The powers that be in the golf industry will throw some astounding numbers at you. They will tell you that golf has a $76 billion annual economic impact in the U.S. – bigger than the furniture or motion picture businesses. They will further say course maintenance alone accounts for $9 billion in spending and payroll. That suggests the average maintenance budget at the average American course is about $500,000. Take labor and overhead out of that equation and it means that the "typical" course spends about a quarter of a million dollars a year on stuff. That's a big number for some of you and a pittance for others, but that's the average. The real question – no matter what budget you have – is what kind of stuff do you buy and from whom do you buy it?

By my estimate, there are about 300 companies that actively sell products to golf course superintendents. Beyond the actual performance of the product, the bottom line when superintendents choose products nearly always comes down to reputation and relationships. You buy from people you trust who represent companies you respect.

So, we asked you which companies you admire and trust the most, and the results of this first-of-its-kind study are presented in this month's cover story. Our goal is to benchmark your opinion of the reputations of the companies that serve you.

We sent out 4,000 online survey links to superintendents randomly selected from our circulation and received about 350 valid responses. We asked folks to choose the 10 companies they admired or trusted most from a list of about 100 companies we identified. (By the way, we randomized the multiple choice lists to prevent people from just checking off the biggest companies, the same companies or the first 10 on the list.) From there, we compiled the data and sat on it. We didn't share the data with anyone – including our own sales team. We decided against using it to go sell self-congratulatory ads to the companies that did well in the ratings. We could have, but it seemed tacky. We hate tacky.

In some ways, the results weren't surprising. The big brands that dominate the consciousness of the market generally performed well. But, there were surprisingly small companies that exceeded my expectations and some huge ones that didn't do as well as I might have expected. So, what's the takeaway? You get to see how your opinions compare to those of your colleagues around the nation and ponder how your views impact your purchasing decisions.

If this study is a measure of corporate brand reputation, here's what it is not: It is not a measure of market share or total sales. Yes, companies with better reputations sell more stuff, but just because Company X ranks higher than Company Y in our study doesn't mean that Company Y isn't kicking Company's X's butt in total sales because they have better distribution, different pricing or more "must-have" products.

It's not necessarily a measure of how much each company spends on marketing. There's definitely a correlation between advertising/marketing and overall reputation but, again, there were smaller manufacturers that ranked high compared to their ad budgets.

It's definitely not a measure of how much advertising each company buys in GCI. We compiled a list of the industry's most visible companies based on multiple sources (ads in all magazines, trade show booths, sponsorships), and we allowed for write-in responses. Many companies that don't advertise with us were included and a few of them did quite well.

All that said, publishing this scares the crap out of me. We've never been afraid to be candid but this feels like risky business for a magazine that relies on the kindness of the very companies we've rated. But, given our reputation for telling it like it is, it's riskier business to ignore the fact that brands are meaningful in this market and your perception of those brands is a big part of their success as companies. Comments are welcome. You know where to find us!

Brian Vinchesi

Smart controllers automatically adjust irrigation system schedules based on weather factors or soil moisture levels. These smart controllers are all the rage in landscape irrigation, but if you think about it, smart controllers have been available for golf course irrigation systems for decades.

Let's look at the weather-based controllers first. Weather-based controllers in golf course irrigation systems are nothing new. Ever since weather stations have been available, they have aided in the operation of golf irrigation systems. Initially, they just provided you with an evapotranspiration rate (ET) that would then be manually entered into the control software and the runtimes automatically adjusted based on the ET rate or you just used it to help you determine runtimes. As golf course irrigation central control systems have matured and technology advanced, stations have become more accurate and reliable, and some superintendents let the computer automatically set runtime based on the ET readings from the weather station. Additionally, it seems each year the central software is updated or the latest and greatest new golf irrigation control system is released which allows you to utilize more than just ET inputs, but also temperature, humidity and wind.

Soil moisture sensors have been around for more than half a century, but they have been accepted in the golf market only recently. With new sensor technologies soil moisture sensors have entered the market quickly and aggressively. Like weather stations, at first the soil moisture sensors were independent of the central control system and had their own software program, much like pump station monitoring used to be. But again, technology has advanced and central control software has updated so soil moisture sensors – if the right ones are purchased – are able to fully interact with the central control system and automatically adjust the run times of the specific sprinklers they are assigned to control.
 

As familiar with weather-based or soil-based systems as you may be – or as good as both of these smart-type systems are – they are different. Whereas the weather-based system will water to a certain ET if irrigation is needed, the soil-moisture-based system can be programmed for both a high and low setting (see figures). This means there is no irrigation if the soil moisture is above a certain level and will only water to a certain point if the soil moisture indicates irrigation is needed. As a result, the soil-moisture system can maintain soil moisture within a specific range.

However, this technology and control does not come without a cost. Weather stations have become mostly standard on an irrigation system and there may be more than one weather station. Their one-time costs are not significant, but they do need to be maintained to be accurate. Because they are new, interactive soil-moisture sensors are at this point pretty expensive. The big decision is how many to install. To do all 18 greens, tees and fairways – or even just 18 of each – is cost-prohibitive. As a result, it is difficult to have a fully interactive system. You can move the sensors around, but then they will not be interactive.

It is important to understand this technology completely and what it is doing if you are going to rely on it. The central computer cannot get fired, but you can. I have always been a believer that the weather station should never be allowed to set runtimes without oversight, but with soil moisture sensors I am not so sure. Once you have determined the optimum soil moisture range, why not let the system automatically keep the moisture within that range. It's certainly something to think about.

While sorting through old family papers recently, I came across a reprint of a book entitled "Don't", a guide to manners first published in the 1800s. The reprint was from the 1960s and included annotations by Eric Sloane, a Colonial Era historian. Sloane compared the manners and courtesies of da/ys long gone with those of his day, noting that there had been a retreat from tradition and customs. He wrote that, "a social rebellion that accepts teen-age revolt, junk art, pornography and hallucinatory drugs appears to have little need for the niceties of etiquette. In fact, the practice of doing the exact opposite of what grandfather used to do in now considered fashionable."

That was nearly 50 years ago: Things have only gotten worse. We are witnessing the decline of basic rules of etiquette in society and our profession. Is a lack of good manners hurting you? Are simple courtesies keeping you from getting a better job, making more money, moving up the ladder?

Just as the game of golf is steeped in history and tradition, I suggest a quick review of the following traditional, yet simple, rules of social decency and consideration for others from 200 years ago. Yes, some of them are pretty funny, but they are timeless suggestions that will serve us all both on and off the golf course. With a new year upon us, they also might serve as fodder for resolutions.
 

Appearance. The adage "you never get a second chance to make a good first impression" still holds true. The comments from the 19th century remain relevant today:

• "Don't neglect personal cleanliness — which is more neglected than careless observers suppose." Do you have a set of clean clothes in your office? You never know when you'll be called upon to represent your club.
• "Don't be untidy in anything. Neatness is one of the most important of the minor morals." How neat is your office? I don't just mean your desk, but your bunkers, rough, greens, tee boxes, etc. What does your "office" say about you and your work ethic?
• My personal favorite. "Don't neglect the small hairs that project from the nostrils and grow about the apertures of the ears." Enough said!

Conversation. The way we speak says all anyone needs to know about our intelligence and knowledge. The original points were made at a time when writing and speaking were the only methods of communication. We may communicate in many new ways — phone, texts, e-mails and so on — but the lessons haven't changed.

• "Don't speak ungrammatically. Study books of grammar and the writings of only the best authors." A great man once told me "readers are leaders." That includes reading and knowing the rules of grammar.
• "Don't use slang, profane language anywhere. Moderate your transports." As a boss or employee you are a representative of your club, so choose your words carefully and resist the temptation to become too loud or profane. Furthermore, speak clearly and slowly so you can be both heard and understood.
• "Don't use extravagant adjectives. Extravagance in any form is never in good taste." Speak and write plainly. Big words don't impress and are often used incorrectly. Also, don't think you have to write or say a lot: There is no need to state your case in 100 words when 20 will do.
• "Don't pronounce incorrectly. Listen carefully to the conversation of cultivated people." No one is expecting you to make speeches, but be sure you know what you are talking about before you open your mouth, and that includes pronunciation as well as speaking clearly and concisely.

Common courtesy. I'm amazed how many phone calls, e-mails, and voice mails go unanswered. I can't think of anything so rude as not getting back to someone who has reached out to you. Is it that difficult to pick up the phone or send back an e-mail? I'd rather be told no or to get lost than hear nothing at all.

• "Don't fail to apologize if you tread upon or cause inconvenience in any way." Return those phone calls, letters, and e-mails. And if you're slow doing so, apologize for your tardiness.
• "Don't fail to acknowledge, by note, all invitations, requests, and questions, whether accepted or not." Again, return those calls.
• "Don't write notes on rules paper or inferior paper." When writing back to someone, use proper business stationery or invest in quality, tasteful note cards.
• "Don't talk about yourself and don't talk about your affairs. If you wish to be popular, talk to people about what interests them and not what interests you." Let others talk, learn to listen, and not only will you learn some things, you'll become very popular.
• "Don't, as an invited guest, be late for the appointment." Being late is being rude. It's that simple.

If it's true that we cannot know where we're going until we know where we've been, here are five takeaways from 2011 that foreshadow what the golf industry can expect in the coming year.

1. Flight to quality. Our recessionary economy rewards excellence while punishing mediocrity. Businesses that reinvested in their futures through capital improvements and product introductions are growing and increasing earning power. Golf-related businesses that chose to hunker down are being clobbered by value-driven consumers who are intolerant of under-performance. This characteristic seems to span every segment of golf, from the most modest of municipal courses to the highest and mightiest of private clubs.

Clubs prosper where continuous improvement is evident. New programs and investment in the lifestyle of the club are being rewarded. Because the growth of clubs tied to residential communities is driven largely by women, programs that emphasize family, fun and fitness have emerged as competitive advantages. In order to hold position, established brands must continue to improve product performance and customer service. In a zero-sum game, there are winners and losers. Golf growth has slowed and now stabilized. With very little organic growth in new golfers and new golf facilities, the top performers are today's – and tomorrow's – winners.
 

2. International superiority. Competitively speaking, a large proportion of top performing golfers are citizens of the world. On the course, the U.S. PGA Tour is challenged as never before by the European Tour. On the business side, the European Tour already may have overtaken the U.S. Tour for its ability to attract sponsors and fans. Clearly the economic health of the European Union influences the global business community far more than the capabilities of international players. However, there is no denying that companies hoping to appeal to golf-conscious demographic segments can reach a broader audience internationally. For American companies seeking female golfers, the emerging markets are in Europe, Scandinavia and East Asia. Manufacturers and suppliers of goods and services report revenue and unit-count growth in Asia and parts of the EU. Performance indicators for the international hospitality segments are trending upward.
 

3. U.S. mistakes spreading. Golf development outside the U.S. has followed the American model and, as a result, is being hurt by the same factors of oversupply in unproven and brittle markets. As in America, many new project planners and investors have not identified audiences with adequate depth and breadth to sustain start-up and standalone enterprises. In a difficult global economy, the small range of economic tolerance for golf communities, resorts and projects has shrunk to the point that only carefully planned and extremely well-capitalized projects in highly attractive locales will be successful.
 

4. Dumb money drying up. Seated at tables where deal-making is being done, one understands that new capital is evaluating golf-related opportunities for land acquisition, new concept and product introductions and property development or re-development. Meanwhile, many uninitiated observers believe there is no investment money available to golf. The truth is that there is little or no dumb money looking at golf-oriented investments. New capital sources have emerged, and they are highly skeptical and extremely discerning.
 

5. Growing the game? Maybe. Golf and golfers have long talked a better game than they played. The allied associations and interests within golf segments have talked endlessly about the need to grow the game; every group has its own version of what should be done to increase participation. Golf 2.0, the PGA of America grow-the-game initiative, may just be an answer that works. The program has been carefully studied and is being properly measured for actionable tactics. The program drives accountability down to the point of attack, which includes everyone who plays, promotes and uses the game of golf. PGA of America CEO Joe Steranka has brought to bear great resources of funding, organizational energy and engagement. Others will follow. Engaging non-golfers to play and encouraging existing golfers to play more remains a top priority for us all.