Callaway Seeks Permanent Injunction Against Titleist

[sapguy]

[quote name='StaffBag' post='877968' date='Jan 22 2008, 11:55 PM']Relax to all of the Titleist lovers here. I really strongly dout that Titleist will be forced into removing thier product from the market by a grandstanding complaint from Callaway.[/quote]

OK, we shall find out soon enough if the motion and order for PERMANENT injunction filled by the wily Callaway lawyers will be granted by the courts or not.

We'll see if you will be so smug at that time.

Oh yeah, be prepared to see a few price increases on Pro V1 soon, in order for Titleist to pay for their lawyers

If the injunction is granted, then on January 1, 2009, Callaway lawyers can send letters to any retailer having Pro V1 on their shelf to friendly remind to remove those balls. And if Titleist plan to drag things on by using the appeal process, it will be suicide leading to a slow death, as the Callaway lawyers can put the screws to Titleist and Acushnet to the point of driving them into bankruptcy protection.

And don't think for a minute that Acushnet's overlord, Fortune Brands, is not noticing any of this. In fact, during Fortune Brands’ third-quarter earnings conference call, patent litigation and related costs were cited as having had a negative effect on the company’s third quarter results.

Acushnet is under pressure from its parent company, Fortune Brands, to get this sad story over with somehow, and Fortune Brands may be selling Acushnet soon since Titleist is "damaged goods" now, especially in the eyes of the Wall Street investors. Without Fortune's deep pockets, Acushnet will not have the dough to pay the lawyers to defend itself.

In the meantime, Callaway is reporting IN ADVANCE record sales and profits to the Street and their stock (ELY) is heading to Pluto Now that's smug!

Stay tuned! The fun has just only begun

[teedoff]

[quote name='scubus' post='877341' date='Jan 22 2008, 06:59 PM'][quote name='teedoff' post='877315' date='Jan 22 2008, 06:48 PM'][quote name='scubus' post='877019' date='Jan 22 2008, 04:39 PM'][quote name='Goldenhawk' post='876887' date='Jan 22 2008, 03:42 PM']I'm going to throw another tidbit into this whole mess. Nike. They had Tiger play the TW Tour Accuracy ball back in 2000 and then he won all those tourneys and majors. The TW TA was a three piece rubber core ball too. It makes me wonder if the Nike ONE is outselling the Callaway Tour HXs and if Nike is next on the list......or is Nike already paying royalties to use the technology?[/quote]
Nike is probably paying royalties to Bridgestone.

I'll point out, again, it isn't the number of layers, or even layers in general that is patented. It is what the layers are made of and how the layers interact.
[/quote]

Simplest way to describe Nike's relationship pertaining to golf balls is that they are a customer of Bridgestone. Bridgestone continues to make the performance golf balls for Nike.
[/quote]
True, but I am certain that Bridgestone would not allow Nike to use their patents for free.

First of all, they are too valuable. Even if Nike went to another manufacturer, they would still have to pay the license fee.

Second, if you fail to defend your patent in every instance, you weaken your ability to defend it in other cases.

Nike either licenses the patents or they are not included in the manufacture of Nike golf balls.
[/quote]

There is a strong relationship there between Nike and Bridgestone, going back to when Rock Ishi was the Bridgestone engineer with Tiger Woods. There continues that relationship today with the current engineers at Bridgestone and Rock. Nike's golf ball is not Bridgestone technology but a colaboration of sorts. Nike utilizes none of the patent technology that Bridgestone developed without compensation.

As for defending their patents. I remember when the lawsuit between Bridgestone and Titleist first found it's way to these boards, there were so many comments regarding the little company in Bridgestone taking on this giant champion of golf, Titleist. Perception is not always reality and the giant in the golf business world really is Bridgestone with last years revenues of over 28 Billion. They are the largest rubber producing company in the world. The golf ball is 92% rubber. Protecting their patents will never be an issue for them. So far they have won against Callaway and Titleist.

[mr ice]

[quote name='QueenCityGolfer' post='877772' date='Jan 23 2008, 04:30 AM']Ahhhhhh....simple, detailed facts. Finally.

So basically, Callaway is suing Titleist for stealing patented technology that Callaway originally stole themselves, and then later bought. That's really all that ever needed to be said here. I guess all of the negative remarks I made about Callaway and their character, or lack thereof, are even more deserved than I had previously thought.

What do you do when your chief competitor makes the decision to cheat their way to the top, seemingly unchallenged? I would say you do whatever you can to remain competitve, and worry about the details later. What Titleist did seems fair to me, eye for an eye, so to speak.

Case closed in my book. Cryaway are the villiains here. The only reason they own the patent is because they didn't get away with stealing it in the first place.[/quote]

George W, is that you???

[sidewinder]

[quote name='StaffBag' post='875726' date='Jan 21 2008, 06:10 PM']Also, keep in mind that there are NO MORE ORIGINAL IDEAS out there any more![/quote]
Really? I bet you would get along great with this guy:

"Everything that can be invented has been invented."

--Charles H. Duell, Commissioner, U.S. Office of Patents, 1899.

Scott

[petergf]

Does anybody know if the titleist professional 90/100 balls fall under the patent rip- offs.
cheers peter

[kemau]

denial is always the first sign of a problem.....i guess the similarities of [b]Titleist[/b] and [b]Elitist[/b] not only sounding alike goes a step further by being true to the definition

"persons or members of certain classes or groups with a belief of deserving favored treatment by virtue of their [u][b]perceived[/b][/u] superiority, as in intellect, social status, or financial resources."

[drpino]

some of you from both sides of the argument need to give it a rest and just wait and see what happens. it's becoming a **Edited** is bigger than yours e-fight.

[squarre]

[quote name='sapguy' post='878030' date='Jan 23 2008, 12:34 AM']And don't think for a minute that Acushnet's overlord, Fortune Brands, is not noticing any of this. In fact, during Fortune Brands’ third-quarter earnings conference call, patent litigation and related costs were cited as having had a negative effect on the company’s third quarter results.

Acushnet is under pressure from its parent company, Fortune Brands, to get this sad story over with somehow, and Fortune Brands may be selling Acushnet soon since Titleist is "damaged goods" now, especially in the eyes of the Wall Street investors. Without Fortune's deep pockets, Acushnet will not have the dough to pay the lawyers to defend itself.

In the meantime, Callaway is reporting IN ADVANCE record sales and profits to the Street and their stock (ELY) is heading to Pluto Now that's smug![/quote]


Fortune's main problem on the Street is the home and hardware portion of the business. It is not down big because of Acushnet. The 10-Q does note the Callaway lawsuit, but Fortune says they don't believe it will have an adverse effect on operations, cash flows or financial condition. This doesn't mean the litigation had no effect, but it is not the main reason for the stock's struggle.

Regardless of whether Acushnet is part of Fortune or not they will have the ability to pay for the litigation. They had $1.16 billion in net sales through the 3rd quarter of 2007. Callaway has shown great growth, but their net sales for the same period were $235 million.

[mattbbaker]

One more comment from me...except for those dedicating their life to picking this case apart and spewing hodgepodge and badmouthing Titleist just to simply be on the Titleist hate bandwagon...to the rest of the normal world and golfers (pros too) Titleist will NOT be "damaged" goods. Why do I say this? Because, who honestly cares? I play the ball that I feel performs the best for me regardless of who made it and where the technology came from. Every large technology related company in this country is probably guilty of some type of infringement whether they know it or anyone else knows it. For the ones who have issues with Titleist or whoever else, I recommend you also return your flat screen TV if it is not Samsung. I will not go into the details of this but I am the field that develops these technologies and everyone has "stolen" from Samsung. Also, on a second note, if Callaway is right and Titleist did steal their technology, then why may I ask does the ProV series perform at a superior level to any Callaway ball? Now, I can already see the heat that I am going to get from that statement but after a certain point statistics almost ensure "fact". And, you can't go by the pros because they get paid and yada yada yada. But look at top amateurs and others around the world, majority use Titleist golf balls. Yes, some credit goes to excellent marketing by Titleist but the rest must be given to the high performance of the ball and the confidence it instills in players. Some of you may think I am just a Titleist loyalist but this not true. I have been playing recently with the Bridgestone B330 and in my opinion performs just as well, if not better in some cases, as the ProV. My point is this, stop hating just to hate and dont assume that Titleist did something with a conceited blatancy. We will never know the 100% truth so just let the course be ran and continue to support golf in this country.

[woodlandsgolfer]

[quote name='mattbbaker' post='878392' date='Jan 23 2008, 09:23 AM']One more comment from me...except for those dedicating their life to picking this case apart and spewing hodgepodge and badmouthing Titleist just to simply be on the Titleist hate bandwagon...to the rest of the normal world and golfers (pros too) Titleist will NOT be "damaged" goods. Why do I say this? Because, who honestly cares? I play the ball that I feel performs the best for me regardless of who made it and where the technology came from. Every large technology related company in this country is probably guilty of some type of infringement whether they know it or anyone else knows it. For the ones who have issues with Titleist or whoever else, I recommend you also return your flat screen TV if it is not Samsung. I will not go into the details of this but I am the field that develops these technologies and everyone has "stolen" from Samsung. A[b]lso, on a second note, if Callaway is right and Titleist did steal their technology, then why may I ask does the ProV series perform at a superior level to any Callaway ball?[/b] Now, I can already see the heat that I am going to get from that statement but after a certain point statistics almost ensure "fact". And, you can't go by the pros because they get paid and yada yada yada. But look at top amateurs and others around the world, majority use Titleist golf balls. Yes, some credit goes to excellent marketing by Titleist but the rest must be given to the high performance of the ball and the confidence it instills in players. Some of you may think I am just a Titleist loyalist but this not true. I have been playing recently with the Bridgestone B330 and in my opinion performs just as well, if not better in some cases, as the ProV. My point is this, stop hating just to hate and dont assume that Titleist did something with a conceited blatancy. We will never know the 100% truth so just let the course be ran and continue to support golf in this country.[/quote]

The thing is that its not the same ball. No one has ever claim that they are the same ball. The ProV1 may very well indeed perform at a superior level. It does not take away from the fact that according to a jury trial, Titleist has infringed on 8 of 9 patents owned by Callaway. That is not to say that Titleist stole the patents. They very well may have been developed at roughly the same time, only one a little faster than the other.

To anyone thinking that the ProV1 will be around next year and the year after and so on, it may be. But you ought to know that it is very serious that they settled on one patent infringement suit out of court and lost one another suit, and one party is seeking injunctive relief. That is a very serious matter, and one that could fold the entire Titleist ball business up if the judge grants injunctive relief and Titleist would lose its appeal. If the ruling was overturned, then it might not have any other effect other than a higher price for ProV1's.

[bloodredsun]

Actually, Titleist have admitted to infringing the patents and did so in the trial so that is not . Their position is that the patents are invalid so they should not be punished. They are currently seeking to get the USPTO to over turn the 4 patents and currently the initial decision is that 1 of them has been overturned for being obvious.

Callaways beef is that Titleist used there position as the dominant ball manufacturer to ensure that Callaway's Rule 35 ball was stillborn as the ProV1 was as good (if not better) as the Rule 35 ball - something that Callaway say would not have been possible without Titleist unfairly copying Callaway's patented ideas. The tour players are the top of the marketing pyramid and imagine what it would be like now if back in 1999 everyone has moved over to Callaway which is what would have happened if Titleist didn't come up with a ball that was at last as good as the competition.

My position is that Titleist have admitted infringing, so they should be punished if not quite injunctive relief. If the USPTO should re-examine the patents and if they are found to be valid, then injunctive relief should be granted.

[jkloster]

[quote name='bloodredsun' post='878437' date='Jan 23 2008, 11:53 AM']Actually, Titleist have admitted to infringing the patents and did so in the trial so that is not . Their position is that the patents are invalid so they should not be punished. They are currently seeking to get the USPTO to over turn the 4 patents and currently the initial decision is that 1 of them has been overturned for being obvious.

Callaways beef is that Titleist used there position as the dominant ball manufacturer to ensure that Callaway's Rule 35 ball was stillborn as the ProV1 was as good (if not better) as the Rule 35 ball - something that Callaway say would not have been possible without Titleist unfairly copying Callaway's patented ideas. The tour players are the top of the marketing pyramid and imagine what it would be like now if back in 1999 everyone has moved over to Callaway which is what would have happened if Titleist didn't come up with a ball that was at last as good as the competition.

My position is that Titleist have admitted infringing, so they should be punished if not quite injunctive relief. If the USPTO should re-examine the patents and if they are found to be valid, then injunctive relief should be granted.[/quote]

I agree with your general assessment...but the notion that Callaway...by default, would have 'taken over' the tour and the market with the Rule 35 ball had Titleist not introduced the ProV1 is something that can't be proven, or tested, or known.....it's total speculation--and floating that idea makes them look bad.

Even if they win....why one earth would you take a CASH COW like the ProV1 off the market? Seriously....that's retarded. Callaway can take a cut and laugh all the way to the bank, just like Bridgestone. They can buy Titleist......but flat out killing the ball does two things: 1) it breeds contempt with a relatively large portion of the golfing public and 2) it will most assuredly fragment current ProV1 purchasers across all other golf ball manufacturers - which given the Bridgestone, Nike, Srixon, and TalorMade's offerings is all but assured.....They can't reasonably expect to replace Titleist as the 'king pin' overnight.... Not in the manner they're trying to do it. Maybe in 5-years, but not likely any faster.

[geogolf]

Think about it- Bridgestone- Top Flite work for years on solid core players balls. Their brains leave Top Flite head to Acushnet and Titleist hits a home run on their first try?


Acushnet was found guilty. Basically 3 things can happen:

1) Titleist comes up with a Pro V that is not patent infringing

2) Callaway Licenses their Patents to Acushnet (which won't happen)

3) The Pro V will Vanish.




Acushnet already is going to pay a pretty penny to Callaway, I believe.

as quotes from Golfweek December 14th

“We have now established in court that our golf ball patents are valid and that Titleist Pro V1 golf balls infringe those patents,” said Michele Szynal, Callaway’s vice president of communications. “We will immediately start the process of requesting an appropriate remedy, including injunctive relief and damages.”

If the jury’s outcome stands, Acushnet could find itself incurring further costs related to ball development. On Sept. 28, Acushnet reached an out-of-court settlement with Bridgestone Sports Co. Ltd., resolving a 2 1/2-year ball patent infringement suit. Under terms of that agreement, Acushnet is required to pay Bridgestone on-going royalties for use of an undisclosed number of Bridgestone patents.

[StaffBag]

[quote name='sapguy' post='878030' date='Jan 22 2008, 11:34 PM'][quote name='StaffBag' post='877968' date='Jan 22 2008, 11:55 PM']Relax to all of the Titleist lovers here. I really strongly dout that Titleist will be forced into removing thier product from the market by a grandstanding complaint from Callaway.[/quote]

OK, we shall find out soon enough if the motion and order for PERMANENT injunction filled by the wily Callaway lawyers will be granted by the courts or not.

[b]We'll see if you will be so smug at that time.
[/b]
Oh yeah, be prepared to see a few price increases on Pro V1 soon, in order for Titleist to pay for their lawyers

If the injunction is granted, then on January 1, 2009, Callaway lawyers can send letters to any retailer having Pro V1 on their shelf to friendly remind to remove those balls. And if Titleist plan to drag things on by using the appeal process, it will be suicide leading to a slow death, as the Callaway lawyers can put the screws to Titleist and Acushnet to the point of driving them into bankruptcy protection.

And don't think for a minute that Acushnet's overlord, Fortune Brands, is not noticing any of this. In fact, during Fortune Brands' third-quarter earnings conference call, patent litigation and related costs were cited as having had a negative effect on the company's third quarter results.

[b]Acushnet is under pressure from its parent company, Fortune Brands, to get this sad story over with somehow, and Fortune Brands may be selling Acushnet soon since Titleist is "damaged goods" now, especially in the eyes of the Wall Street investors. Without Fortune's deep pockets, Acushnet will not have the dough to pay the lawyers to defend itself.
[/b]
In the meantime, Callaway is reporting IN ADVANCE record sales and profits to the Street and their stock (ELY) is heading to Pluto Now that's smug!

[b]Stay tuned! The fun has just only begun[/b]
[/quote]


I'll be "SMUG" whenever the I want to be, buddy!

I see from your sig. that you are not a Titleist user, but a Callaway user. To me, this means you have a definitely strong BIASED opinion to the speedy demise of Titleist!

Don't worry! will be in play for a loooooooong time to come. They are NOT "damaged goods"! Far from it!!!


My guess is that there won't be a problem with taking the ProV's off the shelves if it comes to that, because there will be a new ball to replace it! It's about time for them to do that anyway. The injuction will be specifically on just the ProV line and not a "new" line of golfballs! Market share will come back if it is damaged at all.

Yes. I am biased.
I fully disclose that fact.

I have hit both balls and cannont see why anyone could say that there is a more superior ball than the ProV1 or V1X! Heck! Even the sales reps are constantly using the phrase... "It's just as good as the ProV1 and ProV1X" or "Think of it as the ProV1 and the ProV1X" when they come around to sell thier balls. The Bridgestone rep, the Callaway rep, ... ALL of them!!! Why would anyone put in another ball for sales if it is "just as good" as your top selling golf ball?! The Titlest line of balls is the benchmark for the industry and everyone else is just trying to now FORCE thier way into grabbing market share because they haven't been able to succeed through regular channels of SKU sales!!!!


(BTW... I'm a golf professional and an ex-professional golfer, so I know what is right... At least for ME!)

Where in the do you get your information, anyway?!


Stay tuned is right!

The fun has just begun!





One more thing...

IF the worst comes; the planets align, the seas boil, the plagues come, and Callaway actually forces the end of the ProV1, I guarantee to you that I will NEVER... EVER use the Callaway ball!

The best "[u]second place[/u]" ball out there is the [b]Bridgestone B330 [/b]and [b]B330S[/b] balls!

If so forced, I would go there. Not to Cally... not to Nike.... not to Taylor Made... not to [b]anyone[/b] else!

[jwfgolfpro]

From a very reputable "Tour Source"

The Titleist Pro V and Pro V X have amassed $100 million in sales since the introduction of the ball. Callaway is going after royalties from every dime. When this is all said and done Titleist will be finacially crippled. Look for Fortune Brands to dump them. The ball is what carries Titleist.
Cobra outsells Titleist in the club department.

This has been a known fact on Tour for quite some time.

John

[Goldenhawk]

[quote name='StaffBag' post='879787' date='Jan 24 2008, 12:56 AM']My guess is that there won't be a problem with taking the ProV's off the shelves if it comes to that, because there will be a new ball to replace it! It's about time for them to do that anyway. The injuction will be specifically on just the ProV line and not a "new" line of golfballs! Market share will come back if it is damaged at all.[/quote]

I would love to know what this new replacement ball from Titleist is. It's been mentioned here numerous times. Is it some weird evolution of a wound, liquid-filled ball?

[scubus]

[quote name='Goldenhawk' post='880066' date='Jan 24 2008, 10:10 AM'][quote name='StaffBag' post='879787' date='Jan 24 2008, 12:56 AM']My guess is that there won't be a problem with taking the ProV's off the shelves if it comes to that, because there will be a new ball to replace it! It's about time for them to do that anyway. The injuction will be specifically on just the ProV line and not a "new" line of golfballs! Market share will come back if it is damaged at all.[/quote]

I would love to know what this new replacement ball from Titleist is. It's been mentioned here numerous times. Is it some weird evolution of a wound, liquid-filled ball?
[/quote]
It could be a new multilayer solid core ball. That is not what is patented (as near as I can tell anyway). It is the interaction between those layers and core and the patents cover materials and dimensions.

My question is: if the ball and technology exist and a ball is just waiting to hit the shelves, why isn't it out there. I find it very hard to believe that the powers at Titleist would continue selling a ball whose lineage is even questionable when a better performing ball is waiting in the wings.

[Night train]

[quote name='jwfgolfpro' post='880054' date='Jan 24 2008, 08:53 AM']From a very reputable "Tour Source"

The Titleist Pro V and Pro V X have amassed $100 million in sales since the introduction of the ball. Callaway is going after royalties from every dime. When this is all said and done Titleist will be finacially crippled. Look for Fortune Brands to dump them. The ball is what carries Titleist.
Cobra outsells Titleist in the club department.

This has been a known fact on Tour for quite some time.

John[/quote]

I would have thought that it was probably more than a $100 million..........regardless, it will be interesting to see how it all plays out.

[sapguy]

[quote name='jwfgolfpro' post='880054' date='Jan 24 2008, 09:53 AM']From a very reputable "Tour Source"

The Titleist Pro V and Pro V X have amassed $100 million in sales since the introduction of the ball. Callaway is going after royalties from every dime. When this is all said and done Titleist will be finacially crippled. Look for Fortune Brands to dump them. The ball is what carries Titleist.
Cobra outsells Titleist in the club department.

This has been a known fact on Tour for quite some time.

John[/quote]

Careful John. It's posts like this from "Callaway people" like you and me that will have Titleist hardcore people (they know who they are) on this board foaming at the mouth

[CLEVELAND59]

[quote name='StaffBag' post='879787' date='Jan 24 2008, 12:56 AM'][quote name='sapguy' post='878030' date='Jan 22 2008, 11:34 PM'][quote name='StaffBag' post='877968' date='Jan 22 2008, 11:55 PM']Relax to all of the Titleist lovers here. I really strongly dout that Titleist will be forced into removing thier product from the market by a grandstanding complaint from Callaway.[/quote]

OK, we shall find out soon enough if the motion and order for PERMANENT injunction filled by the wily Callaway lawyers will be granted by the courts or not.

[b]We'll see if you will be so smug at that time.
[/b]
Oh yeah, be prepared to see a few price increases on Pro V1 soon, in order for Titleist to pay for their lawyers

If the injunction is granted, then on January 1, 2009, Callaway lawyers can send letters to any retailer having Pro V1 on their shelf to friendly remind to remove those balls. And if Titleist plan to drag things on by using the appeal process, it will be suicide leading to a slow death, as the Callaway lawyers can put the screws to Titleist and Acushnet to the point of driving them into bankruptcy protection.

And don't think for a minute that Acushnet's overlord, Fortune Brands, is not noticing any of this. In fact, during Fortune Brands' third-quarter earnings conference call, patent litigation and related costs were cited as having had a negative effect on the company's third quarter results.

[b]Acushnet is under pressure from its parent company, Fortune Brands, to get this sad story over with somehow, and Fortune Brands may be selling Acushnet soon since Titleist is "damaged goods" now, especially in the eyes of the Wall Street investors. Without Fortune's deep pockets, Acushnet will not have the dough to pay the lawyers to defend itself.
[/b]
In the meantime, Callaway is reporting IN ADVANCE record sales and profits to the Street and their stock (ELY) is heading to Pluto Now that's smug!

[b]Stay tuned! The fun has just only begun[/b]
[/quote]


I'll be "SMUG" whenever the I want to be, buddy!

I see from your sig. that you are not a Titleist user, but a Callaway user. To me, this means you have a definitely strong BIASED opinion to the speedy demise of Titleist!

Don't worry! will be in play for a loooooooong time to come. They are NOT "damaged goods"! Far from it!!!


My guess is that there won't be a problem with taking the ProV's off the shelves if it comes to that, because there will be a new ball to replace it! It's about time for them to do that anyway. The injuction will be specifically on just the ProV line and not a "new" line of golfballs! Market share will come back if it is damaged at all.

Yes. I am biased.
I fully disclose that fact.

I have hit both balls and cannont see why anyone could say that there is a more superior ball than the ProV1 or V1X! Heck! Even the sales reps are constantly using the phrase... "It's just as good as the ProV1 and ProV1X" or "Think of it as the ProV1 and the ProV1X" when they come around to sell thier balls. The Bridgestone rep, the Callaway rep, ... ALL of them!!! Why would anyone put in another ball for sales if it is "just as good" as your top selling golf ball?! The Titlest line of balls is the benchmark for the industry and everyone else is just trying to now FORCE thier way into grabbing market share because they haven't been able to succeed through regular channels of SKU sales!!!!


(BTW... I'm a golf professional and an ex-professional golfer, so I know what is right... At least for ME!)

Where in the do you get your information, anyway?!


Stay tuned is right!

The fun has just begun!





One more thing...

IF the worst comes; the planets align, the seas boil, the plagues come, and Callaway actually forces the end of the ProV1, I guarantee to you that I will NEVER... EVER use the Callaway ball!

The best "[u]second place[/u]" ball out there is the [b]Bridgestone B330 [/b]and [b]B330S[/b] balls!

If so forced, I would go there. Not to Cally... not to Nike.... not to Taylor Made... not to [b]anyone[/b] else!
[/quote]

I love how you accuse others of having a bias, and agree that you have one of your own, yet seem to act as though the other persons "bias" prevents them from having a legitimate point, opinion or thought, but at the same time expecting the person reading your post to take your word as gospel. It doesn't work that way in the real world.

This has nothing to do with "forcing market share", it has to do with Titleist using the property of others to produce a product. Just like Titleist acted to protect its patents related to the development of the 975D many moons ago, Bridgestone and Callaway are acting to protect its patents today. It's not a grossly hard concept to understand. Titleist violated patents and got caught. Plain and simple. And no one here said so, a jury said so. Twice. In 2 different cases. It's not an opinion, but a legally proven fact.

Ask anyone in the financial markets and they will tell you that Fortune Brands is struggling. Wall St. has been speculating that Fortune Brands would split off Acushnet and sell it soon, and if the legal proceedings continue to go at their current rate, that will occur either very soon or never, because if Callaway gets injunctive relief as well as financial relief, the Bridgestone royalty agreement will have to be adjusted to a lump sum payment, likely an amount equal to if not larger than any financial award to Callaway. Those 2 judgments would significantly de-value the Acushnet brand in terms of its value as a brand and make it very difficult if not impossible for Fortune Brands to sell off.

Titleist needs to keep the Pro V alive as long as possible because its the only way it can afford to sustain the financial fallout of the Bridgestone case. If they are forced to pay lump sums to Bridgestone and Callaway, it would be a blow to them that they might not be able to survive. The other reason they need to keep the Pro V line alive is because they are no where near close to having a replacement ball ready. The only balls they have in development are based on the current model and would fall under the same patent judgment. They have been very slow and far behind the curve in terms of R&D and they have lost a large number of their talented engineers over the past several years. To think a suitable replacement for the ProV could hit the shelves in short order in case of an injunction is sheer lunacy.

[doublenuts]

Well the HITS keep on coming but this time it's ACUSHNET who's serving and GUESS who the lucky recipient is;



Acushnet Serves Subpoena on the USGA!
Posted by David Dawsey PE Esq at 1/21/2008 12:00 AM and is filed under USGA Rules,Litigation,Woods,Competitive Intelligence

[url="http://golf-patents.com/2008/01/21/acushnet-subpoenas-the-usga.aspx"]http://golf-patents.com/2008/01/21/acushne...s-the-usga.aspx[/url]

[AUDuffer]

[quote name='wardogatc' post='874401' date='Jan 20 2008, 11:13 PM']They should refer to the case of Callahan Auto Parts vs. Zalinsky Auto Parts. In a landmark ploy, Callahan avoided a buyout by selling their product to Zalinsky, thus making the necessary capital to avoid a bank forclosure. Zalinsky had planned to buy out Callahan, close the production factory, and sell the Callahan product as a premium name in Zalinsky stores. Maybe Acushnet should try this with Callaway.

Just an idea...shut up Richard![/quote]

I need to know where you went to law school because you make an absolutely brilliant argument here--outstanding work!

[withdrew]

[quote name='wardogatc' post='874401' date='Jan 20 2008, 11:13 PM']They should refer to the case of Callahan Auto Parts vs. Zalinsky Auto Parts. In a landmark ploy, Callahan avoided a buyout by selling their product to Zalinsky, thus making the necessary capital to avoid a bank forclosure. Zalinsky had planned to buy out Callahan, close the production factory, and sell the Callahan product as a premium name in Zalinsky stores. Maybe Acushnet should try this with Callaway.

Just an idea...shut up Richard![/quote]
Early contender for quote of the year.

[Togatown22]

Sapguy:
I think you might want to take a closer look at the 52 week and 2 year stock chart for ELY.... it's no where near " heading to Pluto" as I think you said.
The retail golf market is actually looking pretty flat this year; with regard to stock performance anyway.
No offense meant, just trying to make sure we keep some of this discussion factual.

Carry on.

[squarre]

[quote name='jwfgolfpro' post='880054' date='Jan 24 2008, 09:53 AM']From a very reputable "Tour Source"

The Titleist Pro V and Pro V X have amassed $100 million in sales since the introduction of the ball. Callaway is going after royalties from every dime. When this is all said and done Titleist will be finacially crippled. Look for Fortune Brands to dump them. The ball is what carries Titleist.
Cobra outsells Titleist in the club department.

This has been a known fact on Tour for quite some time.

John[/quote]

According to numbers I have seen the Pro V line has amassed sales of over $1 billion.

[IH823PUTT]

I'm thinking Cally will win this one..... I also agree with the majority of the posts here saying that Titleist is carried only by there ball sales. Those new AP1 and AP2 irons look terrible! Eww!

[stealthontour]

A side note.....but there is NOTHING stopping tour pros from stocking up on ProV1's and using them past 2008 if the ProV1 is removed from shops and titleist don't have a decent replacement....

This has happened with the current ProV where alot of the tour players prefer the previous 2005 version and have loads of them stocked up to use during play.... (Ernie before switching, Luke Donald, Darren Clarke plus many many more)

The injunction may potentially cripple titleist, but if tour players are still using and winning with a ProV1 ball in 2009, after it's not available anymore, surely this would be a sneeky victory for titleist as the other balls on offer just aren't as good as ProV's..... The ProV isn't going to become illegal of anything, it will just cease production.....

I know for one thing...I will certainly be stocking up on ProV's as and when I can.... I've tried the lot and the only other ball that I like and compares in my view is the Nike One Platinum.... The Cally is awful

[enterprise920]

this is funny, all the Titleist fan-boys are going crazy and getting offended

[NPVWhiz]

Keep in mind that "ProVI" is a brand name...a trademarked brand name. We've already seen several different versions of the ball.
Titleist has built value in the brand, not a specific ball. The original ProVI was probably the best of the whole lot, but the business side of the patent issues is a more important factor in "innovation" than most people realize. This whole case is a good example.

To wit, "new and improved" sometimes means "less infringing" than last years model.

Granted, this is a big if in some ways, but if Titleist can develop a non-infringing ball (this is not rocket science...these are golf balls. Layered pieces of inexpensive synthetic polymers.)

The idea that Titleist is at the end of their ability to innovate around the patents is a stretch.

Clearly Titleist has a problem, but one thing to keep in mind is that the big issue here is going to be how the whole re-examination process shakes out at the US Patent and Trademark Office.

No question Titleist has already lost one battle...their earlier contract with Spalding, which Callaway acquired via the purchase, has been interpreted by the court to have prohibited either party from requesting tha the PTO reexamine any patents. When Titleist asked the PTO to re-examine them, they breached the agreement.

But, the bigger question is whether the PTO will find all the patents invalid. They've already ruled one of them is invalid, which amazingly enough conflicts with what the jury found.

If Callaway finds all five patents ruled to be invalid (and the PTO has already rejected all patents in "non-final" office actions, which means that the Callaway patent attorneys fighting the re-exam have some issues to deal with, and one of the patents has been ruled invalid under a final office action.

Callaway has a huge amount of value at risk here. This is the risk you take when you go aggressively after someone for infringement. At this point, Titleist has to weigh the cost of litigation against the cost of settlement....and by the way things are going for Callaway at the US PTO, Titleist may well be proven right in the end.

The scorecard at this point is Callaway 2 (the jury rejected most of Titleist's argument that the patents were invalid, and the court ruled Titleist breached the earlier contract by asking the PTO to re-examine the patents) Acushnet 1 (the US Patent Office has already ruled one of Callaway's patents shouldn't have been issued and is now invalid and the others look to be in trouble.

But Callaway is stuck now that the re-examination process is underway. If the PTO rules all five patents are invalid, then Callaway loses a huge amount of value. Any other ball companies that pay them a royalty under those patents can stop paying, and Callaway ends up with less leverage in negotating deals with other companies for access to patents that they would otherwise be infringing in making their current balls.

I think there is a very real chance we'll see Callaway coming out with a "new, improved" ball that is so "revolutionary" that it doesn't happen to infringe on anyone elses patents. How that ball will perform is an entirely separate question.

[drpino]

NPVWhiz, thanks for another factual and informative contribution to this topic....it's refreshing amongst all the speculation and fan-boyism (from both sides).

as funny as the Titleist fan-boys are, the Callaway ones that are parading around yelling "burn 'em at the stake" are just as amusing.