We analyzed this app across 3 independent signals and corroborated nothing unfair. That is a signal, not an audit.
This analysis describes version 6.9.0 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-05 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 6.9.0, updated 2026-09-17.
What the analysis found
One source only — shown, not confirmed 3
A single kind of evidence. We publish these because withholding them would be the bigger distortion, and we do not treat any of them as a finding we stand behind.
What reviewers said
Verbatim excerpts from public store reviews, shown as corroborating user reports. They are not Appworthy audit evidence, and a quotation is not proof of the finding it sits under.
Hard to cancel
Cannot cancel or modify tee-time on app — I like the app for booking teetimes however, when cancellations are required, the app fails miserably. I’ve never been able to cancel the app online. Always required to call customer service to…
Terrible service — Cannot cancel any tee times. Terrible service. Does not have communication with the golf course.
Untrustworthy — Couldn’t cancel due to thunderstorm it took my credit. Staff if the course I had a tee time at were very rude and did not help. GolfNow says they have chat support but that is a lie , the link doesn’t go anywhere. Don’t…
Reports that the ads misrepresent the app
Broken app and false advertising — I subscribed to the GolfPass+ membership for the video library as well as the discounted tee times. After purchasing, the GolfPass app won’t recognize my membership on my phone or Roku, therefore not…
Paid Membership Not Worth the Premium — GolfNow charges a premium for its paid membership, but the benefits are so restrictive that they feel almost unusable. You sign up expecting meaningful value from the points, credits, and discounts…
DO NOT USE. BAIT AND SWITCH — what they don’t tell you is that you can only cancel one reservation. After that, if you cancel, you don’t get your money back you get credits, and you can’t use the credits unless you book on specific days…
Reports of unexpected charges
Horrible Refund Policy — Booked a hot deal tee time nearly a week out. Canceled the next day. Wouldn’t refund my account only gave me credits that expire in 6 months. Very predatory. Your better off just calling your local course than…
Don’t expect customer support — I booked a tee time and couldn’t make it, but the representative called the ProShop and since the pro shop wouldn’t refund the money, but I paid through the app. So I lost money on a round and I’m very angry.
Cannot get money back — I accidentally booked a wrong tee time but immediately cancelled. However, the system accepted the cancellation then told me no refund due to 24 hrs policy. Called in and basically told me no execuse . Only provide…
How the automated analysis works
This assessment is produced automatically. Three independent signals are read — user reviews, the store listing and the store privacy disclosure — and each candidate finding is filed under the sources that support it.
No charge stands on one kind of evidence — with one published exception. A finding is either a measured fact that anyone can reproduce (an ad SDK is in the package; every subscription bills weekly; the privacy label omits a tracker we can see), or it is an interpretation — and an interpretation needs independent sources to agree before it reaches the catch list. The exception is a harm only users can see: a charge may publish from reviews alone, as “Reported by N users”, once enough reviewers raise it to clear that charge’s own published bar. That agreement rule is what replaced the human reviewer, not a model’s confidence.
There is no overall score, on purpose. A 0–99 number was published here until 2026-09-15. It was withdrawn because it discriminated too weakly to be the instrument — 44.7% of every pair of apps tied — and because a single number is a verdict where a count is an observation. What publishes instead is a row of measurements, each of which says what was counted and, where we could not look, says that instead.
Findings under One source only are real reports we do not stand behind as findings. They are shown because withholding them entirely would hide a genuine complaint, and labelled because publishing them as charges would be an accusation off a single source.
Several measurements above say “Not assessed” because no artefact we hold can answer them. A human review is what resolves those — and it can remove a favourable band as easily as add one.
Hands-on inspections are not yet open.