Driver vs Driver, Golf Channel and Wilson

[chilepepper]

I tried to watch it but it was just horrible 

[Slowcelica]

23 hours ago, rehmwa said:

Worst.....show.......ever........except for Melanie

I agree, it was like an 8 hour infomercial for wilson golf.

[newtogolf]

7 minutes ago, Slowcelica said:

I agree, it was like an 8 hour infomercial for wilson golf.

I agree to some level, it could have been much more insightful to the design process but they seemed to want to hide that part.  

[kpaulhus]

I really liked the overall crowd sourcing idea Wilson had in picking their next driver. A few points I took from the show below:

• IMO Wilson's golf reputation is not what it used to be. They simply cannot compete with the big 3 equipment manufacturers at this point in time. Albeit, if you sell a few million $ a year, that's still a pretty sweet business depending on who you talk to.
• The driver they chose didn't provide any actual data points vs other clubs. Why pay $450+ for a Wilson driver? 
• The whole show turned into a huge Wilson advertisement and wasn't as detailed on the specs and performance of the drivers as I would have liked to see.
• I think the idea was great, but the club isn't as revolutionary as I had hoped, and think they didn't pick right driver. 

[Valleygolfer]

14 minutes ago, kpaulhus said:

I really liked the overall crowd sourcing idea Wilson had in picking their next driver. A few points I took from the show below:

• IMO Wilson's golf reputation is not what it used to be. They simply cannot compete with the big 3 equipment manufacturers at this point in time. Albeit, if you sell a few million $ a year, that's still a pretty sweet business depending on who you talk to.
• The driver they chose didn't provide any actual data points vs other clubs. Why pay $450+ for a Wilson driver? 
• The whole show turned into a huge Wilson advertisement and wasn't as detailed on the specs and performance of the drivers as I would have liked to see.
• I think the idea was great, but the club isn't as revolutionary as I had hoped, and think they didn't pick right driver. 

Data points were not there is why. They were looking "sell a lure that catches fisherman" rather than something that is a stand out in performance. The whole ad is hokey and shameful. Using a very small selection of people getting amazing results in an area that is know to have superior ball flight and carry.

I don't know if it matters which driver was picked or if the any of the stats were actual. Word on the show was that the other driver was the performer but they could/probably have done this to create interest in the show. All in all I am not impressed with the driver. It still looks dumb and there was no performance comparison done. I predict the "Ronco" driver will be sold on Rock Bottom for $79.99 in 3 weeks.

[sjduffers]

On 11/27/2016 at 5:23 PM, natureboy said:

A fact I'm sure they failed to mention, right?

They mentioned it was at Lake Tahoe (and I could tell just from the footage too), but sure enough they didn't mention the altitude or the fact that the ball travels that much further. On the other hand, they had drives clocked to 360+ (so, say, 325+)... But the guys hitting them that far had visibly a real fast swing and were big tall guys, i.e. ex MLB pitchers and NHL hockey players.

Edited November 29, 2016 by sjduffers

[iacas]

10 hours ago, Valleygolfer said:

I predict the "Ronco" driver will be sold on Rock Bottom for $79.99 in 3 weeks.

How much are you willing to bet on that? Because I'll take you up on it. I'll even give you until January 1.

[Rainmaker]

I watched some of the final episode but it was pretty boring and there was a lot of fast forwarding.  Golf Channel comes up with some great concepts, though.  One thing I learned from Driver Vs Driver . .  there's not a whole lot left you can do to a driver.  It has made me think about club appearance, though . .particularly which clubs in my bag I like the look of/feel confident with vs not . .I decided to slowly upgrade the ugly clubs out of the bag.  

[Valleygolfer]

7 hours ago, iacas said:

How much are you willing to bet on that? Because I'll take you up on it. I'll even give you until January 1.

Maybe was being a bit hasty on three weeks but I would not be surprised that it won't be much into the 2017 season before you can pick up one of these around $100 or less. I'll bet you a dozen Kirkland golf balls by the end of April...

Where do they sell Wilson clubs anyway?

[Missouri Swede]

2 hours ago, Valleygolfer said:

Where do they sell Wilson clubs anyway?

"Seriously?"  (Remember the Wilson ads)

GolfGalaxy
EdwinWatts
PGAsuperstore

Or check here.

[Valleygolfer]

1 hour ago, Missouri Swede said:

"Seriously?"  (Remember the Wilson ads)

GolfGalaxy
EdwinWatts
PGAsuperstore

Or check here.

I guess I wasn't paying attention to the ads .... and I don't honestly care. It was merely a flippant statement based on observation of the market. I don't shop internet stores unless I am shopping specifics. I don't remember seeing Wilson golf at any website, but then again I really don't look for Wilson golf stuff either.

[caniac6]

I saw the driver today, and really didn't like the white stripe.

[Joey G]

On Wednesday, November 23, 2016 at 8:05 PM, Missouri Swede said:

Watched the final episode today (on DVR).  I was hoping they'd do more about the competition between the two finalist designs, showing the relative strengths of each, to lead up to the winner.  I was surprised they had an advertisement showing the winning club about 20 minutes into the show (although I wasn't watching the original broadcast--I DVR'd one of the re-runs).

Kept fast-forwarding through the show (reflections, memories, how'd you feel ...) until about 50 minutes in when they got to the point of announcing the winner, but at that point the ad had already already said who won, so it was kind of a non-event.

Did the exact same thing...I want to check out the driver but it wasn't a very entertaining production. 

[70sSanO]

Wilson made a decision over 10 years ago to focus more tour level clubs in lieu if their big box market.  When Padraig won a few majors it gave Wilson a boost, especially in Europe.

I've gamed their Ci7 irons and they were very solid.  Their Fybrids were also very nice.  Not a big box offering.  I will say that I have never warmed up to their drivers, which I think are still behind the competition.

But they will sell a whole lot more than Nike and Adams in 2017.  Their revenues have been up for a number of years and the golf division is not up for sale.  My understanding is that their market share is equivalent to what Nike's share was, but without the McIlroy and Woods sponsorship financial anchors.

Admittedly, I have a soft spot for Wilson since my first clubs were Wilson's BITD and they were the premier brand.  It was tough to see the dark years of discount store garbage, but they have moved pretty far from that era.

John

[Valleygolfer]

11 minutes ago, 70sSanO said:

Wilson made a decision over 10 years ago to focus more tour level clubs in lieu if their big box market.  When Padraig won a few majors it gave Wilson a boost, especially in Europe.

I've gamed their Ci7 irons and they were very solid.  Their Fybrids were also very nice.  Not a big box offering.  I will say that I have never warmed up to their drivers, which I think are still behind the competition.

But they will sell a whole lot more than Nike and Adams in 2017.  Their revenues have been up for a number of years and the golf division is not up for sale.  My understanding is that their market share is equivalent to what Nike's share was, but without the McIlroy and Woods sponsorship financial anchors.

Admittedly, I have a soft spot for Wilson since my first clubs were Wilson's BITD and they were the premier brand.  It was tough to see the dark years of discount store garbage, but they have moved pretty far from that era.

John

Considering Nike is no longer making clubs, I should hope they can out sell them.

[70sSanO]

49 minutes ago, Valleygolfer said:

Considering Nike is no longer making clubs, I should hope they can out sell them.

My point was more along the lines that the company that sponsored possibly the GOAT and one of the top current golfers went out of business even with their high profile investments.

And Taylormade is rumored to be on the auction block without any takers, so it seems odd to bash a company that has been around for decades and is making a profit just because you don't get out much.

John

[Valleygolfer]

14 minutes ago, 70sSanO said:

My point was more along the lines that the company that sponsored possibly the GOAT and one of the top current golfers went out of business even with their high profile investments.

And Taylormade is rumored to be on the auction block without any takers, so it seems odd to bash a company that has been around for decades and is making a profit just because you don't get out much.

John

I'm bashing a company that produced a crappy infomercial disguised as a reality show. We have yet to see if the driver is profitable. Comparing those companies is like apples to oranges. They all have different issues. I just don't see much "Wilson" on the golf course cept for their golf balls.

[70sSanO]

I do agree with you on how profitable that particular driver will be.  I also question whether the show will pull people in or push them away.  I have hit the D200 and although it was nice,  at the time I went with a Ping G30.

As for apples and oranges, the exact details of the issues are meaningless as the result is the same... the bottom line.  If you are not making money does it matter if was due to bad mgmt forcing out product or bad product that mgmt allows to go out... or just a combination of a lot of bad decisions. The result is the same.

Regardless, Wilson golf is turning a profit with a lower advertising and sponsor program.  They only have a few tour players.  It is just their approach.  Time will tell how things work out over the long haul.

It is obvious that Nike's approach didn't help their bottom line or develop enough long term player support.

John