People like to make fun of weathermen, but when you think about it, it’s pretty difficult to predict the future of just about anything. Financial and real estate markets, baseball playoffs, college football games, elections, inflation, you name it – some expert is always astounding us with his or her stupidity when they try to predict the future. I suppose it’s for this very reason that I’m not too worried about the future of golf. Or maybe I am.
A couple of articles caught my eye this week. The first was this article by a magazine called chicagoland golf. You can read it yourself (it’s very interesting), but the overall message is simple: growth in golf is stagnant in the U.S. Golf courses are closing, and participation is flat or decreasing. A few years ago, some study was published which stated we would need a new golf course built every day for something like the next ten years to keep up with the demands of a growing game. Now, they’re saying the opposite. Another very good article by Golf Channel’s Rich Lerner gives us an inkling of the problems facing private clubs in the U.S.
I’m not an economist, and I don’t really know a hell of alot about the golf business, to be honest. Take my opinions for what they’re worth, and take a swipe at them by all means. But here are some of the things I’ve pondered concerning golf’s future:
One: Who Cares?
I’m not saying I agree with this sentiment, but is it really so bad that golf isn’t growing? Do we really need another million people clogging up already overcrowded courses? Much has been made of trying to make golf affordable and to encourage participation by city youth, etc., but are we fooling ourselves in these efforts? Golf is expensive to play and always will be. Nobody takes up the game expecting a bargain, and maybe we are at the practical limit of participation in the U.S.
I happen to think we do need to continue to grow the sport, but before we start into discussions about how to change golf to make it more appealing, etc., we need to decide if there really is a problem to begin with. I’m smart enough to know that, despite my leanings otherwise, maybe there really isn’t a problem at all.
Two: The Wrong People are in Charge
Golf course development in the U.S. today is, I think anyway, largely driven by real estate developers and other large, commercial entities who use golf’s appeal to sell something else, like houses, or a hotel/resort, or to create revenue growth for a large, publicly owned corporation that operates golf courses. The roots of golf everywhere else in the world, and in the U.S. too a century ago, are quite different. Golf clubs were started by people who play and love the game, people whose sole mission was creating nice places to play and socialize, not sell spec houses. I happen to believe that if you are using golf to accomplish an ulterior motive, then golf becomes a whore and suffers the inevitable consequences. Private and/or semi-private golf courses, owned and operated by true blue golfers, is an imperative for the continued health of the sport.
Three: Wither the Private Club?
Having made the point above, why is club golf dying? Well, ultra-high level club golf isn’t, as the very rich are building new courses and doing quite well. I don’t think Baltusrol, Pine Valley, and Augusta are suffering, either. I think it’s the second- and third-tier clubs, like Lerner’s Berkleigh, that are suffering. The reasons given for this are that men today have insufficient time to devote to golf, have competing leisure options, don’t have the money to do it anyway, and are disinterested or outright turned off by the dusty, dated social scene and culture at many private clubs. All of these are probably true to an extent, so can’t we fix them?
Golf needs to be flexible. The seven- to eight-hour ritual that defines today’s weekend golfer can be changed, if we want it to. We need a bite-size version of the game, that a man can complete in an hour or so, and not some silly par three thing or mini-golf. Maybe it’s a course with a bunch of three-hole loops. Relaxed design and maintenance standards to make golf a bit easier and cheaper wouldn’t hurt, either. In other parts of the world, private club golf, with all of its advantages, is accessible to people of all income ranges. I think we would be better off if that were the situation in the U.S. as well.
Clubs have to adapt and become more in tune with modern families, which means catering to young children and mothers. I won’t go into the details, but a place with a musty-smelling dining room and naked 70-year-old men walking around the locker room is not going to entice many modern families to take up golf.
I read an interview with Herb Kelleher of Southwest Airlines, in which he summarized the genius of his company as follows: he realized early on that his competition was not United Airlines or TWA or any other airline. His competition was Greyhound. Kelleher had the ability to conceive of air travel in a different way. Today, everyone is trying to keep up with him.
If we want golf to succeed today, maybe we have to think like Kelleher. We have to realize that it’s a competition, and our opponent is not golf as defined in 1950. It’s video games, youth soccer, the movies, wine tasting, skateboarding, paintball, and all of the remaining diversions available to folks today. The sorts of changes I think are important to compete in this sphere are probably abhorent to many golfers, who tend to be quite conservative and traditional in their thinking.
Maybe we don’t need to grow to survive, but if we don’t try to grow, we are in danger of extinction.
I have a few notes, which I will try my best to keep short.
I just read the other day that the average American of 2005 has less money to spend on “extras” than the average American of 1975. Same median income levels, but things like food, housing, clothing, etc. cost more now than they did then. Well, that or the median income is relatively lower than 30 years ago – same thing.
Americans are working longer work weeks than ever before. There’s also a re-emphasis on spending time with the family. The dad of the 1970s was “the breadwinner” and that, by and large, was his role. Nowadays, his role is simply “parent.” This leaves less time for golf (and it’s not sexist to point out a simple fact: more men than women play golf, so a decline in the male golf population is going to have a bigger impact than a growth in the female golf population).
I can’t fathom the logistical problems (both in laying out the course and otherise) of six three-hole loops. I hate it when someone cuts in front of me on the 10th tee as I’m walking up the ninth fairway – imagine that happening five times in a round!
The distance nuts will try to make the case that golfers hit the ball further (they do), and thus more land is required (rarely so), more maintenance is required (not really true at all), and rounds take longer (nope), which drives up the cost of golf (nah). Combine that with their belief that PGA Tour is less interesting to watch (nah) and they manage to convince themselves that the slight decline or leveling off in golf is due to the ball going further.
I like your idea of the 3 hole loop. I myself do that often at the golf club I belong to. It just so happens that holes 1,2,3 and 10,11,12 are: Par 5, Par 4, Par 3.. in that order… So, in just 3 holes I basically get to use all my club types… Woods, Long Irons, Short irons/wedges, and the putter. Usually takes me anywhere from 45 – 75 minutes depending on the pace of those in front of me.
My personal opinion is that the three hole loop would not work. Three holes would not provide enough variety and the logistics would be almost impossible. However, I think that it would be worthy to consider an alternative approach.
It is definitely true that the social scene has changed. Most people don’t have enough time to play 18 and then sit around the clubhouse with their buddies like they did in the past. Whether it’s due to increased work responsibilities/ time requirements, family, competing recreational activities, etc, the fact of the matter is that it takes a long time to play golf.
What’s to say that golf can’t be a round of 12, or a round of 14? Most people [that I know] usually start dragging around 14 or 15 anyway and it seems like the last 3-4 holes are played with the attitude that “we’re almost done so we might as well finish.” Most of the time scores aren’t where we had foreseen them being when we started the round (no matter what our handicap is) and this affects the last couple of holes. I’ll admit that with the weather starting to get colder, I start feeling the same way around 16 and play the last two with much less thought and pre-shot routine.
With a 12 or 14 hole course, land requirements would decrease (or a long course would take up the same land as a normal course of today), maintenance costs (and therefore greens fees) would decrease, and round time would also decrease. You would be able to play the “back 6” in a little over an hour, and a full round in two and a half hours.
I guess the hardest part of this approach would be to convince the traditionalists that this is acceptable. With or without the traditionalists, I’m sure that these type of courses would attract the recreational player… which could be good or bad, depending on if they are in front of me or not! 🙂
If any tycoons are visiting this forum and want to start a business venture with me, just shoot me an email! 😉
Greg–how about a club/course with three, 6-hole loops? Play 6, 12, or 18. Even on the slowest of days, I’m thinking you can finish 6 in 2 hours, which is certainly better than what we have now. This way, people with time can still get their 18 hole round in…
We occasionally hear articles written about quirky clubs in England or Canada with something like 11 holes, or 16, or 18 holes using only 12 greens, whatever. Maybe we have too much of a cookie-cutter idea of what a round of golf is in the US.
I guess I would have to put myself into the traditionalist category. I wouldn’t play a course that was less than 18 holes. If I don’t have the time for 18, I play 9. If I don’t have the time for 9, then I hit balls or putt. And I certainly don’t want some gaggle of jerkwads jumping in front of me every 3 or 6 holes.
To me golf is a sport for the young and old. Few 30 or 40 somethings have the time or money to devote to golf. That’s just the cold hard facts. Trying to mold or transform golf into an hour long activity, to fit into more people’s lifestyles seems wrong to me.
I don’t think golf is declining. I don’t believe golf is in poor health. I think, just like all things, its settling down after the whole tiger Woods Phenomenon. I have to agree with Erik’s comments above as well. I think its a little early in the fight to be throwing in the towel.
If there is a slight decline in golf I believe it is due to the fact that we have so many obligations in life now. Work weeks are long. Families are important and increases in pay have not kept up with the cost of living.
I also believe that the information age has brought a great deal of things to people that they never knew of before. I have a friend that is a member of my club who is not playing on Saturdays right now, because he is training for a marathon and uses Saturdays as his long run day. I think it is great that he is setting a goal and working hard to acheive it, but I guess my point is who do you know that would have thought of running a marathon 20 years ago? Another of my friends did not play last week because he went to a Nascar event. 20 years ago a Nascar fan and a golfer were 2 totally different people. But today with luxury skyboxes and pit passes and tons of information and media Nascar is drawing a whole new fan base.
People are finding different interests and hobbies. I have found different interests in the past, but I always come back to my first love, the game of golf.
While golf may be in a small valley right now I am not too concerned. If any of us need one really good reason to keep playing and encouraging your friends and family to play I think it woud be this. Name a golfer (besides the late Payne Stewart, whose death was a huge loss for our sport) who has died from natural causes at an early age. Sure there are exceptions but in general golfers, whether they be tour pros or weekend hackers tend to live a very long, rich life. In some case, very long compared to life expectancies of Americans now. Many still play golf well into their 70’s.
I do agree the devlopment of courses as a way to sell homes has led to a lot of poorly designed courses. The tees are often spaced incredible distances from the previous green, extra dead zones are incorporated on the course to protect homes. The course capital is tied up in this extra land and of course there are additonal maintanence costs. Since the goal is to sell homes, course routing is less important. Marketing requires that the developer be able to put the words championship after the name. The assumption that carts will be used leads to more lazy design, and again additional maintanence expense. Extreme hills and valleys tend to worsen water problems etc.
Greed will also help along with the cost of fuel,which will have an ever increasing effect on the viability of golf courses. In SW Florida the cost of golf has gone through the ceiling,and what they forget is that fuel costs and mortgages are going to make golf a luxury. Therefore outside many budgets.
Those greedy courses asking $60 and above are going to suffer period.
But headtilt–the weird thing is, if you read the chicago golf report, the courses closing are low end operations, nine holers, and executive courses, more than expensive courses.
The opposite of what most of us think is the problem.
I can already see the replies to this missing the point. The barriers to gettting started in Golf are huge (and I don’t mean money, $300-$500 for a video game console plus games hasn’t slowed that down.) Ask the average person on the street the following question?
“Tell me what you would need and what steps you would take to get up next Saturday morning and participate in the following activites:”
1. Go Hiking
2. Go Bowling
3. Attend a baseball game
4. Play video games
5. Go Swimming
6. Play Tennis
7. Visit the Grand Canyon
8. Play Golf
I would wager just about every person you asked could give a plan right off the top of their heads for 1-7. When you get to #8 (play glof) that’s when you’re going to get a number of blank stares, ummmms, & I’m not sures.
Getting into golf is like gettting into the Free Masons. Without someone who is already initiated helpting to guide them, to the unitiated looking iin it looks like a complicated mass of rules, traditions, and barriers designed to keep people out, not invite them in.
The irony is that golf is a perfect activity for the aging baby boom generation, but they probably won’t pick it up because it is too much of a mystery/pain in the *** to get started.
Want to get more people involved in golf? Don’t just say “come play golf this Saturday”, say “here are the six steps you need to take to come play golf this Saturday”. You are going to have to spell it out, step by step. KISS has never applied to golf, but that’s what courses are going to have to do if they want to attract new customers.
Even though I am British I buy the American golf mags as well. Yes I saw the article and could hardly believe it. Then either way this article might be right!! As others have pointed out there are many economic reasons why this game may head for the doldrums.
Disposable income versus the cost of living, seems to be the issue, But I still think greed has a lot to do wit it. I have a vacation home in SW Florida and some of the prices down there inthe winter are just gouging to say the least. They will most certainly suffer.
I won’t get too worried unless golf continues to decline over the next 10-20 years, during the time when more and more baby boomers will be retiring. Seem like a good percentage of those retirees, now having both time and money simultaneously, will begin playing. And some of those “real-estate-driven” courses aren’t half bad. I’m loving Monarch Dunes – the first 18 of a planned 48 holes in a development eventually consisting of 1300 homes here on the Central Coast. Good enough and cheap enough that I can imagine joining a private club. That’s what hurts the low to mid end private clubs – a good selection and variety of local public courses.
I blogged on my personal blog a few months ago about that the time for a 6 hole golf course is upon us. I fall into the category of less time to play, but would love to have a 1 to 2 hour option in my neighborhood.
http://e9golf.typepad.com/weblog/2007/08/the-six-hole-go.html
I don’t necessarily agree that real estate developments or resorts are the challenge, I just think it’s bad business models of some of these types of properties that are causing them to struggle or even shut down. You can’t run a golf course within a development at a loss in hopes of selling more real estate forever. Eventually the real estate all sells and your income won’t cover the loss.
Ultimately, the ability to make money on a golf course lies primarily in the price you’ve paid to purchase the course (or the amount of debt the membership has incurred to build it in the case of some equity clubs). When properties struggle financially they are sold and eventually someone will purchase the property at the correct price (sometimes out of foreclosure) and will have a better chance than the previous owner. Over time the market corrects.
I think we have boom years ahead of us (think baby boomers retiring), but need to adapt to the needs of the next generation to keep interest in the sport moving forward.
I don’t think Lerner’s story is about the general problems facing private clubs. I really believe it is more about the cultural changes that are eliminating the old ethnic segregation that existed in the golf scene since the early 1920s.
I have to agree with Danny Ottmann. I think we are just seeing the down-turn from the Tiger era. Like they say for every up there is going to be a down at some point.
I don’t think the game of golf requires any modifications of any sort. Sure people are more busy with work, family and other activities. But like those other activities, if people truly enjoy the game they will find time to play.
I am from Canada and we have seen a similar scenario with minor hockey. It’s become expensive for families to join leagues and purchase new equipment for their every growing children as well as finding time to go to practices and tournaments, but they haven’t changed how the game is played. Sure the costs have forced some children to take up soccer or other less expensive sports, but I think that’s todays reality. I do not believe we have anything to worry about.
Another aspect to look at when discussing the decline of Golf in NA. is to consider the people who started playing, but have found another up and coming sport that they would rather use the time they set aside for golf to play that other sport or like said earlier train for a marathon. There will always be the die hards to keep this game a live and well.
We need challenging “Donald Ross” type layouts with no gimmicks like unnatural man-made mounds, no excessive bunkering, etc., with regular old fashioned domed greens that run 10-12 on the Stimpmeter and several risk/reward shorter par 4 holes provide scores at a very respectable level. Relatively open layouts with fewer trees and lightish rough minimizes searching for your ball. Fairly flat terrain allows walking a round in less than 4 hours.
I play a course like this now and again (it’s a little too far from my home) — they have a maintenance crew of three and provide a thoroughly satifying less than four hour round for $25-30.
Good golf with the option of walking and where a round can be played in 3 1/2 hours at a rate of $25. This is what is sorely needed — not a bunch expensive gimmicky, cart path only courses. When is the golf industry going to catch on?
I question how many “baby boomers” once retired will take up golf for the first time. By then years of running, hiking or whatever cardio they did will have taken its toll and their bodies will not stand up to rigors of golf to play it at a resonable level (with all the ball beating it takes to get there.)
Instead of the PGA giving all its monies to charities, why not plough some of it back to help golf courses. Subsidize golfers and not just research scientists and what have you.
Let charity begin at home!
One factor no one has touched on is the cultural change. Many people today, especially the current generation, want instant gratification, results NOW.
Golf is just too difficult and too slow for many of us. Part of that is the industry’s own fault. I’ve been tempted by the golf magazine articles and TV infomercials that seem to promise that if only I adapted this technique or bought that club, EUREKA! my handicap plummets. Whether it’s a diet or golf, there just isn’t a quick fix.
wachesawgolfer is right; Boomers who haven’t played until age 40 or wait until retirement to start are in for a long, painful road of 120+ stroke rounds before it gets better. I know, I’m one of them