Quote:
Originally Posted by vineyarder  I would imagine that it is to:
A) maintain a boutique feel, with greater member input, etc. (as mentioned by 3DH), thereby appealing to those who prefer a more 'personal' experience, and
B) to encourage members to 'join now, before we sell out and you miss your chance forever!'
Of course, if the management team is successful selling out a club with a cap, they can always start a second club, then a third, etc., so the profitability isn't really limited... |
Well that was my thought. Once a club reaches a cap, I would think they would start another club and it would essentially be the same club and there would be some kind of reciprocal use and so on, thus losing the boutique feel you mentioned.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quintess Michael
In 20 years, maybe nobody wants to go to Cabo and Napa, and Lake McConnaghy, NE is the hot spot. A smaller club will be able to adapt much quicker to major market fluctuations.
Additionally, smaller clubs with higher dollar real estate averages tend to have free standing homes in the best location (ON the beach...not two blocks away, etc...)that hold their value better, because they dont' need to buy 18 units (condos) to enter a new Destination. How are 3000 people going to share 5 or 10 houses in the hottest new destination? Rather cantakerously, I would imagine.
|
I would think that a smaller club is more susceptible to market fluctuations. And yes, larger clubs that buy homes in bundles may not be directly on the beach but this is more beneficial for the overall health of the club because of the economies of scale. Thus, why I think all these mergers are occurring is that clubs need to be bigger to succeed financially.
05-28-2008, 07:14 PM
Re: Stan Bonnemort - Executive Director, Membership Sales - A&K RC 
Linear Mode
