Tiger equipment that never made it big

[WristySwing]

I think there is some truth to what you are saying but I also think brand loyalty is starting to be a thing a lot more now. PING iron guys seem to always be PING iron guys. I have customers come through my shop that have played almost exclusively PING since the release of the Eye2 and are open to changing but really always seem to gravitate to that product line. Titleist guys are the same, come hell or high water they are going to have the newest metal woods, irons, Vokeys, and Scotty in the bag, regardless if it is an improvement or not over last year's release.

Your Taylormade and Callaway guys seem to flip flop between these two as they recognize the name and appreciate the brand but will tend to lean towards one or the other if all else is equal. I think this is where Nike had a bit of trouble. Guys on GolfWRX supposedly are brand agnostic, but based on the comments here I can see many of them ignored the very good products Nike released. There's a host of reasons, was it brand loyalty to something else? Maybe. Your staunch Tiger followers bought Nike clubs without hesitation, and most were surprised by how good the clubs were. Was it racism? Maybe. I had more than my share of people make offhand racist comments about Tiger and Nike equipment to my face when they were in the business. I would just shake my head and walk away. Nike didn't seem to have a large core group of loyalists willing to push the brand. They had a smaller following and the others who had their clubs often bought them because they discounted so heavily at product turnover. I just think a lot of it stems from people following the first impression rules. They might have tried the (admittedly terrible) T40 drivers or Ignite irons for example, and been turned off from even glancing at the later, very well received at retail and on tour, product releases like the Victory Red and Vapor lines.

Your comment about the tour pros playing where the money is mostly correct, but you also have a new group of players only interested in performance. Funnily, most of them are ex-Nike players. Koepka, Reed, Fleetwood, Schwartzel, Casey, and lots of others, are equipment free agents and play what performs best. Many of them using Nike product up until very recently. I believe Koepka only just replaced his Vapor Fly Pro 2/3i this season and Schwartzel and Fleetwood often cycle Nike fairway woods in and out of the bag along with the odd wedge here and there. I'm sure they do get some money here and there from Mizuno, Titleist, Ping, whoever when they win with their driver or irons in the bag, but they aren't getting the millions of dollar yearly contracts like Rory and Justin Thomas are getting for being the poster boys of brand XYZ.

I think these definitely would have been awesome sellers. Rory was seeing 8mph more ball speed off the driver from his Vapor Fly Pro...that's disgusting. Sounds like they might have figured out something like Jailbreak as well but decided against the hassle.http://www.golfwrx.com/531080/photos-of-a-nike-vpr-strike-driver-that-apparently-would-have-come-out-in-2017/

[Anser]

Oh I believe there is brand loyalty for sure I just don't think it's due to what pro plays what brand. Ping folks are the most loyal of any brand in my opinion with Titleist being a close second. You will rarely see a ping driver in a bag without ping irons altho they've changed that a bit recently due to how good their stuff is since the G400 line.

 

[Red4282]

Oh just stop already-

“I heard an extra 8 mph of ball speed vs. the blue Vapor FLY Pro.”

 

HEARD... must be a fact. Lol..also could be an indication that your VFP stunk...?

 

The main issue is they are just ugly. I dont know why nike thinks they need a giant swoosh visible from darn near every angle. Like we get it...

did nike make some good product? Yes. Most of it was garbage. Interestingly enough their good product was made by other companies ?‍♂️

 

[WristySwing]

Read the article, direct from an ex-Oven employee "The Vapor Strike Elite was a RZN head and the ball speeds were incredible. It was aimed more at the guys who sweep the ball and better players. Rory loved it and wanted to put it in play following final testing at The Oven, but Nike wouldn’t let him. I heard an extra 8 mph of ball speed vs. the blue Vapor FLY Pro."

Maybe the Vapor Fly Pro stunk, or maybe you just weren't good enough to hit it? I had no problems with ball speed or hitting it straight with myself or any of my customers. Which "good product" was made by other companies? The Tiger-Miura blades? That was a myth and has been beaten to death and disproven by Tiger, the people who made and built his clubs, and pretty much everyone in his camp. Tales of Tiger’s equipmentYou can just stop already. You've posted nothing but hearsay and lying posts for as long as I can remember because it doesn't align up with your narrow world view of how golf should be played and how equipment should look. Go back to the 1950s, grandpa. I'm sure you'd prefer the 5 cent milkshakes and segregated drinking fountains, too.

[Red4282]

I read the article, sounds like typical marketing junk...Im posting hearsay?.. ha! You are the one posting about a mythical club and rumors how great it would have been...ohhh rory wanted to play it soooo bad but they said no.... yea ok lol

bridgestone made the nike balls. Thats what i was referring to the only “good” product.

[Mudguard]

Your comment about the tour pros playing where the money is mostly correct, but you also have a new group of players only interested in performance. Funnily, most of them are ex-Nike players. Koepka, Reed, Fleetwood, Schwartzel, Casey, and lots of others, are equipment free agents and play what performs best. Many of them using Nike product up until very recently. I believe Koepka only just replaced his Vapor Fly Pro 2/3i this season and Schwartzel and Fleetwood often cycle Nike fairway woods in and out of the bag along with the odd wedge here and there. I'm sure they do get some money here and there from Mizuno, Titleist, Ping, whoever when they win with their driver or irons in the bag, but they aren't getting the millions of dollar yearly contracts like Rory and Justin Thomas are getting for being the poster boys of brand XYZ.

 

This is a little misleading. Those 'free agents' are playing what they want because they were still being paid by Nike. If that ceased instantly do you think they'd not be fully paid up by another brand? The instant the cheques stops they'll be using some club that their sponsor wants them to use.

[WristySwing]

But none of them have full equipment contracts. Sure Nike is paying them for apparel endorsement, but they are also doing it for 100 other pros varying in popularity from Rory and Koepka and Day all the way down to David Duval and Notah Begay, who aren't exactly moving the needle when they play in their one tournament a year and miss the cut more often than not. Don't get me wrong, these guys are still serious players but equipment and clothing contracts are not one and the same. You can't tell me Koepka hasn't had every major OEM knocking on his door with multi-million dollar/year contracts. He definitely has. I don't imagine his Nike clothing contract is so lucrative that it makes up for what he isn't making if he was playing Callaway, Taylormade, Titleist, or Ping. He's gotta be giving up a fair chunk of change...but that seems to be his mantra most of the time, he doesn't care and just plays what he wants and lets his scores do the talking most of the time.

[Mudguard]

They were still being paid for apparel and equipment but didn't have to use the equipment. Those that signed contracts still had them honoured so they didn't need to rush out and get Titleist/Mizuno/Taylormade etc to cover the income. Kevin Chappell was one of those 2017 free-agent winners. After 180 starts on the PGA TOUR, he broke through at the Valero Texas Open, and eventually landed a spot on the winning U.S. Presidents Cup team. "For me personally, I'm still playing under what was my original Nike contract," Chappell said. "There was no financial reason to go sign an equipment deal. I can test what I want when I want, and play what I want when I want. I still play my Nike irons, but only because I haven't found anything that's better than that."

That was three years ago, now Honma irons and masked Titleist long iron and wedges. That would suggest his Nike equipment contract has well and truly wound up. Or he just likes Honma and conveniently covered the Titleist logos with lead tape.

[anythingfinite]

I mean, think about it this way:

Even Tiger couldn't keep Nike a viable hardgoods company. That is absolutely saying something about the product.

[dekez]

I was really surprised to see the MOI ratings of the irons on Maltby MPF. But the VCOG was also very high. I wonder if that made them difficult to play for the average hack.

[Chappie]

Again, not accurate. Nike was viable when Tiger was dominating. When everything went down with him you also see Nike equipment take a huge hit and they never recovered from that.

[the bishop]

It seems whenever this argument comes up, it gets talked about as if Nike's success/failure in hardgoods is a binary argument. Nike had a really, really good Tour staff. And they were paying a ton of money on those contracts. Nike's expectation was that good equipment + a class A Tour staff would lead to more market share than they captured. So I guess it depends on how you define failure. If Nike had the market share they had and the Tour contract and marketing obligations of say Mizuno they'd probably still be around. Now as to WHY they didn't capture more of the market is a good debate. Companies like PING, Mizuno, Titleist- they're not altruists. They're in it for a profit. But, right or wrong, they are perceived as actually caring about the game more than I think Nike was. These are all just my personal beliefs of course but I think there was a cynical view of Nike that looked at their golf venture as an exercise in pure profiteering.

[Red4282]

Sorry but one mans downfall shouldnt make a company no longer viable. Especially if they are making good stuff (they werent).

[anythingfinite]

E X A C T L Y

[Chappie]

I mean you can have that opinion, but the original VR line, including the 430 head driver with real PX shaft (unusual at the time), VR wedges, players cavities and blades were extremely highly rated in their day. They never made particularly great fairway woods or hybrids, but driver, irons and wedges were well received and reviewed for most of their run.

Nike didn't market their clubs the same way other club manufacturers did. TMAG, Titleist and others focus on volume: the most balls used on tour, the most wedges, the most drivers, the most putters, most wins, etc. Nike never did this and that was part of their problem. Their marketing was what Tiger was doing, despite having years where their pro lineup as a whole was dominant, they focused on one man as he defined the sport, and tried to sign the next with McIlroy and position him in that way, which realistically was too much to expect from him in retrospect. When your entire marketing focuses on one guy, and that one guy completely falls from grace and doesn't have a slow walk into the sunset of retirement, you just can't carry a viable marketing strategy out, and Nike simply couldn't do that. The numbers speak for themselves. Up through 2009 they were a growing profitable brand. They staggered in 2010. They slowly regressed from then on. It's not some coincidence.

[Red4282]

I hear ya but even when tiger was relevant their apparrel, and balls had success. I hardly EVER saw a nike golf club at my home course or any other course for that matter. Actually i credit nike to a trend that i really dislike. They were one of the first to make “flashy” clubs. Bright colors and swooshes.... so i guess they gave us that!

[BraxtonFullerton]

This. I could never hit their woods/driver well enough to justify buying them. Iron wise, the 2010 Slingshot set was probably one of the best I've ever owned, forgiving and still shape shots. A good set of VR Pro Combos are always a white whale on any trade forum I frequent...

 

The problem was they put the marketing onus all on Tiger. When Tiger fell from grace & out of the golf world for a little bit, they scrambled to try to make up for the drop-off. If they had stuck with it, I think they would've recovered. But they're a gigantic company that didn't need to make golf clubs. So they cut it to pad their margins and invest in more profitable areas.

[MelloYello]

You're so far inside the machine you don't realize it. The only thing that matters in any of this is image and advertising. Welcome to modern capitalism. "Good product" are no longer about quality, which has become ubiquitous. It's all just image now. That's the only way to make someone buy yours versus theirs.

 

Big box stores don't even stock those "other" brands. The only brands they sell (aside from the ones they own like Walter Hagen and Tommy Armour) are the ones endorsed by major names. Moreover, those brands with the most endorsements (e.g. TaylorMade) get the most real estate inside the store.

 

There's no disagreeing with any of this, btw. To disagree is to simply say that 2+2=5. This is America. For better or worse, it's western civilization. Take it or leave it. It is what it is.

[Chappie]

I saw a lot of Sumo stuff with the higher handicap crowd. A friend of mine to this day plays a sumo square hybrid because it fits his eye (for some reason, hell if I know why).

I still game a a VR forged wedge that I got as NOS a few seasons ago happily. The 60.06 is easily one of my favorite wedges ever, just a perfect grind and you can hit it easily from tight lies. I also had the VR tour driver with the blue PX 6.0 tipped slightly in the bag back in the day and absolutely loved it. It still is one of my favorite heads I’ve ever played, and if it wasn’t for the SLDR I would’ve considered building another one. Always wanted to mix that with a devotion but I’ll take this head and the Kiyoshi white instead.

[Anser]

Advertising and marketing is everything we just disagree how much effect players have on it.

I sold about 5 million worth of clubs but I'm sure you know more than I do on what motivated those sales. About 1% of it had something to do with a specific player using it but don't stop now.

[WristySwing]

Agreed. My store did over 2 million in sales last year and the shop I used to work at while Nike was around was close to about 10 million in sales (clothes, shoes, clubs, etc.). But we are the one's who don't understand what is really going on because a couple people haven't seen a Nike club when they've been at a golf course. I love this forum sooooooo much some days.

I will say though when I first started I sold literally hundreds of Wilson Fat Boy drivers, woods, hybrids, and it took me close to a decade to see one in the wild. I suspect a lot of it has to do with the type of courses some of these people play. As I said (not to you) that Nike did discount fairly heavily when a new line launched so it could be that much of their product made it into the bags of the weekend warriors who haunt golf now and the munis.

At the end of the day I don't care, really. I know they made a sick product and would have no problem whatsoever playing any of the Pro Combo irons and Victory Red or Engage wedges to this day, drivers give me a Vapor flex and I'm good to go.

[anythingfinite]

Is your friend Fred Couples? He still games a Sumo SQ hybrid.

[WristySwing]

The recent evidence would suggest he does not: GolfWRX Insider: An exclusive look inside the bag of Fred Couples

[anythingfinite]

Whoops...I read that a while back and remembered it was a square club so I thought it was the Nike SQ.

[jons1]

I can’t believe more people didn’t buy a neon yellow square driver that sounded like a tin can with a great name like Sasquatch. Seemed like a home run ?

Nike tried so hard to be different, that they created clubs that repulsed as many people as they attracted. If Tiger wasn’t signed, they would have sold 1/4 of the clubs they did imo.

But I had some nike clubs and they performed well. You just had to look past the pretend rivots and crazy colors and all the gimmicks they used to market themselves as the “hip and cool” golf company.

To me the biggest thing Nike did was the golf ball. I think Tiger killed the fields in 2000 with the help of that ball, which was out before the Prov1. The TW ball was a monster compared to the old professional 100 ball that many others were still playing that year.

 

[Red4282]

which was made for them by bridgestone lol

[jons1]

When did Nike start making their own balls? Did they ever have their own ball plant? I thought they did. I ask because the balls got worse over the years compared to the early days when Bridgestone made them

[Red4282]

Im not sure about all their balls... most these companies contract out to a few factories anyways. I just know the one tiger played was a bridgestone.

[WristySwing]

To be fair, everyone had ugly drivers that sounded bad back then. Titleist with their triangle D1, Callaway FT-i, FT-iq, and the even worse FT-iz, Nickent 3DX, Adams Insight 5000, Cobra Speed LD, L4V, and L5V triangles with scallops, the Cleveland Hibore, Hibore XL, and Hibore Monster. The only companies really doing anything traditional were Taylormade, Ping, and Mizuno, but even Taylormade strayed with the R7 CGB Max burgundy triangle with 3 shafts. It was a bad time to be a driver R & D team.

[Afraid2goLow]

Nothing better than the original Vr 430 driver with the real px shaft in it.

I don’t understand how Bridgestone seems to keep failing in marketing their ball with Tiger now.