Top teachers getting some big fees.....

[Kevin Shields]

I honestly dont, and never will, care about what people earn for a living. i was, however, a little taken aback by the posted rates of some of the Top 50, or whatever.

Nevermind the $10,000 a day or $30,000 that Lead and Pelz charge. I noticed alot of $350-$750 per hour rates. I'm just wondering what the general opinion of this is? Do you think they actually get this from each student or is it a power play? Has anyone here paid these rates and how did it work out? Are some in a position to keep this rates so they dont have to teach much? Is it location(I know those rates wouldnt fly in Pittsburgh!)

I need to work harder because if I got $600 per lesson you'd have to drag me off the tee.

 

[faux_maestro]

I honestly dont, and never will, care about what people earn for a living. i was, however, a little taken aback by the posted rates of some of the Top 50, or whatever.

Nevermind the $10,000 a day or $30,000 that Lead and Pelz charge. I noticed alot of $350-$750 per hour rates. I'm just wondering what the general opinion of this is? Do you think they actually get this from each student or is it a power play? Has anyone here paid these rates and how did it work out? Are some in a position to keep this rates so they dont have to teach much? Is it location(I know those rates wouldnt fly in Pittsburgh!)

I need to work harder because if I got $600 per lesson you'd have to drag me off the tee.

Good one.

I've never paid more than $50 for a golf lesson though my last real lesson was about 10 years ago. I have paid more for music lessons ($1200 once for 4 hours) and while it was insightful it probably wasn't actually worth it. I bet those crazy lesson rates are a combination "I don't really want to teach much" and "I charge that much because I can and someone will be stupid enough to pay it".

 

[golfdad]

I think it is an outrage.

However, one thing to consider, besides posturing to fellow colleagues and the general public how accomplished they are, is their opportunity costs. Those who charge $$$$$ for lessons are sending the message that if you want to drag me out of my Belize waterfront mansion, this is how much it will take to make up my mind because I have already enough in the bank. They need private time doing what they really want to do more than money.

My kid plays violin and in the violin making field, some makers also play games as well. For instance, some will announce that they have a waiting period of couple years when in fact that is not the case at all. They will put a violin on auction and have a couple friends bid it real high and set a going price for the rest of his violins,,,a little misrepresentation at best.

Having said the above, if a teacher can turn Tiger around, helping him win and break records, I think a $30 mil price tag is not too much.

 

[wulsy]

There are some rich fools out there who may pay that from time to time, but IMO they probably get that kind of money once a month if they are lucky. Its just a marketing ploy to convince clueless mugs that they know something that no-one else does. JMHO. I know a guy charging about 200$ an hour and he does about 20 lessons a week, rarely more.

 

[Dariusz J.]

The answer is simple, Kevin. First, it may be a simply supply-demand issue. Second, it may be only an ego issue.
Say, if i have 5 customers a month for $ 30.000 a day why should I lower to $ 300 a day, work every day and earn less ? The ego issue is e.g. if I do not care for money becayse I have enough of it, I can offer lessons at $ 100.000 a day knowing noone will ever come - but how does that look ! The most expensive instructor in the world - for many people it means "he must be the best".
OTOH, very seldom people respect and are grateful for what they receive free of charge. I know something about it.
We men are wretched things, as Achilles would say in the Troy movie

Cheers

 

[mgranato]

Doesn't bother me in the least. Supply and demand, free market, etc. etc. They serve a niche market and they don't have a monopoly on teaching someone to play better golf. From what I can tell, golf instruction has all the price points covered. I don't blame anyone for charging whatever they think their market will bare. That being said...

The list I'd really like to see is the list of people who are paying these high end rates. I'd like to see what their games were like prior, and how they've changed since. I'd like to see what kind of improvement you get vs. money they’ve "invested."

Might be impossible to quantify, but I'd like to see a list of the "Best Value" instructors. Not the cheapest, but the guys/gals who help the widest range of students improve the most per dollar spent. My guess would be that list would look a lot different.

 

[mgranato]

We men are wretched things, as Achilles would say in the Troy movie

Yeah, but imagine what sports would be without us.

 

[dcg1952]

I wonder if they advertise a huge price to keep the riff-raff away but actually charge much less to their actual clients.

 

[BIGBALL]

I wonder if they advertise a huge price to keep the riff-raff away but actually charge much less to their actual clients.

So, an average player is riff raff? I'm an average player, but have a good job, great family, very respectful, etc. Do I still count as riff raff? I assume, and hope, you mean they just want to work with pros and highly skilled / wealthy / high profile amateurs?

 

[Richie3Jack]

There's certainly an element of supply and demand. Teachers only have so many hours a day that they can and are willing to work. Let's say a teacher has 50 'slots' a week for lessons (6 days a week, 8 or 9 slots a day). As their popularity goes up, they may not be able to or willing to increase those number of slots. Hell, it's gotta be tiring. But if they have a demand for 70 slots, the goal...to max profit...is to find a price point that will get the demand close to 50 slots. And of course, if they get demand for 120 slots, the price of a lesson will go higher. And obviously, if the teacher wants to reduce the # of slots, the price will still go higher.

So...I understand that.

I do think that what is best for this game is to keep all aspects of the game affordable to the mass public. When you don't, people will quit the game sooner or later, people in the industry start to lose jobs and profits decrease.

It's really a catch-22 because I think Mike Breed asking $500 per hour for a lesson is preposterous and I think it only is there to help rich people...many of whom, have little interest in getting better. Furthermore, if I could charge a junior golfer $150 and he's intent on beng better, the lifetime value of him as a client is likely going to be far greater than the retired former CEO I'm charging $500 for. A junior golfer is far more likely to come back for lessons and for a longer period of time. Plus, while it doesn't relate to the instructor...the lifetime value of that junior golfer spending money in the industry is far greater.

I think the golfing public usually...completely ignores this or it just flies over their head. I remember being a junior golfer who spent quite a bit of my own money that I worked for on some golf courses and still being treated like crap by adults, particularly ones who spent far less than I did...because they were an adult and I was just a teenager. It's completely asinine logic from a business standpoint.

But on the other hand, it's difficult to deny a teacher to make the most they can make. There's no guarantee that a guy like Breed will still be successful 10 years down the road. And if you don't set the price point correct, that could cause a riff between the club you work at because members will get upset that they cannot get a lesson with you.

Personally, if I was a teacher and had that much popularity, I would strive to make it a case-by-case basis. I would probably do a 'call for lesson price' thing. One could probably do something similar to what they do on Priceline or Orbitz. Although there's no guarantee that it wouldn't be a headache in the end.






3JACK

 

[Richard the Nerd]

Could be that they are MUCH more efficient MARKETERS than instructors.....

As far as supply and demand....when a hurricane or say a big convention comes to town, some eatin' joints and hotels boost their prices. Is that "wrong"? Not really that is just the price mechanism working to allocate scarce resources. How many people can Leadbutter see in a day? He can make his jack and then set up some kinda trapazoid scheme where..."you can't afford me? well you can see my boy "dingdong" here and he can basically give you what I got at a cheaper rate." Time and access being scarce....wonder where internet instruction may go in this regard? Do you really have to "see" people? I mean to me that is one of the nice things that Homer did...try to make up a common language (even though you may not agree with the premise of the language) where if some doo doo head says "#2" you know what he's talking about....if you speak the cat's language and you can send him a video...looks like fools could get PzzzAID doing lessons sittin' around at home in their tighty whiteez eatin cheetoz and drinkin' grap soda....

And with the internet...do people really need Golf Digest to "bless" instructors anyhow? Some of them cats I wouldn't go to if it was free across the dang street much less three-fiddy an hour.....

 

[Virtuoso]

I do think that what is best for this game is to keep all aspects of the game affordable to the mass public. When you don't, people will quit the game sooner or later, people in the industry start to lose jobs and profits decrease.

3JACK

But that's the beauty of it, right? In this scenario, the prices have been set higher than the market can bear, and the adjustments begin.

The real problem is not what we individually decide is a "reasonable" price structure--that will be different for each person, for a whole host of reasons. The real disaster begins when we have to decide WHO will determine what is "reasonable" for the rest of us. This has been tried over and over for thousands of years and has always failed miserably.

No doubt, it will be tried again.... heck, it's happening in this thread right now!!

 

[cmartingolf]

Kevin, I have a hard time getting my head around it too. It is a supply and demand issue, of course. If you are slammed, or as slammed as you want to be, then you control price. If you are not busy, then price is subject to the environment.

Since most of my folks are traveling to see me and I prefer spending more than one hour with people, I have less expensive half-day and full-day rates hoping they opt for those options rather than one hour.

When I was a club pro, one hour was fine as I'd see them all the time around the club. Now, the folks either sign up for a three day school or a half-day, full-day option. The hourly lessons are now the anomaly.

 

[Richie3Jack]

But that's the beauty of it, right? In this scenario, the prices have been set higher than the market can bear, and the adjustments begin.

Having been around this game for a long time, usually the adjustments occur way too late and the damage is already done. I will give credit to the OEM's for finding creative ways to plateau and even lower their equipment prices while still turning a nice profit.

I see a bigger problem usually with the actual golf course. When I lived in Atlanta, it was a perfect case of how that turned out. I first got down there in 2000, and to play a decent course, it was usually a private course that had very expensive membership fees. Within 8 years, these clubs went belly up and a lot of them were bought out by a corporation that owns about 20+ clubs in the Atlanta area now...almost all of them former distressed properties.

Yeah..it worked out for me in the end. But, it was a part in why I quit the game for 8 years. Personally, I don't think the industry would want golfers like myself quitting the game because chances are that they never come back. Also, it damaged a lot of the relationships between golfers who paid $10K+ for an initiation fee, only to see the club go to crap in the lean years, then get bought out and give memberships for only a $250 initiation fee.

I'd rather see golf figure out how to increase their price point to level off the demand rather than having to decrease the price to level off the demand because the latter drives away more golfers, IMO.






3JACK

 

[Richie3Jack]

Could be that they are MUCH more efficient MARKETERS than instructors....

I completely agree with this. If you want to be a popular instructor, you pretty much have to be good at marketing your service. While I work as a statistician, I actually have a degree in Marketing and took some Masters courses in Advertising. IMO, Leadbetter is a brilliant marketer. I think any small type of business starting out could learn a lot from him.





3JACK

 

[TeeAce]

I completely agree with this. If you want to be a popular instructor, you pretty much have to be good at marketing your service. While I work as a statistician, I actually have a degree in Marketing and took some Masters courses in Advertising. IMO, Leadbetter is a brilliant marketer. I think any small type of business starting out could learn a lot from him.


3JACK

Ballard told it, Leadbetter sold it

 

[Virtuoso]

Having been around this game for a long time, usually the adjustments occur way too late and the damage is already done. I will give credit to the OEM's for finding creative ways to plateau and even lower their equipment prices while still turning a nice profit.

I see a bigger problem usually with the actual golf course. When I lived in Atlanta, it was a perfect case of how that turned out. I first got down there in 2000, and to play a decent course, it was usually a private course that had very expensive membership fees. Within 8 years, these clubs went belly up and a lot of them were bought out by a corporation that owns about 20+ clubs in the Atlanta area now...almost all of them former distressed properties.

Yeah..it worked out for me in the end. But, it was a part in why I quit the game for 8 years. Personally, I don't think the industry would want golfers like myself quitting the game because chances are that they never come back. Also, it damaged a lot of the relationships between golfers who paid $10K+ for an initiation fee, only to see the club go to crap in the lean years, then get bought out and give memberships for only a $250 initiation fee.

I'd rather see golf figure out how to increase their price point to level off the demand rather than having to decrease the price to level off the demand because the latter drives away more golfers, IMO.

3JACK

I understand what you're saying Richie, but let me ask you this: did the drop in initiation fee's from $10k to $250 increase access for the average golfer?

When you say you'd "rather see golf figure out..." well, there is no mechanism in place to allow "golf" to figure out anything. It's always people--either the mass market in general, or a small group of golf czars. The general free market economy didn't allow the 10k model to work in the lean times so the market eradicated it.

Is the system perfect? No, but it's way better than the alternative.

 

[savydan]

I'd rather see golf figure out how to increase their price point to level off the demand rather than having to decrease the price to level off the demand because the latter drives away more golfers, IMO.

I'd vote for decreasing the price to level off demand because it would be cheaper and less crowded.

 

[golfdad]

As some have pointed out,, golf teaching for the most part is operating in a free market, that is, it is not regulated by any entities. coaches associations do not mandate and enforce pricing. lowering price will cause the supply to drop and demand to increase, meaning fewer teachers will be around to teach but more golf students will be interested to take lessons. But that situation won't last long because the free market will soon find a new equilibrium.

On the other hand, the star teachers may not really fit into this model because their "irrational" behaviors are justified through other considerations. For instance, Leadbetter has many schools using his name. I don't know how much he is still involved with corporate governance, but he probably can use his time more efficiently taking care of many things at one time corporate wise than spending time teaching one student that afternoon. It may be debatable if dealing with his schools will do more good to golf than teaching one student, but in the end, it is his choice. He can choose to teach for free, or he can choose to think dearly of golf's future, or he can care less.

Besides, many on this site do not think much of Leadbetter anyway. So, in a way, his pricing will prevent more people from learning his stuff

 

[Virtuoso]

As some have pointed out,, golf teaching for the most part is operating in a free market, that is, it is not regulated by any entities. coaches associations do not mandate and enforce pricing. lowering price will cause the supply to drop and demand to increase, meaning fewer teachers will be around to teach but more golf students will be interested to take lessons. But that situation won't last long because the free market will soon find a new equilibrium.

On the other hand, the star teachers may not really fit into this model because their "irrational" behaviors are justified through other considerations. For instance, Leadbetter has many schools using his name. I don't know how much he is still involved with corporate governance, but he probably can use his time more efficiently taking care of many things at one time corporate wise than spending time teaching one student that afternoon. It may be debatable if dealing with his schools will do more good to golf than teaching one student, but in the end, it is his choice. He can choose to teach for free, or he can choose to think dearly of golf's future, or he can care less.

Besides, many on this site do not think much of Leadbetter anyway. So, in a way, his pricing will prevent more people from learning his stuff

Well, just because he chooses to teach less doesn't mean he dosen't fit into the model. For the smaller alotted time he does choose to teach, the supply/demand relationship works the exact same way.

But remember, it's not the actual value of his instruction, it's the percieved value. So, obviously, self-promotion plays an enormous role. And, those that self-promote the best can create more percieved value.