Titleist Tour Soft

[North Butte]

When the K-Sig came out, Titleist was doomed. Dead as the proverbial parrot.

 

Then when the AVX showed up, it was obviously doomed. Nobody but nobody was going to pay $48 for a Urethane ball other than ProV1.

 

Then the Tour Soft arrived and Titleist was TOTALLY doomed. Nobody is going to spend $35 for a 2pc ball and they will be the laughingstock of the industry.

 

And now the AVX is, in fact, apparently a viable product so that means the ProV1 is doomed.

 

Yet the K-Sig disappeared, Titleist is still the best selling brand, the AVX does seem to be selling and Tour Soft is just as popularl the $35 Titleist balls have always been. Do you guys think it is maybe conceivable that all the talk of Titleist’s demise is greatly exaggerated?

 

But hey, keep pitching. If you keep predicting something long enough eventually it’s bound to happen, right?

[nsxguy]

Anyone who doesn’t think Titleist is scrambling a little with the AVX , colored Velocity and Tour Soft is somewhat in denial. Clearly they are trying to recapture lost market share.

 

They will most likely do well with the Velocity , but the jury is up in the air with the other 2. Can a brand really have 3 balls pushing $47? Bridgestone tried this but always discounts massively shortly there after. The AVX may lure a couple customers back , but at $47 I am not convinced it’s enough to sustain another ball in the line-up. On the Tour Soft , initial intrigue will boost short term sales but I expect that to flatten out early summer.

 

Might be popular as a “winter” ball for the Titleist fans in cold weather climate but still see it struggling after the hype is over.

 

The most curious thing to me is this - are both the AVX and True Soft going to hurt ProV1 sales more than hurting their direct competitors in Callaway , Taylormade and Srixon ?

 

Has AVX actually been fully launched ? Initially it was only released in about 6 or 7 states, no ?

 

Only thing I can think of vis-a-vis AVX is there ARE some highly skilled players that don't like the clickly/hard feel of the ProV1 and the AVX is targeted towards those guys.

 

If so, the AVX is NOT a competitor of the ProV1 and won't be taking ANY sales from the ProV1.

[golfer07840]

I'm asking this just for kicks, but does anyone remember the Titleist HP2 ball?

[North Butte]

Yes

[Kmac]

This thread is WRX at its finest! Carry on.

[Break81]

When the K-Sig came out, Titleist was doomed. Dead as the proverbial parrot.

 

Then when the AVX showed up, it was obviously doomed. Nobody but nobody was going to pay $48 for a Urethane ball other than ProV1.

 

Then the Tour Soft arrived and Titleist was TOTALLY doomed. Nobody is going to spend $35 for a 2pc ball and they will be the laughingstock of the industry.

 

And now the AVX is, in fact, apparently a viable product so that means the ProV1 is doomed.

 

Yet the K-Sig disappeared, Titleist is still the best selling brand, the AVX does seem to be selling and Tour Soft is just as popularl the $35 Titleist balls have always been. Do you guys think it is maybe conceivable that all the talk of Titleists demise is greatly exaggerated?

 

But hey, keep pitching. If you keep predicting something long enough eventually its bound to happen, right?

like I said the jury is still out and it’s way to early to say AVX and TS are success or failures. I was simply giving my opinion and not fact.

 

Do you agree Titleist offering a orange , pink and vis-a-white Velocity is a reactionary move to capture loss sales in that specific market segment ?

[North Butte]

Objection...assuming facts not in evidence, your honor.

 

people buy funny colored balls so Titleist offers some colors other than white

 

people buy balls advertised as "soft" so Titleist starts pitching "soft"

 

people respond to silly claims about who is "longer" so Titleist plays up their own claims of "longer"

 

Those are the facts. You are purely conjecturing any "reaction" to "loss sales". One could equally well conclude that Titleist has a competent market research department and is simply adjusting their ads and product mix to reflect current trends.

 

That's the thing about conjecture, once you get started the sky's the limit!

[xxio]

K Sigs disappeared because they were a batch product. A certain production bought at a discounted price without the intent to have continuous production.

[NJpatbee]

Believe it or not I played the NXT for years for a few reasons: 1) It was a Titleist 2) It played well for my swing 3) It was second tier Titleist and as a mid-teens handicapper I stayed away from true tour balls. When I tried the old Gamer V2 I was surprised to see that I was longer and doing better on approach shots and around the green and the ball was half the price. The e6 was also a better ball for me. I had been a Titleist ball only golfer for about 15 years because I believed that they were the best simply because of brand recognition and the amount of pros, friends, and family that always played Titleist. It hit me that I was paying much more for a 3 piece surlyn ball because of the brand and it was not even the best ball of its type for my swing. The "exposed" factor for me was that the NXT was one of the most overpriced golf balls in the market and I know that I am not alone in that opinion. I believe it is why the NXT has been discontinued.

 

I am certain that Titleist made a ton of money on the NXT (some from me) which is what they are supposed to do. And of course they will use their brand to leverage the highest price for their golf balls. But their claims that their new 2 piece surlyn ball is better than the competition's urethane tour golf balls seems as disingenuous as telling me that the ProV1 is the best ball for my swing which was their mantra for a couple of years.

[North Butte]

I do agree that Titleist is guilty as charged. They definitely make a variety of vague advertising claims about their golf balls and those claims morph over time to follow trends.There is often no internal consistency between ads for one product five years ago and ads for a different product today.

 

Just not sure how that is supposed to be different from Callaway, Taylormade, Bridgestone, Srixon, Wilson and literally every single maker of golf balls. They all just throw stuff up against the wall marketing-wise and see what sticks, in search of appealing to a wide variety of potential buyers.

 

So what is it about Titleist that makes you lot think their advertisements are supposed to be less "disingenuous" than their competitors?

 

Some marketing guy for Titleist says "Our ball is better than Bridgestone's and Callaway's" and the uproar is loud and continuous. How dare they claim such a thing?

 

But when some marketing guy for Bridgestone or Callaway says "Oh no it isn't, our balls is way, way better!!!!!" then you're all like, "Well I guess that set the record straight, you tell 'em".

 

P.S. I mean for goodness sake, there are people whining on this thread about Titleist putting "Tour" in the name of a ball that nobody on Tour plays...as if there weren't at last count 2,703 golf products currently on the market with "Tour" in their name, including 498 golf ball models. Approximately.

[chris975d]

When the K-Sig came out, Titleist was doomed. Dead as the proverbial parrot.

 

Then when the AVX showed up, it was obviously doomed. Nobody but nobody was going to pay $48 for a Urethane ball other than ProV1.

 

Then the Tour Soft arrived and Titleist was TOTALLY doomed. Nobody is going to spend $35 for a 2pc ball and they will be the laughingstock of the industry.

 

And now the AVX is, in fact, apparently a viable product so that means the ProV1 is doomed.

 

Yet the K-Sig disappeared, Titleist is still the best selling brand, the AVX does seem to be selling and Tour Soft is just as popularl the $35 Titleist balls have always been. Do you guys think it is maybe conceivable that all the talk of Titleist’s demise is greatly exaggerated?

 

But hey, keep pitching. If you keep predicting something long enough eventually it’s bound to happen, right?

like I said the jury is still out and it’s way to early to say AVX and TS are success or failures. I was simply giving my opinion and not fact.

 

Do you agree Titleist offering a orange , pink and vis-a-white Velocity is a reactionary move to capture loss sales in that specific market segment ?

 

Being on the retail side of golf balls, I see it more as a new trend (people buying brightly colored golf balls) or sales category emerging and being somewhat sustained (Volvik Vivids have been a solid seller in my proshop for the past 2 seasons) and Titleist moving to be part of that trend after seeing it get some staying power. I don't think it's a "lost sales" thing, as I still see customers buying brightly colored balls for the novelty/better visibility AND more "tour caliber" balls...obviously mostly Pro V1s, often at the same time.

 

I guess one could make a point that it sort of is lost sales, as Titleist didn't previously have a product in that category, therefore the brightly colored/hi-viz sale went to someone else. But I don't see it having been much of the case the hi-viz ball market stealing many sales from current Titleist customers. I really don't think many people on GolfWRX/dedicated golf forums understand how much of a golf consumer mindset lock Titleist has on the vast majority of the golf ball buying customer.

 

As a sometimes (among many other things) golf ball salesman, I can tell you it's extremely hard to break through the perception Titleist has created as being the "best ball in golf" with the everyday, run of the mill "Joe Golfer". I've personally made ball recommendations to my customers on non-Titleist balls that would possibly help their game, watched them play with the non-Titleist ball, and in fact play better/get results more like they are desiring, and STILL come back and buy damn Titleist balls the next time instead of the non-Titleist ball that they had better performance from. I sometimes don't understand it....

[North Butte]

BTW, in the Japanese market Titleist has sold a variety of colors for quite a while. It was apparently a trend over there before being a trend over here.

[North Texas]

I do agree that Titleist is guilty as charged. They definitely make a variety of vague advertising claims about their golf balls and those claims morph over time to follow trends.There is often no internal consistency between ads for one product five years ago and ads for a different product today.

 

Just not sure how that is supposed to be different from Callaway, Taylormade, Bridgestone, Srixon, Wilson and literally every single maker of golf balls. They all just throw stuff up against the wall marketing-wise and see what sticks, in search of appealing to a wide variety of potential buyers.

 

So what is it about Titleist that makes you lot think their advertisements are supposed to be less "disingenuous" than their competitors?

 

Some marketing guy for Titleist says "Our ball is better than Bridgestone's and Callaway's" and the uproar is loud and continuous. How dare they claim such a thing?

 

But when some marketing guy for Bridgestone or Callaway says "Oh no it isn't, our balls is way, way better!!!!!" then you're all like, "Well I guess that set the record straight, you tell 'em".

 

P.S. I mean for goodness sake, there are people whining on this thread about Titleist putting "Tour" in the name of a ball that nobody on Tour plays...as if there weren't at last count 2,703 golf products currently on the market with "Tour" in their name, including 498 golf ball models. Approximately.

 

Yea, I'm not sure what Titleist is doing that is any different than what other companies do. Or maybe I should say that Titleist is merely doing what everyone else does. Everyone does the same thing. Surprised at how many people don't get that.

[North Butte]

All these companies have marketing guys that went to the same B-schools, no doubt. They are playing the same marketing game and over any given period of time SOMEONE has to do it better than the other. For the last few decades Titleist has been the one doing it better, which isn't to say they will always be on top. But it's the status quo.

 

If you truly believe that Titleist is on its last legs, maybe you ought to go short the living crap out of NYSE:GOLF and make yourself a fortune.

[Break81]

I don’t recall anyone saying they were on their last legs. What has been repeatedly said is that they have lost marketshare and are doing things before that they wouldn’t have been caught dead doing.

Acknowledging quickly changing marketplace and saying their demise is eminent are completely two different things.

[North Texas]

I have seen a few people say that Titleist has or is losing marketshare. Does anyone have a source or link showing this?

[NJpatbee]

I don't think anyone suggested that Titleist is going out of business! They may have lost some market share for some items but they are still the number one selling golf ball. And yes other manufacturers make claims that are at best exaggerations.

 

But Titleist can do one thing that the other manufacturers cannot, and that is to grossly over charge for some balls because they are the brand of record. Their marketing program to get all golfers to play the ProV1 because it will "perform" for them was at least misleading (oh, we meant spin!) but I am sure some golfers bought into it because it came from Titleist, the brand you can trust. I give them credit for producing some great balls and equipment over the years and they have paid huge amounts of money to successfully promote their brand which leads to a large budget to support. But they have crossed the line in the last several years and their claims about the Tour Soft seem to me to be outrageous, but golfers like me 10 years ago will buy them. Titleist already makes an excellent 2 piece ionomer soft ball in the DT Trusoft for $21.99 so lets see how it compares to their new $34.99 2 piece ionomer soft ball.

 

 

And yes, after all this yakking you know that I will have to try them!

[North Butte]

I've never understood why anyone ever bought an NXT Tour instead of DT Solo. But pretty sure the NXT Tour was always the better seller of the two. Wouldn't be at all surprised of Tour Soft outsells TruSoft by a healthy margin, among the guys I play with I've literally never seen a DT Solo or Trusoft in play but lots of NXT Tour, NXT Tour S and now already two guys are playing (or at least trying) Tour Soft.

[tbowles411]

I don't think anyone suggested that Titleist is going out of business! They may have lost some market share for some items but they are still the number one selling golf ball. And yes other manufacturers make claims that are at best exaggerations.

 

But Titleist can do one thing that the other manufacturers cannot, and that is to grossly over charge for some balls because they are the brand of record. Their marketing program to get all golfers to play the ProV1 because it will "perform" for them was at least misleading (oh, we meant spin!) but I am sure some golfers bought into it because it came from Titleist, the brand you can trust. I give them credit for producing some great balls and equipment over the years and they have paid huge amounts of money to successfully promote their brand which leads to a large budget to support. But they have crossed the line in the last several years and their claims about the Tour Soft seem to me to be outrageous, but golfers like me 10 years ago will buy them. Titleist already makes an excellent 2 piece ionomer soft ball in the DT Trusoft for $21.99 so lets see how it compares to their new $34.99 2 piece ionomer soft ball.

 

 

And yes, after all this yakking you know that I will have to try them!

The other thing that Titleist can boast is the fact that ALL of their ball manufacturing is in house. I don't know of any other company that can honestly say that.

[Break81]

Would love to see a head to head test against this ball. Can’t imagine much different in performance.

[North Butte]

You left out “unbiased”. I think all “head to head tests” are legally required to be called “UNBIASED head to head tests”. ;-)

[Break81]

You left out unbiased. I think all head to head tests are legally required to be called UNBIASED head to head tests. ;-)

so when Titleist tested the True Soft vs the TP5 , ChromeSoft and B-RX is was all unbiased ?

[North Texas]

I have seen a few people say that Titleist has or is losing marketshare. Does anyone have a source or link showing this?

 

Anyone?

[North Butte]

You left out unbiased. I think all head to head tests are legally required to be called UNBIASED head to head tests. ;-)

so when Titleist tested the True Soft vs the TP5 , ChromeSoft and B-RX is was all unbiased ?

 

All of these test are equally “unbiased”.

[Break81]

I have seen a few people say that Titleist has or is losing marketshare. Does anyone have a source or link showing this?

 

Anyone?

I am sure there is a lot more stats to be found but this article suggest Callaway has taken a fair amount of market share away from Titleist

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2017/06/16/smaller-golf-production-companies-making-headway-against-industry-giants.html

[North Texas]

I have seen a few people say that Titleist has or is losing marketshare. Does anyone have a source or link showing this?

 

Anyone?

I am sure there is a lot more stats to be found but this article suggest Callaway has taken a fair amount of market share away from Titleist

https://www.google.c...try-giants.html

 

"Suggest" is the key word here.

[Break81]

I have seen a few people say that Titleist has or is losing marketshare. Does anyone have a source or link showing this?

 

Anyone?

I am sure there is a lot more stats to be found but this article suggest Callaway has taken a fair amount of market share away from Titleist

https://www.google.c...try-giants.html

 

"Suggest" is the key word here.

suggest an exact number in 14%

 

Look you asked for a link and take it for what you consider it’s worth. I get that anything short of a Titleist themselves saying they lost market is share is going to be taken as speculation.

[Tanner25]

Unless you have stock in them, why do guys care so much, if they are losing market share?

[xxio]

I do agree that Titleist is guilty as charged. They definitely make a variety of vague advertising claims about their golf balls and those claims morph over time to follow trends.There is often no internal consistency between ads for one product five years ago and ads for a different product today.

 

Just not sure how that is supposed to be different from Callaway, Taylormade, Bridgestone, Srixon, Wilson and literally every single maker of golf balls. They all just throw stuff up against the wall marketing-wise and see what sticks, in search of appealing to a wide variety of potential buyers.

 

So what is it about Titleist that makes you lot think their advertisements are supposed to be less "disingenuous" than their competitors?

 

Some marketing guy for Titleist says "Our ball is better than Bridgestone's and Callaway's" and the uproar is loud and continuous. How dare they claim such a thing?

 

But when some marketing guy for Bridgestone or Callaway says "Oh no it isn't, our balls is way, way better!!!!!" then you're all like, "Well I guess that set the record straight, you tell 'em".

 

P.S. I mean for goodness sake, there are people whining on this thread about Titleist putting "Tour" in the name of a ball that nobody on Tour plays...as if there weren't at last count 2,703 golf products currently on the market with "Tour" in their name, including 498 golf ball models. Approximately.

 

Yea, I'm not sure what Titleist is doing that is any different than what other companies do. Or maybe I should say that Titleist is merely doing what everyone else does. Everyone does the same thing. Surprised at how many people don't get that.

 

No other company compared them to actual Tour/urethane balls.

[nsxguy]

OK, let's bottom line it then.

 

Regardless of what it costs to make, if you could sell your product for $35, would you sell it for $25 ? :beruo:

 

And the NXT line was "exposed" ? Do you have any idea how long the NXT line has been around ? I'm guessing longer than the BEST selling model of ANY other brand's ball. :help:

 

Believe it or not I played the NXT for years for a few reasons: 1) It was a Titleist 2) It played well for my swing 3) It was second tier Titleist and as a mid-teens handicapper I stayed away from true tour balls. When I tried the old Gamer V2 I was surprised to see that I was longer and doing better on approach shots and around the green and the ball was half the price. The e6 was also a better ball for me. I had been a Titleist ball only golfer for about 15 years because I believed that they were the best simply because of brand recognition and the amount of pros, friends, and family that always played Titleist. It hit me that I was paying much more for a 3 piece surlyn ball because of the brand and it was not even the best ball of its type for my swing. The "exposed" factor for me was that the NXT was one of the most overpriced golf balls in the market and I know that I am not alone in that opinion. I believe it is why the NXT has been discontinued.

 

I am certain that Titleist made a ton of money on the NXT (some from me) which is what they are supposed to do. And of course they will use their brand to leverage the highest price for their golf balls. But their claims that their new 2 piece surlyn ball is better than the competition's urethane tour golf balls seems as disingenuous as telling me that the ProV1 is the best ball for my swing which was their mantra for a couple of years.

 

I'm not sure - is this a "Yes" or a "No" ? :dntknw: :D