Flashy vs more anonymous instructors

[WAGolf82]

5 hdcp here, down from 15 3 years ago. Most of that improvement has been thru online coaching (ie assess your swing, get tailored drills), but with the world open again, I'd like to go back to an in person or blended approach, as I find that it's tougher to iterate and get all my questions answered when purely online, and frankly it feels like I'm plateauing a bit with the instruction.

 

Most of my online stuff has been decently pricey (ie 300-500 a month type stuff) with well reputed online people. But I'm starting to question whether many of them are as great at instructing as their ig and youtube channels have you believe. I could imagine that many have good ig feeds with ostensibly sensible drills that make you think they are good at coaching and help raise their rates, but ultimately aren't the guaranteed greatest coaches.

 

So I'm now experimenting with a less well known instructor who works at a muni driving range and who won state championships and has coached juniors successfully into d1 programs, and is a good deal cheaper.

 

For those that continued to improve beyond a 5 index and worked with coaches-did you find yourself relying solely on the pricier folks with big reputations, or did you also find good success with the less well known instructors?

Edited September 14, 2023 by WAGolf82

[doctor220]

When you say less well known, do you means in terms of YouTube/social media or local world of mouth ? People that coach state champs, D1 players etc become pretty well known locally imo but sure they may not have big social media presences. 
 

conversely you can have people who have massive social media followings but can’t teach super well.

 

 

[baudi]

 

Flashy vs anonymous ... 🤔

Your question reminds me of a practical joke by Steve O. He's going to buy a new computer with a friend to allow him a discount.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/ulXuSJtUhek

  

[MPStrat]

9 hours ago, WAGolf82 said:

But I'm starting to question whether many of them are as great at instructing as their ig and youtube channels have you believe. I could imagine that many have good ig feeds with ostensibly sensible drills that make you think they are good at coaching and help raise their rates, but ultimately aren't the guaranteed greatest coaches.

Great observation. This is extremely hard for most regular golfers to navigate. Big following on the internet generally means great marketing and/or great personality. Some combination of the two. Teaching ability and true knowledge is a separate thing and less important when it comes to popularity. Even top teacher lists like golf digest and and golf magazine are highly political and have almost nothing to do with actual student results. Joe Mayo has asked repeatedly to not be listed on them because they are so silly. 

Many of the best teachers in the country rarely get mentioned in this forum. It’s generally the ones who are heavy on the personality and/or marketing that are continually referenced. AMG is able to charge $6000 for a 2 and a half day golf school because they are genius marketers. There isn’t a golf teacher on the planet worth that amount of money. But they are if unknowing golfers will pay it. 

 

[Darom87]

Some MORAD influence if inquiring minds want to know... 

 

Alex Moore - can find on Skillest. 

Kevin Ralbovsky - great youtube channel and located in Honolulu.

Mike McNary - local muni in southern CA.

John Dochety - great youtube information and located in TN.  Coaches a small NAIA university locally.  

[MelloYello]

When I was a 5-index I worked with an instructor in Atlanta at a private club where I was a member and it really helped. It was one of the first big things that really got me started on getting consistently better.

 

It helped take me from hitting 50% GIR on my best day to hitting 60% on average in the years following. The lessons really made me aware of some of the kinks in my swing and things I should be thinking about fixing long-term. 

 

There were several great things about the instructor:

 

- Pricing was fair (~$100/hr) and further discounted for members of the club

- Lesson topics were more/less decided upon by the student

- Teaching could be as technical (or simple) as desired based on the student's preference

- Online Booking (super convenient!)

- Great Environment (Private hitting bay that opened onto the range)

- Great Technology (Multiple cameras always going, Trackman always going, etc.)

- History of working with high-level juniors (Instructor was a top-ranked Jr Instructor in GA)

- Library of Tour Swings for discussion, comparison, explanation, etc. 

 

I definitely credit those lessons with helping me realizing how much (and what) I needed to be cleaning up in my swing. Within about 3 years I was playing at a scratch level and it all started with understanding why I wasn't hitting it very consistently as a 5-index. 

 

More important than anything though was that it allowed me to become more consistent and have more fun enjoying golf as a hobby. It's no fun at all feeling like your swing comes and goes. 

 

 

.

Edited September 17, 2023 by MelloYello

[Ri_Redneck]

7 hours ago, baudi said:

 

Flashy vs anonymous ... 🤔

Your question reminds me of a practical joke by Steve O. He's going to buy a new computer with a friend to allow him a discount.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/ulXuSJtUhek

  

Employee # 1 has gotta hold some cred!! Yeah, I would trust Monte over just about anybody online or in person.

 

BT

[MPStrat]

@johnrobison

 

I’m replying to your thoughts about AMG in the Zach Allen thread. This discussion would be more on topic in this thread.

 

Teachers are free to charge what they want. I have no issues there at all. I’m not calling for them to lower their rates. 
 

I was referring to gouging as a synonym to over-charging, not the actual crime of “price gouging” when supply is limited. 

Some higher priced “luxury” items are actually a good value, some are a terrible value. It’s fair to make that distinction.
 

There are teachers as good as AMG and many who are better, who charge a small fraction of what they charge. They are able to charge what they do because their marketing is superior. That’s the point I’m making.

[Soloman1]

On 9/14/2023 at 11:06 AM, Ri_Redneck said:

Employee # 1 has gotta hold some cred!! Yeah, I would trust Monte over just about anybody online or in person.

 

BT

 

It’s early in the morning. My eyes read this as “… just about anybody online or in prison.”

[Zitlow]

If you asked 10 teachers how to start the downswing you'd probably get 10 different answers. 

[johnrobison]

1 hour ago, MPStrat said:

@johnrobison

 

I’m replying to your thoughts about AMG in the Zach Allen thread. This discussion would be more on topic in this thread.

 

Teachers are free to charge what they want. I have no issues there at all. I’m not calling for them to lower their rates. 
 

I was referring to gouging as a synonym to over-charging, not the actual crime of “price gouging” when supply is limited. 

Some higher priced “luxury” items are actually a good value, some are a terrible value. It’s fair to make that distinction.
 

There are teachers as good as AMG and many who are better, who charge a small fraction of what they charge. They are able to charge what they do because their marketing is superior. That’s the point I’m making.

There is no over-charging, either. The supplier and consumer determine value, not you or me. Just because you don’t find it a good value, doesn’t mean it isn’t to someone else.

[MPStrat]

38 minutes ago, johnrobison said:

There is no over-charging, either. The supplier and consumer determine value, not you or me. Just because you don’t find it a good value, doesn’t mean it isn’t to someone else.

just because the consumer believes they are getting a good value doesn’t mean they are

[doctor220]

2 hours ago, johnrobison said:

There is no over-charging, either. The supplier and consumer determine value, not you or me. Just because you don’t find it a good value, doesn’t mean it isn’t to someone else.

Or lots of these guys price themselves prohibitively to really only take people who are very serious or willing to pay a ton. AMG guys mainly focused on their online presence and online membership which are infinitely scalable. I doubt they have people beating down their door to pay 500/hr for in person lessons. think the elite thing is likely poor value as well. 
 

most of these social media people in general are poor value imo and similar or better info can be had by people not on crazy amounts of social media. Think Shauheen similar story and personally I would avoid the people with large social media following with exceptions being people like Dana, Iteach or Monte though in general their followings are quite smaller than some of the social media people . Did my online 200 dollar lesson with one of the big names and basically got told to lay the shaft off less. But ya people are free to do what they wish. 

Edited September 16, 2023 by doctor220

[GoGoErky]

2 hours ago, MPStrat said:

just because the consumer believes they are getting a good value doesn’t mean they are

If they believe they are then they are. The consumer paying for the service is the only opinion that matters. If they feel different afterwards they won’t pay for that service again, if enough people pay for it and then don’t come back then the person offering the service will either adjust their prices or start to lose money and then make whatever decision they need to at that point.

 

 

[bluedot]

1 hour ago, GoGoErky said:

If they believe they are then they are. The consumer paying for the service is the only opinion that matters. If they feel different afterwards they won’t pay for that service again, if enough people pay for it and then don’t come back then the person offering the service will either adjust their prices or start to lose money and then make whatever decision they need to at that point.

 

 

Correct, and true for all sorts of things in golf.  Is club fitting “worth it”?  How about premium golf balls?  A new driver that costs $600 and gives 8-10 yds of distance? A private club membership?  A $200 greens fee to play an iconic golf course?

 

Every decision is specific to the individual consumer, and that consumer’s determination of “value” is the only one that matters.

 

 

[MK7Golf21]

2 hours ago, doctor220 said:

Or lots of these guys price themselves prohibitively to really only take people who are very serious or willing to pay a ton. AMG guys mainly focused on their online presence and online membership which are infinitely scalable. I doubt they have people beating down their door to pay 500/hr for in person lessons. think the elite thing is likely poor value as well. 
 

most of these social media people in general are poor value imo and similar or better info can be had by people not on crazy amounts of social media. Think Shauheen similar story and personally I would avoid the people with large social media following with exceptions being people like Dana, Iteach or Monte though in general their followings are quite smaller than some of the social media people . Did my online 200 dollar lesson with one of the big names and basically got told to lay the shaft off less. But ya people are free to do what they wish. 

 

I don’t mind the $500 an hour rate that is posted now, I wouldn’t pay it but no different than what Foley etc are charging. It’s the 3 hour half day $5,000 rate that doesn’t make sense to me

[GoGoErky]

1 hour ago, MK7Golf21 said:

 

I don’t mind the $500 an hour rate that is posted now, I wouldn’t pay it but no different than what Foley etc are charging. It’s the 3 hour half day $5,000 rate that doesn’t make sense to me

If we look at the $500/hr rate then $1500 of that is the lesson fee, iirc they used to charge $1000 for a lesson using gears, so between the lesson, use of gears, their state of the art facility plus $744 worth of free amg+ membership for a year. It’s not that hard to see the cost. 
 

Not sure if the up to 3 golfers means 3 at the half day lesson, but if so that’s a pretty good value for 3 people 

[MK7Golf21]

1 hour ago, GoGoErky said:

If we look at the $500/hr rate then $1500 of that is the lesson fee, iirc they used to charge $1000 for a lesson using gears, so between the lesson, use of gears, their state of the art facility plus $744 worth of free amg+ membership for a year. It’s not that hard to see the cost. 
 

Not sure if the up to 3 golfers means 3 at the half day lesson, but if so that’s a pretty good value for 3 people 

Yeah, up to 3 people at the half day for 5 grand but that’s still more than 500 an hour each person. 3 * 1,500= 4500. Plus you are sharing the 3 hours with 3 others.

 

so you are saying the $500 hourly rate they posted doesn’t include gears or their new state of the art building? Weird must be hitting balls in a shed out back 

Edited September 16, 2023 by MK7Golf21

[MPStrat]

3 hours ago, bluedot said:

Every decision is specific to the individual consumer, and that consumer’s determination of “value” is the only one that matters.

Someone charging a price and a

consumer paying that price doesn’t mean the consumer got the best value for their money. 
 

Now whether the consumer cares about getting a good value or is even educated enough to make that determination is another conversation. This is partly why guys like Hank Haney can charge what they do. 

 

Just because a consumer might choose the higher priced teacher doesn’t mean they got the most they could from their investment. 

[doctor220]

4 minutes ago, MPStrat said:

Someone charging a price and a

consumer paying that price doesn’t mean the consumer got the best value for their money. 
 

Now whether the consumer cares about getting a good value or is even educated enough to make that determination is another conversation. This is partly why guys like Hank Haney can charge what they do. 

 

Just because a consumer might choose the higher priced teacher doesn’t mean they got the most they could from their investment. 

And not sure anyone actually pays Haney those insane amounts. None of these guys charging thousands of dollars for a lesson are commonly getting lessons from random rich amateurs 

[GoGoErky]

1 hour ago, MK7Golf21 said:

Yeah, up to 3 people at the half day for 5 grand but that’s still more than 500 an hour each person. 3 * 1,500= 4500. Plus you are sharing the 3 hours with 3 others.

 

so you are saying the $500 hourly rate they posted doesn’t include gears or their new state of the art building? Weird must be hitting balls in a shed out back 

I’m not sure what it includes other than the one year amg+ membership.

 

I don’t know if their $500/hour lesson includes gears or not, but their faq says it’s only available with Shaun and Mike.

 

Up to $3 people is like 1/2 day golf school.

 

For some willing to pay $5000 I wouldn’t say it’s not worn the price 

[MelloYello]

A few things:

#1

If you're worried about money, just find someone who's in your budget and don't worry about the stuff you can't afford. Best not to worry about it. Don't succumb to FOMO. 

 

#2

Most instructors aren't charging the rates that are posted. Deals are constantly being worked out with various people, groups, institutions, etc. Most of those rates are--at best--only for the "outsiders" who aren't members at the club where that particular (high-profile) instructor works. 

#3

Ultimately, you shouldn't be worried what the lessons cost. Any fee is well worth it if your game improves noticeably in some way that is sustainable by way of changes you believe in.

 

Instead of focusing on what the instructor can do for you, spend an equal (or greater) amount of time forming a vision in your own head of what you would like to accomplish and how instruction is going to help be part of what helps you get yourself there.

 

Ultimately, it's on you as a student to make things work. The best students are the ones who are using their instructor as a resource and leave having learned something that makes them better at golf. An instructor isn't someone who's just there to say "move it like this."

 

At the end of the day, the student who's self-motivated is always going to end up getting the most out of lessons because their curiosity and genuine interest will ensure they make the most of that opportunity. 

 

 

.

 

Edited September 17, 2023 by MelloYello

[bluedot]

26 minutes ago, MPStrat said:

Someone charging a price and a

consumer paying that price doesn’t mean the consumer got the best value for their money. 
 

Now whether the consumer cares about getting a good value or is even educated enough to make that determination is another conversation. This is partly why guys like Hank Haney can charge what they do. 

 

Just because a consumer might choose the higher priced teacher doesn’t mean they got the most they could from their investment. 

What you are saying would also have to be true for houses, cars, watches, restaurant meals, clothes, and pretty every purchase.  “Value” is determined ONLY by the individual consumer; not you or me.

 

I spend what I spend on golf, including lessons, without regard to what anyone else is doing, and while I can’t imagine myself paying some of the lesson prices I see, I’d be foolish to say that my determination of value is the correct determination for everyone else.

 

I handed my pro $75 for a 30 minute lesson last Saturday, I paid $600+ for a new driver back in May to pick up 8 yds on average, I have a new set of irons on order after a recent fitting, and I spend a LOT of money each month for my club membership, including a 4k assessment for an upcoming capital improvement.  Is all of that a good “value”?  I think so, but I have a LOT of friends, including golfers, who choose not to make those same purchases.  But they don’t determine value for me, nor I for them.

 

Btw, most of my friends drive much newer and nicer cars than mine, which is a 2012 Camry that I plan to drive until wheels fall off.  I’m not a car guy, but I don’t make that determination for anybody else.

[MK7Golf21]

55 minutes ago, bluedot said:

What you are saying would also have to be true for houses, cars, watches, restaurant meals, clothes, and pretty every purchase.  “Value” is determined ONLY by the individual consumer; not you or me.

 

I spend what I spend on golf, including lessons, without regard to what anyone else is doing, and while I can’t imagine myself paying some of the lesson prices I see, I’d be foolish to say that my determination of value is the correct determination for everyone else.

 

I handed my pro $75 for a 30 minute lesson last Saturday, I paid $600+ for a new driver back in May to pick up 8 yds on average, I have a new set of irons on order after a recent fitting, and I spend a LOT of money each month for my club membership, including a 4k assessment for an upcoming capital improvement.  Is all of that a good “value”?  I think so, but I have a LOT of friends, including golfers, who choose not to make those same purchases.  But they don’t determine value for me, nor I for them.

 

Btw, most of my friends drive much newer and nicer cars than mine, which is a 2012 Camry that I plan to drive until wheels fall off.  I’m not a car guy, but I don’t make that determination for anybody else.

you are including many purchases which have resell value, with some being investments. You include houses which actually increase in value over time, watches same thing. Your new driver and irons can be sold off and make a good amount back on what you paid.
 

These aren’t really the same as a golf lesson unless you are learning under someone to then go advertise that and give lessons yourself. 
 

I’m also saying and others that the place charging $6000 for a 2 day school is no different from my experience than a guy charging $1,000. Look at their students results as the determining factor, that’s what it’s about at the end of the day. Not how many toys they have. I’ve taken lessons where they have a trackman setup and all these toys but they don’t even use it. Actually, most are like that because they give lessons all day and can see the issues right away. That’s who you want to give your money too. 

Edited September 17, 2023 by MK7Golf21

[bluedot]

25 minutes ago, MK7Golf21 said:

you are including many purchases which have resell value, with some being investments. You include houses which actually increase in value over time, watches same thing. Your new driver and irons can be sold off and make a good amount back on what you paid.
 

These aren’t really the same as a golf lesson unless you are learning under someone to then go advertise that and give lessons yourself. 
 

I’m also saying and others that the place charging $6000 for a 2 day school is no different from my experience than a guy charging $1,000. Look at their students results as the determining factor, that’s what it’s about at the end of the day. Not how many toys they have. I’ve taken lessons where they have a trackman setup and all these toys but they don’t even use it. Actually, most are like that because they give lessons all day and can see the issues right away. That’s who you want to give your money too. 

I understand the concepts of both resale and building equity over time, but those things are only about dollars at some point in the indefinite future, and aren’t really relevant to the perceived value of a purchase to the consumer making the purchase. This is why economists use terms like utility and value, rather than simply price.

 

Putting cars and houses and golf clubs aside, you can use my private club membership as a comparison.  The club is NOT an equity club, so I will never get my initiation dollars back, much less my monthly dues.  In that regard, the “purchase” of a membership is questionable vs playing MUCH more cheaply at the public course an equal distance from my house.  But the membership has a lot of value/utility for me, so I spend the dollars.

 

If somebody chooses to pay four figures for golf lessons, that person and ONLY that person, can determine the value of the lesson to them.  You’re confusing price, which is objective, with value/utility, which are specific to the consumer.

[MK7Golf21]

26 minutes ago, bluedot said:

I understand the concepts of both resale and building equity over time, but those things are only about dollars at some point in the indefinite future, and aren’t really relevant to the perceived value of a purchase to the consumer making the purchase. This is why economists use terms like utility and value, rather than simply price.

 

Putting cars and houses and golf clubs aside, you can use my private club membership as a comparison.  The club is NOT an equity club, so I will never get my initiation dollars back, much less my monthly dues.  In that regard, the “purchase” of a membership is questionable vs playing MUCH more cheaply at the public course an equal distance from my house.  But the membership has a lot of value/utility for me, so I spend the dollars.

 

If somebody chooses to pay four figures for golf lessons, that person and ONLY that person, can determine the value of the lesson to them.  You’re confusing price, which is objective, with value/utility, which are specific to the consumer.

The purpose of a golf lesson is to improve at golf. We are saying you don’t need to spend 6 grand to improve when the other guy only charges 1 grand and can get you the same improvement.
 

From my experience the cost doesn’t equal the value most of the time. it’s based in YouTube/media popularity or golf digest political popularity lists. If someone is taking golf lessons other than to improve, then something is off with them. 

 

Edited September 17, 2023 by MK7Golf21

[johnrobison]

12 hours ago, MPStrat said:

Someone charging a price and a

consumer paying that price doesn’t mean the consumer got the best value for their money. 
 

Now whether the consumer cares about getting a good value or is even educated enough to make that determination is another conversation. This is partly why guys like Hank Haney can charge what they do. 

 

Just because a consumer might choose the higher priced teacher doesn’t mean they got the most they could from their investment. 

You don’t know best what’s right for someone. Believing that you’re more educated and have the knowledge they lack doesn’t make you right about their value choices. This isn’t a commodity - it’s not a gallon of gas. There are numerous variables that go into what the provider determines is a fair price for their service and what the consumer is willing to pay for it.

[johnrobison]

5 minutes ago, MK7Golf21 said:

The purpose of a golf lesson is to improve at golf. We are saying you don’t need to spend 6 grand to improve when the other guy only charges 1 grand and can get you the same improvement.
 

From my experience the cost doesn’t equal the value most of the time. it’s based in YouTube/media popularity or golf digest political popularity lists. If someone is taking golf lessons other than to improve, then something is off with them. 

 

I had a choice between a few universities, all of which look equally good on a resume. My purpose in going to any of them was to get an education. If I chose the more expensive option, did I overpay?

[MPStrat]

@bluedot @johnrobison
 

Golfer A takes a lesson from Hank Haney at $650/hr

 

Golfer B takes a lesson from Dan Carraher at $200/hr

 

For the sake of discussion let’s say all other things are equal. We are just talking about the golf lesson itself.
 

If both golfers sole purpose in taking the lesson is to improve their golf game, the correct answer is golfer B  got a better value for their money. Golfer A might be living under a rock and not know this when they make their value determination, but that doesn’t mean they got the best value for their money. 
 

I feel like this is fairly common sense stuff. 
 

[MPStrat]

2 hours ago, bluedot said:

Btw, most of my friends drive much newer and nicer cars than mine, which is a 2012 Camry that I plan to drive until wheels fall off.  I’m not a car guy, but I don’t make that determination for anybody else.

Consumer A pays $35,000 for a new Toyota Camry

 

Consumer B pays $36,000 for a 2012 Toyota Camry with 120,000 miles 

 

Which consumer got the better value?