SOCIAL MEDIA REMOTE MEMBERSHIP DEBATE
There have been plenty of healthy discussions about
remote membership in social media with
opinions divided.
“This so-called friction over remote membership
by clubs is a load of small-minded, petty, childish
nonsense,” said one correspondent.
“Remote membership is a legitimate GA handicap
option, which makes it possible for social golfers to
join a club and play in competitions.
“The stance by some clubs in treatment of the
remote membership golfers in competitions typifies
the insular ‘our way is the only way’ golf club
mentality which is a significant part of the problem
for golfing in Australia.
“Stealing members from other clubs is not a longterm fix for your problems. Golf has to grow its own
members by stealing them from other sports – not
from other golf clubs.
“If it can’t, or won’t, do this then clubs have
to close.”
Another said: “A large number of clubs should go
under in this country. Butchering each other in price
helps no one in the long run.”
“These remote memberships are not helping
anyone,” said another social media writer.
“People have to realise golf courses are not cheap
(to run) and you can’t pay a pittance for first- or even
second-class facilities.”
“The discrimination of clubs against handicap
options taken up by people needs to be stamped on
by Golf Australia.”
Another commented: “Open competitions, like
reciprocal rights, are there to provide options for
golfers who are travelling or to allow members of
clubs to play different courses.
Another wrote: “If GA endorses an organisation to
be a part of the handicapping system then clubs
must accept that handicap whether it is iGolf
or Howlong.
“It’s about equity. You can have a Howlong
handicap, that’s not at issue but you just don’t get
to bludge into open comps where there is equity
amongst other golf paying members.”
“I think this ‘discrimination’ is aimed at clubs
like Howlong.
Another blogger agreed and said clubs had a
right to invite or reject remote members into their
competition fields.
“The cheap membership option and people using
it virtually have a full membership and play as a
visitor in their home town – thus avoiding a full
membership fee.
“Clubs are starting to say ‘if you live in the area and
want to play here then you join here’.
“That is the way it should be. Country memberships
were originally for people who moved away but
wanted to retain/support their old club.
“These cheap membership options are prostituting
memberships and I don’t see anything wrong with
clubs policing who plays in their competitions.
“Charge them more or say, ‘you can only use the
visitor option three times a year’.
“If you want to play in their comps, then join their
club. If you choose to take a cheap option and go
and join a club 500kms away that you have possibly
never set foot in, then your only robbing your
local community.
“I have the same attitude with golfers who try demo
clubs from their club pro and then buy them over
the internet to save $50.
“If people don’t want to support their local golf club
by joining, then they should be prepared to travel
further to play golf when that club goes broke.”
And this: “If clubs don’t want visitors to play in their
comps then they shouldn’t have open day comps.”
Golf Industry Central Spring 2014
17