Don’t really understand all the hate for this.

If there are people out there that are willing to pay this much to have a course to themselves, good luck to them? – why hate on the builders/developers for catering to a market?

For almost all of the prospective members it will be no different to putting 100k in a unit trust or property trust or other investment vehicle, except with this they happen to get a golf course to share amongst themselves. I doubt there will be many (with the possible exception of the obscenely rich) who will consider it as 100k for membership of a golf course.

Open the door and the flies swarm in,
Close the door and I’m sweatin’ again,
And in the process I crack my shin,
Just one dern thing after another.

Here’s where the “hate” (and I don’t think it’s hate, it’s more skepticism) comes from:

- Thompson hasn’t designed anything that you would necessarily write home about – let alone they called that this will be among the best, if not the best golf course in Australia… highly doubt he’s capable

- the existing StAB is a belter of a course, you can get on that for pennies in comparison (designed by a legend), anytime you want – most people would doubt whether the second course would be even as good as the first.. first one went broke pretty quick

- As an “investment”, can you name me one golf membership debenture that has worked in Australia? The Grand was designed for the obscenely rich, their members are now lugged with $10k+ annual subs just to keep it going and the value of the memberships has dived… same as the national – I can get on the national for $7k now, three courses (two great, one ordinary – the thompson one)

- Now for the more scientific part – fees currently at $4,900 a year, multiplied by 280 odd members is roughly 1.38m, with limited visitors etc, that’s actually not enough income to run the course (at the club I belong to, annual course maintenance expenditure alone is north of $1.5m).... ummmm

So, the business model is sketchy, most would have doubts about how good the course is after the pumping up they’ve given themselves and $100k buys you 14 memberships at the national, which is already built, a cracking club, great clubhouse.. and I would argue, already has that “exclusive” feel to it…

Don’t really understand all the hate for this.

If there are people out there that are willing to pay this much to have a course to themselves, good luck to them? – why hate on the builders/developers for catering to a market?

For almost all of the prospective members it will be no different to putting 100k in a unit trust or property trust or other investment vehicle, except with this they happen to get a golf course to share amongst themselves. I doubt there will be many (with the possible exception of the obscenely rich) who will consider it as 100k for membership of a golf course.

Open the door and the flies swarm in,
Close the door and I’m sweatin’ again,
And in the process I crack my shin,
Just one dern thing after another.

Here’s where the “hate” (and I don’t think it’s hate, it’s more skepticism) comes from:

Thompson hasn’t designed anything that you would necessarily write home about – let alone they called that this will be among the best, if not the best golf course in Australia… highly doubt he’s capable

the existing StAB is a belter of a course, you can get on that for pennies in comparison (designed by a legend), anytime you want – most people would doubt whether the second course would be even as good as the first.. first one went broke pretty quick

As an “investment”, can you name me one golf membership debenture that has worked in Australia? The Grand was designed for the obscenely rich, their members are now lugged with $10k+ annual subs just to keep it going and the value of the memberships has dived… same as the national – I can get on the national for $7k now, three courses (two great, one ordinary – the thompson one)

Now for the more scientific part – fees currently at $4,900 a year, multiplied by 280 odd members is roughly 1.38m, with limited visitors etc, that’s actually not enough income to run the course (at the club I belong to, annual course maintenance expenditure alone is north of $1.5m).... ummmm

So, the business model is sketchy, most would have doubts about how good the course is after the pumping up they’ve given themselves and $100k buys you 14 memberships at the national, which is already built, a cracking club, great clubhouse.. and I would argue, already has that “exclusive” feel to it…

+1

Sorry man but I just dont understand that sort of attitude…

Golfgeek sums it up very well, it is not hate, more like realism that the project is less than likely to succeed in the long term.

The market down there is saturated at all levels.

Sorry man but I just dont understand that sort of attitude…

Open the door and the flies swarm in,
Close the door and I’m sweatin’ again,
And in the process I crack my shin,
Just one dern thing after another.

A realist attitude?

Don’t really understand all the hate for this.

If there are people out there that are willing to pay this much to have a course to themselves, good luck to them? – why hate on the builders/developers for catering to a market?

For almost all of the prospective members it will be no different to putting 100k in a unit trust or property trust or other investment vehicle, except with this they happen to get a golf course to share amongst themselves. I doubt there will be many (with the possible exception of the obscenely rich) who will consider it as 100k for membership of a golf course.

Open the door and the flies swarm in,
Close the door and I’m sweatin’ again,
And in the process I crack my shin,
Just one dern thing after another.

Here’s where the “hate” (and I don’t think it’s hate, it’s more skepticism) comes from:

Thompson hasn’t designed anything that you would necessarily write home about – let alone they called that this will be among the best, if not the best golf course in Australia… highly doubt he’s capable

the existing StAB is a belter of a course, you can get on that for pennies in comparison (designed by a legend), anytime you want – most people would doubt whether the second course would be even as good as the first.. first one went broke pretty quick

As an “investment”, can you name me one golf membership debenture that has worked in Australia? The Grand was designed for the obscenely rich, their members are now lugged with $10k+ annual subs just to keep it going and the value of the memberships has dived… same as the national – I can get on the national for $7k now, three courses (two great, one ordinary – the thompson one)

Now for the more scientific part – fees currently at $4,900 a year, multiplied by 280 odd members is roughly 1.38m, with limited visitors etc, that’s actually not enough income to run the course (at the club I belong to, annual course maintenance expenditure alone is north of $1.5m).... ummmm

So, the business model is sketchy, most would have doubts about how good the course is after the pumping up they’ve given themselves and $100k buys you 14 memberships at the national, which is already built, a cracking club, great clubhouse.. and I would argue, already has that “exclusive” feel to it…

Great post and pretty accurate.

Anyone thinking or calling it an investment is kidding themselves. Its a lifestyle decision for those with too much money and nothing more. Good luck but the $100k wont be worth 10k inside 10 years.

Don’t really understand all the hate for this.

If there are people out there that are willing to pay this much to have a course to themselves, good luck to them? – why hate on the builders/developers for catering to a market?

For almost all of the prospective members it will be no different to putting 100k in a unit trust or property trust or other investment vehicle, except with this they happen to get a golf course to share amongst themselves. I doubt there will be many (with the possible exception of the obscenely rich) who will consider it as 100k for membership of a golf course.

Open the door and the flies swarm in,
Close the door and I’m sweatin’ again,
And in the process I crack my shin,
Just one dern thing after another.

Here’s where the “hate” (and I don’t think it’s hate, it’s more skepticism) comes from:

Thompson hasn’t designed anything that you would necessarily write home about – let alone they called that this will be among the best, if not the best golf course in Australia… highly doubt he’s capable

the existing StAB is a belter of a course, you can get on that for pennies in comparison (designed by a legend), anytime you want – most people would doubt whether the second course would be even as good as the first.. first one went broke pretty quick

As an “investment”, can you name me one golf membership debenture that has worked in Australia? The Grand was designed for the obscenely rich, their members are now lugged with $10k+ annual subs just to keep it going and the value of the memberships has dived… same as the national – I can get on the national for $7k now, three courses (two great, one ordinary – the thompson one)

Now for the more scientific part – fees currently at $4,900 a year, multiplied by 280 odd members is roughly 1.38m, with limited visitors etc, that’s actually not enough income to run the course (at the club I belong to, annual course maintenance expenditure alone is north of $1.5m).... ummmm

So, the business model is sketchy, most would have doubts about how good the course is after the pumping up they’ve given themselves and $100k buys you 14 memberships at the national, which is already built, a cracking club, great clubhouse.. and I would argue, already has that “exclusive” feel to it…

Sorry meant that last comment to be against this post.

Don’t really understand all the hate for this.

If there are people out there that are willing to pay this much to have a course to themselves, good luck to them? – why hate on the builders/developers for catering to a market?

For almost all of the prospective members it will be no different to putting 100k in a unit trust or property trust or other investment vehicle, except with this they happen to get a golf course to share amongst themselves. I doubt there will be many (with the possible exception of the obscenely rich) who will consider it as 100k for membership of a golf course.

Open the door and the flies swarm in,
Close the door and I’m sweatin’ again,
And in the process I crack my shin,
Just one dern thing after another.

Here’s where the “hate” (and I don’t think it’s hate, it’s more skepticism) comes from:

Thompson hasn’t designed anything that you would necessarily write home about – let alone they called that this will be among the best, if not the best golf course in Australia… highly doubt he’s capable

the existing StAB is a belter of a course, you can get on that for pennies in comparison (designed by a legend), anytime you want – most people would doubt whether the second course would be even as good as the first.. first one went broke pretty quick

As an “investment”, can you name me one golf membership debenture that has worked in Australia? The Grand was designed for the obscenely rich, their members are now lugged with $10k+ annual subs just to keep it going and the value of the memberships has dived… same as the national – I can get on the national for $7k now, three courses (two great, one ordinary – the thompson one)

Now for the more scientific part – fees currently at $4,900 a year, multiplied by 280 odd members is roughly 1.38m, with limited visitors etc, that’s actually not enough income to run the course (at the club I belong to, annual course maintenance expenditure alone is north of $1.5m).... ummmm

So, the business model is sketchy, most would have doubts about how good the course is after the pumping up they’ve given themselves and $100k buys you 14 memberships at the national, which is already built, a cracking club, great clubhouse.. and I would argue, already has that “exclusive” feel to it…

Third time lucky…

What the fuck is going on here!!!

Anyway the quote keeps going against the wrong post, I agree with GG :(

Don’t really understand all the hate for this.

If there are people out there that are willing to pay this much to have a course to themselves, good luck to them? – why hate on the builders/developers for catering to a market?

For almost all of the prospective members it will be no different to putting 100k in a unit trust or property trust or other investment vehicle, except with this they happen to get a golf course to share amongst themselves. I doubt there will be many (with the possible exception of the obscenely rich) who will consider it as 100k for membership of a golf course.

Open the door and the flies swarm in,
Close the door and I’m sweatin’ again,
And in the process I crack my shin,
Just one dern thing after another.

Here’s where the “hate” (and I don’t think it’s hate, it’s more skepticism) comes from:

Thompson hasn’t designed anything that you would necessarily write home about – let alone they called that this will be among the best, if not the best golf course in Australia… highly doubt he’s capable

the existing StAB is a belter of a course, you can get on that for pennies in comparison (designed by a legend), anytime you want – most people would doubt whether the second course would be even as good as the first.. first one went broke pretty quick

As an “investment”, can you name me one golf membership debenture that has worked in Australia? The Grand was designed for the obscenely rich, their members are now lugged with $10k+ annual subs just to keep it going and the value of the memberships has dived… same as the national – I can get on the national for $7k now, three courses (two great, one ordinary – the thompson one)

Now for the more scientific part – fees currently at $4,900 a year, multiplied by 280 odd members is roughly 1.38m, with limited visitors etc, that’s actually not enough income to run the course (at the club I belong to, annual course maintenance expenditure alone is north of $1.5m).... ummmm

So, the business model is sketchy, most would have doubts about how good the course is after the pumping up they’ve given themselves and $100k buys you 14 memberships at the national, which is already built, a cracking club, great clubhouse.. and I would argue, already has that “exclusive” feel to it…

+1

Titleist 910D3 Aldila RIP 60
Titleist 910Fd Aldila RIP 60
Titleist 909H Adilda Voodoo
Titleist 710 AP1 Nippon NS Pro 105T
Vokey Spin Milled Oil Can 52, 56, 60
Scotty Cameron Studio Select Newport
Pro V1x

D4S – what share options have worked in golf in AUS out of curiosity

Don’t really understand all the hate for this.

If there are people out there that are willing to pay this much to have a course to themselves, good luck to them? – why hate on the builders/developers for catering to a market?

For almost all of the prospective members it will be no different to putting 100k in a unit trust or property trust or other investment vehicle, except with this they happen to get a golf course to share amongst themselves. I doubt there will be many (with the possible exception of the obscenely rich) who will consider it as 100k for membership of a golf course.

Open the door and the flies swarm in,
Close the door and I’m sweatin’ again,
And in the process I crack my shin,
Just one dern thing after another.

Here’s where the “hate” (and I don’t think it’s hate, it’s more skepticism) comes from:

Thompson hasn’t designed anything that you would necessarily write home about – let alone they called that this will be among the best, if not the best golf course in Australia… highly doubt he’s capable

the existing StAB is a belter of a course, you can get on that for pennies in comparison (designed by a legend), anytime you want – most people would doubt whether the second course would be even as good as the first.. first one went broke pretty quick

As an “investment”, can you name me one golf membership debenture that has worked in Australia? The Grand was designed for the obscenely rich, their members are now lugged with $10k+ annual subs just to keep it going and the value of the memberships has dived… same as the national – I can get on the national for $7k now, three courses (two great, one ordinary – the thompson one)

Now for the more scientific part – fees currently at $4,900 a year, multiplied by 280 odd members is roughly 1.38m, with limited visitors etc, that’s actually not enough income to run the course (at the club I belong to, annual course maintenance expenditure alone is north of $1.5m).... ummmm

So, the business model is sketchy, most would have doubts about how good the course is after the pumping up they’ve given themselves and $100k buys you 14 memberships at the national, which is already built, a cracking club, great clubhouse.. and I would argue, already has that “exclusive” feel to it…

+1

Titleist 910D3 Aldila RIP 60
Titleist 910Fd Aldila RIP 60
Titleist 909H Adilda Voodoo
Titleist 710 AP1 Nippon NS Pro 105T
Vokey Spin Milled Oil Can 52, 56, 60
Scotty Cameron Studio Select Newport
Pro V1x

D4S – what share options have worked in golf in AUS out of curiosity

There’s many a slip ’tween a cup and a lip.

http://www.golflink.com.au/...

Maybe National?

I didn’t cross out GG’s paragraph (if that’s what you’re getting at), that was ISG’s doing. Like you I agree with GG.

Dont know why the admin do that. Seemed a fair paragraph to me???

National isnt anywhere near it. I think they were 25-30k now down to 8k.

Played there on the weekend, Moonah Course. Great layout though the front 9 was much easier than I had anticipated and much shorter.

I think some residential land will also be for sale, abit like The Nash.
The developer is not the existing StAndrews Beach owner.

Dont know why the admin do that. Seemed a fair paragraph to me???

National isnt anywhere near it. I think they were 25-30k now down to 8k.

Played there on the weekend, Moonah Course. Great layout though the front 9 was much easier than I had anticipated and much shorter.

There’s many a slip ’tween a cup and a lip.

http://www.golflink.com.au/...

I think it’s just some sort of coding glitch, not censorship.

You’d have to say that The National is pretty successful. Supply and demand sets the price, so yeah it’s less to join now than pre GFC, but overall the club is doing very well on and off the course.

Anyone know what the initial share price was (not the peak price) in the late 80s/early 90s?

Not sure but I think they have about 2800 members at $3600 per annum plus $500 for bar.

So thats $11,200,000 per year income at least.

Golfgeek sums it up very well, it is not hate, more like realism that the project is less than likely to succeed in the long term.

The market down there is saturated at all levels.

Play it as it lies, get on with it, its not life or death, its just a game!

I never said anything to the contrary.

The point is, as another alluded to, it’s for the market to decide.

No one is forcing prospective investors to commit money to the project, anyone doing so does so at their own risk.

In fact, they have specifically targeted people registered with ASIC as sophisticated investors – these are people who frequently invest this sort of money in projects (be they real estate or otherwise) and have either a) the ability to discern good investments from bad, or b) so much money that it simply doesn’t matter. Either way, I don’t see what the problem with letting them find things out for themselves is.

Be skeptical, sure, but dont just sh!tbag a project that will take advantage of a premium piece of land in a premium area. Would you prefer the land just remain there, undeveloped, til the end of time?

Now for the more scientific part – fees currently at $4,900 a year, multiplied by 280 odd members is roughly 1.38m, with limited visitors etc, that’s actually not enough income to run the course (at the club I belong to, annual course maintenance expenditure alone is north of $1.5m).... ummmm

Quite scientific indeed. I guess they’ll be giving away food and drinks, rental clubs, hosting weddings out of the goodness of their hearts etc. $100k is starting to sound cheaper and cheaper already.

Don’t imagine their will be a massive market for rental clubs at the course.

If people are going to spend about $100k to become a member, I’d reckon they might at least have a half set lying around their garage somewhere.

As for the targeting specific people via ASIC… Its obviously not working too well because they’re advertising on SEN1116. Can’t say for sure, but I’d guess that a vast majority of SEN listeners aren’t sitting on a spare $100k+ to invest in a golf membership

Well a specifically limited exclusive club membership is more likely to hold its value – plus there would be a certain cache for some people in being a member of an exclusive course.

Where they might have problems is the ongoing income. I suspect that you will see some accommodation options on course available to members, perhaps a spa or similar plus a high level restaurant.

The only people/companys with a 100k to throw actually around,
Arent going to give a rats arse if there membership is worth 10k in 10 years.
Its a prestige thing. Nothing more.

I reckon corporate companies in Asia will dominate membership there

The only people/companys with a 100k to throw actually around,
Arent going to give a rats arse if there membership is worth 10k in 10 years.
Its a prestige thing. Nothing more.

I reckon corporate companies in Asia will dominate membership there

2012 B Grade Champ Paterson River ISG OOM Round #3
2012 ISG Matchplay Champion
2013 B Grade Champ Sanctuary Lakes ISG OOM Rd 1

http://www.golflink.com.au/...

Nah, it’s not the 90s anymore. They have plenty of quality options in their own backyard.

Not sure but I think they have about 2800 members at $3600 per annum plus $500 for bar.

So thats $11,200,000 per year income at least.

There’s many a slip ’tween a cup and a lip.

http://www.golflink.com.au/...

The chap was asking the cost of the initial membership. Not the subs. !

As an “investment”, can you name me one golf membership debenture that has worked in Australia? The Grand was designed for the obscenely rich, their members are now lugged with $10k+ annual subs just to keep it going and the value of the memberships has dived… same as the national – I can get on the national for $7k now, three courses (two great, one ordinary – the thompson one)

$7K ? Can you get $6500 for me ?

Not sure but I think they have about 2800 members at $3600 per annum plus $500 for bar.

So thats $11,200,000 per year income at least.

There’s many a slip ’tween a cup and a lip.

http://www.golflink.com.au/...

The chap was asking the cost of the initial membership. Not the subs. !

ellimb

Fair dinkum? thanks for clearing that one up…

Now for the more scientific part – fees currently at $4,900 a year, multiplied by 280 odd members is roughly 1.38m, with limited visitors etc, that’s actually not enough income to run the course (at the club I belong to, annual course maintenance expenditure alone is north of $1.5m).... ummmm

Quite scientific indeed. I guess they’ll be giving away food and drinks, rental clubs, hosting weddings out of the goodness of their hearts etc. $100k is starting to sound cheaper and cheaper already.

So you’re telling me that f&b income and rental clubs(they won’t host weddings and functions, otherwise the place wouldn’t be exclusive) from 280 members, who are only allowed one guest at a time is enough to sustain the club? That course maintenance number is only for people cutting grass and fertiliser, the pro shop, restaurant, bar, admin office, new capex, range upkeep etc etc etc hasn’t been paid for yet? Grab a copy of the annual report of a major golf club and you’ll see that the economics of this course don’t work at this stage…

every chance they’ll be like the grand and the fees will go up to $10k+ a year…

Dont know why the admin do that. Seemed a fair paragraph to me???

National isnt anywhere near it. I think they were 25-30k now down to 8k.

Played there on the weekend, Moonah Course. Great layout though the front 9 was much easier than I had anticipated and much shorter.

There’s many a slip ’tween a cup and a lip.

http://www.golflink.com.au/...

I think it’s just some sort of coding glitch, not censorship.

You’d have to say that The National is pretty successful. Supply and demand sets the price, so yeah it’s less to join now than pre GFC, but overall the club is doing very well on and off the course.

Anyone know what the initial share price was (not the peak price) in the late 80s/early 90s?

Titleist 910D3 Aldila RIP 60
Titleist 910Fd Aldila RIP 60
Titleist 909H Adilda Voodoo
Titleist 710 AP1 Nippon NS Pro 105T
Vokey Spin Milled Oil Can 52, 56, 60
Scotty Cameron Studio Select Newport
Pro V1x

from memory it was around $3k… then at its peak, the second hand market was into the 20s, and the last release (2002?) was around $35k…

if it drops to $5k, I’m buying…