Are Your Competitors Really Who You Think They Are?

Back in 2004 when I started with TGA, I had an Outlook folder titled “Competition” where I would put emails/information related to other junior golf programs.  I chuckle about it now as it demonstrates how little I initially understood the business I was about to spend the next 8+ years helping to build.

I’m asked daily about TGA’s competition.  Usually the question comes from a franchise candidate and goes something like this – “My city has a First Tee chapter and several local golf facilities have good junior programs.  How does TGA compare with these competitors?  Can the business be successful coexisting with them?”

As TGA grew in size and scope, it became clear that our market was not the same as The First Tee’s. They are a non-profit focused predominately on programs for under-resourced youth that emphasize life skills and take place at golf facilities.  TGA is a for-profit focused predominately on parent-funded programs for middle/upper income youth that emphasize "enrichment" and take place at elementary schools.  Both causes are important and needed, but besides having golf as the common denominator, they’re very different.  TGA franchisees overlap with First Tee chapters across the country and our paths almost never cross.

It also became clear that TGA’s market was not the same as a golf facility's.  When a golf course holds a junior program, almost all of the kids who register have played golf before and/or come from golfing families where mom or dad has taken an active interest in getting them into the game.   When TGA offers our enrichment program at a school, almost all of the kids who register have never played golf before and come from non-golfing families – meaning, they’re not the ones showing up at the local golf facility.

At TGA, we’re not focused on competing for the 2.4 million kids who play golf but rather on capturing the 74 million kids who don't.  As a result, our competition does not come from other golf organizations or programs.

We compete for kids’ limited time and parents’ limited budget.  When parents make their purchase decision with TGA, they’re comparing us to karate and chess club and art class and soccer and basketball and drama and the many other activities available to kids.  That's our competition.  They are not analyzing whether they should sign up for TGA or The First Tee or the program at the local golf club.

And that, to me, represents three important things:

1. It’s a great example of the entrepreneurial journey and how your “competition” folder can end up looking nothing like it did in the beginning.
2. We have made important strides at TGA to become more razor-focused on who we serve, why we matter and what we want to accomplish.
3.  There is a staggering number of kids in the U.S. not playing golf and we should all be obsessively focused on bringing the game to them as that is where the true opportunity exists.

Knowing your competition is a crucial element of understanding where you fit into the industry ecosystem.  A business professor once said something along the lines of – “if you can’t identify and describe your competition within 30 seconds of being asked, you don’t understand your business.” 

Eight years ago, I had no clue.  Most entrepreneurs don’t.  That’s what the entrepreneurial journey is all about.  Thankfully we have a great team at TGA that figured it out together and did so fast enough that I'm able to write this blog from TGA’s office as the COO. 

And with that, now I must get back to figuring out how to strengthen TGA’s value proposition against swim class, gymnastics, baseball, music lessons and cooking class.

An Entrepreneur's Approach to Challenging Augusta

I’m a week late in joining the Augusta conversation thanks to travel but have read a decent amount of commentary and put a lot of thought into it.

I think it was a smart decision for Augusta to allow female members because it’s the one I would’ve made. If I were a member there, I’d welcome female members for the more social environment.  If I were running the place, I’d welcome them because it’s smart for business as it doubles the pool of potential members and it’s smart politically.

I do not, however, agree with the pressure put on them to do it.  There are many social clubs in America that “discriminate” based on gender, ethnicity and other things like income and prestige.  It’s right that they’re allowed to do so.  They’re private and don’t involve access to jobs/education, fair pay, political equity or any of the other areas where women and men should be equal as human beings. 

I can’t join the Belizean Grove.  So what?  I’ll very likely never be allowed to join Augusta even though I’m a white male because I’m not rich and powerful.  I’m okay with that.

If women want to join a spectacular golf club in Georgia, they’re welcomed to create one.  They can make it female-only if they want.  That’s the beauty of America.

The entrepreneur in me has listened to Martha Burke for all these years and thought – if I were her, I’d transfer all of this time and energy into creating an amazing women’s-only club that rivals Augusta and use THAT as an example of why women are equal to (and in many ways superior) to men.  That would’ve been a powerful entrepreneurial approach to this situation.  

This is how all successful entrepreneurs I know look at the situations they find unsatisfactory.  They identify the problem, create an innovative solution, determine if there are enough like-minded people to develop a market and then go for it.  They don't bang on the door of the incumbent and demand change.  And, on a tangentially relevant topic, one of the beautiful things about entrepreneurship is that it’s almost completely agnostic to gender, ethnicity, age and everything else besides brains, guts and luck.

I applaud Augusta because I agree with their decision.  But I also believe that other male-only clubs like Cypress Point and Pine Valley are not doing anything legally or ethically wrong.  If their membership wants it that way, they have the freedom to do so.  And if you disagree, you have the freedom to do something about it.

The PGA Tees it Back While Telling Us to Tee it Forward

Adam Schupak had an interesting tweet recently that I’ve been thinking about.  It said:

Adam Schupak ‏‪@GolfSchupak

‪@JoshuaJTGA True but a mixed msg to say avg golfer should play fwd while pushing the pros back. If pros at 7700, whose going to play 6500?

There was intriguing dialogue back and forth about this concept between industry vets I know well and good points were made on both sides.  But the more I thought about it, the more I agreed with Schupak’s stance.

When you’re a kid shooting hoops in the backyard, what does everyone dream about?  Scoring 60 and hitting the game-winning shot in Game 7 of the NBA Finals, of course.  Or, at least that’s the scenario that played out in my mind almost every afternoon for years.

Fast-forward to adulthood and the same concept applies.  When you’re on the putting green lining up 8 footers, what do you imagine?  Is this the putt to win the U.S. Open or to shoot 88 instead of 89 on the local muni?

Kiawah's 9th Hole, a 494 Par 4

Tee It Forward is a great program and one that I want to succeed.  I bet we’ve all had too many bad experiences being behind a player or group that was playing inappropriate tees and holding everyone up.  A recent NGF study determined that the average round of golf takes 4 hours 17 minutes and 30% of golfers think that this is too long.  This is important considering most golfers cite golf’s time commitment as one of the two main limiting factors in how much they play (the other being cost).  Therefore, speeding up and maintaining a healthy pace of play is critical to the industry.

People want to play the courses the pros play.  The want to play under the same circumstances as the pros to gauge how far away they are from being as good as them.  It’s the kid in us that still likes to dream and play make-believe every once in awhile.  And telling folks to tee it forward while the pros are teeing it back eliminates the opportunity to do so.  Which is why people don’t play from their appropriate tees as it is.

Of course, the PGA of America has an obligation to the players and fans to provide a tough and fair test of golf, as does the PGA Tour and USGA.  However, I agree with Schupak that they’re sending a mixed message by using a 7,676 yard course for their national championship while promoting Tee It Forward during commercial breaks.

Next year the PGA Championship is at Oak Hill in NY.  Wouldn’t it be neat if they kept it at the length currently listed on the PGA’s website of 7,134 yards, or even shortened it to under 7,000, to align with their campaign?  That would send a powerful message, especially if they used other means besides length to challenge the players.  Otherwise, as long as the pros keep teeing it back, I believe the PGA will have a hard time convincing the weekend warrior to tee it forward.

What Kind of Entrepreneur Are You Going to Be?

I was talking to a serial tech entrepreneur and venture capitalist in the Bay Area recently and he had an interesting take on entrepreneurship.  This was his comment:

There are three types of successful entrepreneurs:

1. The young and dumb kind who work tirelessly and fearlessly until they find something that sticks
2. The technical experts who solve a specific problem that only a handful of people know exists and how to fix
3. The authentic kind who have domain expertise, industry experience and the infrastructure needed (relationships, etc.) within a market to exploit its inefficiencies

Barring you being a technical expert, what kind of entrepreneur are you going to be?

When I look at my career, we were definitely in the “young and dumb” category when launching and building TGA Premier Junior Golf.  But, thankfully, we succeeded due to a great concept and a decent amount of luck.

When we launched GLinks in 2010, we were sort-of authentic entrepreneurs.  We knew through our experience in the golf industry that there’s a real pain point for young professionals to learn golf in a fun, convenient and cost-effective way.  However, we came to realize that GLinks is mostly a marketing company and this is not where our expertise lies.  With TGA, the marketing is easy because our partnerships with the schools give us direct and open communication channels with our customers.  With GLinks, we had to get word out to the broader community…. A task that requires a greater investment in time, resources and capital.  We ultimately decided that it wasn’t worth it (right now) when our main focus is on building TGA.

Last year, we launched TGA Premier Youth Tennis again as sort-of authentic entrepreneurs.  Through TGA, we knew the youth sports market and franchising industries well, but we lacked experience in the tennis industry.  This concerned us.  So, we formed a founding partnership with the governing body of the tennis industry, the USTA.  The combination of our expertise with the USTA’s gives us all of the tools we should need to be successful.  If we could go back and redo GLinks, we would’ve used the same strategy and added a promotions guru to the founding team or partnered with a marketing/promotions group before launching.

The lesson in my friend's comment is that most entrepreneurs are either the young and dumb kind or the authentic kind, and you definitely have a better chance at success if you're in the authentic camp.  As my MBA professors used to say, always entrench yourself in an industry before trying to start a company in it.

This advice provided me with clarity and I hope it gives you food for thought as you put your ideas through the feasibility funnel.  And, for those of you aspiring entrepreneurs who don’t want to worry about such matters, the franchise industry has thousands of proven business models for you to explore.

Leadership Change at the PGA

This week saw more big news in the golf industry as Joe Steranka, CEO of the PGA of America, announced that he is retiring at the end of 2012 following 25 years with the PGA and 7 as its Chief Executive.

I met Joe once to discuss a potential partnership with TGA Premier Junior Golf.  He was cordial (and is generally well-regarded throughout the industry as a nice guy and universally respected) but we didn't agree philosophically.  He said: "I don't believe in privatizing or profiteering from junior golf."  My stance was (and still is) that this mentality is why we've seen a 34% decline in youth golf since 2005 (when he became CEO) while other sports with different philosophies have grown.

It will be interesting to see how Mr. Steranka's legacy unfolds.  Based on the state of the industry, it won't be positive.  Golf has contracted significantly since 2005 and that is why I think this is a positive and necessary change.  Whether or not the contraction has been the result of his policies, or bad luck with the economy - or even if he's done an incredible job at minimizing the bleeding - we'll probably never know.  Like any administration presiding over tough times, the causes don't matter as much as the results.  However, ultimately I believe his legacy will be handcuffed to the success of Golf 2.0, which is good news as I believe it has a great chance of success if executed properly.

I look forward to seeing a change at the top of the PGA and hope that Mr. Steranka's successor is collaborative, embraces innovation and supports entrepreneurship.  I encourage his successor to study the inclusive and open-minded culture of the United States Tennis Association, which has led to a 13% growth in tennis participation since 2005 while golf has seen a 13% decline in that same time.

I wish Mr. Steranka all the best in the next step of his career and thank him for his service to the golf industry.  He was dealt a tough hand and had mixed results, but from I've seen and heard, he deserves gratitude and applause from everyone in the industry for his commitment to the game. 

A Significant, Sustainable & Non-Radical Solution to Golf's Participation Problem

The Wall Street Journal published an article last weekend called “The Battle for the Soul of the Game” and it captured the essence of this interesting time in the golf industry. 

The article discusses how the golf industry is thinking about combating the game’s declining participation, causes of which include 5-6 hour rounds, expensive green fees, increasingly difficult courses and little overall accessibility.  Industry leaders face difficult decisions because many of the popular solutions to these problems require a fundamental shift in the traditions, values and “soul” of the game.

Some of the more radical ideas include: two sets of rules – one for professionals and one for amateurs, golf balls that fly farther or shorter to accommodate courses of different lengths, doubling the size of the hole, building courses with less holes and so forth.

I understand why these ideas exist but I don’t support them because they disrupt a fundamental aspect of the game that I believe should be forever sacred – “the number.”  Every round of golf produces a score.  Golfers can compare it to previous performances.  It’ll make them feel good about themselves, or strive to be better, or both.  They can compare it to others.  It can be discussed at ease with both golfers and non-golfers alike.  They can even compare it to professionals.  Thanks to one set of rules, 18 holes, normal-sized golf courses, standardized equipment and a 3” hole, every score produces a number that means something.  In many ways it means everything.  And it should never be taken away.

There are traditional solutions as well – moving the tees forward, eliminating carts on courses where they have to stay on the path, increasing marketing efforts, etc. – but these all feel to me like using a band aid where stitches are needed.

There is one solution, however, that was discussed in the Comments section of the article that I think is game-changing because it would solve these problems in a significant and meaningful way while also preserving the traditions of the game.

The concept is to create a system where people need to be able to achieve a certain handicap on a short course and pass a rules/etiquette assessment before receiving a card that would allow them to play on an 18 hole regulation facility.  This policy would apply to juniors, men, women, everyone.  It makes a lot of sense and would do several things:

1.    Create inherent demand for building short courses and a sustainable business model to support them.

2.    Provide a nurturing, non-intimidating environment for beginners to try the game and develop some skills before going to longer, harder, more expensive and time-consuming courses.

3.    Offer all golfers more opportunities to enjoy the game in a relaxed setting for two hours or less.

4.    Speed up play at 18 hole facilities.

Failing golf courses could convert into a short course as opposed to closing, thus saving jobs and making the transition to this model smooth for everyone.  In the interim of building the short course, or in areas where it would be impossible to sustain one, regulation facilities could utilize the family tees or create a modified routing format (such as Tierra Rejada's innovative "Players Course") on certain days/times for beginners.  USGA members with a handicap below a certain number would be grandfathered in while all others would need to pass through the program.

I’m sure there are many more considerations as I dive deeper into the concept, including potential legal and political complications, but this to me makes a lot of sense on many levels… much more so than some of the alternatives.  It maintains the integrity of “the number,” preserves the game’s traditions, makes it more accessible to beginners, presents more opportunities for seasoned players to enjoy it and has a sustainable business model to support it. 

And, this model would present ample opportunity for entrepreneurs to capitalize on the shifting landscape.

What do you think?

Clarity Within the Noise

I was recently invited to be a mentor for an incubator called StartEngine, which is a 90 day program for very early stage technology companies to get their startups off the ground.  I’ve met with several companies since and I’m noticing a recurring theme – the entrepreneurs are getting conflicting information from the various mentors/investors/advisors around them, and they’re having trouble making sense of it. 

Here was an exchange I had last week:

Entrepreneur with a social media / mobile app company – “Last week we had an investor come in and say that we had to have a business/revenue model from the outset.  Then one of our mentors told us that we don’t need to worry about a business model right now and instead just need to build product.  Then a separate person told us that it’s all about users.  Which is it?”

Me – “It depends.  What do you ultimately want the company to be?”

Entrepreneur – “(insert standard 30 second pitch)”

Me – “Doesn’t answer the question.  Let’s try it this way – why did you get into this business?"

Entrepreneur – “To make life easier for my market of users.”

Me – “Ok, then answer me this – one year from now, would you rather have 100,000 free users and be dependent on outside funding or have 10,000 paying users who each pay a couple of bucks and have you on the road to sustainability?”

Entrepreneur – “Not sure, which one would investors look more favorably upon?

Me – “That depends on what you ultimately want your company to be.”

This discussion is typical of several conversations I’ve had with other entrepreneurs about the unique challenges and decisions they face with their business.  It’s not too different from the process I go through daily with folks interested in starting a TGA franchise.  With all of the noise out there offering business advice and guidance – blogs, books, Twitter, advisors, mentors, investors, etc. – it is understandable why many young entrepreneurs find themselves with spinning heads.

When it comes to big decisions, my advice is simple – always remember why you got into the business (vision) and know what your long-term goals are (strategic plan).  Then make decisions that align accordingly.  It works because the vision is set in stone at a period in time, and thus will keep you grounded, while your long-term goals are malleable and thus will allow you to adjust and pivot. 

I was discussing these thoughts yesterday with our Curriculum Consultant at TGA who has a doctorate and 25 years in education, and she told me about a book called “The Element” by Sir Ken Robinson.  She described it as a book that identifies four conditions for achievement – aptitude, passion, attitude and opportunity.  The two features of being in one’s “element” are aptitude and passion, and the conditions for it are attitude and opportunity.  Basically, you’ll be successful if you do something you’re good at and passion about, so long as you have a positive attitude and the right opportunity.  I ordered the book last night and I look forward to diving deeper into the concept as I think it aligns with the advice I’ve been giving to the entrepreneurs.

I make a concerted effort to constantly read, learn and surround myself with people smarter and more experienced than me.  I certainly encourage all entrepreneurs to do the same.  But when it comes to big decisions with your business, the focus shouldn’t be on what others are telling you but rather on what aligns with your reasons for getting into the business and what you ultimately want it to be.

Where Do Entrepreneurs Find Their Money?

In my experience talking to aspiring entrepreneurs on a daily basis, access to start-up capital is one of (if not the) overarching factor preventing them from pursuing their entrepreneurial aspirations.

I recently came across a video thanks to Brad Feld that was created by the Kauffman Foundation and is titled “Where Do Entrepreneurs Get their Money.”  I’ve embedded it below and it provides a great overview of your financing options as an entrepreneur.  The key points are:

1.    More than half of young companies get all their funding from founder savings and cash flow derived from the business.

2.    Credit cards are the second largest source of capital for startups after founder savings. 

3.    Friends and family are the third largest source of capital.

4.    Banks are the fourth largest source of capital.  The difficulty with banks is that they want to lend against secured assets, which most young companies don’t have.

5.    Venture capital is available to high growth companies, but interestingly, less than 20% of the fastest growing companies in the U.S. received venture funding thanks to #’s 1-4.

6.    In the last few years, new sources of capital have arisen such as Angel investors (Tech Coast Angels, AngelList) and peer-to-peer crowdsourced fundraising (Kickstarter, Lending Club, etc).

Here's the video.  Until next time, have a happy holiday season and cheers to a great 2012!

Core Golfers & Technology

The National Golf Foundation recently released a report called “Core Golfers & Technology – Engagement with the Digital World, Including Social Media.”  I wanted to pass along some of the key findings along with my thoughts about their implications for golf entrepreneurs.

The data focuses on “Core” golfers, which accounts for 14.8 million of the 26.1 million total golfers in the United States.  “Core” golfers play 8+ rounds per year and are a critical market for most companies in the golf industry to capture. 

Here are the highlights:

Internet / App Use:	% or #
Researched Golf Equipment Online	84% (30% purchased)
Downloaded Golf Related App	2.4 million, or almost 20%
Would prefer high tech device in app form over dedicated device	4.3 million, or 29%
Regularly read blogs/reviews about golf brands, courses or travel	4.6 million, or 31%
Use Facebook, LinkedIn or Twitter	71% (compared to 56% of nt’l pop)

All numbers from this chart are increasing significantly by the year.  For example, mobile app downloads for golf-related items are double in 2011 what they were in 2010 across several categories, including apps to: receive industry news, engage with specific brands, book tee times, track scores/handicap and measure distances.

Turning now to marketing and brand engagement, core golfers had this to say about how they prefer to connect and interact with brands:

Communication Preference – Email vs. Social Media:	2010	2011
Email	94%	93%
Social Network Service	6%	7%

Likelihood to Increase Loyalty & Expenditure:	2010	2011
Email	36%	51%
Social Media Service	15%	25%

Email remains consumer’s overwhelming preference for engaging with golf brands but the gap is closing while both communication venues are increasingly important for building loyalty.

Here’s what I think it means:

The takeaways from this data will vary depending on your niche in the industry, but I think there are a couple of overarching themes for all of us:

1.    Golfers are increasingly using the Internet for golf research and purchases so you need to be there with an engaging website that includes blogs, reviews and other relevant information.

2.    A strong email marketing campaign (and thus a large and growing email database) is essential for communicating with customers.

3.    An active and relevant social media campaign is less important right now than email marketing but this gap is closing so it’s time to get on Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn and others with a well-planned strategy.

4.    If a mobile application is relevant to your business in any way, develop and deploy it.

Good luck and happy entrepreneuring!