or Connect
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Golf Talk › TaylorMade cuts 15% of it's Workforce and closes Adams Golf Headquarters in Plano
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

TaylorMade cuts 15% of it's Workforce and closes Adams Golf Headquarters in Plano - Page 2

post #19 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Desmond View Post

I'm wondering  about the "final" decision ---

When TM strategizes and figures out whether it is less expensive to market under the more famous and magical "Taylormade" brand with a "Better Player line," and a "Average Joe Golfer" line as they had with the a Tour/Better Player Product and the Burner "Average Joe" Product; OR

Will they determine that the Better Player lineup will be Taylormade and the "Average Joe Golfer" line will be Adams.

Right now, it seems an unrefined mix ...

Recently, the TM Marquee Lineup and a JetSpeed Lineup was not successful, so it seems as a quick short term answer, they went to a SLDR S Lineup. Still the SLDR is not exactly "Average Joe Golfer" although they market that way.

IMHO, I think there either a lack of reality or truthiness as to the marketing of the SLDR. From what I've seen on the range and course, it appears to lack the "Average Joe" factor. I think the R1 also lacked "Average Joe" factor, as well as the R11 Series. I saw too many guys, even with speed, who had trouble with those lines/shafts as well as the fairways - long and crooked/short and crooked/short and squirrel hunting. Of course, the RBZ driver was more of an Average Joe and Better Player club, but I think the RBZ fairways and hybrids were more better player due to the longish shafts and deep faces. I think a lot of guys bought the RBZ and either had success with it, or hit it 50 yards into the dirt, and have just surrendered to the "I can't hit a fairway off the deck" mentality. They haven't bought since...

A. Two Brands? Two Choices

1 a. Taylormade for Better and Average Joe Players
 1. b. Adams for Beginners (so as not to dilute the TM Lineup)

or

2. a . Taylormade for Better Players
2. b.  Adams for Average Joe

But it does say "TaylorMade" on the Building .... 

B. One Brand with Two Lineups?

You would think that B. would be the logical choice, but who knows after the JetSpeed fiasco? Or maybe it was the marketing of that product or the longish winters.

TM has some thinking to do.

Honesty with the market
Two Brands or One?

Interesting but. I see it eventually as one brand, Taylormade!

better golfers =TM tour preferred! average Joe = Taylormade buy the stock product with maybe a couple of shaft options. TM has had a 3 teir model for years now. I do not pretend to have any inside information, but. I believe TM bought Adams for a couple of reasons:

Intellectual knowledge and perhaps subtle patents.
An established market share of Hybrids and and fairway woods that they would in effect own, just like the driver.
TM bought Adams as a block.

The last reason will be tough to prove and would be a strategic board room only discussion. They bought Adams so that a brand like NIKE would not. Callaway was in ( and still is) in financial issues. Nike has been known to buy market share rather than develop market share. if Nike were to, the intellectual knowledge would be theirs, market share for hybrids and fairways- contrary to what many people think Nike doesn't sell a lot of clubs, shoes & shirts yes, clubs no. If Nike were to get into the fray of buying Adams, they would be buying club sales. The same would also occure, eventually the nike Name would over take and rebadge Adams over time. Its just the way business is conducted now.
post #20 of 42
It's the golf industry in general. Not just TM..
post #21 of 42

I recently purchased an ADAMs IDEA set of clubs (4-GW) and found one of the clubs to be slightly more closed (6). I called both the Adams customer service line (nothing we can do about it) and the reseller (nothing we can do about it...)....I am not surprised that a company that doesn't care about the quality of products or the customer satisfaction experience is being shut down.

 

Like the 7-8-9-PW though!

 

As for TM and their worries about lack of new golfers....It doesn't seem to be effecting any of my local courses in N.Cal..I frequently have to wait on every tee and yesterday gave up after 9 because the course was jamming as many 4-somes as they could out there!

post #22 of 42

Some would claim TM acquired Adams to avoid litigation or licensing costs over the speed slot / pocket.  Adams has dominated the hybrids market and I'd expect TM at least keeps that part of Adams alive.  Or they could use the Adams name to market non-conforming clubs.

 

TM had a good 2 - 3 year run when they were able to convince customers that every club they released was longer and more forgiving than the previous. but people wised up as the adage states, "fool me once shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me".  Callaway stole a page out of their playbook and have had great success with the X Hot and X Hot 2 lines but they going to follow TM into the abyss because the strategy isn't sustainable.  I don't see X Hot 3 or whatever they call it having the same level of sales as the previous generations.

 

In addition to the extremely short product cycles, both companies have consistently raised prices.  The Callaway Big Berta Alpha and SLDR TP were $500 at introduction, but the trade-in value for the same clubs today is only $135 and $165.  It's hard to justify a $330 - $365 loss every 6 months.

 

Fortunately for golf manufacturers, we golfers are always searching for the silver bullet and are willing to spend / waste our hard earned money chasing it.

post #23 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Desmond View Post
 

... Recently, the TM Marquee Lineup and a JetSpeed Lineup was not successful, so it seems as a quick short term answer, they went to a SLDR S Lineup. .. 

TM really does pump things out fast. I missed the Marquee push.

post #24 of 42

I play TM not cause it was a big brand name, actually I didn't even like the brand name but tried the irons and loved them. I ditched a set of AP2's (literally gave them away to a friend) for my TM TP irons. A lot of people say TM flips items too quickly and I think they do as well. But the up side to this is we get to buy equipment of past models at lower prices sooner then we would other brands, Some might say that since 2008 Titleist has stuck with the AP2 AP1name, have they changed much about the iron, yes but how much in 6 years? TaylorMade has released a great deal more with different names. Now they also put more efforts in R&D their equipment goes on sale. If you don't like how one set of irons look, wait 6 months...options Titleist does not give their customers. 

post #25 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottcarmichael View Post

 

But TM? The brand just seems priced too high for all the different stuff it offers. All of their stuff can't possibly be that great, yet it seems like every item is premium priced.

 

Personally, I have no desire to buy anything from TM, unless it's maybe golf balls or some cheapo item for practice or whatever.

 

You know what's funny? I've been scouring all over for a good price on new clubs...and again and again, the best prices for good models (that aren't super old) seem to be from TaylorMade. I also see they seem to support online sellers much more than certain companies *ahem* Ping *cough* and just look at all the eBay sellers they have given their stamp of approval to! They even make their list of resellers easy to find. http://taylormadegolf.com/shared-customer-service/customerService-authorizedebay.html

 

So, after much back and forth and knowing I had a budget to stick with, I've decided to go with TaylorMade stuff. I read the customer reviews, and the vast majority of players seem happy. My irons should arrive in a few days, and next month or two I'll try to pick up a SLDR driver.

 

Marketing overload or not, tons of models or not...one thing's pretty clear - you do get a decent bang for your buck, as opposed to many other companies like Ping & Titleist where a set of irons alone will cost you $900+ (before tax & shipping/gas to pick them up). In fact, one thing that turned me off of Ping was seeing "$50 OFF!" or "20% OFF!" on sites, store ads, etc. and there's always a big asterisk that points to "Excluding PING."

post #26 of 42
There's a reason many companies chose not to go down the discount route. Plus I wouldn't hold it against Ping or other OEM for not participating in a retailers sales offers. I never understood the X amount off Ads with exclusions apply that exclude 80% of the stores products. It's fairly shady advertising.
post #27 of 42

Reading online just a bit will hint that PING goes after places that use discounts they don't like far more harshly than others do. http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/topic/145962-why-no-pings-at-dicks-sporting-good-stores/page__st__30 Now I'm not saying they don't have a right to charge whatever they want, but many people (like me) will ultimately make a decision based on cost, and if I can get a discounted competitor irons set + a nice driver and maybe even a new bag....for the standard price PING charges for just irons...well, that's a big issue. I'd love me some PING clubs...but I'm not rich.

 

I don't worry about PING's future, but from what I can see, they're sorta like the "Apple" of the Golf world in terms of brand power. Titleist is up there with them. TaylorMade and Callaway are more like "Samsung" it seems. We almost shouldn't be using them as a basis of comparison for clubs aimed at the masses because they cater to a specific niche, wealthier crowd.

post #28 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottcarmichael View Post
 

 

You know what's funny? I've been scouring all over for a good price on new clubs...and again and again, the best prices for good models (that aren't super old) seem to be from TaylorMade. I also see they seem to support online sellers much more than certain companies *ahem* Ping *cough* and just look at all the eBay sellers they have given their stamp of approval to! They even make their list of resellers easy to find. http://taylormadegolf.com/shared-customer-service/customerService-authorizedebay.html

 

So, after much back and forth and knowing I had a budget to stick with, I've decided to go with TaylorMade stuff. I read the customer reviews, and the vast majority of players seem happy. My irons should arrive in a few days, and next month or two I'll try to pick up a SLDR driver.

 

Marketing overload or not, tons of models or not...one thing's pretty clear - you do get a decent bang for your buck, as opposed to many other companies like Ping & Titleist where a set of irons alone will cost you $900+ (before tax & shipping/gas to pick them up). In fact, one thing that turned me off of Ping was seeing "$50 OFF!" or "20% OFF!" on sites, store ads, etc. and there's always a big asterisk that points to "Excluding PING."

Agree 100% Another way of looking at it is Titleist and Mizuno can't keep up with product R&D. How much technology has changed in the pro v1 Is it the same ball from last year or even 6 years ago? if they add technology and just keep the same name its exactly what TM does except the change the name. Yes they release Clubs every 2 years so people say it will hold its value longer. Say what you want but if titleist releases a new line in 2014 and you are not a fan then you're stuck waiting 2 more years for something new. Just cause a company releases New clubs every year or 6 months doesn't mean the old stuff is no good it just means the consumer (US) has more options to choose from. That is a good thing!

 

If you guys are like me you probably tried a bunch of different clubs from different companies and past models before settling on one set. Options are a very good thing. Theres some things I liked from one company and other things I didn't like from the same company.

post #29 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottcarmichael View Post
 

Reading online just a bit will hint that PING goes after places that use discounts they don't like far more harshly than others do. http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/topic/145962-why-no-pings-at-dicks-sporting-good-stores/page__st__30 Now I'm not saying they don't have a right to charge whatever they want, but many people (like me) will ultimately make a decision based on cost, and if I can get a discounted competitor irons set + a nice driver and maybe even a new bag....for the standard price PING charges for just irons...well, that's a big issue. I'd love me some PING clubs...but I'm not rich.

 

 

Ping likes their product to keep its value and its distribution channels know what will happen if they do not conform to Ping's pricing policy. For the consumer, it's a product that you'll want to keep to get the most from your buck.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by scottcarmichael View Post
 

 

 

So, after much back and forth and knowing I had a budget to stick with, I've decided to go with TaylorMade stuff. I read the customer reviews, and the vast majority of players seem happy. My irons should arrive in a few days, and next month or two I'll try to pick up a SLDR driver.

 

 

If you're buying the SLDR line, hope you have a better than average swing. Most reviews I've read show that in comparison to other OEM lineups, the SLDR line is fairly demanding.

 

In comparison, Callaway brings out product frequently, but they seem to segregate the market in their lineup. Looking at the driver market, they have a driver for the Average Joe and more in the X2Hot,  a driver for the better player in the BB, the driver for very good players with speed in the BBA (and new BBA), and a driver for those guys who want more speed and can handle a lite setup - V Series.

post #30 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottcarmichael View Post
 

Reading online just a bit will hint that PING goes after places that use discounts they don't like far more harshly than others do. http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/topic/145962-why-no-pings-at-dicks-sporting-good-stores/page__st__30 Now I'm not saying they don't have a right to charge whatever they want, but many people (like me) will ultimately make a decision based on cost, and if I can get a discounted competitor irons set + a nice driver and maybe even a new bag....for the standard price PING charges for just irons...well, that's a big issue. I'd love me some PING clubs...but I'm not rich.

 

I don't worry about PING's future, but from what I can see, they're sorta like the "Apple" of the Golf world in terms of brand power. Titleist is up there with them. TaylorMade and Callaway are more like "Samsung" it seems. We almost shouldn't be using them as a basis of comparison for clubs aimed at the masses because they cater to a specific niche, wealthier crowd.

Ping, Mizuno and Titleist enforce Minimum Advertised Price (MAP) so that retailers do not discount their products or participate in promotions that would ultimately reduce the price of their products.  While MAP hurts consumers who are looking for the latest and greatest at a steep discount, those who invest in the clubs see their clubs retain their value much longer than TM or Callaway.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrownCoast View Post
 

Agree 100% Another way of looking at it is Titleist and Mizuno can't keep up with product R&D. How much technology has changed in the pro v1 Is it the same ball from last year or even 6 years ago? if they add technology and just keep the same name its exactly what TM does except the change the name. Yes they release Clubs every 2 years so people say it will hold its value longer. Say what you want but if titleist releases a new line in 2014 and you are not a fan then you're stuck waiting 2 more years for something new. Just cause a company releases New clubs every year or 6 months doesn't mean the old stuff is no good it just means the consumer (US) has more options to choose from. That is a good thing!

 

If you guys are like me you probably tried a bunch of different clubs from different companies and past models before settling on one set. Options are a very good thing. Theres some things I liked from one company and other things I didn't like from the same company.

It has nothing to do with not being able to keep up with R&D, it's that Titleist, Mizuno and Ping use different product life cycles to retain the value of their clubs and maintain a consistent flow to their business.   TM and Callaway tried to capitalize on some good marketing and player feedback and kept the market flooded with new products to maximize revenues.  The boom period for TM has ended and now they are laying off people and consolidating their businesses (Adams, TM), Callaway isn't far behind imo.

 

The problem consumers have now, is that their new $300 JetSpeed will only get them $45 as trade-in in less than a year.

 

I agree options are a good thing, but equally important to me is that the company I spend my money with respects the value of my money and doesn't do things to devalue the products I purchase for their own gain.  As consumers we vote with our $$$$ so when you buy something from one company over another you're sending a message as well.

post #31 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtogolf View Post
 

Ping, Mizuno and Titleist enforce Minimum Advertised Price (MAP) so that retailers do not discount their products or participate in promotions that would ultimately reduce the price of their products.  While MAP hurts consumers who are looking for the latest and greatest at a steep discount, those who invest in the clubs see their clubs retain their value much longer than TM or Callaway.

It has nothing to do with not being able to keep up with R&D, it's that Titleist, Mizuno and Ping use different product life cycles to retain the value of their clubs and maintain a consistent flow to their business.   TM and Callaway tried to capitalize on some good marketing and player feedback and kept the market flooded with new products to maximize revenues.  The boom period for TM has ended and now they are laying off people and consolidating their businesses (Adams, TM), Callaway isn't far behind imo.

 

The problem consumers have now, is that their new $300 JetSpeed will only get them $45 as trade-in in less than a year.

 

I agree options are a good thing, but equally important to me is that the company I spend my money with respects the value of my money and doesn't do things to devalue the products I purchase for their own gain.  As consumers we vote with our $$$$ so when you buy something from one company over another you're sending a message as well.

I agree with you, how we spend our money sends messages to companies and yes although trade in values might be lower I don't think when a company or store buys back products to resell they never give a good money back deal. I just think it is nice for consumers to be able to buy the RBladez tour for $500 now where as the AP2 and Mizu MP and ping s55 will run me $1000.00-$1200.00 (here in Canada) Not to mention I can get a past model iron set from 6-12 months ago with technology updated a little more then an iron set from 2 years ago. 

 

I'm not knocking titleist, I had a set of AP2 irons, they were way to good for me but felt like butter when I hit them pure. So I know how nice those clubs are. I just like options even though I have a used set from 2009 and really strike well. But on a budget it helps having a solid quality set of irons (with up to date technology) for a substantially lower price.

post #32 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrownCoast View Post
 

Agree 100% Another way of looking at it is Titleist and Mizuno can't keep up with product R&D. How much technology has changed in the pro v1 Is it the same ball from last year or even 6 years ago? if they add technology and just keep the same name its exactly what TM does except the change the name. Yes they release Clubs every 2 years so people say it will hold its value longer. Say what you want but if titleist releases a new line in 2014 and you are not a fan then you're stuck waiting 2 more years for something new. Just cause a company releases New clubs every year or 6 months doesn't mean the old stuff is no good it just means the consumer (US) has more options to choose from. That is a good thing!

 

If you guys are like me you probably tried a bunch of different clubs from different companies and past models before settling on one set. Options are a very good thing. Theres some things I liked from one company and other things I didn't like from the same company.

 

I sense that you don't like Titleist just as I don't like TM.

 

The Pro V1 has been around since 2000 and doesn't appear to have fundamentally changed since that time (well except for the Pro v1x with 60 fewer dimples).

 

"The Pro V1 made its debut on the PGA Tour at Las Vegas on October 11, 2000, the first week it was available to the pros. A longtime Titleist user, Billy Andrade, won that first tournament with the new ball. The Pro V1 was available to the public by December. The Pro V1 was a dramatic departure for the brand, which had traditionally used a wound-ball construction (with a liquid-filled core center) for its top-of-the-line golf balls.

Shortly after its introduction the Titleist Pro V1 became the most played ball on the PGA Tour,[9][10][11] and three years after Titleist's initial breakthrough with the Pro V1 came the Pro V1x, a ball with 60 fewer dimples. The combination of a larger firmer core, a thinner cover, and 60 fewer dimples resulted in a ball that retained the same soft feel of the Pro V1 while reducing spin and increasing distance.[12]

In December 2007, Acushnet lost a patent infringement suit brought by Callaway.[13] The following November, Callaway won an injunction in a Delaware court, ruling that sales of the Pro V1 golf balls must be stopped from January 1, 2009, with professionals being able to continue with their use until the end of the year. Acushnet immediately announced that they would be appealing the decision.[14] Acushnet somewhat redesigned the Pro-V1 during the dispute. On August 14, 2009, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated the judgment against Acushnet and ordered a new trial. On March 29, 2010, a federal jury ruled in favor of Acushnet (Titleist), and found that the Callaway patents were invalid."

 

It is still the most played balls among professionals (I know doesn't really count because professionals will play the balls from which ever manufacture will pay them) but also among low handicappers. Even among the high handicappers (myself included) at my club it is played by at least 75% of the members. Maybe the Pro V doesn't have to change every year because they got it right the first time?

 

I know that you started another thread about balls and the inference is that there is really no difference between golf balls. So the question you wanted answered was why does everyone still play a golf ball with 15 year old technology? Frankly I don't know the answer but the Pro V1 has been the go to premium golf ball for 15 years and they still command a very high price. So either the ball is better or a whole lot of us (including college and other good players) have been duped all these years.

 

I just don't buy into the premise that TM is doing a lot of R&D and that is why they are able to introduce new clubs every year.
 
The current "technology" of slotted iron for example was introduced by Wilson in 1979.
 
 
How long has the "technology" of a white driver lasted?
 
I will acknowledge that TM does a great job of promotion and advertising.
 
It seems to me that TM has to introduce an improvement or a new technology every year in order to maintain sales. They throw out something new every year and hope that it sells.
 
Manufacturers like Titleist, Ping and Mizuno do not adhere to the same ideology. 
post #33 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by ay33660 View Post
 

 

I sense that you don't like Titleist just as I don't like TM.

 

The Pro V1 has been around since 2000 and doesn't appear to have fundamentally changed since that time (well except for the Pro v1x with 60 fewer dimples).

 

"The Pro V1 made its debut on the PGA Tour at Las Vegas on October 11, 2000, the first week it was available to the pros. A longtime Titleist user, Billy Andrade, won that first tournament with the new ball. The Pro V1 was available to the public by December. The Pro V1 was a dramatic departure for the brand, which had traditionally used a wound-ball construction (with a liquid-filled core center) for its top-of-the-line golf balls.

Shortly after its introduction the Titleist Pro V1 became the most played ball on the PGA Tour,[9][10][11] and three years after Titleist's initial breakthrough with the Pro V1 came the Pro V1x, a ball with 60 fewer dimples. The combination of a larger firmer core, a thinner cover, and 60 fewer dimples resulted in a ball that retained the same soft feel of the Pro V1 while reducing spin and increasing distance.[12]

In December 2007, Acushnet lost a patent infringement suit brought by Callaway.[13] The following November, Callaway won an injunction in a Delaware court, ruling that sales of the Pro V1 golf balls must be stopped from January 1, 2009, with professionals being able to continue with their use until the end of the year. Acushnet immediately announced that they would be appealing the decision.[14] Acushnet somewhat redesigned the Pro-V1 during the dispute. On August 14, 2009, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated the judgment against Acushnet and ordered a new trial. On March 29, 2010, a federal jury ruled in favor of Acushnet (Titleist), and found that the Callaway patents were invalid."

 

It is still the most played balls among professionals (I know doesn't really count because professionals will play the balls from which ever manufacture will pay them) but also among low handicappers. Even among the high handicappers (myself included) at my club it is played by at least 75% of the members. Maybe the Pro V doesn't have to change every year because they got it right the first time?

 

I know that you started another thread about balls and the inference is that there is really no difference between golf balls. So the question you wanted answered was why does everyone still play a golf ball with 15 year old technology? Frankly I don't know the answer but the Pro V1 has been the go to premium golf ball for 15 years and they still command a very high price. So either the ball is better or a whole lot of us (including college and other good players) have been duped all these years.

 

I just don't buy into the premise that TM is doing a lot of R&D and that is why they are able to introduce new clubs every year.
 
The current "technology" of slotted iron for example was introduced by Wilson in 1979.
 
 
How long has the "technology" of a white driver lasted?
 
I will acknowledge that TM does a great job of promotion and advertising.
 
It seems to me that TM has to introduce an improvement or a new technology every year in order to maintain sales. They throw out something new every year and hope that it sells.
 
Manufacturers like Titleist, Ping and Mizuno do not adhere to the same ideology. 

I like titleist AP2 irons, like I said I owned a set. sadly it was out of my league so I gave them to a friend who is a better golfer then me. I wish I could hit those irons! As for the prov1 I hit that ball and found it really nice...well I used the 1x but same thing. I just didn't find it to be worth my while especially since I can find water and trouble with ease. so $5 for a lost ball doesn't seem right. I alsoFind it funny that they charge so much for balls from 4 years ago. If they do add and make changes to their balls then why are past models still so expensive if they in fact improved their golf ball. and if Callaway or TM just kept the same name for balls I think people would start to think of them the same way they do about Titleist balls. I read that one of the big wigs from Titleist ball department left there and joined TM last year and created lethal. 

 

I don't often comment on ping or mizuno cause I never hit them but ping does catch my eye and seems like they have a lot of options from drivers right down to putters for all levels. That is the next set I'd like to try. And Ping has a fantastic website with lots of info. For a company I've never tried I can say I'm a big fan!

post #34 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrownCoast View Post
 

As for the prov1 I hit that ball and found it really nice...well I used the 1x but same thing. I just didn't find it to be worth my while especially since I can find water and trouble with ease. so $5 for a lost ball doesn't seem right. I alsoFind it funny that they charge so much for balls from 4 years ago. If they do add and make changes to their balls then why are past models still so expensive if they in fact improved their golf ball. and if Callaway or TM just kept the same name for balls I think people would start to think of them the same way they do about Titleist balls. I read that one of the big wigs from Titleist ball department left there and joined TM last year and created lethal. 

 

 

I agree with you in that I do find it amazing that we golfers are prepared to pay $5 per ball for Pro V's that essentially haven't changed since 2000.

 

To me it is very impressive that Titleist can stay at the top for SO long and without really a big change.

 

You have got to admire this.

 

As for TM well I agree with you on the naming of their golf balls ..... frankly I can't keep up. Here is an excerpt from an article I read on TM balls -

 

What’s In A Name

Quite frankly I don’t know what TaylorMade’s deal is when it comes to the golf ball. It’s not that their tour-level balls haven’t been pretty good (or better) over the last several years, but what’s with the total inability to maintain any sort of consistency with the name?

TP red and black…TP LDP (also red and black)…Penta TP (good one)…Penta TP3 (not such a good one)….Penta TP5 (at least it made sense). Project 5 would have been awesome if they had run with it.

They didn’t. They went Lethal.

Stop snickering…apparently this ball is deadly.

For the love of dimples, TaylorMade, find a name and stick with it. It’s a concept that has worked pretty well for, oh, I don’t know…the Titleist ProV1.

You might simply know that one as many golfers do; The #1 Ball in Golf.

Seriously, TaylorMade, stop it. You’re confusing the consumer, and it’s a shame because, as it turns out, the Penta series was actually pretty damn good, and Lethal; it’s even better.

post #35 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrownCoast View Post
 

I don't often comment on ping or mizuno cause I never hit them but ping does catch my eye and seems like they have a lot of options from drivers right down to putters for all levels. That is the next set I'd like to try. And Ping has a fantastic website with lots of info. For a company I've never tried I can say I'm a big fan!

 

I am a hack but I do find that Ping makes the best drivers for me and Mizuno's forged iron feel the best for me when I hit them properly.

post #36 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by ay33660 View Post
 

 

I agree with you in that I do find it amazing that we golfers are prepared to pay $5 per ball for Pro V's that essentially haven't changed since 2000.

 

To me it is very impressive that Titleist can stay at the top for SO long and without really a big change.

 

You have got to admire this.

 

As for TM well I agree with you on the naming of their golf balls ..... frankly I can't keep up. Here is an excerpt from an article I read on TM balls -

 

What’s In A Name

Quite frankly I don’t know what TaylorMade’s deal is when it comes to the golf ball. It’s not that their tour-level balls haven’t been pretty good (or better) over the last several years, but what’s with the total inability to maintain any sort of consistency with the name?

TP red and black…TP LDP (also red and black)…Penta TP (good one)…Penta TP3 (not such a good one)….Penta TP5 (at least it made sense). Project 5 would have been awesome if they had run with it.

They didn’t. They went Lethal.

Stop snickering…apparently this ball is deadly.

For the love of dimples, TaylorMade, find a name and stick with it. It’s a concept that has worked pretty well for, oh, I don’t know…the Titleist ProV1.

You might simply know that one as many golfers do; The #1 Ball in Golf.

Seriously, TaylorMade, stop it. You’re confusing the consumer, and it’s a shame because, as it turns out, the Penta series was actually pretty damn good, and Lethal; it’s even better.

I wish they just stuck with the tour preferred name for tour level balls. I know they went back to it this year maybe it will stick this time around. As for the LDP, they continue to keep that. So we know they know how to reuse a name and stick with it lol. If they want to change something every year, change the box they come in. As for their premium and distance balls, well they've used burner a few times so stick with that and as for premium just find something and stick with it. But thats just me. I would prefer a one name line up like titleist has pro v nxt velocity and dt solo, bridgestone has their b series, e series and the fix. Names we can continue to follow. even when they do change things about the ball they keep it in the same lineup so that consumers know what they like and will continue to buy based on the name. I believe titleist upgrades their ball they just keep the name that so many know. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Golf Talk
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Golf Talk › TaylorMade cuts 15% of it's Workforce and closes Adams Golf Headquarters in Plano