Hi Jeff,
You are the first person to mention our cart paths which are worse than most public courses and for that I applaud you! I also agree that a balanced budget should take precedence before taking out any more bank loans; especially considering the outstanding loan on the club house which is now 10 years old.
Regards,
Jared
J
Jeff Ficks
9 years ago
I think it's bad timing for this . I would like to know more about it .
Let's fix things around the club house and for sure on the course like the cart paths . and let's balance the budget first!
J
James M Kerns
9 years ago
If it was free for membership to use maybe, but since it's a rather risky business proposal designed for profit, I don't like being asked to shoulder the financial responsibility if it fails.
J
Jerry Dinsmore
9 years ago
I suggest that the person who came up with this idea buy the simulator, charge for its use and reap those gigantic profits. What a waste of money.
V
Vicki staley
9 years ago
I agree. Save money for this.....no more loans when ou financial situation is not stable!
J
Jackie Gates
9 years ago
I don't see how this is going to make money. This should have been put up to the membership for approval. It was brought up to me that if this doesn't make money the membership will be liable for the loan. NO thank you!
F
Frank Robertson
9 years ago
As a new member, I am somewhat taken aback by the apparent lack of transparency and effective communication on such a significant financial decision for the membership.
I strongly believe any decision should be postponed until a more thorough understanding of this proposed investment can be had by the members.
I joied this club because of the golf course, club house, members and staff. I assumed effective management and leadership was in place to further these top priority elements. Please do not disappoint me (and other members) by making significant financial decisions (that might well effect me) without my awareness and input!
D
DavidandMichelle DeHart
9 years ago
Would like to learn more about this use of $150K. Seems like this wasn't well communicated with the entire golf community.
R
Richard Peyser
9 years ago
Terrible waste of money. They down the mortgage let's get out of debt
R
Robert Morse
9 years ago
As a Past Prsesident, I understand the governance of the Board. I presume they have done their homework but taking on more debt at this time doesn't make any sense to me. Are we all done with assessments to balance the budget? It is perceived that for the past few years a certain portion of the membership is targeted for additional funds to balance the operating budget. This is wrong! If we are back to being financially healthy again, we should utilize excess funds for clubhouse and golf course improvements.
Bob Morse, President 2005
R
Roxanne
9 years ago
Not until there are no more assessments. And what about the "What if's" (no one uses it) who pays for it then!
M
Michael Lopata
9 years ago
why don't we entice members with a prestine course and an upgraded clubhouse. Also if we could teach people how to repair ball marks on the green, that'd be super. Maybe we could use this $150 to supply some divot tools next to the tees and scorecards in the first tee. Maybe fix the driving range net so we can hit driver and not the yellow marshmallows. Maybe put some lights on the range so we can hit balls past 4:30 in the fall/winter.
Too many things to fix that are actually golf related and would add something to the club. A simulator that can only be used by one person at a time doesn't seem like a "value added" purchase when we can make improvements to the club that all members can enjoy.
Imnsure you all won't miss me, but if this happens, I'm out. And I probably won't be the only one. But such is life I suppose
M
Mark White
9 years ago
its difficult to see the advantage this would bring to the club and very hard to fathom how much revenue it would generate. It may make sense down the road but not when there are other needs such as the golf course and the clubhouse. Also, after there are no further needs for assessments.
D
Dale Allen
9 years ago
The timing for the simulator project is bad, and that statement is based assuming that someday it may make sense. We are lagging on capital improvements due to not having the funds available in the past. Based on the website information, we are behind year-to-date on budgeted dues revenue. Assessments are in place to make up for the shortfall. Any spending , especially a large amount, should be focused exclusively on clubhouse and course improvements. If not, then eliminate the assessments.
This project has a feeling of secrecy. There has not been any communication on the total cost or the amount of the loan that is being used for financing. How can we possibly get involved in another loan at this point? The June board minutes, that recap when the project was approved, were not posted on the website until August 5. The same posting date applies to the May minutes. Why the delay? Recaps of the prior meetings are on the website very soon after the meetings. Admittedly, there was a brief Approach mention of the project, but not close to the information that should have been communicated for this project. If the simulator is so great, why wasn’t the membership given full disclosure well in advance of inking the contract?
The statement has been made that the simulator will be self-supporting. I’m not good with numbers but it seems that we will need 3.2 users everyday of every week just to break-even. Is that possible in the summer months? If not, then the fall and winter uses become closer to 5 or 6 per day. Even if I am incorrect on the usage assumptions, the project should not be done at this time.
We have a clubhouse and golf course that are overdue for improvements. Just for the building, look at the furniture or take a tour of the kitchen equipment.
As stated, the timing of this project is bad. The cost is too high at a time when we should to be focused on repairing areas that were neglected for the past several years. If we can afford
G
Greg spencer
9 years ago
Featured
$150,000??? My friend put one in his shop at his house for 15,000 and it is great. That is too much money. Pay off debt first!
D
Dave Garberg
9 years ago
Simulator sound like a "would like to have" not a "need to have". Golf course and in particular stream along #12 is in need of help from a labor and cost standpoint.
A
Anonymous
9 years ago
We don't need the simulator
J
Jeff Lambert
9 years ago
I fail to see a benefit to the overall membership with this expenditure. Based upon the information provided when I first joined, the assessments and dues have already exceeded any expectations.
R
Ryan Thrower
9 years ago
Member need more information from the board. I checked the board minutes and no information about the discussion of the pros and con of this idea. Need to take better care of the club house first.
G
Gary Tidd
9 years ago
The money should be invested in the course and reduce all debt first and foremost
Hi Jeff, You are the first person to mention our cart paths which are worse than most public courses and for that I applaud you! I also agree that a balanced budget should take precedence before taking out any more bank loans; especially considering the outstanding loan on the club house which is now 10 years old. Regards, Jared
I think it's bad timing for this . I would like to know more about it . Let's fix things around the club house and for sure on the course like the cart paths . and let's balance the budget first!
If it was free for membership to use maybe, but since it's a rather risky business proposal designed for profit, I don't like being asked to shoulder the financial responsibility if it fails.
I suggest that the person who came up with this idea buy the simulator, charge for its use and reap those gigantic profits. What a waste of money.
I agree. Save money for this.....no more loans when ou financial situation is not stable!
I don't see how this is going to make money. This should have been put up to the membership for approval. It was brought up to me that if this doesn't make money the membership will be liable for the loan. NO thank you!
As a new member, I am somewhat taken aback by the apparent lack of transparency and effective communication on such a significant financial decision for the membership. I strongly believe any decision should be postponed until a more thorough understanding of this proposed investment can be had by the members. I joied this club because of the golf course, club house, members and staff. I assumed effective management and leadership was in place to further these top priority elements. Please do not disappoint me (and other members) by making significant financial decisions (that might well effect me) without my awareness and input!
Would like to learn more about this use of $150K. Seems like this wasn't well communicated with the entire golf community.
Terrible waste of money. They down the mortgage let's get out of debt
As a Past Prsesident, I understand the governance of the Board. I presume they have done their homework but taking on more debt at this time doesn't make any sense to me. Are we all done with assessments to balance the budget? It is perceived that for the past few years a certain portion of the membership is targeted for additional funds to balance the operating budget. This is wrong! If we are back to being financially healthy again, we should utilize excess funds for clubhouse and golf course improvements. Bob Morse, President 2005
Not until there are no more assessments. And what about the "What if's" (no one uses it) who pays for it then!
why don't we entice members with a prestine course and an upgraded clubhouse. Also if we could teach people how to repair ball marks on the green, that'd be super. Maybe we could use this $150 to supply some divot tools next to the tees and scorecards in the first tee. Maybe fix the driving range net so we can hit driver and not the yellow marshmallows. Maybe put some lights on the range so we can hit balls past 4:30 in the fall/winter. Too many things to fix that are actually golf related and would add something to the club. A simulator that can only be used by one person at a time doesn't seem like a "value added" purchase when we can make improvements to the club that all members can enjoy. Imnsure you all won't miss me, but if this happens, I'm out. And I probably won't be the only one. But such is life I suppose
its difficult to see the advantage this would bring to the club and very hard to fathom how much revenue it would generate. It may make sense down the road but not when there are other needs such as the golf course and the clubhouse. Also, after there are no further needs for assessments.
The timing for the simulator project is bad, and that statement is based assuming that someday it may make sense. We are lagging on capital improvements due to not having the funds available in the past. Based on the website information, we are behind year-to-date on budgeted dues revenue. Assessments are in place to make up for the shortfall. Any spending , especially a large amount, should be focused exclusively on clubhouse and course improvements. If not, then eliminate the assessments. This project has a feeling of secrecy. There has not been any communication on the total cost or the amount of the loan that is being used for financing. How can we possibly get involved in another loan at this point? The June board minutes, that recap when the project was approved, were not posted on the website until August 5. The same posting date applies to the May minutes. Why the delay? Recaps of the prior meetings are on the website very soon after the meetings. Admittedly, there was a brief Approach mention of the project, but not close to the information that should have been communicated for this project. If the simulator is so great, why wasn’t the membership given full disclosure well in advance of inking the contract? The statement has been made that the simulator will be self-supporting. I’m not good with numbers but it seems that we will need 3.2 users everyday of every week just to break-even. Is that possible in the summer months? If not, then the fall and winter uses become closer to 5 or 6 per day. Even if I am incorrect on the usage assumptions, the project should not be done at this time. We have a clubhouse and golf course that are overdue for improvements. Just for the building, look at the furniture or take a tour of the kitchen equipment. As stated, the timing of this project is bad. The cost is too high at a time when we should to be focused on repairing areas that were neglected for the past several years. If we can afford
$150,000??? My friend put one in his shop at his house for 15,000 and it is great. That is too much money. Pay off debt first!
Simulator sound like a "would like to have" not a "need to have". Golf course and in particular stream along #12 is in need of help from a labor and cost standpoint.
We don't need the simulator
I fail to see a benefit to the overall membership with this expenditure. Based upon the information provided when I first joined, the assessments and dues have already exceeded any expectations.
Member need more information from the board. I checked the board minutes and no information about the discussion of the pros and con of this idea. Need to take better care of the club house first.
The money should be invested in the course and reduce all debt first and foremost