Are Golf Clubs Becoming 2% Milk?
Many might say they already have.
The signs have been showing up for some time indicating “Commodification” might be happening to the golf equipment industry right now as I speak.
- A commodity is a product that has the same characteristics no matter who produces it.
- A commodity is a good for which there is demand, but which is supplied without qualitative differentiation across a market. Examples are notebook paper, milk, copper, power, etc.
Notebook paper is all pretty much the same. Are there some pieces of paper better then others…yeah sure. But for the most part and in general consumers look at one brand of paper pretty much the same as any other type pf paper. The quality of one brand compared to another is so close that it really doesn’t matter which piece of paper you buy. Same with milk…everyone has a particular brand they like but for the most part they are all on a level playing field…it’s all cow’s milk.
So when it comes to golf clubs in today’s time…does quality & performance still offer much value to golfers (or) is marketing the key to the success of a golf club and a brand?
What Makes A Brand Successful Nowadays? Marketing or Performance?
What makes a brand unique or better then any other brand nowadays? Outside of having a great PR/Marketing firm and some deep pockets…what is the measuring stick for the success of a new piece of golf equipment today? It’s such a basic question, but finding the answer can leave you scratching your head if you put some thought to it. Yes, there are those products that stand out in a crowd because of the amount you see them in ads on TV or how many golfers play them on Tour. But how many of those clubs actually stand out when it comes to outperforming their competition? Not many.
And yes you see a lot of new flashy designs with all kinds of visual (so-called) technology…but how many are any different then their predecessors when it comes to out dueling them in regards to distance and accuracy? Once again…not many.
Commoditization of an industry often starts with the lowering of your prices (check), lowering your margins (check), which results in loss of the traditional distribution channels (check), which results in less enthusiasts for the industry and a product that is all pretty much the same and (if something is not done about it), the demise of your brand.
Some might be thinking…”there have been all kinds of new technologies released in the last 5 years for golf clubs”. And you would be right…but…how much difference have they actually made for the golfers that buy that technology? There were definitely less technological advances in times past…but those advances did make a noticeable difference to players games. Going from persimmon (wood heads) to titanium for example. Or bigger sized heads is another. Thinner faces also made a big difference. Yes these are not ground breaking technologies when you think about them…they all sound simple…but they did all make a visible difference to those golfers that made the change.
The patents and ideas for golf club designs in the past few years on paper looks great…often times incredible but with all the limitations made to equipment it has shown to be a tough road to actually produce something that is as game changing as the Big Bertha driver was for golfers years ago.
So golf is in a creative design drought. Which has created somewhat of a level playing field for much of the competition performance wise. And it has taken a few years for consumers to notice this but you definitely hear more rumblings now from golfers not believing everything they read or hear or buying into all hype surrounding the far more often new product releases. You also hear golfers holding on to equipment longer then they used to…one reason is because they don’t see the benefit to upgrading. That was not true for the golf industry up until just recently.
Wonder why you see all those bright colors and odd shaped clubs with special promotional offers…like buy one driver get a FREE fairway wood or buy a set of X brand get another set FREE? Because with pricing all being about the same (typical of commodities) they have to find a way to differentiate themselves. What makes you choose one brand of milk over another? Marketing. How do you actually know which brand is better? You don’t…you buy what you see other people buying or hear other people talking about. So if performance is no longer a way to separate yourself…you are left with only these kinds of promotions to grab the golfers attention and the market share. The days of the $500 driver are over…but not because they won’t sell. Trust me if someone comes out with a technology that will lower golfers scores or provide a benefit like titanium did when it first came out…you’ll once again see $500 drivers selling like hot cakes. But like I said we are in an the “Golf Club Design Creative Drought Era”. And until someone breaks through with something pioneering again we will remain in this era.
So now just like paper or milk and with an economy struggling like it is…a large % of golfers are simply looking for the best deal on their golf equipment. But for every golf shop out there abiding by the manufacturers MAP pricing model there are hundreds of others willing to sell it for what ever they can get. Just like milk and paper. Everyone promotes the lowest price over the highest quality product. The performance of the product plays second fiddle to price.
So How Do You Not Become A Commodity?
Customer Service:
You see this trend currently with companies like Wal-Mart and Best Buy. Which are both showing signs of trouble…which is forcing both of them to look at their business models. Both these businesses have put their entire focus and resources into offering the lowest prices possible…which in the long term is showing to be detrimental. Even with Best Buy’s main competitor closing up shop they are still losing market share. So how do they change that? Well one way is to put more focus on customer service and taking care of the customers you have better then your competition. I am sure we have all been frustrated a time or two trying to find help at a Best Buy. You find yourself standing around waiting what seems like hours for an employee to come to the section you are in so you can ask them a simple question. And the majority of the time they don’t have the answers you are looking for even when you do finally get their attention.
Hope Depot is another example. They built that business on the backbone of customer service…but in recent years have strayed from this model in order to have a bigger bottom line. And early on this often works but like I said over time it can and usually is detrimental. Customer service has an incredible value and the golf equipment companies you see that properly employ this usually do well. It creates unique individual buying experiences for consumers which can set you apart from other brands. The opposite of this seems to be happening in golf. The companies that are left have gotten bigger and bigger…many of which are driven by a stock price and the concern for only the bottom line. Golf companies and the stores that sell their golf products need to get back to the way things used to be or else it will simply become only about who has the lowest price which in the end will lead to even more “commodification” in the golf industry.
Original/Creative & Effective Technologies:
When companies become worried more about their stock price then they are the quality of the equipment they provide their customers…creativity suffers and becomes stifled . Companies become less willing to take chances on new technologies. They stick to what works or to put it more clearly “what sells”. Why do you think you see the same putter designs being made year in and year out? Or why do you think you see all these amazing patent ideas that never get developed? It’s not because there are a lack of ideas and technologies out there to be produced. It’s because no one wants to go out on a limb and take a chance on something that has even the smallest possibility of bringing down their market share. Why take a risk when you can re-package last years design with a couple simply modifications and know it will sell. So in the end you get putter designs that look the same as designs 20 years ago…with a simple change in the finish color or some new creative engravings with some different color paintfills. Or you get a driver that is almost identical to the last 3 models that have been released…except for a different paint color, or slightly improved materials with an insignificant amount of weight being taken from one spot and moved to another. Or maybe even a fancy new name for technology that already existed spun to make you believe it’s revolutionary.
Information about product releases happens at an alarming rate nowadays with social media. And consumers now have the ability to voice their opinions to a much larger audience much faster with blogs, forums, facebook, twitter, etc. So more golfers are having their voices heard. They are tired of all the marketing hype that swirls around what they now are starting to realize are simply re-packaged concepts and designs from years past. One of the most requested review I now get is to test old equipment vs. new equipment. They want to know once and for all if that new driver is any better then one released 3-5 years ago. What the industry calls the “first adopters” which were the golfers that bought all the new gear as soon as it was released are now starting to change their buying habits. They are now starting to wait until that technology goes on sale or waiting to hear actual reviews on the product before they make a purchase. Which is a good sign…because if it continues golf companies will start to listen. And start to become less concerned about how much they have to spend to market their new commodity and become more concerned with coming out with equipment that they know offers an improvement in performance.
What are your thoughts on this topic?
What do you think about this topic? How do you think things have changed over the past few years with golf equipment? Do you see this trend continuing? Or do you think golfers voices will begin to be heard and companies will respond with new technologies that provide actual benefits? Don’t agree with the article? Let’s hear what you think.
Loading ...
{ 31 comments… read them below or add one }
They are becoming commodities because there is nowhere to go. Hybrids were a nice boost to the golf club game, but what’s next? It’s nice to see Adams trying new things (Speedline technology and F11 fairway woods).
That is a lot to think about. I think it will open some eyes. Very well written article.
Fantastic article. The differences with the companies is not large. The differences in sound and look has been “fine tuned” in the past decade. However, you see some companies (TM) spending zillions of dollars trying to convince people about how much better their products are. As a result, they seem to have 20 different iron offerings every year.
I challenge you to walk into a GolfTown or Dick’s and try a few of those. You will NOT see much difference. What you will notice is that the clubs are outfitted with different shafts. If the clubhead makes such a difference, why not put the same shafts in them? Why do forged and blade clubs have “tour” shafts in them while the “game-improvement” clubs have MUCH less quality control and cheaper shafts?
The reason for this is margins and to fool to public. I do recall true temper making ultra light and light flex shafts. So these companies create smoke-and-mirrors type of scams to sell.
What has been apparent in the last few years is that Adams is a company that is moving forward and making top-quality products available at affordable prices. Also, the only two companies that have stuck to what works and do not play on “tricking” the public is Titleist and Mizuno. These brands have and still stock their clubs with top quality shafts. They each have a very loyal following for a reason. I’m sure you’ve heard the saying; “Once a Titleist player, always a Titleist player”. That is loyalty speaking.
You will almost always see a Titleist player have a full bag of their gear. Taylor Made followers on the other hand, have a mixed bag of everything and swap things out almost on a weekly basis based on their playing partner’s new find or latest marketing campaign. Why do you suppose tour players change sponsors? They simply keep the same shafts and lofts and make the switch…likely for money reasons, who wouldn’t. Graeme McDowell is a prime example. Becomes #1 in the world and switches and continues to play very well.
Lastly, get fit for the right shafts and stick with that…no matter what the clubhead has printed on it.
It’s exactly spot-on. The Rules have governed drivers since 2006, yet the OEMs still think they can dupe people with “flashy” and made-up “innovations”. He!l, even the loft/lie angle thing isn’t innovative or new… Maltby shows you how to do it with wooden heads in his “Golf Club Design, Fitting, Alteration and Repair” manual.
The only real difference is in ego. No one cares what type of paper you bought, or if you bought Equate ibuprofin or Advil. However, in golf, what you use is almost like standing together in a urinal… people want to have a bigger/better… something (*ahem*) than the next guy. The OEMs know this and push it to the extreme with their marketing schemes.
What kills me is that even though prices are relatively low (though I don’t know how much “better” a $300 driver is compared to a $400 one), more and more people leave the game. It is still way too expensive, even though the clubs are being made for dollars (maybe even less) at the same sweat-shop foundries overseas. Golf courses try to emulate Augusta National/Oakmont/Pine Valley, to the expense of the non-Touring golfer. The sad part is, it’ll only stop when there are so few of us left to carry on… which can easily become reality.
The sport should consider itself like the motorcycle industry: it’s not WHAT you play (ride), it’s IF you play (ride).
Nice article! Review comparing older equipment with the new ones sounds really interesting as well.
The article is not only well written, but is right on point. As a former retail salesperson with one of the large retail/mail order firm, it was common knowledge within the employee ranks, that there was truly little difference, if any, between the club makers. Each sale was actually the buyer selling themselves. They just wanted to know what that something special about the clubs they wanted compared to the all the others.
there hasn’t been an original thought in golf club design since karten ping developed the cast head! how is this for a quote from one of the best design guys ever. “i just make custom wedge sets for our guys who win majors and i havn’t made many of them lately” bob vokey.
as my friend james used to say fishing lures are made to catch fishermen not fish!
regards,
sarg1948
well, the laws of physics dictate everything, so it doesn’t matter how much OEM shouts 10 more yards, people just know it’s not true. And of course, the so called traditionalists snare at anything that looks 21st century so what do people expect?
Innovation will come from private companies that are suffiiently capitalized, not publicly held corporations. Risk taking is not part of a public company’s plan. Certainly not after it becomes publicly owned. The DNA of innovation may have been visible in the beginning, but once the founders / innovators execute their exit strategy, the innovation leaves with them or gets watered down for the sake of earnings.
There have been a few of outstanding innovators over the past 5 years in the golf industry but most of them were under capitalized, thus doomed for financial failure and not have what they required to get through the recession and the recent golf industry downturn. Those companies include Rife, Nickent and Burrows. One company that does stand out for me as both an innovator and survivor is Heavy Putter, or now called Boccieri Golf. The whole idea of properly weighting clubs to enhance the putting stroke, or full swing, is innovation that works. I used Balanced-Certified weights in my clubs about 10 years ago. Counter balance weight in the butt end of the shaft works and creates consistency without the need for excessive practice. I just could not get the total weight distribution right on my own but I knew this was the way to go with everything in my bag. Boccieri seems much more like what I had in mind 10 years ago. Boccieri’s butt end weight is heavier that what I used 10 years ago, then adding more weight / mass to the head makes sense in terms of basic physics. This may be the next big innovation in golf. Creating a lighter club makes no biomechanic, or physics, sense to me. It will be interesting to see what the market thinks.
While you may be on to something, the Heavy Driver gets panned for its looks. That and the fact they don’t plaster their logo anywhere it can fit doesn’t help their cause, either. Amazing how fickle the market is…
I don’t think my personal visual preferences are much different that other traditional-leaning golfers…. don’t give me distracting visuals, let me align it easily, then get out of the way…. clean and mean…. same for their irons….. let MY performance shine through with some help from the equipment….. in the case of Heavy driver and irons there is alot of help.
Give me a set of TItleist DCI irons any day. It’s the swing, man, not the club. It;s the artist, not the paint brush.
You didn’t hear about that new paintbrush that adds superdeep texture and ambience? Well, word on the street is, there’s another new paintbrush coming- it’s an inch longer (to get longer paint strokes) and has ADJUSTABLE ambience! You can even change the angle of the brush, swap out handles… for just $400, you’ll be painting like Monet. Of course, for an extra $100 you can have the DaVinci model (comes with a “pro” handle), so you can be even more like Monet.
This article hits the nail square on the head. I’m a retired engineer and have been a part time fitter/clubmaker for about 10 years. I tell all of my friends and customers that the ONLY things that count are:
1. get the right fit, including iron head type, loft and shaft……the performance thing
2. do the heads look or sound terrible to you?…..a mental thing
3. is the set makeup that you carry in your bag right for your game?…..a “do I have the right tools?” thing
It doesn’t matter which company’s name is engraved on the heads or what color they are, or even what they are made of. Heads are ABSOLUTELY commodities.
Absolutely, driver technology has been maxed out for the past 2 yrs, it’s now just maketing, which TM is the best at and has the biggest budget.
This is so true as there are limited opputunities to greatly improve on the performance on most current designs but the true area of improvement that we see still exists from our extended Test Pilot testing in that of better fitting of the right products and shaft types to help players play a more consuistent game. The setup that might allow a player to hit his longest drives may not be the most consistent setup for hitting more fairways,,,,the same is true for ball fitting.
The subject of this article is fantastic. I really don’t believe that one manufacturer really is much ahead of any other. They seem to have all perfected similar ideas. Golfers today are buying mostly based on marketing and lower sale prices 6-9 months after new equipment is introduced.
I thought the best driver I tried last year was the Adams Speedline 9064LS. I’m sure that it didn’t even come close to brands like Callaway and Taylor Made in sales though. All due to marketing budgets and not quality of product.
Golf clubs as a commodity is a good choice of words. This is due to the golf business going corporate. This has happened at the manufacturing level and at retail. This freezes out new innovation from new sources. It puts up barriers to enter the market place. Except for cosmetics there is a lot of similarites to all the product. Perhaps consumers are partially to blame for all this. If anyone thinks that TaylorMade’s quality hasn’t suffered from all the product they now make then they are mistaken. All of you may not remember all the shaft issues Callaway had when the Great Big Bertha first came out. More of the shafts were mislabeled than were correct. In fact a cottage industry started to fix this. Reshafting Great Big Berthas became a big business. I believe the situation is even worse for TaylorMade now. I wonder how many shaft manufacturers they use and what the chances are of getting a driver and one or two fairways with the same companies shaft. Painting the head white won’t fix this problem.
What gets my goat, is the how quickly a club becomes obsolete now a days. It seems that when I first started playing golf that you could stick with the same set of irons and woods until the lacquer or chrome started to wear off, which seemed to be about 10 years. It is definitely a different type of craftsman/technician that exist today compared to the craftsmen who made the clubs of MacGregor and Wilson of the 60′s and 70′s. I can really see the fun in heading to a short public course with minimal green fees, and lugging an old canvas bag filled with old Spalding Robt. T. Jones irons and some persimmon woods. I would be curious to know if there has been an uptick in the membership of The Society of Hickory Golfers? I miss Titleist’s ad campaign featuring Ian McCallister, he always brought an interesting view to the advancement of technology in the game.
I’m not rich, and we get ripped off in Australia compared to the states, but I do not mind paying A$800 for 9 irons if in 2 years I can part exchange / trade them in for A$300+.
Nowdays, your set is worth nothing after 1 year unless you can get one of your mates to buy 2nd hand instead of new.
If PING for instance, said heres a i15 for A$400, trade it in in 1 year for the i20 and get 50% off, and 30% in 2 years for the i25, they’d retain such brand loyalty; it works for cars?
My question is, do you think there is less or more that separate clubs of today vs. 15-30 years ago. I would argue there is quite a bit more separation today than there was in the days of Staff vs. Apex vs Haig. Anyone who bought new clubs in the 60′s, 70′s, 80′s knows it had a lot to do with subjective cues.
Most of the golf clubs are made in China for almost nothing . In South Africa and the exchange rate we pay for set of Taylor Made clubs $6000 .When you inport them from China yourself
you pay $2000
Very good article. You have touched on two very good points: performance & technology and marketing.
While there have been some very innovative updates to golf clubs because of technology and design (materials and game improvement design) these innovations do not vary a lot from manufacturer to manufacturer, so in that sense there is a lot of commoditization. I don’t beleive there is a lot of difference in irons over the last 10 or so years. As an example, the Ping Eye 2′s would probably hold up against almost anything put out today as long as they were appropriately fitted to the individual player. What has changed dramatically is golf ball technology, shaft technology and fitting systems that definitely has impacted performance in terms of how one can hit a ball (although I would bet the average score across the board hasn’t really changed much). Putter design has also made strides from a technological and design standpoint, but the club doesn’t necessarily provide a good putting stroke.
Manufacturer’s do not make money making clubs, only selling clubs so they need to present points of differentiation in order to remain competitive. I would suggest that Titelist, while an excellent club manufacturer, doesn’t care so much about clubs, but uses clubs to bolster its image to sell golf balls…that’s where the real money is.The influence of marketing is huge. However, there are so many different brands being used on the tour, and so many different winners that it begs the question of “is it the equipment or talent that wins?”.
As the market continues to be saturated with different brands and new ideas at greater costs each year, and as golf participation continues to shrink as it has over the last 3 years, players will, I bet, start holding on to their equipment longer going forward. Why shell out a ton of money today with the fear that the equipment will “appear” almost obsolete according to next year’s marketing claims? What happens next is anyone’s guess. My guess is that we will see a lot of consolidation in ownership and shift in brand recognition. Shit happens…remember when MacGregor, Wilson Staff and Tommy Armour were the gold standards?
The USGA has stifled club manufacturers. Their quest to keep the game from becoming too “easy” for the touring professional has limited what the R&D departments can do when designing golf clubs. Meanwhile, more people are driven away from the game because it is too hard and too difficult to pick up right away. The answer is simple – two sets of equipment rules, one for the pros and one for the everday hacks like us. I’m sure we would see noticeable jumps in club performance if designers were freed from the USGA shackles. Then the best R&D would win out and there would be a “buzz” about the new equipment and a jutifiable reason for a golfer to upgrade his current bag.
But if you think about it, there already are two seperate equipment “rules”… it’s just not written anywhere. Tiger and AK were gaming Nike DyMo’s at 380cc… the retail version (just like the pros!) was 460cc. Nike has a bajillion different ball patents. Stewart Cink gamed a ball that was a One Tour D inside with a One Tour cover. It was supposedly softer than the Tour D’s cover. We don’t have those options. Nike isn’t the only one, but the ones I can remember off the top of my head.
Companies are never going to quit doing what makes money. If a company makes millions by changing the color of a driver than so be it. Its the idioacy of the consumer. Maybe some rogue company should start up a fitting company that spends millions on advertising how important custom fitting is. Then maybe we will see a chance.
That rogue company that spent millions advertising the importance of fitting: PING…..kind of their whole thing.
I think the article is spot on. Since technology has basically become stagnant you see more and more companies messing with specs to achieve the desired result and that is where the real mess is occuring.
Drivers at 46.25, 3 irons at 19, PW at 42. We are seeing companies skewing the specs to get that extra ten yards. Ifs my 3 iron is lofted to that of a 2 iron of course it will go further. Using a 40g shaft at 46.25 will only increase distance. People see this as a great leap when in fact its not a 3-pw set anymore its a 4-gw set. The clubs are the same its just the ego that is inflated.
Couldn’t agree more. Distance is just a number that better be close to the same each time I hit that respective club. I know I hit my shovel 157 yards and my broom carries 119 yards. I like what a company such as Scratch has done by only engraving the loft degrees on their irons with no reference to iron number. But market tends to lose sight of the fact that consistent accuracy is far more important in scoring than any occassional bomb. “Weight” is what provides consistency. This is why most Tour players use heavier equipment. They get it.
I like to use outside sources to prove MGS is right. Take basketball shoes. Does anyone really think spending $150-$200 on the newest LeBron James sponsored shoes will make me a better basketball player (or just a basketball player, period) than the $50 pair from last year? I’d be naive to think that. Or (harking back to my younger years), if I spent $300 on a new firstbaseman’s mitt as opposed to using my old $60 one… would I have been a better firstbasemen when I was already leading the rec league with a .995 fielding percentage? Hardly… Will a $150 pair of sunglasses block UV rays better than the $20 pair? Nope. By the way, sunglasses and their manufacturing process is eeirly similar to golf equipment… Yahoo had an interesting article a few months ago about it.
Justin, do you by chance have the adress of the yahoo article on sunglasses. My e-mail is [email protected]. I would gratly appreciate it. Thanks much……….Greens & Fairways 4ever……..