A sign of the times for Nike?

[gioguy21]

[quote name='mbomber' timestamp='1434630566' post='11775014']
[quote name='gioguy21' timestamp='1434480491' post='11763250']
[quote name='SHIVAN' timestamp='1434480294' post='11763218']
[quote name='gioguy21' timestamp='1434477282' post='11762838']
i know that ping has the market share for drivers thanks to the G30...[/quote]

I had always figured TMAG held the top number of drivers old with the SLDR, R15, & Aeroburner trio.
[/quote]

they did...till g30 lst came out. even ppl who owned the g30 went back out and bought another one. i had a few long talks with the local ping rep (see him often at demo days) and he has, on any given demo day - a minimum of 10 g30 orders. minimum...
[/quote]
sounds to me that you've been sold to by the sales man...
[/quote]

lol considering i'm the tent next to him during demo days, no, i wasn't sold - merely observations. he's a great guy...besides, he has nothing to sell me on. i hit the G30 for awhile and got rid of it.

[bladehunter]

[quote name='kmac02576' timestamp='1434609121' post='11774390'][quote name='bladehunter' timestamp='1434603062' post='11774146']
[quote name='kmac02576' timestamp='1434571851' post='11770994'][quote name='venturagolfer87' timestamp='1434563787' post='11770038']
[quote name='Judge Smails' timestamp='1434549317' post='11768364']
I'm glad to see they went back to black woods with the new line, but the Engage wedge?? I mean c'mon. I don't care how good it is.
[/quote]

Legit question, how often in a round do you hit the ball with the back of a wedge? Because, if you've never actually stood over an Engage wedge at address, I think you would care how great it is.

But seriously, why do all these traditionalists care about what the back of the club looks like? YA'LL USE IRON HEADCOVERS AND YOU KNOW IT!
[/quote]

More importantly, when you hit your driver, how often are you looking at the sole of your club?

Also, when you hit a ball, are you looking at the ball or the club? Because if you are making contact with the ball whe you swing your club, my guess is your looking at the ball. So when you hit the ball, does the appearance of the crown mean anything at all?

If it does, your doing things wrong and/or are mentally weak.[/quote]


So now if you aren't a Nike player your mentally weak. Lol. Who is weaker. The person who says " I don't like this and here's why " or the guy who has to hurl personal insults to appear the alpha ? Hmmm

I pick up and look at a Nike club every time I go into a store that has them. I simply can't get past the looks. Speaking specifically to their woods and hybrids. Vr blades and wedges I could play in a second. But the flashy " volt" crap is just strange. I happen to like the color personally. But keep it on the sole. Why can't the crown be clean like most other clubs. Sure some TM crap is busy up top. Ala r1 etc. I'll tell you it's ugly too. So no discrimination here. Just stating why i can't buy Nike.
[/quote]

I don't own a single Nike club nor do I claim to be anything more than an average golfer. I simply stated that golfers do not see the sole of the driver when hitting a ball, and when they swing, they keep their eye on the ball, not the club.

And is the inability to get past the looks would appear to be a mental issue. That's not an insult. Just a logical conclusion.[/quote]


Sure but it doesn't denote " weakness". Hell I could play a driver with a big pink V on the crown. I'm that mentally " strong " lol. But if I'm paying $400 plus for it , it's gonna look like a respectable club. Not some kids basketball shoe.
That's the problem . Nike insists on marketing ONLY to the youth they think wants this style. I personally think even the youth market would buy the same amount of nike with a more conservative styling. Then more of us old farts (35 ) would buy it too.

[Golfnut801]

Let me get this straight. And please correct me if I'm wrong. Nike lays off 40 employees. Which is probably 1% if you account for all Nike employees. And that's suppose to mean something? Is this just another Nike bash thread?

[kmac02576]

[quote name='bladehunter' timestamp='1434631723' post='11775128']






Sure but it doesn't denote " weakness". Hell I could play a driver with a big pink V on the crown. I'm that mentally " strong " lol. But if I'm paying $400 plus for it , it's gonna look like a respectable club. Not some kids basketball shoe.
That's the problem . Nike insists on marketing ONLY to the youth they think wants this style. I personally think even the youth market would buy the same amount of nike with a more conservative styling. Then more of us old farts (35 ) would buy it too.
[/quote]

That doesn't make you or I necessarily mentally strong. It just makes us normal.

If there is a club that performs better than any other club for you, there are ways to easily customise the appearance to your liking. I actually make a bit of money customising golf clubs. If the swoosh or other crown marking are so distracting I can make the crown, black or grey, flat, semi-gloss or glossy. There's many places that do this as well and the fees aren't that bad for getting the best performing club for you with a look you can be pleased with.

[PostandGhost]

[quote name='Golfnut801' timestamp='1434631943' post='11775156']
Let me get this straight. And please correct me if I'm wrong. Nike lays off 40 employees. Which is probably 1% if you account for all Nike employees. And that's suppose to mean something? Is this just another Nike bash thread?
[/quote]

I'm not trying to put words in someone else's mouth but I think the reason this was such a big deal is that the terminated employees account for 50% of the Nike Golf Hard Good Reps. I do not have any direct knowledge, just heard this from a rep that was fired. Apparently the soft goods reps will pick up the slack. If the rumor is true, then it definitely means something. The real question is what does it mean: good business move to restructure an inefficient rep force OR a down sizing in the hard goods sector for Nike going forward?

The problem is that the blind haters will always misdirect conversation and hurt the potential for enlightenment in these types of threads.

[Shawn Paul]

Nike is learning that golf is a cruel mistress.

[Sixcat]

I'm not intending to participate in a Nike bashing thread, just giving my honest opinion. In the beginning of the Nike decision to start making equipment, they grossly underestimated golfers brand loyalty. Nike's equipment is on par with what anyone else is producing but have little in terms of brand loyalty from an equipment standpoint. I must admit, when I see a kid show up at my club with an entire bag of Nike products, I stereotype. Nike took over the shoe market by catering to high school basketball stars who would become college and NBA stars. They whiffed on many of those high school players but the return on investment was well worth the expense.

Its hard to throw money at golfers, who by-in-large have plenty of disposable income anyway and come away with brand loyalty. They tried a different approach thinking weekend guys would play what the pros play so they signed everyone with an expiring contract. Golfers saw it for what it was, an attempted takeover.

Nothing new in business really, Toyota did the same thing in the 70's and early 80's when gas was in high demand and short supply.

[Georgie Z]

[quote name='gioguy21' timestamp='1434485516' post='11763948']
[quote name='ebn2002' timestamp='1434485250' post='11763928']


It has no class, which I'm sure you're familiar with. But really the RBZ is just a white crown with some angled [i]alignment[/i] lines, they just throw the swoosh on there for [i]no reason.[/i]
[/quote]

lol wow. you sir, are a stretch armstrong. you got some reach.

the covert is red, with one white swoosh. the RBZ has an R, plus those so called 'alignment' lines. btw, if you rest your club down, those alignment lines point right of target
[/quote]
both clubs are hideous

[Georgie Z]

nike makes good equipment, but damn they are ugly. They have overtaken TM as #1 of gimmicky designs. I miss the days of the vr pro irons and woods.

[Illest]

[quote name='BuckeyeGolf1981' timestamp='1434505325' post='11765926']
I talked to a salesman at Golfsmith one day when I was looking at drivers and woods. He said that basically 50% or more of Nike equipment that they sell is either returned or traded in. He also said that the majority of the traded in stuff just sits there until they send it to a local play it again sports. I have owned a method mod putter that I sold and a vr sand wedge which I still have but rarely use. Also played a few rounds with some vr pro cavity irons and they weren't too bad. Never used any woods so I can't say anything about them good bad or indifferent. I will say that for $1000 I'm not gonna buy a neon green club whether it's from Titleist, Callaway, etc etc.
[/quote]

The trade-ins sit there because Golfsmith expects you to pay 99% of the original price for a used club. It has nothing to do with the brand.

[Bad9]

[quote name='Golfnut801' timestamp='1434631943' post='11775156'] Is this just another Nike bash thread?
[/quote]

Yes it is.

[gioguy21]

[quote name='Georgie Z' timestamp='1434996053' post='11811280']
nike makes good equipment, but damn they are ugly. They have overtaken TM as #1 of gimmicky designs. I miss the days of the vr pro irons and woods.
[/quote]

gimmicky designs? or do you mean...functional? VR pro woods had compression channels...

clearly this is your thread to piss in so, hope it all comes out ok.

[Shilgy]

[quote name='BuckeyeGolf1981' timestamp='1434505325' post='11765926']
I talked to a salesman at Golfsmith one day when I was looking at drivers and woods. He said that basically 50% or more of Nike equipment that they sell is either returned or traded in. He also said that the majority of the traded in stuff just sits there until they send it to a local play it again sports. I have owned a method mod putter that I sold and a vr sand wedge which I still have but rarely use. Also played a few rounds with some vr pro cavity irons and they weren't too bad. Never used any woods so I can't say anything about them good bad or indifferent. I will say that for $1000 I'm not gonna buy a neon green club whether it's from Titleist, Callaway, etc etc.
[/quote]And yet you PM grind wedge has as much bright green showing as any Nike iron-just sayin'.

[JaNelson38]

[quote name='pegleg' timestamp='1434537596' post='11767548']
It's heartening to see that, although they had to lay off 40 sales reps, their CEO still managed to make $14.7 million last year.

[u][b]THAT[/b][/u] is your sign of the times.
[/quote]

You mean the head of a $15 BILLION corporation that is insanely popular and profitable, has about a 40% share of the footwear market in this country, and is the official apparel/jersey rep of the top sports league in the world (and many NCAA schools) makes a good wage?

You dont say.

[nova6868]

[quote name='gioguy21' timestamp='1434996902' post='11811412']
[quote name='Georgie Z' timestamp='1434996053' post='11811280']
nike makes good equipment, but damn they are ugly. They have overtaken TM as #1 of gimmicky designs. I miss the days of the vr pro irons and woods.
[/quote]

gimmicky designs? or do you mean...functional? VR pro woods had compression channels...
[/quote]

Compression channels do seem functional, and several other companies use something similar. Cavity back woods... Not so much. Hence, marketing gimmick.

[gioguy21]

[quote name='nova6868' timestamp='1434997713' post='11811576']
[quote name='gioguy21' timestamp='1434996902' post='11811412']
[quote name='Georgie Z' timestamp='1434996053' post='11811280']
nike makes good equipment, but damn they are ugly. They have overtaken TM as #1 of gimmicky designs. I miss the days of the vr pro irons and woods.
[/quote]

gimmicky designs? or do you mean...functional? VR pro woods had compression channels...
[/quote]

Compression channels do seem functional, and several other companies use something similar. Cavity back woods... Not so much. Hence, marketing gimmick.
[/quote]

we could go t** for tat with other companies attributes - ie the 'moto' channels on the bottom of the 815's, or the turbulators, or ASP, or...

just sayin, the hate is real...we get it.

[Shilgy]

Disclaimer #1 I do play the Nike Vapor irons-and I have tried but cannot for the life of me cannot see anything hideously green at address. And they work great.
Disclaimer #2 I am on old guy on this board-58 years old.

That said a little volt swoosh bothers me a whole lot less than a white or red or blue head on a wood. The whole wrx community likes to pat itself on the back as being smart, educated and knowledgeable about everything there is to do with golf. But when I read threads like this I really have to wonder. Really? Guys would pass up 10 extra controllable yards because of a color on the back or sole? C'mon-ya can't see it when you hit it! I just hit a friends Flex driver yesterday and at address looks very traditional and performs great. Who cares what color I see when the headcover comes off?? And the complaints about the Engage wedges compared to Vokeys are what wrx'rs would have said years ago about a cavity back iron(and some guys on here still do). "They look too hideous to hit! Who cares if I play better with them I just can't stand 'em!" To each his own but if your preference is different than mine I won't bash your decision and I really don't understand anyone bashing someone else. Me I will continue to search for what works best-for me- and you'all can do the same. Rant over...

[nova6868]

[quote name='gioguy21' timestamp='1434997872' post='11811610']
[quote name='nova6868' timestamp='1434997713' post='11811576']
[quote name='gioguy21' timestamp='1434996902' post='11811412']
[quote name='Georgie Z' timestamp='1434996053' post='11811280']
nike makes good equipment, but damn they are ugly. They have overtaken TM as #1 of gimmicky designs. I miss the days of the vr pro irons and woods.
[/quote]

gimmicky designs? or do you mean...functional? VR pro woods had compression channels...
[/quote]

Compression channels do seem functional, and several other companies use something similar. Cavity back woods... Not so much. Hence, marketing gimmick.
[/quote]

we could go t** for tat with other companies attributes - ie the 'moto' channels on the bottom of the 815's, or the turbulators, or ASP, or...

just sayin, the hate is real...we get it.
[/quote]

I realize I'm usually standing up for PING, but when it comes down to it, they are mostly honest. I think customers recognize that and they appreciate it. PING came out and stated that speed gains from the turbulators were only significant at high swing speeds above 105 or something. They did wind tunnel testing. And they flat out admitted that their testing showed no effect for the fairway woods regardless of speed; those turbulators were purely cosmetic to match the driver.

Where's the data or argument for the benefits of a cavity back wood? The only real objective data I've seen is that the cavity back design leads to a lower MOI and high CG.

[prhiam]

[quote name='gioguy21' timestamp='1434997872' post='11811610']
[quote name='nova6868' timestamp='1434997713' post='11811576']
[quote name='gioguy21' timestamp='1434996902' post='11811412']
[quote name='Georgie Z' timestamp='1434996053' post='11811280']
nike makes good equipment, but damn they are ugly. They have overtaken TM as #1 of gimmicky designs. I miss the days of the vr pro irons and woods.
[/quote]

gimmicky designs? or do you mean...functional? VR pro woods had compression channels...
[/quote]

Compression channels do seem functional, and several other companies use something similar. Cavity back woods... Not so much. Hence, marketing gimmick.
[/quote]

we could go t** for tat with other companies attributes - ie the 'moto' channels on the bottom of the 815's, or the turbulators, or ASP, or...

just sayin, the hate is real...we get it.
[/quote]

Also, the MOI is so high on the Nike Drivers these days I'm surprised that anyone would think that the cavity doesn't at least play a part in that. The Vapor Speed is as forgiving a driver as the G30, if not more. All I do is hit it straight, I don't get the contempt for Nike. I really don't think there is any weak equipment these days. The last company that put out questionable equipment was Callaway, not Nike...

[Shilgy]

[quote name='nova6868' timestamp='1434999741' post='11811896']
[quote name='gioguy21' timestamp='1434997872' post='11811610']
[quote name='nova6868' timestamp='1434997713' post='11811576']
[quote name='gioguy21' timestamp='1434996902' post='11811412']
[quote name='Georgie Z' timestamp='1434996053' post='11811280']
nike makes good equipment, but damn they are ugly. They have overtaken TM as #1 of gimmicky designs. I miss the days of the vr pro irons and woods.
[/quote]

gimmicky designs? or do you mean...functional? VR pro woods had compression channels...
[/quote]

Compression channels do seem functional, and several other companies use something similar. Cavity back woods... Not so much. Hence, marketing gimmick.
[/quote]

we could go t** for tat with other companies attributes - ie the 'moto' channels on the bottom of the 815's, or the turbulators, or ASP, or...

just sayin, the hate is real...we get it.
[/quote]

I realize I'm usually standing up for PING, but when it comes down to it, they are mostly honest. I think customers recognize that and they appreciate it. PING came out and stated that speed gains from the turbulators were only significant at high swing speeds above 105 or something. They did wind tunnel testing. And they flat out admitted that their testing showed no effect for the fairway woods regardless of speed; those turbulators were purely cosmetic to match the driver.

Where's the data or argument for the benefits of a cavity back wood? The only real objective data I've seen is that the cavity back design leads to a lower MOI and high CG.
[/quote]Aren't all woods today cavity back? I mean none of them are a solid block of metal. So the "traditional" metal wood was made to look like what people were used to at the time which was a block of wood. Maybe, just maybe, Nike found that if they got rid of the shell the could move the weight in a more advantageous way.

[nova6868]

[quote]Aren't all woods today cavity back? I mean none of them are a solid block of metal. So the "traditional" metal wood was made to look like what people were used to at the time which was a block of wood. Maybe, just maybe, Nike found that if they got rid of the shell the could move the weight in a more advantageous way.
[/quote]

OK, that would be a cool story. But all the evidence seems to show that by removing the lower and rearward part of the head they actually moved the weight in a way that is not optimal (higher).

[gioguy21]

[quote name='nova6868' timestamp='1435000679' post='11812020']
[quote]Aren't all woods today cavity back? I mean none of them are a solid block of metal. So the "traditional" metal wood was made to look like what people were used to at the time which was a block of wood. Maybe, just maybe, Nike found that if they got rid of the shell the could move the weight in a more advantageous way.
[/quote]

OK, that would be a cool story. But all the evidence seems to show that by removing the lower and rearward part of the head they actually moved the weight in a way that is not optimal (higher).
[/quote]

cool story bro, where's your PhD? i mean, for all the bashin you got, might as well have some proof right?

i'm not sayin i got proof it does, but if you're so adament about the fact it doesnt' work...c'mon boy...start spitting REAL knowledge instead of "well i heard from a guy once that his dogwalker said that doing this won't make it do that and that...blah blah"

[Shilgy]

[quote name='nova6868' timestamp='1435000679' post='11812020']
[quote]Aren't all woods today cavity back? I mean none of them are a solid block of metal. So the "traditional" metal wood was made to look like what people were used to at the time which was a block of wood. Maybe, just maybe, Nike found that if they got rid of the shell the could move the weight in a more advantageous way.
[/quote]

OK, that would be a cool story. But all the evidence seems to show that by removing the lower and rearward part of the head they actually moved the weight in a way that is not optimal (higher).
[/quote]That is perhaps why I said maybe. I don't know. But there is a lot of unfounded bashing of many brands-not just Nike. What evidence are you aware of that says it is not for the better for some players?

[nova6868]

You can find CG charts on other golf websites. I can't post the link here.

I'm only in this discussion because I think Nike has great people like David Franklin and others on staff. If you would have asked them to pick their most efficient wood design, you think they would have picked the cavity-back design? It was a design they had worked on, yes... But I'm guessing the final choice was made by the marketing department.

[gioguy21]

[quote name='nova6868' timestamp='1435003103' post='11812376']You can find CG charts on other golf websites. I can't post the link here.

I'm only in this discussion because I think Nike has great people like David Franklin and others on staff. If you would have asked them to pick their most efficient wood design, you think they would have picked the cavity-back design? It was a design they had worked on, yes... But I'm guessing the final choice was made by the marketing department.[/quote]
Is this Dave Franklin? If not, you're puttin words in a pretty big mouth that aint urs

[Georgie Z]

[quote name='gioguy21' timestamp='1434996902' post='11811412']
[quote name='Georgie Z' timestamp='1434996053' post='11811280']
nike makes good equipment, but damn they are ugly. They have overtaken TM as #1 of gimmicky designs. I miss the days of the vr pro irons and woods.
[/quote]

gimmicky designs? or do you mean...functional? VR pro woods had compression channels...

clearly this is your thread to piss in so, hope it all comes out ok.
[/quote]

gimmicky aesthetics. I think the tech is legitimate.

[rafal]

[quote name='gioguy21' timestamp='1434997872' post='11811610']
[quote name='nova6868' timestamp='1434997713' post='11811576']
[quote name='gioguy21' timestamp='1434996902' post='11811412']
[quote name='Georgie Z' timestamp='1434996053' post='11811280']
nike makes good equipment, but damn they are ugly. They have overtaken TM as #1 of gimmicky designs. I miss the days of the vr pro irons and woods.
[/quote]

gimmicky designs? or do you mean...functional? VR pro woods had compression channels...
[/quote]

Compression channels do seem functional, and several other companies use something similar. Cavity back woods... Not so much. Hence, marketing gimmick.
[/quote]

we could go t** for tat with other companies attributes - ie the 'moto' channels on the bottom of the 815's, or the turbulators, or ASP, or...

just sayin, the hate is real...we get it.
[/quote]

I think this is the point when you're supposed to step away from the keyboard and go for a walk.

[rafal]

Covert cavity has got to be the worst gimmick design out there since square driver heads. Pushes weight up on drivers which is absolutely the worst thing to do. Nike was hugely into these terrible square heads as well, I see some consistency.

[Rory Mcilwoods]

[quote name='rafal' timestamp='1435652376' post='11860732']
Covert cavity has got to be the worst gimmick design out there since square driver heads. Pushes weight up on drivers which is absolutely the worst thing to do. Nike was hugely into these terrible square heads as well, I see some consistency.
[/quote]

I think it rivals the Turbulator as the biggest gimmick.

[prhiam]

[quote name='rafal' timestamp='1435652376' post='11860732']
Covert cavity has got to be the worst gimmick design out there since square driver heads. Pushes weight up on drivers which is absolutely the worst thing to do. Nike was hugely into these terrible square heads as well, I see some consistency.
[/quote]

Really???
Sliding weights, Turbulators, "Flying" weights, ARC channels, Gravity cores, and you think a cavity that helps improve MOI and is not proven to move weight higher in the club is the biggest gimmick?