Technology Names - Does it bother you?

Jman

Golf Scrivener
Albatross 2024 Club
Staff member
Joined
Jan 20, 2010
Messages
179,356
Reaction score
93,990
Location
Oklahoma
Handicap
3.4
In the M4 thread there has been a conversation about technology names (Hammerhead in this case) and how it is viewed by people. Some jump to conclusions about people simply being defensive, but that is just dismissing a different perspective IMO.

So, Hammerhead, Power Holes, Dragonfly, Turbulators, Jailbreak, Power Wave, etc....do they bother you? Or is it only a nuisance when it comes from certain companies because of how they are repetitively viewed? Discuss.
 
No. They can call it anything they want as long as it helps me.
 
Great question, but with my screen name, I think I should recuse myself at this time.
 
When the marketing doesn't match the name.
When the name doesn't make any sense.

Those two things are marketing 101 and should never be brought to retail.
 
nope, doesn't matter to me at all. In fact the more out there they are the more I will probably enjoy it.
 
Find them to be annoyingly uninformative nickname noise but then again I am 70 y.o. and tend to lean toward being cranky anyway :D
 
If Taylormade doesn't provide some 'gimmick' along with a silly name to go along with it, then 'THP's critics' won't consider it a 'new release of technology' and will just 'assume' it's not that good! (Pretty dumb on their part).

IMO, TM's best efforts have been the clubs the company produced without such 'gimmicks'.
 
I think some of the names are stupid, but I wouldn't say they bother me.

I'll admit that a dumb name can have some actual impact on me when it comes to visible technology too. Turbulator is the one that comes to mind for me. My reaction was something along these lines, "just because you call them Turbulators doesn't change the fact they they are really just ugly ridges on the crown of the club that I doubt will make me any better." That probably falls in one or both of JB's categories above, but I pay more attention to it when I can see it.
 
Generally I could care less.

However, the “Hammerhead” does seem like a lame attempt to come up with something to compete with “Jailbreak”. I say that as a fan of TM woods.
 
I can't say a name has bothered me enough to not purchase or try something but I have seen a few and thought was stupid.
 
Performance should be all that 'ultimately' matters to the consumer, not the 'gimmicks' and silly names used by TM and others to create an 'illusion' of some new technology breakthrough!

Too many 'marketing hype myths' already, but the OEM's feel they must use false 'breakthrough' gimmicks to sell their equipment, and plenty of people are naive enough to fall for it, so it has now become a perpetual marketing strategy for TM and others.

Fact: 'Real' technology breakthroughs are actually quite rare these days!

My message to Consumers....Don't be naive!
 
Last edited:
Yes it bothers me.

As a consumer it develops a pre-conceived and uninformed visual of the product. That's the danger in these early photo leaks. Based on the other thread, it appears some individuals have made up their mind about the product already.
 
People may hate it but it works.

Many really hate the name EPIC, yet many have purchased them.

I remember people railing on Jailbreak when it was first announced.

RocketBallz may be the dumbest name, but they sold a ton of them...perhaps the white head helped, but if there was one name that should influence sales negatively this should have been it. (Possibly the power slit beats this one.)

The other side of it, is how many people feel like Titleist is elitist, reserved only for better players? Perhaps because of their naming conventions? They may come across as taking this whole golf thing too seriously.

Maybe if they came out with "ball thruster" technology, the average golfer would show interest.
 
When the marketing doesn't match the name.
When the name doesn't make any sense.

Those two things are marketing 101 and should never be brought to retail.

That I understand.
But my question would be and I guess it's answered in Jman's initial question with taylor made here, but if say titleist or callaway names something that people don't like will people really not buy it?
If your a fan of that manufacturer is the name really going to be an issue for you?

"I'm not buying that driver because its called hammerhead"
ok..

Ping could've called their driver turdulator and I'd still buy it..


Same names to me can be annoying but I just don't see how it deters you from buying that brand.

If Scotty Cameron had some names of putters that you were like what??? Not going to stop me from buying it let alone trying it!
 
That I understand.
But my question would be and I guess it's answered in Jman's initial question with taylor made here, but if say titleist or callaway names something that people don't like will people really not buy it?
If your a fan of that manufacturer is the name really going to be an issue for you?

"I'm not buying that driver because its called hammerhead"
ok..

Ping could've called their driver turdulator and I'd still buy it..


Same names to me can be annoying but I just don't see how it deters you from buying that brand.

If Scotty Cameron had some names of putters that you were like what??? Not going to stop me from buying it let alone trying it!

I think RocketBallz told us people will buy regardless of name, right? :D
To me its all about making sense. Im sure in their mind Hammer Head makes sense, and I am not a fan of leaks because of things such as this.
If the marketing matches, I am for it.
I hate skipping numbers. I hate all over the place. I hate when marketing doesn't match.

There are some that do it well and some that don't. JetSpeed was a pretty darn good product. The name was fine too. The marketing behind it was downright terrible.
RBZ was a terrible name, but the marketing behind it matched and the product did too, therefore it was solid.
Going from one number to no numbers to different numbers and then skipping numbers I am not a fan of.
Turbulators, was marketed perfectly for what it was and it worked.
Just some examples.
 
Rocketballz was dumb but I don't know why didn't bother me, but I find names like jetspeed, geocoustic, or speedfoam worse. Things like RZN because of the resin or jailbreak because of the bars don't bother me either. I'm really not sure why some do more than others.
 
Thinking about it a little more, I think if a name sounds like a gimmick I have more of a negative perception than just if the name is bad. Great Big Bertha Alpha 816 double black diamond is a terrible name, but it doesn't say gimmick to me the same way something like JetSpeed does.
 
I may find the names cheesy and dumb but ultimately if the driver works that's all that matters. Plus, what's better than piping a great drive and yelling out "TURBULATORS!!!!!!!".
 
It's all marketing, at the core it's how that company needs/wants to market their product.
 
I certainly prefer something that doesn't sound like a 6th grader came up with it on the playground, but it doesn't bother me enough to change a club decision.

I would also prefer that they leave technology wording off of the driver. I understand their reasoning for putting it there, but I think it hurts the look of a golf club.
 
It wouldn't deter me from buying, but it wouldn't influence me personally either. It's all just buzzwords for marketing purposes. Companies will keep throwing them out there and hope one sticks. I think it takes a perfect combination of naming, real world performance and a unified marketing campaign to be a true difference maker, as in the case of Epic.
 
Callaway has done a great job of marketing their ‘jail break’ technology. So much so that when I️ pull the driver from the bag, someone always says there’s that cheater club with the jailbreak. So that name works but it’s not why I️ bought the club. I️ bought it because it works.

Names don’t bother me at all. I️ Buy based on results. People get caught up in that stuff and make no sense to me but hey to each their own.
 
As for 'technology names', if it reasonably communicates what's happening I'm fine. But too often the marketing department gets a hold of it and it becomes a stretch.

For example, regardless of what one might think of them, the name turbulators and cup face worked. Some of the others aren't as good.

That said, I understand that marketing doesn't want to have some dry sounding name, and that over time a lot of the better names get trademarked so that they can't be used (at least for golf).

But I envision some of the people sitting in a room having come up with some of the names - won't mention the ones that begin with rocket - thinking they did something clever when in fact those tend to turn me off. I'm perfectly fine with G400, 917, etc.
 
Back
Top