Kirkland (Costco) Premium Golf Ball

[iacas]

16 minutes ago, Lihu said:

Acushnet apparently bullied many smaller ball companies out of the market in the past. I wonder what Nassau is doing, or do they have to do anything?

Bullied is one way of looking at it. If Titleist patents and IP were not infringed, then that would have been bullying, because they likely knew those smaller companies couldn't afford to fight them. And maybe it was, since Vice, KickX, and a few others are still around.

"Enforced their patents" is another way of putting it, and it would not be "bullying" to enforce their patents. So if those balls did infringe, then Titleist wasn't being a bully at all, really.

But hey, @Lihu, at least you're consistent in supporting Costco and condemning Titleist, despite the fact that you have no better idea what is really going on here than anyone else. (I'm interested in how it turns out, and I'm playing devil's advocate a bit… but I don't really care if Titleist wins or loses. I've been a KickX/Snell guy for a number of years now.)

[Lihu]

27 minutes ago, iacas said:

Bullied is one way of looking at it. If Titleist patents and IP were not infringed, then that would have been bullying, because they likely knew those smaller companies couldn't afford to fight them. And maybe it was, since Vice, KickX, and a few others are still around.

"Enforced their patents" is another way of putting it, and it would not be "bullying" to enforce their patents. So if those balls did infringe, then Titleist wasn't being a bully at all, really.

But hey, @Lihu, at least you're consistent in supporting Costco and condemning Titleist, despite the fact that you have no better idea what is really going on here than anyone else. (I'm interested in how it turns out, and I'm playing devil's advocate a bit… but I don't really care if Titleist wins or loses. I've been a KickX/Snell guy for a number of years now.)

 

All I can say is that they're both pretty stubborn companies. I might have some bias towards Costco, but I also purchase a lot more things from them than Titleist. For instance, I can't buy a new AC unit for my house, car or massage chair from a golf store. If I could and it bore the name "Titleist" I might be more biased towards Acushnet. . .

[iacas]

12 minutes ago, Lihu said:

All I can say is that they're both pretty stubborn companies. I might have some bias towards Costco, but I also purchase a lot more things from them than Titleist. For instance, I can't buy a new AC unit for my house, car or massage chair from a golf store. If I could and it bore the name "Titleist" I might be more biased towards Acushnet. . .

They're just companies. They don't care much about your loyalty. They exist to separate you from your money. They're not looking out for your interests at all.

[colin007]

Who the eff is paying $5 for a ProV??? Nobody pays $60 a dozen...

[Lihu]

9 minutes ago, colin007 said:

Who the eff is paying $5 for a ProV??? Nobody pays $60 a dozen...

My daughter has some "well to do" friends who buy customized Pro-V1 for about that much. I never payed that much. . .I just play with other people's logos on them for half the price.

Edited March 22, 2017 by Lihu
Added the "half the price" part.

[Pete F]

Not sure how this will all work out but I know a lot more people have heard about Kirkland golf balls because of it. And not that they are an inferior product just less expensive.

[Lihu]

4 minutes ago, Pete F said:

Not sure how this will all work out but I know a lot more people have heard about Kirkland golf balls because of it. And not that they are an inferior product just less expensive.

It's funny how marketing works. "Just do it." sold a heck of a lot of $300 athletic shoes.

Not that I haven't already given enough of it, but IMO, Kirkland balls are probably just as good for my game as any other ball on the market. I doubt my score would change all that much, and the feel is pretty reasonable at a pretty affordable price.

Edited March 24, 2017 by Lihu
wrong message, meant to write this. . .

[rehmwa]

On 3/22/2017 at 3:32 PM, iacas said:

They're just companies. They don't care much about your loyalty. They exist to separate you from your money. They're not looking out for your interests at all.

I believe, good sir, you are ignoring an important part of Lilu's post.

the clear market opportunity of a Titlieist massage chair.  Tiger can rep for it.

 

[Lihu]

1 hour ago, rehmwa said:

I believe, good sir, you are ignoring an important part of Lilu's post.

the clear market opportunity of a Titlieist massage chair.  Tiger can rep for it.

 

There you go! I'd even buy one too!

[GolfLug]

KS IPA courtesy of Costco. Not too bad.

[woodzie264]

17 minutes ago, GolfLug said:

KS IPA courtesy of Costco. Not too bad.

that's one reason Costco & Kirkland are better than Acushnet

[Lihu]

4 minutes ago, woodzie264 said:

that's one reason Costco & Kirkland are better than Acushnet

Costco is good, not sure about "better" but they are most definitely good.

[GolfLug]

6 minutes ago, Lihu said:

Costco is good, not sure about "better" but they are most definitely good.

@Lihu, it was tongue-in-cheek. I think he meant they are better because KS/Costco makes/sells beer.. unlike Acushnet...

[iacas]

15 minutes ago, woodzie264 said:

that's one reason Costco & Kirkland are better than Acushnet

Fortune Brands used to own Acushnet… and Jim Beam.

[No Mulligans]

From the Wall Street Journal:

Quote

Dean Snell, a former ball designer at Titleist and TaylorMade who now sells low-priced balls under the Snell Golf brand, said the purpose of all the patents isn't merely to protect the designs of balls currently on the market. It is also to prevent competitors from using new innovations in future designs.

"In this industry, if you look at the amount of patents filed every day versus the number of golf balls actually made, it's a ridiculous number," Snell said.

Patents not to protect your product's design but to squash new innovations from competitors.

[Lihu]

5 minutes ago, No Mulligans said:

From the Wall Street Journal:

Patents not to protect your product's design but to squash new innovations from competitors.

Yeah, this is unfortunately what it's turned into in the last 100 years or so.

People call it innovation, while in reality it's to be able to stifle smaller companies with similar but different inventions from coming out with new inventions. The deeper pocket usually wins, because claims are not exact. Lawyers can pretty much prove anything even vaguely close infringes.

[Ernest Jones]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/erikmatuszewski/2017/03/26/this-week-in-golf-biz-costco-takes-on-titleist-a-3-bln-investment-in-golf-pimento-cheese-shoes/#7be5afb06c08

 

[boogielicious]

Who's the bully here? Costco is not the "little guy".

Quote

Costco was the first company to grow from zero to $3 billion in sales in under six years. For the fiscal year ending on August 31, 2012, the company's sales totaled $97.062 billion, with $1.709 billion net profit.

Quote

Acushnet IPO form shows annual net sales of $1.5 billion. Acushnet, parent company of golf industry leading brands Titleist and FootJoy, generated more than $1.5 billion in net sales in 2015