Board considers Mizuno versus Titleist for pro shop; asks for contract and inventory before deciding

The Atoka Municipal Golf Authority discussed selecting a pro-shop vendor, with staff presenting options from Mizuno and Titleist and trustees asking for additional contract and inventory information before any purchase is approved.

Superintendent Gregor (the meeting presenter on pro-shop items) said he had met with representatives from both Mizuno and Titleist and favored Mizuno for customer service and local availability. Gregor told the board he believed players could be persuaded to use Mizuno products and noted a key financial difference: Titles reported to require substantially higher sales volume to achieve the same profit margin the presenter quoted for Mizuno. Gregor also said Titleist would not disclose pricing until an account is opened, while Mizuno provided a price spreadsheet; the transcript records a minimum first-year order of $5,000 discussed by the presenter.

Why it matters: a pro-shop agreement affects clubhouse revenue, inventory carrying costs and promotional opportunities such as tournament prizes.

Trustees raised procedural and inventory concerns. They asked staff to produce a current inventory report for balls, gloves, hats and other retail items and to obtain the vendor agreement for review and formal approval before placing any order. Staff noted the vendor would allow deferred payment until August on first-year product in one scenario, and trustees discussed using product rebates or vendor credits for clubhouse promotions (for example, club championship prizes).

No final vendor selection or purchase was approved at the meeting; trustees directed staff to return with a vendor agreement and a reconciled inventory list for review and formal action.