Fix Wilson Staff

[Agent Jay]

I dont think Nike has any more R&D than Wilson does FWIW.

I guess I just disagree with you. I dont think the Wilson Brand being sold elsewhere is the main cause of their issues. I believe it is solely marketing and how little dollars they have to spend.

The perfect example of that is apparel. Nobody stops buying Nike and adidas and Puma because they can get it at TJ Maxx or JC Penny. Why? Because they are different lines or older lines.

Educated consumers will be educated consumers regardless of where the products are. Most golfers do not look at equipment at these stores, hence they would not even notice that they are there or arent there.

Golf has become more than ever a game of social credit. You want to play what is cool, what the pros play, what looks pretty, etc. Nobody wants to play the clubs that never get looked at, are never in commercials, etc.

Due to the perception of what's a "good" equipment company to buy from? Ok...I'll stop with the perception issue. BUT it IS an issue, and no one can say it isn't. If it wasn't, and it was solely about there clubs, then I don't feel this thread would be here. Wilson golf and Wilson Staff clubs need to catch up with the times, and they haven't. That's what JB is asking, and a smarter man than me would need to figure out why. Is it the tech in the clubs? Is it the fact that most of us remember Wilson Golf clubs and go straight to remembering there Dad's old clubs in the basement? I know I do!

My Dad had this exact bag with the old Wilson blades in them and persimmon woods. Am I the only one that thinks about this picture when I hear the name Wilson and golf in the same sentence?

I'm sorry JB, I don't mean to ruffle feathers or anything. I actually don't feel that I disagree with you at all. Though I would imagine the R&D budget is much bigger at Nike Golf than Wilson Golf.

 

[sternalot]

I just read all 19 pages of this topic and I have to say I might be more confused now than I was after reading JB's initial post.

First, there are a lot of people that keep saying that they should drop the Wilson brand. I'm not sure if people want Wilson to drop the product or the branding. While I can see an argument to dropping the branding, I think it is a TERRIBLE idea to drop the product as a whole. I don't see this as a bad marketing idea, but I see it as an absolutely awful financial decision. My guess is that the Wilson brand equipment is high volume, low price/low margin product. W/S is the opposite, low volume and high price/high margin (relative to Wilson at least). I'm guessing that as an aggregate, Wilson brand equipment is actually more profitable than the W/S product. Again, maybe not at the margin, but in overall profit. Considering Wilson is a global sports brand, the aggregate profits are more important than just having a big margin number. I do see some credibility to combining all products under one umbrella. Why can't a brand sell starter equipment with pro-level equipment too? In addition, there are financial benefits to this by unifying the brand costs. Cost synergies are important to identify in this exercise as JB stated budget constraints.

Secondly, I think Wilson Golf as a whole should consider separating itself from Wilson sports. You see Nike operate new sport assets very similarly when they first enter markets. When Nike bought Bauer and start Nike Hockey, there was no link on either website to connect Nike to its hockey brand. When Nike started entering the lacrosse market, the same was true. By doing this, I think the sub-brand can subtly separate itself from the preconceived notions of the parent brand. In this case, you are separating Wilson Golf from the mediocrity of Wilson Sports. This shouldn't be a huge cost to the company, but a small one nonetheless.

One idea that has developed in this thread that has a lot of merit is the focus on certain product categories (ie- Hybrids and Irons). It doesn't mean you can't carry some of the others (Golf balls due to high replacement rate and financial benefits), but R&D and marketing should rely on developing a niche within certain product category. Again, this saves money and can help Wilson create a unique identity for itself within a mosaic of large companies that have largely defined themselves already.

Why am I so concerned about finding cost synergies and money? Because at the end of the day, the only way you change Wilson Staff is changing the story and the people that play the product. Like JB has said, there is a huge correlation between tour usage and market share. While this is a large assumption, that maybe JB can clear up, I would guess this has always been true. Therefore, I don't think you can change the drivers to market demand via some special marketing. The company needs to save money via brand merging and product simplification. Through those savings, the company needs incremental young pros to play and hopefully provide results. In turn, market share will follow via the high price, high margin Wilson Staff product. This would "fix" Wilson Staff.

 

[golfinFF]

Lots of interesting things going on in here today!

I for one think Wilson Staff needs to be more visible in store. I say this cause I have only ever seen one club the d100 in store for testing.

If Wilson can get their clubs into the hands of more people they will sell more. I believe this as I really like the Ci-11's I am currently gaming they are fun to hit and are forgiving yet workable.

I don't and never have seen WS as the Walmart brand for golf.

I also don't believe that they need to be marketing giants nor do they need to be the company that rolls out clubs every 9-12months.

I agree with JB that for many golf or the clubs that you play are social status symbols. By this I mean they want to have the newest, most hyped clubs on the market and don't look at other manufacturers.

 

[Brent]

I for one think Wilson Staff needs to be more visible in store. I say this cause I have only ever seen one club the d100 in store for testing.

That may be the best advice I have read in this entire thread. It seems like some stores do not carry Wilson Staff equipment. I have never seen any clubs on display at my local Golf Smith or Dick's. I have seen equipment at Golf Galaxy and Sports Authority. Does Wilson Staff have relationship-vendor issues?

On another note, many have been suggesting that Wilson Staff needs more marketing/tour players. I don't think it is in their business strategy to do so. It would not be smart to pump the kind of money Callaway, Nike, and Taylormade do into advertising. They have a niche market and provide a quality alternative to the big boys of the golf industry.

Fun Fact of the Day: Callaway has not turned a profit in 3 years! Where is the "Fix Callaway" thread?

 

[JB]

There have been many Fix Callaway Threads over the last 3 years.
THere is also multiple THP Radio shows about the new direction of Callaway.

 

[Xt1ncT-NZ]

As a long-time Wilson user this thread caught my eye.
However, the thread seems to perpetuate a faulty premise: how to "fix" Wilson.
Wilson doesn't need fixing. It's doing just fine, thank you very much.
This discussion is missing the big picture and lacks some context.
Wilson is a huge global sporting goods corporation and golf is only one slice of their international business.
Wilson sports equipment is used in the NFL, NCAA and MLB. The company makes sports equipment that is used in more than 100 countries. Wilson is omnipresent in baseball, football, tennis, squash and several other sports.
Wilson's main competitors are the big boys of worldwide sports -- Nike and Mizuno.
The company is much bigger (and much more profitable) than the golf-oriented companies (brands) such as Callaway, Acushnet, Cleveland/Srixon, Cobra, Ping, etc.
Can Wilson's golf division ever rival Taylormade/Addidas in the golf business? No. That's not the company's objective. Wilson can do very well with a modest, but important, share of the international golf business.
Wilson has successfully revived its legendary Staff brand in the last 20 years and continues to market its "value" sets in big-box retailers like Walmart. This is obviously a profitable strategy, otherwise Wilson wouldn't do it.
I play Wilson Staff. I don't care that they make cheap starter sets. Heck, not everyone can afford to drop $400 or $500 on a set of irons, especially the casual golfer who only plays twice a month in the summer.
So my conclusion is this:
Wilson Golf should continue to do exactly what it's doing -- making high-quality clubs under the Staff brand without spending multi-millions trying to raise its profile on tour. And it should continue to produce "entry level" equipment for the casual golfer.
By the way, my experience with Wilson Golf (U.S.) customer service has been very positive -- both on the phone and via email.
If I was lucky enough to be the CEO of Wilson I wouldn't make any dramatic changes. Wilson's on the right path and 25 years from now when 4 or 5 golf brands have folded or have been merged, Wilson will still be making quality clubs.

Great post.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

 

[Tedfroop]

They have an identity problem right now. People think of Wilson basketballs, footballs, tennis, and all that and don't see the serious golf company that is part of it.
They got lots of love here for the ci11's. Now they just need better advertising and marketing. Having their "brand ambassador" Padraig Harrington hitting an R11 driver in the European PGA commercial doesn't help the effort.

They make a good product, they justneed a progema to get more people trying and hitting them. Sadly the Hot List branded the D100's the best clubs you won't hit this year, and they may be right.

 

[Geoff.]

Interesting thread. I'll post my impression as a new player to the game.

Until this July I hadn't played golf in over 15 years. When I pulled my clubs out of storage I had a set of 1991 persimmon Ping woods and Wilson Gear Effect irons. Of course I need to upgrade so I went looking for iron reviews. I found some nice sites and they had what you folks who have stayed up golf equipment would expect. I went looking for a good Ping set since that is that last company I remember reading good things about way back when... I clicked through a few other companies in the list Taylormade, Callaway and Mizuno.

Here is the interesting part, even though I had played Wilsons in the past I did not click on them. My thought was, "I want good clubs." Being new I didn't know much about anything in the current state of golf. But in my mind Wilson was what you bought if you wanted a basic baseball glove, basket ball or tennis racket, so the same must be for golf clubs. They were stuck in my mind as an entry level club. That was me, just coming into the industry. Somehow I had already formed that opinion.

At the moment I am enamored with Taylormade, but I know that this opinion was formed basically by reading threads at this site. I have hit R9s but honestly I am not good enough to know if they were any good. I am too new to the game. Others post and thoughts have influenced my opinions. I know this but even knowing it my mind still has warm fuzzies towards Taylormade. What they do to support THP also reinforces that warm fuzzy feeling.

I am also a GM at a company and I spent this afternoon having a similar discussion with sales and marketing. How can we get people who don't know us to begin to feel warm and fuzzy so they will want to meet with the sales people and give us the opportunity to make a sale. So my question for Wilson would be how to make people fell this way towards them.

Can they do what Taylormade has done at THP and throw a few free sets out for reviews by normal players? (have they done this already) What other ways can they build a feeling that it is a brand worth checking out, at least giving them a chance? How can you change the perception of us new people who are joining the sport everyday?

 

[Barberakb]

I dont think Nike has any more R&D than Wilson does FWIW.

I guess I just disagree with you. I dont think the Wilson Brand being sold elsewhere is the main cause of their issues. I believe it is solely marketing and how little dollars they have to spend.

The perfect example of that is apparel. Nobody stops buying Nike and adidas and Puma because they can get it at TJ Maxx or JC Penny. Why? Because they are different lines or older lines.

Educated consumers will be educated consumers regardless of where the products are. Most golfers do not look at equipment at these stores, hence they would not even notice that they are there or arent there.

Golf has become more than ever a game of social credit. You want to play what is cool, what the pros play, what looks pretty, etc. Nobody wants to play the clubs that never get looked at, are never in commercials, etc.

Some of us honestly don't care about that. But I would agree that I am in the minority there.

 

[moosejaa]

Wilson Staff clubs need to catch up with the times, and they haven't.

Wilson Staff clubs can stack up with the best of them right now. The clubs are there, the exposure isn't. Wilson Sports is huge and probably has the money to devote to marketing but must choose not to for whatever reason. I was in Dick's and Golf Galaxy the other day and there was no Wilson Staff, not even golf balls. They've got to make the Wilson Staff line more available. I did see it prominently in the pro shop of a very nice course near me (Seneca Hickory Stick) recently.

 

[TrueFX]

Wilson Staff clubs can stack up with the best of them right now. The clubs are there, the exposure isn't. Wilson Sports is huge and probably has the money to devote to marketing but must choose not to for whatever reason. I was in Dick's and Golf Galaxy the other day and there was no Wilson Staff, not even golf balls. They've got to make the Wilson Staff line more available. I did see it prominently in the pro shop of a very nice course near me (Seneca Hickory Stick) recently.

I really think that is a big problem for Wilson, availability. I fell in love with the Wilson Duo golf ball this winter. None of the major golf shops in the area carry them. I had to go to Academy Sports to buy them.

As for clubs, if not for the THP Demo Day, I may have never hit one. Again, none of the shops around here carry them. The Wilson clubs I hit at Demo Day were clearly quality clubs. I had absolutely no complaints and actually bought 3 irons this summer (PW - 8).

Unfortunately, like Bridgestone clubs, access is limited at best. Stores only have so much rack space and will carry what is selling at the moment.

 

[Scrap Iron]

Get a few guys under the W/S brand like Jason Day, Jordan Speith and Graham DeLeat.
Get involved in The Morgan Cup. I think the Amp Cell got in so many peoples bags is because of the great reviews on here.
Hire me to take over their social media campaign.

 

[lopsta5]

Im not sure how to fix them but I think a lot of it comes down to very limited marketing. I know when I got mine I didn't even know about them when I went into the shop, and only found out about them cause the guys suggested I hit them, which I did and liked them, hence I now own a set of ci11's. But I reckon more ads on the tv and billboards and get the clubs into more pro shops and places that people go to get fitted and buy new sets. A bit more exposure and people might get in the shop and ask to try the WS clubs.

 

[moosejaa]

Get a few guys under the W/S brand like Jason Day, Jordan Speith and Graham DeLeat.
Get involved in The Morgan Cup. I think the Amp Cell got in so many peoples bags is because of the great reviews on here.
Hire me to take over their social media campaign.

I agree. Streelman is giving W/S some exposure since he's having such a good year but Barnes and Harrington no so much. I think Day is a TM guy but if they could get Speith and DeLeat it would be huge for them. I doubt it though. Those two are gonna get snapped up by the big boys real soon.

 

[dietDrThunder]

<snip>
The company is much bigger (and much more profitable) than the golf-oriented companies (brands) such as Callaway, Acushnet, Cleveland/Srixon, Cobra, Ping, etc.
Can Wilson's golf division ever rival Taylormade/Addidas in the golf business? No. That's not the company's objective. Wilson can do very well with a modest, but important, share of the international golf business.<snip>

So...you're saying that Wilson is huge and profitable, so therefore they have no desire to make the W/S brand larger and more profitable? Why would that not be the company's objective? This makes no sense to me.

Also, if they are huge and profitable (they are), then why is it that they can't rival Taylormade? Callaway and Ping seem to be doing a fine job of it...I can't swing a dead cat at my home course without hitting a bag with irons from one of those two in there.

EDIT: I did want to point out that I'm not a hater, as you can see by my WitB below...

 

[JB]

So...you're saying that Wilson is huge and profitable, so therefore they have no desire to make the W/S brand larger and more profitable? Why would that not be the company's objective? This makes no sense to me.

Also, if they are huge and profitable (they are), then why is it that they can't rival Taylormade? Callaway and Ping seem to be doing a fine job of it...I can't swing a dead cat at my home course without hitting a bag with irons from one of those two in there.

EDIT: I did want to point out that I'm not a hater, as you can see by my WitB below...

You are right. They absolutely do want to grow the golf business and make it profitable. In fact when we met with them a few months back at their HQ, they discussed this very thing.

FWIW,
Wilson is huge and profitable. But not as profitable as they previously were. There was some incorrect info in that previous post (the one you quoted). Not incorrect mind you as much as just not completely accurate. Wilson Staff's parent company (Wilson) is quite large. Although when comparing companies, it was listed as bigger than Cleveland/Srixon (which it is not) and others. TaylorMade/adidas is neck and neck. SRI's parent is much bigger. Bridgestone is much bigger as well and since they were speaking of international business, both of the latter dominate the Asian market (1&2 respectfully in golf).

Wilson does quite well in other sports. However that does not mean their goals are not to grow golf and make it profitable. Based on marketshare (only for 2011 & 2012 because its all I have), the golf division floundered.

 

[#Cookie]

While it definitely won't "fix" Wilson Staff.....I would love to see them involved in something like the Morgan Cup. They need more product in the average consumers hands. The whole "seriously" thing is funny but Barnes and Paddy just don't move product.

 

[Rvick82]

I still like the idea's from most people about really utilizing social media. Flood the market with pictures, videos of club fittings with average everyday golfers. Do demo days around times and places where there will be the most golfers present. For example, doing a demo day around Jacksonville and Ponte Vedra Beach the week of The Players. Use a decent course in the area and advertise in all the local golf shops and flood social media as well. Then take videos at these events and post them online via their website, twitter, facebook, etc. See if they can get one of their sponsored tour pros to show up for a few mins and talk about why he likes Wilson Staff. I would say do 6-8 of these events a year that coincides with a PGA/LPGA/Champions Tour event in the area.

Also, setting up a club demo process similar to bridgestone would be a great addition to the above. The ability of an average golfer to call in to wilson staff and have a driver, 6 or 7 iron, wedge, etc sent to them to demo for a few weeks and then send back would be a great addition.

Also, I think they would benefit the most initially from really pushing one product line. Like really focusing on their irons, golf balls, etc. I think they have a great thing going in their wilson staff duo ball. I really love that ball and it seems to work extremely well for a lot of us hackers.

Finally, I would revamp their website. I went on it and it is really nothing special and it is attached to the Wilson sports website. I would want to make a completely separate website that is wilson staff only and is not related to the other wilson sports products.

 

[Hawk]

While it definitely won't "fix" Wilson Staff.....I would love to see them involved in something like the Morgan Cup. They need more product in the average consumers hands. The whole "seriously" thing is funny but Barnes and Paddy just don't move product.

That would be something else.

 

[Herky]

So...you're saying that Wilson is huge and profitable, so therefore they have no desire to make the W/S brand larger and more profitable? Why would that not be the company's objective? This makes no sense to me.

Also, if they are huge and profitable (they are), then why is it that they can't rival Taylormade? Callaway and Ping seem to be doing a fine job of it...I can't swing a dead cat at my home course without hitting a bag with irons from one of those two in there.

EDIT: I did want to point out that I'm not a hater, as you can see by my WitB below...

That's not what I'm saying. Of course, Wilson would like to increase its golf market share. But at what cost?I'm saying that to significantly increase market share in the golf biz it would require a lot of investment and lot of resources. And the central question would be: Would Wilson (or any company) make enough money to justify the increased commitment?
Let's say Wilson decided to double or even triple its golf division. Would it be a profitable strategy for the company? Maybe, maybe not. It's entirely possible Wilson could triple its slice of the golf market and lose money -- a lot of money -- on its golf business. Increased volume does not equal increased profit.
Some market analysts are not exactly buoyant on the golf business, especially in North America and western Europe. It's generally a low-growth environment that is over-stored and over-crowded. Growth prospects are at least slightly problematic Perhaps, this is factored into Wilson's corporate strategy.
Now, here's what I don't understand.
What's wrong with Wilson golf just the way it is?
Hey, I'm a long-time Wilson guy. All that matters to me is that they continue to make quality equipment and sell it at a reasonable price. And that's what they're doing. What does it matter that Wilson Golf U.S. isn't as big or popular as TM, Cally, Acushnet or Ping? Let's face it: It's unlikely that we'll see any big change in the golf market in the next 3 or 4 years.
I don't care if a bunch over-compensated pros are wearing Wilson caps or visors. If they were, I might have paid more for my Di-11 irons and my Duo balls.
Wilson is a fine company. It doesn't have to be TM or Cally to be viable.
Wilson ain't broke, so don't try to fix it.

 

[Cats04]

Where would you begin.....complete overhaul! I think they make great irons but I've never seen them in any store I've visited (similar to B-Stone!). I agree with the overhaul in logo's/color/branding etc. I personally didn't think Cobra Golf would do very well and am not a big fan of all the color's/patterns on their clothes and gear but what they have done is SIGN some big names and gotten their product in a lot of hands. I know funding comes into play here but with companies like Wilson and Mizuno there just isn't going to be a lot of sponsorship money they are going to toss out at tour guys. In the end sadly, a lot of people play companies they see on TV (or even blow up social media like Callaway has done). My big question would be "does Wilson even want to compete?"

 

[JB]

What's wrong with Wilson golf just the way it is?
Hey, I'm a long-time Wilson guy. All that matters to me is that they continue to make quality equipment and sell it at a reasonable price. And that's what they're doing. What does it matter that Wilson Golf U.S. isn't as big or popular as TM, Cally, Acushnet or Ping? Let's face it: It's unlikely that we'll see any big change in the golf market in the next 3 or 4 years.
I don't care if a bunch over-compensated pros are wearing Wilson caps or visors. If they were, I might have paid more for my Di-11 irons and my Duo balls.
Wilson is a fine company. It doesn't have to be TM or Cally to be viable.
Wilson ain't broke, so don't try to fix it.

I can answer the first question in this by saying that if something does not change, the Wilson that you love will not be the same full line company in future years. Marketshare must increase in order for them to maintain what they do now, because the last few have been extremely unkind in that regards.

 

[jdtox]

Unfortunately for them like many have said I put them in the category of cheap clubs or beginners or even seniors. I played on a league with my dad a few years ago and several guys had the "fat shaft" irons. Yuck. They need a whole new advertising campaign and probably company. They need something fresh new and exciting. They need a bomber, like when Daly used to peddle their clubs to get their drivers out there and As others have said they need to get some irons in some young PGA guys hands and start promoting. Their irons are some of the best available right now in my opinion and those FG Tour irons are gorgeous, but it seems nobody knows about them.

Every company needs a gimmick at some point. Taylor Made had the bubble shaft years ago, then the white crowns, etc. They something innovative and creative to get the ball rollling and create a buzz.

 

[Herky]

I can answer the first question in this by saying that if something does not change, the Wilson that you love will not be the same full line company in future years. Marketshare must increase in order for them to maintain what they do now, because the last few have been extremely unkind in that regards.

You might be right. That is a distinct possibility. Remember some of the top brands in golf 30 years ago -- Ram, Top-Flite (Spaulding), MacGregor, Armour, Titleist -- and, yes, Wilson. Titlesist now owns the ball market and Wilson, after years of steady decline, has re-emerged with the revival of its legendary Staff brand.
It's possible that Wilson can incrementally increase its market share in the next 5 years, enough to maintain its viability in the golf industry. I'm not expecting a dramatic increase. That would be unrealistic.
Wilson, by all accounts, is a fairly well run company and I would wager a Sam Adams Boston Lager (or Boulevard Pale Ale) that it will continue in the golf biz for the next 5 years. Maybe 10 years. Wilson has endured and, unlike MacGregor, Ram and Armour, it has the resources to hang around for awhile.
After 5 or 10 years who knows?
Will Callaway -- as a free-standing company -- still be around 10 years from now? Will Cobra change hands -- again? Or will it morph into something else.
Titlesist (Acushnet) is now a subsidiary of Flia Korea and rubber giant Bridgestone has made serious inroads in the ball market. TM now owns Adams. Will they eventually do to Adams what Cally did to Hogan?
The market will change and change again. Wilson will probably change, too. It's way too early to say who will make the cut.

 

[JB]

You might be right. That is a distinct possibility. Remember some of the top brands in golf 30 years ago -- Ram, Top-Flite (Spaulding), MacGregor, Armour, Titleist -- and, yes, Wilson. Titlesist now owns the ball market and Wilson, after years of steady decline, has re-emerged with the revival of its legendary Staff brand.
It's possible that Wilson can incrementally increase its market share in the next 5 years, enough to maintain its viability in the golf industry. I'm not expecting a dramatic increase. That would be unrealistic.
Wilson, by all accounts, is a fairly well run company and I would wager a Sam Adams Boston Lager (or Boulevard Pale Ale) that it will continue in the golf biz for the next 5 years. Maybe 10 years. Wilson has endured and, unlike MacGregor, Ram and Armour, it has the resources to hang around for awhile.
After 5 or 10 years who knows?
Will Callaway -- as a free-standing company -- still be around 10 years from now? Will Cobra change hands -- again? Or will it morph into something else.
Titlesist (Acushnet) is now a subsidiary of Flia Korea and rubber giant Bridgestone has made serious inroads in the ball market. TM now owns Adams. Will they eventually do to Adams what Cally did to Hogan?
The market will change and change again. Wilson will probably change, too. It's way too early to say who will make the cut.

The comparisons do not work however, because Ram, Macgregor and Tommy Armour were all sold to stores to be house brands before the change in marketplace.

Since the launch of Wilson Staff, the company has had a steady decline in market share, not the other way around. In fact distribution has gotten smaller and smaller and with that demand has gotten smaller and smaller.

Saying "its possible that they will have incremental increases" is no different than someone saying they will have incremental decreases, however the statistics over recent history say the latter is obviously more possible since it has currently been going on.

Then add the internal shift of bringing in new R & D director. Losing their marketing director. And changing paces yet again to a niche that nobody can quite figure out, and you have a recipe for similar success (meaning not a lot). The marketshare of todays product is not dictated by history (obviously) because frankly the demographic buying clubs frequently does not care about history (generally speaking).

The company has to change to a certain degree. It showed that completely when they launched their "Seriously" campaign and went away from trying to market the sleek style designs that made them famous and instead market the forgiving/distance category like many others. Its what sells in this marketplace currently. They abandoned that campaign (generally speaking) and are now making another shift because it made no inroads.

You mentioned non-growth but staying the pace instead of competing (generalizing the statement). That simply cannot happen for Wilson Golf right now.

EDIT: I should add that I want them to succeed. There is a place for the brand and they make high quality equipment. However changes will have to take place for that to happen (in my opinion).