City Run Golf Courses Losing Money

Over $1,000,000 per year if you believe the report , in losses!
Is anything around that government run that can make money?

Should they be making money is what I ask?

We run recreation for all sorts of sports at a loss. Why should we make money off of golf?

Do we still have to phone 311 to make a reservation at a city-run course?
If yes, why? Its not like they can save on staff since you still need staff at the actual course.
I wonder how much the city-run courses have to contribute to 311.

We should not even be in the golf "business". But if we are at the very least let it pay for itself.

grumpy old man wrote:We should not even be in the golf "business". But if we are at the very least let it pay for itself.

Exactly.

Should we be in the Arena business? Soccer field business? Library business?

No. Yes. Yes.

whats the dividing line?

Where private interests have a competitive offer. Where private interests can do the job better and cheaper.

I am certain that private interests can run Libraries much much cheaper. Same as well for Soccer fields. They can do a better job at that too.

It's a leisure time accomodation that should be left to private enterprize. The city could provide the space/field but should not be involved in the event imo.

....much like they should not be in the pool hall business or the movie theatre business.

so whats the dividing line though.

Why MUST we be involved in Libraries and soccer fields and baseball diamonds but not be involved in golf?

shouldn't golfers expect some sort of fair return for their tax dollars as well?

I didn't say MUST.

Imo, there are lots of things the city should not be involved in until such time as the essentials are looked after properly.

If there WERE private interests building and managing libraries and soccer fields I'd say let them have at it. There are private companies that do an excellent job at running arena's and golf courses...

There are soccer fields not run by the city. They are heavily used and make a good profit. There are also "libraries" run for profit.

Then we should get out of the soccer field business IF the city is LOSING money running our current soccer fields. I suspect though the soccer fields are multi-purpose football/soccer/baseball/other and maybe ought not be a direct comparison to golf courses.

I was not aware of privately run library companies. Can you post a link?

you haven't been to a bookstore lately?

All the bid ones are essentially private libraries. HELL they even allow you to have coffee while you read their books without paying. Sure you cant take it with you.. but you can come back as much as you want and read the entire book.

we are indeed losing MAJOR amounts of money on soccer/baseball/football fields..

and city tennis courts and outdoor ice rinks and.. well anything really. Almost every service the city offers is a money loser. Community centres..dont even get me started on how much those cost us per year.

As for the privately run soccer facilities, in the league that I play from, we actually avoid using the city fields because of the poor condition they are in. We will have games scheduled at the private fields first before the city fields are allocated. A study was done by the league to compare injury reports submitted by players in our league and 75% of the reports were because of field conditions on city owned fields. Of course some of the injuries would have occurred regardless of where the game was played because it was player/player contact but when it was player/field, it was significantly city fields. It is also the referree's responsibility to write a report on the field conditions and these are looked at by the MSA and the MSRA (ref's association) for next season's requests. There are some fields that the MSA are willing to take over the operations and upkeep but the city will not give them up.

More sports injuries= a law suit??

rosencrentz wrote:More sports injuries= a law suit??

not likely, as the leagues carry insurance for sports injuries.

insurance companies might go after the city though if they can prove it was due to neglect of the field.

I think that is why there were studies being done by our league as well as the MSA as the insurance rates were being looked at and being compared to the other sports associations that fall under the Mb Sports Federation (all sports associations use the same insurance company through MSF). The other thing is the MSA and our league is looking at possibly adding/changing our insurance company if possible. It is amazing to see how many young children are now wearing what I call "bionic" knee braces as opposed to when my kids were young. And this is mostly caused by the field conditions that the kids are made to play on.

holly golightly wrote: It is amazing to see how many young children are now wearing what I call "bionic" knee braces as opposed to when my kids were young. And this is mostly caused by the field conditions that the kids are made to play on.

I wouldn't agree with that assumption.
I think it's more the attitude towards injury more than the field conditions.

I'm presuming you're about my age (give or take), and the game was different then...and the attitude was much different.

I know when I was playing in High School, a knee "tweak", or ankle turn meant a bit of ice and some tape, and get back on the field. Going to the doctor's office to get x-rays & scans was rare...and even then the diagnosis was usually "stay off of it awhile, and you'll be fine" (of course...I was back on the field the next day regardless).

Today though, they scan the tissues and find minor "imperfections" and declare you a "risk" of injury and prescribe the "bionic" knee braces, active ankles, etc.

Which, I'm not saying is all bad...as there are days I can barely make it upstairs to my bedroom due to the torture I've put my ankles through...but IMO, most the fields are actually not as bad as many I played on as a kid. It was the rare exception when we got to play on a groomed/turf field with clearly painted lines and no dips or holes.

As a goalie...I routinely brought a change of uniform for halftime...just because of the small pond that was inevitably in front of each goal.

Deank wrote:you haven't been to a bookstore lately?

All the bid ones are essentially private libraries. HELL they even allow you to have coffee while you read their books without paying. Sure you cant take it with you.. but you can come back as much as you want and read the entire book.

Not sure how to respond to this. Doubt you are serious though.

Deank wrote:we are indeed losing MAJOR amounts of money on soccer/baseball/football fields..

and city tennis courts and outdoor ice rinks and.. well anything really. Almost every service the city offers is a money loser. Community centres..dont even get me started on how much those cost us per year.

If the city decides they wish to offer certain services as part of their mandate and Winnipeggers agree then I'm all for it. But the minute they start CHARGING for services there is a different dynamic in play.That does not mean I agree with every service but the real core services like outdoor ice rinks and baseball diamonds and football fields sure.

And we can debate until the cows come home which services should be offered and not offered.