Callaway’s Hand Slapped Over Misleading Marketing
News

Callaway’s Hand Slapped Over Misleading Marketing

Callaway’s Hand Slapped Over Misleading Marketing

Written By: Tony Covey

It appears that Callaway has once again been called out for what somebody considers deceptive marketing practices. As was reported in Thursday’s GolfBiz.net Daily Pulse, Callaway is replacing all of its Big Bertha and XR iron marketing collateral, which features its Up to 2 Clubs Longer claim, with new material that bills the iron sets as offering Distance Where You Need It.

Distance. Where You Need It.

It has a nice ring to it, doesn’t it. It’s not as bold as Up to 2 Clubs Longer, but I like it just the same.

Here We Go Again

This isn’t the first time in recent memory that Callaway’s marketing practices have been called into question.

In 2013, the company found itself on the wrong side of a National Advertising Division decision over it’s description of its RAZR Fit Xtreme Driver as the Longest Driver in Golf.

Last February, I called the company out for what I believed to be a disingenuous claim that Big Bertha was The Number One Selling Driver Brand.

Most recently someone has taken Callaway to task over its Up to 2 Clubs Longer Claim.

Within the golf industry there’s an unspoken rule that everyone gets to be a little full of shit. When a little moves closer to totally others start grumbling, and within the industry there’s a lot of grumbling about Callaway right now.

Some of that grumbling, it would seem, has led to action.

978x470-Big-Bertha-Irons

Who Threw the Flag?

According what was published in the Daily Pulse the blowback came from outside the company, and it stands to reason that Callaway didn’t rethink its approach without some sort of nudge (or flying elbow). Given where the other complaints originated, we can make a well-reasoned guess where it originated this time.

It was TaylorMade who called foul over RAZR Fit Xtreme and while contacts inside both TaylorMade and Callaway are either saying nothing or simply repeating no comment, no comment, no comment, a credible source with knowledge of the situation is telling us that it was TaylorMade who called foul this time too.

All of that suggests this most recent action isn’t so much about protecting the consumer from dishonest advertising as it is protecting declining market shares from a competitor with an effective marketing campaign.

Score one for us, right?

What’s the golf industry without an annual slap-fight between its two biggest players?

What’s the Problem?

Again, with the parties involved keeping the actual details quiet, we’re forced to read between the lines of the letter Callaway sent to its retail partners.

We’ve included the full letter below, and it’s reasonable to conclude that the complaint has something to do with the fact that a Callaway Big Bertha pitching wedge is under no reasonable circumstance ever Up to 2 clubs longer than a Razr X HL pitching wedge.

bertha-distance

Here’s how Callaway explains that piece of it to retailers:

“It was never our intent to imply that the short irons delivered an equivalent distance benefit as the rest of the set and we thought that this would be naturally understood.”

Did you really?

I’m conflicted about this.

As a guy entrenched in the industry I understand that part of the design philosophy for the modern distance iron is to increase gaps on the long end, and then narrow them back to normalcy on the short end. These gapping decisions actually do benefit the type of golfer who generally buys game-improvement clubs, and the simple fact of the matter is that nearly everyone who makes irons employs a similar strategy in their game-improvement designs.

More to the point at hand, Callaway actually spelled out the basis for its claims in the fine print of the Big Bertha Iron distance claim.

Quite frankly, while I thought the comparison itself was bit dubious given the apples to bananas nature of the differences in length and loft between the irons tested, I also thought Callaway did a reasonable-enough job of qualifying it.

However, if I put myself in the shoes of a guy not entrenched in the golf industry, and who probably has little-to-no concept of the ins-and-outs of game-improvement design philosophy from a gapping perspective…that is to say, if I put myself in the shoes of the average golfer, then yes, I can easily see how one might interpret the original ad as a promise for 20 more yards (give or take) from a pitching wedge.

If the 4-iron is 2 clubs longer and the 6-iron is 2 clubs longer, why wouldn’t the 9-iron and pitching wedge also be 2 clubs longer?

From that perspective I might feel mislead.

The average golfer wouldn’t inherently understand that the Big Bertha short irons don’t deliver an equivalent distance benefit. For all the market research Callaway does, one would assume it knows this.

If there’s an argument to be made in Callaway’s defense, it’s that it never actually said that its Big Bertha short irons are up to 2 clubs longer than anything. 4-iron. 6-iron. That was the extent and basis of Callaway’s claim. Check your recent history. Nobody ever goes beyond the 6 iron.

But again, the guy who’s going to buy Big Bertha irons can’t reasonably be expected to know that.

The Smack Down

XR-distance-where-you-need-it

Without somebody talking specifics it’s hard to know exactly how all of this went down. Maybe one of those threatening letters that the golf company’s legal teams exchange all the time was enough for Callaway to alter its course. Maybe there was involvement by a 3rd party like the Better Business Bureau. It’s been suggested to me that the threat of a class action lawsuit isn’t out of the realm of possibility.

No Comment is the refrain of the day, but let me spell it out for you…it was TaylorMade. Somehow, it was TaylorMade.

Even if Callaway doesn’t believe it was wrong (and even I’m not totally convinced that Callaway is totally wrong), it must have believed it would have been very expensive to try and prove it was right.

And so here we are.

Maybe Callaway Lost, But Who Really Wins?

Perhaps we should celebrate what is arguably a victory for straight-forward truth in advertising, but when companies make reasonable efforts to qualify and back-up their claims, and still get taken to task by competitors throwing rocks from inside glass houses, what are we left with?

Does the fine print need even finer print?

* 2 Clubs Longer Claim based on robot testing of Callaway Big Bertha 4-iron and 6-iron at multiple impact locations versus Callaway Razr X HL 4-irons and 6-irons using average player swing speeds2.

2. Distance gains not applicable to short irons where distance will be roughly equivalent between clubs3.

3. Because of differences in length, loft and other design considerations, some clubs may not be considered equivalent.

Where does it end?

It ends with nonsense.

When You’re Out of Words, Create Your Own

When there are no quantifiable claims to be made, or when qualified claims need to be quantified and then re-qualified, consumers are left to try and make sense out of a steady stream of near-meaningless, although often catchy, gibberish.

Up to 2 Clubs Longer (and the specific terms that accompany the claim) is out. The even less meaningful Distance Where You Need It joins the ranks of Outrageous Speed, Ridonkulong, Made of Speed, Made of Greatness, and the 6000 or so variants of faster, longer, and totally-fucking-better-than-what-you-bought-6-months-ago that some of the golf companies have assaulted us with for decades.

Nobody wins here, least of all the guy looking for actual quantifiable performance information.

None of this helps the consumer stretch his dollars either, and that’s distance where we actually need it.

The Letter

Here is a copy of the email Callaway sent to its retail partners. We didn’t add the bold print. That comes straight from Callaway.

Note how the company turns what should be a contrite sorry-we-screwed-the-pooch-and-we-need-you-to-help-us-clean-it-up letter of apology, or at least letter of explanation to its partners, into an opportunity to further push the products associated with the claims currently under scrutiny.

Getting dinged for dubious marketing is, in and of itself, a marketing opportunity.

Consumers love them.*

*excludes consumers who may have felt mislead by the original claim.

Valued Retail Partners,

Recently, it came to our attention that our “Up to 2 Clubs Longer” advertising claim for the Big Bertha Irons and XR Irons could potentially be interpreted as all clubs providing an equal distance benefit. As we all know from our experience with the sets, the distance and forgiveness benefits of our Cup 360 technology are real! Consumers love them and they are going to set a new standard of iron performance.

Consistent with our passion for delivering ultimate performance that benefit golfers on the course, the distance benefits are built into these sets starting with small benefits in the short irons and building in an impressive manner with large benefits in the mid and long irons.

It was never our intent to imply that the short irons delivered an equivalent distance benefit as the rest of the set and we thought that this would be naturally understood. To ensure the consumer clearly understands the benefits of these clubs, we believe it makes better business sense to simply modify the claim to accurately describe what consumers have been experiencing in droves with Big Bertha and XR. Specifically, they both deliver incredible distance through the set, or as we call it, “Distance Where You Need It.

Over the next few weeks we will be implementing this change at retail and in the marketplace and will continue, as we have steadily done the past two years, with growing share in the iron category with demonstrably superior performance.

As a result, we will need to make sure that all of our digital assets on your site are updated to reflect the changes. If you could please look at digital, social and supporting copy on the XR Irons and Big Bertha Irons product pages, we would appreciate it. We are asking that all product page copy, videos and digital assets be updated by 3/21. We have included the links to digital assets which your team should utilize moving forward.

Additionally we are sending new in-store graphics and would like to make certain all POP materials and merchandising displays are updated to reflect the new messaging by 3/31. We appreciate your partnership and support with switching out artwork in the appropriate channels. If you have any questions or concerns, please reach out to your Callaway Retail Marketing Contact or Sales Representative.

For You

For You

Golf Technology
Apr 25, 2024
Skillest is Reimagining Golf Instruction
Golf Bag Carts
Apr 25, 2024
Forum Member Review: Clicgear Model 4.0 Golf Push Cart
News
Apr 24, 2024
Are You Wearing the Right Size Shoe?
Tony Covey

Tony Covey

Tony Covey

Tony is the Editor of MyGolfSpy where his job is to bring fresh and innovative content to the site. In addition to his editorial responsibilities, he was instrumental in developing MyGolfSpy's data-driven testing methodologies and continues to sift through our data to find the insights that can help improve your game. Tony believes that golfers deserve to know what's real and what's not, and that means MyGolfSpy's equipment coverage must extend beyond the so-called facts as dictated by the same companies that created them. Most of all Tony believes in performance over hype and #PowerToThePlayer.

Tony Covey

Tony Covey

Tony Covey





    This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

      CJV

      9 years ago

      There is still a lot of talk about ‘jacking’ lofts on irons. I think the loft/number written or assigned to that iron is irrelevant. What determines a 7 iron being a 7 iron? Lots of things but loft isn’t one of them. Trajectory, apex height, spin, descent angle, these all determine what number should be written on the bottom of the club. If a 7 iron with stronger lofts flies the same as a 7 iron with weaker lofts but goes 10 yards further, what’s the problem. If any of you have hit the XR or XR PRO irons then you will know that if these clubs had ‘traditional’ lofts in them that they would not fly the way they should. The compliancey of the face means that they launch HIGH so with a weaker loft a 7 iron would take off more like a pitching wedge.

      Reply

      dcorun

      9 years ago

      Go pick the irons you want and compare them with your old ones. Then get fitted and see what the difference in yardage is compared to your current irons. It’s what I did and kept my Cleveland MT 588. Some were longer but, not worth the price to upgrade. 588 will stay in the bag for 2015.

      Reply

      barney

      9 years ago

      yeah. like the EPA “highway mileage” figure derived from a standard 48mph w/no accessories energized. more smoke. more mirrors.

      Reply

      retiredRichard

      9 years ago

      To heck with Callaway and Taylormade-I’m still laughing over the KickX ball ad. 20 yards more with irons and 30 with the driver??? Every golfer in the world should use the ball, right? And just think, with the XR iron it would be about 40 yards more-and with the old RBZ 3 wood it would be incredible!! Random thought-was the guy in the KickX ad using a Taylormade driver? Bottom line-we each need to test our own stuff against the new so the stats are relative and easily compared (except that it is hard to get 9/PW demos). But back to the ball-oh, forget it.

      Reply

      pooch

      9 years ago

      Golf spy should know that when Taylor made RBZ was introduced with their claims someone had to shave their head. We all know about irons because the TM RBZ irons did the same thing with the their irons. The longer irons were longer than competitors and when you got into the 8,9,PW and AW the so called trampoline gets tighter for one reason and that is accuracy not distance. So Callaway isn’t doing anything different than the Almighty Taylor Made.

      Reply

      Jon Silverberg

      9 years ago

      I’m surprised that not one comment has focused on what I take to be a major issue with these Callaway irons: is increasing the total distance range from pw to 6i from say, 120-160 yards, to 120-180 yards a good thing? I think it’s a very bad thing…1) why would a golfer want bigger gaps between irons? 2) if you think that such an increase would make two clubs superfluous at the top end of the range (say two hybrids, or a hybrid and a 5 wood), why would you want that? After all, if the pitching wedge still goes as far as it always did, you don’t have any distance room created below the pw distance so as to carry more wedges. Bottom line with the irons in this set that do produce greater distance, as described: your distance accuracy will be worse due to bigger gaps and your side to side accuracy will be worse due to longer shafts and lower lofts.

      Reply

      JD

      9 years ago

      Stupid claim regardless. Distance control and distance consistency is what is needed when it comes to irons.

      Companies should save the “X times longer” boasting for the driver.

      Reply

      Taylor.c

      9 years ago

      Interesting stuff. So wait, both iron sets were 2 clubs longer? And I just can’t believe Cway would change their marketing because of wedge gapping. I doubt any iron in the set is 20 yds longer vs the same Razr x iron, unless the lofts are really jacked up. It doesn’t matter how you qualify it, if it ain’t true.

      Reply

      Taylor.c

      9 years ago

      Last thing after reading that letter to retailers. Where’s Bill O’Reilly when you need him? Do they really think their customers are going to buy that they’re changing their BB and XR campaigns because of wedge gapping?!?! Come on.

      Reply

      Taylor.c

      9 years ago

      Look at the garbage 5mph claim on the XR driver too. Callaway employees are testing these clubs?!?! I got some ocean front property in Arizona to sell you.

      Reply

      Drewb

      9 years ago

      These guys are still riding Cally I see. Did MGS call out TM for their 17 yards longer marketing BS? Nope. They actually joined in the BS. Lol!

      Reply

      mygolfspy

      9 years ago

      I think Tony deserves an apology for your comment:
      http://mygolfspy.com/rocketballz-haircut-challenge/

      Reply

      Drewb

      9 years ago

      I’m very aware of the link you posted…it was a mainstay on the front page for weeks, maybe months. Under that watchful eyes of probably the best clubfitters TM had to offer, MGS did note that they never got the 17 yards (with a lot of mumbo jumbo and explanations/excuses)…but still got the haircut nonetheless.

      My point is not to rehash the 17 yards claim again, but rather to highlight that all manufacturers greatly exaggerate length. And no one took TM to task on their 17 yards claim…because there was a lot of fine print with it.

      I’m not a Cally fanboy, I play Ping irons, Cally driver, TM putter, Cleveland wedges, and Cleveland hybrids. To me, it looks like MGS goes out of its way to stick it to Cally while other manufactures slither by unnoticed…that’s all.

      Tony Covey

      9 years ago

      It’s not that I don’t understand where the perception of “riding Callaway” comes from, but I don’t really see how it applies in this case. We’re not the ones who raised the objection to the claim (in fact, if you go back to our original coverage of the release, apart from making the reasonable observation that the comparison wasn’t quite apples to apples, it seemed reasonable enough. In actuality, it was TaylorMade who raised the objection, and apparently had enough muscle behind to for Callaway to capitulate and change their campaign. That coupled with the fact that nobody can talk about it suggests this was a pretty big deal.

      Are you saying you object to the coverage? Ask yourself why this story isn’t making headlines elsewhere.

      Regarding the TaylorMade claim…Adam already provided the link to my personal experience with it, but more relevant to the larger discussion…as you may or may not recall, TaylorMade made a complaint to the NAD (division of BBB) over Callaway’s “longest driver in golf” claim. As sort a tit for tat kind of thing, Callaway made a counter-claim against TaylorMade for the 17 more yards thing (we covered this all in the story linked in this article).

      How that all eventually played out was that the independent NAD determined that Callaway’s claim could not be supported based on the methods used as the basis for the statement. It boiled down to how the testing was conducted and the fact that Callaway used its own employees in the test. Furthermore, the NAD determined that TaylorMade’s methodologies were in fact sufficient to be used as the basis for a claim.

      My point in all of this is that not only did we call out TaylorMade at the time (and were to a large degree taken to task over it), but a division of the Better Business Bureau also looked at that same claim and determined that the basis for the 17 more yards statement was valid.

      Bottom line, Callaway is making exceptionally bold claims right now, and while that’s all well and good, it’s walking a fine line, and this isn’t the first time it’s found itself on the wrong side of some sort of action. That said, I also think given TaylorMade’s slow hemorrhage of marketshare it should probably spend more effort focusing on getting its own house in order.

      This sort of thing looks bad for both companies.

      Reply

      Drewb

      9 years ago

      I don’t object to the coverage, but I would suggest you consider taking the same fervent stance with other manufactures who are selling us pipe dreams.

      Tony Covey

      9 years ago

      Drew – I’ll continue to continue this conversation because I’ve found you to be generally reasonable (even when you disagree with us), though you do seem to be consistently more negative on all things loosely TM related.

      As far as calling others out…the whole thing with RocketBallz came about after we blasted TaylorMade for the claim. That was basically a “Part 2” article. If memory serves I called them out the fine print – *based on 150MPH ball speed, which most people don’t sniff with a 3wood. But that said, we did in fact call them out prior to the haircut incident.

      Regarding the follow-up…yeah, my time was spent with fitters. That’s sort of how it works everywhere…it’s a disconnect between marketing and the R&D sides. Marketing makes claims, the guys on the other end of the building just want to you play equipment that works best. It’s not trickery, it’s that the fitters aren’t invested in the claims. That’s true at TaylorMade, it’s true at Callaway, and it’s true with everyone else I’ve visited.

      What was lost in that article, however, is that I went from my fairway wood with a stiff flex fubuki shaft to a rocketballz with a stiff flex fubuki shaft so it’s not like we found something dramatically different than what I was playing it’s simply that validating the letter of the claim wasn’t anybody’s focus at the time.

      On to other matters…when Adams (owned by TaylorMade) called the Tight Lies “better from everywhere”, we published a test (it was better from some places…not from others).

      On two separate occasions we’ve looked at TaylorMade’s general claims about RSi iron forgiveness (better on mis-hits). On both occasions we’ve found support for what they suggest (and we’re likely not done with those irons yet).
      PING made some claims about the G30 driver, and we explained those in the launch article. That was a bit different in that PING speaks in a different voice, and very clearly laid out for us who was most likely to see benefits and who wouldn’t see as much or any at all. Basically they laid out the fine print as clearly as possible.

      Contrast that with Callaway’s original V-Series claim (For anyone who wants to hit the ball farther). Callaway is making exceptional bold claims right now (by comparative standards), and whoever happens to be doing that at any given time is going to be subject to more scrutiny. I think some inside Callaway would concede they’ve taken some mis-steps with some of their messaging over the last couple of years. Just spitballing here, but my guess is they don’t think “Up to 2 clubs longer” was one of them…and frankly, I mostly would agree with that.

      You say we should be going after others, but really give this some thought for a moment…how often do you actually see claims that are both bold and quantifiable anymore?

      Nearly everyone has shifted towards claims that are difficult, if not impossible to validate, because the claims themselves are practically gibberish. We can’t send an AeroBurner head off for a metallurgical analysis to determine what percentage of the club is actually ‘Made of Speed’, nor can we determine the ‘greatness’ percentage of R15. Whether it’s 1 golfer, 6 golfers, 20…50, I can’t put a Callaway XR on a launch monitor to determine if it actually produces ‘outrageous speed’. I have no way to verify if X2Hot hybrid is actually ridonkulong. So in those cases, I generally just poke fun at the statement themselves, but if you look around you’ll see I’m extremely consistent in that. Everybody gets crap from me over their non-claim-claims.

      And so, as I actually said in the article, this type of thing (where a company gets reamed for making a reasonable attempt to qualify its claim) is actually bad for consumers because it basically encourages (if not forces) companies like Callaway to move away from things that can be quantified and validated (2 clubs longer) to blanket statements that sound great, but mean almost nothing (distance where you need it).

      And again…this isn’t us going after Callaway, this is largely me reporting on TaylorMade going after Callaway with some opinion intermingled (most of which suggests that while I can see the basis for the complaint, I think Callaway was reasonable in how it qualified the claim).

      ryebread

      9 years ago

      When these clubs were originally released a while back, I said four things on another website:
      1) Specs up top were jacked. Most gains, if there were any, were due to that.
      2) Max COR faces, if they’re indeed that, could help create higher ball speeds.
      3) Max COR faces more help the high swing speed player, which is typically the lower handicapper. Most lower handicappers won’t be caught dead with that club.
      4) Most lower swing speed players are likely going to replace the long irons with hybrids. Most low swing speed players are likely to hit the law of diminishing returns with some of the clubs up top.

      I didn’t understand the claims or club positioning. I was told they were magic and they created higher launch, less spin and it was all in the head design. Standard marketing regurgitation……………

      This is very interesting……….

      Reply

      Anthony

      9 years ago

      I hit these clubs a couple weeks ago at a Golf Smith. I normally hit my 7 iron 175-180. I was hitting this club 190-200. Distance was consistent on mishits. They are a bit chunky but they perform.

      i would have liked to try a long iron as i am inconsistent with them.

      Reply

      Regis

      9 years ago

      I had a similar experience to some extent. Never been a Callaway fan but the XR irons have a number of shaft options and they are offering a free upgrade until April 1st. It being miserable weather for mid March I decided to book a session with my club guy. Brought my current gamers (which I love) and the XRs were about 1 club longer with my fitted shafts and I love the feel, flight, dispersion etc. Placed an order. Did I rely on their advertising. Get serious. In can see advertising getting someone into the store but are there really people who would buy a set of irons without trying them out and comparing them to other sticks? Maybe.

      Reply

      Kor.A.door

      9 years ago

      Not sure why this matters so much, if you aren’t sure about the claims, go and hit them for yourself. I have hit the XR pros, and purchased them btw they were easily 2 clubs longer, granted the lofts are jacked, but that’s not the claim, I was hitting the 7 iron over 200 yards, but it had the lightest graphite shaft in them, I put a heavier shaft in and I can’t hit it that far, but the claim is “up to 2 clubs longer”, if you put the correct shaft in the club, and Jack the lofts you can achieve any claim, these clubs are long, and much longer than my the clubs they are replacing. The claim isn’t false, 2 clubs longer is achievable, the clubs may not work for you at those distances, but is it false or misleading if they can achieve 2 clubs longer, however the means of doing so.

      Reply

      Taylor59

      9 years ago

      I think you guys are taking this whole seeking the truth thing a little far. It’s marketing, get over it already. If blindly believe everything you read then I can only imagine what some people believe about world events/news. My Golf Spy take it easy!

      Reply

      SkipThisAd

      9 years ago

      Callaway is trying to exaggerate all of their club’s claims, a la Taylormade style, to make it more messy, Callaway even hire a club maker named Cleveland.

      Reply

      Drew

      9 years ago

      Reply

      Repo

      9 years ago

      I’ve been biting my tongue for a while now, but I can’t anymore. I consider myself a relative newcomer to the game. I picked it up “officially” about 3 years ago, before which I played about 1 round a year or so. I became hooked. Apparently obsessive compulsive perfectionists shouldn’t be allowed to try golf. I instantly began searching for references on proper swing technique and the science behind what makes a golf ball move.

      What I found was garbage. Everywhere. A mechanical engineer and Air Force pilot, I am used to analytical approaches based on irrefutable evidence. I basically had to figure most of it out myself, with the help of a few diamonds in the rough (Jorgensen, “The Physics in Golf”). Not that there isn’t great advice and some excellent teachers out there, quite the contrary; it’s just masked by a plethora of detritus.

      In the end, it’s pretty simple. A person’s swing rotational speed will produce various club-head speeds at different shaft lengths. From there, impact conditions reign supreme. If you hit it the ball in the middle of the face, max coefficient of restitution limits your ball speed. Then it’s up to loft and spin combination to maximize distance. This is not rocket science.

      The marketing these companies use is laughable. With a given COR, how exactly are these irons going “2 clubs longer.” Ok, I get that the loft/spin/MOI optimization that comes with smart CofG placement makes a difference, but really? 2 Clubs? I’m glad that they’re starting to be called out on their bullshit.

      Reply

      Blade

      9 years ago

      There isn’t a COR restriction on irons. With higher lofts, they will always have a lower COR than a driver. If they make hollow faces that flex, reducing how much the ball compresses, they can raise the COR compared to other designs. But it will still fall below what you get out of a driver.

      Reply

      paul

      9 years ago

      They were almost 25 yards then my titleist CBs. And I don’t see a problem with Callaway’s claims at all on this one.

      Reply

      DaveMac

      9 years ago

      I find it amusing that it is Taylormade and Callaway getting all hot and bothered about another round of exaggerated performance gains, not us the customer. I think at last we are growing immune to the hype.

      By the way I don’t think you need to resort to expletives to make your point. Prudish, yes I know but I prefer golf articles U/PG rated.

      Reply

      golfer4life

      9 years ago

      Yes very prudish.

      Reply

      Rex

      9 years ago

      Another spanking for Dirty Harry……

      Reply

      Tom

      9 years ago

      Interesting as Callaway never promised it would be any longer for everyone even with a 4 or 6 iron. They said “Up to two clubs longer” not “Two clubs longer”. I always assumed ones mileage may vary.

      But then after hitting these and buying XR Pro’s I wondered why they were even talking distance when the bigger thing for me at least was consistent distance. *shurg*

      Reply

      FTWPhil

      9 years ago

      If you like your 2 clubs longer you can keep it.

      Reply

      O. Robert

      9 years ago

      Many of the new folks at Callaway are from Taylormade, correct? Wouldn’t this indicate Taylormade knows what the new folks at Calloway are capable in terms of marketing claims? Hot off the face, perimeter weighting, aerodynamic, 14 yards longer…… Yawn. Do your own research, ask the Pro’s at Dick’s, OK scratch that….

      Reply

      Drew

      9 years ago

      My experience with these clubs has been great. I love the feel and consistency with which I hit them. On top of that, I do hit the 7 iron consistently 15 yards further (carry) than my old clubs. Also, the launch is higher and it stops faster.

      I’m a fan of the clubs, even though I do HATE the way they advertise.

      Reply

      Kenny B

      9 years ago

      Brilliant! Absolutely brilliant! A well written analysis and commentary that provides us, the consumers, with the facts of the case.

      Reply

      Bob

      9 years ago

      I have to agree with both DavidW and mnfats95. Advertising is self promotion. ‘Best food in town’ says who? At least Callaway made an effort to qualify their claims. Perhaps the quantification was not as complete as we the consumer would like to see but I would also point out the many MGS club test results do not reveal all the data leaving the ‘clear winner’ to be a bit subjective.

      Reply

      Dave S

      9 years ago

      There’s a difference between what’s termed “puffery” in the law (opinion-based claims) and misleading claims of fact. No one can prove that the author of the “Best food in town” sign doesn’t actually believe that to be true, but when you say “up to two clubs longer” when talking about an iron set, it’s reasonable to believe that the average consumer would think such a claim applied to all the clubs in the set.

      Reply

      Dave S

      9 years ago

      That said, I agree with some of the other comments in that if you don’t do your own research and read the fine print (assuming the fine print is adequate), it’s your own fault.

      Tom54

      9 years ago

      Maybe I’ve misheard the add but I’m pretty sure Haney says he added 70 yds to the guy who’s shanking it all over.

      Reply

      mnfats95

      9 years ago

      While I’m all for truth in advertising, I go back to the statement I’ve made many times. If you don’t read the fine print and do your own research into things like this then it’s no one’s fault but your own if you get duped.

      Reply

      David W

      9 years ago

      If they are going to get on to golf companies for marketing they need to start with Kick X golf balls. In the add a guy claims he hits the Kick X ball consistently 20 yards longer with each iron and 30 yards longer with his driver. Then let’s move to Hank Haney who claims he can tell you how to make one move that will add 20 yards to your driver every time but then says to watch his video where he give a guy a 30 minute lesson which only adds 7 yards. Chevy used to run an ad that showed a Chevy truck run over a ditch and a Ford truck fall into it and get stuck. The Chevy truck had 18″ or larger wheels with truck tires and they had slapped some 15″ wheels on the Ford with small car tires. Advertising lies, it’s a fact of life.

      Reply

    Leave A Reply

    required
    required
    required (your email address will not be published)

    This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

    Golf Technology
    Apr 25, 2024
    Skillest is Reimagining Golf Instruction
    Golf Bag Carts
    Apr 25, 2024
    Forum Member Review: Clicgear Model 4.0 Golf Push Cart
    News
    Apr 24, 2024
    Are You Wearing the Right Size Shoe?
    ENTER to WIN 3 DOZEN

    Titleist ProV1 Golf Balls

    Titleist ProV1 Golf Balls
    By signing up you agree to receive communications from MyGolfSpy and select partners in accordance with our Privacy Policy You may opt out of email messages/withdraw consent at any time.