Two More Bite the Dust

PARlance wrote: »

Boards would make a fortune if they charged Blessington Lakes and Corrstown for their members promoting on here.

It would turn me off playing the course. Trying too hard.

Justified in my opinion.

In BL case, it was suggested their course had closed down a few posts earlier.

PARlance wrote: »

Boards would make a fortune if they charged Blessington Lakes and Corrstown for their members promoting on here.

It would turn me off playing the course. Trying too hard.

You left out St Margaret’s

PARlance wrote: »

Absolutely right to come back on that point.

Finest 9 hole in the Country... bit of a sell.
Other courses up to their knees in muck... bit much really, for me.

When you fight for something you love the blinkers can come on but thats human nature. Most of the posters on here that are members of golf clubs are in control of their own destiny for us on the blessed nine even with the most benevolent of owners that was something we could only dream of. Perhaps the up "to their necks in muck" was not the choicest turn of phrase. Our course is laid over an old sandpit so the land is particularly good at draining and can very often be open when other clubs are closed.
The reference to being the best 9 hole course in Ireland stems from an Ivan Morris book on the nine hole courses of Ireland where he rated the Blessed nine as the best park land track he played. If i am being honest having played a few i reckon their are a number equally as good, Carrickmines has to be up there.I think Mr Morris also rated our 2nd hole as the best 2 hole on any 9 hole course in the country. We have a excellent track in a setting that would not look out of place to a backdrop scene from the hobbit if only the scenery would pay the bills, so please forgive our enthusiasm in promoting hopefully our new found independence. Free Palestine, not so sure about Catalonia very complicated.....on dear, the previous post explains the ivan Morris stuff better i need to be a quicker poster, too many edits, not enough time.

PARlance wrote: »

Absolutely right to come back on that point.

Finest 9 hole in the Country... bit of a sell.
Other courses up to their knees in muck... bit much really, for me.

Hazel Grove might have something to say about that!

Ollieboy wrote: »

i was told today that Synergy golf have taken over Kilkock Golf Club, similar arrangement to St Margaret’s I heard. A very strange decision by a members own club.

I don't know much about Synergy other than the fact that, since they took over Grange Castle, the golf course has come on its leaps and bounds. Personally, I have no complaints about them anyway.

WHIP IT! wrote: »

I don't know much about Synergy other than the fact that, since they took over Grange Castle, the golf course has come on its leaps and bounds. Personally, I have no complaints about them anyway.

Kingswood Rover wrote: »

several members own clubs outsource maintenance, Cill Dara a 9 holer have done for the last 3 years with a similar company and the course seems to have improved incrementally year on year since.

This is different, this is a members club handing over the total management of the club to a 3rd party company. St Margaret’s was a private business and the Grange was a public course, so makes sense for them. But a members club given over control of everything is very strange. I am sure some members will post and clarify the actual situation and would love to hear the exact arrangement.

ShriekingSheet wrote: »

Where are you getting "total management" and "given control of everything" from?

They are still answerable to the members/owners, the same way they're answerable to the council for Grange Castle and the ownership of St Margrets.

It's common for a specialist golf company to be employed to run a club, rather than the owners employing their own staff, relying on their own experience/knowledge and doing everything in house and alone. Things like marketing and social media know how, IT and golf website stuff as well as course maintenance and society deals can mean (wait for it...) synergy by one organisation running several golf clubs, rather than them all being stand alone.

But at all times, they're serving the owners/club/members who are their employers. There's no real giving up of control.

I have no knowledge of the Kilcock situation. That's just business logic.

I believe that is not the business model in these clubs. The owners rent the property to the golf management company and they run the business, like any normal business tenant agreement. This would be logical for the owner to have a hands of agreement. This is the way Elm Green, Corballis and St Margaret’s are ran. I believe Grange Castle is the same sort of agreement along with Castleknock. But as stated already these are not member own clubs. I personally don’t know off any other members club that as taken this route, but I am sure a Kilcock member will confirm the actual situation. And I am not saying this is a bad thing either, just unusual.

What is normal in members clubs is to contract out Marketing, Course Maintenance, Catering and Pro shop. But in those type of golf clubs the committees still have control of time sheets and the running of the golf at the club.

ShriekingSheet wrote: »

You're assuming, with little or no knowledge, that (a) the members have put nothing in the contract to protect their timesheet and other important elements, and (b) they have no way of evicting their tenant if the tenant treats the members badly.

I also have little or no knowledge, but I know that turkeys don't vote for Christmas.

In every club Synergy works with, they are beholden to their owner/landlord/employer/partner - call it what you will. Some owners will give them relatively free reign (e.g.: places with no or very few members), but most will have stipulations (be they commercial, golf, whatever).

Just because Synergy have one deal with one course, doesn't mean it's the same with every club. The tone of your posts is as if Kilcock have "given up control" in such a way that Synergy could arrive in and make Saturdays and Sundays fully society days and cancel all the monthly medals.

What I have stated so far is fact you are making the assumptions! Kilcock is under new management, that is clearly stated on the sites. What that exactly means I don’t know and hence why I said i am sure a member will confirm the actual situation. But this would not be normal for a members club and the first I have heard off but not a surprise as I have heard a few clubs float the idea.

Commercial or single owner clubs would do this in the current market place and would have no input in the running of the club. They might have men’s clubs set up that work with them but it is usually not contractual.

But all I have done is shared some news with this community.

Ollieboy wrote: »

I believe that is not the business model in these clubs. The owners rent the property to the golf management company and they run the business, like any normal business tenant agreement. This would be logical for the owner to have a hands of agreement. This is the way Elm Green, Corballis and St Margaret’s are ran. I believe Grange Castle is the same sort of agreement along with Castleknock. But as stated already these are not member own clubs. I personally don’t know off any other members club that as taken this route, but I am sure a Kilcock member will confirm the actual situation. And I am not saying this is a bad thing either, just unusual.

What is normal in members clubs is to contract out Marketing, Course Maintenance, Catering and Pro shop. But in those type of golf clubs the committees still have control of time sheets and the running of the golf at the club.

it's not unusual at all, Look up Carr Golf, Synergy are doing the Same thing in a few clubs.... Many Clubs Management committees could manage a Balloon let alone the running of a good club. These guys come in and offer very professional services, Invest in the product and improve it, While saving money and increasing revenue. alot more clubs should be seeking this kind of solution.

Ollieboy wrote: »

The only other members club I can find on either site is Charlesland and I am not even sure if they do the management of that club. Other clubs are just maintenance agreements from what I read. And yes, if public or private own club it makes perfect sense to use this sort of service.

Anyway, it doesn’t matter has I was just interest to know why a members own club would do it and how it work out, but maybe the people I should ask is Carr or Synergy.

I personally would hate it unless the contract had a lot of clauses in relation to timessheet, catering services, pricing and course opening. A lot of these business clubs might have no interest in opening on a particular day if the course is a marginal call and if they have no green fee or society income to earn on that day if the contract wasn’t protecting the members.

They manage all in Charlesland too.
Greens,Catering,building and bar. Charlesland like Castleknock are not member owned clubs, they were paying to rent the course off the owners. The committee's couldn't make it work.... call in people who can and do.... And yes it causes a little unrest for a while, human nature doesn't like change, And members are inclined to have the negative opinion you have about such companies. Ideas like "oh... We're gonna have 10 societies this weekend...we'll never get a game." etc.. etc
it won't happen... what will happen is through better marketing, rate management strategic planning and inside knowlage of the buisness is you will see an increase in footfall and you will see your club becomeing stronger and you will no longer hear talk of Levies or increased Subscriptions.

neckedit wrote: »

They manage all in Charlesland too.
Greens,Catering,building and bar. Charlesland like Castleknock are not member owned clubs, they were paying to rent the course off the owners. The committee's couldn't make it work.... call in people who can and do.... And yes it causes a little unrest for a while, human nature doesn't like change, And members are inclined to have the negative opinion you have about such companies. Ideas like "oh... We're gonna have 10 societies this weekend...we'll never get a game." etc.. etc
it won't happen... what will happen is through better marketing, rate management strategic planning and inside knowlage of the buisness is you will see an increase in footfall and you will see your club becomeing stronger and you will no longer hear talk of Levies or increased Subscriptions.

So do the company providing services to the members of Charlesland GC have the contract with the club itself or with the owners. Ballinascorney have a similar arrangement you would wonder what sort of annual rent the golf clubs would be paying to the landowners??

neckedit wrote: »

They manage all in Charlesland too.
Greens,Catering,building and bar. Charlesland like Castleknock are not member owned clubs, they were paying to rent the course off the owners. The committee's couldn't make it work.... call in people who can and do.... And yes it causes a little unrest for a while, human nature doesn't like change, And members are inclined to have the negative opinion you have about such companies. Ideas like "oh... We're gonna have 10 societies this weekend...we'll never get a game." etc.. etc
it won't happen... what will happen is through better marketing, rate management strategic planning and inside knowlage of the buisness is you will see an increase in footfall and you will see your club becomeing stronger and you will no longer hear talk of Levies or increased Subscriptions.

The other reason members clubs might go this route is due to the lack of volunteers with the correct skillsets to run a business/club, but I can’t see many members own clubs go this way which is why I am surprised by Kilcock, but if the members can’t make it work then fair enough.

But most member clubs do make it work. We only allow societies out at 3 onwards at weekend on the main course, hence we get very few of them and we have only increase subs once in the last 12 years and they are actually lower now then in 2008. So members can run clubs well if they have the right people.

If the above business run to many clubs then they will end up with to much power which is already a issue in relation to booking systems in Ireland. They will also view the course as a short term asset which could also lead to problems in 20 years time with no capital investment.

But in the current climate with the race to the bottom these type of business have a purpose, but in a rising or full market, I am not sure!