T H E  T R U E  V A L U E  O F  D E S I G N 
设计的真正价值
By Tom Doak
作者 汤姆 多克
Allan Zhang
翻译 张旭
 

Printed in Golf Course Architecture Magazine, Europe, January 2006

发表于高尔夫球场设计杂志，欧洲版，2006年1月
 

When I first got the opportunity to work alongside Pete Dye, I would have worked for free just for the experience -- but back in the summer of 1981, I was paid the princely sum of $4.50 per hour to work on the crew at Long Cove. As skinny as I was back then, I probably wasn’t worth it.

当我第一次得到与皮特戴一起工作的时候，我是没有薪水的，仅仅是为了获得工作经验；但是若回到1981年的夏天，当我在long cove球场任职的时候，我的薪水是4.5美元每小时，现在看来，那时我可能并不值这个价钱。
 

To this day, I seldom think about the money when I’m actually working on a routing or out on a site. (I told my son when he was small that I design courses for free, but I get paid to travel.) I certainly never thought about it when I had the chance to work on my first solo design, or any day I spent on site at Pacific Dunes in Oregon; I felt like it would have paid for me to design those courses for free, because of the recognition they might bring and the opportunities they would create. Yet, I’ve got eight associates doing outstanding work who deserve to be rewarded for it; and as a more informed business person today, I now understand that we brought much more value to those jobs than I would have dared to ask for back then.

今天，当我去访场时，我很少考虑钱的问题（当我儿子小的时候，我告诉他我给别人免费设计球场，我就可以免费旅行）。当我第一次独立设计球场的时候，我从来没有想过钱的问题，在俄勒冈Pacific Dunes球场工作的时候，我更没有考虑过钱的问题，我想其将不会付给我设计费，因为他们会冒一定的风险，同时也会创造一定的机会。现在我已经得到了8个机构颁发的杰出奖项；如今作为一名更正式的商务人士，我终于明白了从过去那些工作中获得的价值比当时所想要要多得多。

The pricing of design services is one of the most complex problems I have tried to puzzle out. We all know that golf architecture is a very competitive business, yet the designers who charge the highest fees are by far the busiest, and everyone else scrambles for the leftovers. Prices vary tremendously from one region to the next because of local competition and local costs: for example, designers in the western USA tend to charge higher fees than those in the east or midwest, because those projects tend to entail bigger irrigation systems and more engineering and overall higher costs, and it only seems fair that designers are paid more to put in the time to deal with more details.

设计服务的价钱曾经是我最为迷惑的一个复杂问题。我们都知道高尔夫球场设计师一个非常具有竞争性的行业，那些要价最高的设计师多是那些最忙的设计师，其他的那些人（普通设计师）就去争抢那些残羹冷炙（低成本的高尔夫项目）了。由于当地的竞争和当地的成本，某个地区和其他地区的价格是天壤之别的。例如：设计师在美国西部的设计费要价通常比在中东部要高些，因为这些项目必须要求更多的喷灌系统、工程和总体成本，唯一看起来似乎合理的是：给设计师支付更多，他们才能花更多的时间去处理细节问题。

In early days, some of the great designers were amateurs who refused to take a fee for their labors, while others based their fees on a percentage of construction costs. The latter method makes sense from some perspectives, but since it also creates an incentive for the designer to add frills to the design and drive up his own fees, it is frowned upon by the professional societies and by some clients.

早期，一些伟大的设计师都是将设计作为其业余职业，他们不接受劳务费，而其他人的收费则是按照建造成本的百分点收取的。从某些角度来说，后者更合理些；但是这样以来，使得一些设计师在设计里面加入更多的花拳绣腿以提高自己的设计费，但是一些专业协会和一些客户却对此必以为然。

Today, a select few designers are paid fees amounting to more than a million dollars, not all of which is directly attributable to their design work. Part of their fees are justified by the value of their reputation toward selling memberships or real estate, and we should all be grateful, because their high prices have enabled the rest of us to make a healthy living while still appearing to be reasonably priced. (The irony is that the big names are priced out of competing to design on the best land for golf, because their name brand is of little value if the property is good enough to attract golfers without it.)

今天，少数设计师的设计费动辄百万美金，并不是所有的钱都花在他们的设计工作上。一部分费用用于他们（设计师）声誉所带来的商业价值—为了更好的销售球场的会员和房地产。我们（指设计师）应心怀感激，他们（业主）的高价钱会让我们的下半辈子能过上更富足的日子，然而这仍然也是看似合理的价格。；（有点可笑的是，大牌的设计师往往不会去竞标那些最合适做高尔夫项目的地块，因为如果球场本身的条件既然没有有名的设计师也能吸引球手，设计师名望的附加价值就显得无足轻重了。）