- Admin
- #1
Let’s say a brand is starting out (club brand) or returning (Lynx, Hogan, etc). Can they make it?
What would it take to be successful?
What would it take to be successful?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I think to be successful they need one hell of a technology story to tell as most major OEM’s are touting some kind of tech.
If it’s just a rebrand/relaunch with nothing new to add I can’t see them gaining on the established leaders.
What about putters? There seem to be a few recent additions to the putter world (albeit some more niche than others) that appear on the surface to be having solid success.
I think they can but they have to be on point with everything they do. A misstep and it hurts them far more than a major oem and they may not be able to recover. Technology is a big thing your product has to stand up to the major oem, and price unless noted as a premium or super premium product needs to be better than the competition especially if you are direct to consumer. I think Ben Hogan has done the best with this as a full line manufacturer. Lynx I'm guessing is where this is coming from with the Instagram post will have a tricky road in America. They are trying to occupy the same space as Ben Hogan but their prices are higher with a similar product.
Short answer... yes. What’s the definition of success? Defined differently by many... If it’s to compete with the big boys, then they have to offer similar performance in a less expensive package, use clever/ no nonsense marketing, offer something or things other companies don’t, and quite frankly some luck...
I think Ben Hogan and New Level have been very successful in their short lifespan so far! They have good social media presences and solid business models. I'm curious to see what happens with Sub 70. If they can carve out a piece for themselves too!
I’ll be the pessimist and say no, they can’t make it without comical amounts of financial backing the is fine with a decade of losses. They can’t compete with sourcing prices, QC, or marketing. And R&D isn’t likely existent (if it is its years behind)
I’m with you on the financial argument
However- the other arguments don’t hold water to me - the golf industry shares talent and swaps talent a lot I wouldn’t be surprised to see a new brand land a pretty bright R&D/marketing person or even two in one swoop
QC is the factory/design piece which could also provide a problem or is an easy fix too
I’m with you on the financial argument
However- the other arguments don’t hold water to me - the golf industry shares talent and swaps talent a lot I wouldn’t be surprised to see a new brand land a pretty bright R&D/marketing person or even two in one swoop
QC is the factory/design piece which could also provide a problem or is an easy fix too
I think Molten is describing something different. While a company might get a new R&D person or two, some of these companies have 20+ engineers working. Speaking to QC, depending on money, they may have people overseas viewing and checking, may be moved to the front of the line due to quantities, etc. All things that come with dollars. One of the interesting dynamics is what Cobra did with the CNC milling, because while it has a story and looks cool, the biggest benefit is QC.
I think Molten is describing something different. While a company might get a new R&D person or two, some of these companies have 20+ engineers working. Speaking to QC, depending on money, they may have people overseas viewing and checking, may be moved to the front of the line due to quantities, etc. All things that come with dollars. One of the interesting dynamics is what Cobra did with the CNC milling, because while it has a story and looks cool, the biggest benefit is QC.