Bushnell Launch Pro Device with Foresight

[James495738]

2 minutes ago, Jamesheeney said:

But that is the reason to get the subscription. This market will flood in the next couple years and that will drive down subscription prices (not up). So the idea of paying 7k up front would be like paying 25k for a flat screen (which people did). Bets on subscription being cheaper.

I agree. I think this device will be dramatically cheaper in 5 years so I would go with the subs approach. By that point there might also be a successor to the gcq meaning they can be picked up used. A used gcq in 5 years time could be close to a full price gc3 now...

[jeromek]

Just now, csufman said:

Do you have to pay for the basic subscription with the GC3?  Saw someone post a copy of their invoice and it referenced including 12 months of Basic Subscription.

My rep said that was inadvertently added to the part number

[csufman]

Just now, jeromek said:

My rep said that was inadvertently added to the part number

Thanks for the clarification.

[mdmack]

3 hours ago, James495738 said:

Using a device like this on a driving range is pointless because range balls are rubbish (see the MGS test). I guess if you start playing with range balls it makes sense, but I doubt many people buying something like this use range balls when they play! 🙂

 

Even an R10 is pointless with range balls because launch and spin are radically different and therefore distance is off.

 

I agree that hitting typical range balls with a LM is pointless, but the range I go to uses better quality balls than normal, probably around half are provs, with some other decent quality balls mixed in. No they are not brand new and perfect, but plenty good enough to get usable data.

 

My major concern though is the lack of an option for just a generic 3D range when even the $600 R10 provides that for free and I think they should at least make their hardware usable in the most basic way without paying for a subscription.

[Jamesheeney]

7 minutes ago, csufman said:

Do you have to pay for the basic subscription with the GC3?  Saw someone post a copy of their invoice and it referenced including 12 months of Basic Subscription.

First year is free. Then 100/per year basic. $400 silver. $800 gold

[CStephenson17]

3 minutes ago, Jamesheeney said:

First year is free. Then 100/per year basic. $400 silver. $800 gold

There is never a subscription fee if you buy GC3. I just clarified with the rep

[noodle24]

My only glimmer of hope here is if the Launch Pro gold package allows TGC 2019 and GS Pro, even though it appears the GC3 will not. Even then, that $800/year subscription is cash burned when I go to resell it.

[CStephenson17]

4 minutes ago, Jamesheeney said:

First year is free. Then 100/per year basic. $400 silver. $800 gold

 

[wedgegame]

18 minutes ago, Jamesheeney said:

But that is the reason to get the subscription. This market will flood in the next couple years and that will drive down subscription prices (not up). So the idea of paying 7k up front would be like paying 25k for a flat screen (which people did). Bets on subscription being cheaper.

Yeah but you're still only renting features for your $3K hardware.  I haven't seen anything about an upgrade path for fully unlocking the Launch Pro, but I would hope they would eventually make that an option.

[jcrews5508]

If fsx play is moving to a unity game platform

wouldn't that resolve many if the issues with current graphics? 

[nessling]

I sold my Mevo+ as soon as this product was announced, worried that the resale would really take a hit if they were to compete head to head. Now looking at the details, not sure I made the right choice (being Canadian also doesn't help!)

 

I'm mostly a range user and simply dabble in the sim mode, so @ $3k I suppose I could be fine paying the premium for more accurate data capture. I wonder though about what the in-app experience of FSX Pro will be like compared to the FS Golf... i.e How basic and "de-contented" will it feel compared to the purpose-built app experience I had with my Mevo+

 

The video capture experience alone on FS makes it great for winter retooling... Videos auto-captured , stats displayed on the video for reference later, change clubs using my Apple watch, etc... I worry that I'd pay a premium to upgrade to the LP Basic but always feel like I have a substandard product/experience.

 

Looking forward to seeing user reviews in the Basic experience. 

 

[soupy01833]

6 minutes ago, jcrews5508 said:

If fsx play is moving to a unity game platform

wouldn't that resolve many if the issues with current graphics? 

that would be  yes if they have decent course designers.  

Edited September 30, 2021 by soupy01833

[thigos]

For those that have pre ordered GC3, what are you getting as a receipt that shows what you are buying?  I have talked to someone at FS, and kind of got the response that the details are not released until Monday, but you can pre-order now.  Seems a little vague to be plopping down $7k.  There has to be some sort of invoice or product description, right?

 

If someone has the contact info of a rep or someone who can provide documented details, I want to go ahead and order it..

[Gresh12]

Just now, soupy01833 said:

that would yes if they have a decent course designers.  

Resolves the graphics most likely but not the exorbitant cost to add each course after your included 5 or 10. I think it’s a huge miss staying with a pay per course model. 

[jeromek]

3 minutes ago, thigos said:

For those that have pre ordered GC3, what are you getting as a receipt that shows what you are buying?  I have talked to someone at FS, and kind of got the response that the details are not released until Monday, but you can pre-order now.  Seems a little vague to be plopping down $7k.  There has to be some sort of invoice or product description, right?

 

If someone has the contact info of a rep or someone who can provide documented details, I want to go ahead and order it..

I pmed you my rep info

[herdtlocker]

I guess one of the upsides to the LP is that if for some reason it gets smashed and can't be replaced(warranty info is a whole other conversation), or stolen or something, one would be out half the price of the GC3...

 

I'm so torn between the two.  Been waffling back and forth all day at it.

[mdmack]

22 minutes ago, soupy01833 said:

this is what fsx pro looks like so no

 idea what their definition of 2D range is

 

If this is what they are calling the "2d ball flight type" I feel much better about the whole thing. Getting this range for the $100/year sub vs $400 or $800/year sub at least makes the unit usable for practice without wanting the courses. 

 

I am a little skeptical that this will be included though. While i dont know a ton about FSX pro, bushnell says that the $100 sub includes "FSX Pro configured for Basic Subscription" not just that it includes FSX pro which leads me to believe it might be a watered down version that only whos the overhead 2d and the side 2d views like posted a few pages back.  

[PostandGhost]

Not trying to make a statement, honestly curious, but what reason would someone buy the GC Quad over the GC3 now and is the Quad really worth the additional money?

[Topher925]

9 minutes ago, mdmack said:

 

If this is what they are calling the "2d ball flight type" I feel much better about the whole thing. Getting this range for the $100/year sub vs $400 or $800/year sub at least makes the unit usable for practice without wanting the courses. 

 

I am a little skeptical that this will be included though. While i dont know a ton about FSX pro, bushnell says that the $100 sub includes "FSX Pro configured for Basic Subscription" not just that it includes FSX pro which leads me to believe it might be a watered down version that only whos the overhead 2d and the side 2d views like posted a few pages back.  

 

Maybe too optimistic, but I'd guess the pictured FSX Pro range will be the basic range and the basic configuration will just be which data points are displayed.  The comparison also shows all three subscriptions to include Std Range.

Edited September 30, 2021 by Topher925

[Gresh12]

6 minutes ago, From_Parts_Unknown said:

Not trying to make a statement, honestly curious, but what reason would someone buy the GC Quad over the GC3 now and is the Quad really worth the additional money?

With GC3 you can never get impact location or face angle plus a few other things. 
 

I don’t disagree that the value difference (especially for a consumer) is tough to justify right now but where I take pause is Will I want those extra parameters in 3 years if pricing is in my range (quad is simply too much for me) then I’m left trying to resell GC3 which it’s tough to tell how it will hold its value on this pricing basis. 

[CStephenson17]

So this was probably assumed by most like me but I went ahead and asked to be 100%.

 

if you go with the BLP and get the standard or silver subscription, the unit still reads it the same as if you had unlocked or gold it just doesn’t display the into.

 

Having confirmed that, I will be going with the BLP and getting the sliver package. I can afford to do whatever but I also have access to TM4 at my home course if I need specific data. Knowing that I can use the range on BLP and play some courses and it will still be as accurate as a fully unlocked GC3 gives me peace of mind to not need all of the data.
 

The rep I spoke to also said while they are not wanting 3rd party softwares other than what they have deal with to work, it’s almost inevitable that they will find a way to do so. 

 

so I am going to go the cheaper route and see what happens. 

[Indygolf21]

11 minutes ago, From_Parts_Unknown said:

Not trying to make a statement, honestly curious, but what reason would someone buy the GC Quad over the GC3 now and is the Quad really worth the additional money?

If you’re a touring professional or a club fitter, having loft/lie and impact location data, and the option to get putting analysis, could, I suppose, make it worth it. 
 

But for everyone else - even country clubs and commercial practice facilities - I’m really not sure why you wouldn’t buy a GC3 and save the 10k. 

Edited September 30, 2021 by Indygolf21

[mdmack]

2 minutes ago, Topher925 said:

 

Maybe too optimistic, but I'd guess this will be the range and the basic configuration will just be which data points are displayed.  The comparison also shows all three subscriptions to include Std Range.

I really hope your right. The "ball flight type" being listed as "2d" on the line below the STD range is whats throwing me off I guess. 

[cmatthews77]

9 hours ago, Jamesheeney said:

To me the flat rate is a mistake to take. What are the odds they can push the subscription rate at that price for that long. As more companies jump in and there is more competion I see that rate going down not up

 

Not to mention the additional products that will come out in the 5 years it takes to "break even" if you're buying the gold sub package.  To me, to pay for the GC3 you're assuming that a) Foresight isn't going to come out with anything else within 5 years b) you HAVE to have camera and can't use Mevo + and c) no other competitors will introduce a decent product like a ST2, Garmin, etc.

[CStephenson17]

1 minute ago, cmatthews77 said:

 

Not to mention the additional products that will come out in the 5 years it takes to "break even" if you're buying the gold sub package.  To me, to pay for the GC3 you're assuming that a) Foresight isn't going to come out with anything else within 5 years b) you HAVE to have camera and can't use Mevo + and c) no other competitors will introduce a decent product like a ST2, Garmin, etc.

All it takes is a GC3 style Trackman 5

[jeromek]

4 minutes ago, cmatthews77 said:

 

Not to mention the additional products that will come out in the 5 years it takes to "break even" if you're buying the gold sub package.  To me, to pay for the GC3 you're assuming that a) Foresight isn't going to come out with anything else within 5 years b) you HAVE to have camera and can't use Mevo + and c) no other competitors will introduce a decent product like a ST2, Garmin, etc.

Life is too short to worry about stuff like that.  Buy the product if you think it's worth it, and enjoy it.

[oc_mike]

The subscription options show saved/cloud videos.  Does the unit have some sort of capability to take videos or add a swing camera?

 

 

 

[soupy01833]

35 minutes ago, oc_mike said:

The subscription options show saved/cloud videos.  Does the unit have some sort of capability to take videos or add a swing camera?

 

 

 

fsx does the video recording if you add cameras and you can save them to FSX live

Edited September 30, 2021 by soupy01833

[cmatthews77]

6 hours ago, mdmack said:

I think they missed the boat on not offering a better range option. For people in climates that can play outside year round many of us just want a LM that we can take to the range pretty easily for distances, but also practice on a 3d digital range in our garage. There is a large portion of the LM market that dont give 2 craps about playing Sim golf, but would like a 3d range that does not cost $800/year. 3k is extremely reasonable for the hardware, but for someone who just wants a 3d range at home and basic accurate numbers on the real range the subscription model just is not going to do it for them. $7k is also pretty steep for someone just wanting an accurate digital range. Obviously this is a to each his own situation, but I know quite a few guys in my group that I play with that have the means to buy this but just wont see the value for the money. 

 

This exactly! Throw in a father who wants to be able to squeeze in 30 minutes to work with his 13YO son taking up the game at home and doesn't have enough space to set up a simulator... $7k is too much for an outdoor net range while $3k + $800/yr seems too pricey a sub.  I'm with almost everyone that if the Tier 1 or Tier 2 came with a 3D range I'd be sold.  Otherwise, Mevo + seems like the much better option although I was holding out to see if this camera option would work.. 

[cmatthews77]

4 hours ago, bbish937 said:

 

If people can afford and were targeting $7k, absolutely this is a home run. If people were hopeful for that $2k-$3k range, this is disappointing to say the least. Like I mentioned earlier if you cannot afford $7k, you are much better off financially financing the GC3, instead of opting for the LP, the LP is an endless money pit to get you in the door at a lower price, it's a fool's product.

 

Yes, it does seem like just paying $3k down on the GC3 and then financing the $4k difference is a smarter option than spending $3k and then still having to pay $70/mo for eternity...