Over the last few years, direct to consumer golf ball brands have become more popular than ever. Five years ago, we saw an influx in the marketplace, but most did not last long once IP issues started to surface. Fast forward to last year and once again a number of these products have come to market, promising performance without the price tag, but this got us wonder is that really the case? Can a company go direct to consumer at low prices and still have a product in place that meets or exceeds expectations? Maybe.
There is no shortage of brands for those that want to test the waters such as Cut, Aris, Snell, Vice, Wyre, OnCore, Bixtar, Zen and many others. Each promising to deliver performance without a high price tag. For those that believe all golf balls are created equal, and that only the number of layers and the cover material matter, this is great news for you. You can pick up any number of products for a fraction of the cost of others and jump right in. You probably won’t even have to mark your ball in your regular game, because being different has its perks.
Each time one of these companies launches and the conversation on the THP Forum begins, quality and performance are equally discussed along with price and sacrifice. Is there a research and development team/person in place? Is testing of the product done? Are there quality control checks? If yes, you might have found yourself something awesome for less money. If there isn’t, or the information is not available, testing and research from other golfers might help give you the information you are looking for.
One of the interesting elements when searching for all products (golf or otherwise) revolves around sourcing. When products are made overseas, one of the elements in question is a factory that has some awareness and expertise in manufacturing (hopefully). None of the direct to consumer golf ball companies own their own manufacturing plants, so with that said, where are the golf balls coming from? This is the differentiator in products and the main source of question that core golfers have for a lot of the smaller brands.
If you buy a Chrome Soft, you know it is being made by Callaway at their plant in Massachusetts. If you buy a Pro V1, you know the same is true. If you buy Tiger Woods’ latest golf ball, you know Bridgestone is manufacturing it at their plant in Georgia. What does that mean for the direct to consumer golf balls? Are they all made at the same plant and as they come down the conveyor belt, a different logo is stamped on there? No…With an asterisk.
There is golf equipment that is considered “open” and is made at a factory where someone can look through the specifications, find a product that fits what they are looking for, and order along with having their logo stamped on the side of it. Then an order for packaging later, a quick website setup and you are now a golf ball company. This exists. In fact it might be more common than you imagine. Does that make the product inferior?
The question then begs, what is a golfer to do if they want to buy direct to consumer? While we won’t go into every brand, we can say that Snell Golf is a direct to consumer company that is not buying open, catalogued golf balls and stamping MTB on the side of it. Dean Snell has a long pedigree in the world of golf, including being a part of the original Pro V1 design for Titleist and designing many golf balls at TaylorMade for nearly two decades. The products have engineering as well as thorough testing that takes place prior to release. You can read the reviews of both the MTB Red and MTB Black right here on The Hackers Paradise.
Are all of the others done the same way? Some are, some aren’t. To add a further wrinkle into the mix, does buying an “open” golf ball and stamping a logo on it make it a bad product? Online forums went crazy over the Kirkland Signature golf ball last year. Does anybody believe that Costco all of the sudden hired a golf team and started research and development on the products to sell at a deep discount? Yet they were loved mostly due to price and the idea that generally the Kirkland brand had been viewed as a less expensive alternative without a sacrifice in quality.
There is another item to consider. Buying from a direct to consumer company like Cut Golf will save you money vs the top tier golf balls. Their Cut Grey golf ball has been well received and comes in at $20 a dozen. Do they have a large team of engineers creating the products? No, they don’t, but they have a fairly deep lineup of offerings.
One question, if the golf ball company is marketing online and to the core golfer, through sites like this one and others like it, they have to expect a level of knowledge to exist from the user base, right? Taking a look at the newest birth, the Aris Golf Ball Company, their website offers little technical information or data. My personal take is if the target is the core golfer, that information is downright crucial to get someone to take the plunge. Combine that shared knowledge, with a great engagement presence through digital outlets and you could really tap into a nice core group of users.
Circling back a bit to the beginning of the article. Can a company go direct to consumer at low prices and still have a product in place that meets or exceeds expectations? After reading this, you tell us in the comments section below or join us in the THP Forum here, and jump into the conversation on this article.
The direct to consumer model is a great concept, but the quality is a huge unknown, and it’s something each brand has prove for themselves. At the lower price points it’s pretty easy to give a brand a shot just to see if their balls will fit what a golfer is looking for, which is the saving grace for a lot of these companies. The other issue they face is getting consumers to give their product a shot, without a presence in the retail space it can be difficult to get any kind of recognition, or traction in the market. I think that’s a big part of why the Kirkland ball is so popular, people can walk into a Costco and pick up a dozen very easily. Throw in a little bit of mystery about what ball it might be, and you’ve got a recipe for success evidently.
So yeah, it can work, but it’s not a guaranteed success.
I absolutely feel like this market is a great thing for the game. I’ve tried several of the brands listed in the article, and can see how they would appeal to a large number of players. I think for me the lack of visual variety between the standard white and yellow/orange, etc among the DTC companies limits the audience, and will prevent me from playing them long term. I much prefer colored options.
Direct to Consumer means less American workers lower price.
There are so many variables that make this game hard to deliver a consistent strike – course conditions, wind, weather, physical health on that day, etc. I think playing these off brands just introduce another variable. QC is the most important part to make sure you are hitting the same ball each time, to eliminate one of the variables.
Great article, my thoughts are kinda mixed on this. I love the idea of saving money but at the same time I don’t want to have to wait to get what I’m buying. Sure Amazon has changed my perception of having to have it now but not for everything. Since I have never settled on one brand or model in my obsession for this game I have become very impulsive when buying balls. Case in point, I went to Dick’s Sporting Goods 2 weeks ago to pick up some CS truviz and walked out with Taylormade TP5s. I did this because I have never tried them in the regular and decided to try them. That to me is why DTC balls don’t appeal to me I’m just to impulsive with my buying habits to be a loyal customer.
A really thought provoking article JB. I had not really considered the “open” golf ball manufacturing side of the D2C model, but it makes me extremely hesitant to try anything beyond the known entity in that space in Snell. I expect a company to be able to provide excellent technical information on the ball with things like compression, flight and spin characteristics, etc. When I went to the websites of a lot of the companies that you mentioned in the D2C space, that information was incredibly hard to find or entirely missing. What you might find is words like stable and controllable, the hot buzz words that really mean nothing for someone looking for something specific in a ball. Go to a OEM’s page or Snell’s and I find info-graphics with percentages and compression and flight/spin characteristics. Great article and should lead to some great discussion on the forum!
I believe there is a price that gets too low and causes extreme skepticism regarding quality to likely, and righfully, step into a consumer’s mind. If it is just a company selling golf balls for a bargain price with no real supporting or comparative data behind the ball, it will likely experience short term success due to consumer curiosity bur will likely fade off into the sunset within two years.
Glad you enjoyed it and there is a growing conversation on the THP forum as well.
There is a fine line to supporting a small up-and-coming company (like a Snell) and in trying to keep manufacturing jobs in the US. I really love the Snell balls, but don’t mind paying a little bit more to buy American, as it were. It’s a very tough call. We as golf consumers, though, need to vote with the wallet. I’m torn between supportng a company like Snell and in buying an American-made product. It’s time to buy another box o’ balls, so it’s time for me to vote, and I find myself extremely torn.
But what happens when one of the “biggies” feels these new companies are ‘borrowing’ design, tech or something else? Why, they sue and try and force them to shut down- as was the case with 3UP a few years ago. While 3UP was willing to fight, the costs involved in a small company like that was no match for Acushnet and their pool of sharks (I mean lawyers). Reluctantly, they shut down rather than lose all their money to legal fees. You can BET that the big guys are currently tracking and checking these smaller company offerings for ANY encroachment on patents, trademarks, etc… Unless there are payments being made to license the technology, which I doubt the smaller guys can afford because then that would price them nearly as high as the ‘premiums’.
I think the Made in the USA idea is a good one for those that support that notion. The secondary could be company being a US company. While I am sure companies like Snell would love to own a plant or be made here, the costs are staggering and there are not a lot of options to have US plants make golf balls at a higher level for outside offerings.
This is partially true Ray. However if we take a look at the current landscape of golf balls, there are a lot of companies producing them without infringing on intellectual property. So designs can exist or be created to stand outside of infringement.
I believe companies like Snell have shown this over the last few years.
True, I remember reading about the Snell model around the time the 3UP went down. They were meticulous in making sure they didn’t infringe. But- The others might not be quite so meticulous and may one day find themselves up against the big boys. Personally, my game isn’t at a point where I NEED to play a particular ball and can generally find a ball I like from different manufacturers and will buy accordingly. I’ve considered a couple of these DTC balls but just haven’t gotten around to it, since I will impulse buy when I’m at a store, so I can’t judge their quality. Other than the 3UP’s that worked great for me, I can’t vouch for the others.
I Like the IDEA of DTC but it’s hard for me to take the plunge on a product that I can’t “put in hand” before ordering. Even at a big box store I can open a sleeve and get a feel for the ball. In fact, I have been on the fence about ordering Snell or Vice golf balls for a while despite positive reviews by forum peers. I found a Vice Pro on the golf curse a few weeks ago and gamed the ball for 8 holes (until I lost it) and was really impressed with the ball and it’s play characteristics. Without looking at a logo, I knew that I was playing a high quality ball. I was no longer on the fence. I’ll be ordering a dozen to throw into my rotation. Snell is a ball that I don’t think I can ignore any longer, either. Too much positive feedback to NOT at least give a trial pack a run. The risk with this type of marketing is typically MY situation. It takes a lot of golfers willing to take a risk and spend a portion of their budget on an unknown. From there, enough positive feedback has to reach the marketplace to convince others to give it a try, themselves (I don’t think my situation is unique in that regard). It’s a tough way to make a niche in the market but if a company is offering a quality product, the golfers will come. Especially the “internet golfers”. This core group of consumers is the DTC company’s bread and butter. Online marketing is all well and good but until the consumers start coming out running the flag up the hill for these companies they are merely internet “noise”. The “internet golfer” is the engine for these types of companies, IMO. They may not be born on golf forums or social media outlets but they are dead in the water without them, IMHO. I don’t know Dean Snell but I thought it was brilliant marketing to engage with THP and do an interview with the site to explain his ball, why it’s second to none in quality, and why he can offer it to you (the consumer) at a competitive price. Without that type of insight I think many would see the price of his ball (without any context) and assume that the lower price equates to an inferior product. Inadvertently, I’m sure, he shone the spotlight on ball companies with a similar marketing strategy. No the problem, for the consumer, is sorting through all of these options and decide whether or not their product is worth the gamble. Some may be ordering from one company thinking that they will get Snell level quality and that company fails to deliver. The risk is not much different than a brick and mortar purchase other than the fact that your feedback outlet is nameless and faceless. Even in the age of the internet, some people aren’t as comfortable with that dynamic. Great story Josh. I appreciated the effort.
Hello Hackers Paradise. I have been working in these fields for some time and believe me, any small company you will be infringing more than a few patents when working on a urethane ball. There is a reason why major brands can sell their balls at premium prices. I wonder if any of these brands even have an IP professionalized lawyer (at least one)working in their office? I also wonder if they actually understand designing a urethane golf ball. Not the “beginner’s” tech like trajectory from dimples, softness but real in-depth knowledge of why this golf ball can be softer and why that golf ball has more spin around the green.
If you have any questions, I’d be glad to give more knowledge of what I’ve learned and what I know about the golf ball industry.
QC is a very critical part to a good golf experience.
https://youtu.be/aeibKavgytc
A few thousandths of an inch off and you get massively different ball flight.
I don’t play ProV1 all of the time because of price but there is a huge difference between them and lower quality balls. For anyone that is playing in a Saturday morning cash game or tournaments I would never suggest using a lower quality ball.
Peter Finch did a review (you can catch it on You Tube) of Oncore’s Elixir ball versus ProV and it really tested toe to toe. I just ordered some to try them.
Not to disparage the author, but not a lot new information here. I think previous testing has proved that while there are certainly manufacturing & quality/design differences a lot of the DTC or “open balls” perform similarly. The challenge I see is that many of these DTC companies started out like PXG by avoiding sponsorships and limiting expenses. Now, like PXG, they are taking on more sponsorships, players, etc. All of those additional expense make their original model, i.e., low cost/DTC, more difficult to sustain and eventually their prices will rise to meet their competitors.
Except PXG didn’t avoid sponsorships, they flocked to them and quickly. The DTC companies have yet to do that across the board. Including, but not limited to, the brands in the article, I don’t think a single one of them has taken on players.
Just going to throw this out there…I’m a golf ball elitist. By that I mean I tend to favor a ball and stick with it. I’m a 9 handicap, and the thing I see so many folks on the course do to build inconsistency into their game is just play any ol’ shag ball they’ve found on the course! Seriously?!? I see them start off with a top flight, lose it, pull a Bridgestone out and play it, eventually lose it, find a Titleist NXT and start playing it….and then wonder why they hit a 7 iron 160 yards on one hole, and then only 135 yards with the same club on the next hole. This article explains it all very well. Now on to some awesome news about golf balls. That news?!? “Direct to consumer balls”! I used to be a Pro V1X diehard. Could never get that “8 foot of backspin” on the wedge shot into the green like the pros get, but it would stop on a dime. But at $47 a box, made for an expense that hurt, even though I can usually make 1 ball last about 26-27 holes before lost/damaged. $47 a box means I’m paying for that pro golfer’s salary, and the store’s markup because of their own profit margins, etc. Golf Digest turned me into direct to consumer balls with “Vice Golf” getting a Gold Rating on the hot list. I now play the Vice Pro Plus, and have actually put a 1-4 foot backspin on several green shots! The more boxes you order, the better the discount. I buy 5 dozen for only $25 a box! Same distance as the Pro V1X, better greenside control and $22 per box cheaper! No brainer here. Whether it’s a Cut, Snell, or Vice, I’ll never buy a premium ball again.
Just a note about Vice balls. Amazon doesn’t give a multi-box discount, so you’ll only get them for $35 a box. You if go to Vice Golf, you can buy any number of boxes you want. The more boxes you buy, the better the discount. 1 box = around $37. Each additional box you buy lowers the cost of each box. The best value is to buy in multiples of 5. At that price, it’s roughly $25 per box. On a side note, Vice ships from Germany and there is around a $7 “international” fee or something like that. I bought 5 boxes of the Pro Plus totaling $132. Still, much cheaper than Pro V1/X. The actual ball websites have ball recommendations per your game and give discounts per amount you purchase.