When I discovered the GolfNow links in Google Map/Search results my initial impression was "this is bad". The Lightspeed booking widget issue feels the same.
I understood exactly why GolfNow did what they did, can't say the same for the Widget-to-Chronogolf path. It could be a combination of small wins for Lightspeed, adding up to a big win. Like I said, I'm not sure. But based on the response I've seen from management companies, this may, in the long run, be worse for Lightspeed Golf than GolfNow.
GolfNow - quickly - provided their clients an opt-out option. Did they fumble on the FAQ a few times - Yes - but they kept working on it until they got it right.
Some possible reasons why Lightspeed/Chronogolf has chosen to host the golf course tee time checkout page the way they do:
1. More exposure and ultimately sales of their "DEALS", driven by trade agreements.
2. More inbound links to the Chronogolf marketplace (this drives up their domain ranking), where they sell "DEALS", driven by trade agreements.
3. They don't understand what good e-commerce looks like vs. bad
4. Someone determined the return was worth the risk of getting caught and having hundreds of customers learn about it on LinkedIn
5. ??? (pls chime in, what reasons can you think of?)
Another question: Why did they think it would be OK?
Here's some hard truths:
Most operators, including leaders at management companies, do not shop their online experiences. They do not book online tee times 2, 3, 4 times a month, including check-out, through different channels and with different devices. They should, they would learn a lot. Lightspeed and others know this and it gives them the opportunity to thrive in gray areas. Same can be said for checking on search results. They know their customers are busy with other things, they know there's implied trust and the customer relies on that trust rather than doing the work to confirm. In short, Trust but Verify is not prevalent in golf operations.
What should happen? By end of day Sunday, 8/11/24 - Lightspeed Golf should have a new checkout page live and operating for their golf course customers (remember, they serve two customers: golf courses and golfers). The page should have very few click options for the booker and none of those options should send the booker to a page with available tee times from other golf courses. Lightspeed Golf should acknowledge the error and simply promise to do better moving forward.
These mistakes are predictable. When golf management software companies also sell tee times directly to golfers, questionable decisions will be made. Think there's only two of these companies doing this? Think again and stay tuned...
Last week we published: Lightspeed Golf: A Comprehensive Technology Solution with Room for Improvement
We've received feedback ranging from anger to confusion. The anger stems from what some are calling "Direct Booking Interference" This happens when the tee time booking vendor offers the booker/golfer alternative booking options at competitive golf courses, before completing the reservation that began on the golf course website.
Read the article here: https://lnkd.in/gBkrahaK
The golf world is proving to be more and more difficult for companies offering tee time marketplaces and operational technology. Perhaps the cookie trade jar is too appealing?
Are you a Lightspeed/Chronogolf customer - what's your opinion on this?
Troon DuPage County Ohio State Parks State of Ohio we included examples from Kapalua Golf & Tennis, The Preserve at Oak Meadows and MAUMEE BAY STATE PARK Golf Course.
Specialist, Member Care
3moCongrats!