Golf is Exclusive? An iPhone costs more than most sets of clubs and a bucket of balls is less than a movie.

[soregongolfer]

Obviously I need to move.  My clubs cost way more than an I-Phone and a movie ticket costs less than a large bucket.  $40 gets you 18 and a cart at one goat track in town, otherwise you're going cartless here with $40.

[rafal]

Side note, this just occurred to me reading thru the responses, you know what's really exclusive(j/k), expensive and time consuming?  Having kids.  If not for kids, finding money and time for golf wouldn't be an issue. 

 

🤔

Edited October 3, 2020 by rafal

[NoTimeToDie]

10 hours ago, oikos1 said:

Not sure where you're going with this OP.  It reads like "golf isn't an exclusive sport" so I can feel good about __________(insert emotion).

 

Golf is absolutely exclusive/privileged.  The economic numbers and cultural demographics clearly identify this.  There's really no argument that it isn't.  Some are able to break through the barriers, but just look at the numbers.  The average golfer household income is $100,980, more than 200% greater than non golfers.  https://www.benchcraftcompany.com/demographics/

 

It's a combination of time and money (and in certain instances who you know), and even at it's least expensive levels ($200 for used clubs, $100 month membership, peripheral club and equipment costs, access to courses and finding at least ten hours a week to devote to the game), that is a mountain of discretionary time and income that many do not have.

 

Embrace your blessings.  I'm off to do that right now...

I don't know who the source of that site are, but they are not using any bone fide stats, the census says the average Median household income was $68,700 in 2019, so more than 200% greater is just wrong, as that would be more than 3 times higher i.e. it would have to be less than $33,000 even if the golf figure 100k is correct and the Median not the mean. So it looks like the average Median household is about 70K and the golf Median not the Mean would be about the same or maybe 10-20k higher, 20% max, not 3 times or more than 200%. Lies damn lies and statistics from bad sources 🙂 The difference looks like it's within a statistical margin of error and the two may be almost the same if you take out households below the poverty line who don't do any sports much and certainly can't afford iPhones and movies.

 

https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2020/income-poverty.html

[freowho]

18 hours ago, NoTimeToDie said:

I obviously grew up in a little different place / era, my 2 local courses only rules 35 years ago were a shirt with sleeves, no collar necessary 🙂 and no bare feet or flip flops. How much is a collared shirt now days, 5 dollars at K-Mart? My local range still allows any dress as long as it's neat and one down the road allows pretty much anything other than naked 🙂 The local Starbucks is far more exclusive IMHO.

It's not the cost of the shirt. It's the snobiness. Golfers are always depicted as snobs in movies and news articles and the wife is always cheating with the pro. The general public don't think much of the golfing community and the facilities can only blame themselves. In Australia there are a couple of stories every year where the mayor talks about closing a public course and giving the open space back to the communiy even though the course is profitable. Because golfers aren't considered part of the community. The PGA tour could help with this. Show some clinics of pros dressed like normal people given a clinic to kids or beginners dressed like normal people. At least let the pros wear shorts on tour. They mostly play in summer. I'm not against a private club wanting their own dress standards but more needs to be done by the golfing bodies to show that golf is a game for everyone.

I like the rules your local clubs have.

[James the Hogan Fan]

9 hours ago, Bluefan75 said:

 

Try starting playing hockey in Canada as an adult.  After you buy the equipment(which is comparable to golf equipment if not more), you need to either a)find a league that will allow beginners, or b) find a hockey school for adults.  If you don't know someone who has ice time, you can have a hell of a time getting chances. If you grew up playing, no problem, all the guys know buddies who know buddies.  Not to mention, almost all the rinks reserve most of the time for minor hockey.  So you better be ready to play at 10 pm or later(which can really screw up the next day if you have to work normal hours because you aren't falling asleep until 1 am at best).  Or you can play at 6 or 7 am on weekends. 

 

So you can be like some people who think you should whine and cry until they make it easier, or you suck it up and do it, or you find something else to do.  These aren't charities.

 

I don't follow. Golf is not exclusive because it isn't as exclusive as hockey? 

 

"So you can be like some people who think you should whine and cry until they make it easier, or you suck it up and do it, or you find something else to do.  These aren't charities."

 

So to anyone who thinks golf is exclusive... it is, deal with it? Next you'll tell me "Augusta National isn't exclusive, you just aren't in the proper socioeconomic strata to be considered for membership. They aren't a charity you know" 

[FlyingAce]

A local public course was sold a few years ago. New owners want to make it “exclusive”. They raised the greens fee, no twilight/senior/birthday deals. Eventually it will become a private club.  People are pissed because they don’t want to pay for it  and said the new owners should lower the price so more people can play.

Local muni are packed to capacity, even private clubs in the area are so busy it is impossible to get weekend/morning tee times. The “private club” I used to belong to cost only $250/month for unlimited golf on a 27-hole course. I played at least 20 rounds a month - it is cheaper to be a member than to play at a muni course.  But I left because it was getting too crowded and became a member of this exclusive course. I really don’t mind paying more just so I don’t have to stress about getting a tee time to play. It cost alot more than an iphone (maybe 10 iphone 11 pro max)...But there are plenty of options around town to play golf at any budget - muni are $30, resort are $60-$80. 

To me, golf is not exclusive if you are willing to spend the money and time, but it is to those who would rather spend their money and time elsewhere.

Edited October 3, 2020 by FlyingAce

[Soloman1]

At least my battery doesn't wear down when I don't buy the latest version of clubs . . .

Edited October 3, 2020 by Soloman1

[NoTimeToDie]

3 hours ago, Soloman1 said:

At least my battery doesn't wear down when I don't buy the latest version of clubs . . .

Yeah up to this year I still played my 15 year old R7 irons and RAC wedges, I did get an "exclusive" / expensive replacement this year, I figured 1000 for a full new set of P790's irons (only play AW-5I, kept old hybrids and woods) was OK if I divided by 15 years that was just $65 a year 🙂The last iPhone I bought, the phone over heated when my daughter kept playing Pokemon on it and it warped and screen broke away from the insides, that was only 700 but it only lasted 2 years.

Edited October 3, 2020 by NoTimeToDie

[BlackDiamondPar5]

8 hours ago, Hawkeye77 said:

Played 18 at a 9 hole course in the area I don't normally play this afternoon/evening - $26.  Nobody there, balmy 55 degrees and sunny, greens had been punched but rolled fine and the course was in good shape.

 

 

Sounds exclusive 🙂

[Sean2]

12 hours ago, Admhowarth said:

Really enjoying this thread.

 

If you look at population density, it tends to be on the coasts (some would argue that is changing). If you have high population density, you often have high land scarcity. That (generally speaking) would make golf more expensive the closer to the coast you get given the scarce (and expensive land). As you move inland, there are fewer people and more space. This would (generally speaking) make the cost of golf (tee times) less expensive. 

 

We moved from a coastal state, where public golf was difficult to access and could be expensive to an inland state where public golf is easy to access and has options from very affordable (sub 20 bucks) to expensive (north of 100 bucks).

 

 

Yes, these days the majority of the population sure is dense, lol. 

[Sean2]

5 hours ago, freowho said:

It's not the cost of the shirt. It's the snobiness. Golfers are always depicted as snobs in movies and news articles and the wife is always cheating with the pro. The general public don't think much of the golfing community and the facilities can only blame themselves. In Australia there are a couple of stories every year where the mayor talks about closing a public course and giving the open space back to the communiy even though the course is profitable. Because golfers aren't considered part of the community. The PGA tour could help with this. Show some clinics of pros dressed like normal people given a clinic to kids or beginners dressed like normal people. At least let the pros wear shorts on tour. They mostly play in summer. I'm not against a private club wanting their own dress standards but more needs to be done by the golfing bodies to show that golf is a game for everyone.

I like the rules your local clubs have.

Not to mention the economics of golf. For example, here in Massachusetts golf brings in over $2 billion annually and employs 1000's of people. 

[oikos1]

11 hours ago, NoTimeToDie said:

I don't know who the source of that site are, but they are not using any bone fide stats, the census says the average Median household income was $68,700 in 2019, so more than 200% greater is just wrong, as that would be more than 3 times higher i.e. it would have to be less than $33,000 even if the golf figure 100k is correct and the Median not the mean. So it looks like the average Median household is about 70K and the golf Median not the Mean would be about the same or maybe 10-20k higher, 20% max, not 3 times or more than 200%. Lies damn lies and statistics from bad sources 🙂 The difference looks like it's within a statistical margin of error and the two may be almost the same if you take out households below the poverty line who don't do any sports much and certainly can't afford iPhones and movies.

 

https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2020/income-poverty.html

 

The comparison was golfer income to non-golfer, not the total U.S. census mean income as you indicate.  If you look at the site, they show $100,000 for golfers, $50,000 for non-golfers income.  200% of 50,000 is 100,000.  The site also notes average net worth of golfers at $758,400.

 

We can argue stats until there are no more stats.  It doesn't matter.  What's more fascinating is the denial that golf as a whole isn't exclusive. 

 

I mean, straight out disingenuous denial.  Seems to be a thing these days...

[clinkinfo]

8 hours ago, freowho said:

It's not the cost of the shirt. It's the snobiness. Golfers are always depicted as snobs in movies and news articles and the wife is always cheating with the pro. The general public don't think much of the golfing community and the facilities can only blame themselves. In Australia there are a couple of stories every year where the mayor talks about closing a public course and giving the open space back to the communiy even though the course is profitable. Because golfers aren't considered part of the community. The PGA tour could help with this. Show some clinics of pros dressed like normal people given a clinic to kids or beginners dressed like normal people. At least let the pros wear shorts on tour. They mostly play in summer. I'm not against a private club wanting their own dress standards but more needs to be done by the golfing bodies to show that golf is a game for everyone.

I like the rules your local clubs have.

 

what? Golfers are portrayed badly in the media? ok...?

 

Almost 25 million people play golf in the US alone.  
 

for reference about 9.2 million ski/snowboard

 

45 million ride Bikes regularly
 

I don’t know that I understand what the intended point of this whole conversation is

 

 

 

[clinkinfo]

13 minutes ago, oikos1 said:

 

The comparison was golfer income to non-golfer, not the total U.S. census mean income as you indicate.  If you look at the site, they show $100,000 for golfers, $50,000 for non-golfers income.  200% of 50,000 is 100,000.  The site also notes average net worth of golfers at $758,400.

 

We can argue stats until there are no more stats.  It doesn't matter.  What's more fascinating is the denial that golf as a whole isn't exclusive. 

 

I mean, straight out disingenuous denial.  Seems to be a thing these days...

 

But in the end, everything is relative.  Based on numbers, skiing is MORE exclusive than golf.  
 

And golf’s exclusivity definitely depends on the part of the country you live in IMO.   In large metro areas where land is expensive, golf is expensive.  In large resort destinations golf is expensive.  Being expensive makes something exclusive and skews some of those statistics you’re pointing at.  For example, $100,000/year is a lot of money in some parts of the country., But try living in NYC Or San Francisco or LA on that and you’ll find it’s pretty light.  It would be highly unlikely to be a member at one of the mid or upper level clubs in those areas with that income.
 

I see rates published in Arizona on the Troon website that I would DIE to have.  But I don’t live in Arizona and we don’t get those same rates here.

 

so I feel like this conversation is totally flawed because it’s got to be a region by region discussion and conclusion.

[BlackDiamondPar5]

20 minutes ago, clinkinfo said:

 

But in the end, everything is relative.  Based on numbers, skiing is MORE exclusive than golf.  
 

And golf’s exclusivity definitely depends on the part of the country you live in IMO.   In large metro areas where land is expensive, golf is expensive.  In large resort destinations golf is expensive.  Being expensive makes something exclusive and skews some of those statistics you’re pointing at.  For example, $100,000/year is a lot of money in some parts of the country., But try living in NYC Or San Francisco or LA on that and you’ll find it’s pretty light.  It would be highly unlikely to be a member at one of the mid or upper level clubs in those areas with that income.
 

I see rates published in Arizona on the Troon website that I would DIE to have.  But I don’t live in Arizona and we don’t get those same rates here.

 

so I feel like this conversation is totally flawed because it’s got to be a region by region discussion and conclusion.

Yes it regional and many here on wrx inly think major metros where it can be expensive. In my experience golf pricing in NY, Pa, Mi, and Ontario Canada is fairly low cost. Public course rounds can generally be in the $35-$60 range or less with a cart in peak season. Get close to the major metros in those states/province and the pricing can rise dramatically. 

 

When you think about entertainment costs per hour it can be less expensive than going to a movie and most other  activities where there's an admission fee. 

 

[clinkinfo]

1 hour ago, BlackDiamondPar5 said:

Yes it regional and many here on wrx inly think major metros where it can be expensive. In my experience golf pricing in NY, Pa, Mi, and Ontario Canada is fairly low cost. Public course rounds can generally be in the $35-$60 range or less with a cart in peak season. Get close to the major metros in those states/province and the pricing can rise dramatically. 

 

When you think about entertainment costs per hour it can be less expensive than going to a movie and most other  activities where there's an admission fee. 

 

 

I find 2 specific areas are expensive.  Generally areas around metropolitan centers (like Washington DC, NY, Philly, LA, San Fran, etc AND many destination vacation areas big and small like Orlando, Hawaii, Hilton Head, Turning stone, Nemacolin,  etc.  The ingredients for expensive are land cost, labor costs, Median income of the area, and opportunity costs (What the land could be used for otherwise so they can still be profitable).  I assume those ingredients also drive vacation area pricing as well, although they sometimes feel more greedy since you’re captive and they don’t necessarily have all those elemental pricing pressures.
 

For example, the local club here is very expensive for what it is because if the land was sub-divided for housing it would generate a significant developer profit.  If it’s not profitable as a golf club, economic drive would remove the club and put houses in.

 

I’m not sure the “per hour” entertainment price is a reasonable way to measure cost,  since you are forced to commit to a 4-5 hour increment.  It’s like skiing, if you look at it per hour the crazy lift ticket prices seem “Reasonable”, even less than golf in places.  But I don’t think anyone would say skiing is cheap because of the “per hour” accounting.  

 

Vacation rates even vary wildly by region, but these would generally be considered “expensive” in each of these areas:

 

Hawaii - The Plantation Course
Greens Fee with Shared Cart Fee:
Standard/Resort Rate - $329 + tax

 

vegas - wolf creek

March 2 - May 3, 2020
Rack $230 / Twilight $155*

 

orlando - The Ritz-Carlton Golf Club

between $100 and $200 - no published rate sheet

 

Pebble - 

$575 + $45 pp cart fee
Caddie Fee	$95 per bag	$95 per bag
Single Caddie Fee	$145	$145
Forecaddie	$47.50 pp/3 player min	$47.50 pp/3 player min

Turning stone (Ny) - 

Public Guests

$225

 

tpc Myrtle beach

$80-$100 *cant find a rate sheet

 

 

Edited October 3, 2020 by clinkinfo

[clinkinfo]

19 hours ago, Soloman1 said:

No! Please do not pack up and move to Phoenix. Stay away! There's dragons and coyotes and no more tee times or room on the highways for you. Everything is full. Move to somewhere else, PLEASE!

 

Local muni for $27? Y'all must live in the sticks. Sheesh. It's $100 for a dumpy, burned out goat ranch of a golf course... 😠

 

 

are you implying that golf is expensive in Phoenix? 
 

that’s one of my favorite places to visit, I’ve historically found quite the opposite.  

[Soloman1]

$150 to $250 for morning tee times before 100+F heat seems a little expensive to me.

[Sean2]

1 minute ago, Soloman1 said:

$150 to $250 for morning tee times before 100+F heat seems a little expensive to me.

If that was the norm, I would think there would be a lot fewer golfers out there, including me. 

[Soloman1]

It's the beginning of the "season" here, so the prices are getting up there, even though it's still over 100F every day. It's less in the summer, but the heat is brutal. You need to be inside after about 10:30 am.

 

And one in four in Scottsdale are millionaires. The airport has 500+ private flights per day (no airlines). Might be the only Costco with rows of Bentley, Lamborghinis and Ferraris parked in front.

[howaboutme]

Most of my thoughts have been covered but I will respond to the original OP post and say that (although anecdotal) I tend to believe most people that "buy" an Iphone do not buy it outright or unlocked. Therefore the cost of the phone is spread out (2 years typically?). If you finance your golf, maybe the argument is relevant but otherwise it is not fair to compare.

[golfortennis]

15 hours ago, James the Hogan Fan said:

 

I don't follow. Golf is not exclusive because it isn't as exclusive as hockey? 

 

"So you can be like some people who think you should whine and cry until they make it easier, or you suck it up and do it, or you find something else to do.  These aren't charities."

 

So to anyone who thinks golf is exclusive... it is, deal with it? Next you'll tell me "Augusta National isn't exclusive, you just aren't in the proper socioeconomic strata to be considered for membership. They aren't a charity you know" 

 

I'm saying that someone would think hockey is quite easy to play in Canada, but it's quite exclusive frankly.  Choices are simple. 

 

Again, what is the solution?  "Make things cheaper."  Ok, you work at a course, right?  Do your part and tell your boss you will work for half your pay.  After all, you are wanting to "make golf less exclusive." 

 

Like I've said already, the people who complain about golf being "exclusive" really mean "I hate that I can't play Augusta National while some of these people can."  Which you just proved again.  There was an article in Golf Digest's Apple News feed a couple of days ago about sand golf courses for pete's sake.  People can play golf.  But that isn't what they really mean.  They just want to be able to play what they see on TV. 

 

Sorry that life doesn't work that way.

[NoTimeToDie]

12 hours ago, oikos1 said:

 

The comparison was golfer income to non-golfer, not the total U.S. census mean income as you indicate.  If you look at the site, they show $100,000 for golfers, $50,000 for non-golfers income.  200% of 50,000 is 100,000.  The site also notes average net worth of golfers at $758,400.

 

We can argue stats until there are no more stats.  It doesn't matter.  What's more fascinating is the denial that golf as a whole isn't exclusive. 

 

I mean, straight out disingenuous denial.  Seems to be a thing these days...

Others are "lying or denying" is pretty strong stuff, just try to take a chill pill and see others aren't the rich evil to be opposed, we're all just ordinary people playing golf.

 

It's not intentional, but you just have bad maths 🙂 

 

"more than 200% greater"

If it was 50% greater it would be 1.5 times as much, if it was 100% greater it would 2 times as much, if it was 200% greater it would 3 times as much and so more than 200% greater is more than 3 times as much so 33k vs 100k. So 70k average vs probably less than 100k for golfers is not more than 200% greater it is maybe 20-30% greater if that, or ten times less than the excess you quoted.

As for the data, the US Census is clearly more reliable.

 

 

Edited October 4, 2020 by NoTimeToDie

[NoTimeToDie]

Maybe I'm old fashioned and generally a proud, self reliant person who optimistically sees the sport I play as not excluding me when I can only find $20 a week to play and that's all I spend on entertainment a week in my whole life, no holidays etc for years. But I hope others can find a way to enjoy this sport and have something in their life that doesn't make them feel excluded. I'm sure golf doesn't need to be seen that way and I'd hate others to miss out on something that is a good life time hobby for those that choose it. 

 

I worry that many are excluded because of the bigotry against golf, not because golf is exclusive.

[Titleist_PT23]

Its kind of funny if you read this thread (pro exclusive points) and the thread about the modern, casual approach to golf.

[NoTimeToDie]

8 minutes ago, agolf1 said:

Its kind of funny if you read this thread (pro exclusive points) and the thread about the modern, casual approach to golf.

Yes I agree, casual is a great way to look at golf, even in schools they could easily put in a synthetic putt green, I suppose giving out the putters would make the staff worry about hitting each other, but hockey (field and ice) and a lot of other sports have the same issue with sticks.

[blueonblack]

Golf is going to become more elite if public access courses go away. If you are interested in something, generally there is a way to figure out how to participate. Especially in my lifetime, when access boomed. But things seem to be regressing now, and becoming a little more exclusive. Even ways that you have to book a tee time in this "new normal" requires online access, credit cards, on and on.

 

So not all "change" is good, and the public access daily fee golfer always has to be a steward of their course to insure it sticks around and take interest in it. Cool new clubs do us no good if there is no where left to affordably go use them. Land is at an absolute premium in many markets, and golf courses are most certainly on the development radar. They comprise huge parcels of remaining available land. So take care of your course!

[NoTimeToDie]

10 minutes ago, blueonblack said:

Golf is going to become more elite if public access courses go away. If you are interested in something, generally there is a way to figure out how to participate. Especially in my lifetime, when access boomed. But things seem to be regressing now, and becoming a little more exclusive. Even ways that you have to book a tee time in this "new normal" requires online access, credit cards, on and on.

 

So not all "change" is good, and the public access daily fee golfer always has to be a steward of their course to insure it sticks around and take interest in it. Cool new clubs do us no good if there is no where left to affordably go use them. Land is at an absolute premium in many markets, and golf courses are most certainly on the development radar. They comprise huge parcels of remaining available land. So take care of your course!

Our local public course was abandoned for years and recently the Council made a decision not to make it public park because it was just costing them too much to maintain what is essentially flood land. So they gave a free 20 year lease to new management who now have the $450 a year five day or $600 seven day unlimited golf memberships. At least the Council doesn't have to pay for land maintenance no one used it as public walking area anyway, there was a whole bunch of other parks around and it was overgrown and dangerous.

 

I agree in general that Covid may have made us all a little edgy in the way we look at the world, even Golf might seem to be more restricted and therefore excluded. It's a very good point.

[blueonblack]

6 minutes ago, NoTimeToDie said:

Our local public course was abandoned for years and recently the Council made a decision not to make it public park because it was just costing them too much to maintain what is essentially flood land. So they gave a free 20 year lease to new management who now have the $450 a year five day or $600 seven day unlimited golf memberships. At least the Council doesn't have to pay for land maintenance no one used it as public walking area anyway, there was a whole bunch of other parks around and it was overgrown and dangerous.

 

I agree in general that Covid may have made us all a little edgy in the way we look at the world, even Golf might seem to be more restricted and therefore excluded. It's a very good point.

I've been watching the commercial and residential real estate for a long time. Our market, the average small private course's land-locked acres represent some of the largest parcels presently being sold off. The developers just DROOL. The Parks systems in most cities are little more than a front for their often massive real estate holdings and letting the land appreciate further for now. They're sitting on gold all over the place.

 

They've made improvements often at public facilities, of course using taxpayer dollars. So they claim they lose money in operations, but the land value skyrockets meanwhile. They sell off at the right price, whatever that is.

Edited October 4, 2020 by blueonblack

[Lincoln_Arcadia]

On 10/2/2020 at 2:25 AM, NoTimeToDie said:

Calling Golf exclusive is just rubbish. An iPhone costs more than most sets of clubs and a bucket of balls is less than a movie in most places.

 

The truth is Golf is hard and not about natural athletic ability as much as most sports. I don't want it changed, do you?

 

Some truth to this. It’s like many other activities, it can be exclusive or more for us common folk.

 

There are plenty of places where an evening out for a couple costs more than all you listed combined.