Acushnet Loses Advertising Claim Challenge To Bridgestone

bridgestone is a bigger company overall than acushnet

and acushnet is not even close to losing money, they were just sold for 1.2B and profited a pretty penny i believe in 2010

You may want to continue reading. He clarified his post as golf and they are losing money in terms of marketshare. Their marketshare has gone down the last two years. Losing money as a company? No. However compared to the previous year? yes.
 
But how many of those are putts?
And since virtually no impact is put on the ball with a putter stroke, that would be irrelevant for fitting for the most part outside of audible tone.
Even those that hit very few greens in regulations will hit 3-4 a round. So if you factor that in there, then you would hit just as many tee shots as any "around the green" shots.
But if I miss my ideal target from the tee by 5 yards I have to change club selection; if I can't control my pitches and chips there are shots lost because of 15 foot putts instead of 5 foot putts.
 
One thing I want to add that has been said dozens of times here. Nobody is saying both companies dont make great equipment. Heck, they both make outstanding equipment. This is not about their gear. This is about people's thoughts on the case that was listed. You can substitute Apple Computers and Google in there and the same thoughts would be there. Its not an Acushnet vs Bridgestone thing. Its what transpired that some have issues with.
 
But if I miss my ideal target from the tee by 5 yards I have to change club selection; if I can't control my pitches and chips there are shots lost because of 15 foot putts instead of 5 foot putts.

Again though, pretty much every "tour" ball spins the same around the green. With that being constant, I'll take the extra 5-10 yards off the tee.
 
But if I miss my ideal target from the tee by 5 yards I have to change club selection; if I can't control my pitches and chips there are shots lost because of 15 foot putts instead of 5 foot putts.

Again, you are assuming that you need the spinniest ball to do so. According to Golf Digest, the ProV1 was not the spinniest ball. And for that matter, every single premium golf ball had similar spin above 6000 RPMs.
 
So if that is the case and most tests show that most tour/premium balls offer similar spin on approach shots, wouldnt someone want to be fit where there would be a difference, in compression with the most violent swing.

imo, similar spin around the greens is still a difference i want to focus on. they still factor in long shots(titleist) and i didn't like how BS makes you hit it into a net and look at a computer instead of playing all your shots and seeing how the ball reacts to your total game over an extended period of time, not 15 minutes in a cage
 
imo, similar spin around the greens is still a difference i want to focus on. they still factor in long shots(titleist) and i didn't like how BS makes you hit it into a net and look at a computer instead of playing all your shots and seeing how the ball reacts to your total game over an extended period of time, not 15 minutes in a cage

I think you should read the article again. They are the ONLY ball fitting. Titleist does not have ANY ball fitting. They simply ask questions and hand you golf balls to try out on your own. There is NO science behind that at all. Every company does the exact same thing on their website. You are again believing this is about which is a better product. Its not! One company disputed the facts of a company's ball fitting. They were told they were wrong. Then they were told that what they offer is not exactly ball fitting.
 
Again, you are assuming that you need the spinniest ball to do so. According to Golf Digest, the ProV1 was not the spinniest ball. And for that matter, every single premium golf ball had similar spin above 6000 RPMs.

No, the point is that I select my ball based on performance around the green rather than performance off the tee. I don't want to give up yardage but if the choice is yardage (ball fitted by tee shot) or control around the green (based on spin control) I'll opt for the control. (this from a guy who struggles to drive over 220 yards)
 
I think you should read the article again. They are the ONLY ball fitting. Titleist does not have ANY ball fitting. They simply ask questions and hand you golf balls to try out on your own. There is NO science behind that at all. Every company does the exact same thing on their website. You are again believing this is about which is a better product. Its not! One company disputed the facts of a company's ball fitting. They were told they were wrong. Then they were told that what they offer is not exactly ball fitting.

what are the ball fitting vans that travel around the country every single year with staffers performing ball fittings at cc's and golf clubs. Your WRONG http://www.titleist.com/teamtitleist/b/tourblog/archive/2010/09/10/golf-ball-fitting.aspx (they use trackman if you don't believe me)

when have i mentioned any products? it has all been about the fitting process, imo you can get "fitted" in either way, i don't prefer BS's way
 
No, the point is that I select my ball based on performance around the green rather than performance off the tee. I don't want to give up yardage but if the choice is yardage (ball fitted by tee shot) or control around the green (based on spin control) I'll opt for the control. (this from a guy who struggles to drive over 220 yards)

And as I have said all along, while some may opt for that...NO OTHER company is offering ball fitting. The entire point of the article is that Acushnet went after Bridgestone's claim for being the #1 ball fitter. They were then told what they did was NOT even fitting. They can ask questions and take surveys all they want, that has little to do with fitting, all that is is perception.

I dont know why people are trying to make this about the equipment. Its not. Its about another case of a ridiculous case that was looked at by the BBB and the judgement was awarded to Bridgestone as the ONLY ball fitter.
 
what are the ball fitting vans that travel around the country every single year with staffers performing ball fittings at cc's and golf clubs. Your WRONG http://www.titleist.com/teamtitleist/b/tourblog/archive/2010/09/10/golf-ball-fitting.aspx (they use trackman if you don't believe me)

when have i mentioned any products? it has all been about the fitting process, imo you can get "fitted" in either way, i don't prefer BS's way

Please read the article in the first post from the Better Business Bureau. Its THEIR assesment that only ONE company is actually offering a TRUE fitting! THe other is merely a survey! Not my judgement or your judgement. The one by the Better Business Bureau!
 
From the 1st post.


NAD noted that the challenger does not, in fact, “fit” the consumer to the ball for his or her short game. Rather, the challenger leaves it to consumers to self-evaluate their performances on the course after taking a comprehensive survey rather than providing an in-person professional fitter on the green, or having any technical measurements taken of his or her performance with competing golf balls.
 
Oh boy this thread turned into a high school drama festival.

It's pretty simple, one company said they were best, another company said no, we are. The BBB stepped in, looked at the facts and ruled in favor of Bstone. End of story, thanks for playing please tip your bartenders and waitresses.

How that managed to devolve into babbling about equipment bias is beyond me.

--
tapatalk
 
Oh boy this thread turned into a high school drama festival.

It's pretty simple, one company said they were best, another company said no, we are. The BBB stepped in, looked at the facts and ruled in favor of Bstone. End of story, thanks for playing please tip your bartenders and waitresses.

How that managed to devolve into babbling about equipment bias is beyond me.

--
tapatalk

:drinks:
 
Back
Top