Can a New Brand Be Successful?

JB

Follow @THPGolf on Social Media
Albatross 2024 Club
Staff member
Joined
Oct 8, 2008
Messages
281,794
Reaction score
423,287
Location
THP Experiences
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?
 
In the world of social media, I think definitely they can be. Requires a fantastic presence on all mediums (or high attention to one or two of them). Engagement with people through contests, demo programs, testing programs, and a bit biased but support of places where people talk golf (THP comes to mind).

Most equipment being built these days is done well. Sometimes it takes more than that to plant the seed, and connecting with the masses is the easiest way. I do not think ads on TV do anything. Maybe on very active podcasts if the feedback is positive (and again not a basic ad).
 
I think there is always room for something new, if it captures the consumer’s fancy. I will never forget when Callaway came out with the Big Bertha. It sounded corny and the head looked huge, but it definitely was a game changer. I remember the 2 Ball putter. Just two examples of many.

I think it takes adoption by a big name on tour, something truly innovative or big money.
 
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.
 
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.
 
not starting a twitter war would be advisable
 
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...
 
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 putters are their own unique category. We’ve seen many boutique brands pop up with their version of the anser style putter be very successful. I think it’s part because that’s a category to easily stand out where golfers are looking for some artistic creations to stand out from the rest.

The rest of the bag I think companies might find it harder because aside from something new on the block, they have a bigger hurdle to jump with the gear Callaway, TM, Cobra, etc. Are putting out.
 
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 think it depends on what the brand considers successful. I think it's getting to the point that there are so many brands that it will be tough to find a unique niche. Maybe if Ben Hogan continues it's success we will see more direct to consumer brands with lower price points, that might be the best bet at this point.
 
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.
 
I think so. There are very few monogamous golfers (married to one brand). The trick is getting your clubs into golfers' hands. I don't buy that you have to have some amazing tech story. Tech stories are just marketing ploys (I'm not saying tech isn't real;I just don't think most of it is has any significant impact). I think looks are probably the most important thing, followed by performance, and then price.

Sent from my SM-T820 using Tapatalk
 
It is hard but I think the path is through social media and a direct to consumer plan. I think smaller brands can look so much bigger with a great social media plan. Still it is silly hard to crack into anything new. In golf so many great brands are out there. DTC and killer service are key. I doubt you get a second chance.
 
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.

The whole “interchangeable face” aspect for Lynx is more than a little skeptical.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Get the product in peoples hands demo days and in the hands of a tour player who is on tv alot
 
Look at PXG and how quick they have come around to a major player in the club market-they have only been around for just under 5 years
 
What determines successful? PXG and Hogan have taken what seems like opposite paths and I don't know how to classify if either is successful or when you can say that they are.

Is Hogan getting into metal woods a sign that the business is flourishing or a big gamble the could drop them behind? Is PXG developing a lower cost iron set a sign that they are now ready to compete with the major OEMs in the standard price range or is that they aren't able to survive on just the uber premium audience they have catered to up until now?

I don't know on either but how long do they have to be around before they are a "success"?
 
Successful is a relative term. Would they ever be a Titleist or TaylorMade? Probably not but I think its a great time for a new company.

More top players than ever are playing without deals so they can use whatever clubs or clothes they see fit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Depends on price (not necessarily the lowest), technology and target competition.
 
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...

Turning a profit to setup for longevity would be my first thought.

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!

Neither of those companies can be turning a profit yet I can’t imagine. I’m sure with some digging I can get that answer.
 
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’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’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.

Indeed! And the other side of R&D is product planning a year or two in advance. New companies would be hand to mouth with any new tech and can’t have lifecycle management.
 
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.

That makes sense also forgot about patents

CNC and MIM has to be a huge win for Cobra from a manufacturing/production standpoint
 
Back
Top