Base year analysis is a good choice for evaluating performance after a project that added nine holes to a nine-hole course.

Base year analysis is a good choice for evaluating performance after a project that added nine holes to a nine-hole course.

• A. True
• B. False
• C. Not applicable
• D. Optional

Answer: (A)

Base year analysis uses the period before a change as the reference point to judge what happens after the change. When you add nine holes to a nine-hole course, capacity nearly doubles, so comparing post-expansion results to the pre-expansion baseline lets you see how much additional demand, rounds, and revenue the project actually generated, while also accounting for typical seasonal patterns. You’d look at relevant metrics (rounds, revenue, tee-time utilization) and typically adjust for capacity so you’re not misled by simply having more holes. For example, you can compare same-season periods year over year or measure rounds per hole to normalize for the bigger course. If post-expansion results exceed the base-year levels after these adjustments, it indicates the project had a positive impact on performance. If they don’t, it suggests limited or no measurable benefit. This approach is especially appropriate here because the change alters capacity, so the baseline helps isolate the effect of the expansion rather than just reflecting normal year-to-year variation.

Base year analysis uses the period before a change as the reference point to judge what happens after the change. When you add nine holes to a nine-hole course, capacity nearly doubles, so comparing post-expansion results to the pre-expansion baseline lets you see how much additional demand, rounds, and revenue the project actually generated, while also accounting for typical seasonal patterns.

You’d look at relevant metrics (rounds, revenue, tee-time utilization) and typically adjust for capacity so you’re not misled by simply having more holes. For example, you can compare same-season periods year over year or measure rounds per hole to normalize for the bigger course. If post-expansion results exceed the base-year levels after these adjustments, it indicates the project had a positive impact on performance. If they don’t, it suggests limited or no measurable benefit.

This approach is especially appropriate here because the change alters capacity, so the baseline helps isolate the effect of the expansion rather than just reflecting normal year-to-year variation.