Giga Golf anyone?

[nuck81]

  NativeTxn said:

To me there is nothing wrong with clones. However, everything is wrong with counterfeits.

+Infinitybillion

Not to mention at GigaGolf you can get the clubs adjusted to fit your measurements AND have custom grips and shafts put in that are even better than most stock OEM's offer. But I think this subject has run it's course, no one is going to change anyones mind. The haters are going to hate, even though most have never hit or even seen a GigaGolf club, and those of us that have are going to continue to praise their quality, customization, and price. Or until next week, when it gets brought up again...

[sean_miller]

  NativeTxn said:

I've never really said anything on the other "clone debate" threads, so I'll just throw my opinions out on this one.

How is comparing name brand and no-name ibuprofen relevant? They're exactly the same chemical. The storebrand isn't putting up a website with a "similar but different" chemical and telling people it's better than Advil - specifically using the brand name in it's brochure.

[nuck81]

  sean_miller said:

I pretty much disagree with everything you just typed. Your formatting is nice though.

Tricky edit!!!

Because GigaGolf clubheads are made from the same over seas factories and foundries as OEM's. GigaGolf just uses better shafts and grips when they assemble their clubs to their customers specific order...

[kennay92]

  pxc said:

I thought the term clone meant "knockoff", basically that they're trying to pass it off as a real Ping or Callaway or whatever. I dont' think GG does that.

yeah id say more that gigagolf replicates clubs rather than trying to clone them... clone meaning their trying to rip off other companies, replicating meaning that the general public obviously likes the big names club designs so why not use those designs as well to the fullest without intruding on a patent or whatever. and i think thats what gigagolf would tell you to.

[NativeTxn]

  sean_miller said:

I pretty much disagree with everything you just typed. Your formatting is nice though.

By all means that is your choice, and I certainly respect your opinion on the matter.

As you can see from my sig, I've only got one clone, and other than that hybrid, I don't use them. However, I still see absolutely nothing wrong with someone who wants to play them, and I never will. I've really never read a truly cogent argument as to why clones are bad. Sure there are negatives to them, but there are positives too - just like anything in life. I've heard people say that their stealing the OEM's designs, etc. They're definitely using the designs to make their own clubs, but that is certainly not the first time that that has happened, and there is nothing wrong with it either. Furthermore, it is highly likely that the clones cannot be exactly the same as the OEM clubs, because it is also highly likely that the OEMs have patents on their particular club designs that would prevent another company from copying them exactly (i.e. the measurements, dimensions, etc.) I've heard people say that the OEM's spend tons on R&D; and the clone manufacturers are hurting the OEMs financially. That doesn't hold water because you could argue that every time someone buys a used club or set of clubs instead of a new club or set of clubs, that person is hurting the OEMs financially since the OEMs get exactly zero dollars or cents from someone purchsing a used club. At the end of the day, while I don't play clones other than the one hybrid, I just don't see anything wrong with someone else stocking their entire bag with clone clubs if that is what they want to do. And also at the end of the day, I certainly respect your right to disagree with me. And I very much appreciate the complement about my formatting!

[sean_miller]

  nuck81 said:

That's ok. If I couldn't explain or back up my opinion I'd end with a lame joke too...

See my edit. The clone business model is very common in industry. Copy what works, then try tell people you're as good as, or better than, the original. PS. you laugh off other people's comments quite often - it's lightens the mood when you don't share an opinion.

[nuck81]

  sean_miller said:

See my edit. The clone business model is very common in industry. Copy what works, then try tell people you're as good as, or better than, the original.

Laughter burns calories, and I hate to run...

I edited too by the way. To be fair I have some GigaGolf Hybrids that I don't play. Not because they are bad clubs but simply because I don't like how they look at address (face is closed) and how they feel when I swing. But I love the irons I have....

[delav]

Nuck, seriously, why perpetuate the exact same argument that you have in several other threads. Can't we ignore this issue this time and not clog the forum with this bullshit?

[nuck81]

  delav said:

Nuck, seriously, why perpetuate the exact same argument that you have in several other threads. Can't we ignore this issue this time and not clog the forum with this bullshit?

Because I keep seeing the same bullshit counterarguments!! Why else??

[NativeTxn]

I'm not sure where they ever say that their product PERFORMS BETTER - it says "Compare features and performance to ____". It never says that it performs better (or at least I couldn't find such a statement) - it simply says compare.

That being said, Pinemeadow does state that they provide a BETTER VALUE.

There are two sides to that coin - one says that you can pay more for something that is higher quality and it should theoretically last longer; therefore, providing a lower cost per unit of time (whether it be months, years, etc.). The other side says that if you can get performance and/or quality that is, let's say, 80% as good as the "original" for 1/3 the price, that that is the better value. I tend to subscribe to the former personally.

The comparison to ibuprofen stands on the fact that in both cases (clones and ibuprofen), they are bringing to your attention that you can compare this product to the name brand product. Then it is up to you, the consumer, to decide what you want. I know some people who swear by Advil or Tylenol as compared to the generic, and that is fine for them - they will pay more. It is up for debate as to whether they are getting better performance versus if they used Equate.

Hell, I won't eat generic Frosted Mini-Wheats because I haven't found one that I like as much as the original Kellog's version. Because of that choice, I pay more for my name brand cereal, but that is my choice. And far be it from me to suggest that anyone is in any way ripping Kellog's off by purchasing a generic frosted mini-wheat (which by the way probably wouldn't contain the exact same ingredients and therefore would be "similar but different") because that is absolutely not the case.

As I've said before, you're obviously welcome to disagree, but I will not change my mind to think that clones are somehow bad because they aren't manufactured by an OEM until someone lays out a persuasive and cogent argument to that effect.

[sean_miller]

  nuck81 said:

Laughter burns calories, and I hate to run...

  nuck81 said:

Tricky edit!!!

I edited my post before your reply was posted - I even told you to refer to my edit. It sounds like you've done your homework - enjoy your clubs.

[NormH3]

  delav said:

This has all been said before. Hundreds of times.

yes it has. It's ashame that a poster can't get an opinion about a particular manufacturer without all the naysayers jumping in and giving their holier than thou speeches about whether or not a "clone" club is morally acceptable.

[James_Black]

  sean_miller said:

That's probably where to leave it - they're clones (hence being reviewed on a website called "golfclonereview.com"), but nobody's forcing us to put them in the bag, so, meh.

Lets spin this the other way around.

How can they not be clones? What could they do to be classified as a normal manufacturer? Big brands have loads of different models out, it's hard to make a SGI iron that doesn't look a bit like another brand. Their forged muscleback iron looks like a Titleist MB blade. It's not their fault that is what a blade looks like.

[Cussin hacker]

Why can Giga Golf sell their clubs so cheap someone asked. Because they are not paying millions in advertising and sponsorships. Good clubs no matter how you look at it.

[jonnythan]

  James_Black said:

Lets spin this the other way around.

Their designs are obviously copied almost exactly from Ping, Taylormade, and Callaway. But they're clearly not being sold *as* those clubs.

They are clones - they are not counterfeits.

[pxc]

  delav said:

3....2....1.... Pandoras Box!

You called that one.

[delav]

  pxc said:

You called that one.

Almost... it hasn't hit 20 pages of verbal diarrhea yet.

[max power]

  jonnythan said:

Their designs are obviously copied almost exactly from Ping, Taylormade, and Callaway. But they're clearly not being sold *as* those clubs.

Exactly, and apparently nice ones.