Why are There Two Titleist Pro V1 Models?

[ChetlovesMer]

13 minutes ago, ncates00 said:

Business strategy and ethics aside, 

There is NO ethics issue here. Every company wants SMOMS. (Sell More Of My Stuff). 

There is nothing illegal or immoral about developing two products which are really similar and trying to sell as many of them as possible. I often hear people speak of marketing like its a bad word.

There's a great article in the June 2019 issue of GOLF magazine "The ball that, almost, changed it all". 

The article talks about how Titleist beat Nike to the punch with a better and quicker marketing scheme. Titleist grabbed (and/or protected) tons of market share, while at the same time boxing Nike out. You might be able to argue that event eventually resulted in Nike no longer producing Golf balls, bags, and clubs. 

[ncates00]

10 minutes ago, ChetlovesMer said:

There is NO ethics issue here. Every company wants SMOMS. (Sell More Of My Stuff). 

There is nothing illegal or immoral about developing two products which are really similar and trying to sell as many of them as possible. I often hear people speak of marketing like its a bad word.

I think you're slightly reading into what I said a bit here.  I have no problem with businesses making money.  I'm all for it.

The potential ethics issue I'm addressing is not the fact that they're similar; the problem is the fact that the balls are touted as being different when they're (measurably) not.

Example: I have no problem with having Coke, Diet Coke, and Coke Zero (and all the others).  They're similar, but very different.

Here, Titleist is marketing Coke and Diet Coke, but when you take a sip, they're the same drink.  They said they're different--I bought Diet Coke because I wanted Diet Coke, but I got Coke.

That is the ethics issue.

[rehmwa]

2 minutes ago, ncates00 said:

Here, Titleist is marketing Coke and Diet Coke, but when you take a sip, they're the same drink.  They said they're different--I bought Diet Coke because I wanted Diet Coke, but I got Coke.

That is the ethics issue.

But they are different, and performance wise it just might not actually be different enough for us to tell.

I remember tape cassettes coming out at the end with tons of new technology.  The more expensive had less noise and it was measured and proveable.  However, the human ear could absolutely not discern the differences between the top tiers of tapes even though they cost significantly better for 'the best' performance......

Yet people still insisted they could hear it, and audiophiles were insistent on only buying the top end tapes......

Same psychology here even if the examples aren't perfectly analogous....

People buy what they want, providing a market for that isn't an ethical issue.  If I want to buy a different ball because of cosmetic differences and my ego thinks the V1x is for a higher swing speed hero......that's on me.

[ChetlovesMer]

1 minute ago, ncates00 said:

I think you're slightly reading into what I said a bit here.  I have no problem with businesses making money.  I'm all for it.

The potential ethics issue I'm addressing is not the fact that they're similar; the problem is the fact that the balls are touted as being different when they're (measurably) not.

Example: I have no problem with having Coke, Diet Coke, and Coke Zero (and all the others).  They're similar, but very different.

Here, Titleist is marketing Coke and Diet Coke, but when you take a sip, they're the same drink.  They said they're different--I bought Diet Coke because I wanted Diet Coke, but I got Coke.

That is the ethics issue.

2 Things:

1 - "the balls are touted as being different when they're (measurably) not." - Actually they are measurably different. Just very slightly and not normally noticeable to most people using them.

2 - Even if they were exactly the same, still not an ethics issue. Tons of companies sell the same vehicle (car, tractor, combine, etc...) which are exactly the same, except they turn on, or turn off some features. This is pretty easy with electronics. So, you sell them at 2 different price points even though they are the same. Not an ethics issue. 

3 - A better example might be Viagra. They sell it here in the US for 40 dollars a pill (or what ever). They sell it in Africa for a few pennies. But in Africa its marketed as a cure for River Blindness. It is literally the same pill. They market it two ways. They sell it at two price points.... still not unethical. 

[ncates00]

3 minutes ago, ChetlovesMer said:

1 - "the balls are touted as being different when they're (measurably) not." - Actually they are measurably different. Just very slightly and not normally noticeable to most people using them.

That's the point though.  I would want a noticeable difference in performance, just like how I would look at the difference in a low spin head v. a higher spinning head.  Those heads may only be 400 rpm's different, but 400 rpm's is both measurable and significant (for driver at least).  Strike concerns aside, a guy spinning his driver at 3k could see big gains in driver carry by knocking those 400 rpm's off his driver backspin.

All I'm saying is they could make 2 premium balls that actually and noticeably have different performance characteristics.

[ChetlovesMer]

1 minute ago, ncates00 said:

All I'm saying is they could make 2 premium balls that actually and noticeably have different performance characteristics.

Sure, they could.

And all I'm saying is it's not an ethics issue.

[iacas]

31 minutes ago, ncates00 said:

Here, Titleist is marketing Coke and Diet Coke, but when you take a sip, they're the same drink.  They said they're different--I bought Diet Coke because I wanted Diet Coke, but I got Coke.

That is the ethics issue.

No, Coke and Diet Coke are much different products. One has like 140 calories in a can, the other has zero.

That's not a valid analogy.

[Vinsk]

18 minutes ago, ncates00 said:

I would want a noticeable difference in performance, just like how I would look at the difference in a low spin head v. a higher spinning head. 

Right. But just because you don't see a noticeable difference means nothing to Titleist because they've got consumers like @Mr22putt who are all in.

[ncates00]

4 minutes ago, iacas said:

much different products.

That's the point.  V and X aren't different enough.  They're priced the same and are still "flagship" products of the company.  I'd like to see V and X more like the example; meaning, a bigger difference, yet still a premium option.  E.g., a noticeable difference in backspin or launch or something.

[iacas]

1 hour ago, ncates00 said:

That's the point.  V and X aren't different enough.

Which is why your analogy fails. Coke and Diet Coke are very different.

[Typhoon92]

18 hours ago, iacas said:

They generate almost exactly the same numbers. Why are there two different versions of this ball?

I have said that for years.  It’s only for people on golf wrx ...lol ... because they can tell the difference!!

I play both, no difference.  Had them both on the GC2 as well, no difference.  Nice to see the TXG guys get exactly what I got.

[Cartboy]

15 hours ago, Mr22putt said:

I think most golfer chose a ball based on 3 factors:

Feel

Price

Distance

Likely feel as the most important factor.

 

I play any of a number of soft balls, based on a bounce test.

Both ProVs are out for me.

If a find an individual ball I really like, I will almost always lose it on the first hole . . . which is unusual because I normally play the same ball the entire round (the four in my pockets are just for balance).

😎

It's amazing how many balls come in in carts, and wind up in buckets in the cart barn.  Then, almost as amazing, how those buckets tend to disappear when they get full.

😉

I shagged our course for a few years, and sold 1000's of balls on Craigslist.  ProVs were $10/dozen, and I had standing orders for them.  Everything else was $5/dozen, and I couldn't give away some balls that were really nice. 

Now a few of the members shag the course for charity, so I retired from that.

I shagged the woods along the range last month, and got four 55 gallon barrels.  That saves the course a lot of money on range balls.

Edited November 26, 2019 by Cartboy

[iacas]

7 minutes ago, Cartboy said:

I play any of a number of soft balls, based on a bounce test.

Both ProVs are out for me.

Soft balls are slow balls.

[leftybutnotPM]

5 hours ago, Vinsk said:

I’ve got some ocean front property in Arizona I’d love to sell you.

 

Yes always such a disappointment when you find a ball, excitedly notice that it's a ProV and then have to discard it because it's an X. Nothing worse than the "clicky" ProV1X.

I mean - you'd roll your eyes if a famous pro said he preferred the  V1 over the V1X because it was "clicky".

 

[Vinsk]

8 minutes ago, leftybutnotPM said:

Yes always such a disappointment when you find a ball, excitedly notice that it's a ProV and then have to discard it because it's an X. Nothing worse than the "clicky" ProV1X.

I mean - you'd roll your eyes if a famous pro said he preferred the  V1 over the V1X because it was "clicky".

 

Lol! Yep...like when Phil said, ‘ it would take me a month to get used to a new ball.’ It’s all just entertainment. Every sport and every hobby has this realm from golf to pinewood derby racing.

[Double Mocha Man]

8 hours ago, iacas said:

Their testing has been poor for some time now. Limited sample size, basic facts about some of the products are wrong… etc. Look at their ball test and their personal launch monitor testing for example of how to poorly conduct testing. The ball testing I have heard that they hit VERY few balls with no real accounting for varied weather conditions. Look at the dispersion rates on some of the balls. Look at the basic facts they get wrong - about almost every product - in the PLM test. Look at the comments.

They're relying on past successes and are putting out shoddy work.

 

Here's a golf ball test that looks pretty good. 

ROBOT TESTED: Which golf ball suits my game? | Today's Golfer

---

ROBOT TESTED: Which golf ball suits my game?

 I especially like the part where they hit a brand new golf ball just once.  I've been there and done that...

[ChetlovesMer]

Well, According to the Target store near me there IS a difference between the Pro-V1 and the Pro-V1x.

Apparently, the Pro-V1x requires an ant-theft case, whereas the Pro-V1 does not.