How should companies go about releasing new equipment?

[tristanhilton85]

There seems to be two different theories in the golf industry with regards to bringing new equipment to the public. Some companies, like Titleist and Mizuno, stick to a very predictable pattern; in Titleist's case new drivers and woods one year and then irons the next. Others, like TaylorMade, seem to bombard consumers with multiple releases every year.

On one had, it feels like going with a TaylorMade product will keep you on the cutting edge of technology, but within a few months, your club will be old news. Companies who stick to the more traditional release schedule might have more time to put into each product, but often times are seen as trying to catch up.

Which way do you think is best?

[Patch]

Fewer releases per time frame would/should lead to more time spent on R&D; in between those releases. Then again, perhaps with today's releases, the  R&D; was completed a few years ago, with today's R&D; being applied in a few more years.

Golfers seem to be a gullible bunch, and the manufacturers know this.

I read an article that several groups of golfers, with different handicaps, were given the chance to test two drivers. One club sent the ball a mile, but was not player friendly when it came to accuracy. Although it sent the ball a long ways, the ball usually wound up lost, off the fairway. The other club was more accurate with the same golfers finding the fairway more often than not. Difference was it did not have the distance of the other, much longer club. At the end of the test, the golfers were given their choice of which club to take home with them as payment for being part of the test.  Most of the golfers in the test groups, by a large margin, chose to take the less accurate, longer distance club.

[newtogolf]

Interesting topic.

The question is, what are the real tangible benefits of each new model over the previous.  Computers and electronics have very short product life cycles and we expect that the model we purchase today will likely be replaced by a new model that has a new feature or benefit that really won't matter much to us.

Golf is a bit different in that as we get more involved with the game, our desire to improve increases exponentially and a great number of golfers will spare no expense to shave some shots off their handicap until they achieve a level of performance they are satisfied with.

Companies like TM and Callaway have picked up on that, they appeal to the golf ho in all of us, teasing us with new clubs that are longer and more forgiving.   I think it's normal for golfers to get caught up in the frenzy and buy the latest and greatest clubs every time they are released.  After a while, many of these golfers realize that the new driver they just bought really isn't that much more forgiving or longer than their last one.  Instead of turning over their bag every six months or sooner, they start to settle in on a set of equipment they like and are comfortable with.

I'd guess one of the reasons that better golfers seem to trend towards Titleist, Mizuno and Ping is because their product release schedules are more in line with their thinking and their marketing isn't as hype driven as the others.

My personal experience is that buying new clubs is fun and exciting but it doesn't lower my handicap.  You can't buy a single digit handicap but it took me a few years and thousands of dollars to figure that out.  My irons, driver, hybrids and wedges haven't changed all season in my main bag.  I am still searching for a 3W I like off the tee and deck so I'm prone to ho'ing them, but rather than spend the money for latest and greatest I go for the bargain deals on older models.  I just picked up a Ping G25 3W that I think I'm in love with, but we'll see how long the honeymoon lasts.

[David in FL]

I can't vote for either option.

I'm a free-market capitalist.  I believe that the answer to the question is simple.....they should do whatever best supports the organization's strategic goals and ultimately provides the best value to their shareholders.

I suspect that both TaylorMade and Titleist each believe they're doing exactly that.

[isukgolf]

I can't vote for either option. I'm a free-market capitalist.  I believe that the answer to the question is simple.....they should do whatever best supports the organization's strategic goals and ultimately provides the best value to their shareholders. I suspect that both TaylorMade and Titleist each believe they're doing exactly that.  ;-)

+1 ... well said

[hilmar2k]

I voted the second option, but not for the reason listed. I love that TM releases new stuff all the time, as it means I can get the last gen but still new stuff on the cheap. Just picked up a brand new Jetspeed rescue club for $85. I also picked up a barely used R1 over the winter (traded in by someone who absolutely had to have a SLDR, no doubt) for $119.

[boogielicious]

I can't vote for either option.

I'm a free-market capitalist.  I believe that the answer to the question is simple.....they should do whatever best supports the organization's strategic goals and ultimately provides the best value to their shareholders.

I suspect that both TaylorMade and Titleist each believe they're doing exactly that.

Good point, but the trade (retailers) usually dictates when products should launch.  In retail personal care (my industry), the trade wants release at certain time of year to maximize launch volumes.  For golf, they may have a similar strategy with most releases being in the fall.

[iacas]

Good point, but the trade (retailers) usually dictates when products should launch.  In retail personal care (my industry), the trade wants release at certain time of year to maximize launch volumes.  For golf, they may have a similar strategy with most releases being in the fall.

Eventually it just becomes "what you do." TaylorMade releases things throughout the year. Titleist sometimes does late fall (for what, Christmas?), and sometimes spring (which would seem to make sense - start of the golf season).

The PGA Show is just after Christmas, which is a bit weird too, but it's close enough to the start of golf season too, particularly when a lot of companies just introduce the stuff, and start shipping in late February or March.

[WUTiger]

For golf equipment, I prefer the circa 2007 cycle which saw a given product model stay in production for about two years (or maybe 3 years for low-sale players irons).

If the pros want to play around with prototypes, that's fine. They have swings finely tuned enough that 1/4" here or 4 grams of weight there might make a different. For most of us, get close to ideal on a fitting, and then learn how to maximize that club!

I want Callaway to offer improvements in their clubs after two years of enhancement . The X.Hot becoming the X2.Hot and turning orange is not an improvement!

[David in FL]

For golf equipment, I prefer the circa 2007 cycle which saw a given product model stay in production for about two years (or maybe 3 years for low-sale players irons).

If the pros want to play around with prototypes, that's fine. They have swings finely tuned enough that 1/4" here or 4 grams of weight there might make a different. For most of us, get close to ideal on a fitting, and then learn how to maximize that club!

I want Callaway to offer improvements in their clubs after two years of enhancement. The X.Hot becoming the X2.Hot and turning orange is not an improvement!

But why do people care?  If you buy the X.Hot and see no improvement in the X2.Hot, you're not going to buy it.

Why do people get so wound up over the fact that they're offering it?  It's almost as if some take it as some kind of personal affront....

[dbuck]

I can't vote for either option.

I'm a free-market capitalist.  I believe that the answer to the question is simple.....they should do whatever best supports the organization's strategic goals and ultimately provides the best value to their shareholders.

I suspect that both TaylorMade and Titleist each believe they're doing exactly that.

+2 and yes well said

[caniac6]

I don't replace my gear often, so I really don't care what the companies do. If I find something that works, I stick with it.

[WUTiger]

... But why do people care?  If you buy the X.Hot and see no improvement in the X2.Hot, you're not going to buy it. ...

David,

I try to track the models of golf clubs from cycle to cycle - and all the constant releases make it hard to track. I know, it's not a very good reason to get concerned...

[David in FL]

David, I try to track the models of golf clubs from cycle to cycle - and all the constant releases make it hard to track. I know, it's not a very good reason to get concerned... :-\

Interestingly, it's probably a better reason than most have! :beer: