- Thread starter
- #51
Here’s a normal ball cut in half by the same manufacturer
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
How much concern should this cause..?
- Thread starter
- #52
Not sure thats a fair comparison as no one in here is talking about this being bigger than a golf ball QC issue potentially.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- Thread starter
- #53
No. It’s nothing like cable news. They will just lie to create a story. This is a real golf ball that’s cut in half
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It is not what a manufacturer or consumer wants to see but that does not necessarily make it "very problematic". That's where information like number of balls inspected, number of manufacturers they ran the test against, the actual effect of having an off center core matters. Of course you don't get that type of thing from this particular source - the alleged source that is scientific in its analysis - maybe because they can't let any opportunity pass to attack a particular manufacturer. And that's the real shame of this ... every so often they might get something right but it is hard to know because they have lost credibility by having an axe to grind.
- Thread starter
- #55
I’m interested to see if any other ball manufacturers care to comment or take a stance. Probably a slippery slope
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
mikedean441
6X HOF
Bridgestone claims this isn't a "one off" issue with Callaway balls.
CobraX51
F-ck Yeah Baby!
Seems like the Golf Ball Marketing Manager for Bridgestone wasted no time in taking a swipe with this one photo.
To be clear on my end, I’m not saying this is an emergency for Callaway. Not am I saying that every ball company doesn’t have their own QC issues. I think everyone has some sort of brand bias and this wouldn’t change anyone’s mind in that. But it does open your eyesto if there was NO logo on that ball.....would anyone’s viewpoint or opinion vary. What if it were a Kirkland ball? Or a CUT brand.....or any brand honestly. It’s still eye opening nonetheless
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
to if there was NO logo on that ball.....would anyone’s viewpoint or opinion vary. What if it were a Kirkland ball? Or a CUT brand.....or any brand honestly. It’s still eye opening nonetheless Name on the ball does matter. So does price. I'm sure Callaway would say they expect every ball to be perfect, which is a fair expectation for consumers who are paying top dollar for a product. I certainly have a brand bias. Callaway earned it with me. But I'm also able to still be objective. And I can objectively say that Callaway has some of the smartest people in the world using some of the most advanced equipment in the world, so I trust them. Obviously this ball didn't meet their standards. One ball out of a gazillion isn't going to change my view of the brand, which is exactly the inference the Tweet invites readers to make. That's a cheap shot, IMO
Last edited:
Mmmmmmm.... I think there's a few inferences in this thread to the contrary.
- Thread starter
- #60
I’d also say regardless of brand there are a ton of brand defenders. Here and everywhere else. If there wasn’t a logo in the ball.......would the response be different? I think it would be. Titleist, Bridgestone, Callaway, srixon, etc etc etc
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
But still presented with minimal context, no research, no actual comparison, and passed off as objective. A one-off passed off as systemic.
- Thread starter
- #62
Is that sourced or just conjecture in general lol. This comment is almost as bad as MGS hypothesis and tweet
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2017
- Messages
- 24,298
- Reaction score
- 25,834
- Handicap
- 17.2
I've played 100's of Chrome Softs and never had a problem. Unless he is willing to go buy a dozen balls in 3 or 4 states from 20-30 different stores and get a real sample to see if there is a problem than this is BS self promotion IMO.
- Thread starter
- #64
So if they produced 100 more it would then only be an issue?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- Thread starter
- #65
No there hasn’t. It’s all been conversation regarding what consumers are buying and been told. Not how it potentially affects their lives. Cmon man
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
My response would be different from Titleist and Bridgestone because I haven't been to their facility, seen their equipment, seen the manufacturing processes, testing processes and met their people.
My response would be different for Srixon because I've been to their HQ and met their people (well, at least the people who were then employed by the company), but not seen their ball manufacturing stuff.
One of the great things about THP is it affords some of us the opportunity to learn and see more. And yes, that matters. But just in case anyone (not saying this is you) thinks I'm a mindless fan...that ball shown in the picture is unacceptable. If I am paying top dollar for a product I expect it to be right every time. That didn't happen here.
I'm always nervous to pick a watermelon at the store, because I don't know what's inside. Don't tell me I have to worry about my golf balls now too...
- Staff
- #68
Have you noticed the Twitter mentions have many tweets of people cutting open Chrome Softs without defect?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- Thread starter
- #69
Great response and I appreciate it!
I’m an equal opportunity buyer and learner. The whoooolle point of me bringing this here is because I am genuinely interested in people’s reaction to seeing that ball cut in half and the perception it has on the buying public. Absolutely in no way whatsoever was it ever intended for me to Grind the Ax further against Callaway. Maybe that was MGS goal. Maybe it wasn’t and I don’t really care. Nor does it change the fact that it’s there and apparently the overwhelming consensus is that no one cares. Which is a bit surprising in one way and not surprising in another.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Well, I buy it. No wonder my drives always go wonky.
mikedean441
6X HOF
Does the bridgestone ball marketing manager count as sourced?
Edit with the link now
https://twitter.com/MellowGolf/status/1151151931190128641?s=19
I would be concerned. There is equipment to test for this and it isn't a situation where it's off by a little. I would think that would have significant flight differences. If this was a low cost ball that would be one thing but this is a ball trying to compete to be the best ball on the shelf and it comes at a premium price. I would hope that Callaway looks into it, performs a root cause analysis, then adjusts their process to prevent this in the future.
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
If Callaway sold, say, 50,000,000 golf balls in a year, and they had a .0001 failure rate, there would still be 5,000 imperfect Callaway golf balls floating around out there. Now you and I would hate to end up with one of those 5,000 imperfect balls, because that's potentially $4 we're pumping into the woods despite being well-struck. But the head of any quality control department would love to have a success rate of 99.999% played out over 50,000,000 products.
