HytrewQasdfg

The 80/20 rule applies to customer service also. 20% of your customers account for 80% of your customer service cost. Companies often lose money on that 20% of customers due to the cost of providing them customer service. Companies are in business to make a profit, and there are a lot of ways to do that. One way is to provide top-notch custoerm service to everyone, but that means raising prices for 100% of their customers to account for the extra cost of servicing the 20% of high maintenance customers. The other way is to lower prices for 100% of their customers, not provice extra customer service for the 20% of high maintenance customers, and allow that 20% to go somewhere else. It may seem ironic, but yes sometimes you do make more money by having fewer customers. Example: 8 customers, gross sales profit = 8$ total, total customer service cost = $1. 2 customers, gross sales profit = $2 total, customer service cost = $3. If he keeps all 10 customers, his total gross profit is $10, but his total customer service cost is $4, so he has a net profit of $6. If on only sells to the 8 low mainenance customers, his gross sales profit is only $8, but his total customer service cost is only $1, so his net profit is $7. He actually makes more money ($7 instead of $6) by selling to fewer customers. It sounds like tim is actually a pretty good businessman. Low prices and high customer service are a deadly combination. Few businesses can stay in business long doing that. You want high customer service, go someplace that charges high prices.

What compounds an "arms swing" as being the biggest problem (imho) is that when someone tries to switch from an arms driven swing to a body driven swing at first you are really, really bad. Not many people can handle taking a huge step backwards so they can start moving forward again, so they go back to the arms swing which "at least was working" (even if working poorly).

Ding, ding, ding. We have a winner. Trying to use your arms (and hands) to swing/control the club is the single biggest problem (imho), because it is the most natrual thing to do. Give a glof club to anyone for the first time (child or adult) and they will swing it with their arms. Aren't several of the items on the original list caused by using your arms and upper body (shoulders in particular) to power/control the club instead of the lower body and core muscles?

No, they had a production run error that caused a run of balls to go out that were illegal (as I understand it, they went out with he wrong cover). Those were recalled, and they continued to sell the correctly made (and legal) balls. Unfortunatly, the idea that the reds were illegal got stuck in the public's mind. That's why they are being discontinued. Not because they are illegal, but because there a number of golfers that wrongly believe them to be illegal (and thus won't buy them).

How can you fit someone that is just starting out? The measurement charts are balogna. There are plenty of tall guys that have a flat swing, and plenty of short guys that have an upright swing. Until he has established some basic swing mechanics there is no way to fit him. I still stand by my previous advice. Just go out and purchase an old, cheap beater set of clubs (from Play It Again Sports or even Goodwill). Take some lessons and get the basics of your golf swing down with them. Then you'll have enough info (about your swing, fitting, and club needs) to make a serious purchase.

No I didn't. I said I played a model by Golfsmith called a P2. It is not a clone and looks nothing like a Ping (actually, someone said it does bear some resembles to a TM Rac, but imho it is a very superficial resemblence). Nothing so outlandish that it would suggest they are trying to fool anyone into thinking it was a TM much less a particular TM model. As far as the joke? It looks like the joke is (I'm sorry to say) on whoever has purchased a clone set, because when you run the numbers (apples to apples) they are overpriced.

My 2 cents worth: The salesman crossed the line from being helpful to being a jerk. It is his job to advise you, not to dictate to you. Bottom line: it's your life, your money, and you're the one that has to live the the consequences. The final decision (right or wrong) is yours, not his. What club to buy? When I first started (which wasn't that long ago) I went to Goodwill and mixed-and-matched a set from what they had. It was a full set of irons, wedges, and a putter, but they weren't all the same (different brands, but mostly Wilsons, and different types--from forged muscle-backs to cavity backs; even got a 1 & 2 iron). $1.25 per club. Also bought a bagthere ($8). That's really enough to get you started playing. You'll get a feel for what type of club you like and don't like to play. The in a few months (with a little experience under your belt) you can pop for a more expensive & make an intelligent decision. Remember, golf clubs (like air conditioners) go on sale in the fall. You'll get a better deal if you can wait till the fall to purchase.

My 2 cents worth: The salesman crossed the line from being helpful to being a jerk. It is his job to advise you, not to dictate to you. Bottom line: it's your life, your money, and you're the one that has to live the the consequences. The final decision (right or wrong) is yours, not his. What club to buy? When I first started (which wasn't that long ago) I went to Goodwill and mixed-and-matched a set from what they had. It was a full set of irons, wedges, and a putter, but they weren't all the same (different brands, but mostly Wilsons, and different types--from forged muscle-backs to cavity backs; even got a 1 & 2 iron). $1.25 per club. Also bought a bagthere ($8). That's really enough to get you started playing. You'll get a feel for what type of club you like and don't like to play. The in a few months (with a little experience under your belt) you can pop for a more expensive & make an intelligent decision. Remember, golf clubs (like air conditioners) go on sale in the fall. You'll get a better deal if you can wait till the fall to purchase.

That makes perfect sense. What can I say? I get confused easily. To me it makes sense to say both: what it is relative to the path, and what it is relative to the target. I think that is essentially what I was saying, just using a different prop as the tool.

I was going to walk away from this thread, but I strongly disagree with this statement. What is the purpose of selling a club like this: The only reason to do this is to try and establish some measure of equivalence between these two clubs in the mind of the consumer. That is what their entire sales pitch is about. Everything on their web site talks about "the same as"--the same factories as; the same metal as; the same technology as. It's all just a slick sales pitch to get you to compare their clubs to top end clubs. Why? So they can overcharge you. Compared to top-end clubs, clones seem like a deal. That's because they have manipulated you into comparing their clubs to higher quality clubs (apples to oranges). When you do an apples to apples comparison and compare clones to equivalent quality clubs, you find that clones are tremendously overpriced. Say you are a beginner and want an inexpensive golf set to get started with (Driver, woods, irons, wedges, putter, & bag). How much would a set of clone clubs run you? @Gigagolf: Driver: $75 - $130 #3 & #5 wood: $40 - $100 Irons - $150 - $300 Sand Wedge: $20 - $48 Putter: $29 - $40 Bag: $57 - $65 Headcovers: $22 - $44 (not included with woods or putter) So your cost for a full set from Gigagolf is somewhere between $393.00 & $727.00. Wow, when compared to buying new top-end clubs it seems like a deal, but that's the apples to oranges comparison. How do they stack up price wise when doing an apples to apples comparison--when you compare their prices to the price of purchasing new similar quality clubs? From Dick's website: Top Flite full set - $200 Nackalus full set - $250 Maxfli full set - $300 Tour Edge full set - $400 You get similar results at several retail vendor's sites. These clubs too are all made in the same factories, out of the same metal, and use the same technology as the big boys (just like the clones). This is the apples to apples comparison. Clone clubs full set: $393 - $727 Equivalent retail full set: $200 - $400 The bottom line is you don't get a deal when you purchase clone sets. You pay $200-$300 too much, because they manipulated you into comparing their clubs to the wrong level of clubs. That's a deceptive sales practice.

Yes, it's my consistent ball path. A number of times I've taken a large box (approx. 2 ft high, 3 ft long, and 2 ft deep) and set it along my target line. I set the ball at the front corner 1 club head from the box. If I was comming over the top I would bang the heck out of the box. I can go all day hitting push/slices and never touch the box. I convinced a big part of my problem getting square is simple lack of flexiblity. My backswing and turn are tremedously puny. On the shorter clubs I never push at all, but as the clubs get longer the push comes in and then the slice. I'm convinced I just don't have enough time in my downswing with the longer clubs to allow them to come square (I should say I'm making an effort to be a rotational/swinger--no hand or arm manipulation on the downswing, just let the momentum of the swing bring the clubhead to where it should be). I can produce a straight shot or even a draw simply by rotating the club a little counter-clockwise in the hand when I take my grip, but I'd prefer to fix things so I'm doing it right instead of meddling with my grip. I've worked a stretching routine into my mornings (which has just confirmed how unflexible I am), but it will take time. I put a large exercise ball between my knees, a 5 ft piece of PVC pipe across my shoulders, bend 45 degrees at the waist, and rotate. I can barely get that piece of pipe pointing at my left leg. That's what--a 30-40 degree turn at best?

I'm a little confused here. Hitting a draw with the face open? Maybe I'm not clear about what open means? Assuming right hander with inside-out swing here. Open to the path of the club? That would impart a clockwise spin to the ball. That would create a high pressure area on the left side of the ball, and a low pressure area on the right side of the ball, which would result in the ball going to the right (a slice). Open to the target line? If the clubface was closed compared to the path of the club, but open to the target line it would cause the ball to spin counter clockwise. That would create a low pressure area on the left side of the ball, and high pressure area on the right side of the ball, causing the ball to curve to the left (a draw). It seems unclear to me what you mean by open.

I'm part of the 1% that slices with an inside-out swing path. If the original poster is part of that 1% also, then I can tell you from hard learned experience that putting swing thoughts into his head about not comming over the top is going to screw up his swing big time. All it takes to avoid screwing up someone's swing is one simple question: does your ball start out to the left and then curve to the right, or does it start out to the right and then curve to the right? (for a right handed golfer). If it starts out to the left, then he is probably among the 99% comming over the top. If it starts out the right, then he is among the 1% of inside-out slicers. Is it really that hard to ask one question to ensure you're not giving the incorrect advice?

Really? These are clones of what? When you look at them you immediatly mistake them for what? The company markets them as being similar to what? Actually, they are original designs and the company makes no attempt whatsoever to associate their component offerings with an OEM brand. There are component companies that make clone components (Hireko comes to mind). Neither Golfsmith or Matlby fall into that category. There are component clone, but not all components are clones.

No I'm not. I've said I have no problem with anyone playing inexpensive clubs. I have not problem with anyone playing component clubs (even cheap component clubs). I have a problem with clones (which are different from components and inexpensive clubs). I have a problem with companies imitating a companies product to the point that they make them look identical and use virtually identical names. This, imho, steps over a moral and ethical line:

I know what goes on in a manufacturing plant and quality control, not golf clubs per se, but product manufacture. I also know that clones and component clubs are different (which from your comment you apparently don't udnerstand). I actually play components (Snake Eyes Viper woods and Golfsmith P2 irons), so as a matter of fact I probably paid less than you did for your clones and ended up with a superior compnent set. Compnent lines like Maltby or Golfsmith's Snake Eyes are legitimate, original designs that stand on their own. Pong irons or Callieway Big Berther woods? C'mon, that's in the same league as buying an Onega watch.

I think it depends on what kind of slice you are talking about. As I understand it: A pull/slice (where the ball starts to the left then slices to the right) is caused by comming over the top (outside in) with an open clubface. A push/slice (when the ball starts out right, then slices sharply to the right) is caused by an inside out swing with an open clubface. If that slicer simply squares the clubface they would be hitting draws.

Sand wedge heads often weigh over 300 grams. A 10% variance in weight (30 grams) is not unrealistic. I once purchased some "economy" True Temper iron shafts. Their bottom of the line shaft that went for about $4 each. They were speced at 125 grams. I took them home and weighed them. They varied from 110 to almost 140 grams (a 30 gram variance). Took 'em back. TT is a name manufacturer, but because it was a low end item they saved money by lowering the quality control on that item. That's often why cheap items are cheap--corners are cut on quality control. As far as the golf balls, you are mixing apples and oranges, and we both know it. The Wilson Zip ball sold at Wal-Mart is the exact same Wilson Zip ball sold at Golfsmith. On the other hand, the Wilson Prostaff club line sold at Wal-Mart is different thant the Wilson Staff line sold at Golfsmith. Everyone knows it, everyone recongizes they are different, there is no attempt by anyone to fool people into thinking they are the same quality clubs. And therein lies my problem with clones. They are trying to fool people into thinking their Pong clubs are somehow equivalent to Ping clubs. They aren't. They are a lower quality product.

The biggest difference is the quality control. The Ping head will be made with a consistent quality of metal. The Wal-Mart heads will be made of whatever metal that is available on the market, that might mean the same as the Pings or it might mean scrap metal from automobiles and refrigerators. A Ping head that is 30 grams too light (due to an air pocket having formed in the casting) will be rejected. A Wal-Mart head that is 30 grams too light will be passed into production. The loft/lie tollerances on a Ping head is probably 1 degree after casting, and the heads are adjusted to the correct loft/lie before shipping. The loft/lie tollerance on a Wal-Mart head is probably at least 3 degrees, and no adjustments are made to correct the loft/lie (this is why on less expensive sets it isn't unusual to have two adjoinging clubs (say the 7 & 8 iron) that have the exact same loft, because the 8 is too strong and the 7 too weak). The bits and blades on the machinery to level the face and cut the grooves on the Pings are changed at specific intervals to maintain a specific quality level. The faces and grooves of the Wal-Mart clubs are probably cut using the "worn out" Ping bits and blades, becuase while they are no longer in good enough condition to use on Pings, they are probably still have plenty of (lower quality) life left in them that is good enough for the Wal-Mart clubs. The list could get pretty long, but the point is to make a cheaper club you have to take quality control short cuts and allow things to pass into the market that would be rejected by a higher quality (and more expensive) clubmaker.

Yea, I took the shipping charges as a given, as I always roll them into any bid I'm making so a $35 bid with $15 shipping is actually a $50 bid in my mind. Of course when I tell my wife how much I paid I always leave the shipping off. "See honey, I only paid $35 for this club. What a deal."

And you think Ping hasn't tried to stop them? The clone companies stay just this side of trademark infringement. There are a lot of actions that are legal that aren't right. Let me ask you this: if they aren't trying to steal some of Ping's goodwill, why do they make a club that looks like a Ping and label it Pong? It's all part of the story line where they try to convince you it is almost a good as the real thing. Every part of their sales pitch is an attempt to convice you they just as good as the real thing, just cheaper. That, imho, is a deceptive practice. If they told you the truth--it looks like a Ping, but is Wal-Mart Wilson quality--do you think they would sell nearly as many clubs? I'm not surprised they play fine, so do the Wal-Mart Wilsons. The law of diminishing returns for quality tells you that. Think of quality levels as a staircase, where the height of each step is 1/2 the height of the previous step, but the effort to climb that next (smaller) step is more than all the previous steps combined. It's easy (and cheap) to build a club that is 80% as good as a Ping, but the cost escalate quickly as you go up in quality. I have no doubt clones are 80% as good as the real thing (so are the Wal-Mart Wilsons). What I have a problem with is their implication that they are 90, 95, or 98% as good as the real thing. They aren't, because the effort (and thus cost) to acheive those levels of quality (as small an increase as that may seem to be over 80%) would force them to price their product closer to the level of the real thing.

It amazes me that the people that are defending the clones still don't understand the difference between the club pictured above and this: They both cost the same. They both are the same quality. I don't think a single person on this board would have an issue with someone playing the inexpensive Wilson Prostaff club. So, if the issue people have with clones isn't the cost or the quality , what is it? The issue is the clone is trying to take advantage of the goodwill of another company that the clone has not earned. The clone company is trying to make people think it is "almost" like the high end expensive Ping, when infact it is actually like the inexpensive Wilson Prostaff set found at Wal-Mart. Clone makers are decpetive in their practices. It's not about money, it's about integrity. You don't try and steal another company's goodwill (and for those of you that aren't business savy, the biggest value of most companies is the goodwill built up around the name) by cloning their products.

I think about rotating my sternum (the indentation in the middle of your chest) from the front to the right. The "effort" comes from my core area. I don't try and shift my weight or use my shoulders at all. I try to hold the arm "V" from setup as long as possible in the backswing. At some point momentum takes over and right arm folds in, my left arm floats into position, and my weight shifts to my right foot.

I'd much rather be the guy playing inexpensive clubs and shooting my current scores than be the guy who cant break 100 playing top of the line clubs. That one word is where we differ. I have nothing against inexpensive clubs, nor do I think you need expensive clubs to play well. I also know there are plenty of inxepensive clubs available that are NOT clones. Wilson, Tommy Armor, Ram, Top Flite, Hippo, Tour Edge, & Adams all make inexpensive clubs that are just as high a quality (if not higher) than any clone club. My point is that if you think a set of Pong clone clubs is a higher quality/easier to play/more technically advanced set than any of the sets listed above, you are fooling yourself. A manufacturer that is dishonest enough to try and sway you to purchase his product by making it "look" like an OEM club and labeling them "Pong" is dishonest enough to cut corners in areas you don't see (and not tell you about them).

ebay is great if you follow a few simple rules. 1. Know how much you would pay for an item if you just ordered it off the internet. I can't count the number of times I've seen people bidding more on ebay than they could just go out to a web site and pay for it. 2. The "buy it now" is not the retail going price. I'm convinced some people set it high to get you to overbid. 3. Pick a few favorite vendors and stick with them. Golf equipment has a very high fraud rate on ebay (imho), but there are still plenty of good vendors on there also. Stay with people you know and trust (even if it means passing on a few "deals") and you won't ge burned. 4. Show some common sense. I recently bid $35 for a Wilson/Staff fybrid from a vendor I wasn't familiar with. I figured (1) I could afford to lose $35, and (2) the odds are low that people would be creating fake Wilson/Staff equipment (because it isn't that expensive to begin with). Had it been a Ping hybrid I would have passed, because the odds that I could get a genuine Ping hybrid for only $35 are pretty low.