So there is this guy named Tiger, and another named Rory. Both were signed by Nike on mega contracts. Both combined for A LOT of wins. Every time there is a new product it's almost guaranteed people say "if Tiger were to play it, it would sell like crazy", which would logically make sense. So...for Nike, what was the issue? I certainly don't think it was a lack of quality, because a lot of their stuff was actually quite good.
To me...I think it was timing. Tiger was hot. Rory came in hot. The problem was, the demographic they attracted wasn't old enough yet. The average golf club consumer I would think has to be 30's+, if not even into their 40's or 50's. Tiger was uber popular, but consumers who were able to buy were already set in their ways.
So the ultimate question here is...do you think Nike would have done much better club sale/ball sale wise if they were to have come out recently, instead of when they did? Now a days a lot of the people who grew up on Tiger and that swoosh are approaching and into their 30's, if not in their 40's now, and are primed to spend money on equipment being touted by Tiger. Or do you think Nike's fate would have happened the same if they were brought out semi recently?
To me...I think it was timing. Tiger was hot. Rory came in hot. The problem was, the demographic they attracted wasn't old enough yet. The average golf club consumer I would think has to be 30's+, if not even into their 40's or 50's. Tiger was uber popular, but consumers who were able to buy were already set in their ways.
So the ultimate question here is...do you think Nike would have done much better club sale/ball sale wise if they were to have come out recently, instead of when they did? Now a days a lot of the people who grew up on Tiger and that swoosh are approaching and into their 30's, if not in their 40's now, and are primed to spend money on equipment being touted by Tiger. Or do you think Nike's fate would have happened the same if they were brought out semi recently?