How you qualify a golf trip enquiry is usually settled in the first ten minutes, before anyone opens a spreadsheet. This one lands on a Tuesday and it is four lines long.<\/p>\n
\u00abEight players, Madrid, four nights in October, championship courses please. Can you send a price?\u00bb<\/p>\n
That is the whole brief. What you do with it decides whether you win the booking or spend three days pricing something nobody asked for.<\/p>\n
Most operators do the same thing here. You read \u00abchampionship\u00bb and you build the biggest programme Madrid will let you build, four marquee days in a row, because coming in short with a group of eight is the mistake you only make once.<\/p>\n
You send the number on Thursday.<\/p>\n
On Monday you get three words back. \u00abBit steep, sorry.\u00bb<\/p>\n
You did not lose on price. You lost because you quoted a trip the client never described.<\/p>\n
Worth saying first: pricing high on thin information is not laziness. It is scar tissue. Somewhere in your career you came in light, the group noticed on arrival, and you have not forgotten that call. Padding is what an operator does after being burned once for doing it properly.<\/p>\n
On the Algarve or the Costa del Sol that reflex has a ceiling. The courses sit in a cluster, the spread between your top programme and your sensible one is narrow, and overpricing by a margin still leaves you in the running.<\/p>\n
Madrid has a wider spread. More than a dozen courses across the metropolitan ring, different access rules, different conditioning, transfers running twenty to forty five minutes depending on the hour. The gap between your most expensive build and the one the client actually wanted is large enough to lose the file.<\/p>\n
There is a second trap that is specific to Madrid. The names an international golfer has heard of, the ones that sound like championship from the outside, are largely private members clubs that do not take visitors. They are not expensive. They are not available. If you price the word literally you either quote something you cannot deliver or you quote the most expensive thing you can deliver. Both are losing moves.<\/p>\n
After fifteen years reading that word in enquiries, it always means one of three things. Never all three, whatever the client believes.<\/p>\n
One, they want a name.<\/strong> They want to walk into the clubhouse at home and say where they played without having to explain where it is. What they are buying is the conversation in the locker room. This client needs one course with a story and genuinely does not mind if the rest of the week is quieter.<\/p>\n Two, they want to be tested.<\/strong> This is the low handicapper in the group, usually the organiser, and what he fears is being bored. Back tees, real rough, quick greens. What he is buying is measurable difficulty.<\/p>\n Three, they want conditioning.<\/strong> This is the true answer most of the time and almost nobody words it. He has been on a golf holiday where the greens were hollow tined, the bunkers were hard and the fairways were thin, he paid the same as he would have paid for them in perfect nick, and he is not doing it again.<\/p>\n Notice what just happened. The third one is the cheapest to guarantee and the least restrictive on your selection. A course in excellent condition in Madrid in October is not a lucky find. It is the default, because October sits in the strongest window of the year here, alongside spring.<\/p>\n When the client who wanted conditioning receives a programme built for the client who wanted a name, he reads it as prestige he did not ask to pay for. And he books with whoever understood him.<\/p>\n This is not a form. It is a six line email sent the same day the enquiry lands, and it does something a price cannot do on its own: it makes you look like the operator who knows Madrid, because asking properly is what knowing looks like.<\/p>\n 1. Did the group use the word \u00abchampionship\u00bb, or did the person writing to you?<\/strong><\/p>\n Often your contact is the organiser, not the decision maker, translating a group chat into what he thinks is trade language. If the word is his and not theirs, you have far more room than the brief suggests.<\/p>\n 2. What have they played in the last three years?<\/strong><\/p>\n Highest information return per character in the whole email. Championship is always relative to their last trip. A group coming off the Algarve and a group coming off an Ayrshire links are using one word for two unrelated things. Two or three course names and you have calibrated the entire reference.<\/p>\n 3. Handicaps, lowest to highest, as numbers.<\/strong><\/p>\n Do not ask about the standard of the group. You will get \u00abmixed\u00bb. Ask for the figures. If the top end is 28, difficulty stops being a selling point and becomes a risk: that man plays five and a half hours and goes home telling people the trip was hard work.<\/p>\n 4. Walking or buggies?<\/strong><\/p>\n Reads like logistics, works as criteria. A British or Nordic group that has walked eighteen holes for forty years is telling you what terrain it tolerates and what kind of course it wants. It also heads off the first morning complaint, which is the one that colours the rest of the week.<\/p>\n 5. Of the four days, which one is the day?<\/strong><\/p>\n Hold that one. It is coming back.<\/p>\n 6. Who pays and who chooses?<\/strong><\/p>\n If the organiser is not the payer, your proposal has to survive two sets of criteria. If it is eight men each paying their own way, it has to survive a group chat where somebody will type \u00abthat’s a lot\u00bb. You can write for that chat, but only if you know it exists.<\/p>\n Here is the one I owed you.<\/p>\n No group of eight remembers four courses. It remembers one. The day of the photograph, the day there was money on it, the day somebody hit the shot of the trip.<\/p>\n The other three days are not filler. They are good golf, which is exactly what the group wants. They are just not the photograph.<\/p>\n Quote four marquee days and you are charging four times for something the group consumes once. The client feels it without being able to name it. He sees a big number and no shape, just four expensive things in a row.<\/p>\n Quote one big day and three good ones and three things happen at once. The number lands in the range where eight men say yes without meeting again. The programme has shape, which reads as judgement rather than catalogue. And the group comes back, because something was left unplayed. A group that consumes the whole destination in one visit has no reason to repeat it.<\/p>\n Madrid builds this well because the material is there for both halves. Golf Santander<\/a> is a Rees Jones, twenty minutes from the centre, and it carries a name. The Centro Nacional<\/a> is the Spanish federation’s own course, where Jon Rahm won the 2018 Spanish Open, which is precisely the line your client will repeat at home. Around them sit solid courses for the other days, all inside that twenty to forty five minute band.<\/p>\n The combination exists. What you have to decide is which day carries the weight, and that is not a decision you can make without asking.<\/p>\n This is where operators hesitate. They accept the argument and then worry that a single flagship day looks like they trimmed the trip.<\/p>\n It does not, if you present it in this order.<\/p>\n The big day first, with a name and a reason. \u00abThursday is X, and it sits on Thursday because that is when the course presents best and you arrive into it rested.\u00bb<\/p>\n The other three days second, described by what they contribute rather than what they cost. A shorter one for arrival day, when the group lands off a flight with no warm up. A windier or wetter one for the man who wanted difficulty. One close to the hotel for the day they will want a long lunch.<\/p>\n The price third, and only third.<\/p>\n A golf trip is judged on whether it feels considered, not on how many expensive courses it contains. The proposal that explains why each day sits where it sits beats the proposal that stacks names. Every time.<\/p>\n And if the client still wants four marquee days, build them and charge for them. That is now his decision, taken with information, instead of a margin you added because you were afraid of coming in light.<\/p>\n When a four line enquiry arrives with the word championship in it, do not open the spreadsheet.<\/p>\n Send six questions. Who used the word. What they have played in three years. Handicaps as numbers. Walking or buggies. Which day is the day. Who pays and who chooses.<\/p>\n Those six answers tell you whether the request is about a name, difficulty or conditioning. From there you build one big day and three good ones instead of four expensive days nobody specified.<\/p>\n It costs you half a day before the proposal goes out. It stops you losing groups on a number you set yourself.<\/p>\n Same logic applies once accommodation enters the build, because in Madrid the hotel picks your courses<\/a>. And it is the same arithmetic behind where golf group profitability actually sits<\/a>, which is in the hours, not the commission line.<\/p>\n I have the six questions written as a template you can forward as it stands the next time a vague brief arrives, plus the Madrid course selection sorted by what each one solves: name, difficulty or conditioning.<\/p>\nSix questions to qualify a golf trip enquiry before you price it<\/h2>\n
The question that moves the number: which day is the day<\/h2>\n
How to present one marquee day without it reading as a downgrade<\/h2>\n
The short version<\/h2>\n
If you want the script<\/h2>\n