Hack Golf Initiative

[jgreen85]

Honestly I couldn't careless about TM or any other golf company profits, however if there is a real major decline in numbers then courses will become more expensive for me to play on them, and with the decline in profits for the major golf manufacturers the equipment will be more expensive as well... Besides, for me I want to bring people in the game to have more friends to play with and compete against.. Don't you agree?

do you have numbers to back that up the added costs? You're assuming prices will go up. What's the breakdown between COGS/R&D; and marketing for the mfgs? I know they say there's "new technology", but has anyone experienced it? I see quite a few people mocking those who buy in to t-made et al's claims of longer, longer, longer. Should we have mizuno, cleveland/srixon, callaway, nike, titleist, puma, taylormade, etc? Or can the industry further consolidate? Perhaps we have too many golf courses? Idk, my only interests are in equipment costs, greens fees, and my enjoyment on the course (Pace of play/conditions). Are there numbers out there that show I should put effort in to recruiting other golfers simply for the sake of "growing the game."

I'm willing to bet you bring your friends to play b/c you want to hang out with your friends and not because you want to "grow" the game. Is this 90-10 (fun-grow game) 70-30, 50-50?

Is this a serious question?

very.

[3putter]

I have to leave for a lesson but I want to make this a thing later. I think each person here can commit to bringing one new golfer to the game this year.

I'll start that thread later today.

I'm for this, and I'm already working on it.

P.S. To everyone who is committed to bringing someone into the game, can you please make sure some of them are good looking women? Please. There is a shortage out there!

[MS256]

do you have numbers to back that up the added costs? You're assuming prices will go up. What's the breakdown between COGS/R&D; and marketing for the mfgs? I know they say there's "new technology", but has anyone experienced it? I see quite a few people mocking those who buy in to t-made et al's claims of longer, longer, longer. Should we have mizuno, cleveland/srixon, callaway, nike, titleist, puma, taylormade, etc? Or can the industry further consolidate? Perhaps we have too many golf courses? Idk, my only interests are in equipment costs, greens fees, and my enjoyment on the course (Pace of play/conditions). Are there numbers out there that show I should put effort in to recruiting other golfers simply for the sake of "growing the game."

I'm willing to bet you bring your friends to play b/c you want to hang out with your friends and not because you want to "grow" the game. Is this 90-10 (fun-grow game) 70-30, 50-50?

100-100. Why would I have to have less of one by favoring the other?

I can have equal amounts of fun and wanting the game to prosper. I don't care to see courses shut down and would feel that way even if I didn't work at one.

[Abu3baid]

do you have numbers to back that up the added costs? You're assuming prices will go up. What's the breakdown between COGS/R&D; and marketing for the mfgs? I know they say there's "new technology", but has anyone experienced it? I see quite a few people mocking those who buy in to t-made et al's claims of longer, longer, longer. Should we have mizuno, cleveland/srixon, callaway, nike, titleist, puma, taylormade, etc? Or can the industry further consolidate? Perhaps we have too many golf courses? Idk, my only interests are in equipment costs, greens fees, and my enjoyment on the course (Pace of play/conditions). Are there numbers out there that show I should put effort in to recruiting other golfers simply for the sake of "growing the game." I'm willing to bet you bring your friends to play b/c you want to hang out with your friends and not because you want to "grow" the game. Is this 90-10 (fun-grow game) 70-30, 50-50? very.

No I don't have any numbers nor do I have an empirical data to support my position.. I am also not planning on exploring the numbers nor doing an analysis to prove my point.. I do enough of it at work :) No, but seriously I am just applying common business knowledge to golf... More people less cost, less people well the exact opposite.. Yes, I am getting people to play for fun, but the bi product is the game grows , in the end I don't have financial interest in growing the game, but rather a personal enjoyment and gratification.. Same reason I will introduce my two sons to golf when they are ready!

[cipher]

very.

Yes, why would anyone want to see a sport they love grow?

[GangGreen]

HAHAHA...agreed, nothing wrong with improving the "scenery" out there.

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fourputt

I feel that this sort of diversity is all that is really needed to encourage new players, junior players, and experienced players of all levels.  Special clubs, oversized holes, and other gimmicks are simply unnecessary overcomplications.

In your opinion… and yet, golf is where it is today - declining in participation. "Golf as usual" isn't introducing players to the game to offset those who are dying or quitting.

Because most courses don't offer this sort of diversity.  I realize that some don't have the option, but those which do aren't doing anything to change.  My home course is a facility which was built in 1972 with the 18 hole and par 3 courses.  The Executive 9 was added 20 years later, by closing a trap and skeet range, sifting the lead out of the land, and adding the additional 9 holes.  It takes really very little real estate to add a 9 hole par 3 course and offer something for the beginning golfer.

[iacas]

Because most courses don't offer this sort of diversity.

Most courses can't.

And that's got little to do with my main disagreement with your posts, which you've (unsuccessfully, as I've clearly noticed) failed to quote those portions of my responses. :) You don't think golf's in trouble, but the stats clearly show otherwise. It's in a decline. I don't care if someone isn't playing "100% strict by the rules Golf-with-a-capital-G" if they're whacking a ball around on a course, that's a good thing.

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fourputt

Because most courses don't offer this sort of diversity.

Most courses can't.

And that's got little to do with my main disagreement with your posts, which you've (unsuccessfully, as I've clearly noticed) failed to quote those portions of my responses. :) You don't think golf's in trouble, but the stats clearly show otherwise. It's in a decline. I don't care if someone isn't playing "100% strict by the rules Golf-with-a-capital-G" if they're whacking a ball around on a course, that's a good thing.

I guess we'll just have to disagree, maybe because we form out opinions in different parts of the country.  Golf boomed in the '90s, and now it's in correction mode with reality catching up.  There certainly isn't any shortage of players anywhere I've played in my home state of Colorado, or in Idaho when I visit my brother.

[iacas]

I guess we'll just have to disagree, maybe because we form out opinions in different parts of the country.  Golf boomed in the '90s, and now it's in correction mode with reality catching up.  There certainly isn't any shortage of players anywhere I've played in my home state of Colorado, or in Idaho when I visit my brother.

If you want to "agree to disagree" with the numbers, be my guest. They paint a much more dire picture than just being "in correction mode."

[ScouseJohnny]

A couple of (my) thoughts:

1./ What are the actual numbers that are being discussed as either "corrective" or "dire?" Let's take a look:

Based upon NAICS code 713910 ("Golf courses and country clubs") what does the federal government's Economic Census data have to tell us?

All of this data is taken from the CBxxxxxx (County Business Pattern) tables.

2011

Table CB1100A11

NAICS code: 713910

Geography: United States

Year: 2011

Number of establishments: 11,751

Paid employees for pay period: 289,505

First quarter payroll: (x$1000): 1,516,230

Annual payroll (x$1000): 7,980,698

2009

Table CB0900A1

NAICS code: 713910

Geography: United States

Year: 2009

Number of establishments: 11,853

Paid employees for pay period: 302,486

First quarter payroll: (x$1000): 1,600,519

Annual payroll (x$1000): 8,043,078

2007

Table CB0700A1

NAICS code: 713910

Geography: United States

Year: 2007

Number of establishments: 11,851

Paid employees for pay period: 316,442

First quarter payroll: (x$1000): 1,601,731

Annual payroll (x$1000): 8,059,238

[Pre-Economic Armageddon data appears below]

2004

Table CB0400A2

NAICS code: 713910

Geography: United States

Year: 2004

Number of establishments: 12,070

Paid employees for pay period: 303,705

First quarter payroll: (x$1000): 1,395,107

Annual payroll (x$1000): 7,244,339

2002

Table EC0200A1

NAICS code: 71391

Geography: United States

Year: 2002

Number of establishments: 12,261

Paid employees for pay period: 312,812

Annual payroll (x$1000): 6,656,680

1997

Table EC0200CCOMP1

NAICS code: 71391

Geography: United States

Year: 1997

Number of establishments: 11,758

Paid employees for pay period: 276,078

Annual payroll (x$1000): 5,023,345

Hence, it seems there has been contraction in the industry, but not, I think, evidence of an ongoing collapse.

Interesting to note that the contraction began between 2002 and 2004 (in other words, before the Great Recession began).

Roughly the same number of establishments operating in 2011 as there was in 1997: 1997's courses, however, apparently needed 13,427 fewer employees to run them than was the case for 2011 courses.

Looking at the rapid growth between 1997 and 2002, and the slow contraction thereafter, I guess golf needs another Tiger to appear on the scene.

2./ Having now actually researched "Hack Golf," I mostly withdraw my previous complaints. ..

I still think beginners would be much better off playing Pitch & Putt than Hack Golf. However, I now see that Hack Golf involves only 4 unusual, oversized clubs, and an oversized ball.

I imagine this is the "wood"...?

...or is it the "iron?" Who knows?

Anyway, I take back my earlier criticism. This dumbed-down version of golf is clearly not going to intrude on golf itself.

The best analogy I can think of is that Hack Golf is to golf as Kwik Cricket is to cricket. Kwik Cricket was designed as a fun, cheap, and easy way to get kids into playing cricket, at a time when kids outside of the Indian subcontinent were starting to drift away from cricket, even in strong cricketing nations like Australia, New Zealand, and England. It seems to have been quite successful in that regard. And Kwik Cricket hasn't exactly replaced the Lord's Test yet, has it? Although given the way England played in the Ashes this year, maybe Kwik Cricket might be the way to go for the English national team...

[iacas]

I still think beginners would be much better off playing Pitch & Putt than Hack Golf. However, I now see that Hack Golf involves only 4 unusual, oversized clubs, and an oversized ball.

That's still not really true. Hack Golf will be whatever people make of it. If Titleist or Cobra wants to introduce a "Hack Golf" set of two woods and four irons and a putter that helps you line up your ball, with a dome that you stick in the hole which beeps if you hit it to signal that you've "holed out," they're free to do so.

Hack Golf is simply an effort to crowdsource ideas to get more people interested in the game by getting them interested in a relative of "The Game."

[ScouseJohnny]

Point taken; and I concede that I much prefer your term "relative" to my slightly pejorative "dumbed down."

[jgreen85]

No I don't have any numbers nor do I have an empirical data to support my position.. I am also not planning on exploring the numbers nor doing an analysis to prove my point.. I do enough of it at work :) No, but seriously I am just applying common business knowledge to golf... More people less cost, less people well the exact opposite.. Yes, I am getting people to play for fun, but the bi product is the game grows , in the end I don't have financial interest in growing the game, but rather a personal enjoyment and gratification.. Same reason I will introduce my two sons to golf when they are ready!

So common business knowledge teaches, that as demand increases, price decreases? It's actually the opposite. I suppose you could be speaking in terms of economies of scale, but that primarily benefits the supplier.

[Abu3baid]

So common business knowledge teaches, that as demand increases, price decreases? It's actually the opposite. I suppose you could be speaking in terms of economies of scale, but that primarily benefits the supplier.

Ditto.. As demand increases suppliers become more innovative and start growing at a scale to support that % increase, and I tend to disagree that it primarily benefits the supplier.. Although, it does benefit the supplier, the customer still ends up paying significantly less than he would have if there was no such growth, and the supplier was still producing an item for 500K customers rather than 500M customers.

[Spitfisher]

So common business knowledge teaches, that as demand increases, price decreases? It's actually the opposite. I suppose you could be speaking in terms of economies of scale, but that primarily benefits the supplier.

The apple iphone is a great example of innovation creates demand, demand creates customers quantity, quantity produced creates larger market share- creating even more customers and additional innovation along with limited distribution......none of which decreases prices. Maybe at the wholesale and manufacturing end- but to the end user the price remains the same or goes up.

[indyvai]

The apple iphone is a great example of innovation creates demand, demand creates customers quantity, quantity produced creates larger market share- creating even more customers and additional innovation along with limited distribution......none of which decreases prices. Maybe at the wholesale and manufacturing end- but to the end user the price remains the same or goes up.

Except in this case, you are trying to attract new consumers to an industry, not existing consumers toward a product.

[Meltdwhiskey]

No I don't have any numbers nor do I have an empirical data to support my position.. I am also not planning on exploring the numbers nor doing an analysis to prove my point.. I do enough of it at work :)

No, but seriously I am just applying common business knowledge to golf... More people less cost, less people well the exact opposite.. Yes, I am getting people to play for fun, but the bi product is the game grows , in the end I don't have financial interest in growing the game, but rather a personal enjoyment and gratification.. Same reason I will introduce my two sons to golf when they are ready!

So common business knowledge teaches, that as demand increases, price decreases? It's actually the opposite. I suppose you could be speaking in terms of economies of scale, but that primarily benefits the supplier.

The apple iphone is a great example of innovation creates demand, demand creates customers quantity, quantity produced creates larger market share- creating even more customers and additional innovation along with limited distribution......none of which decreases prices. Maybe at the wholesale and manufacturing end- but to the end user the price remains the same or goes up.

This is a very interesting aspect of the Grow the Game movement.  It looks like we have 1 vote for makes-golf-cheaper and two votes for makes-golf-more-expensive.  This is terrible for me.  I can barely hang on now.  I guess I had previously considered that it might make it increase, but just sort of in the back of my mind.

I was thinking that courses could get more people into the game by making it more affordable.  I like this aspect. But growing the market and it becoming more expensive will price me out of the game.