The essential goal of the project was to create and develop cooperation between golf actors in Russia and Kainuu by creating a golf tourism product and by constructing a golf course. In order to be successful, this was to require active cooperation with programme service companies, travel agents, and accommodation providers. Th erefore, a goal of the project was to create permanent and functional customer relationships with the best travel agents for the theme in Russia. In addition, permanent products, and cooperation relationships associated with the products were to be created between the various golf courses in Kainuu and various service-providers. In addition, the intent of the project was to train personnel at the local golf courses and the associated tourism companies to respond to the needs of Russian travellers. A problem was encountered at the very beginning of the project when the companies pulled out of the project despite the provided business commitments. Th e competitive bidding process for the external specialist services was completed, but the selected (the most cost-effi cient) service provider was not approved by the companies. Th e justifi cation for pulling out was that the selected actor could not complete the assignment at the quoted price, maintain quality and adhere to the agreed work schedule. However, the administrator had considered the qualitative and price factors in the competitive bidding process. During the negotiations between the Euregio Karelia Neighbourhood programme, the companies, and the projects administrator, an outcome was brought about by which the administrator decided to withdraw his participation from the implementation of the entire project. Th e justifi cation was that the administrator could not act in confl ict with the Finnish Competition Act by selecting a diff erent course of action from the one previously described. Th e project was aborted on Oct 6, 2006 (managing authoritys decision to abort on Nov 13, 2006). One payment was made for the project, which included some administrative costs already incurred by the administrator. Despite the project being aborted, golf tourism was seen as a worthy enterprise and it has been taken forward using alternative funding. Achievements: The essential goal of the project was to create and develop cooperation between golf actors in Russia and Kainuu by creating a golf tourism product and by constructing a golf course. In order to be successful, this was to require active cooperation with programme service companies, travel agents, and accommodation providers. Th erefore, a goal of the project was to create permanent and functional customer relationships with the best travel agents for the theme in Russia. In addition, permanent products, and cooperation relationships associated with the products were to be created between the various golf courses in Kainuu and various service-providers. In addition, the intent of the project was to train personnel at the local golf courses and the associated tourism companies to respond to the needs of Russian travellers. A problem was encountered at the very beginning of the project when the companies pulled out of the project despite the provided business commitments. Th e competitive bidding process for the external specialist services was completed, but the selected (the most cost-effi cient) service provider was not approved by the companies. Th e justifi cation for pulling out was that the selected actor could not complete the assignment at the quoted price, maintain quality and adhere to the agreed work schedule. However, the administrator had considered the qualitative and price factors in the competitive bidding process. During the negotiations between the Euregio Karelia Neighbourhood programme, the companies, and the projects administrator, an outcome was brought about by which the administrator decided to withdraw his participation from the implementation of the entire project. Th e justifi cation was that the administrator could not act in confl ict with the Finnish Competition Act by selecting a diff erent course of action from the one previously described. Th e project was aborted on Oct 6, 2006 (managing authoritys decision to abort on Nov 13, 2006). One payment was made for the project, which included some administrative costs already incurred by the administrator. Despite the project being aborted, golf tourism was seen as a worthy enterprise and it has been taken forward using alternative funding.