The golf equipment business

[Spitfisher]

Adidas taylormade and Adams

Nike/ Nikegolf

Puma/Cobra

Fila/ Titleist/footjoy

all clothing and footwear companies, is there room for one more?

Under Armour and Srixon-Cleveland or Callaway?

[newtogolf]

Adidas taylormade and Adams

Nike/ Nikegolf

Puma/Cobra

Fila/ Titleist/footjoy

all clothing and footwear companies, is there room for one more?

Under Armour and Srixon-Cleveland or Callaway?

It would make sense for UA to get into the equipment business.  There's more overlap with Callaway (both make clothing and shoes) but they are a more popular brand, at least in the US.

[Spitfisher]

Callaway licensees their footwear- they just lend their name, same goes for any possible  apparel.  Cutter and buck used to share some resources at one point.

[newtogolf]

Callaway licensees their footwear- they just lend their name, same goes for any possible  apparel.  Cutter and buck used to share some resources at one point.

I didn't know that, thanks.

[SavvySwede]

Under Armor is so big in all of the other sports they really have no incentive to gamble on the golf equipment business given the current state of golf sales.

[jamo]

Under Armor is so big in all of the other sports they really have no incentive to gamble on the golf equipment business given the current state of golf sales.

That was my first thought as well. Very different business models too. They can always offload old polo shirts (because model years don't really mean anything), but old golf equipment is just dead weight, especially if you don't have any experience designing and selling it.

[Golfingdad]

That was my first thought as well.

Very different business models too. They can always offload old polo shirts (because model years don't really mean anything), but old golf equipment is just dead weight, especially if you don't have any experience designing and selling it.

Like hell they don't.  It's evolution baby.

My 2015 sweat is waaaaay more advanced than my 2014 sweat.  No way my old shirts could handle it.

[Spitfisher]

Under Armor is so big in all of the other sports they really have no incentive to gamble on the golf equipment business given the current state of golf sales.

I'm not saying they will.....

Its about brand imaging, images on national TV as well as taking away marketshare from competitors- its also a long term commitment. Which they have with Spieth and others.

Business 101: The best time to buy marketshare is in a down market and you have a lot of cash on hand- something that UA has a ton of right now.

[Patch]

I don't buy any golf company's apparel. Number one it's too expensive, and number two,  it does not help my golf game. My #3 reason is that it is probably made by the same folks who make Wal-Mart's stuff.

What i wear has nothing to with how I play. I would score the same even if I was wearing cut off blue jeans, a tank top , and flip flops.

Even when I play at Pebble, or  Bandon, my $10 dollar shorts, and my $8 collared shirt is acceptable. Now I am not saying wearing $50 pants,  a $40 shirt, a pair of $70 shoes, and a $20 cap/hat is wrong. If that is your thing, then more power to you. I applaud your tastes. It's just not the way I roll anymore. The only piece of golf equipment that I show off, and/or advertise for free, after I purchased it, is my TE Bag. That, and everybody knows what a Clicgear trolley looks like.

[SavvySwede]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SavvySwede

Under Armor is so big in all of the other sports they really have no incentive to gamble on the golf equipment business given the current state of golf sales.

I'm not saying they will.....

Its about brand imaging, images on national TV as well as taking away marketshare from competitors- its also a long term commitment. Which they have with Spieth and others.

Business 101: The best time to buy marketshare is in a down market and you have a lot of cash on hand- something that UA has a ton of right now.

A very good point. But I will add that the name Under Armor implies clothing/stuff you wear. It would be an odd name for a golf club company, doesn't fit the brand.

[Spitfisher]

A very good point. But I will add that the name Under Armor implies clothing/stuff you wear. It would be an odd name for a golf club company, doesn't fit the brand.

I get your point, but one only has to go back a couple of years to see, a company like Titleist was a all company first and foremost, making clubs under their name, a clothing company under a different name, and yet another club company and ball company under another name[quote name="Patch" url="/t/81217/the-golf-equipment-business#post_1124619"]I don't buy any golf company's apparel. Number one it's too expensive, and number two,  it does not help my golf game. My #3 reason is that it is probably made by the same folks who make Wal-Mart's stuff. What i wear has nothing to with how I play. I would score the same even if I was wearing cut off blue jeans, a tank top , and flip flops. Even when I play at Pebble, or  Bandon, my $10 dollar shorts, and my $8 collared shirt is acceptable. Now I am not saying wearing $50 pants,  a $40 shirt, a pair of $70 shoes, and a $20 cap/hat is wrong. If that is your thing, then more power to you. I applaud your tastes. :dance:  It's just not the way I roll anymore. The only piece of golf equipment that I show off, and/or advertise for free, after I purchased it, is my TE Bag. That, and everybody knows what a Clicgear trolley looks like.  [/quote] You should swallow your pride some day and try some of the fabrics out there, which WILL make your game better, no matter where you live of play. But this is another discussion for another thread.

[Spitfisher]

A very good point. But I will add that the name Under Armor implies clothing/stuff you wear. It would be an odd name for a golf club company, doesn't fit the brand.

One only has to go back a few years to see a company like Fortune brands, which was in the tobacco industry, Booz, insurance etc etc own Acushnet, which was part of a rubber company, that owned Titleist, which primary revenue- even today is golf balls, which owns a footwear and clothing Company under another name ( Footjoy) Titleist also owned Cobra and pinnacle It's an example where a company like UA doesn't necessarily have to put their name on everything, especially in golf. Nike proves that every year what poor decision that is. ( close to 75-80% of nukes " golf" sales is in apparel, shoes etc, not so much in clubs) rossignol ski company bought Cleveland at one time in the early 80s, they were cash rich at the time. A year or two later Salomon, another ski company ( bindings and ski boots. Actually at the time) bought Taylormade. The rest is history, at the time many people questioned this logic.

[SavvySwede]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SavvySwede

A very good point. But I will add that the name Under Armor implies clothing/stuff you wear. It would be an odd name for a golf club company, doesn't fit the brand.

One only has to go back a few years to see a company like Fortune brands, which was in the tobacco industry, Booz, insurance etc etc own Acushnet, which was part of a rubber company, that owned Titleist, which primary revenue- even today is golf balls, which owns a footwear and clothing Company under another name ( Footjoy) Titleist also owned Cobra and pinnacle

It's an example where a company like UA doesn't necessarily have to put their name on everything, especially in golf. Nike proves that every year what poor decision that is. ( close to 75-80% of nukes " golf" sales is in apparel, shoes etc, not so much in clubs)

rossignol ski company bought Cleveland at one time in the early 80s, they were cash rich at the time. A year or two later Salomon, another ski company ( bindings and ski boots. Actually at the time) bought Taylormade. The rest is history, at the time many people questioned this logic.

Interesting history lesson, I think you might have changed my mind about all of this. Besides, who doesn't like new makes and models to demo?