<p>Does anyone even go to curves?</p>
<p>Golly, I sure wish I had an opinion on this subject so I could join in. But … no opinion, no membership offer.</p>
<p>(My guess is that the lady CEO could care less about being a member at Augusta National.)</p>
<p>I seriously doubt that many business deals have been made at Curves while we know that is not true of golf courses. I totally agree with Skyhook (post 28) that this issue is about money and power and networking.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>you all should make sure to share these opinions with Wellesley. I’m sure Wellesley would love to join the 21st century as well.</p>
<p>Augusta is a private club and should be able to set it’s own rules as to who is a member. However, IBM is a publicly held company, IBM should be spending it’s money in way that reflects the values of all it’s shareholders and potential customers. As far as IBM stepping away from its sponsorship of the tournament you are right that some one else would step in and fund the Master’s. But as many sponsors found withe the Susan B Koman debaucle IBM has nothing to lose and everything to gain by dropping the sponsorship.</p>
<p>
Are you assuming that all the shareholders and potential customers have the same values?</p>
<p>As has been mentioned,soccer guy, women’s colleges deserves its own thread- why don’t you start one if they are Interesting to you?</p>
<p>yalemom–it is not a “strawman” argument to point out that it is A OK to discriminate against men but not ok to discriminate against women. It’s very relevant even if you can’t see that. As for my learning to play the game of golf, I started playing courses that were appropriate for my skill level and observed common etiquette on the golf course by letting faster players play through. It’s the lack of understanding of how things work on the golf course that bothers me, not new players. Everyone I’ve ever golf with can attest to that, especially the many players I have introduced to the game and taught how to play golf.</p>
<p>Your lack of knowledge about the game and Augusta is very evident in your statement that you think Augusta will die out. Do you realized the length of the list of people that want to join that club? They will never lack for members…</p>
<p>I happen to know there are a significant number of business deals completed at Curves. My wife is a personal trainer and has about 40 clients from there.</p>
<p>SteveMA, and the long list of men in line to pay for a membership is because of the networking and power available to them if they are invited to join. Augusta can be private, that is their right, but over time corporations will feel pressure to re-look at their relationship with these organizations when they don’t match their corporate policies. And yes, shareholders do understand this, so over time, the trend for corporations to look deeper into how their sponsorship dollars are spent and how that relates to company strategy and diversity policies will cause them to question even long-term sponsorships.</p>
<p>Maybe instead of all I should use the term “vast majority of” instead. But the fact it that clearly a majority of IBM shareholders do not have an issue with females in positions of power and the vast majority of the companies they deal with have no issue with woman in position of power. So why try and tie your name to a group who see woman as undesireable?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, the Koman foundation is a classic example of why organizations should NOT step into these kerfuffles. It was reported this week that Koman’s fundraising has dropped off a cliff. </p>
<p>There’s very little upside to taking a public dive into political issues.</p>
<p>That’s right idad – Koman’s fundraising has dropped off the cliff. But it is not the sponsor who lost in this case, it is the Koman foundation itself and that is because most of their corporate sponsors don’t want to be seen as unfriendly to woman’s concerns. And that is where IBM finds itself. It is doubtful that they would lose customers by pulling of the Masters and redirecting those funds towards another golf tournament, or tennis, or even NASCAR, but they stand a bigger risk of losing potential customers if they stay and appear to support a group that is unfriendly to woman’s issues. It is the Master’s that stands to lose if IBM pulls out.</p>
<p>What I’m trying to get at here is that IBM does not want to be involved in the politics of Augusta. But they got pushed to the wall by events so now they have to make choice. Stay and appear to be unfriendly to woman’s issues and take the risk of having to deal with that charge every spring or walk away and be done with the politics? I would walk away.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As I mentioned earlier, Augusta’s policy hasn’t changed. IBM knew what they were getting into when they originally became a sponsor years ago, as did their customers, their Board and shareholders. For them to be suddenly outraged (and there is no indication that they are) would be disingenuous.</p>
<p>Augusta may be the same as it was years ago, but IBM is not the same thing it was years ago. And the business world is not the same as it was years ago. Time to reevaluate its relationship with an old partner and see which way is the best for IBM as a business to go. This happens all the time, business partners grow apart and need to sever relationships to move ahead.</p>
<p>SteveMA, your straw man was bringing women’s colleges into the argument, which as many here have already pointed out, deserves it’s own thread.</p>
<p>This is my argument: Augusta’s policies are bad for the business of golf (let’s say golf in America), because it is the most visible golf tournament in the country. When people tune into watch it who do they see as The Face of Golf Estabishment? Old white guys who won’t let a woman play with them(and who apparently need Cialis, judging by every freaking commercial on the golf channel…)</p>
<p>Every year high school and middle school girls make choices as to what sport they want to participate in, know what sport they’re not choosing? Golf. My point about extinction is that even with Cialis, these old white men aren’t going to live forever, and those left who still love the game of golf (diminishing in number daily, as they die out), will hopefully have a more evolved sense of what it takes to keep a sport vibrant and healthy: new, young players who feel included and welcome.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So you all can claim there’s no relation?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, women’s colleges are worst examples of discrimination than Augusta. At Augusta, women can play on the course they just can’t be members of the club. At women’s colleges, men don’t get to “play on the course” at all. Men are just spectators at women’s colleges.</p>
<p>Aren’t there all men colleges?</p>
<p>SteveMA has this one correct. Golf came from the UK, where I am pretty sure there are still a lot of men only golf clubs. Augusta is a private organization that values its traditions. It is thriving and doesn’t really care who sponsors the tournament or if anyone sponsors it. If it wants to let women in, it will. If not, it won’t. And one of the world’s greatest golf tournaments will go on either way.</p>
<p>I kind of enjoy seeing them go through this most every year. Its refreshing to hear someone tell the media that its membership is a private matter and none of their business. I think that answer sets a good example.</p>
<p>And to Yalemom, your argument seems weak to me. I don’t think young people know or care about who belongs to Augusta, if they tune in to see the Masters. You seem to be very concerned about old white men playing golf. I am sure one could argue that the people who seem so concerned about Augusta’s memberships are old women.</p>