Golf Illustrated OUTED

[SunsetBeachGolf]

seems a bit shady to me. Keeping the club to GIVE away is good customer focussed marketing. SELLING the clubs is a bit low to me....presumably though it would just be one club, not a continuous giving of clubs to sell indefinately.

also, whilst i respect bstoners views tremendously, i cannot agree with what he said. To me it is clear as night and day that money paid to some mags (perhaps ones that do "hot lists"), does result in better points. This may not be the fault of the golf company, but it does seem to happen. I know that golf is often about feel, but imo titleist has not produced a product worthy of going near other than to test since i started playing (1.5 years) apart from the Pro V1...and even that has better competitors. Yet Acushnet products score extremely highly. Like i say, i accept some people will think titleist is awesome....but when zero (yes zero) out of the 10 or so golfers i play with regularly rate titleist - most are 5 to 15 handicappers.....percentages say something is up with some magazines ratings.

Again, that is not the companies fault though i guess.
(went on a little rant there!! sorry bout that)

OK I am not a Titleist apologist by any stretch of the imagination but I think you are way off here. While I agree none of their Drivers, Fairway Woods, Hybrids have piqued the interest of that of the people I play a lot they do make some very good equipment. My friends and I are even in their "wheelhouse" so to speak of catering towards the better players, but their drivers etc have not been anything worth looking at. However, the AP1 and AP2 irons are some of the best irons around. I just received a set of AP2's and while I have only hit them once they are far and away some of the best hitting/feeling/looking players cavity forgiving blade category irons I have put my hands on. With the access I have to equipment that is saying a lot.

You also have to remember that Acushnet uses the Cobra brand to reach more of the game improvement type of players where as Nike, TM, Callaway and others do it all under one brand.

I am not a fan of the Titleist Cameron putters "Big Surprise there" nor am I of the vokey wedges, "yet again another big surprise" LOL

 

[paulthewitt]

Keep in mind Paul, that there is a category in their hot lists called "Demand" and if a company gets 5 stars in that, then it moves them up. It is not necessarily about paying for gold.

Yeah i get that bit, however, what they have said about the AP1 irons illustrates my point. Firstly because they came out in 2008 and were available to buy....even in england during May of 2008. Yet they are down in the 2009 products!!

also:

Innovation: 4.5/5
- EH?? no innovation at all over what was around 12 months previous. A 3/5 i could maybe accept....maybe.....but 4.5 is saying it is close to groundbreaking.

I will not comment on "Performance or Look/Sound/Feel", as these are very subjective. Very individual. So me saying they suck would not serve any more purpose than somebody else saying they are great. But i believe that the point made about even just the "innovation" discredits the whole process.

Yes there may be demand.....but that does not make it a "gold" performer, the actual product should do that. I simply do not believe that this...or some other products (not just titleist) are even nearly as good as the hot list makes out. My point is: being "in demand" does not make it a good product.



Not wanting to upset anybody...but you may be able to tell i feel quite strongly about this. Being newish to golf i put trust in the hot list and made some bad purchases (not titleist btw). I feel like i was lied to and a couple of hundred £££ short because of it.

 

[JB]

Paul,
That right there is one of the very reasons we started THP. To get past the marketing.

 

[paulthewitt]

OK I am not a Titleist apologist by any stretch of the imagination but I think you are way off here. While I agree none of their Drivers, Fairway Woods, Hybrids have piqued the interest of that of the people I play a lot they do make some very good equipment. My friends and I are even in their "wheelhouse" so to speak of catering towards the better players, but their drivers etc have not been anything worth looking at. However, the AP1 and AP2 irons are some of the best irons around. I just received a set of AP2's and while I have only hit them once they are far and away some of the best hitting/feeling/looking players cavity forgiving blade category irons I have put my hands on. With the access I have to equipment that is saying a lot.

You also have to remember that Acushnet uses the Cobra brand to reach more of the game improvement type of players where as Nike, TM, Callaway and others do it all under one brand.

I am not a fan of the Titleist Cameron putters "Big Surprise there" nor am I of the vokey wedges, "yet again another big surprise" LOL

ironic i chose the AP1 irons before you even posted!!

I have hit some of their blades and they felt lovely....The AP2's werent bad either. I just felt the AP1's have no market. The AP2's cover the forgiving players club the AP1 is somewhere in the dead ground between forgiving and players irons imo. That is my issue withthem on the list tho....it is that 2008 irons ae on there and descirbed as "innovative" (i will stop here!! lol)

 

[paulthewitt]

Paul,
That right there is one of the very reasons we started THP. To get past the marketing.

And to be completely honest i am thankful for it. I found the nickent hybrid by myself. But by then knew (in my mind) i couldnt trust big magazines to be honest with me.

i now have a driver, hybrids, fairway woods all thart i am happy with because of honest reviewing which also pointed out a club's flaws. So thanks...dunno how often people say that to you directly ... but you have saved me probably £3-400 by being honest.


**sorry to double post

 

[SunsetBeachGolf]

We all complain when TM releases new irons/woods whatever every 3-4 months as it kills resale value. Ping is similar to what Titleist is doing, they have a proven design and it is for sale for awhile. I am not a Titleist apologist as their woods/hybrids I believe are crap, but the AP1 and AP2 irons are very solid and the AP1's are bigger and mush more forgiving than the AP2's.

I guess we are on different sides here and are not going to see eye to eye, but I think doing the TM and releasing new clubs every 6 months or whatever their cycle is, is horrible and bad for the game. Whether or not the AP2's are 3 months old or two years they are innovative as no one else is doing the same type of technology and it works. I still think they deserve their recognition, I have chosen them over just about everything else out there.

However I still believe that many companies "Pay to Play" and whilst Titleist may be one of them, it was not need on the AP1 or AP2 irons in my opinion and that of quite a few others that I have run into.

 

[Craig Mac]

i now have a driver, hybrids, fairway woods all thart i am happy with because of honest reviewing which also pointed out a club's flaws. So thanks...dunno how often people say that to you directly ... but you have saved me probably £3-400 by being honest.

I think that is the important part, researching and testing on your own. Most of the publications list are nothing more than a guide to use IMO. Even with the shoot outs here at THP, they are more for the average golfer and are based on real world testing and not buzz and demand. But in the end the consumer must look past the hype and find for themselves what is best for them as everyone plays the game differently.

 

[paulthewitt]

We all complain when TM releases new irons/woods whatever every 3-4 months as it kills resale value. Ping is similar to what Titleist is doing, they have a proven design and it is for sale for awhile. I am not a Titleist apologist as their woods/hybrids I believe are crap, but the AP1 and AP2 irons are very solid and the AP1's are bigger and mush more forgiving than the AP2's.

I guess we are on different sides here and are not going to see eye to eye, but I think doing the TM and releasing new clubs every 6 months or whatever their cycle is, is horrible and bad for the game. Whether or not the AP2's are 3 months old or two years, I still think they deserve their recognition, I have chosen them over just about everything else out there.

Hehe, i guess we are. It is a good job really. If everybody liked the same stuff there would be no uniqueness in bags, no development by companies and only 1 or 2 compaies would survive. Diversity is a good thing.

As for your point about TM releasing stuff....i have the tour burner irons and it is SO annoying to see a new product released 3-6 months after buying £400 irons. I just have to keep telling myself "they were the best fit for me...you dont need new ones"!!!!

 

[SunsetBeachGolf]

I think that is the important part, researching and testing on your own. Most of the publications list are nothing more than a guide to use IMO. Even with the shoot outs here at THP, they are more for the average golfer and are based on real world testing and not buzz and demand. But in the end the consumer must look past the hype and find for themselves what is best for them as everyone plays the game differently.

Exactly, I believe one of the complaints about the Yaupon was it was too small and not a true mallet. I am paraphrasing there so don't sue me, but yes it is, I am not making Sabretooth's, Two Balls and the like. The Yaupon is about the same as the fastback from Scotty.

However this can be found out from talking to me as I have sent pics to numerous people with a ruler showing all dimensions of the putter, but this was a negative in his/her mind. But everyone is different.

 

[JB]

We all complain when TM releases new irons/woods whatever every 3-4 months as it kills resale value. Ping is similar to what Titleist is doing, they have a proven design and it is for sale for awhile. I am not a Titleist apologist as their woods/hybrids I believe are crap, but the AP1 and AP2 irons are very solid and the AP1's are bigger and mush more forgiving than the AP2's.

I guess we are on different sides here and are not going to see eye to eye, but I think doing the TM and releasing new clubs every 6 months or whatever their cycle is, is horrible and bad for the game. Whether or not the AP2's are 3 months old or two years they are innovative as no one else is doing the same type of technology and it works. I still think they deserve their recognition, I have chosen them over just about everything else out there.

However I still believe that many companies "Pay to Play" and whilst Titleist may be one of them, it was not need on the AP1 or AP2 irons in my opinion and that of quite a few others that I have run into.

There is really no difference in what Titleist does to what Taylormade does, except that Titleist releases 3 drivers at once and TM does it over 6 months. Lets not forget that Cobra releases the L5V and then the S9 months later, so they do the same thing.

I think that their irons this time around were quite good. No where near the best out there based on our tests, but quite good. However with that being said, you cannot call them a 2009 product when they are not one. Nobody is doing the same thing as Ping Eye 2's so that could be called innovative for 2009 and the same could be said for the Nickent Arc Blades which are TRULY innovative yet did not get on the list.

I think Acushnet makes great products. Some of the best in the world, but because of who they are they get away with things that most companies would not due to fear of losing ad dollars. Because lets face facts, NOBODY and I mean NOBODY spends the marketing money they do on ads, players, marketing, or anything else.

Lets see if we can get this one back on topic though and not turn this over to which company we like the least.

 

[SunsetBeachGolf]

JB,
I will not retort because like you said this needs to get back on topic. We always have some good discussions, LOL.

As far as everything else...for Bridgestone, Titleist, Callaway, Ping, TM if I were them I would balk at this idea. However if I am scratch, ssb, adams, nickent, and many other small medium sized companies that do not have the recognition it might be very worth doing. I had two people this past weekend ask me who Adams and Nickent were. That is not going to happen with those big guys. To get into most peoples minds unfortunately you have to have play on tour as the online "forum" golfer only accounts for maybe 10% of the US golfing public(that is probably a high estimate.

 

[dynarider]

the online "forum" golfer only accounts for maybe 10% of the US golfing public(that is probably a high estimate.

I would say that's extremely high & would bet it's closer to less than 1%.

 

[JB]

From what we hear from manufactureres it is somewhere around 1% for active forum members and 3-4% for browsers looking for info.

However golf shoppers read reviews and gather information more now than they ever have.

 

[MO_Hacker]

I would say that's extremely high & would bet it's closer to less than 1%.

I agree, none of my golf buddies frequent forums. I've tried to get them to register on here but nada.:bad:

I know a couple of them are lurkers, but they haven't signed up yet.

 

[dynarider]

I agree, none of my golf buddies frequent forums. I've tried to get them to register on here but nada.:bad:

I know a couple of them are lurkers, but they haven't signed up yet.

None of the guys from work who are golfers go anywhere near a golf forum.

 

[Pinged]

Pinged,
I agree to an extent, yet those other publications you speak of swear by the integrity of their testing and do not then go and re-sell the products. Whether they are being honest about the pay for the grade or not.

As for your thoughts SSB, I agree with you on the smaller companies, but this was geared towards large manufacturers.

I wasn't really referring to the "testing" or "review" sections, but rather the "what's hot" or "what's new" sections of the magazines. They present these sections as if they're the "latest and greatest" when in reality they're simply the companies that paid to have their items featured in these special sections of the publications.