PXG sues Taylor Made

[ebrasmus21]

Another foam filled iron by TM way back was the Burner Midsize.

 

Now those bring back some memories.

 

Someone mentioned maybe Parsons was bored. I wonder if he is doing this as a publicity stunt?

 

That's kind of what I'm thinking. Bob has a lot of different angles going all at the same time. Signs Paige to sell her sexuality, creating new products, lawsuit against TM. There are a few irons in the fire.

[pinestreetgolf]

1. You don't have to have a patent on what a club is made of. PXG sued based on a process patent. A process patent patents the process by which a product is made, not what the finished product is. All these posts about how long people have had whatever foam in what are irrelevant. We have zero idea if TM violated (or didn't violate) a process patent. The suit is over the process by which the club is constructed, not the technology in the finished product.

 

2. Taylormade was just purchased for only 425 million by a private equity firm. They are incredibly vulnerable right now. It is likely that the current executives in charge have no idea how to defend this, and Parsons' timing is perfect. They need to spent to pay for the financing on the acquisition, and they will have basically zero free cash to defend themselves. Its pretty common for companies to get hammered and dog piled on by competitors when they are bought using high leverage by private equity. Contrary to this thread, Parsons is no dummy, and its not a coincidence he waited until a private equity firm was in charge (and not golf people) to do this. Most probable is that he wants something TM has, and he wants to buy it at a slight markup. The private equity guys just want a flip, so they'll play ball rather than defend golf technology they barely understand using cash they don't have. Its a super aggressive move, but it isn't dumb.

 

PXG needs to improve its woods desperately and TM is pretty good at those. Smells like a settlement with a cross-license, which TM would never give without force. Now that they are thinly capitalized and owned by non-golf people, Parsons is attacking. If TM was still owned by Adidas, this never happens.

 

So, about 80% of posts in this thread are dealing with a non-issue - the composition of the irons is irrelevant. Its a process issue. We will have to see how it plays out, but all this speculation is silly.

[ebrasmus21]

1. You don't have to have a patent on what a club is made of. PXG sued based on a process patent. A process patent patents the process by which a product is made, not what the finished product is. All these posts about how long people have had whatever foam in what are irrelevant. We have zero idea if TM violated (or didn't violate) a process patent. The suit is over the process by which the club is constructed, not the technology in the finished product.

 

2. Taylormade was just purchased for only 425 million by a private equity firm. They are incredibly vulnerable right now. It is likely that the current executives in charge have no idea how to defend this, and Parsons' timing is perfect. They need to spent to pay for the financing on the acquisition, and they will have basically zero free cash to defend themselves. Its pretty common for companies to get hammered and dog piled on by competitors when they are bought using high leverage by private equity. Contrary to this thread, Parsons is no dummy, and its not a coincidence he waited until a private equity firm was in charge (and not golf people) to do this. Most probable is that he wants something TM has, and he wants to buy it at a slight markup. The private equity guys just want a flip, so they'll play ball rather than defend golf technology they barely understand using cash they don't have. Its a super aggressive move, but it isn't dumb.

 

PXG needs to improve its woods desperately and TM is pretty good at those. Smells like a settlement with a cross-license, which TM would never give without force. Now that they are thinly capitalized and owned by non-golf people, Parsons is attacking. If TM was still owned by Adidas, this never happens.

 

So, about 80% of posts in this thread are dealing with a non-issue - the composition of the irons is irrelevant. Its a process issue. We will have to see how it plays out, but all this speculation is silly.

 

Okay, okay, but Paige though. How does Paige fit into all of this?

[pinestreetgolf]

1. You don't have to have a patent on what a club is made of. PXG sued based on a process patent. A process patent patents the process by which a product is made, not what the finished product is. All these posts about how long people have had whatever foam in what are irrelevant. We have zero idea if TM violated (or didn't violate) a process patent. The suit is over the process by which the club is constructed, not the technology in the finished product.

 

2. Taylormade was just purchased for only 425 million by a private equity firm. They are incredibly vulnerable right now. It is likely that the current executives in charge have no idea how to defend this, and Parsons' timing is perfect. They need to spent to pay for the financing on the acquisition, and they will have basically zero free cash to defend themselves. Its pretty common for companies to get hammered and dog piled on by competitors when they are bought using high leverage by private equity. Contrary to this thread, Parsons is no dummy, and its not a coincidence he waited until a private equity firm was in charge (and not golf people) to do this. Most probable is that he wants something TM has, and he wants to buy it at a slight markup. The private equity guys just want a flip, so they'll play ball rather than defend golf technology they barely understand using cash they don't have. Its a super aggressive move, but it isn't dumb.

 

PXG needs to improve its woods desperately and TM is pretty good at those. Smells like a settlement with a cross-license, which TM would never give without force. Now that they are thinly capitalized and owned by non-golf people, Parsons is attacking. If TM was still owned by Adidas, this never happens.

 

So, about 80% of posts in this thread are dealing with a non-issue - the composition of the irons is irrelevant. Its a process issue. We will have to see how it plays out, but all this speculation is silly.

 

Okay, okay, but Paige though. How does Paige fit into all of this?

 

Great question. I'm doing some detailed research to find out. I'll report back.

[ebrasmus21]

1. You don't have to have a patent on what a club is made of. PXG sued based on a process patent. A process patent patents the process by which a product is made, not what the finished product is. All these posts about how long people have had whatever foam in what are irrelevant. We have zero idea if TM violated (or didn't violate) a process patent. The suit is over the process by which the club is constructed, not the technology in the finished product.

 

2. Taylormade was just purchased for only 425 million by a private equity firm. They are incredibly vulnerable right now. It is likely that the current executives in charge have no idea how to defend this, and Parsons' timing is perfect. They need to spent to pay for the financing on the acquisition, and they will have basically zero free cash to defend themselves. Its pretty common for companies to get hammered and dog piled on by competitors when they are bought using high leverage by private equity. Contrary to this thread, Parsons is no dummy, and its not a coincidence he waited until a private equity firm was in charge (and not golf people) to do this. Most probable is that he wants something TM has, and he wants to buy it at a slight markup. The private equity guys just want a flip, so they'll play ball rather than defend golf technology they barely understand using cash they don't have. Its a super aggressive move, but it isn't dumb.

 

PXG needs to improve its woods desperately and TM is pretty good at those. Smells like a settlement with a cross-license, which TM would never give without force. Now that they are thinly capitalized and owned by non-golf people, Parsons is attacking. If TM was still owned by Adidas, this never happens.

 

So, about 80% of posts in this thread are dealing with a non-issue - the composition of the irons is irrelevant. Its a process issue. We will have to see how it plays out, but all this speculation is silly.

 

Okay, okay, but Paige though. How does Paige fit into all of this?

 

Great question. I'm doing some detailed research to find out. I'll report back.

 

Joking aside you bring up some very interesting points. I'll be very interested to see where things go from here and in particular whether or not the PE wants to play ball as you mentioned.

[Jrweber77]

Release from MGS:

 

https://Not allowed because of spam.com/pxg-sues-taylormade-for-patent-infringement/

[grm24]

If TM was still owned by Adidas, this never happens.

According to a very recent article by M G S (dated 9/7) the TM/Adidas "split" has not yet taken place and will not until the start of October. Does that impact this lawsuit in any way? The TM sale was announced a while back but the transfer of ownership I suppose still takes time.

 

At the start of October TaylorMade and Adidas will finally split. No longer having the German giant behind them will either make or break the originators of the metal wood. Some jobs have been lost, others have been created. It’s a time of change for them as they aim to get back on top of Callaway and translate their considerable tour success back to the dominant retail position they were in only a few years ago.

 

https://Not allowed because of spam.com/first-look-taylormade-m-cgb-irons/

[TollBros]

Seriously? Like 90% of PXG clubs aren't pretty darn closely related to PING clubs as well. Sounds like a publicity stunt to me.

[Triple Putt]

Subscribed.

[Bomber_11]

I'd be mad too if people could get the same technology in a better looking package for half the price I'm selling it at!

[PZero]

Bob is now also suing this guy for the sick burn.

 

 

[magpies69]

I play what is best for my game regardless of the brand and made to switch to PXG since the beginning of the year and was really impress with the stopping power, height, distance and forgiveness. Mainly was impress with the stopping power. Tried the P790 but it doesn't have the stopping power like PXG.

 

Know there is loads of hate for PXG but for a high handicapper like me playing to +15, the PXG really is pretty good. Don't really care about the lawsuit but am please that every company now is trying to bring their best to us and that's a good thing.

[Warrick]

This is incredibly stupid IMO. He is basically saying his clubs are way overpriced. If the suit is about the process, which he claims it to be, then he is just hiding that fact it does not cost him nearly what he says to make his clubs, and that TM can make and sell basically the same thing for 1/2 price, just like the guy that tweeted back to Parsons.

 

This will hopefully just shed light on what a lot of us already understand....

 

There is nothing special about PXG, just another golf club, nothing more than a status symbol period. Does he really think he can make a better, softer feeling iron than say Mizuno? The price is a damn joke.

 

Nothing against people who own them, that is their decision. I would not play them if given to me.

[Pigems]

^^ I agree man. I'll take a solid, one piece, Forged head any day. You don't have to trick anyone with cavity badges, speed foam and moving weight around the head in a blade to make it "feel good", they just feel good on their own.

[Ferguson]

Happens all of the time.

 

To be certain, golf companies sue or threaten to sue, each other with alarming regularity. To no small degree, the action itself cements PXG’s position within the industry. It’s now part of the status quo.

[Zurb]

^^^

According to Parsons it is "several patent infringements by TM" whatever those might me...take a guess. lol

 

It means he's getting ready to piss away a bunch of money on lawyers. The idea that a foam filled golf club with screws in it isn't at this point covered by prior art is crazy talk.

 

but he gets a write off for the legal fees. he dont care.

 

So he saves $0.34 tax dollars on each dollar he spends on this..........whooppeeeeeeee

 

..and then that savings gets passed on to you! <infomercial music here>

[TheMoneyShot]

I need to buy the 100k PXG package, so that I can play a round with Bob to get the low down on this...

 

I have been waiting on a good excuse to pull the trigger on this great deal.

[WHC888]

Is this in relation to the new TM irons with the foam stuff in the cavity?

 

You mean these?

 

utility patent in the US is usually granted for 20 years and design patent for 14 years from the date patent was filed, those ICW irons came out around what, 1993 - 1994??

[Soloman1]

PXG would never copy anything, would they?

 

 

 

:)

[pinestreetgolf]

If TM was still owned by Adidas, this never happens.

According to a very recent article by M G S (dated 9/7) the TM/Adidas "split" has not yet taken place and will not until the start of October. Does that impact this lawsuit in any way? The TM sale was announced a while back but the transfer of ownership I suppose still takes time.

 

At the start of October TaylorMade and Adidas will finally split. No longer having the German giant behind them will either make or break the originators of the metal wood. Some jobs have been lost, others have been created. It’s a time of change for them as they aim to get back on top of Callaway and translate their considerable tour success back to the dominant retail position they were in only a few years ago.

 

https://Not allowed because of spam.co...de-m-cgb-irons/

 

That's the main point. Virtually all equity deals have a honeymoon period like buying a house where the buyer can get out after inspection for any reason or no reason. Then there is a closing. The same happens in PE. There was likely a trigger date very recently where the "get out for any reason" passed. And Parsons immediately sued. I don't have the specifics, but whatever TM's iron was before this one probably would have gotten hit too. He is suing them about how their irons are made, not what they are made of.

 

if anyone thinks the timing is a co-incidence I've got some oceanfront property in Kansas I can sell at a great price.

 

Please stop posting that picture of the foam-filled iron so I have to keep scrolling by it. Its a process patent. The fight isn't over the actual iron itself.

 

He wants a cross-license so that PXG can start to make some decent woods. And he is going to get it.

[jmck]

If TM was still owned by Adidas, this never happens.

According to a very recent article by M G S (dated 9/7) the TM/Adidas "split" has not yet taken place and will not until the start of October. Does that impact this lawsuit in any way? The TM sale was announced a while back but the transfer of ownership I suppose still takes time.

 

At the start of October TaylorMade and Adidas will finally split. No longer having the German giant behind them will either make or break the originators of the metal wood. Some jobs have been lost, others have been created. It’s a time of change for them as they aim to get back on top of Callaway and translate their considerable tour success back to the dominant retail position they were in only a few years ago.

 

https://Not allowed because of spam.co...de-m-cgb-irons/

 

That's the main point. Virtually all equity deals have a honeymoon period like buying a house where the buyer can get out after inspection for any reason or no reason. Then there is a closing. The same happens in PE. There was likely a trigger date very recently where the "get out for any reason" passed. And Parsons immediately sued. I don't have the specifics, but whatever TM's iron was before this one probably would have gotten hit too. He is suing them about how their irons are made, not what they are made of.

 

if anyone thinks the timing is a co-incidence I've got some oceanfront property in Kansas I can sell at a great price.

 

Please stop posting that picture of the foam-filled iron so I have to keep scrolling by it. Its a process patent. The fight isn't over the actual iron itself.

 

He wants a cross-license so that PXG can start to make some decent woods. And he is going to get it.

 

Maybe PXG should just try to make some decent woods all by themselves for a change?

[Nessism]

I'm curious what specifically PXG has patented. Talk of "process" is vague and non helpful to understand the validity of the claim against Taylormade. One of the big lawsuits between Taylormade and Titleist about ball patents had Taylormade winning, Titleist violated patents, but on appeal the patents were judged to be common technology, and not unique enough to deserve patents in the first place. I wouldn't be surprised if something similar happens here.

[pinestreetgolf]

If TM was still owned by Adidas, this never happens.

According to a very recent article by M G S (dated 9/7) the TM/Adidas "split" has not yet taken place and will not until the start of October. Does that impact this lawsuit in any way? The TM sale was announced a while back but the transfer of ownership I suppose still takes time.

 

At the start of October TaylorMade and Adidas will finally split. No longer having the German giant behind them will either make or break the originators of the metal wood. Some jobs have been lost, others have been created. It’s a time of change for them as they aim to get back on top of Callaway and translate their considerable tour success back to the dominant retail position they were in only a few years ago.

 

https://Not allowed because of spam.co...de-m-cgb-irons/

 

That's the main point. Virtually all equity deals have a honeymoon period like buying a house where the buyer can get out after inspection for any reason or no reason. Then there is a closing. The same happens in PE. There was likely a trigger date very recently where the "get out for any reason" passed. And Parsons immediately sued. I don't have the specifics, but whatever TM's iron was before this one probably would have gotten hit too. He is suing them about how their irons are made, not what they are made of.

 

if anyone thinks the timing is a co-incidence I've got some oceanfront property in Kansas I can sell at a great price.

 

Please stop posting that picture of the foam-filled iron so I have to keep scrolling by it. Its a process patent. The fight isn't over the actual iron itself.

 

He wants a cross-license so that PXG can start to make some decent woods. And he is going to get it.

 

Maybe PXG should just try to make some decent woods all by themselves for a change?

 

Maybe so. I'm not saying Parsons is right or wrong, I think its silly respond to this with "LOLZ WHAT A BOOB". He's obviously an extremely sharp guy and he sued exactly when the PE merger closed. To me, that speaks to having motivations that have nothing to do with the merits of the case. Given PXG's failure to get attention in woods (compared to irons) and TM's dominance in woods, it seems likely that it is related. I think it is incredibly unlikely the PE firm that bought TM has the stomach or the cash to defend this case to the end (trial, appeal, etc...). Usually PE wants to flip (like a house) and doesn't care all that much about long-term issues like patents on wood technology like an Adidas owner would. They want to improve operations/market share and then either take the company public or re-sell it at a profit. Ambiguously valuable golf patents probably don't further that goal and Parsons probably knows that. But again, I'm guessing. The timing is pretty revealing though.

[BirdieBob]

I need to buy the 100k PXG package, so that I can play a round with Bob to get the low down on this...

 

I have been waiting on a good excuse to pull the trigger on this great deal.

 

 

You need to get your TM stuff on BST ASAP!

[DatSliceDoe]

Bob has an account here. I'd love to see him defend his overpriced garbage against Ping and TM considering he took design elements straight from them both and never got sued. Moron.

[cvvorst]

It's a bit funny seeing the PXG haters emerge in this thread. Pretty much every person on this board has purchased an item because of the brand name/sense of luxury, whether it's a Taylormade wood or a Scotty Cameron putter or whatever. But, to each their own. I doubt this is going to hurt pxg sales. (or Taylormade)

 

 

Edit: also, it seems like a ton of people have tested both irons head to head, based on all these first hand accounts of how the irons compare. I really do need to try the 70 (for fun)

[fawley]

It's funny to read pages of responses that Parsons is a moron, that PXG is garbage, that PXG can't possibly win, that TM didn't infringe on any patents, that PXG has infringed on multiple patents and hasn't been sued.

 

A couple of posters have provided some pretty good analysis of what may be going on and the type of patents PXG may be alleging have been infringed upon. Doesn't matter, Parsons is a moron, PXG is garbage etc. etc.

 

I guess it turns out you really can't reason with people who didn't use reason to get to their position in the first place.

[Jasonic]

I didn't think about the buy and how PXG really gets no love for woods. Could be interesting if he gets some sort of crossover wood technology to merge with the ping tech he already stole. Unfortunately for the TM fanboys they'd have to move on to something else or pay a premium for the same tech.

[mizuno player]

There can only be a few ways to make this product.? I can see a judge saying the process didn't warrant a patent. ( Someone above said that and I agree. )

 

I also do not see PXG getting anything from Taylor Made in terms of Wood design in a settlement.

 

Bob is pissed someone came out with a similar product that performs. He did right by his company and sued. At the end of the day I don't see big winner as a result.

 

Either way it's gonna be fun to watch.

 

[Triple Putt]

If TM was still owned by Adidas, this never happens.

According to a very recent article by M G S (dated 9/7) the TM/Adidas "split" has not yet taken place and will not until the start of October. Does that impact this lawsuit in any way? The TM sale was announced a while back but the transfer of ownership I suppose still takes time.

 

At the start of October TaylorMade and Adidas will finally split. No longer having the German giant behind them will either make or break the originators of the metal wood. Some jobs have been lost, others have been created. It’s a time of change for them as they aim to get back on top of Callaway and translate their considerable tour success back to the dominant retail position they were in only a few years ago.

 

https://Not allowed because of spam.co...de-m-cgb-irons/

 

That's the main point. Virtually all equity deals have a honeymoon period like buying a house where the buyer can get out after inspection for any reason or no reason. Then there is a closing. The same happens in PE. There was likely a trigger date very recently where the "get out for any reason" passed. And Parsons immediately sued. I don't have the specifics, but whatever TM's iron was before this one probably would have gotten hit too. He is suing them about how their irons are made, not what they are made of.

 

if anyone thinks the timing is a co-incidence I've got some oceanfront property in Kansas I can sell at a great price.

 

Please stop posting that picture of the foam-filled iron so I have to keep scrolling by it. Its a process patent. The fight isn't over the actual iron itself.

 

He wants a cross-license so that PXG can start to make some decent woods. And he is going to get it.

You must play PXG?