We've launched the new forums! Read more here

Most Used Ball On Tour

My questions are these.
Since consumers are buying it based on some level of that (whether we like it or not), is it misleading? Yes, I definitely think this is misleading, we all know better then to think that we are buying the same equipment that the pros are using, it only takes a few scrolls through this site or some of the other sites dedicated to equipment to understand the difference. But, this is not the case for most, I have been to countless Roger Dunn, or Golfsmith stores and hear the sales guy blowing smoke up peoples you know what to get a sale. The buyer needs to educate themselves, but I think the large companies and these large wholesalers need to be a lot more upfront, Im honestly suprised a class action suit has not been brought against the marketing of golfclubs.
Would you have an issue if a player was saying "Play this driver like me" but was not playing it? No, becasue of what I posted above..
 
dankil13 said:
Even a lot of the "middle of the pack" tour pros and pros at the low end of the money list get paid for what they wear, and the clubs and equipment that they play. I believe there are guidelines as to how many sponsor logos they can have on their hat, shirt and bag. I read an article a while back that these endorsements cover their travel and playing expenses. I'm sure the same type of deals exist for Nationwide pros, just at a much lower level. It's advertising, and if golfers are your target demographics its surely an effective and efficient way to market your company.
Click to expand...

Almost EVERY pga tour pro is equipment sponsored. But NOT all of them have apparel deals. Many of them choose not to have apparel deals because they can fit more logos from different companies around their clothes. See Phil, and others.
 
JB said:
Almost EVERY pga tour pro is equipment sponsored. But NOT all of them have apparel deals. Many of them choose not to have apparel deals because they can fit more logos from different companies around their clothes. See Phil, and others.
Click to expand...

And they look terrible. Nothing bugs me more than guys like Phil and Toothy that look like Nascar drivers with different brands all over the place. I think it looks tacky and it distracts people I think from their bigger sponsors.
 
JB said:
Almost EVERY pga tour pro is equipment sponsored. But NOT all of them have apparel deals. Many of them choose not to have apparel deals because they can fit more logos from different companies around their clothes. See Phil, and others.
Click to expand...

Sorry I should have been clearer that I was refering to the logo's on their clothing/hats
 
coolbreeze said:
And they look terrible. Nothing bugs me more than guys like Phil and Toothy that look like Nascar drivers with different brands all over the place. I think it looks tacky and it distracts people I think from their bigger sponsors.
Click to expand...

I thought sponsorship logos were limited - one on each side of the hat plus the front, one on each collar, one on the chest and one on the arm (7 in total). So a guy like Phil shouldn't have more logos than a lesser known player (maybe more companies) Maybe I am wrong but I read that somewhere.
 
coolbreeze said:
And they look terrible. Nothing bugs me more than guys like Phil and Toothy that look like Nascar drivers with different brands all over the place. I think it looks tacky and it distracts people I think from their bigger sponsors.
Click to expand...

These ads and logos dont bother me at all. The companies know going in they are not the 'primary' sponsor to a player. If they want primary sponsor status to a player, they would be willing to pay for it. To you really blame the players for accepting money to wear a logo on their shirt/hat/sleeve, etc? Wouldnt you like to be paid to wear a small logo (or 5) to work everyday?
 
pretty good article this week at Golf.com about pro's switching balls - AK and Zach Johnson were featured. They both said it is harder to switch balls than nearly anything else in their bag. They KNOW how the ball will react in almost every situation, and with a new ball that confidence is taken away.
 
ghsace said:
pretty good article this week at Golf.com about pro's switching balls - AK and Zach Johnson were featured. They both said it is harder to switch balls than nearly anything else in their bag. They KNOW how the ball will react in almost every situation, and with a new ball that confidence is taken away.
Click to expand...

Ironically both guys are sponsored by companies that have new balls coming out and have not switched. So is that them saying what they think or them making sure the companies are happy with response? I truly would like to know but I am not sure we ever will.

My question would be if the company wants them to play the new ball why keep making the older ones?
 
JB said:
Ironically both guys are sponsored by companies that have new balls coming out and have not switched. So is that them saying what they think or them making sure the companies are happy with response? I truly would like to know but I am not sure we ever will.

My question would be if the company wants them to play the new ball why keep making the older ones?
Click to expand...

Great question and valid point- wasn't there an article about Couples playing a model from 07 recently - or he switched recently from one from then?
And don't tour players get stuff made for them that isn't available to the public? Wasn't Tiger playing a ball that NEVER was available for purchase?
 
dubbledxu said:
These ads and logos dont bother me at all. The companies know going in they are not the 'primary' sponsor to a player. If they want primary sponsor status to a player, they would be willing to pay for it. To you really blame the players for accepting money to wear a logo on their shirt/hat/sleeve, etc? Wouldnt you like to be paid to wear a small logo (or 5) to work everyday?
Click to expand...

I don't blame them one bit. It is their job out there and they are all about making a living just like the rest of us. Who wouldn't love to be paid for what we play.
I'm a little odd (in case you didn't notice) in that I play one brand right now, mostly because the clubs work for me and my home course/pro has a great personal relationship with them, plus I like to buy at my home course, but I won't spend money on things like hats and shirts with Ping's name on it. It is sort of my place to draw the line. I spent enough on the equipment that I figure that if they want me to advertise for them, they could give me a hat for free (which they don't do of course). The pro knows how I feel, so he has given me plenty of free hats/shirts over the years.
 
ghsace said:
Great question and valid point- wasn't there an article about Couples playing a model from 07 recently - or he switched recently from one from then?
And don't tour players get stuff made for them that isn't available to the public? Wasn't Tiger playing a ball that NEVER was available for purchase?
Click to expand...

Of course they do. Many times its them testing what could be coming to market.
 
I have another thought for JB......Do you think there are pro's out there today that will not play a particular brand for whatever reason no matter what the price is? I've always wondered about Steve Stricker being a Titleist guy yet he plays a Odyssey putter. I would think Titleist would throw any amount of money at him the past few years to have him playing a Cameron yet he has stuck with the Odyssey (I assume he still has it). Always seemed strange to me.
 
HoosierGolfer said:
I have another thought for JB......Do you think there are pro's out there today that will not play a particular brand for whatever reason no matter what the price is? I've always wondered about Steve Stricker being a Titleist guy yet he plays a Odyssey putter. I would think Titleist would throw any amount of money at him the past few years to have him playing a Cameron yet he has stuck with the Odyssey (I assume he still has it). Always seemed strange to me.
Click to expand...

I wish I could answer that one. I think there are guys that are pretty set in their ways. G-Mac and Stricker come to mind with the Odyssey insert.
 
HoosierGolfer said:
I have another thought for JB......Do you think there are pro's out there today that will not play a particular brand for whatever reason no matter what the price is? I've always wondered about Steve Stricker being a Titleist guy yet he plays a Odyssey putter. I would think Titleist would throw any amount of money at him the past few years to have him playing a Cameron yet he has stuck with the Odyssey (I assume he still has it). Always seemed strange to me.
Click to expand...

Might be the one piece of equipment he was afraid would screw him up if he switched?

Along those same lines, I assume guys are contractually obligated to play certain clubs, and switch to certain things at certain times; does anyone think that it's a detriment to a degree that these guys have to keep switching equipment?

Take Luke Donald for example, he's not a good driver, maybe it's not good for his game to switch from whatever he was using last october the R11 because he's constantly trying to relearn how to hit different clubs instead of getting comfortable with one?
 
biggsy said:
I think it speaks volumes. Some players, not all are a creature of habit and don't like to change. But that's some, if it's better, most would change, which your numbers are no indicating.

I'm bothered when pros have the latest and greatest driver headcover, but stuck with an older model, that grinds my gears. It's all about selling the latest and greatest though.
Click to expand...

Or when the driver under the head cover is a completely different brand!
 
While we often only thing of technology being used to improve overall product quality no company exec could look himself in the mirror without admitting that if R&D comes to him with a concept designed to increase margin he will hardly be able to contain himself. That is particularly true if they hold the opinion that the change will not have an adverse impact on share numbers. Every once and awhile I am sure some things that are marketed as better (lets face it, nothing is going to be marketed as being worse) are simply different and might in fact be cheaper to make.

The new Titleist ball may just be less costly to manufacture in some way, either in materials or yield/productivity....who knows. Surely we will be the last to know.
 
Interesting fact for the WGC. If you break balls down by year/model, the Titleist ball is not the most used. It is in fact the TM Penta. That surprised me a LOT.


1212732717_F566y-L.jpg
 
That is interesting. I would have guess the ProV for sure. Of course the ProV has the most models/versions.
 
HoosierGolfer said:
That is interesting. I would have guess the ProV for sure. Of course the ProV has the most models/versions.
Click to expand...

Of course. No question about it.

Here is the perfect example from that first post. Out of the 37 golfers using the Titleist golf ball, only 11 of them are using the current version of Pro V1 or Pro V1x combined.
 
I guess Titlest claims all of its versions as one. So they can say the ProV1 is the most use ball on the tour. Sounds like a marketing guy is in charge.
 
dmb012 said:
I guess Titlest claims all of its versions as one. So they can say the ProV1 is the most use ball on the tour. Sounds like a marketing guy is in charge.
Click to expand...

I think all companies do that to an extend dmb, not just Titleist to be fair.
 
I always hear of players using a prototype ball. It seems any time they show a players bag in golf digest there are always some sort of prototype clubs or balls that we will never see at those specifications, but the pro will always say they use the standard ball. I noticed once on Nike's golf site that if you go through the tour players almost all of them had at least one prototype in.their bag. Whether it ever made it to mass production or not does not really matter...we know they make things differently for the pros
 
JB said:
I think all companies do that to an extend dmb, not just Titleist to be fair.
Click to expand...

I just think they are taking advantage of that method the most.
 
Thats a cool chart JB. I noticed Taylormade just has the Penta, are there any variations to it? I look at all the other ones with stars/diamonds which can indicate possibly a different production model. Wondering if that is the same with Taylormade balls.
 
Question, do you guys think alot of companies will follow suit with the Rezin core technology as they did when Nike started the solid core golf ball? Do you guys see pros other than Nike staff switching to the 20XI ball?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top