Car Park Golfers - The Aftermath

It would seem my post on car park golfers have ruffled a few feathers and provoked some debate and comments. It would seem that opinion falls into two distinct camps. On the one hand there are the golfers themselves who see no problem with members playing this way and think that the blog is creating problems where none exist. On the other side of the fence are golf clubs who seem to be desperate for money in frugal times and would seem to need members to utilise the facilities pre or post round.

However, there also seems to be a misconception that I am totally anti car park golfers. This is not true. If this is the only way members can get out and play and 6.30am is the only time that allows them to get a golfing fix and maintain their own domestic balance then I am happy and said as much. They have paid their fees and I'm a firm believer in golf being made as accessible as possible. To that degree I'm pleased to see so many clubs getting rid of the necessity of being proposed and seconded for prospective membership and making the ability to join a club more open and available.

 

A lot of the comments from those supporting the car park golfer focuses on their right to use the club in any way they seem fit. They have paid their membership fees, sometimes a not insignificant amount per annum, and there is nothing to say they have to use the club, enter competitions or even maintain an active handicap. Very true on every level. Indeed one of the most consistent threads would seem to be that many feel the clubhouse is full of cliques and not actually a welcoming environment and that the cost of a beer or food is expensive, even if the club offers a members discount

The argument would seem to be very much that these members pay their fees each year and so are supplying the club with revenue and therefore have no obligation to do anything more. Again totally correct. They are getting a well maintained course with minimal hassle compared to the lottery of some (definitely not all) pay and plays in terms of condition of the course and the pace of play. Many are competent golfers who adhere to the etiquette of the game in terms of replacing divots and repairing pitch marks and divots. Similarly, not everyone wants to play in competitions and for many they are happy to rock up, go out and go home.

Can golf clubs afford to lose the membership. Probably not and it seems the demographic make up is changing. Fewer it would seem are interested in the social side of being a member and many are just happy to be out playing regularly at a decent course. With some clubs struggling to make the numbers of required members it would be churlish for them to ignore this. However it does then beg the question what if anything do clubs need to do to change the perception of the 19th and make it more welcoming and less intimidating. Clubs need members. That is undeniable and members have the power to decide how they want to exercise their playing privileges once they have paid their subs.

On the flip side, golf clubs surely have an obligation to try and entice members into using the bar and catering and it would seem to be basic marketing. They face an unenviable task of trying to balance the books annually and provide a quality golf course for its members to play on. I know of clubs where there has been uproar at a 2p per pint increase on beer prices and some have commented on the soulless task of working for years to try and raise bar takings by a meagre 2%. For many clubs, the lifeblood is regular green fees and societies. This is fundamental.

However, they also face the challenge of trying to convert the car park golfer. As I said in the original piece if the group of 10 regular early morning players went into the bar for twenty minutes and spent £1.50 per head then over the year that is £750 per annum. Now that is a drop in the ocean, but it doesn't take many of these groups, particularly as the problem extends to midweek members, for the sum to creep up and eventually make a difference.

What can clubs do though? They have to move into the 21st century. Many still seem to operate antiquated rules that make members feel they are walking on eggshells in fear of breaking some obscure rule and incurring the wrath of other members and club officials. That is never going to entice the car park member into changing their habits and quite frankly I wouldn't blame them. There is often a problem with cliques within the 19th too and many observe irregular visitors with suspicion. In tight economic times, bar and food revenue is a small but essential facet of making ends meet. It could be argued, that if members were welcomed into a pleasant, friendly and clean environment then they would be persuaded to use it regularly. I know, as I'm sure you do, of clubs that fail to provide the basics and are unwelcoming and unkempt. Poorly kept beer, unappetising food and dirty furniture are hardly likely to persuade anyone to loiter.

Golf clubs are never going to please all of the members all of the time and never going to convert all of the car park golfers into becoming regular faces in the bar. No-one is trying to argue that this is ever going to happen. Nor should it. However it shouldn't stop them trying. As the advert says "every little helps" and so if they can make profits however small then these can be used to reinvest in course maintenance, keeping the facilities clean and manageable and generally enhancing the membership experience.It is crystal clear that many of you have very strong feeling on the subject of car park golfers and that they have a fundamental right to play as and when they choose.

 

There are far more important issues regarding being a member of a golf club to be concerned about such as pace of play and the condition of the course itself. Many of you feel the car park golfer poses no threat to the sustainability of a club and that it is the club that has the problem and not the golfer. Having weighed the evidence and compelling arguments on here and on Twitter I'd be inclined in the main to agree. However I still maintain that by giving nothing over and above their annual fees, it does nothing to help a club go forward. Balance that with the fact that for many, even finding their annual fees is now a huge issue, then clubs must welcome their ability to pay their fees at all and the fact that they choose to play and go home, doesn't negate their contribution in the grand scheme of things.

I hope this follow up has cleared any misunderstanding and that I do not see car park golfers as some form of lesser member or someone not doing his bit for the club. It has certainly surprised me on how strongly some of you have felt and the level of opposition to my original piece. I stand by it of course and I'm pleased it provoked a frank discussion and that you feel the onus is totally on the club to find innovative and appealing ways of making the car park golfer want to give more in terms of both his time and money, both of which are limited commodities. It would seem many clubs have either given up the ghost and accepted this type of member for what they are while others seem up for the challenge and are actively seeking a way to get them into the bar on more regular basis.I'd like to thank you for your time in reading the original piece and this follow up and for taking the time where applicable for responding here and via Twitter. If this was contentious what you will make of my thoughts on slow play should make interesting consumption but that is a treat for another day.