a link.

> >

> > https://www.cmaa.org/millennials/

>

> I'm not going to dispute any of the findings of this study, because I tend to agree with many of the issues raised. Especially the note about convenience to home/work being a huge issues with more younger people headed towards urban centers and not away from cities. But man is the research methodology suspect.

>

> First of all, I can't help but note that they're defining Millennials as starting with a birth year of 1977, which is definitely earlier than the typical definition that I'm aware of (1981 or so). But that's not a huge difference, so whatever.

>

> More importantly, their conclusions are based on a survey administered to adults ages 22 to 70 (!) who are either "currently club members or express interest in joining a membership club in the next 5 years." That's a wildly self-selecting sample. It's not clear how many of the respondents are even Millennials, and they were polling people who were already in a club or interested in joining a club. Wouldn't it be more informative to hear from the people who are NOT interested in joining a country club?

 

I see where you're going but that study seemed to be directed to folks who run private clubs. The goal of those folks is not to try and convince the general Millennial to give golf a go. That's what driving ranges and Par-3 courses are for. And yes, golf will be hit hard if it loses those!

 

The goal of the private club is to serve the Millennial (along with his/her family) who feels obliged to commit themselves to paying a premium price for a more elite experience.

 

Any club that's trying to attract non-golfers from the general public is stepping way out on a limb trying to do way more than they have to. That's a quick way to go belly up I would think.

 

Again, the concern is about a person like me who's 33 and who plays golf. How do private clubs market themselves to people in my demographic (compared with say retirees or working Boomers who play golf).

 

I'm not sure how exactly a private club could market itself towards guys like me. I'm really not special, LOL.

 

But certainly upgrading and modernizing is going to be necessary given the future. Everyone who plays golf is going to love having an in-house simulator. For some, they want good coffee, a nice bar and a place to work for a few hours in between putting sessions or before a round of golf.

 

The future is people doing 5-hours of work a day on a laptop from some random place they choose. I already have friends who drink Scotch as they work. Things are getting more a more relaxed and flexible. Employees hate cubicles and companies hate the overhead. So it's quickly evolving.

 

A private club can certainly fit into that future. A lot of people work in coffee shops to get out of their apartments. Why wouldn't a golfer head to the club instead?

[shoot4par]

My one friend works in software sales. He has that type of flexibility and we had the opportunity to have a few cocktails while he did work from home. It must be nice, in my business thats not an option. A club I was looking to join was updating the club to include indoor simulators in its capital improvements assessment. I think i'll wait till I see the quality of said facilities before I make moves towards it as a viable option. Hoping it'll be flight scope and decent amenities not just a money grabbing ploy.

[duffer987]

> @MelloYello said:

> > @MaineMariner said:

> > > @BNGL said:

> > > As with any topic seemingly on here it always devolves into another issue...but in the interest of steering it back, I spoke with our club manager yesterday during our Invitational welcome dinner about this and he actually pointed me in a helpful direction with some research done by the CMAA.

> > >

> > > Here’s a link.

> > >

> > > https://www.cmaa.org/millennials/

> >

> > I'm not going to dispute any of the findings of this study, because I tend to agree with many of the issues raised. Especially the note about convenience to home/work being a huge issues with more younger people headed towards urban centers and not away from cities. But man is the research methodology suspect.

> >

> > First of all, I can't help but note that they're defining Millennials as starting with a birth year of 1977, which is definitely earlier than the typical definition that I'm aware of (1981 or so). But that's not a huge difference, so whatever.

> >

> > More importantly, their conclusions are based on a survey administered to adults ages 22 to 70 (!) who are either "currently club members or express interest in joining a membership club in the next 5 years." That's a wildly self-selecting sample. It's not clear how many of the respondents are even Millennials, and they were polling people who were already in a club or interested in joining a club. Wouldn't it be more informative to hear from the people who are NOT interested in joining a country club?

>

> I see where you're going but that study seemed to be directed to folks who run private clubs. The goal of those folks is not to try and convince the general Millennial to give golf a go. That's what driving ranges and Par-3 courses are for. And yes, golf will be hit hard if it loses those!

>

> The goal of the private club is to serve the Millennial (along with his/her family) who feels obliged to commit themselves to paying a premium price for a more elite experience.

>

> Any club that's trying to attract non-golfers from the general public is stepping way out on a limb trying to do way more than they have to. That's a quick way to go belly up I would think.

>

> Again, the concern is about a person like me who's 33 and who plays golf. How do private clubs market themselves to people in my demographic (compared with say retirees or working Boomers who play golf).

>

> I'm not sure how exactly a private club could market itself towards guys like me. I'm really not special, LOL.

>

> But certainly upgrading and modernizing is going to be necessary given the future. Everyone who plays golf is going to love having an in-house simulator. For some, they want good coffee, a nice bar and a place to work for a few hours in between putting sessions or before a round of golf.

>

> The future is people doing 5-hours of work a day on a laptop from some random place they choose. I already have friends who drink Scotch as they work. Things are getting more a more relaxed and flexible. Employees hate cubicles and companies hate the overhead. So it's quickly evolving.

>

> A private club can certainly fit into that future. A lot of people work in coffee shops to get out of their apartments. Why wouldn't a golfer head to the club instead?

 

So you think private clubs setting up hot desks and other things you might expect to find in a 'modern office' or in an executive lounge at the airport might be something to try? Genuine question - no passive aggressive poo-pooing.

I'm a leave work behind guy where golf is concerned, but I can see where for customer-facing folks, if they had a space to take a 30min meeting, it could be seen as a good thing.

[shoot4par]

> @duffer987 said:

> So you think private clubs setting up hot desks and other things you might expect to find in a 'modern office' or in an executive lounge at the airport might be something to try? Genuine question - no passive aggressive poo-pooing.

> I'm a leave work behind guy where golf is concerned, but I can see where for customer-facing folks, if they had a space to take a 30min meeting, it could be seen as a good thing.

 

I think it was more a suggestion than something that was necessary for implementation. With hotspots, wifi devices, laptops and smartphones you can make your office anywhere in some situations. That being said it wouldn't be a bad thing if clubs could brew a good cup or latte in a more traditional way ie. no barista, coffee bar... just thru the kitchen. Some clubs have private rooms for use.

[RobotDoctor]

> @stlouismark said:

> The article is a little light on hard data, but delivers some sobering analysis of the state of golf and of golf clubs.

>

> https://www.city-journal.org/country-clubs

>

> From the article:

>

> “The Great Recession changed the club’s fortunes. As the Wall Street Journal recently reported, Americans born between 1981 and 1996 are financially outmatched by every generation since the Depression. Despite higher levels of education, millennials have “less wealth, less property, lower marriage rates, and fewer children.” Annual country club dues, which run in the thousands of dollars, put membership beyond practical reach for many. Leisure for today’s younger adults more often involves streaming TV shows in a high-rent city bedroom, not playing 18 holes on a suburban green.”

>

 

When I was in the age group of the millennials mentioned in this article I did not have the financial means of joining a country club. Certainly NOT when I was between 18 and 30/32. I don't think this is any different today then it was in the 80s, 90s or 2000s. I do agree the costs of many things have increased. Then again, minimum wage back in my day was around $3.00/hour. I certainly could not afford a home or apartment on that wage just like people cannot today. That's a discussion for another thread. Maybe this may be the same even further back. I started playing golf at 21 and played a lot during my early years. I played public courses. Back in the 80s there wasn't as many indoor activities as there are today but make no mistake there was Atari, Bally and Nintendo had just come out. If I wanted to stay indoors I could have. I chose to be outside and I chose to play golf at public courses.

 

> @dubbelbogey said:

> I've never been a one to join a club. I played competitive tennis and have had plenty of options and probably good reason to join a tennis club - never did it.

>

> The quality of muni / public golf here in Colorado is very high, and the variety is a huge part of the fun. I'm pretty certain that my game and scoring "travels" decently, since I'm almost always "traveling". About a third of my rounds rotate between the 4 or 5 courses closest to me, and the remaining 2/3rds are courses I play maybe once a year.

>

> I have no interest, whatsoever, in clubhouse amenities like swimming, gym or dining. I live in a place where we have so many good places to eat, the though of being tethered to a place where I have to spend a minimum each month seems ridiculous for my lifestyle.

>

> Sure, I'd like to play some of these private courses if given a chance, but as a golfer, I'm not really missing out on all that much.

>

 

I definitely agree here. The quality of public courses in Colorado is excellent. From Northern Colorado to Southern Colorado there are many excellent courses and some at terrific rates.

 

What stops me from joining a private club today is:

 

1) The ease of accessing terrific public courses when I want or can play.

 

2) Being strapped into playing one course when there are many excellent courses to play. I like the variety of courses, even though I play most of my rounds at Collindale Golf Club in Fort Collins.

 

3) I wouldn't use most of the amenities of a country club so there would be a waste there. Also, I do not want to have restaurant minimums attached to my membership.

[max1]

The traditional private clubs will remain as they've been, as long as there are people who love playing and love to be privileged.

[North Butte]

> @RobotDoctor said:

>

> > @dubbelbogey said:

> > I've never been a one to join a club. I played competitive tennis and have had plenty of options and probably good reason to join a tennis club - never did it.

> >

> > The quality of muni / public golf here in Colorado is very high, and the variety is a huge part of the fun. I'm pretty certain that my game and scoring "travels" decently, since I'm almost always "traveling". About a third of my rounds rotate between the 4 or 5 courses closest to me, and the remaining 2/3rds are courses I play maybe once a year.

> >

>

> I definitely agree here. The quality of public courses in Colorado is excellent. From Northern Colorado to Southern Colorado there are many excellent courses and some at terrific rates.

>

> What stops me from joining a private club today is:

>

> 1) The ease of accessing terrific public courses when I want or can play.

 

Do you ride in a cart or do the decent public courses in Colorado allow you to walk?

 

In my area, walking to play golf is reserved for either members of private clubs or those playing $20-$30/round low-end munis. The desirable public courses all require use of carts (and not just *paying* for carts, actually riding in them).

[dubbelbogey]

Most public courses here in CO allow you to walk. Sure, there's some that don't but I'd say those are in the minority. And yes, that proportion decreases as you get into the higher range courses (and certainly less so up in the mountains), but my feeling is that there are some really nice courses here that are walkable.