Submitted by Suanne Z. Thamm
Reporter – News Analyst
October 8, 2014 1:45 p.m.
Representatives of Billy Casper Golf (BCG) addressed the Fernandina Beach City Commission (FBCC) during the FBCC’s October 7, 2014 Regular Meeting on their pricing strategies for the city course.
David Evangelista walked the FBCC through a brief slide presentation to explain BCG’s research on the demographics and income of the average golfer using the city course. BCG has determined that the course’s “value customer” is over 55 years old with an income ranging from $60-100K per year. A value customer plays often due to both value and price, generally averaging $19-21 per round.
Under BCG’s Loyalty Card programs, Advantage Card holders play on average 6 more rounds than non-cardholders during the season, while Player Development cardholders average 8.2 rounds more during the season. Based upon that information, Evangelista said that a major goal for BCG in FY2014/15 is to double the number of Advantage and Player Development Card holders, especially with the local 35-54 year-old players.
Evangelista reported that BCG is looking into a tiered pricing structure, similar to ones used at North Hampton and Jacksonville Beach Golf Club. Rates would drop off during off-season and in afternoons, when the course is less busy. They are also looking at rate specials.
Evangelista noted that BCG has only recently begun conducting these market analyses for their courses. The key to “growing” the city’s revenues is finding new people and getting golfers to play more. He told commissioners that despite a rainy August, the 2014 greens renovation and tree work had helped increase the number of rounds played to 431, putting the course ahead of August 2013. He suggested that with 18 renovated greens, the course could conservatively add 600 rounds per month, resulting in additional course income of more than $200K, once golfer expenditures on rounds, merchandise, food and the range are factored in. Evangelista said that with better course conditions, the city golf course could become competitive with North Hampton and drive additional outing rounds as well.
Mayor Boner invited public comment, and Roy G. Smith joined Evangelista at the podium, where he asked several questions. In response, Evangelista and Josh O’Brien, course manager, replied that it cost $50K to renovate 9 holes, that summer months are a challenge for the golf industry as a whole, and that there is a winter demand for 27 holes. Having 27 holes also helps maintenance work, because play can be diverted to greens that are not being serviced. Smith expressed concerns that the city continues to subsidize the golf course while he keeps hearing that the course will break even this year.
Commissioner Johnny Miller raised concerns about weather conditions affecting course play. Evangelista said that there has definitely been more rain this year, but that more rounds are being played. Mayor Boner reminded commissioners and the audience that it takes several years to build a successful program, but that work is underway.
Rates need to be set so that city taxpayers do not subsidize the operating expenses of the golf course. Any year in which the golf course runs a surplus it should be set aside as reserves for the inevitable downturn. The city should not poach any cash surpluses for other purposes. It is appropriate for the course to generate some of the capital funding needed to keep up the asset. The city may choose to pay some capital expenses in order to preserve the city taxpayers investment in the asset.
But under no circumstances should city taxpayers subsidize rounds of golf for anyone whether they are residents or non-residents.
I generally agree with the comments above, however, there is another point of view that also should be considered. The other city recreation facilities, such as the pool, tennis courts, beach, central park, all the athletic fields, atlantic rec center and peck center are supported by the Parks & Rec budget which is funded by the tax payers. So I don’t believe its unreasonable to expect some support for the golf course, after all, we are city tax payers! Perhaps the golf course should roll back into the P&R budget?