The Board of Directors addresses Members’ comments and questions following the call for the General Meeting scheduled for December 3rd:
1. You do not provide a breakdown of the projected income from green fees
The 2026 budget includes projected income of €530,000 from members’ green fees, €713,000 from guests, and €156,000 from visitors.
These figures have been calculated using the actual sales volumes from 2025 (January to October) and 2024 (November and December), applying the proposed new rates, including:
• €24 for members’ green fees (Category B only)
• €90 for guests on the South Course (no time-band distinction)
• €72 for guests on the North Course (no time-band distinction)
• €200 for visitors on the South Course
• €150 for visitors on the North Course
2. The buggy circulation fee is disproportionate when compared with the annual pass and should not be the same for electric and petrol buggies
No structural changes to the buggy policy are being considered at this stage. A working group of volunteer members has been created to analyse the situation in detail and propose improvements.
The Board’s intention is to encourage the use of Club buggies over private ones and to promote a gradual transition from petrol to electric models.
Specific measures will be communicated in due course.
3. I do not understand why the spouse of a member’s child under 35 does not pay the entrance fee
This is not the case, and we apologise if the table created any confusion. The spouse must always pay 50% of the entrance fee applicable to their own category.
Therefore, in the case of a spouse under 35 who is not the child of a member, the corresponding entrance fee would be €4,500.
4. Have the salary increases had a positive impact on staff turnover and morale?
Yes, clearly. Between 2021 and 2024, there were 16 voluntary resignations within the customer-facing team, four of them involving highly qualified staff, according to our Operations Director. In 2025, there have been none.
Staff morale and general workplace satisfaction appear to have improved considerably. This is reflected both in direct feedback from employees and in the increased stability and internal cohesion of the team.
5. You mention the number of members under 50, but not those over 70
Currently, 46% of members (947 people) are aged 70 or over. At RCGG we are delighted to have members of all ages, all of whom contribute to the Club’s social life.
However, the high average age of our membership, together with the net loss of around 60 members in 2025, requires us to reflect on the medium-term sustainability of Guadalmina’s membership base.
For this reason, the Board has proposed measures to attract new members of working age, for two principal reasons:
• They generally have a longer expected period of membership.
• Their professional commitments mean they tend to make relatively light use of the facilities.
This helps maintain the balance between economic sustainability and usage capacity.
6. You do not refer to the fees of other clubs in the area for comparison
We have so far chosen not to focus our communication on direct comparisons in order to avoid misinterpretations. Guadalmina is a club with its own identity and should not define itself by what others do, but by the value it offers its members.
That said, objective data are clear and the comparison is revealing. We analysed information from 25 local clubs and found that the average annual fee is around €3,600.
The highest fee included in our proposal—€2,450 for Category A members—is the fifth lowest in the group.
Considering our three existing categories, the average annual fee in Guadalmina for 2025 (€1,545) would be the second lowest of all, only above La Cañada (€1,450), which is a municipal club.
7. I do not understand the new guest restriction (a maximum of six invitations per person per year)
Guests are an essential part of the Club’s social life and will always be welcome. In fact, we have simplified and reduced guest fees to facilitate their access.
However, some reasonable limits are necessary. We wish Guadalmina to operate as a genuine private members’ club, where membership retains its value and exclusivity.
Anyone wishing to play more than six times a year is naturally invited to join as a member.
It is also worth noting that this limit is common practice in most private clubs, and that we currently have more than 300 active members who play six times a year or less—demonstrating that such a frequency is fully compatible with full membership.
8. Category A is not good value for non-resident members and Category B is too expensive for those of us who prefer to play 9 holes
We agree that the current fee structure—carried over from many years ago—is neither suitable nor equitable. For that reason, the Board is pursuing a process of harmonisation and unification of fees, as announced in the electoral programme.
The first step has been the elimination of Category C, and the long-term direction is to move towards a single membership fee for all members. Naturally, its final amount must be determined, as well as whether it should incorporate an element linked to usage.
We have opted for a gradual, orderly transition rather than a sudden overhaul of the system.
Regarding the suitability of the Category A fee, we understand and respect individual perceptions. However, market data confirms that Guadalmina remains one of the most competitively priced clubs in the area.
9. Why is Category C being eliminated?
For several reasons. Firstly, the existing fees for Categories C and B were significantly below what would correspond to a proportionate maintenance fee.
To put this in perspective, Category C and B members did not even cover their proportional share of the Club’s staff costs—illustrating the structural imbalance.
Secondly, eliminating Category C aligns with the goal announced during the electoral process: progressing towards unified membership fees.
This measure aims to:
• Simplify and streamline Club management.
• Reinforce equal treatment among members, based on the principle that equal obligations should imply equal rights.
This Board advocates for a members’ club, not a user-based model. While differences in facility usage may justify specific adjustments, they should not lead to structural inequalities.
There are indeed alternative pay-and-play models, but this is not the model we want for Guadalmina.
We understand the sensitivity surrounding these changes, particularly when they affect situations perceived as acquired rights. However, we firmly believe that the Club’s sustainability and the common good must prevail over individual interests.
10. The agenda for the assembly does not include the approval of the new fees
Correct. According to the Club’s statutes, it is the exclusive responsibility of the Board to “establish entrance fees, periodic fees, and any other playing rights, including those applicable to third parties, whether or not they are shareholders of Guadalmina Golf S.A.”
In other words, the Board has full authority to amend fees at any time, without requiring approval from the General Assembly.
Even so, we considered it important to act with full transparency and present the fees ahead of the assembly, allowing members to review them, express their views, and make suggestions.
Once the assembly has taken place, the Board will meet to approve and publish the final fees for 2026.
11. What happens if the budgets are not approved on 3 December?
The budgets approved in June will then become definitive. The Board will meet after the assembly and publish the final fees for 2026.
Initially, we believed that a new Extraordinary General Meeting would be required, but the Club’s advisers have explained that this is not the case.
12. What is included within the €451,000 of general expenses shown in the budget?
This amount corresponds to the operational costs required for the Club’s daily functioning, including rentals, IT maintenance, tax and labour advisory services, audit, legal services, insurance, bank commissions, cleaning, security, staff uniforms, technical services and Club activities, among other essential services.
13. What does GGSA do with the €828,000 it receives from the Club as rent?
Virtually all of it is used to meet financial obligations.
Two loans are currently being repaid:
• €3,500,000, with a monthly instalment of €53,700 (€644,400 annually)
• €300,000, with a monthly instalment of €13,150 (€157,800 annually)
In addition, the company maintains a €750,000 credit facility, currently drawn down by €370,000, with approximately €1,000 per month in interest.
Together, these financial commitments account for over 98% of the income received from RCGG as rent.
15. What is the forecast year-end result for 2025?
The detailed forecast will be presented during the assembly.
In general terms, some items have deviated, although compensations have been possible in others. The expected result is slightly negative, as is the cash position.
This will be managed by deferring the payment of certain invoices to early 2026.
16. I paid an activation fee, and now others will not have to pay it
This concern is understandable, although such situations occur frequently—and also in the opposite direction.
Over the years, activation conditions and share prices have changed, and many members have benefited at different times from higher or lower rates depending on the Club’s circumstances.
What matters is that the entrance fees in force at any given time respond to a clear and justified purpose.
In this case, current reductions aim to encourage the incorporation of younger members and stabilise the membership base, which has been seriously affected by ageing and turnover.
In the last year, the Club has lost around 60 net members (entries minus exits). Continuing at this rate would mean that fixed costs would be spread across fewer and fewer members, inevitably increasing fees.
For this reason, these measures should be viewed as an investment in sustainability and the future of the Club.
17. Why propose such a sharp increase in annual fees instead of phasing it in gradually over several years?
The proposed increase reflects the Club’s actual needs for 2026, with the aim of:
• Updating the budget in line with inflation, which affects most cost items.
• Compensating for the fall in variable income, particularly due to fewer new members and reduced green fee sales in 2025.
• Funding small improvements planned for 2026.
• Covering staff shortages in various areas, hiring reinforcements where needed (4 in customer service, 3 in maintenance and 1 in communications).
In short, the proposed fees are what the Club requires if we wish to maintain and improve service levels and financial stability. A phased increase would simply postpone the problem and carry a deficit into future years.
The alternatives would have been irresponsible:
• Maintaining unrealistically high income estimates
• Not updating costs in line with inflation, reducing maintenance quality
• Abandoning the planned improvements
• Failing to fill essential staff positions
None of these options is acceptable.
It is important to remember that fees must follow the budget—not the other way around. First we determine what the Club needs, then how much it costs, and finally how it is financed.
Doing the opposite—starting with what members would prefer to pay and deciding services accordingly—would not be responsible or sustainable management.
18. Why has the direct-debit discount been removed?
Because direct debit is simply a method of payment, not an additional merit. We do not consider it appropriate to reward the fulfilment of a basic obligation: paying fees correctly and on time.
The objective is to maintain a fair and coherent system for all members, regardless of their chosen payment method.
19. Could an early-payment discount be established in January?
In theory, yes, but it has not been deemed advisable for several reasons.
Firstly, most members choose to pay quarterly, so the real impact of such an incentive would be limited.
Secondly, the reduction in income caused by the discount would mean that fees would no longer cover budgeted expenditure, compromising the Club’s financial balance.
Finally, introducing such discounts would add complexity to financial planning without offering meaningful benefits.
For these reasons, the Board prefers to maintain a simple, uniform and predictable fee-collection system.
20. Why must I contribute to the costs associated with children?
The junior academy has never been self-financing, yet our Club has always strongly supported its children, and it is considered a national reference.
In financial terms, the academy recorded a net cost of €24,831 in 2024, €26,832 in 2025, and is forecast to reach €28,932 in 2026. The new budgets do not entail an increase in its net cost.
Additionally, all members contribute to services they may not personally use—whether the swimming pool, the croquet lawn, the changing rooms, or even the golf course in some cases.
The academy is no exception. Members contribute to the full range of services the Club offers, regardless of their individual usage.
21. Why are competitions not self-financing?
Competitions play a vital role in the Club’s sporting and social life. Many of our key social events are built around them.
If the full cost of each competition were charged directly to the entry fee, participation would be greatly reduced and many events would not be viable.
Conversely, without an attractive and active tournament calendar, the Club would lose part of its vibrancy and social spirit.
For this reason, it is reasonable for the Club to contribute to competition costs, in line with their dual social and sporting character and with the aim of maintaining a high-quality, inclusive programme.
22. What will happen with the restaurant? How much has it cost so far?
Plans remain unchanged from what was presented at the June assembly. The trial period for the in-house management model continues and is still under evaluation.
A new Food & Beverage Manager has recently joined the team. While the current staffing levels do not yet allow for full service on the upper floor, the decision has been taken to maintain activity on the lower floor until the organisation is more robust and stable.
Operational results to date are close to budget balance. More detailed information will be provided during the assembly, although it should be remembered that this matter corresponds formally to Guadalmina Golf S.A., not the Club.
23. Why was it possible to avoid raising fees in previous years?
The main reason is that, following the sale of Martinsa Fadesa shares, there was a significant increase in new membership admissions, totalling over €4 million between 2020 and 2024. This volume of income made it possible to avoid increasing fees during those years.
In 2025, this trend has reversed, and income from new admissions has fallen.
Over this period, the Club has had to absorb cumulative inflation of 21% since 2021, progressively tightening the financial situation.
By 31 December 2024, the Club held only €777,025.50 in its bank accounts, compared with €998,549.84 in outstanding invoices.
Finally, staff salaries—the Club’s largest cost—had been frozen for four years.
