Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Winston O Boogie jr
Not exactly the case. I haven't seen the budget, but f someone knows percentage of the total amenity income goes toward executive golf then you could just apply that same percentage to your amenity bill to determine how much you pay for golf.
We all pay the same amount for golf regardless of how much we play, or even if we don't play at all.
Golf is not free. Someone is paying for it.
I've played many excellent golf courses in my life that get an enormous amount of play and many have been in at least reasonable, if not excellent condition. Pebble Beach comes to mind. It s one of the most played golf courses in the world and I've never seen it in terrible shape.
If a golf course is getting a lot of play then they are getting a lot of income. In the case of the executive courses, the income comes from those 80,000 plus households.
Also, as The Villages has grown, more courses have been added so I don't know that they are getting any more play then they did twenty years ago.
|
C'mon Doc. Comparing Pebble Beach to TV? $495 greens fee! If played as frequently as you describe, imagine the resources they have available to keep the course in the condition you experienced. BTW, when I played PB, it was in the middle of a drought like exists now in CA. They had no grass on the fairway and were watering the greens and tees only. No reduction in fees, though. Plus, the quality of player who goes to PB is far superior to the beginners and novice players who frequent TV courses. Makes a big difference in maintenance costs.
The number of rounds played in TV has increased significantly every year, surpassing 2 million in 2015. Although they have added courses, those of us who have been here for 10 years or more will confirm that it gets harder every year to get desired tee times on desired courses. Each year you have to increase the number of courses and widen the time range on requests in order to avoid being shut out.
The organization of the maintenance program in TV is exactly as it should be. If we follow your logic in the previous post, then any large company or corporation should not utilize suppliers or sub-contractors and should do it all themselves. With all the courses to be maintained, it only makes sense to contract it out to companies that do this as their sole business activity. This is not the easy way out. It is the most efficient. Eric and GMS manage the contractors rather than manage the mass of individuals that would be required by your example.
Every year we go through "Miserable May" as the courses recover from the high season play and overseeding followed by the necessary aeration. And every year they get back to good condition.