"Golf is Struggling in America"

[rollin]

On another note some might say golf in a way has fallen victim to its own success. The golf influx of our era has of course also lead to the then boom in golf business and golf development. Every one jumped aboard the gravy train while the taking was good and the supply tried to meet and cash in on the demand. Which is all fine and dandy but only to a degree. But like most any influx or fad (if we can call it that) usually only lasts for so long before some kind of decline then follows suit. The old saying - "the candle that burns brightest burns out fastest" . Golf not only expanded with the influx but perhaps also went too far and the decline that is now following that influx in combination with the over expansion is leaving a void that is probably much worse than it would have otherwise. Then we also add in the economy and its affects causing even more decline and further creating even more void.

But, just perhaps I will dare to say for sake of debate that some better judgments, or concerns and thoughts was required about a possible over expansion and/or the fact that an influx could never quite last so well for so long. But the greed of cashing in while the going was far more than good vs ever before far outweighed the thoughts and concerns of a better tomorrow. Not to say its wrong because that's just what we do but it could in some strange way be viewed as almost like it was sort of not responsible. As said I do believe there are still far more golfers than there was before the influx. Had the influx (which is not a normal thing) never took place and we compared the numbers of golfers now vs prior we would then be saying that golf has been slowly growing for decades instead of talking about a big decline. And the over expansion would also have not taken place nor spread it self too thin further adding to the problem. Just something to think about.

 

[Scrap Iron]

Golf is anything but struggling up in my area. A lot of people have more money than sense. Getting a tee time can often take calling 3 or 4 places and you have to call or book online as soon as they open it up, usually 4or5 days in advance.

 

[ArmyGolf]

Golf is anything but struggling up in my area. A lot of people have more money than sense. Getting a tee time can often take calling 3 or 4 places and you have to call or book online as soon as they open it up, usually 4or5 days in advance.

Yeah its that way here too. Gotta plan way ahead if you want a half decent tee time.
Id be alright if golf took a step backwards here haha.

 

[TrueFX]

I feel the biggest factor is time. Golf takes time no matter who you are or where you play. With that said, I do think even the committed fathers could probably pick one afternoon to go out and play after work without getting into too much trouble. That gives them at least one day a week to play. But just like anything else, you make sacrifices and choose one thing over another and need to leave it at that.

I really think cost has to be thrown out. Golf is a hobby, all hobbies have their average cost whatever that may be. You can play public munis for ~$40. That is $8.88 / hour. Broken down, that is almost the same cost / hour as going to the movies. There are a lot of other 'hobbies' I would love to do that I simply can't afford. Guess what, I don't do them. I know and work with several people that have 6 figure incomes. Know what they complain about? Being broke all the time! They live paycheck to paycheck. They have houses they can't afford, cars they can't afford and $200 / month cell phone bills so the kids can play games on their $200 iPhones. On the same note, I know people making $40,000 per year living paycheck to paycheck. Americans have a tendency to spend every single dollar they make, regardless of income.

And incomes won't be changing anytime soon. Things are being computerized and automated more and more. On top of that, populations are out of control. There is a ton of competition for low or no skill jobs. Simple economics dictates that salaries will go down when the applicant pool goes up. Supply and demand applies to the workforce as well.

 

[evand23mc]

I can say that the only two reasons I don't play more are cost and time. Cost is what it is, I just need more disposable income (comes with the territory when you have two little ones). Many times when I do play I try to find courses that offer the best value/challenge for my dollar.

Time is an interesting one. I think a key in the golf industry is to make it more friendly for parents to take their children out to play. I know that there are leagues and other programs, but I really think more needs to be done to draw in the kids...who are the future of the game. I have a tough time selling my wife on going out for 4 or 5 hours on a weekend to golf with friends, but if I can take the kids and give her an afternoon alone while bonding with my sons...win/win.

 

[Golf Ghost]

Golf is anything but struggling up in my area. A lot of people have more money than sense. Getting a tee time can often take calling 3 or 4 places and you have to call or book online as soon as they open it up, usually 4or5 days in advance.

Probably a lot of huge trucks in the parking lots as well (I like making generalized statements).

 

[golfnuck]

New member here. Thought this would be a good place to break the ice.

Things are sure different up here in Vancouver.

Getting a tee time on a weekend at any public course is difficult.

I have heard that one of Vancouver's three municipal courses, Fraserview, has the most annual rounds played in Canada.

The top 5 private courses (sorry don't mean to insult other club members) are expensive to join and most have wait lists:

Capilano Golf and Country Club - +$95k initiation fee, at least 8 year wait list for full play men.
Shaughnessy Golf and Country Club - +$80k initiation fee, short wait list for full play men.
Marine Drive Golf Club - +$80k initiation fee, don't know if it has a wait list for full play men.
Point Grey Golf Club- +$80k initiation fee, don't know if it has wait list for full play men.
Vancouver Golf Club - $50k initiation fee, full wait list for men at 30 members.

Of course you have to put the cost of the memberships in perspective as a bare lot 100' by 150' on the westside of Vancouver costs CAD$3,500,000.

Golf seems to be doing fine up here in the Great White North.

 

[PureLiquidHell]

I think golf doesn't appeal to younger Americans because they're too into instant entertainment. Something like golf that takes so much patience and time doesn't appeal to them. Baseball is in the same hole in some areas aswell, people can't sit and watch a game for 3.5-4 hours anymore. Things that require work and quality appeal to me, I love it.

 

[rollin]

I sometimes wonder why it is many of us feel or even insist that every household should consist of some one who plays golf? And there must be something terribly wrong if that's not the case.
Not everyone wants to golf even if they had the time and money. Just like skiing or many other recreations it just wouldn't be normal if every one did it.

And I still feel that being on the downhill side of the last great influx (which couldn't have lasted forever) creates a false illusion that golf is dying when in reality its really nothing more than the end of what was bound to be temporary anyway.

Had the buzz created by Arny and Jack (and then again furthered by Jack himself) taken place in the times of todays modern computer age and social media I would guess it would have created a very similar influx that we experienced with Tiger. And conversely if Tiger played back then (pre modern computerized social media) we probably would only had an influx similar to what Arny and Jack may have created. But like any influx (or fad or bright flame) they eventually fizz out some or at least level off and then slowly go back to normalcy.

Whos to say that golf is not just simply getting back to normalcy after its bright flame (time period)has burned? I mentioned before that I believe (although just a hunch without documented proof) that golf still has many more people playing it now vs before the great influx. Had the great influx and the over expansion of golf business it created never took place we probably wouldn't be having this conversation. I think its sort of a false illusion and almost unfair to compare the golf population today against the great Tiger influx which was not normal at all and where it soared far above where it ever was before and did it in a darn short period of time. Fueled by modern communication and social media (which also took off in its own right at the time) its fair to say it sky rocketed far beyond what anyone could have imagined. How can it be fair to compare anything to that?

Had the influx and over expansion never took place perhaps golf would still be taking some hit due to our economic situations. But that would be a normal hit for any recreation that takes time and money to do when things are not going well. So perhaps golf is really just getting back to normalcy :confused2: who knows for sure?

 

[Barberakb]

Anyone who feels or insists that every household should consist of some one who plays golf is way off base IMO.
Then there would be WAY too many golfers.

 

[Hawk]

Well I haven't really seen or heard that. At least not in here.

The point of the concern for shrinking numbers is that as participants dwindle, so too do the options for courses and equipment for those that do play the game. I know that it would be pretty sad to see the variety of different courses we have here pared down. Not to mention the effect it has on a rather large industry (and the families it feeds) both here and around the world.

 

[deleebar]

Time money. same old. money time. i think these two are contributing factors i don't think it's the reason. If you gave everyone some extra cash and money, that wouldn't make everyone golf, they would probably just do something else with it. Look at the growth of something like cross fit, that costs more than an average golfer would spend (my local crossfit gym cost $160/month). Everyone has a hobby...golf is less and less occupying that spot.

I just think golf has lost it's mainstream appeal. I also think a lot of that has to do with Tiger. The big three sports in america (Basketball, football, and baseball) always seem to have a good replenishment of talent. I think about tennis with sampras and agassi, tennis will never be popular in US like it was during that time. Tennis was actually a cool thing to do. The same with Golf and Tiger, Tiger wasn't another golfer he was represented as a cool athlete. Nike golf commercials were randomly on during other athletic events...crazy

I remember people wanting to learn how to golf, nearly everyone i knew would at least go to the driving range. Some would venture onto the course together, even though most of us were beginners. because it was cool and everyone did it. I know this is going to annoy people but Golf just isn't "cool" right now. I don't care, i love it. I think we're just going through some correction in light of the phenomenon that was Tiger. Because of this, socially it lost it's appeal too. If 3 of your friends were spending 4 hours fishing, i don't fish , but i would join them just for hanging out. It's harder and harder to find golfers. Anyways thanks for reading my wall of text

 

[rollin]

Anyone who feels or insists that every household should consist of some one who plays golf is way off base IMO.
Then there would be WAY too many golfers.

Well I haven't really seen or heard that. At least not in here.

The point of the concern for shrinking numbers is that as participants dwindle, so too do the options for courses and equipment for those that do play the game. I know that it would be pretty sad to see the variety of different courses we have here pared down. Not to mention the effect it has on a rather large industry (and the families it feeds) both here and around the world.

I only make reference to that because these threads do keep popping up and often are sprung from some written article or video, media whatever have you that also keeps popping up. Its often made to sound like "oh my god, whats wrong with golf? not everyone is doing it anymore."
When a lot of it imo is really just the end or downside of an abnormal influx that took place. Just about anyone (relatively speaking of the influx) was at least talking golf if not playing it or taking it up or planning to. And now that its getting back to normal it just seems like many keep implying that something is dreadfully wrong that no one wants to golf anymore. But guess what? There is never going to be such a high percentage of golfers as there was at the influx. That wasn't normal. It was a freak thing imo that may or may not happen again on a rare occasion. Not everyone (relatively speaking to the influx) has ever nor will ever play golf and keeping such a high percentage of people playing is something that was never going to be possible once the infatuation wore off. I think its just "wish full thinking" to think otherwise. Its just not normal for that amount of people to usually take up golf.

Time money. same old. money time. i think these two are contributing factors i don't think it's the reason. If you gave everyone some extra cash and money, that wouldn't make everyone golf, they would probably just do something else with it. Look at the growth of something like cross fit, that costs more than an average golfer would spend (my local crossfit gym cost $160/month). Everyone has a hobby...golf is less and less occupying that spot.

I just think golf has lost it's mainstream appeal. I also think a lot of that has to do with Tiger. The big three sports in america (Basketball, football, and baseball) always seem to have a good replenishment of talent. I think about tennis with sampras and agassi, tennis will never be popular in US like it was during that time. Tennis was actually a cool thing to do. The same with Golf and Tiger, Tiger wasn't another golfer he was represented as a cool athlete. Nike golf commercials were randomly on during other athletic events...crazy

I remember people wanting to learn how to golf, nearly everyone i knew would at least go to the driving range. Some would venture onto the course together, even though most of us were beginners. because it was cool and everyone did it. I know this is going to annoy people but Golf just isn't "cool" right now. I don't care, i love it. I think we're just going through some correction in light of the phenomenon that was Tiger. Because of this, socially it lost it's appeal too. If 3 of your friends were spending 4 hours fishing, i don't fish , but i would join them just for hanging out. It's harder and harder to find golfers. Anyways thanks for reading my wall of text

I think this ^^^^^ is well said. And guess what Agassi and Sampras both had that Tiger also had which fueled the explosions or influx's?
Not so much what they personally had but what we had at the time all three became the talks of the towns?
Answer = The computer boom, social media and internet, communication boom etc, etc.. All of which fueled and cause the explosions. As you said we'll probably never see that again and same holds true for the Tiger influx. They all happened at the exact perfect timing for things to go the way they did. When Jack made his historic 86 Masters comeback it made quite the stir. Not only was it an all time great comeback within the tournament but also a great comeback for a great career. As big a stir as that made I can only imagine that happened in 96 instead of 86. Even if tiger never existed that would have cause some sort of influx in its own right vs what it did at its (real time) but it happened a bit too early. Or when Jack and Arny when head to head which caused a big stir at that time I am certain that (had it taken place in the mid/late 90's) would have created an influx at least equal to or even surpass the Tiger one. who knows? But right place, right time is how these things happen.

 

[Barberakb]

Time money. same old. money time. i think these two are contributing factors i don't think it's the reason. If you gave everyone some extra cash and money, that wouldn't make everyone golf, they would probably just do something else with it. Look at the growth of something like cross fit, that costs more than an average golfer would spend (my local crossfit gym cost $160/month). Everyone has a hobby...golf is less and less occupying that spot.

I just think golf has lost it's mainstream appeal. I also think a lot of that has to do with Tiger. The big three sports in america (Basketball, football, and baseball) always seem to have a good replenishment of talent. I think about tennis with sampras and agassi, tennis will never be popular in US like it was during that time. Tennis was actually a cool thing to do. The same with Golf and Tiger, Tiger wasn't another golfer he was represented as a cool athlete. Nike golf commercials were randomly on during other athletic events...crazy

I remember people wanting to learn how to golf, nearly everyone i knew would at least go to the driving range. Some would venture onto the course together, even though most of us were beginners. because it was cool and everyone did it. I know this is going to annoy people but Golf just isn't "cool" right now. I don't care, i love it. I think we're just going through some correction in light of the phenomenon that was Tiger. Because of this, socially it lost it's appeal too. If 3 of your friends were spending 4 hours fishing, i don't fish , but i would join them just for hanging out. It's harder and harder to find golfers. Anyways thanks for reading my wall of text

I have never seen a gym that costs $160/month. That better be one freaking awesome gym.

 

[JRod]

I have never seen a gym that costs $160/month. That better be one freaking awesome gym.

Cross fit is very expensive but very good if you put on the time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Scrap Iron]

Probably a lot of huge trucks in the parking lots as well (I like making generalized statements).

There is a reason it's a stereotype, because they are usually true.

 

[Fourputt]

I just seen this article on Twitter and was going to post it here.

One of the big things that stands out in that article to me is that 45% of golfers make more than $100,000 a year. With so many people employed in low wage jobs, it's hard to see how that percentage will ever go down.

So this means that more than 50% of golfers make less than $100,000 per year. I'm not sure I see your point.

Yeah I agree that this is not a "new" (past 15 years) thing - it has evolved over time.

JB - I was listening to a local golf radio show over the summer, and they (local PGA pro & golf course owner) talkedh about how several cources that had closed were built to fail, based on selling homes around a "championship course" that was so difficult that the average player could not get through a round without losing a dozen balls. I never played it, but I know I've listened to older guys complain about courses that have forced carries of 170-200 yards off the tee with no bail-outs, etc. that made it impossible for them to play the course.

Do you think any of this "market correction" is due to courses being built too tough for average players?

I agree with this theory. Too many newer courses have been built to look and play more like what the pros play on TV. Then when the average to below average player tries them, he doesn't really enjoy the experience because he spends most of the round searching for his ball (and digging out new ones to replace the dozen he loses), trying to play from impossible lies, battling monster bunkers and ski slope greens - in other words, he decides that golf isn't as much fun as fishing and he goes and buys a boat.

Tiger was definitely the cause of the "golf bubble." As they say, "he moved the needle like no-one else" since the days of Jack and Arnie, and many would argue much moreso. People who didn't know the first thing about golf paid attention to what Tiger was doing and many of them decided to try swinging a club because of him.

And many of them are similar to what I said right above. As soon as the early glow wore off, they found the game too hard and quit just as quickly. That is more a result of the phenomenon than it is of any recession. Too many courses were built to accommodate a fleeting phenomenon, and now the natural adjustment is creating a mostly unjustified panic.

Maybe Coore/Crenshaw are on to something with the minimalist approach to design? Maybe if we can get back to some tree lined courses that are walkable with carry bags or push carts it could help too? Tree lined fairways don't require as much water due to the amount of shade they provide which cuts electricity costs, the trees used to be a hazard in itself instead of all these beautifully manicured environmental areas we lose balls in = less flowers and more shot making creativity, Greens that aren't a million dollars to maintain a year, there are less costly alternatives.

This is how I see it. My former home course in SW Denver was opened in 1972. It was built to accommodate recreational golfers, so it plays that way. At just under 7000 yards from the tips, but now with 4 tee sets to choose from, it can accommodate anyone's game. Lots of trees in strategic locations create some obstacles to play, but still let you find and play your ball (I have had balls that went for 5 or 6 rounds before either getting too scuffed to play, or finally losing them on a hazard). The greens have some deceptive breaks, but are still quite puttable, without multiple tiers which are mostly designed to cause 3 and 4 putt nightmares. Since it's original opening, the facility has added a 9 hole executive course and a 9 hole par 3 course, both of which get heavy play as well, and offer a faster round for those who don't have time for 9 or 18 holes on the championship course. The Executive 9, with 5 par 3 holes and 4 par 4's, is $15 to walk for non residents. The par 3 course, with holes ranging from 80 yards to 195 yards (with bunkers and hazards), only costs $8 for a district resident ($9 for a non resident, and $6 for junior and twilight) to play.

Golf doesn't have to be prohibitively expensive or time consuming, but course architects and managers need to be retrained to understand that the future of the game is not 140 slope torture tracks. The future is golf that is affordable, accessible and playable for the average person. The future is in providing options for the playing public.

 

[Spivey]

I got a newsletter from the club GM that stated that, for all its demise, the golf (specifically instruction, but not exclusively) industry has lots of interested entrants, and that, while the number of golfers is dropping, a sizeable number of people are still playing golf. And spending a lot of money to do so.

Future of golf courses is pretty bleak, with water on its way to becoming a scarce resource. Coore/Crenshaw and their minimalist designs, as well as courses with smart water management, will be more commonplace than the lush green fairways that we see on TV every weekend.

A little off topic, but I believe that (taking greens and their complexity out of the equation) making courses challenging for the better players AND keeping them from being too difficult for the beginner is a tall order, but can be done by eliminating forced carries and allowing bail out areas around the greens. Not every missed green should be penal, but certainly should not be an easy up and down. Which is why green contour and elevation change are kept out of my discussion.

 

[LordByron]

I got a newsletter from the club GM that stated that, for all its demise, the golf (specifically instruction, but not exclusively) industry has lots of interested entrants, and that, while the number of golfers is dropping, a sizeable number of people are still playing golf. And spending a lot of money to do so.

Future of golf courses is pretty bleak, with water on its way to becoming a scarce resource. Coore/Crenshaw and their minimalist designs, as well as courses with smart water management, will be more commonplace than the lush green fairways that we see on TV every weekend.

A little off topic, but I believe that (taking greens and their complexity out of the equation) making courses challenging for the better players AND keeping them from being too difficult for the beginner is a tall order, but can be done by eliminating forced carries and allowing bail out areas around the greens. Not every missed green should be penal, but certainly should not be an easy up and down. Which is why green contour and elevation change are kept out of my discussion.

Agree completely.
The recovery shot is one thing that makes golf so much fun, an overly penal course that eliminates opportunities for recovery is a deterrent for the average golfer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[rollin]

I agree with this theory. Too many newer courses have been built to look and play more like what the pros play on TV. Then when the average to below average player tries them, he doesn't really enjoy the experience because he spends most of the round searching for his ball (and digging out new ones to replace the dozen he loses), trying to play from impossible lies, battling monster bunkers and ski slope greens - in other words, he decides that golf isn't as much fun as fishing and he goes and buys a boat.


And many of them are similar to what I said right above. As soon as the early glow wore off, they found the game too hard and quit just as quickly. That is more a result of the phenomenon than it is of any recession. Too many courses were built to accommodate a fleeting phenomenon, and now the natural adjustment is creating a mostly unjustified panic.


This is how I see it. My former home course in SW Denver was opened in 1972. It was built to accommodate recreational golfers, so it plays that way. At just under 7000 yards from the tips, but now with 4 tee sets to choose from, it can accommodate anyone's game. Lots of trees in strategic locations create some obstacles to play, but still let you find and play your ball (I have had balls that went for 5 or 6 rounds before either getting too scuffed to play, or finally losing them on a hazard). The greens have some deceptive breaks, but are still quite puttable, without multiple tiers which are mostly designed to cause 3 and 4 putt nightmares. Since it's original opening, the facility has added a 9 hole executive course and a 9 hole par 3 course, both of which get heavy play as well, and offer a faster round for those who don't have time for 9 or 18 holes on the championship course. The Executive 9, with 5 par 3 holes and 4 par 4's, is $15 to walk for non residents. The par 3 course, with holes ranging from 80 yards to 195 yards (with bunkers and hazards), only costs $8 for a district resident ($9 for a non resident, and $6 for junior and twilight) to play.

Golf doesn't have to be prohibitively expensive or time consuming, but course architects and managers need to be retrained to understand that the future of the game is not 140 slope torture tracks. The future is golf that is affordable, accessible and playable for the average person. The future is in providing options for the playing public.

I think you have some well made points. but I don't think all courses built (due to the influx) were all made difficult. We may only hear more often of the most difficult ones because they are the ones that (right, wrong, or indifferent) carry the prestige. Plenty of courses were added during the influx in my general area and most of them are not even as difficult as the county courses that have been in place from decades before. With that said I still would agree you have a good point where enough newer courses and renovated old ones are too difficult for the average person. Golf is hard enough to begin with. But also much of it is the person who (in many cases) does have choices where to play and doesn't have to make the game more difficult but insists on doing so anyway. Whether its the wrong tee sets or the wrong courses or even just not keeping their play humble enough on an easier course, too many often make the game much more difficult than it has to be. It usually takes a long time before the average player to learn how not to do that. But unfortunately that time is longer than the time it takes for a "glow" as you put it to ware off and hence they leave the game.

I agree with what you say when using the term "glow". I think I have referred to it earlier as a fad or bright burning candle or perhaps an infatuation and they never last forever. Over expansion now causing your mentioned "unjustified" panic. You bring up too much "course difficulty" in golfs expansion has worked to hurt things for the average person as almost to say its was not responsible thinking and i agree but I also add to say that the expansion itself was over done and not a responsible thing. Was done to take advantage of an infatuation that just couldn't last forever and now a huge void that would not be nearly as hard felt had so many not tried to cash in when the going was abnormally great. People now scratching heads in disbelief "what has happened to golf?" Well, imo not really too much. its just imo getting back to normal and to where it was prior to what was an abnormal explosion of wealth. and as I aways state, there are imo still far more people plying golf now vs before the great influx. When viewed in that light one could argue it has still grown. Not fair imo to compare it against a time of a great abnormal influx that probably may never happen again.

 

[rollin]

I got a newsletter from the club GM that stated that, for all its demise, the golf (specifically instruction, but not exclusively) industry has lots of interested entrants, and that, while the number of golfers is dropping, a sizeable number of people are still playing golf. And spending a lot of money to do so.

Future of golf courses is pretty bleak, with water on its way to becoming a scarce resource. Coore/Crenshaw and their minimalist designs, as well as courses with smart water management, will be more commonplace than the lush green fairways that we see on TV every weekend.

A little off topic, but I believe that (taking greens and their complexity out of the equation) making courses challenging for the better players AND keeping them from being too difficult for the beginner is a tall order, but can be done by eliminating forced carries and allowing bail out areas around the greens. Not every missed green should be penal, but certainly should not be an easy up and down. Which is why green contour and elevation change are kept out of my discussion.

Agree completely.
The recovery shot is one thing that makes golf so much fun, an overly penal course that eliminates opportunities for recovery is a deterrent for the average golfer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I understand But you know what? there are (as said in my post above) plenty of easy courses too. I know of at least a couple near me that are short, forgiving, not difficult, etc...
They are courses that are not much penalizing for being less than good, allow for more of the errant shots, have easier greens, less hazards, etc... and still this problem exists. People are still not knocking down their front doors to get in.

Golf is hard period. Most people are not 'better" at golf and I know the term is only relative but that's not just beginners. its also a huge amount that been playing for years. Certain communities and/or social environments such as places like here on THP are not the norm for their percentage of "better" players. And while I do understand the unnecessary difficult courses or the amount of them I also think many people simply take up the sport and just cant or don't wish to put into it what it requires for improvement. Even with easy courses around they still don't have fun being errant and unable to maintain good consistency. Its just not that important to them to justify the process involved in order to get better. They eventually at some point give up or become frustrated or no longer care for it and move on to something else.

That is something that has been going on with golf forever or any other unimportant recreation. Like most recreations imo only a smaller percentage of those who take them up will stay with them for many years and more. We simply had imo a huge public infatuation and along with it (like any infatuation) came the masses who otherwise may have never given golf a try to begin with. So naturally, the more who try something, the more who will then drop out of it. And then when we consider how many more took up golf (during the influx) than normally would have, the percentage of drop outs would have to be a much higher percentage than normal.

Despite the issues with the game and/or issues with course design plenty people can still play how they want, how long they wish, and do it at easier courses and its still not stopping this so called "exodus". Sorry to sound repetitive but in then end I don't think its an exodus. I feel its mostly just an end to what was an abnormal over explosion to begin with and is now returning to normalcy. And of course normalcy also means (just like it would in any era) it can also be affected by the economy.