AN ANALYSES 0F GBLF AS A RECREATIONAL BUSINESS IN GENEESEE COUNTY, MICHIGAN Thesis for the Degree of M. S. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY LEWSS WHITFIELD MQNCRIEF 1967 ' .. .Lllh‘f’KWuflw’J-R '3‘”), LIB R A. r2 Y a] Michigan St to University THEM! M W? a? ABSTRACT AN ANALYSIS OF GOLF AS A RECREATIONAL BUSINESS IN GENESEE COUNTY, MICHIGAN by Lewis W. Moncrief In recent years there has been a great upsurge in the development of rural recreation enterprises of all types. Golf courses have played a major part in meeting this intensified demand for outdoor recreation facilities. Research was conducted in Genesee County (Flint) Michigan, in an attempt to determine what gross feasibility, planning, developmental, and Operational factors are impor- tant to operators and potential entrepreneurs of golf courses. Particular emphasis was given to answering the needs of farmers who might be contemplating developing a golf course. In considering the feasibility of a particular enterprise, the available market and adequate financing were found to be critical factors. Financing should be adequate to develop a full lB-holes and funds should be available to develop a quality facility in a relatively finished form. Partial financing can be achieved by selling residential lots around the perimeter if adequate land is available. Prior golf course experience and training of the operator in operational methods and techniques does not Lewis w. Moncrief seem to be essential to the long term development of a top quality facility. Managerial ability is important, however. An agricultural background can be of some assistance in initial construction and operations phase because of the knowledge concerning equipment and plant growth processes. The final consideration concerning feasibility, but perhaps first in the order of consideration is the attitude toward the clientele. Tolerance and understanding are necessary elements if the owner is to develop a satisfactory relationship with the public, which is sometimes incon- siderate of property and efforts to be of service. Long hours add stress to the job since operators worked an average of 76 hours per week during the season. Adequate planning including location of the site and previous ownership of the land are important factors to consider. Utilization of the services of a golf course architect is recommended in all cases. Much other assist- ance from the U.S. Soil Conservation Service, county extension agents, golf professionals, and the National Golf Foundation is available and should be used. In the development and operation of courses the use of labor contributed by the owner's family can be quite important. The conversion of pre—existing buildings to golf course uses can also furnish an initial impetus to deveIOpment by reducing capital investment even if it is only a stop gap measure. Lewis W. Moncrief Rural recreation businesses by their very nature are risky and golf courses are no exception. All possible factors that may effect an operation should be thoughtfully studied before an investor decides to establish a golf enterprise. AN ANALYSIS OF GOLF AS A RECREATIONAL BUSINESS IN GENESEE COUNTY, MICHIGAN By Lewis Whitfield Moncrief A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Department of Resource Development 1967 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Many people assisted the author in various ways in the completion of this research. Special thanks are due the owners and operators of the twenty—four golf courses and driving ranges involved in this study. Without their assistance this project would not have been possible. Individual recognition is given in Appendix II. Mr. Stanley Mahaffy, Genesee County extension agent, rendered valuable assistance in this field study. I also gratefully acknowledge the help given me by the members of my thesis committee: Professor Louis Twardzik, chairman; Dr. Emmanuel Van Nierop, who critically reviewed the manuscript several times; Dr. Milton Steinmueller; and Dr. James Hundley. Finally, I should like to give recognition to Mrs. Anne Ringlund who typed the first draft of this work as a kindness to me. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii LIST OF APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii Chapter I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Golf as a Recreation Enterprise . . . . . 3 Scope of this Study . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . . 7 9 II. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Historical Development of Golf . . . . . . . 9 The Golfing Boom . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Types of Golfing Enterprises . . . . . . . . 19 Types of Ownership . . . . . 27 Socio-Economic Characteristics of Golfers . 33 Factors Which Have Contributed to the Growth of Golf .'. . . . . . . . . . . . . A“ III. STUDY AREA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A6 Genesee County . . . . . . A6 Population Characteristics and Trends . . . A7 Economy of Genesee County . . . . . . . . . 50 Land Use . . . . . . . . 52 Significant Institutional Factors . . . . . 53 IV. CONDUCTING THE STUDY . . . . . . . . . . . . . SA Nature of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . SA Design for the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 iii Chapter Page V. THE ENTERPRISES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Categories . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Types of Golf Courses . . . . . . . . . . . 6A Developmental Patterns . . . . . . . . . . 7A Driving Ranges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92 VI. HUMAN ASPECTS OF THE ENTERPRISES . . . . . . 96 User Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . 96 Employees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104 The Managers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 VII. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . 11A Hypotheses Restated . . . . . . . . . . . . 11“ Facility Planning . . . . . . . 115 Management Background and Training . . . . 116 Financing . . . . . . . . . . 118 Outside Assistance Utilized . . . . . . . . 120 Employees . . . . . . . . . . 120 Utilization of Family Labor . . . . . 122 Adaptation of Agricultural Techniques and Knowledge . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 Available Market . . . . . 123 Utilization of Previously Owned Land, Equipment, and Capital Investments . . . 12A Conclusions that are Unrelated to the Hypothetical Framework . . . . . . . . 125 Suggestions for Future Research . . . . . . 130 BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136 iv Table 10. ll. l2. 13. 1A. LIST OF TABLES Estimated Increase in Number of Golfers Since 19A6 . . . . . . . . . . National Golf Course Inventory Since 1960 Golfing Population Since 1960 . Summary of the 196A Census Report for the Athletic Goods Manufacturers Association Characteristics of Subscribers to Golf Magazine . Selected Outdoor Recreation Articles Present in the Household and Article Use Within the Past Year According to Family Income . Tabulation of the Presence and Use of Outdoor Recreation Articles in Households According to Family Income, Class and Place of Residence . Preferred Outdoor Activities and the Various Restrictions on Participation . . . POpulation Characteristics of Genesee County by Townships Inventory of Golf Facilities in Different Areas of Michigan . . . . . . . . General Information Concerning Public Golf Courses in Genesee County General Information Concerning Private Golf Courses in Genesee County Private Clubs Associated with Residential Subdivisions as Related to the Costs of Memberships . . . . . . . . . . . . . Building Conversion from Previous to Present Uses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Page l7 l8 19 37 39 Al A2 A3 50 61 66 68 68 69 Table Page 15. General Information Concerning Semi—Private Golf Clubs in Genesee County . . . . . . . . 71 16. General Information Concerning Privately Owned Public Courses in Genesee County . . . 73 17. Information Concerning Acquisition of the Land and Development of the Courses . . . . . . . 75 18. Financing of the Various Privately Owned Courses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 19. Commercial Driving Ranges . . . . . . . . . . . 93 20. Estimates of the Per Cent of Users from the Various Occupational Groupings . . . . . . . 97 21. Estimates of the Per Cent of Users by Residence 100 22. Use on Weekdays and Weekends . . . . . . . . . 103 23. Employee Information. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 2A. Operator Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108 25. Childhood and Adult Residence Locations of the Operators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 26. Employee Data Compared According to Ownership Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 vi LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Figure Page 1. Growth in the Number of Golf Courses Since 1931 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l6 2. Genesee County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A8 3. Location of the Golf Facilities in Genesee County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 A. Back view of a very large barn that has been remodeled for use as a course clubhouse. The roof is to be altered and columns added to replicate a colonial plantation . . . . . . . 76 5. Barn converted into a clubhouse by a farmer. The barn is built on a sheer precipice which allowed a veranda to be built on the back side level with the front ground level . . . 76 6. Farmhouse basement that was converted into a clubhouse and pro shop . . . . . . . . . . . 77 7. Dairy barn remodeled into a clubhouse . . . . . 77 vii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Opportunities to establish private outdoor recreation enterprises are greater now in the United States than at any other time in this country’s history. Demand is high and according to the Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commis— sion it will continue to Spiral upward barring unforeseen national catastrophies. In summarizing demand for outdoor recreation, the commission noted that about 90 per cent of all Americans participated in some form of outdoor recreation in the summer of 1960. In total, they participated in one activity or another on A.A billion separate occasions. It is anticipated that by 1976 the total will be 6.9 billion, and by the year 2000, it will be l2.A billion——a threefold increase by the turn of the century.1 This pressure has so intensified in the last few years that public agencies are finding it difficult to keep up with the demand for recreation facilities. Private enterprise has to a certain extent been of assistance in alleviating the situation. Some farmers have converted croplands into recrea— tional uses and many other private enterpreneurs have lU.S., Outdoor Recreation for America, prepared by the Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1962), pp. 30—32. -1- _2_ established businesses to serve different segments of the recreational demand. Many farmers, especially those with marginal agricultural land, have found that the use of their property for recreational purposes is more profitable than for crop production. Moreover, the development of outdoor recreation facilities on private land has been encouraged by the federal government through the passage of the Food and Agriculture Act of 1962. Under this legislation outdoor recreation is regarded as a means to continue small farm ownership and to increase the income of farm families.l Farmers are not alone in taking advantage of the current demand for recreation facilities. Rural non-farm landowners, particularly near metropolitan areas, are often in an ideal position to offer recreational opportunities to their urban neighbors. Certain types of outdoor recreation enterprises are well adapted to operation by retired people, by part—time managers, and by people with seasonal jobs. Golf as a Recreational Enterprise Golf as a recreational enterprise seems to have cap- tured the imagination of many land owners and financiers. Several factors are responsible for the appeal of golf as a business venture. One reason is the consistently profitable aspect of this kind of business if properly managed and an lFood and Agriculture Act of 1962, Public Law 87—703, September 27, 1962. -3- adequate market exists.l Evidence of the profitability of golfing businesses is given by the amount of financial assist— ance that is available through the Farmer's Home Administra— tion which administers provisions of the Food and Agriculture Act of 1962. During the first year after the program went into effect, loans totaling $1,310,390 were approved to seven— teen different recreational associations. Twelve of the seventeen projects were for golf courses.2 It would appear therefore that FHA considers golf courses to be low risk in— vestments as compared to other types of farm recreation enter- prises. Private lending firms are also inclined to look upon golf courses as favorable investment opportunities. Golf courses appeal to the private land owner too because basically it is an agricultural operation with a generous amount of public relations and business management mixed with it. The idea of owning a business which entails working in an outdoor environment adds to the attraction. Furthermore, in many parts of the country golf courses are operated on a seasonal basis which enables the owner to take a long vacation or accept part—time employment during the winter season. lVerne Wickham, Municipal Golf Course (Chicago: National Golf Foundation, 1955), p. Hi 2Harry 0. Eckhoff, "Golf Course Loan Programs,” Recreation, January, 196A, p. 2A. _u_ Importance of the Study This study was designed to examine in detail, golf operations as an outdoor recreation enterprise and to ascer— tain key facotrs which have a bearing on entrepreneurship opportunities for potential investors. Golf Operations were chosen for study because there is currently considerable interest in golf course development among farmers and others who are concerned with recreational businesses. A cardinal tenet of the scientific method is to ob— tain all the information that is available about the particu- lar subject to be studied. When decisions involve invest- ments averaging more than $125,0002 for an eighteen hole regulation golf course exclusive of land costs and club house development, it is apparent that a great deal of back- ground material is necessary. Certain factors obviously have a direct effect on the potential profitability of golfing enterprises. For example, supply and demand factors such as population concen- trations necessary to support a golf course have been recog- nized as important considerations. These market requirements 1 Louis F. Twardzik, "Farm Recreation Enterprises—- Problems and Opportunities," Michigan Farm Economics, July, 1966. This figure is computed from statistics given by Ben Chlevin, Golf Operator's Handbook (Chicago: National Golf Foundation, 196I7, p. 69. -5- have been identified and the implications stated.l On the other hand there are many factors which are difficult to evaluate because their intangible nature prevents proper comparative analysis. The U. S. Soil Conservation Service and the Asso— ciation of Soil Conservation Districts are currently spon— soring a nationwide study of the potential for private outdoor recreation developments. This study is a follow—up of a survey of outdoor recreation enterprises that was com— pleted early in 1966.2 The guidelines developed for this study attempt to promote clarity and consistency in apprais- ing the recreational potential of existing resources. Specific multiplier and rating values applicable to a variety of conditions have been developed to arrive at overall eval- uation scores.3 In this study of golfing operations in Genesee County it is hoped that additional light will be shed on certain aspects of golfing operations that have seldom been considered in depth or at least have not been related to the problem at hand—-that of broadening the information base 1The California Committee on Planning for Recreation, Park Areas and Facilities in its Guide for Planning Recrea— tion Parks in California stated that areas with a population of 20,000 can support an l8-hole golf course. Each additional course requires a population of about 30,000. 2 3 U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Guide to Making Appraisals of Potentials for Outdoor Recreation Developments (Washington: U.S. Government Print— ing Office, 19653, p. A. For a further discussion of this inventory see page61. —6- from which potential entrepreneurs and operators of existing facilities can make more knowledgeable decisions. Scope of this Study This study includes all regulation length nine and eighteen hole golf courses, all par-3 nine and eighteen hole golf courses and a representative sample of the commercial driving ranges in Genesee County, Michigan. Originally plans were to consider only semi—private courses but later it was decided to include private clubs and publicly owned courses as well. This change was made for several reasons. The in— clusion of facilities operated by various ownership groups furnishes a basis for comparing the range of facilities that are provided by each group. Examining all the golf courses and driving ranges in the county also makes it possible to determine if trends of ownership change over time exist such as semi-privatel courses becoming progressively more exclu- sive until eventually a private club is formed or vice versa. An examination of the differences in the development and planning that has been employed by the different ownership groups, would enable us to identify possible different methods used in the formation of private enterprises. A comparative study of managerial personnel is likely to uncover certain unique characteristics among those who 1The term "semi—private” generally refers to those courses operated by private enterprise for public use usually on a daily fee basis. However an alternative definition of this term is offered for this study on page 6A. -7- operate profit motivated enterprises which allow them to compete with enterprises whose interest in making a profit is secondary. It was also decided to limit primary study facilities to regulation and par—3 golf courses and driving ranges because other golf related recreational enterprises, such as miniature golf courses, tend to be limited to loca- tions such as densely populated areas on heavy traffic arteries. These kinds of facilities are primarily amusement oriented and do not fall in the outdoor recreation category, as do the other golf course enterprises. The segment of this study devoted to the ownership and management of golf courses may involve personnel who are employed as greenskeepers, club house managers, golf profes- sionals or persons who have a combination of these responsi— bilities. In a few of the larger clubs a manager for the overall facility or the owner may be represented in the study. Hypotheses I. When compared to publicly owned or private group owned clubs, enterprises owned and operated by an individual will exhibit the following characteristics: (1) the facility will be less well planned, (2) the management will be less well trained and experienced in managing golfing facilities, (3) the enterprises will be less well financed, (A) the management will have utilized fewer sources of outside techni- cal assistance, and (5) fewer personnel will be employed. 1For a more detailed discussion of user characteris— tics see page 96. -8- 11. Individual golf entrepreneurs can compete successfully for an equitable share of the total golfing market if certain comparative advantages are utilized including: (1) the utilization of family labor, (2) adaptation of agricultural techniques and knowledge to golf course building and maintenance, (3) an available market in areas that otherwise are not being adequately served, and (A) land, equipment, and capital improvements which were owned by the entrepreneur prior to the development of the golf enterprise that can functionally be utilized in course. development. CHAPTER II BACKGROUND INFORMATION Historical Development of Golf The historical origin of golf in one sense is cloudy. If one is willing to accept the idea that hitting a Spherical object with a stick or club is a form of primitive golf, then it is quite conceivable that a caveman might be accorded the title of inventor of the game. By a very loose interpreta— tion of the objectives of contemporary golf, a case might be made for the evolutionary development of golf as a game through pre-Christian and medieval history. Paganica was a popular game among the Romans. Crooked sticks and balls with a leather cover and stuffed with feathers were utilized. There was no particular goal in the game except to hit the ball as far as possible.1 Chole, a Flemish game, Jeu de mail, a game of French origin, and a Dutch game called Rolven are other games which have been advocated by certain historians of sports as ances— trally related to golf. Charles Price takes the position that golf by design and by historical evidences is a game unique to Scotland when he states, "Whatever resemblance 1 Charles Price, The World of Golf (London: Cassell and Company, 1962), p. 11. -10- there are between golf and other ancient games, the simple truth remains that it was the Scots who first combined in a game the characteristics of hitting a ball cross country, to a hole in the ground, without interference from an oppo— nent."l There is some evidence that golf was a popular amuse- ment in St. Andrews, Scotland, as far back as 1A13 when St. Andrews University was established. The first direct refer— ence to golf is found in a decree from King James II in 1A57 which declared participation in golf to be illegal, because it interfered with the compulsory practice of archery for national defense.2 Golf continued to grow in popularity among the people even though in 1A71 James 111 and James IV in 1A9l reiterated the ban. By 1603, the bow and arrow had been superseded by gunpowder as the principle weapon of national defense, there- fore the statutes were obsolete. In that same year, James VI appointed a royal club-maker and a royal ball—maker. Imports of balls and clubs from Holland had prompted this action as a deterrent to the outflow of gold and silver for purchase 3 of these imports. 1 Ibid., p. 16. 2Nevin H. Gibson, The Encyclopedia of Golf (New York: A. S. Barnes and Company, 1958), p. 3. 3 Ibid. -11- The first golfing society, The Honorable Company of Edinburgh Golfers was established in 17AA.l A Scottish golfing society would be comparable to the formation of a country club today. These organizations possessed influen— tial political power which enabled them to obtain civil recognition. This political influence aided them in receiv- ing land grants and certain other special privileges for their links and other facilities. "The membership of these golfing societies and clubs was confined to the privileged group, a clientele referred to as 'Gentlemen Golfers.'" In 175A, the St. Andrews Society of Golfers, now known as the Royal and Ancient Golf Club of St. Andrews, was established. Historically, this club has been viewed as the authority in all matters related to golf. In fact, in the early years of golf in the United States, St. Andrews rules were strictly adhered to and disputes over interpreta— tions or applications of the rules were often settled by requesting a ruling directly from St. Andrews' officials. One interesting aspect of the growth and popularity of golf in Scotland was that from the beginning the general populace of Scotland played a vital role even though golf societies were composed almost altogether of the affluent. The decrees against playing golf obviously were directed lIbid. 2Quoted from James Grierson, Delineations of St. Andrews (London: Cupar, 1833). -12- toward the average citizen soldier, because the opulent would scarcely have served as common foot soldiers. Although most of the courses were under the control of golf societies, all of them were open free to the public. There seems to have been no social barriers among those who played. In fact, in 1682, while King James II was still a resident of Edinburgh and held the title of Duke of York, he was challenged by two English noblemen to a match on the links of Leith to settle in their own way the ancient dis- pute over the origin of the game. He chose as his partner Johne Paterson, a very poor shoemaker, but an excellent golfer. The match was won by the Duke and Paterson with each taking an equal share of the large stake that had been wagered. With his share Paterson built a house, which stood in the heart of Edinburgh until it was demolished to make way for a housing project in 1961.1 The participation by all segments of Scottish society stands in strong con- trast to the early development of golf in North America as will be noted below. Although Scotland was the cradle of golf, the United States is today the unchallenged leader in every phase of golf from the number of participants to the top money win- ning professionals. In recent years golf has had a growth rate in the United States unparalleled by few other partici— pation Sports. But golf was Slow to catch on in the infancy of this country. lPrice, p. 19. -13- There is some evidence, furnished by several old pamphlets, that a golf club was formed in Charleston, South Carolina, in 1786.1 Apparently, there was also a golf club formed in Savannah, Georgia, because there are records which indicate that an anniversary was celebrated in 1796. These clubs, however, were soon disbanded. There is some disagreement as to which is the oldest permanent golf course in the United States. Foxsburg, Pennsylvania Golf Club is claimed by some to have been founded in 1887 by Joseph Fox, who became interested in golf while on a trip to Scotland.2 Generally, John Reid of Yonkers, New York is credited with forming the first club in the United States.3 He and several other associates built a 3-hole layout in his cow pasture. Subsequently, the course was moved four times before it moved to the location at Mt. Hope in West Chester County, New York, where the club remains to this day. The Golfinngoom Even though golf has tended to be quite sensitive to economic and social conditions since that first permanent course was established in 1887 or 1888, the growth of golf has been phenomenal. By 1900 there were about 1,000 golf llbid., p. 59. 2 "The Origin of the Club," Esquire, December, 1965, p. 80. 3Gibson, p. 16. -14- courses scattered throughout the United States, and every state had at least one course.1 This development in just one decade is amazingly rapid if one considers that in the sixty years following 1900, the growth has been less than seven times that of the initial twelve years. It might seem peculiar to the casual observer that golf in the United States should from the abortive begin— nings ninty years before suddenly blossom into a popular outdoor sport by the last decade of the nineteenth century. However, to understand this development, the 1890's must be viewed in perspective. Not long before this period the challenge of settling a national frontier had been met, the Civil War had been fought and the Industrial Revolution was generating increased prosperity.2 These developments set the stage for the introduction and eager acceptance of golf as well as many other participation sports during the play- minded 90's. Growth in expenditures, substantially increasing numbers of golf courses being constructed, and a veritable avalanche of new participants has characterized the sport since its introduction to the United States seventy—nine years ago. There were approximately 122,200 golfers in the United States in 1898 who were spending approximately 1Ibid., p. 18. Richard S. Tufts, The Scottish Invasion (Pinehurst, North Carolina: Pinehurst Publishers, 1962), p. 5. -15- $15,000,000 on the game annually.l This amounted to about $125 per year per player. In 1965 the National Golf Founda— tion estimated that there were 7,750,000 serious golfers2 who Spent more than $213,200,000 for golf equipment alone, or about $27 per person. This figure does not include club memberships, greens fees and other charges which are as much a part of the game as the equipment used.3 In 1900 there was a total of 990 courses in the United States. In 1965, by official inventory, there were 8,323 golf courses in operation.“ During this period sev- eral dramatic spurts of growth took place and during other times severe slumps were experienced. The pre-World War II peak year for golf courses in operation was 5,727 in 193A. By 1937, there were only 5,196 golf courses in existence. By 1939 there had been an upsurge of courses to 5,303. From 1939 to 19A5 the number of golf courses declined to a post- 1925 low of A,808. The amazing rate of growth which began in 1953 has continued unabated until the present. (See Figure l.) lGibson, p. 18. 2The National Golf Foundation defines a serious golfer as one who plays more than fifteen rounds of golf per year. 3Roger Ganem, "Golf's Business Biceps Bulge," Golfdom, January, 1966, p. 27. “National Golf Foundation, Statistical Information Sheet 2, October 1, 1965.. .1 ) /\ _ .|'00 on...“ a. Hnmfl mocfim mtpMum conflc) one s? cozotw imLBCo mama H we 6 u I rC Id. ‘7.. TI | o,cl..ca.c i a, ,1 (a r. TL .c .m cm 1 cos: sass cccr comm scam cccm 2cm coco comm soso sass cows scan ccmc song coca some cccm comm sosm momhsoo no .02 -16- -17- Figures are not available for the number of golfers in the United States for the years before 19A6. However, the following figures on the number of participants1 are given for each year since 19A6 by the National Golf Founda- tion.2 TABLE 1.--Estimated number of golfers since 19A6 Year Number of Golfers Year Number of Golfers 19A6 2,AA9,905 1956 3,680,000 19A7 2,516,506 1957 3,812,000 1948 2,7A2,23A .1958 3,970,000 19A9 3,112,000 1959 A,125,000 1950 3,215,160 1960 A,A00,000 1951 3,237,000 1961 5,000,000 1952 3,265,000 1962 5,500,000 1953 3,335,632 1963 6,250,000 195A 3,A00,000 1964 7,000,000 1955 3,500,000 1965 7,750,000 The 1960's have been in many respects quite similar to the other two golden eras of golf in America—-the 1890's and the 1920's. The growth rate for the three primary meas- sures of golf growth; i.e., expenditures, number of courses, 1These figures represent only those golfers who play more than fifteen rounds of golf per year. 2National Golf Foundation, Statistical Information Sheet 3. and at a Gane the number of golf courses is even more revealing. lowi bein TABL -18- number of golfers, has continued to increase each year very high rate. Quoting from Golfdom magazine, Mr. m indicates that In 1965 consumer sales reached a high of $213,200,000, a jump of 10.9% over the $192,300,000 in 196A. The annual growth rate in the ten year period from 1955 to 1966 was a flat 10%. The rate between 1960 and 196A was 15.6%. The latter period was particularly active. We EXpect at least a 10% growth in the next year [1966]. The statistics related to the number of golfers and The fol- ng indicate the rapid rate at which golf courses are g constructed.2 E 2.--Nationa1 golf course inventory since 1960 Number Increase Per cent .Year of courses in courses increase 1960 6385 _—_ --_ 1961 6623 238 3.7 1962 7070 AA7 6.7 1963 7A7? u07 5.6 196A 7893 A16 5.5 1965 8323 A30 5. 1966 8900* 577* 6.9* *Estimated lGanem. 2National Golf Foundation, Statistical Information Sheet 2, October 1, 1965. _19_ The following table Shows the growth in the number of golfers each year for the same period.1 TABLE 3.-—Go1fing population since 1960 Per cent Year Number of golfers Increase in golfers Increase 1960 A,A00,000 — - 1961 5,000,000 600,000 11.1 1962 5,500,000 500,000 10.0 1963 6,250,000 750,000 13.6 196A 7,000,000 750,000 12.0 1965 7,750,000 750,000 10.7 1966 9,000,000 1,250,000* 16.1* *Estimated Types of Golfing Enterprises Regulation Length Golf Courses Length is one of the most important factors in creat- ing an "ideal" course. Experts agree that approximately 3,200 yards for a nine hole course is a preferred length in 2 the case of most courses. Recommended par for such a course 1National Golf Foundation, Statistical Information Sheet 3. 2Information regarding lengths in this section is found in "Planning and Building the Golf Course," Planning Information for Private Golf Clubs (Chicago: National Golf Foundation, 1965), pp. 6—7. _20_ is 35, 36, or 37.1 Distance is the major determinant in assigning the par value for each hole. All holes Should fall in the range of a 3, A, or 5 par. The distance from the tee to the green for a par-3 hole should be between 130 and 180 yards. Minimum length for a par—A hole is 250 yards under United States Golf Association rules, but most golf course architects recommend that unless the physical layout of a particular hole is inordinately difficult the hole should be at least 350 yards long in order for the hole to be difficult enough to present a challenge. A par—5 hole ranges in length from A80 to 550 yards. In most instances each nine holes should have two par-5 holes and two par-3 holes of variable lengths within their respective ranges. Golf courses have traditionally had nine or eighteen holes since the game immigrated to America. In Scotland the courses had variable numbers of holes from five to twenty— five. The St. Andrews club set the precedent for eighteen holes when they built nine holes and used the same greens for both the outgoing and incoming nine.2 There are 3915 regulation nine hole courses and 3530 regulation eighteen 3 hole courses in the United States. The Similarity of the lPar is an arbitrary measure of the difficulty of a hole. It is the number of strokes an "eXpert golfer" would take to play the hole, always allowing the player two putts after his ball is on the green. 2Gibson, p. 7. . 3National Golf Foundation, Statistical Information Sheet 2, October 1, 1965. -21- two figures might veil the actual relative status of the two types. An eighteen hole course is a prestige factor which in many cases is more a matter of pride than of necessity. Almost invariably a nine hole course is only an interim condition resulting from a lack of immediate financing or inavailability of enough property or some other reason which limits development of the second nine. A nine hole regulation course requires from 50 to 80 acres; eighteen holes from 110 to 160 acres.1 Par-3 Golf Courses At present there are a total of 880 par-3 golf courses in the United States. A par-3 course is essentially a shortened form of a regulation course. Actually there are three kinds of short courses.2 A pitch and putt course is a shortened course on which all of the holes can be played with a pitching iron3 and a putter. This type course can be played quickly and only two clubs are needed. However, the course tends to be less interesting than other types of courses because of the design limitations imposed by the very short length. A regulation par-3 course is a Short course l"Planning and Building the Golf Course," Planning Information for Private Golf Clubs (Chicago: National Golf Foundation, 1965), p. 3. Most of the data in this section are taken from Earl E. Gaylor, Par-3 Golf, Management Aid Bulletin A7 (Oglebay Park, West Virginia: American Institute of Park Executives, 1965), p. 5. 3A pitching iron is the club which is usually used to hit shots which are within eighty yards of the green. -22_ with holes ranging in length from 80 to 250 yards. This length allows enough flexibility to design exciting varia- bility yet all the holes are par—3's. The third type of short course is the executive or par-60 course. This course is essentially a long par—3 course although there are usually several par—A holes. This design requires the use of almost all the clubs in the bag. Short courses have several advantages which allow them to attract a large clientele and to appeal to the com- mercial interests of entrepreneurs. AS was previously men— tioned, regulation courses can require as much as 160 acres of land for ideal development. On the other hand, a nine and eighteen hole pitch and putt course requires 8.5 and 18 acres respectively. A nine hole regulation par—3 course requires 30 acres; and an eighteen hole course requires about 33 acres.1 An executive course requires at least 35 acres. An eighteen hole short course is strongly preferred over a nine hole installation because several studies have shown that adding a second nine holes will consistently more than double course play.2 These acreage requirements make the location of a short course in or near an urban setting much more feasible than the location of a regulation length course in a comparable setting. 1The requirements for par-3 courses found in this section are from Gaylor, p. 11. 2 Ibid. -23_ A second factor which makes a short course attractive to investors is that development costs are much less for a short course than for a regulation course. A regulation golf course may cost $5,000 to $10,000 per hole to build exclusive of land costs and water systems, depending upon the terrain and other natural conditions. A par-3 course can be built for from $1,000 to $2,000 per hole for a facility of compar— able quality to that mentioned above.1 Lighting and other necessary features would have to be added. Also it is much less expensive to install lighting for night play on a short course. A survey by the American Institute of Park Execu- tives indicates that use can be increased as much as 100 per cent by lighting the courses for no extra investment except for the lighting system.2 Short courses appeal to golfers as well as to inves- tors for several solid reasons. The golfing boom has caused many regulation courses to be constantly overcrowded. In New York City a linkster can expect a five to six hour wait before teeing up. Short courses remove some of this pressure. However, in most instances the long term result of a short course is to increase play on area regulation courses. This is true because of the type of clientele short courses attract. Most players who venture out on the full length lBen Chlevin (ed.), Golf Operator's Handbook (Chicago: National Golf Foundation, 1956), p. 69. 2Gaylor, p. 1A. -2u_ links are true golfers.l Short courses in contrast attract a substantial percentage of novices and duffers. The National Golf Foundation estimates that new golfers account for 30 per cent of the play on the nation's short courses.2 Thus short courses are major channels through which non- golfers are introduced to the game. It usually is not long until the novice is ready to try the "big” courses. Short courses take less time to play. This is a key factor to busy people. An average golfer can play a nine hole short course in A5 minutes whereas on a regulation course it takes twice as long. The short course thus offers the serious golfer an opportunity to practice his short game in a shorter period of time. Play is usually faster on a short course due to fewer lost ballSa Lastly, short courses appeal to many junior golfers, ladies, older people, and family groups because a round of golf on a short course is not as exhausting. Short courses have been a part of golf in America since the game's introduction in the latter 19th century. It received its major impetus after World War II and the development of courses continues to eXpand. One of the country's leading professionals even predicts that by 1975 1The term "true golfer" here denotes a player who has had some eXperience playing golf and who probably owns his own clubs. 2Walter Cook and Ray Holland, Public Golf Courses, Management Aid Bulletin 3 (Oglebay Park, West Virginia: American Institute of Park Executives, 196A), p. 2A. -25_ the number of par-3 golf courses will exceed that of regula— tion length courses.1 This growth will be the dual product of both increased pOpularity of the par—3 game and the con— tinued inability of all foreseeable sources to supply enough regulation courses to meet the total demand. Driving Ranges The first commercial driving range was developed by Charles Engebrit and E. A. Markham, two Cleveland real estate men, when they built Euclid Beach for $18,000 adja- cent to a nine hole par-3 course.2 A driving range is simply a facility used to hit practice shots with various clubs from a tee area. Commercial driving ranges, much like par-3 courses, have proven to be a "breeding ground" for new golfers. It is estimated that non-golfers account for 50 per cent of all users of driving ranges. Other Related Enterprises Miniature golf courses consist of 18 holes with a teeing or starting area, putting strips and an enlarged area around the hole; all of which are usually surrounded by a barrier which keeps the ball in play and facilitates fast play.. A putter is the only club used. One writer indicates that 80 per cent of the players using these lGaylor, p. 9. 2 Chlevin, p. 29. 3Cook, p. 2A. -26_ facilities are non-golfers.l Miniature golf facilities serve as an introductory medium to the game of golf to a limited extent only, because of the nature of the activity. Miniature golf is more or less a form of amusement rather than a segment of the sport of golf. Golf-O-Tron is a form of golfing entertainment which is played indoors.2 The new electronic invention utilizes a special projector and screen that shows a course in color, a booth equipped with a driving net to which there are attached photo electric cells which feed impulses back to a computer which measures the distance and direction of the Shot. As one simulates advancement down the depicted fairway following his shot the computer marks the location of the fictitious shot and indicates the distance to the green. Lansing, Michigan, had one of the first three centers in the United States. Each booth in the center costs about $12,000 to furnish and equip. This novel innovation is geared to appeal to a golfing or non-golfing clientele. Golf Centers or Complexes The golf center is a relatively new development in golf course enterprises and is an extension of the concept of centralized services for multiple uses. Experience has shown that multiple golf activities provided in one location lIbid. 2"Golf Moves Indoors," Business Week, August 31, 1961, pp. 5A-55. -27- tend to complement one another, i.e., a clustering of facilities will attract a greater total of users than the same facilities located separate from one another.1 A golf complex usually has a short course, a driving range, a miniature golf course, an elaborate clubhouse facility and often a regulation length course. The advantage of such facilities is the attractions it offers every member of the family even though great diversity in skill and interest may exist. In addition, an individual introduced to the Sport, through participation in one of the complementary activities, might be induced to graduate to the next level of challenge if the opportunity were right at hand. A golfing complex also permits the use of buildings and em- ployees for several purposes. This versatility is a definite advantage to the investor in terms of return on his capital. Types of Ownership There are many combinations and types of ownership of golfing facilities. Several of the more common or unique arrangements will be discussed in this section. Private Clubs The oldest form of golf club is the private club, more commonly referred to as country clubs in this country. In the formative years of organized clubs in Scotland the nobility, the wealthy, and the politically influential lHarry C. Eckhoff, "Golf Centers," Golfdom, January, 196A, p. 32. -28- formed golfing societies and because of their influence were able to gain public land grants for their links and other facilities.1 The first courses in the United States were also privately operated but differed from Scottish links in that courses were operated for the exclusive use of the club's membership. Of the approximately 1000 golf courses in opera- tion in 1900 there were fewer than 100 which were Open to the general public.2 In 1931 of the 5691 courses in the United States AAA8 were private courses. The depression and the Second World War took a heavy toll of private courses, however. By 19A5 there was a total of A817 courses of which 3018 were private courses. This represented a reduction of 1A30 private courses in that fifteen year period. In 1965 there was a total 8323 courses of which 3887 were private clubs. These figures indicate that private clubs are not the major area of growth in golf today. Publicly Owned Enterprises Most publicly owned golf facilities are owned by municipalities. However, there are numerous examples of other governmental units operating public courses. Many townships and suburban communities near metropolitan areas are developing facilities which draw a large percentage of n lGibson, p. l. 2Wickham, p. 8. _29_ their users from the central city.1 It is a generally accepted rule that municipal golf courses should be operated on a self-sustaining basis. In many cases where this philos— ophy is successful the excess revenue above operating costs is used to pay for other park and recreation programs.2 County governments have recently become more active in initiating golf programs. Montgomery County, Pennsylvania is probably the outstanding example of such a system in the country today.3 Kensington Golf Course northwest of Detroit is a good example of a regional park authority operating a golf facility. The entry of many states into the golfing business is one of the most pronounced trends in governmental adminis- tration of golf facilities. Oklahoma, West Virginia, Ken— tucky, and Tennessee have all recently built courses on state park land. West Virginia is presently building two golf courses and associated facilities in a state park near Hinton, West Virginia, at a cost of $10 million.“ With the federal government's continued policy of aiding economically depressed areas such complexes in low income areas will prob- ably continue to be built to try to attract tourist dollars. 1Cook and Holland, p. 8. 2Ibid. 3Arthur Loeben, "How One County Met the Challenge of Golf," The Golf Course Reporter, July, 196A , p. 20. ”"Two Golf Courses Highlight $10 Million Pipestem State Park," Park Maintenancg, July, 1966,, pp. 12-13. -30_ When the original group of courses was built by the golfing societies in Scotland they were all free to the public even though they were under the control of the socie- ties.l Even today two of the four eighteen hole courses at St. Andrews course in Scotland are public courses administered by the village council.2 Van Cortlandt, the first public course in the United States, was opened in 1895 by the city of New York. Soon most of the larger cities along the Atlantic seaboard had developed courses. By 1931 there were 5A3 municipal courses in the United States. However, it was during the depression years that public courses received a boost from outside sources such as the Works Progress Admin- istration and other make-work programs.3 Municipal golf courses carry a disproportionately heavy load of play relative to their numbers. In 1955, A0 per cent of the nationfs golf play was done on municipal courses, which represented only 15 per cent of the nation's courses.Ll Thirty-two per cent of the nation's play occurred on 59 per cent of the courses-—the private clubs. The other 28 per cent of play occurred on the semi-private courses which were 26 per cent of all courses. Municipal courses have continued to have tremendous use-pressure which has 1 Price, p. 19. 2Wickham, p. 1. 3Ibid., p. A. These figures are taken from a study in 1955, Ibid. -31- caused some operating agencies in heavily populated areas to pursue a policy of non—resident discrimination in facility use. Semi-Private Enterprises Semi—private is a term generally used to denote a golf operation which is privately owned but open to the public usually on a daily fee basis.1 The most common owner- ship arrangement for semi—private operations is the single owner or partnership. A second type of arrangement is the incorporated investment company. A third type of ownership arrangement is the corporation which owns the property, course and facilities just as in the second type but leases the course to private clubs for operation. A fourth and increasingly important type of develop— ment is by land Subdividers.2 Some of the builders donate the land to the city and let them build the course. Others have built courses and then given them to the municipality, which repays the builder for the cost of the course over variable periods of time. Most builders turn the course over to a home owner's association made up of buyers of his 1In this specific study, however, it has been necessary to alter the basic definition Of semi-private course and to develop two classes of ownership types. These types have been designated as semi-private and privately-operated public courses. See pageffli for a definition of terms and a statement of distinctions. 2G. H. Crabtree, "Developing Golf Subdivisions," Urban Land (September, 1958), pp. 3-7. -32- property for Operation after he has subdivided all of his land. A few builders have retained ownership of the course for Operation as a daily fee course for public use. Housing is related to golf courses in that golf courses tend to raise and stabilize the value of residential property. The increased value is approximately $2000 per average lot.l Just as important as the lot is the type of houses which are built in such an environment. The range usually falls in the $25,000 to $75,000 bracket which pro- duces the greatest profits for the builder. These financial figures demonstrate the motivation for builders involving themselves with golf subdivisions. These facts are important to this study, however, because of the impact golf subdivisions are having on the golfing industry nationwide. In 1963 the National Golf Foundation found that more than 35 per cent of all golf courses built that year were associated with the development of residential subdivisions.2 Their conclusion was that real estate sub- divisions loom as the biggest outside producer of golf courses in the future. Resort hotels have been a major category of semi- private ownership since the introduction of golf into the United States. Hotels and motels have been particularly 1Ibid., p. 3. 2Bill Sherman, "Real Estate Men Build One of Three Courses," Golfdom, April, 196A , p. 66. _33_ active in the field of par—3 golf. Both the hotel operators and builders by the very nature of their businesses are interested in golf primarily as a complementary income pro- ducing undertaking. Ever since the end of World War II when, due to the shortage of courses, golf became a very profitable business, semi—private courses have set the pace in the number of courses built each year. In 19A6 there were 1076 semi— private courses. By 1956 the number had increased to 1692. In 1965 the National Golf Foundation reported a total of 3368 semi—private courses.1 This represented an increase of 213 per cent in 20 years. Socio-Economic Characteristics.of Golfers The National Golf Foundation's descriptive motto for golf is "The Game of a Lifetime for Everybody." Golf has proven in the last decade that it really deserves this title. It is played by people from almost every economic and social strata and all sex and age groups, a characteristic which is paralleled by few other sports. National Golf Foundation records indicate that the .number of golfers in the United States has increased 113 per cent since 1950.2 In the same period of time many areas of thecountry have eXperienced growth rates as high as 300 per 1National Golf Foundation, Statistical Information Sheet 2, October 1, 1965. 2Reprint by the National Golf Foundation of an arti- cle which was in The Sporting Goods Dealer, May 1966, en— titled "Golf Interest Doubles Since '50; More Growth Ahead." _34_ cent for junior and senior aged participants.1 The terms junior and senior golfers designate groups between the ages of 10-16 and 65 and over respectively. Golf participation in these two age groups has increased at this rate primarily in metropolitan settings. The participation group which has increased the most numerically in the last five years are lady golfers. Thirty- five per cent of the total increase of 3,250,000 participants since 1960 were women.2 More junior, senior, and women golfers are largely the factors that keep golf courses busy on week-days. Golf can be a very expensive game. A round of golf at private metropolitan clubs costs the average member from $5 to $13 on an average every time he plays depending on the cost of initiation fees and membership dues.3 On the other hand, a nine hole round of golf at a municipal course ranges from 50 cents to $3 depending on where the course is located in the United States. Fees at semi—private courSes are usually about the same as those charged by municipal courses in their vicinity. lReprint by the National Golf Foundation of an article which first appeared in the May, 1966 issue of Ohio Cities and Villages which was written by Harry 0. Eckhoff, entitled “What's Happening in Golf." 2 Cook and Holland, p. A. 3Herb Graffis, "Golf Economics," Golfdom, January, 196A‘, p. 21. -35- Equipment costs are quite variable. A complete first line set of clubs can cost as much as $300 or more while its most inexpensive counterpart can be purchased for less than $50. An incomplete or used set of clubs is even less eXpen— sive. Many people who are newly introduced to the game rent clubs at the courses for a nominal fee. These figures are cited to Show that although some people are excluded from the game for economic reasons, expense for most Americans is a secondary consideration. Golf has not always been available to everyone in America. Soon after the game's introduction most of the courses which were established were private country clubs. Under the economic conditions which existed in that era almost everyone but the wealthy was effectively excluded from participation in the game because it was so expensive. However, as more and more public and semi—private courses were built golf became less and less a "rich man's game." Tufts hypothesizes that the loss of golf's exclusive— ness materially aided in the establishment of America's un- disputed preeminence in international competition which it holds today. Almost all of the championship golfers, both professional and amateur, before 1910 were Scotsmen or Englishmen. In 1913 the two most celebrated golfers in the world at that time, Harry Vardon and Ted Ray, made an extended tour of the United States playing exhibitions and competing lTufts, p. 76. -36_ against all challengers. They were unbeaten until they played a nineteen year old ex—caddie by the name of Francis Quimet who beat them in a dramatic finish. Many golf his- torians rank this event as a pivotal date in the history of American golf.l Of comparable significance was the fact that this victory by a teenager from a background of limited economic opportunity demonstrated that wealth and the oppor— tunity to develop golfing Skills were not mutually exclusive. Since that time a large majority of all the great golfing professionals have been associated with golf as caddies or ways other than that which might be described as a "product of the country club set." Golf is a game that has become a status symbol despite the fact that it is available to most people who might want to participate. This status conveyance may be a carryover from its original association with the opulent, a result of skill at the game nullifying all social, economic, or other disadvantages at least on the links, or the conse- quence of other sophisticating influences. Whichever factors are dominant, a large measure of golf's appeal can be ascribed to this characteristic. Golfers are specialized consumers and as such demon- strate several interesting traits. The dollar volume for the equipment golfers buy is greater annually than the l1bid., p. 35. 2Wickham, forward. -37- expenditures for all other major classes of sporting goods 1 equipment combined. The following table shows the expendi- 2 tures for the various types of equipment for 196A: TABLE A.-—Summary of the 196A census report for the Athletic Goods Manufacturer's Association Equipment Annual Expenditure Golf equipment $128,2A9,0A6* Baseball and softball equipment 35,565,8A7 Athletic shoes 25,266,AAO Inflated goods 22,673,311 Miscellaneous items 1A,ll3,01A Tennis, badminton and related equipment 8,805,686 Helmets and pads 5,977,762 Boxing gloves 233,2Al Bowling bags 1A9,268 Total $250,25A,A63 * This figure represents 51 per cent of the official total for all equipment but actual expenditures for all golf equipment would be much greater if golf shoes and apparel were included. l"196A Golf Sales Account for 50% of Sports Market," Golfdom, June, 1965 , p. 38. 2Source of these statistics is the Athletic Goods Manufacturer's Association Census Report for 196A. The census does not include sales of small manufacturenswhich accounts for possibly 20 per cent of United States golf ball production and 5-10 per cent of United States golf club production. -38- Not only do golfers spend a great deal of money for equipment but they tend to be particular about the type of equipment they purchase. Top quality golf balls represent 5A per cent of the total golf ball volume in the United States. Pro grade lines accounted for 6A per cent of the total dollar volume for all types of golf equipment in 1962 according to the Athletic Goods Manufacturer's Association.l One Chicago athletic goods representative finds golfers less cautious than most sports spenders. "They'll buy anything," he says, "if they think it will improve their game."2 A Manhattan lounge proprietor has his own measure of the effect golf has on people when he says, "When baseball's on the TV, I sell beer. When it's golf, I sell Scotch!"3 Golf and business have had a long and close relation— ship which grows stronger each year. Many business executives hold memberships in country clubs if for no other reason than to entertain business associates and to transact busi- ness. The exquisite Laurel Valley Golf Club in Pittsburg is an example of a private club where business is the primary purpose for its existence.“ Membership is limited to top executives of major corporations located in Pittsburg. 1 _ Herb Graffis, "Golf Economics," Golfdom, January, 196A., p. 99. _ "Six Million Golfers Can't Be Wrong," Business Week, September 1A, 1963 , p. 107. 3lbid. u"The Golf Club That Business Built," Business Week, fAugust 28, 1965 , Po 48- -39- Many firms encourage junior executives and salesmen to take up golf. Often companies even pay for the first series of golfing lessons.l Many university schools of business administration require a course in golf as a stand- ard part of their curriculum. Several marketing firms which have surveyed the golfing market found that the serious golfers, those inter- ested in the intricacies of champion play, are more likely to earn $7,500 and up than other types of sports fans.2 Statistics from Golf Magazine concerning their readers would tend to substantiate this statement.3 TABLE 5.--Characteristics of subscribers to Golf Magazine Professional men and key executives 67% Average family income $1A,965 Members of golf and country clubs 73% Average number of rounds per year 8A Vacation choice influenced by golf facilities 80% Purchasers of special golfing apparel 9A% Use or serve alcoholic beverages 93% 1 "More Firms Encourage Their Executives to Learn to Play Golf," Golfdom,_February, 196A , p. 88. 2"Six Million Golfers Can't Be Wrong," p. 107. 3Quoted from "Golf, the Marketing Maelstrom," Printer's Ink, p. 81. -A0- The assumption that a serious golfer would subscribe to a golfing journal is probably valid. One should not infer from these statistics, however, that serious golfers must necessarily fit this general description but only that in the case of this periodical's readership the above char— acteristics were evident. The Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission found in a socio-economic study of recreationists in general that both direct and indirect economic factors played an important part in people's recreation patterns. The decision on whether to participate in a given recreational activity was viewed in the report as primarily an economic decision when it stated that The input that an individual must make in order to engage requires time, financial resources, physical activity, and training (in terms of skill). On the other hand, the reward achieved may be expressed in terms of satisfactions derived from the activity, from status achieved, from satisfactions derived from continuous learning, from physical development, and other rewards.l From data gathered by the commission it can readily be seen that golf is directly related to the economic status of its participants. ,The following table shows these relationships. The direct relationship of ownership to income is consistent for each income group, although the magnitude of percentage varies. lAbbott L. Ferriss, National Recreation Survey, ORRRC Report 19 (Washington: The Commission, 1962), p. 5. —A1— TABLE 6.--Selected outdoor recreation articles present in household and per cent of article use within the past year according to family incomea Family Income Less than 1500 3000 A500 6000 8000 10000 15000 20000 Article 1500 2999 AA99 5999 7999 9999 lA999 19999 or more Article present in house- hold Golf Set l.l 2.A 5.A 9.1 17.2 25.8 33.6 A6.0 6A.2 Article used in the ast year Golf Set .5 1.1 2.3 A.6 9.3 13.3 17.7 25.8 3A.A albid., p. 373. bThe difference between these percentages does not represent the per cent of unused golf sets in the household, for some household member other than the respondent may have used it. This study also showed that golf is associated with the location of residence and the size of the resident popu- lation. Ownership of golf sets was more frequent in the North Central region with 17 per cent of respondents report— ing that there were golf sets in the household. The South has the lowest percentage with 9 per cent. Persons living in standard metrOpolitan areas reported the highest per cent of ownership with 17 per cent, whereas rural residents reported the lowest, 6 per cent. When location of residence —A2- is correlated with income, article presence, and article use the following results are obtained:1 TABLE 7.--Tabulation of the presence and use of outdoor recreation articles according to family income classes and place of residence Article present in household Using article present in household Family Income Family Income Less 10000 Less 10000 Residence than A500 or than A500 or Location A11 A500 9999 more A11 A500 9999 more All 13.7 3.A 15.5 39.7 7.1 1.5 8.1 21.3 In SMA- Urban over 1 mil. l6.l A.6 lA.5 39.9 7.8 l 9 6.9 19 8 Under 1 mil. 16.5 5.3 17.3 AA.8 7.6 l 9 8.0 22 0 Rural 17.2 3.8 17.1 38.7 9.3 l l 9.1 23 2 Not in SMA— Urban 14.1 3.1 l9.l Al.6 8.3 l 8 11.5 2A 0 Rural 7.1 1.8 11.3 31.9 A.2 l 0 7.0 19 l In determining what prompts people to participate in a particular sport, it is of value to try to determine why people who state a preference for that sport do not engage in it more often. The ORRRC Commission found the following factors to effect frequency of participation.2 g l1bid., p. 374. 2Ibid., p. 10. _u3_ TABLE 8.--Preferred outdoor activities and the various restric- tions on participation Persons preferring outdoor games or sports Participate Reasons for not engaging more often Total freely Facil- Finan- ities cial Time Ability Other Playing golf 33 8 7 A2 3 7 100 Playing baseball A5 10 2 31 3 9 100 Playing tennis 2A 22 9 33 9 3 100 Playing other games or sports A9 8 3 30 5 5 100 Golfers demand the same high quality standards of main- tenance and operation for the courses they play on as for the equipment they play with. The day when a golf course operator could mow the grass short in a cow pasture and put in a few holes of golf is past. A course is seldom so isolated that the operator need not consider competition. Although the operator of a poor quality course may be able to afford to charge smaller fees, golfers tend to be willing to pay higher fees in order to play on quality facilities. These stringent user- demands often penalize the operator who builds a course with -nu- very little initial capital investment with plans to estab— lish a quality facility as his business grows. Factors Which Have Contributed to the Growth of Golf Marion Clawson in his early projections pointed out that more leisure time, higher disposable income, growing population, and increased mobility were all factors which had contributed to the need for more facilities and expanded recreational opportunities.1 These factors have obviously played a part in creating an increased demand for golf facilities and opportunities. Continued urbanization of the American society has also greatly influenced golf's in- creased popularity. Working indoors in Offices, factories, stores and in a multiplicity of other urban jobs often creates a desire for outdoor recreation experiences. Golf is a form of outdoor recreation which is often played in an urban setting even though large open spaces are needed. Television has been an important media of intro- ducing the game to many Americans by showing selected professional tournaments and other special golfing events. Golf tournaments generate much interest in golf for their thousands of spectators. The listeners, readers, and viewers of the different news media which publicize such events are also being introduced to the game. lMarion Clawson, Land and Water For Recreation (Chicago: Rand McNally and Company, 1963), p. 35. -u5_ During its entire history, golf has had a number of ardent participants who are famous for achievements in other fields. President Eisenhower is probably the most famous such personality. Taft and Harding were other residents of the White House who were enthusiastic linksmen.l Bob Hope and Bing Crosby, two well—known entertainers, are also directly associated with golf through the promotion of celebrity—professional golf tournaments. These prominent people with their intense interest in the game, have probably had a two-fold effect upon golf--conferring upon the game some status and increasing the publicity given to the game. All these and other factors have influenced the increased interest in golf to varying degrees. As golf con- tinues to grow in popularity, the benefits which accrue to the participant in the game will probably become its greatest point of appeal. Golf has long been recommended as a form of healthful exercise and as a method of relieving tension.2 1 Dave Stanley and George Ross, Golfers Own Book (New York: Lantern Press, 1956), p. 320. 2"Let's Play Golf," Today's Health. August. 1952: pp. 28—31. CHAPTER III STUDY AREA Genesee County Genesee County is located in the southeastern quadrant of Michigan and is within the second largest Standard Metro- politan Statistical Area in the state.1 The city of Flint is the major urban aggregate in the county and the third largest city in the state. The economic stability of the county and of the area is dependent upon the industrial complex in and around Flint. Genesee County was chosen as the study area for this research effort for several reasons. The fact that Genesee County is heavily urbanized and yet has a great deal of Open space for continued expansion of the city of Flint was a major consideration in choosing to locate the study there. Second, it was felt that the Flint area would offer enough diversity in golf operations to increase significantly the comparative value of the study in analyzing the different types of golf courses that are located there. It was also felt that the nineteen golf courses and four driving ranges in the county Offered a reasonably workable total to include 1U. S. Bureau of the Census, Eighteenth Census of the United States: 1960. Population, I, Part 2A, p. 16. _u6_ —A7- in a study of this nature and yet a great enough number to allow worthwhile conclusions to be drawn. Perhaps the most important factor in choosing Genesee County was the encour- agement of Stanley Mahaffy, the County Extension Agricultural Agent for Genesee County, to study golf as a phase of the total recreational industry in his county. Population Characteristics and Trends In the 1960 census the city of Flint had a pOpulation of 196,9A0. This represented an increase of 33,797 over the 1950 population or a percentage increase of 20.7.1 The popu- lation of Genesee County in 1960 was 37A,313 as compared to 270,963 in 1950.2 This was an increase of 38.1 per cent. These figures indicate that the fastest rate of growth has taken place in areas outside the city limits of Flint. The natural increase for the county from 1950 to 1960 was 76,697 and the net migration was 26,653.3 The city limits of Flint is contained within the boundaries of four townships--Flint, Genesee, Mt. Morris and Burton (see map on p. A8 ). Genesee Township has eXperienced the fastest rate of growth among these urban townships. The population gain for Genesee Township from 1950 to 1960 was 1Ibid., p. 12. 2Ibid., p. 1A. 3Michigan State University, Bureau of Business and Economic Research, Michigan Statistical Abstract (East Lansing: Graduate School of Business Administration, 196A), p. 1A. 833 —o— _o _.—1o—o—o (goo—o—o—o—o—o—' —A8- GENESEE COUNTY E I I I THETFORD ! MONTROSE I I | 3""11 1 . I _ WI . I I i ‘ MO TROSE I VIE NNA ' r—“' ___-_r-..._-_--. _____ +_-.--____. I I * ' FLUSHING I mom I RICH FIELD I MORRIS - | . I GENESEE , I FLUSH'NG IMOUN T EEEE:EEI?Z‘.£'E :5". l , ‘1 .3 r IMORR Is ' k | 1‘: __ _|___ _,_ -1- _ __ __i "‘ "— “- -“’ ” '7‘ g3. FL INT ‘® I - IFLJNT I DA “I'SON i I . CLAYTON T‘ n I r _.. j I SWARTZ CR5m |L_ _ __ _ __W ' _!_ I I I | I GRAND - . GAIN as I MUND Y ame I V I I 6...... I I I .I BLANC l 'GAINES I o I I I I . I _ .J T“- ’ ‘— -— I-— -— I'" —-= . °°°°°°° I I . I - I ARGENTINE I i -A9— 8,621, an increase of 69.5 per cent. On the other hand, Mt. Morris Township was 59A for the decade of the 50's or about 20.5 per cent. The growth of Flint and Burton Town- ships was less than that of Genesee but were much greater than that of Mt. Morris. Flint Township had an increase of A8.1 per cent while Burton's rate of increase was 63.A per cent. Certain population trends seem to exist for the rural townships of the county. In general the population in the townships in the southern half of the county are grow- ing at a faster rate. However, Gaines and Atlas Townships in the southern extremities of the county experienced the least growth of any of the townships. The fastest rates of growth among the townships were in Grand Blanc and Mundy. Grand Blanc had a 100.9 per cent increase while the rate of increase for Mundy was 85.7 per cent in the decade of the 50's. These townships are located directly south of the city of Flint. I The type of people who are moving into the various rural townships is difficult to ascertain because compilation of census tract statistics for the Flint Standard Metropoli- tan Statistical Area coincides exactly with the boundaries of the city limits of Flint. Thus statistical information is limited to the four urban townships. However, it was found during the field study that the more expensive housing in the highly exclusive neighborhoods outside Flint were -50- being built in the southern half of the county, primarily in Grand Blanc, Mundy and Fenton Townships. TABLE 9.--Population characteristics of Genesee County *according to townships Township 1960 1950 Amount Per cent of change change Rural Townships in the Northern Half of Genesee County Montrose 5,006 3,156 1,850 58.6 Vienna 7,232 3,993 3,239 81.1 Thetford 3,843 2,404 1,439 59.8 Forest 2,662 1,932 730 37.7 Richfield 4,147 3,036 1,111 36.5 Flushing 8,535 4,707 3,828 81.3 Urban Townships Mt. Morris 3,484 2,890 594 20.5 Genesee 21,011 12,390 8,621 69.5 Flint 19,178 12,944 6,234 48.1 Burton 29,700 18,171 11,529 63.4 Rural Townships in the Southern Half of Genesee County Clayton 2,680 2,1A6 53A 2A.8 Davison A,9A8 3,103 1,8A5 59.A Gaines 2,271 2,Al8 - 17A - 7.1 Mundy 5,004 2,694 2,310 85.7 Grand Blanc 9,A18 A,687 A,73l 100.9 Atlas 2,210 1,900 310 16.3 Argentine 2,106 1,330 776 58.2 Fenton 12,761 8,245 4,516 54.7 Economy of Genesee County The economy of Flint and Genesee County is based almost entirely on heavy manufacturing. Out of a total labor force of 1A3,200 more than half the total, or 73,000, -51- are employed in manufacturing industries.1 Motor vehicle production alone employes 58,800 workers. Many other jobs in the area are directly attributable to the automotive industry because of the large number of service industries which it requires. There were 5,600 persons employed in jobs directly related to agriculture in 1963 when these statistics were compiled. However, the number of farms and farmers in the county has been decreasing significantly each year for a number of years.2 Many of those who are engaged in farming, work in factories or other kinds of jobs to supplement their incomes. Several other facts give interesting insight into the economic climate of the Flint Metropolitan Statistical Area. The median income for families in Genesee County is $6,340. Family incomes in the county are clustered in the middle income range between $3,000 and $10,000; moreso than in most Michigan metropolitan areas.3 Families with less than $3,000 income per year account for 12.2 per cent of all families in the county. This is the third lowest percentage of all Michigan counties. Genesee County is the eleventh ranked county in the state in the per cent of families with lIbid., p. 96. 2See the 1959 United States Census of Agriculture report for Genesee County, Michigan, p. 143 and the 1964 U. S. Census of Agriculture Preliminary Report for Genesee County, Michigan, p. 2. 3Michigan Statistical Abstract, p. 86. -52_ incomes greater than $10,000, with 15.9 per cent in this class. Many of the metropolitan counties rank ahead of Genesee in this statistical category. The average weekly family income in Flint is $149.61. This compares to an average of $128.27 for all of Michigan and $99.38 for the United States. The average weekly family income for Flint is the highest in the state and is $13.32 per week greater than Detroit, the second highest average income area in the state. Wages for hourly workers are the highest in the state also. The average hours worked per week is also the highest in the state with 44.5 hours per week which exceeds Saginaw, the area with the second highest average number of hours worked, by .3. Land Use The land use which has been predominant in Genesee County as well as in most of the other counties in south- eastern Michigan historically has been farming. Genesee County has a land area of 411,520 acres and a water area of 3,200 acres.2 In 1959 Genesee County has 2,300 farms with a total acreage of 239,200. This amounted to 58.1 per cent of the total land area in the county.3 Large tracts of land are being subdivided for residential construction and even more are lying idle in the transition from rural to urban usages. llbid. 21bid., p. 64. 31bid., p. 143. -53- Significant Institutional Factors The automobile industry in Flint is one of the more obviously important economic institutions in the community. However, the unions which are associated with the automotive industry such as the United Auto Workers as well as many other types of unions represent a powerful interest group that is highly influential. In one respect Flint is a particularly unique com- munity. Few communities can boast of an institution like the Mott Foundation. This non—profit corporation is a highly significant social force in the community because of its financial support of many charitable and other local projects. Millions of dollars have been contributed toward educational, medical, recreational and other civic improve— ments by the Mott Foundation. Needless to say, the influence of the Mott Foundation is a potent force in most major local decisions affecting Flint. CHAPTER IV CONDUCTING THE STUDY The study from which this thesis was developed was completed in the summer of 1966 by the author under the direction of Professor Louis F. Twardzik and with the full cooperation of Mr. Stanley Mahaffy, Extension Agricultural Agent for Genesee County. The first major decisions concerning this study were to decide upon a general topic to be dealt with and to select the area of study. After concluding these initial steps the next task was to limit the wide range of research approaches available to one small workable unit that could feasibly be researched under the particular set of circum- stances operative during the conduction of the study. Nature of the Study In the study of golf courses and driving ranges at least three major approaches are appropriate in analyzing factors which allow privately owned courses operated for profit motivated ends to compete with publicly operated courses and privately operated clubs. The competitive ad- vantage often exists for the latter two types because they are only secondarily interested in the profit-making aspects of golf. In certain instances these facilities are heavily -54- -55- subsidized by outside sources because of the evaluated worth of the service which they render. A basic inventory designed to pinpoint unique characteristics and features of various kinds of existing golf operations was the approach used in this study. Approaching the research problem with the purpose of answer— ing pragmatic and immediate questions which potential oper- ators would logically want information about was deemed to be a priority research need. It is hoped that the general information collected pertaining to golf enterprises in Genesee County will have some application to the future development of golf facilities nationally or at least on a regional basis. Another purpose of this thesis was to explore some of the variables which particularly influence the operator- owned enterprises. Private and publicly owned courses Oper- ated by hired personnel were used as partial control groups for comparative purposes. The variables considered in this connection include course background, personnel eXperience, and assets controlled by the operator prior to facility development. Two other methods of analysis were considered but after careful comparison with the method chosen were rejected as premature. One obvious approach to this golf research problem is an intensive study of the users of the facilities including the identification of major socio-economic char- acteristics of the different user groups. The greater —56- understanding of the attitudes, desires, and expectations of golfers which could be expected to result from this study would be quite valuable in planning and developing future facilities. This approach was dismissed, however, for several reasons. The most obvious weakness of this type of study is that there has been no basic work done in iden- tifying the resources actually available. The user analysis approach was also rejected because of the time and expense involved in handling the large sample that would be necessary to obtain worthwhile data. Another area of research emphasis might have been employed which could have yielded fruitful results. Concen- trating on the quality of the facilities and the range of services rendered by the different managements and then correlating these findings to the costs involved for these services might significantly contribute to a greater know- ledge of user demands. The appropriateness of this type of study is more clearly seen when one considers the growing trend of emphasizing quality in spite of the higher costs they incur.l Such highly refined inclinations could be realized only in an era of great economic prosperity such as this country is presently experiencing. This approach was not used primarily because there are no standard author- itative criteria for judging facility quality and secondly lDavid Milstein, Project 80, Michigan's Outdoor Recreation and Tourism (East Lansing: Michigan State University, 1966), Report 42, p. 23. -57- such information has a more limited application to the entire problem of golf course development and operation than the emphasis which is proposed for this study. The following methodology was used in formulating and conducting the study: 1. Submission of a prospectus outlining the general problem and method of solution. 2. Determination of the sample to be interviewed. 3. Compilation of an interview-questionnaire. 4. Pre-testing of the survey questionnaire. Upon completion of these initial steps a personal interview-questionnaire survey was conducted with all the owners and/or operators of known golf courses and driving ranges in the county. Since the questionnaires were filled out under the supervision of the author, all of the replies were usable for processing and analysis although the answers to certain questions were rather inconclusive. Design for the Study Before deciding upon the general type of question-e, naire best suited for meeting the needs of this study, a survey of the literature related to this general topic was completed. The threefold purpose of the literature review was to determine what kinds of research had been done which would contribute to this study, to avoid duplication, and to assist in the design of the questionnaire. -58- To the knowledge of this researcher this study is a unique contribution in the field of rural or privately owned recreation for public use, and in particular for golf courses as recreation enterprises. The National Golf Founda- tion conducts many studies on different phases of golf course development and management. However, these studies are primarily macro-oriented on a national or regional basis. Most of the material gathered is of a broad inventory type for the purpose of ascertaining developing trends in the golfing industry. Very little work has been done on the micro—level by the National Golf Foundation, i.e., the intensive study of individual operations. The School of Hotel, Restaurant, and Institutional Management at Michigan State University completed a study of operating statistics for 273 private clubs from through— out the country in 1965.1 Major areas of consideration were club membership characteristics, food operations, room rental statistics, sports facilities and merchandising. The information obtained during the study was used in this re- search as one base in formulating the design of this study. However, the value of this study in Club Management was limited because of the relatively homogeneous character of the sample tested and because of the different emphasis and interest Operative in the study. l"Profi1e of Operating Statistics of 273 Private Clubs," Club Management, April, 1965. -59- The Harris, Kerr and Forster Accounting and Auditing firm was commissioned by the National Golf Foundation to do a study of maintenance costs of private golf clubs in dif- ferent parts of the United States.1 Overall conclusions were that total revenues and dues for the 50 clubs included in the study were at an all-time high during 1963-64 while operating eXpenses were also greater than ever before. The margin of difference between revenues and expenditures was about one dollar per member with which to meet interest, depreciation, and amortization charges. Ten years ago there was a balance of $15 to cover these charges. Very little work has been done to determine the type of people who supply different privately owned recrea- tional resources for public use. However, McCurdy and Mischon, research foresters for the Central States Forest Experiment Station, conducted a survey of the suppliers of summer outdoor recreation facilities to determine some of the attributes of these people which might be important common denominators of motivation and/or ability.2 These researchers separated the businesses into two groups accord- ing to annual gross receipts. They found that the operators of facilities that grossed more than $2000 were generally of l"Country Clubs--Golf Course Maintenance Costs," a study completed by the Harris, Kerr, and Forster Company, accountants and auditors, for the National Golf Foundation, 1965. 2Dwight R. McCurdy and Raymond M. Mischon, "Outdoor Recreation and Ohio Bankers," Ohio Banker, January, 1965, pp. 8-9. -50- similar background and displayed similar characteristics. These entrepreneurs' characteristics usually contrasted in a distinct way with those operators whose enterprises grossed less than $2000. The general methodology utilized by these two researchers was helpful in furnishing insights into the formulation of an operator section in the Genesee County golf operations study. In 1965 Michigan's Soil Conservation Districts, with the assistance of the United States Soil Conservation Service made an inventory of existing outdoor recreation enterprises in the state as part of a nationwide survey.1 The report prepared by the Soil Conservation Committee in- volved twelve different facility types. Information in the report included amount of land and water resources, facili- ties offered and capacities of the facilities. Data for the golfing operations by three principle geographic regions are shown in Table 10. Although it is probable that these figures are not complete since so many different personnel contributed data, nonetheless, they probably accurately portray the overall distribution of facilities. These figures demonstrate the high concentration of par-3 courses in the heavily urbanized southern part of the state. Also the relatively large number of regulation golf courses in the Upper Peninsula as compared lEmmanuel VanNierop, Inventory--Private Outdoor Recreation Enterprises. Mimeographed summary of the study findings distributed by the Michigan State Soil Conservation Committee (East Lansing, 1966). -61- to Northern Michigan might indicate the important role that golf courses can play in attracting tourists. It is evident that driving ranges and putting courses are primarily located in areas of the state with higher population densities. The 28 driving ranges and 27 putting courses listed in the sum— mary are probably underestimates because data from Wayne County are not available and in many instances Soil Conserva- tion personnel were probably not aware of all driving ranges and putting courses in the urbanized areas. TABLE 10.--Inventory of golf facilities in different areas of Michigan Type of Facility 0.2. N. Mich. s. Mich.* Total regulation courses 43 35 182 Par-3 courses - - 16 Driving ranges 7 8 28 Putting courses 3 9 27 * These figures do not include statistics for Wayne County. In 1960 the American Recreation Society with the cooperation of the National Golf Foundation conducted a nationwide survey of nine and eighteen hole regulation 1 publicly operated golf courses. The study was primarily lNationwide Sampling of Municipal and Tax Supported Golf Operations for 1960. Compiled and published through the cooperative efforts of the American Recreation Society and the National Golf Foundation, 1960. —62- concerned with operation costs, receipts, fees, facilities provided and personnel. Its objectives came close to paralleling those of the Genesee County study except that no consideration was given to developmental processes and patterns. The study was also limited to a Specialized group of operations. The publication simply listed the data for each course which submitted information and no gross tabulations or conclusions were given by the authors. The review of the literature on the general subjectj‘ inof outdoor recreation proved to be of considerable value in & formulating the questionnaire used for the present study. In its final form the questionnaire contained questions relating to seven areas of emphasis.1 These categories were 5 as follows: (1) facility inventory, (2) course background ‘l and development information, (3) degree 0f use, (4) charac- . \ teristics of the userS, (5) employee information, (6) opera7f ‘tional influences, and (7) background of the management- // / l The questionnaire on pages l37«l44cd‘AppendixI shows these questions grouped in these seven categories. CHAPTER V THE ENTERPRISES Categories Genesee County, as one might well assume, has a wide variety of golfing facilities. Except for perhaps one unob— trusive and unpublicized golf driving range which the author had no knowledge of until he happened to drive by it the last day of the data gathering phase of the study, every known operating golf related enterprise in Genesee County was included in this study. For purposes of promoting clarity in the discussion which follows the two major categories—-golf courses and com- mercial driving ranges-—will be dealt with separately. With- in the golf course category the primary sub-grouping will be distinguished on the basis of ownership or operational func— tions. Where appropriate a third designation will be used based on the length and/or number of holes. The categorical discussion will be arranged as follows: I. Golf courses A. Publicly operated B. Privately operated (country clubs) C. Semi-private courses _63- —64— D. Privately operated public courses 1. Nine or eighteen hole regulation length courses 2. Nine or eighteen hole par-3 courses The driving ranges are not so variable in character as the golf courses because spatially they are all pretty much comparable. All the driving ranges will be dealt with under the driving range section of this chapter. Types of Golf Courses Usually there are three categories Of operations which are used to distinguish different types of golfing Operations, i.e., private, public and semi-private courses. However, in tabulating the results of this study it seemed expedient to divide those courses in the semi-private cate- gory into two groups. This was necessary because two dif- ferent course types with markedly different characteristics were discernible. Several of the courses charge an initia- tion fee which has the effect of excluding certain elements of the public from using the facilities. However, these courses differ from private clubs in that this fee is so nominal that memberships range up into the thousands rather than merely in the hundreds as would be the case with exclusively private clubs. Daily use fees are also charged. These courses will henceforth be referred to as semi-private courses. Those facilities which charge no initiation fees and operate primarily by charging daily use fees will be referred to as "privately Operated public courses." \ “65' . <3) fig 46 ~9-II. ——.-—-—-4——0--_o—o ..—-..~.—._.u-vou— mO—‘IVTIEéq . LAKEBI Mowmqsa . * ctr. i e 4H3, . 04.5.1... . g t 8 1 i 1'2" | s g ' , r . - . 1 l . , , 3 ~ MOUNT 8’3 I MORRIS . . I FLUSHING ‘45 w — 1 ! ‘1; | 'O I ! — g .11.- ---._ —- {h ‘ F L INT ‘.:: . ~ ~ -. --- - ’-- - ----._ -—--—1 .. v-w— ~— -J awn-r2 CREEK ‘ .__-_. _._-+--._--.- - _.—.‘-ao- 01~.—..- ) 5 Privately Owned Public Course \J L- Public Courses _.~.—.-—.—"h" . . . , A semi-’Private COLIPSeS GENESEE COUNTY —66._ Publicly Operated Golf Courses In Genesee County there are four public courses operated by the Golfing Division of the Flint Recreation and Parks Department. Of the total 72 holes provided, 27 holes are operated as two par-3 courses; an l8-hole course and a 9-hold course. The following table depicts some of the gross data of these facilities. TABLE ll.-—General information concerning public golf courses in Genesee County Type Annual Total Nine Estimated Course Regu- Par-3 acreage Hole Gross lation Rounds Value Swartz Creek 18 9 300 60,700 $750,000 Pierce 18 75 20,000 300,000 Mott 9 60 35,300 150,000 Kearsley Lake 18 240 40,400 350,000 Totals 45 27 675 156,400 $1550,000 The properties on which these facilities are located were obtained in a variety of ways. Kearsley Lake Golf Course is located on Kearsley Lake Reservoir and is owned by the Flint Water Department. The Flint Recreation and Park Department holds a long term lease on the property. Mott and Pierce Parks were received by the city as gifts in the form -67- of undeveloped land. Swartz Creek Park and Golf Course was purchased by the city in 1920 for about $300 per acre. All improvements at the four courses were added by the Park and Recreation Department after they obtained the property. Private Golf Clubs There are seven organizations in Genesee County which might be termed private clubs because of their exclu- sive character due to high membership fees. In this dis— cussion each club has been assigned a number and will be differentiated from the rest by referring to that number hereafter. The table which follows shows some of the data which were obtained for each operation. A course with eighteen holes seems to be a status symbol of some importance with the people who invest in these kinds of clubs.1 Therefore it is not surprising that clubs 3 and 6 which have only 9-hole courses have very immediate plans to add nine more holes. Both of them have adequate amounts of land to add these holes without addi- tional acquisitions although 3 just completed purchase of additional acreage to assure adequate room for expansion. Course 3 also plans to sub-divide sixty lots from the perimeter on one side. Three of the seven clubs were associated with the development of housing sub-divisions. 1This point will be discussed further on page 87. -68- In fact, fees and charges to the members are directly cor- related to the number of lots subdivided. TABLE l2.-—General information concerning private golf clubs in Genesee County Course Number Total Annual Fees of Acreage Nine—Hole Holes Rounds Stock Annual Played Fees Dues 1 18 151 14,500 $ 600 $144/yr 2 18 120 8,500 — _ 9 135 23,000 850 276/yr 18 176 28,000 500 385/yr 5 18 160 30,000 2000 480/yr 6 9 164 16,000 2500 600/yr 7 18 185 40,000 200 456/yr Total 108 1091 160,000 $1100 av. $390/av. TABLE l3.--Private clubs associated with residential sub— divisions as related to the costs of memberships fl Number Fees Course of lots Stock Annual Total sub-divided Fees Dues Acreage 1 14 $ 600 $ 144 151 3 60 850 276 135 4 75+ 500 385 176 -69- The stock fees for Course 1 deviate from the pattern only because the members did a major part of the total con- struction themselves. Course 7 has a small initiation fee but this is the case because they have many more members than most of the other clubs. These types of dual develop- ments are following a pattern of golf course—subdivision 1 development which is very pronounced at the present time. One surprising fact that was noted from the study is the number of buildings constructed by the original owners that were adapted for some major use when the golf course was built. buildings as shown in Table 14. Four of the seven clubs made use of pre-existing TABLE 14.—-Building conversion from previous to present uses Club No. l U Pre- Pres- Pre- Pres- Pre- Pres- Pre- Pres— ses vious ent vious ent vious ent vious ent farm club farm club barn tool two pool house house house house shed stall house & pro garage shop barn greens house club house lunch supt. house room office stor— same stable pro garage cart age shop stor- shed age 1 For a more detailed discussion of golf course subdivision developments see pageffi- -70- Conversion of these buildings saved some rather large capital investment expenditures even in those cases where the converted buildings are only interim measures. Even though the different managements all indicated that the major converted structures which housed important club functions would be replaced eventually, utilization of these buildings has played a significant role in the forma- tive stages Of the different clubs. Semi—Private Courses Basically semi—private clubs are of two major types: the major distinguishing feature being whether the facility is owned and operated for profit or for serving the recrea- tional needs of a large group ownership. In considering overall Objectives, this latter type is comparable to the strictly private club but its other characteristics deviate markedly from those of the private clubs. In Genesee County there are four courses which would fit into the semi-private category. One club is owned by a family but has been leased to a private club. The owners, however, maintain and Operate the facility and exercise con- trol over it. Two are owned by individuals who have sold the memberships and operate the courses themselves. The fourth golf course is owned by the Industrial Mutual Associa— tion and is operated for the exclusive use of all the many thousands of factory workers in the Flint area who make up its membership. -71_ The following data shows the statistical tabulations for the different courses. The courses will be denoted by numbers 8 through 11. TABLE 15.--General information concerning semi-private golf clubs in Genesee County I T _ _— — :— T -_ a No. Annual , Fees Course of Tbtal Memberships 9—ho1e Member- Use holes acreage rounds ships Charges 8 18 160 2000 single 27,000 single $25 2.50 WD 25 full full $175 3.00 WE 9 18 165 2700 32,000 single $85 2.25 WD famfly $110 3.00 WE 10 18 148 15000 40,000 - 2.00 WD 2.50 WE ll 18 117 2800 25,000 $14.50 1.75 WD 3.00 WE Totals 72 590 22525 124,000 8Fees are divided into two types: initiation fees which provide membership privileges, and in the case of semi—private courses, use charges which are usually in the form of greens fees. All figures given in the use—charge column are for 18 holes of golf. For 9 holes it is usually about 1/3 less. WD and WE specify week days and weekends respectively. These courses were all fairly recently developed except for 10. Recent development is in fact a character- istic Of a majority of all the courses in the county regardless of type. The Industrial Mutual Association bought their course from another group in its developed form in 1964 although major alterations are planned. -72- Course 9 was inherited by the present owner from his father- in-law. Course 8 is owned by four brothers who also Operate a building construction business. Number 11 is owned by an individual who although having just constructed the facility in 1964 has owned the land since 1936. Building conversion was important on only one of these courses. Course 8 had an extremely large barn on the property when it was purchased. The owners had it moved to the brow of a hill overlooking most of the course. Many thousands of dollars have been invested in remodeling the structure even though all the remodeling has been done by the owners' own construction company. The entire floor space in the building is perhaps twice as much as that of most of the other club houses in the county. Elaborate plans calling for a major renovation of the front including giant porticos to develop a colonial plantation theme are in the process of being executed. When completed, the clubhouse should be a unique attraction by itself. Privately Owned Public Courses Golf courses operated by private enterprise for public use are the fastest growing segment of the golf course industry.1 There are four such courses in Genesee County. The following facts are noteworthy in considering these courses. They will be designated by numbers 12 through 15. 1 See page 31. -73.- TABLE l6.--Genera1 information concerning privately owned public courses in Genesee County Number Annual Age of Courses of Total 9-hole the holes acreage rounds course 12 9 125 10,000 5 13 9 64 30,000 9 l4 18 120 17,000 38 * 15 12 140 12,000 3 * Six more holes are being built at the present time This group of courses has gone through a common developmental pattern that differs significantly from that of most of the other courses.1 Suffice it here to say that these owners have developed their courses more slowly and in more of a piecemeal fashion. Under these circumstances two of the courses have depended very heavily upon buildings which, prior to the construction of the golf courses, had other uses. Course 12 utilized three different buildings with prior uses. A barn was remodeled into a clubhouse and pro shop. A house on the property is used as the manager's residence and a quonset building is used to store equipment. Course 15 has a particularly unique clubhouse arrangement. lThis patterning will be discussed in greater detail under the "Developmental Patterns" subsection on page 7”, -7l,l- The basement of the owner's residence has an outside entrance which made it feasible for him to remodel the interior and create an attractive clubhouse facility. Several of these courses have a very small member- ship fee ranging from $1 to $5 and several have a yearly fee which allows for unlimited use of the facility by the holder and his family. Income is received primarily from daily use green fees. Developmental Patterns Land Use Agriculture has been the primary land use in the past in Genesee County.1 Even now more than 50 per cent of the total land area in the county is devoted to agricultural pursuits. Thirteen of the golf courses are on land that was previously in farms. One course, number 11, was developed on land that had been used for timber production. The other five golf courses were developed on idle land. Two of these courses are relatively near the central part of the city and there was intensive urban growth all around them at the time of their development. A third course, Kearsley Lake, was built on idle land by the city of Flint during the depression with the assistance of the Works Progress Administration. Course 13 was developed on land created by a swamp fill while 1A more complete treatment of land use in the county is given on page 52. -75_ course 3 was reconstructed on a site where a golf course had previously been but for seventeen years had lain idle. The patterns of ownership and the year of develop— ment are listed as follows: TABLE l7.——Information concerning acquisition of the land and development of the courses Developer Purchaser Present owner's Courses Year Year Year of tenure of land of purchasecfl‘ of oper— purchase dev. dev. course ation Private courses 1 1961 1961 5 2 1925 1926 40 3 1957 1957 9 4 1956 1959 7 5 1957 1958 8 6 1957 1960* 6 7 — 1911 1953 13 Semi—private courses 8 1960 1962 4 9 - 1925 1956 10 10 - 1941 1964 2 11 1936 1964 2 Privately owned public courses 12 1949 1961 5 13 1937 (27) 1943 (43) 1957 9 14 — 1928 1965 l 15 1947 1963 3 Public courses Kearsley — 1935 30 Mott 1924 1924 42 Pierce 1941 1964 2 Swartz Creek 1920 1924 42 9(- Second nine holes added in the late 1930's. -75- Fig. 4.--Back view of a very large barn that has been remodeled for use as a course clubhouse. The front roof is to be altered and columns added to replicate a colonial plantation. Fig. 5.-—Barn converted into a clubhouse by a farmer. The barn is built on a sheer precipice which allowed a veranda to be built on the back side level with the front ground level. -77- Fig. 6.--The basement of this farmhouse was con— verted into a clubhouse and pro shop. -------- Fig. 7.--This dairy barn was remodeled into a clubhouse and pro shop in 1928. —78— Most of the private clubs are relatively new; five of the seven having been developed between 1956 and 1961. Only the facilities of 3 and 7 had previously been operated by another group. When the club purchased the property for course 3 in 1957 it had lain idle for seventeen years. The renovation and rebuilding was so extensive and intensive as to make the value of the previous layout negligible. Only 2 has had a long history of continuous Opera— tion among the private clubs. They were located at what is now course 7 as far back as 1915. Course 7 was built in 1911 but has changed hands five times. It has belonged to, among others, the Flint Auto Club, Flint Country Club, the Masonic Lodge, and its present owner, Mr. Henrickson. Course 7 is the oldest course in the county. The land on which 14 is located was owned by one family for well over 60 years and was Operated as a dairy farm until 1928 when it was developed into a golf course. It was under the con- tinuous management of the same family until 1965 when it was sold to the present owners. Course 9 was owned by one individual from its development in 1925 until 1956 when it became the prOperty of his son—in-law by inheritance. The son-in-law still owns and operates the course. One developmental pattern which distinguishes the privately owned public courses from the other types is the length of time between the acquisition of the property and the actual development. With but a few exceptions, the land bought by the private and semi-private owners was developed _79- within a few years after its acquisition. On the other hand, except for course 14 which was purchased as a developed course, all the owners of privately operated public courses held their lands for a significantly longer time before development than did most of the other owners. The tenure of ownership of the land prior to development ranged from 20 to 12 years. Even course 14 was operated for many years as a dairy farm by its first owners before they developed it as a golf course. One owner indicated that he would not have gone into the golfing business if he had had to purchase the property at current land values.1 On the other hand, developing a golf course at the time he actually bought the land would have been too early due to a lack of user demand. All the owners of courses Operated for public use designed and built their courses themselves with one excep- tion. Development has been in phases. In fact the owner of course 15 has resorted to building his holes without regard to even building in multiples of nine. He simply builds a few holes as he has the time and money. At present his course has twelve holes. In all these cases the phasing procedure has been necessary because of a lack of adequate financing. l A personal interview with Mr. Juluis Sahaydak, the owner of Vienna Greens Golf Course, July 26, 1966. —80— Financing the Developments Financing varied a great deal among the different types of courses and even among those of the same type. For the public golf courses all additions and improvements are financed through a golf reserve fund which is composed of revenues received by the courses. The table below shows various data related to financing of privately owned facili— ties. TABLE 18.—-Financing of the various privately owned courses Percent Of financing Present Limitations Course from various sources estimated imposed by gross market a lack of 1 2 3 value financing 1 80% 20% $ 400,000 none 2 100 - none 3 60 40 - severely 4 70 30 350,000 moderately 5 65 35 1,000,000 none 6 100 250,000 none 7 100 600,000 moderately 8 40% 60 450,000 none 9 100 - none 10 100 750,000 none 11 100 750,000 moderately 12 l 99 150,000 moderately 13 100 240,000 a little 14 100 300,000 severely 15 20 8 75,000 moderately * Sources of financing: (1) personally, (2) sale of memberships, (3) private lending firms. _81- Question 21 pertaining to financing listed seven possible sources. However, as Table 18 indicates, all the privately owned courses were initially financed from only three sources: personally, sale of memberships, and pri- vate lending firms. Somewhat surprisingly, no money was borrowed through federal financing agencies even though several programs exist through which such funds are avail- able. An owner of one of the semi-private clubs, indicated that he had been interested in obtaining federal financing but that it involved "so much red tape and so many qualify- ing conditions" that it was not worth trying to get, as far as he was concerned. Generally the private clubs were financed primarily through the sale of memberships with supplementary funds coming from lending firms. The semi-private and privately owned public courses depended heavily upon personal financ- ing with several of them using capital from private lending sources. A definite weakness in the questionnaire can readily be seen because of incomplete information received regarding financing. Although the Operators who developed their own courses were asked to indicate the purchase price of the land, this was not enough information to determine the total amount necessary to complete initial development. Those l A personal interview with Mr. John LaBoskey, the owgzr Of Genesee Hills Golf Club, Flint, Michigan, July 28, 19 . —82— owners who bought previously developed courses furnished adequate data which helped to determine their total initial investments. Complete information concerning initial in- vestments would have been valuable information in viewing the total financing picture. The operators were asked to give an opinion as to whether they were substantially limited by a lack of ade- quate financing in the development of their courses. This question was of limited value except that it measured the Operator's perception of his financial situation. It is quite conceivable that in his reply one operator might have given a more optimistic evaluation of his situation that another and yet in relative terms have been hindered to a much greater extent. Nonetheless, seven operators, chiefly among the private and semi-private courses, indicated that they were not substantially limited by financing in the development of their courses. One course was somewhat limited in develOpment for financial reasons while five operators indicated moderate limitations in this regard. One private course and one privately owned public course were both severely restricted in their development accord- ing to their representatives. Design and Construction Eleven of the nineteen golf courses in Genesee County were designed by professionally recognized golf course designers. For the purposes of this study, -83- professional golf course designers include any design con- sultant whose services were rendered for a fee without regard to professional training or certification. All of the semi—private courses and six of the seven private club -courses were designed by professional consultants. Moreover, none of the privately operated public courses were planned by design specialists. One public course was professionally designed and one wasn't. This information was not available for the other two public courses. Several golf courses have had to be improved to varying degrees after their original construction. Seven courses have undergone major redesign and five of these will have additional improvements. Operators of three other courses are planning major changes in design in the near future. The Swartz Creek Public course is being redesigned to make room for a proposed highway. Four of the ten courses that have been or will be changed were designed by professional planners. These four courses make up 36 per cent of the eleven courses which were professionally designed. In comparison, six of the eight courses or 75 per cent which were not designed by a profes- sional planner will undergo major changes. Within the limits of this study, it seems therefore that non- professionally planned courses will have a greater chance of requiring redesign or reconstruction work than those which were designed by professional consultants. -8)4_ The necessity of renovating greens is not quite so directly tied to faulty planning as green relocation or some other type of redesign. However, renovation required as a result of natural catastrophies or super heavy traffic is the exception rather than the rule. Nine courses out of the total of nineteen are planning to reno- vate at least some of their greens. Six of the courses are to have only one or two greens redone. However, the other three courses will have all of their greens renovated. This situation, as far as these three courses are concerned, is probably a product of extremely heavy use at least in part. The three courses have a total of 54 holes and have a combined annual average of 120,700 nine hole rounds played on them. That is pretty much the capacity for comparable courses in most parts of the country. Three of those courses which will have several greens renovated were designed by professional planners. In the construction phase1 of development ten courses were built by the owners or resident superintendents who leased the equipment, hired the workers, and directed the construction. Two of the public courses were built by this method. Three of the privately operated public courses 1In the question used to determine the various types of development there were five construction methods listed. These types were taken from a list by Geoffrey Cornish which appeared in an article in The Golf Course Reporter entitled "Superintendents Supervise Construction," September- October, 1964, pp. 21—22. He indicated that every course he knew of could be categorized into one of these five groupings. —85— two of the semi—private clubs, and three of the private clubs were constructed in this way. This information indicates a fairly even distribution among the different types although this was the pre-eminent method used in the development of privately owned public courses. One private course hired a construction superin- tendent specifically for that job who, in turn, leased the equipment, hired the workers, and directed the construction. One private club and one semi-private club each contracted the construction out to a firm which constructed the course without any direct supervision from the ownership. Six course operators did not answer the question. Those who did not answer were, without exception, the owners of some of the older courses, many of which had changed owners several times since their construction. A question was incorporated to determine secondary sources of technical assistance which were used by the owners in their development programs. The results were disappointing either because the present management was not associated with the courses at the time of their devel- Opment or they could nOt remember. Amortization and Future Plans In response to a question concerning the present rate of return, and period of amortization, the following answers were given: -86- l. eight courses have been completely paid for 2. three courses will be paid for within five years 3. five courses willtm paid for within twenty years 4. one course will be paid for within forty years 5. two courses did not respond. Most of these courses expect to be debt free on their present investments within twenty years. This expected tenure of debt retirement is particularly signifi- cant when considering that most such large scale investments have a long term amortization period of about forty years.1 Of course, many of the courses will periodically incur new debts for remodeling, course expansion, and additional secondary facilities or other improvements. Only one owner indicated that he might be interested in selling his course. He mentioned two reasons: economic insecurity and old age. Eight Operators plan to add additional holes, a total of 69. One interesting aSpect of this planned expan- sion is that courses 7, 8 and 9 would become twentyvseven hole courses. At present there is only one such course in the county. The addition of the proposed holes would make the other five courses in this expansion group eighteen holes, leaving only one course in the county, Mott Park, with nine holes. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Farmers Home Administration, "Loans for Recreational Enterprises," Bulletin PA 723, April, 1966. -87- The purpose for expansion is undoubtedly to add additional playing capacity for some courses. A primary reason is probably prestige, however. One operator who owns an l8-hole facility told the author in an interview that the rate of use on the front nine of his course is fully three times as heavy as on the back nine.1 The reason for this situation in his opinion was that most of his clientele play only nine holes because of time limita- tions. In his view the front nine was more heavily used from habit and not because of other factors such as a less interesting layout for the back nine. In fact, his opinion was that the back nine was probably a more inter- esting design than the front nine. His conclusion was that an eighteen hole course in his case is not needed because of capacity demands but because of the prestige which eighteen holes imparts to a course. Operational Considerations Several questions were incorporated into the ques- tionnaire to determine the influence of certain factors upon the different types of operations. Not much emphasis was placed upon these specific operational factors, however, because it was felt that concentrating on the independent variables would be a more effective use of the limited time and resources available. Nevertheless, to touch on some of An interview with Mr. Leo T. Sugar, owner of Shoreacres Golf Club, July 26, 1966. -88— these miscellaneous considerations may render a clearer and more true overall picture. Subsidiagy Services Most of the courses offered an array of subsidiary services such as a pro shop, a grill, golf car rentals, golf cart rentals, and golfing instruction. Other facili- ties such as a restaurant, food catering service, lockers, showers, golf equipment repair and storage were more likely to be found among the private and semi-private clubs. Only one type of service seemed to be a major deter- minant in predicting the profitability of golf courses in general. That determinant is a bar. Aside from the public courses which concentrate on supplying the sporting experi— ence and render an absolute minimum of supplementary services, only four courses had no bar. One of these was a private club whose members decided to have only a drinking room with drinks being brought in by the individual members and stored in individual locked liquor cabinets. The mem— bers seem quite happy with the arrangement and interestingly enough the manager indicated that the room was not used by its membership very much anyway. The other three courses which did not have bars were privately operated public courses. One of these operators indicated that lacking a bar did not materially affect his business. His course received almost maximum capacity use and from all apparent indicators is quite profitable. This -89- heavy use is a result of several things. The course is located on a very heavy traffic artery in a fast growing section of the county. Thus there is a lot of impulsive play from travelers and commuting residents. The course is also heavily used for organized league play, particu— larly by women during the day. Also there is a public driving range associated with the facility which is often used by families and by older children while their parents use the golf course. In contrast, the other two courses seem to be struggling operations which are probably adversely affected by not having a bar. In fact one Operator, who does not Operate a bar because of personal moral reasons, indicated that if he had known that a bar was such a predominant consideration in developing a course he would never have gotten into the business.1 He plans to sell his course if, after completing the eighteen holes, his profits do not increase. Tournaments Two major annual professional golf tournaments are held at local golf clubs. The Buick Open, a major Profes— sional Golf Association tournament, is held at Warwick Hills Golf and Country Club. It is sponsored by the Buick Divi- sion of General Motors which leases the course for the 1A personal interview with Mr. Julius Sahaydak, the owner of Vienna Greens Golf Course, July 26, 1966. _90- tournament The Yankee Open is held at the Atlas Valley Country Club each summer. It pits the top lady golfers of the Womens Professional Golf Association against each other. It is sponsored by the Yankee Stores Incorporated. Several of the course owners and/or operators indicated that there was a discernible increase in golf interest just before and after these events. These in- creases can be measured both in increased use of the courses and greater equipment sales. This increase is probably a product of the widespread exposure to the news media and to increased advertising. leis: It was thought that it would be desirable to be able to analyze the effect that taxes have upon the dif- ferent types of enterprises. For this purpose four questions were incorporated into the questionnaire dealing with this general subject. The results, however, were disappointing probably for two reasons. First, there was a lack of knowledge as to exact figures for answering specific questions and second, some of the operators were hesitant to give out this information. Two general observations can be made. The decisions of the individual owners tend to be influenced to a greater extent by tax considerations than are the decisions of those managing group controlled facilities. Second, there was very little uniformity of tax evaluation or in the tax rates of _91- the different townships or other governmental units. The operators concurred in the observation that assessors were unsure as to the criteria by which golf courses should be taxed. Only two Operators, both of privately owned public courses, indicated that taxes were a heavy burden in the overall management of their courses. Lighting Lighting golf courses for night use is a strong recent trend in many parts of the country. It has been found that lighting a course for night use can increase its use by as much as 100 per cent on the same course for no extra investment other than for the lighting system and its installation. At present only one golf course, the eighteen hole par-3 public course in Pierce Park, is lighted. However, one regulation length golf course that is under construc- tion which was not included in this study will have the entire course illuminated for night use. The manager of Pierce Park Golf Course indicated that approximately 20 per cent of each season's play is done at night. He also added that having the facility lighted somewhat complicates management procedures. Three operators said that they intended to light various parts of their courses. The owner of Shoreacres Golf Course indicated that he was seriously considering lighting nine of his eighteen holes. The manager of the _92- Oakwood Golf Club indicated that they were considering lighting the last four holes on each nine. The manager of IMA Brookwood Golf Course also said that they intended to light the last three holes of each nine. These holes would be lighted to take advantage of an extra two hours of play- ing time in the evening which ordinarily are lost because the golfers are not able to finish their rounds. Driving Ranges There are four commercial driving ranges in Genesee County which are associated with golf courses. Three of them are operated by the course pros while the fourth one is directly tied in with Operations of the course. One driving range is located at a private club while two are associated with privately operated public courses and the fourth is with a semi—private course. All of these driving ranges except one of the privately operated public course driving ranges are very marginal Operations. This is the only golf course—driving range complex that is located on a major traffic artery. Because of its location this driving range attracts large numbers of non-golfers. A location on a major thoroughfare seems to facilitate the attracting of such a user group. The other three driving ranges attract primarily golfers. There are four commercial driving ranges in Genesee County that are not associated with golf courses as the major attraction. Some pertinent statistics concerning -93- these driving ranges are shown in the table below. These ranges will be assigned the numbers 16 through 19 and hence- forth Specific reference to the different ranges will be given in these terms. TABLE l9.-—Commercial driving ranges in Genesee County Estimated Driving Buckets NO. of gross Years in ranges Acreage driven stalls market Operation value 16 11 35,000 35 $ 75,000 1 17 20 19 l2 18 19 40,000 13 75,000 20 19 28 10,000 13 100,000 8 Totals 78 85,000 80 Facility 19 also has a very small 9—ho1e pitch and phi golf course which utilizes about thirteen acres. It comes the closest to fitting the description of a golfing complex as discussed on page 26. It contains a miniature putting course as well as the driving range and the pitch and putt golf course. This operation is particularly novel in that the driving range started as a 4—H project by its owner when he was still in high school. The golf course and the miniature putting course were added as the owner accumulated money from his revenues to finance additional developments. He has built all of the -94- facilities himself and has put every cent the operation has earned back into facility improvements. Seventy per cent of the financing was carried by the owner personally and 30 per cent was financed through lending firms. According to him, the total facility has an estimated gross value of $100,000. He plans on developing a barn which is adjacent to the golf course into an indoor recreation com- plex as his next major project. Driving range 16 is located on a major street in a fast developing section of Flint. It is within a recrea— tional complex because its immediate neighboring businesses are a baseball batting cage, a miniature putting course, a bowling alley, and a roller skating rink. Although these businesses are all operated by separate managements they complement one another. The owner has tentative plans to build an eighteen hole short golf course on acreage imme— diately adjacent to his prOperty on two Sides. This facility attracts primarily adolescents and family groups. In its first year of operation in the sum- mer of 1965, 35,000 buckets of balls were driven by customers. The driving stalls are arranged in two tiers to add novelty and appeal to the eXperience. The property and facility is leased from a large company which Operates a nationwide chain of miniature putting courses and driving ranges. The financing was done through private lending firms. _95_ Range 18 is located on a major truck route which runs through the city. The owner indicated that a large percentage of his users are traveling salesmen. He also stated that most of his users were golfers. The market value of the facility is estimated at $75,000, all of which was financed by the owner personally. He indicated that his operation would not be profitable except for the very large volume of golf equipment which he sells. He Spoke of selling the business as soon as a buyer could be found. Driving range 17 has a pro Shop with a complete stock of golf equipment along with a miniature putting course. The facility is at a competitive disadvantage to one of the other ranges, which is in a nearby neighborhood. This neighboring facility furnishes strong competition because range 17 is older and is located on a secondary road. The owner was hesitant to answer most of the key questions so not too much worthwhile data was obtained. CHAPTER VI THE HUMAN ASPECTS OF THE ENTERPRISES User Characteristics Information on user characteristics discussed in this chapter was obtained from the golf course operators rather than from the golfers themselves. It is recognized that this approach has its Shortcomings but it was deemed the most practical approach for purposes of this study. Under a separate heading in the questionnaire the golf course managers were asked to furnish certain details about the users of their facilities. One question dealt with the occupations of the golfers while others concerned the place of origin of the users and the distance traveled. Occupational Characteristics The private clubs displayed great variability among the members occupationally depending on the club's location, its historical traditions and the degree of selectivity in choosing members (see Table 20). In most of the private clubs the members come pri— marily from the professional, business, and white collar classes. The private clubs can be divided into two groups: (1) those serving predominantly white collar workers, or (2) those with memberships made up primarily of business and -96- -97- professional people. The latter type of club tends to be quite exclusive. Admittance to membership is restricted by charging high stock and dues fees and by the selection of individuals by the membership committee. TABLE 20.——Estimates of the per cent of users from various occupational groupings White Blue Prof. Bus. Collar Collar Farmers Ladies Other Private 1 3 10 75 10 l l 2 60 40 3 10 10 65 15 4 13 3O 50 7 5 20 80 6 50 50 7 35 35 3O Semi-private 10 15 15 30 2 25 3 9 5 15 75 5 10 40 60 11 3 5 5 40 15 32 Private Open Public 12 10 10 30 30 20 13 7 40 20 20 13 14 1 10 8 70 1 10 15 l5 15 10 20 10 30 Public Kearsley Lake 10 5 10 70 5 Mott 5 5 15 20 5 50 Pierce 5 20 70 - 5 Swartz Creek 10 10 10 70 -98- The members of the semi-private courses seem to be drawn from the white collar and particularly from the blue collar groups. Both courses 8 and 11 are heavily used by women. Eleven was also an interesting case in that almost one-third of the total membership consists of salesmen. This Situation is quite understandable as this particular semi—private course offers very attractive facilities. In addition it is somewhat exclusive although membership fees are comparatively nominal. These are factors of importance to salesmen who want to have a membership in order to entertain clients and business associates. The privately-operated public courses have a fairly even distribution of users with a concentration of users from the ranks of the white collar and blue collar workers. All the managers of these courses indicated that at least 10 per cent of the total rounds were played by women and the estimate for course 15 was 30 per cent. Although difficult to confirm, it is not unlikely that some of these operators may have overestimated the per cent of users from the pro— fessional and business groups. Such an error in appraisal could easily result from a selective perception of the total users and as a reflection of the owners' high esteem for facilities which they built themselves. The public courses showed much the same user distri- bution as the privately owned public courses except that the professional and business elements were less strongly _99_ represented among the users. Mott Park has a unique user group in that adolescents comprise fully one half of its total users. User Origins A knowledge of user origins was considered to be necessary in order to determine the importance of the distance factor in influencing where golfers decide to play golf. Also it was hypothesized that both the distance from the market and the location in the county would influ- ence the various types of enterprises differently. The smaller private clubs with less expensive mem— bership fees tend to draw the bulk of their members from local communities with which the various clubs have their most intimate economic and social ties. In fact these clubs were all created by local people to supply a specific service which was needed. Examples of such clubs are l, 3 and 5. Club 2 did not seem to be materially affected by the distance factor. This may be due to the high prestige factor associated with the club. Membership origin and distance of residency from the course are both reversals of the usual pattern. The members live in the suburbs as do the members of the other clubs. However, since the course is in a central location in Flint, the members drive to the inner city to recreate in contradistinction to the other private clubs. The members in most cases drive further from their homes to the club, too. .OOpmHH pom opoz whom: cmmHQOHzlcoc mo pcoo LOO OH HmcoHpHOOm cm£ mQHBOHHOH one .GOHpcoE HOHOOOm mepmSO on whom: umpmhpcoocoo swsoco QOHB mmopm HHmEm Op Lo :HmHLo msoocmHHoomHE mo whom: Op gospHo pomon awe OHQmp man CH :pozpo:H mm OO m OH OO xoopo NHQOZm m m om oosoaa om om om m mm ppoz m om o: m m mH om HoHngoom OHHQOm mH mH Om Om mm m om mH om m m OH om :H OH Om O3 om mom mH m: mH m mp mH m m OH mm OH mH OHHpsm Ooczo mHoum>Hpm m Om OO m m m: om HH OH om om mm mH OO O: OH mm mm mm mu O mH O: O3 m OH on om m Opm>HLOIHEom OH Om om om OH om OO 5 OO OH OH OO O Om Om om OO o: m m om mm mH m OH O3 om : m om mo HO m m m: om m mH mm m m NH mH mm H Om m OH mm H Opm>Hsm H H H H H H H H H H H +Om Om-OH OH-m mIH IH .OO .00 .OO .OO Hnozpo sochmm poogmq Ocmemo monocmo chHm omgsoo oopsoo 63p Eopm oocmpmHQ COHHOOOH ooCOOHmom mmLSOO mflp EOCH.M QOCGPWHU ECG moCmUHmmmH HAD whmmfi MO Pcmo .HQQ m3». .HO mmmeHPmHmll.HN ”WMde —100— -101— Clubs 4 and 7 have extremely heavy membership con— centrations outside of a ten mile radius of the courses. Course 6 has a peculiar membership distribution. It is eight miles from the central part of Flint, yet 90 per cent of its members live in Flint. Only 10 per cent are local people. This last figure is less than might be ex— pected considering the relatively high population densities and the expensive houses in that area. A majority of the members of the semi-private clubs live in Flint with the rest residing in the suburbs near the city. The privately-owned public courses are used quite heavily by local area people. Course 12 is located farther southwest of Flint than any other course. Therefore, it is not surprising that as many people come from nearby Oak- land County as from the city of Flint to play the course. About 90 per cent of the golfers using Course 14 are from Flint despite the presence of other clubs and courses in its vicinity that are closer to the urban area. The users of the publicly operated courses come pri- marily from the city of Flint although Kearsley Lake which is on the perimeter of the city draws about 15 per cent of its users from the county. There have been requests from people living in the northern half of Flint to have a public course built in that part of the city. Thus far, however, the Parks and Recreation Department has not been able to find a piece of property that meets the necessary locational ~103— and natural requirements. The Department does plan to obtain a course site by purchasing the desirable parts of several parcels Of land contiguous to one another but owned by several owners.1 Tixne (1f [Jse Times of use both during the day and during different times of the week may give some indication of user character- istics. Most of the courses had greater total use on week— days than on weekends (see Table 22). When comparisons were made, however, on a unit—time basis, use, as measured by the following equations, was definitely greater on weekends. -l = volume/ day on weekends 2 X2 -_ = volume/ day on weekdays 5 where: X1 = total play on weekends X2 = total play on weekdays Except for courses 1 and 13 all of the enterprises had at least fifty per cent of their total rounds played on weekdays. No major variations were observed that would explain such concentrated weekend play on these two courses as distinguished from all of the others. In considering the events that are sponsored by the various courses no major trends were apparent which would Personal interview with Mr. James Bruce, superintend- ent(of the Flint Recreation and Parks Department, July 25, 196). -103- explain the time-use patterns except that the public courses tend to sponsor fewer special events. The semi-private and privately owned public courses offer a greater variety of special activities than do the private clubs. TABLE 22.--Use on weekdays and on weekends and events sponsored * Per cent of users Events Sponsored Course Weekdays Weekends l 2 3 4 5 6 Private 1 30 70 x x 2 65 35 x x 3 5O 50 x x x x x 4 x x x x 5 60 40 x x x x 6 66 34 x x 7 60 40 x x x x Semi-Private 8 50 50 x x x 9 50 50 x x x 10 75 25 x x x 11 70 30 x x x x x Privately Owned Public 12 66 34 x x x 13 40 60 x x x 14 60 40 x x 15 5O 50 x x x x Kearsley x Mott 70 30 Pierce 60 40 x Swartz Creek 60 40 x l. Leagues 2. Pro Tournaments 3. Amateur Tournaments 4. Ladies Days 5. Kids Days 6. Senior Citizens Days -104- The official opening and closing dates for the courses are about April 1 and November 15 respectively. These dates can vary as much as a month depending on whether there is un- seasonable weather. The private clubs differ from the other types in that during good weather some of the courses are open to use by the members. The other courses close and are not available for use until Spring. Employees As with most other types of businesses, salaries can be a very major expenditure in the operation of golfing enterprises. One answer to this ever increasing cost has been to mechanize as much as possible. However, with all the major advances in technology, employees are still a critical factor. Several questions were included in the questionnaire regarding the employees of the courses. The tabulated results of these questions should provide an ex- panded perspective of the enterprises. Also, it was felt that the use of members of the manager's family as a neces- sary labor input might be an important factor for certain types of courses. The private clubs generally hired the greatest num- ber of employees in all categories. They average 11, 21, and 21 for the permanent full—time, seasonal full-time and part-time employees respectively (see Table 23). Courses 2 and 4 have a very large number of permanent personnel who work primarily in the restaurants. Courses 2, 5 and 7 hire 31 * . 1:1 :01; ‘1fiv pécgle The largest numbers cl part-iile 1 pic c,s 11 w rel by enterpllscs 2, 4, and 5 it .isrnr til 1..1 3a r:ufioe: o1 “WK. flahw e.s'.nsi:1 with the operation of trige slurses T“lo 1; lb 122. ”Irce most of the managers were enpltyres themselves. TARLE 23.--Employee information ———_-— _ ——_—-——.—— - Numb, Em ‘ ees . . . ‘ er 3? ploy Relatlve 01 the 1 Course Eermaneni Seasonal Pa't Operator is employed lull-Timc lull—time time Privalri l 2 5 2 no 2 26 40 75 no * 3 4 4 2 wife (4) 4 25 8 33 no 5 ll 29 35 no 6 3 13 3 no 7 5 4t 0 son (40) Semi—Private 8 7 15 4 4 brothers all work periodically wife (50) wife (20) son (48) 9 10 10 12 11 ll 18 WW O\O\J:' Private Open Public 12 0 13 0 1 wife (60) 2 son (70) wife (40) 3 20 no 4 2 son (20) NO 14 15 OD Public Kearsley Mott 0 11 wife (40) 1’10 Wife (40) 17 1 wife (40) Pierce mmmm Swartz Creek * Hours per week —106— The semi-private clubs averaged 7 permanent full— time employees, 14 seasonal full-time people, and 5 part— time personnel. Each Operator had a great deal of assist— ance from members of their families, however this situation was not so much a necessity as a means of earning some money for family members. The privately-operated public courses are all characterized by a minimum of workers in all three cate— gories. Three of the courses did not have a single perma- nent full-time employee including the owners themselves. Course 14, on the other hand, hires more than half a dozen employees. The Operator of course 14 is also the only one who does not have relatives assisting in the operation of the business. In contrast to the semi-private courses, which can be adequately operated without the assistance of members of the owner's family, the privately-operated public courses depend to a considerable degree on family labor to survive. The public courses operate with small crews and with a heavy emphasis on temporary employees. All of the managers' wives work at the course except at Mott Park. These cases are also an instance where the job is strictly an income producing endeavor and is certainly not a result of economic necessity as far as the operation of the courses are concerned. -107- The Managgrs Two types Of golf course operators are easily distinguished in Genesee County. One group is composed of those who own the course they operate. The second group consists of those managers who operate the courses for another individual or for an ownership group. A major observation concerning management is that there is very little uniformity in dividing and specifying responsibility. Some private clubs are operated by a com— mittee composed of members who delegate responsibility to various employees of equal status, e.g., the clubhouse manager, the greens keeper, and the club pro. Other clubs and courses have a manager of overall Operations who is responsible for all phases of operation. This lack of uniformity in responsibility complicated the analysis of data somewhat. The procedure followed in collecting data was to interview the person with the greatest supervisory responsibility who was available during the contact period. Background and Experience Five of the seven operators of private clubs had golf experience prior to taking their present positions (see Table 24). The private club Operators are all employees of the clubs except the manager of course 7 who owns the facility. If education and experience are taken as measures of professional competency then most of these operators would rate well. OOH O: NH OH NH Hmoso nesssm on O: ON Hm OH ooLOHm moH OH NN ON NH psoz os OO OH OH NH HmHmsmmx OHHOSO oc OO O O OH OH OOH OH H H OH OH oe OH OH OH O OH o: OH O O OH mH OHHOSO Ooczo OHOOO>HHO OOH OH N HO NH HH 0: OH m ON OH OH OOH OOH OH OH OH O mom OO O O NH O OOO>HLO1HEOO OOH HO OH OH OH H OOH NH O ON OH O OOH OH H H OH O OOH OO H OH NH O on OO O O OH O OOH NH H NH OH N mm» OO O m mH H Opm>HLm Ooh Ocsop Lmow xoms \ Ooxhoz Omssoo HCOOOHO ooCOHLOOxm COHpmosum pmmmcmz mpson owmso>< pm mocOHpoaxm mo mpmmw mo mhmow Omnsoo COHOOELOHCH HOpOLOQOI:.:m mqmo so OO0.00H Ho HOHo HOV .OOO.OO:OOO.OH Ho HOHo HOV .eOOssOsm so sssOusoe Hagan HOV aOOOsOH GOSH mmOH OHHQSEEOO Amv .Esmm O CO AHO ”msoHHom mm OHOOO mOOHOmqu* x x OOOLO mppmzm x x xsmm OoLOHm x x xpmm Opoz x x oxmq OOHmLmox momnsoo OHHpsm x x OH x x OH x x OH x x mH momssoo OHHOOO OOHOLOOO OHOOO>HLO x x HH x H OH N X m x x O momHsoo Opm>HhQIHEom x x O x x O x x O x x m x x m x x H momszoO OOO>HHO O O m m H O O m m *H HOOOLOQO Omusoo mocOOHmon pHOOm mo COHumOOH OOOQOHHQO wQHLOO occOOHmOm mflopwkaO 059 MO wCOHumUOH moflmfiflmmh UHSUG USN UOOLUHHQOIS.mm Mdm<8 —lll— ~112— during childhood and during adult life before becoming associated with a golf enterprise is most important since causal relationships are being sought. Present adult resi- dence is of no consequence since all those included in the survey are already golf Operators and their residence loca- tion would be influenced by their jobs. No direct relationships were uncovered between location of childhood residence and interest in golf course management as a profession from this information. However, certain trends did seem to exist. Generally more managers of the private and semi-private courses came from large cities than is the case with their counterparts from the privately-operated public courses and public courses. All but two of the managers from the latter group grew up in a non-urban setting. On the other hand, a majority of the operators of private and semi-private courses grew up in cities over 100,000. Time Spent in Managing the Course The total amount of time involved in golf course management during the season ranged from a high of 105 hours per week to 40 hours per week. The average amount of time devoted to operations was 69 hours per week. All the managers spent about the same amount of time on a random basis except for the public course operators. They averaged 30 hours per week less time with a 46 hour per week average as compared to a 76 hour average work week for the other fifteen managers. -113- Two of the private and semi-private club managers worked only eight months per year. Both of them are pro- fessional golfers and they migrate to Florida in the winter to give lessons to tourists during the winter season. Five of the privately operated public course and public course operators work at the golf courses only part of the year. The operators of Kearsley Lake, Pierce Park, and course 12 work at their courses full time during the playing season and are employed elsewhere during the winter. The operators of 13 and 15 are both occupied with other jobs during the playing season. One is a foreman at an auto production plant and the other manager has a landscape firm which employs several people. CHAPTER VII SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS In the previous two chapters the data were tabulated Vaccording to enterprise types; i.e., public, private, semi- private, and privately owned public courses. This chapter summarizes the results of the study according to the hypo- thetical framework as stated on pages 7 and 8. In order to do this the data applicable only to the individually owned enterprises will be analyzed. "Individually owned enter— prises" refers to those golf courses which are owned by one individual as contrasted with group owned enterprises whether they be publicly owned, private clubs, or corporately owned for investment purposes. Eight of the golf courses and three of the driving ranges in Genesee County are managed by individual owners for profit. Two owners Operate private clubs, two operate semi-private clubs and all four of the privately owned pub- lic courses are owned by individual operators or their families. Hypotheses Restated I. When compared to publicly-owned and private group owned clubs, enterprises owned and operated by an individual will exhibit the fOllowing characteristics: -ll4- -115- (l) The facility will be less well planned, (2) the manage- ment will be less well trained and experienced in managing golfing facilities, (3) the enterprise will be less well financed, (4) the management will have utilized fewer sources of outside technical assistance, and (5) fewer personnel will be employed. 11. Individual golf entrepreneurs can compete successfully for an equitable share of the total golfing market if advantage can be taken of: (l) the utilization of family labor, (2) adaptation of agricultural techniques and knowledge to golf course building and maintenance, (3) an available market in areas that are not otherwise being adequately served, and (4) land, equipment, and capital improvements which were owned by the operators prior to the development of the golf enterprise and which were functionally utilized after the course was developed. Facility Planning It was not possible to measure directly the quality of the planning which was done for each course in the developmental process. However, two criteria were used to arrive at certain tentative conclusions. These criteria were: (1) was the facility planned by a professional planner, and (2) have any redesign and reconstruction pro- jects been necessary to relieve certain planning inadequa— cies? -ll6— Two Of the eight golf courses that belong to indi— vidual owners were designed by professional planners. The others were planned by the owners who originally developed the courses. In contrast, all the private group owned clubs were designed by professional planners. For an elabo- ration of this contrast see page 83. Five of the eight owner operated courses had made or were contemplating major changes on their courses. Most of these involve greens renovations. However, one owner of a privately operated public course plans to enlarge all of his greens and another owner intends to relocate one of his greens. One individually owned private club and one semi- private club are going to have their courses partially redesigned and some of the greens renovated. The semi- private course was only very recently purchased as a developed facility. According to the criteria established for judging the quality Of planning proposition I-l is validated--the individually owned courses are less well planned than the group owned facilities. Management Background and Training Of the eight managers of individually owned courses, seven had no previous experience in golf course management.: Three of them were brought up on farms and two of them still live on farms. Three operators were reared in the city while one lived in a community of less than 10,000 population. -117- Two of these operators were involved in farming before they became golf course owners or operators. One was a builder, and one had a landscaping business. The fifth owner worked for the Flint Recreation and Park Department for several years before his entry into the golf course industry. The vocational experience of the two operators is not known. One had worked with golf courses most of his life. The owners of three of the publicly used courses had a great deal less formal education than did the individual owners of the private and semi—private courses. However, the other golf course owners had more years of education on the average than did the professional managers at the other courses. In contrast to this group of inexperienced owners, the other managers of golf courses in Genesee County averaged more than ten years of experience, usually at more than one course. On the basis of education and experience, proposi- tion I-2 is substantiated—-the operators of individually owned facilities had less formal preparation for positions in golf course management than did the professional per- sonnel employed at the group-owned courses. Other results of the study seem to indicate, however, that background and experience are not as critical as some of the other factors dealt with in the study. -ll8- Financing One important question with which this study is concerned deals with the availability and adequacy of financing and the sources of financing. Three of the courses were purchased with the owners' private funds. Two were financed with loans from lending firms and one course was obtained by inheritance. The other two courses were financed mainly through lending firms with lesser amounts of owner investment of funds. The owners were asked to judge the degree of limita— tion that financing had imposed upon them. Only one oper- ator among the individual entrepreneurs indicated that in— adequate finances had been a considerable obstacle in getting his golf course established. Four Operators stated that they were moderately limited by financing while the other three had eXperienced little or no difficulty in this regard. One measure of the adequacy of investments might be the length of time required to attain a complete set Of facilities as originally planned for. Three of the privately operated pwiuc courses are essentially incomplete in that two of them have nine holes and one has twelve holes. All three owners plan to eXpand as soon as possible to 18-hole courses. The delay is obviously a lack of investment capital since 1For more detailed information concerning the financing of these courses, see Table 18, page 80, enter- prises 7, 8, 9, 12, 13, 14, and 15. -119- none of the courses are limited by a lack of available land. One owner helped to defray the expense of initial develop- ment of his course by selling eighty choice residential lots on the perimeter of the property at inflated prices. Generally the estimated gross market value is less for the facilities owned by individual Operators than those which are publicly owned or group-owned facilities.1 Two of the facilities, 7 and 8, were valued at a higher figure than certain of the group owned facilities. However, the four privately owned public courses were the four courses with the lowest market values. Five of the eight courses were developed by their present owners while two were purchased as develOped courses. The other course was inherited by its present owner. Four of the five courses built by the owners themselves have been constructed on a piecemeal basis. All four of these courses are privately—operated public courses. This lack of complete initial development was primarily due to inadequate financing. The information available seems to indicate that individually owned golf courses were not as well financed as the group owned courses. Thus hypothesis section 1-3 is verified. 1See page 80. -l20- Outside Assistance Utilized A question was incorporated in the questionnaire to determine what sources of technical assistance might have been used by the owners in the development of their courses. The results of the question were incomplete either because the present managers were not associated with the courses at the time of develOpment or they could not remember. The only assistance that the group owned clubs utilized more than the individually owned courses were golf course archi- tects. Therefore proposition I—4 cannot be substantiated from this data. Employees Differences in the number and kinds of personnel employed by the different types of courses appear quite pronounced as indicated in Table 26. TABLE 26.—-Employee data compared according to ownership types Average Number of Employees Course type Permanent Seasonal Part—time full—time full-time Public 2. 6.5 6.2 Individual owner 2.7 11.4 4.7 Group owned 10.8 16.1 20.2 —l21- These averages are misleading, however, since the distribu- tion of the same kinds of workers within the same types of courses is not at all even. For example, two Of the private group-owned clubs each have more total employees than the other three combined. Larger numbers Of permanent full— time employees are in all cases associated with dining and bar facilities. It is not surprising that three of the privately operated public courses which lack dining and drinking facilities, have no full-time employees. In con- trast, one individually owned course which has a bar and a restaurant employes a full-time staff of four and a larger number of seasonal and part-time workers. An analysis of the data indicates that in terms of employment the owner—Operated courses may be classed into two groups. The individually-owned private and semi- private courses are larger, supply more services and cater to their users throughout the year. Therefore, it is to be eXpected that they will employ more people. The privately- operated public courses Operate with fewer personnel than any other type of operation. The data clearly indicate that generally the indi— vidually owned courses employ fewer personnel than the group-owned facilities.l However, the data are biased in that the nature of the two user groups are not comparable in their demands and eXpectations. Also the year round lSee page105 for specific numerical employment data. -122- operation of the group-owned facilities naturally requires greater numbers of employees. Section 1-5 is thus true with some qualifications—-individually owned courses do employ fewer personnel than group-owned courses. Utilization of Family Labor All but one of the owners of the individually- owned facilities employ relatives in the operation of their courses. However the length of time worked and the motivation for using these relatives' labor varies greatly. One semi—private course is owned as a joint venture by four brothers. Two of them work primarily with a family- owned construction company but all four of them give some time to course Operations. The wives of four of the owners of courses work in different phases Of course operations. Three of them work more than forty hours per week as a necessary labor contribution to the operation of the course. Three of the owners employ their sons during the summer; two out Of necessity and one primarily for the financial benefit of the son. Section II-l postulates that the utilization of family labor can be an important competitive factor for some of the individually owned courses. The findings of this research indicate that this can be a very important factor in the labor inputs of production. These findings can be corroborated on pages 104-106. -123- Adaptation of Agricultural Techniques and Knowledge Three of the seven owners of individually-owned enterprises have an agricultural background. Two of these three indicated that their farm experience had been directly beneficial in operating their golf course. However, the concensus among the owner—operators was that the most beneficial method of acquiring knowledge of golf course maintenance and other operations is to learn by working directly with a golf course. This was not a major competi- tive factor which counters proposition II—2 in the hypo- thesis. Available Market The courses in Genesee County seem to fall into two categories as far as markets are concerned. One class attracts a very localized user group, while the other seems to appeal to a user group from a larger area. Courses in the first class are generally located in small suburban communities and have been built by local peOple as small private clubs or by a single entrepreneur trying to capture a local user market. The second class is not so strongly affected by time-Space limitations because of the highly prestigious character of the user group. The privately Operated public courses and the individually-owned semi-private courses fall into the class catering to the local user groups. However, the private -l24- course in the Single-ownership group is not bound to a localized clientele. Available untapped user-markets was clearly a basic factor in the ability of individual courses to compete for a share of the golfing market. This is particularly true in the case of the privately-owned public courses which have had to begin with a minimum of initial resources and upgrade and eXpand as their clientele numbers increased. Pertaining to quality factors, this study seemed to indi- cate that a golfer's enjoyment of a given course was much more important than the distance he had to travel. As postulated in section II-3 available untapped markets is an important competitive factor. Utilization of Previously Owned Land, Equipment, and Capital Investments Three of the individually owned and operated courses were acquired by their present owners in a developed state. The other five were built by their present owners. Two of the owners farmed the land before they converted the land for golfing purposes. They owned the land for sixteen and twelve years respectively before they developed their courses; two other operators bought the land and immediately developed a course. The fifth owner possessed the land for twenty years before he built his course. The land was previously used for a sanitary landfill. 1See data on page 69. _125_ Four of the individually-owned enterprises had equipment which was used in connection with the original farm operations. This equipment included primarily tractors. Equipment did not seem to be a significant factor except in the operation of one privately owned public course. Capital investments, primarily in the form of buildings, appear to have been a very important element in the developmental patterns of five of the eight individually- owned courses.l Three of these owners remodeled barns into club houses and pro shops. One course operator built a club house in the basement of his residence. The other course had several secondary buildings that were adapted for storage and for maintenance shops. In conclusion, the utilization of land owned prior to course development and the remodeling of pre-existing buildings was important. Equipment was not an important factor. Conclusions that are Unrelated to the Hypothetical Framework In considering whether a golfing enterprise would be a wise investment for a land owner or other persons interested in outdoor recreation enterprises, additional information from this study may be worthwhile. 1See data on page 69. —l26- Who should consider golf as a potential business venture? If the owner plans to make a Significant labor contribution, the long hours and the type of work involved should be considered. The owner-Operators of the courses included in this study, spent much of their time in manual labor. Their work ranged from very heavy work to light menial activities. The hours are quite long, with an average of 76 hours per week. For most of the individual owners, course operations do, however, involve work for only eight or nine months per year. Attitudes of the entrepreneurs toward their cus- tomers, the golfers, may be a much more critical factor than the room allotted in this thesis would indicate. From talking to the owners it seemed that most of them enjoyed working with people. It also seemed that most of them con- sidered it their responsibility to be of service to people as well as to make a profit. For example, several of the owners, those open to the public in particular, donate the use of their courses many times each year to certain groups of users. One observation might be pertinent at this point. It would be wise for anyone who cannot tolerate any misuse and abuse of his property to stay away from golf course operations. Several of the operators implied that one of their biggest problems was the lack of respect among users for the facilities. -127- A few factors seem to be key considerations in the actual development of the course. Land, particularly in metropolitan areas such as Flint, is very high in price. One distinct advantage to the golf course developer in creating a profitable business is to have purchased the land before intensification of demand through urban sprawl has inflated land prices. All the individual owners included in this study who developed their own courses, with one exception, owned the land at least ten years before developing the course. Location seems to be of considerable consequence as far as privately owned public courses are concerned. A site on a major traffic artery is important. The use made of the land surrounding the course also influences user appeal. Because of the prestige involved it is recommended that enough land be available to build an l8—hole course. The importance of building quality facilities cannot be overemphasized. Of all the conclusions drawn from this study, this is perhaps one of the most significant. Judg- ing from the owners' attitudes and goals, it appears that complete initial construction is preferable to piecemeal development. The above mentioned conclusions can be summarized by pointing out that adequate initial financing presents far fewer problems than evolving a high quality course -128- through the reinvestment of profits to continually upgrade a course of initially poor quality. Most of the problems come from user disenchantment. One way to adequately finance a course if enough land is available is to sell residential lots on the perimeter of the course. Care must be taken in planning the course to achieve maximum compatibility between the playable and the salable proper- ties. Protection of the homes is a major aspect of this planning. User attraction is an important consideration. The type of facility and the services will determine the kind of people who will use a course. If the situation is such that the Operator wants to cater almost altogether to eXperienced golfers, this study suggests that bar and restaurant facilities are necessary for maximum appeal. On the other hand, if a course is designed to attract members of the family in addition to the experi- enced golfers, other types of facilities and services will be necessary. In this case the owner should consider offering a variety of golf related facilities--driving range, putt-putt course, par—3 course, etc. It is par- ticularly significant that such a course be located on a major road. For those who might want to develop only one of these secondary golf related facilities such as a driving range, the results of this study seem to Show that a facil- ity designed to serve the entire family will likely prove to be more profitable. _129- On all types of courses, but especially on courses which appeal to all family members, a strong emphasis should be put on increasing weekday play. This can be done through leagues, group golfing instruction, other promotional efforts. Some of the privately operated public courses had well planned weekday programs. The results of this study clearly demonstrate that professional designers should plan the layout of the course. However, the owner may construct the course himself without adverse results if he follows construction specifications and avails himself of the outside sources of assistance which are at his disposal. One significant point of information was the lighting of strategic areas of several of the courses, to lengthen playing time during the early evening. The dif- ferent plans ranged from lighting the entire back nine to lighting the last few holes on one or both the front and back nine. The last point in these conclusions to be con- sidered is whether patterns involving the transformation Of a facility from one type to another exist, e.g., from a privately owned public course to a semi-private course, etc. No such changes were apparent in the study. However, there seemed to be a tendency among the semi—private course operators to move toward more of a private course status by periodically raising initiation fees and dues to eliminate some of their large membership. -130- Suggestions for Future Research This study at best has only served to identify some of the more important factors which influence the development and Operation of a golf course by an individual entrepreneur. More research is needed to determine the relative importance of the various factors that are listed in the conclusions. Another area of needed research has to do with user preferences within each broad course type. Another research need is a sutdy of quality standards and price formulation which would clarify the question of how much people will pay for a various scales of quality. Equipped with such knowledge an individual entrepreneur could develop his course so as to optimize profits. BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Articles and Periodicals Cornish, Geoffrey. "Superintendents Supervise Construction," The Golf Course Reporter, September—October, 1964, pp. 21—22. Crabtree, G. H. "Developing Golf Subdivisions," Urban Land, September, 1958, pp. 3-7. Eckhoff, Harry C. "Golf Centers," Golfdom, January, 1964, p. 32. "Golf Course Loan Programs," Recreation, January, 1964, p. 24. . "What's Happening in Golf," Ohio Cities and Villages, May, 1966. Ganem, Roger. "Golf's Business Biceps Bulge," Golfdom, January, 1966, p. 27. "The Golf Club That Business Built," Business Week, August 28, 1965, p. 48. "Golf Interest Doubles Since '50; More Growth Ahead," The Sportinngoods Dealer, May, 1966. "Golf, the Marketing Maelstrom," Printers Ink, p. 8. "Golf Moves Indoors," Business Week, August 31, 1961, pp’ 514—550 Graffis, Herb. "Golf Economics," Golfdom, January, 1964, pp- 21, 99. "Let's Play Golf," Todays Health, August, 1962, 40:28-31. Loeben, Arthur. "How One County Met the Challenge of Golf," The Golf Course Reporter, July, 1964, p. 20. McCurdy, Dwight R. and Mischon, Raymond M. "Outdoor Recreation and Ohio Bankers," Ohio Banker, January, 1965, pp. 8-9. -1 32.- —133- "More Firms Encourage Their Executives to Learn to Play Golf," Golfdom, February, 1964, p. 88. "1964 Golf Sales Account for 50% of Sports Market," Golfdom, June, 1965. "The Origins of the Club," Esquire, December, 1965. "Profile of Operating Statistics for 273 Private Clubs," Department of Hotel, Restaurant and Institutional Management, Club Management, April, 1965. Sherman, Bill. "Real Estate Men Build One of Three Courses," Golfdom, April, 1964, p. 66. "Six Million Golfers Can't Be Wrong," Business Week, September 14, 1963, p. 107. Twardzik, Louis F. "Farm Recreation Enterprises—-Problems and Opportunities," Michigan Farm Economics, July, 1966. "Two Golf Courses Highlight $10 Million Pipestem State Park," Park Maintenance, July, 1966, pp. 12-13. Books Chlevin, Ben. Golf Operator's Handbook. Chicago: National Golf Foundation, 1956. Clawson, Marion. Land and Water for Recreation. Chicago: Rand McNally and Company, 1963. Gibson, Nevin H. The Encyclopedia of Golf. New York: A. S. Barnes and Company, 1958. Grierson, James. Delineations of St. Andrews. London: Cupar, 1833. Price, Charles. The World of Golf. London: Cassell and Company, 1962. Stanley, Dave and Ross, George. Golfers Own Book. New York: Lantern Press, 1956. Tufts, Richard S. The Scottish Invasion. Pinehurst, North Carolina: Pinehurst Publishers, 1962. Wickham, Verne. Municipal Golf Course. Chicago: National ’ Golf Foundation, 1955. -1311- Public Documents California. California Public Outdoor Recreation Plan Committee. Guide for Planninngecreation Parks in California. Sacramento, California, 1964. Michigan State University. Bureau of Business and Economic Research. Michigan Statistical Abstract. East Lansing, Michigan: Graduate School of Business Administration, 1964. U.S. Bureau of the Census. Eighteenth Census of the United States: 1960. Population, Vol. I. U.S. Census of Agriculture Preliminary Report for Genesee Counpyi Michigan: 1964. U.S. Congress. Food and Agricultural Act of 1962, Public Law 87-703. 1962. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Farmer's Home Administra- tion. "Loans for Recreational Enterprises," Bulletin P.A. 723, April, 1966. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. Guide to Making Appraisals of Potentials for Out- door Recreation Developments. Washington, D. C.: Soil Conservation Service, 1965. U.S. Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission, Outdoor Recreation for America. Washington, D. C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1962. National Recreation Survey. ORRRC Report 19. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1962. Reports and Bulletins American Recreation Society and the National Golf Founda- tion. Nationwide Sample of Municipal and Tax Supported Golf Operations for 1960. Chicago, 1960. Cook, Walter and Holland, Ray. Public Golf Courses, Bulletin 3. Wheeling, West Virginia: American Institute of Park Executives, 1964. Gaylor, Earl E. Par-3 Golf, Bulletin 47. Wheeling, West Virginia: American Institute of Park Executives, 1965. -135- Harris, Kerr, Forster. "Country ClubS——Golf Course Maintenance Costs.” Chicago: National Golf Foundation, 1965. Milstein, David N. "Michigan's Outdoor Recreation and Tourism,” Project 80. East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, 1966. National Golf Foundation. Statistical Information Sheet 2. Chicago, October 1, 1965. Planning Information for Private Golf Clubs. Chicago: National Golf Foundation, 1965. . Statistical Information Sheet 3. Chicago, 1965. Van Nierop, Emmanuel. Inventorye—Private Outdoor Recreation Entepprises. Summary of results of a study conducted by Michigan's Soil Conservation Districts. East Lansing, 1966 (mimeographed). APPENDICES Name APPENDIX 1 QUESTIONNAIRE Township of enterprise FACILITY INVENTORY This recreational facility includes: VVVVV 9-hole regulation length golf course 18-hole regulation length golf course 9—hole par-3 course ' ' l8-hole par-3 course commercial driving range - Number of stalls Secondary recreational facilities available include: AAA/NA“ VVVVVV putting green practice driving area swimming pool ' Size X tennis courts - Number miniahre golf course others (Specify) Subsidiary services rendered: ( ( AAAAA ) VV VVVVV pro-shop ( ) golf car rental grill ( ) rental of golf car storage spac pre-packaged foods 8 ( ) golf club storage refreshements ( ) golf club and Cart rental restaurant ( ) golf club repair service bar ( ) golfing instruction food catering service ( ) other (specify) lockers showers How many acres are there in the entire enterprise? BACKGROUND AND DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION The enterprise is owned by: AAA/"s ( VVVV ) a municipality or other political subdivision an individual owner partnership a non-profit organization (country club, recreational association,'etc.) an investment corporation Had the facility previously been Operated by another group or individual as a golf enterprise? ( ) yes ( ) no -137- 8. 10. ll. 12. 13. I4. 15. 16. If the answer to question 7 is "yes", please check the circum- stances listed below which best describe the development of the facility: ( ) a golf course developer designed and built the facility Ifor immeddate resale ‘ ( ) the facility was purchased from an individual owner/operator who had built and operated the course the course was received by its present owner as a gift the course was received by its present owner as an inheritance the facility was purchased from a corporate ownership don't know other (Specify) AAA/Kn VVVVV When did the present Ownership acquire deed to the prOperty? How long has the land been used as a golfing enterprise? NOTE: Question 11 is to be filled out if the land was bought before the golfing facility was built. The cost/acre for the present ownership at the time of purchase was: ( ) $50-$100 ( ) $lOO-$250 ( ) $250-$500 ( ) $500-$750 ( ) $750-$1000 ( ) $1000-$1250 ( ) $1250—$1500 ( ) $1500-$l750 ( ) $1750-$2000 ( ) $2000-$2250 ( ) $2250-$2500 ( ) $2500-$3000 ( ) greater than $3000, please specify NOTE: Question 12 is to be filled out if the golf facility was built before the present ownership’obtained it. Please list the price which was paid by the present ownerShip for the land and facility. The estimated total gross market value of the entire golfing enterprise today is: $ Does the present ownership plan to continue to operate the facility as a golfing enterprise for at least the next ten years? ( ) yes ( ) no If the answer to question 14 is "no", which of the following do you expect to do? ( ) sell it ( ) sell it and relocate elsewhere ( ) develop the land for some other use,(please Specify) If the answer to question 14 is "yes", do you plan to make any changes in the course or its associated facilities? ( ) yes ( ) no l7. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. .24. -138- Please check the following changes which you expect to make in the future: ( ) renovation of the greens ( ) all ( ) some (Specify which ones) ( ) redesign of the course ( ) complete ( ) partial ( ) the relocation of certain greens (please spcify which ones) Has the course ever been redesigned or reconstructed? ( ) yes ( ) no The land use immaiately prior to its development as a recreational enterprise was: ( ) farming ( ) timber ( ) industrial ( ) idle land ( ) other (specify) ( ) don't know Was the development of this facility associated with the devel— Opment of a residential subdivision? ( ) yes ( ) no Which of the following sources of financing were utilized to fully complete the construction of the facility in its present form: ( ) financed personally by the ownership % of total ( ) financed by bond issue I_—% of total ( ) financed by sale of memberships _—% of total ( ) financed by government loan ——% of total ( ) financed by government grant —_% of total ( ) financed by private lending firms ——% of total ( ) other (please specify) ' ::% of total TO what degree were you limited by financing in developing the course ideally: ' ' ( ) none ( ) a little ( ) moderately ( ) severely Was the course originally designed by a professionally recognized .golf course architect? ( ) yes ( ) no Other types of consulting help used in the planning stages were: engineering consultants golfing professionals machinery company consultants National Golf Foundation consultants Agricultural Extension service Soil Conservation Service chemical company consultants plant material consultants others (Specify) AAA/\AAAAA VVVVVVVVV 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. -139- In the construction phase of development the work was: contracted out to a construction firm for total construction the work was contracted out in phases golf course architect contracted to design and build the course the club's superintendent or owner hired the equipment and labor and built the entire course himself ( ) the club hired a construction superintendent who hired the equipment and labor and built the entire course ( ) other (Spaify) Were any preexisting buildings utilized in the develOpment of the course? ( ) yes ( ) no Please list information below concerning the previous and present use of these preexisting buildings: Previous Use Present Use (Example: barn Club house and pro shop) Building§_ l. l. 2. 2. 3. 3. Please check the designation below which best expresses the degree of remodeling which had to be done for each building: l. ( ) very little ( ) moderate ( ) extensive 2. ( ) very little ( ) moderate ( ) extensive 3. ( ) very little ( ) moderate ( ) extensive Was there any equipment which had been used on the land prior to its develOpment as a golfing enterprise which was utilized after the land was put to a recreational use? ( ) yes ( ) no Please list these pieces of machinery: l. 2. 3. DEGREE OF USE Are you going to add more holes? ( ) yes ( ) no How many? A. For golf courses: How many nine hole rounds of golf are played on the course each year? B. For driving ranges: How many buckets of balls would you estimate are sold each year? 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. -140- Please list the Opaing and closing dates for the last three seasons: 1963 to 1964 to 1965 to How many memberships are held in the club? Does you club have an associate membershi>plan? ( ) yes ( ) no What percent of the total play on your course is done at the following times: (1) weekdays % (2) weekends 8 Holidays % Which of the following types of special features or events are sponsored on your course? ( ) golf leagues, days of the week ltime of day number of weeks in the season professionallournaments, date amateur tournaments, date pro—am tournaments, date ladies days, days of the week time of day number of weeks in the season ( ) kids days, days of the week time of day number of weeks in the season ( ) senior citizens days and/or hours, days time of day number of weeks in the season ( ) complimentary use occasions for promotional purposes, when AAA“ vvvv Do you take reservations? ( ) yes ( ) no Please list all fees or membership charges below: Characteristics of Users Please give an estimate as to the percent of those using your facility whbh are: (1) professional people (doctors, lawyers, teachers, etc.) (2) business men and business executives (3) white collar workers (Office workers, clerks, etc.) (4) blue collar workers (factory workers, etc.) (5) farmers (6) ladies (7) others (Specify) 09096969690909 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. —l4l— Please give an estimate of the percent of users which comes from each area listed below: Oakland Co. Livingston Col Saginaw CO. Lapeer Co. Non-Michigan City of Flint Genesee Co. Shiawassee Co. Tuscola Co. Others 6969696909 HMHOPHMH Please estimate the percent of users which come from each radius distance listed below. Less than 1 mile radius 1 to 5 mile radius 5 to 10 mile radius 10 to 20 mile radius Greater than 20 mile radius HMNOJHMN EMPLOYEE INFORMATION How many permanent full—time employees does the course have? Please check the appropriate capacity in which each of these permanent; full-time emplpyees work: (NOTE: if one employee carries out more than one function, give an approximate ratio of time Spent at each job; Example: 1/2 manager, 1/2 pro). T e job Give the number in each position ( i golf professional : golf course superintendent greenskeepers mechanics , tractor Operators laborers accountants office workers grill workers others, (Specify) AAA/\AAAAA VVVVVVVVV How many seasonal full-time employees are used in ayear? How many part—time employees are used in a_year2 OPERATIONAL INFLUENCES If any product dispensed through vending machines? ( ) yes ( ) no Please list below the products which are dispensed by vending machines: l. 2. 3. IS the facility lighted for night use? ( ) yes ( ) no How much is lighted? (specify) When was lighting installed? 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. —l42— Have you considered lighting the facility? ( ) yes ( ) no How much? (specify) If the facility is lighted, what percent of the total seasons play is at night? % If the facility is lighted, please indicate the affect that longer period of daily use has on the overall management and Operation of the facility. ( ) no affect ( ) decrease the problems ( ) somewhat complicate management procedures ( ) greatly complicate management procedures Please indicate below the tax bracket under which your prOperty is evaluated: ( ) exempt ( ) agricultural ( ) commercial ( ) residenthl ( ) other (please specify) Please check below your estimate of the percentage of change in taxes between 1962 and 1965: ( ) decreased ( ) less than a 10% increase ( ) 10-25% increase ( ) 25-50% inc. ( ) 50-100% increase ( ) over 100% increase Please specify NOTE: Please answer question 53 if the present ownership built the facility. If possible, please give the rate of tax evaluation for the property the year before and the year after its develOpment as a golf enterprise: (1) year before, 19___amount (2) year after, 19__ amount What affect has the reduction in federal excise taxes had upon your course? ( ) advantageous ( ) no affect ( ) disadvantageous At your present rate of return, how long will it take to amortize the investment? ( ) already paid for ( ) amortized within 5 years ( ) amortized within 20 years ( ) amortized within 40 years ( ) long term lease How successful would you term this enterprise under its present circumstances: ( ) very successful ( ) successful ( ) not too successful —l43— Background of the Management To be filled out by the owner or manager who is responsible for the total operatipp_of the course or driving range. Name Age Position title 57. com- rural on a munity non city in city firm. less than farm or 10,000- 100,000 101000 suburb 99,999 or over 58. 59. 60. 61. a) where did you live most of your OHld— hood? b) where have you lived most of your adult life? Do you play golf? ( ) yes ( ) no At what age did you start playing? Please give the number of years of education you have had at each level listed: No. of years High schooI College 0n the job_golf course traineeship or gpprenticeship pppgram Technical or Vocational school Other (Specify) If you have had technical school or college training, please check the field in which you specialized: ( ) horticulture ( ) turf maintenance or agronomy ( ) business administration ( ) engineering ( ) landscape architecture ( ) other (specify) How many years of working experience have you had in same phase of golf course management and/or maintenance? 62. 63. 64. 65. —144— Have you had eXperience with golf coursg other than the one you are working with now? ( ) yes ( ) no How many years eXperience at this course? How many hours per week on the average would you estimate that you devote to golf course management and/or maintenance during the playing season? Do you manage the course as a year-round job? ( ) yes ( ) no Does anyone in your immediate family contribute labor toward the operation of the golf course? ( ) yes ( ) no Relationshipfls) How many hours per week In what capacity? (\Jl—J CDN ONUW DUO ll. l2. l3. 14. 15. l6. l7. l8. l9. 4:me APPENDIX II ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF ASSISTANCE OF THE GOLF FACILITY OWNERS AND OPERATORS IN GENESEE COUNTY, MICHIGAN Golf Courses Wayne Henrickson——Atlas Valley Country Club Leonard Fortinberry, Bernard Dyball——Clio Golf Course, Inc. Bob Minto--Davidson Country Club Curtis Washburn-—Flint Golf Club A1 Edwards-—Flushing Country Club John La Boskey—-Genesee Hills Golf Club Peter Frick--Goodrich Golf Club Steve Isakov—-Industrial Mutual Association Brookwood Golf Course Lawrence Smith——Kearsley Lake Minicipal Golf Course Robert Main—-Loch Lomond Golf Club Edward LaRose——Mott Park Municipal Golf Course R. A. Sincerbeau-—Oakwood Golf Club George Fox-—Pierce Park Municipal Golf Course Leo T. Sugar—-Shoreacres Golf Club Daniel F. Albert——Spring Meadows Country Club Charles Waterbury--Swartz Creek Municipal Golf Course Julius Sahaydak—-Vienna Greens Golf Course Wayne H. Lobdell-—Warwick Hills Golf and Country Club Kyran Mitchelson—-Willowood Country Club Driving Ranges Philip J. Becker--Arnold Palmer Driving Range Ken Failing-—Fairway Acres, Inc. Anthony P. Topolka——Fllnt Driving Range Milton Seifert, Jr.-—Seifert Golf Center —l45— E 1 111111 11'“ ”llllulllllfill; 93 0319