Can anyone PROVE the RBZ is longer?

[Doc.Jordan]

Despite the driver and woods question, take a look at these numbers from the RBZ irons, compared to my RAC OS:

With those lofts, they should go longer... I´d like to see a comparison between 2 irons with the same loft, despite the number printed on it (4i RAC OS x 5i RBZ, for example)...

[ceasterb]

[quote name='floyd' timestamp='1328871049' post='4250987']
[quote name='jdhallissey' timestamp='1328866907' post='4250923']
No it is not. Side by side with your favorite three wood/driver with the same launch and everything (close too) the ball is going to same distance. It is all marketing hype.
[/quote]

I agree, if it is 20-30 yards longer that means I will be hitting a three wood 290 yards.
[/quote]
I think that extra 20-30 may be only for players with super fast swing speeds. Even then I have my doubts. Also personally, I'm not a big fan of the white heads. I'm staying away from Taylormade until they switch back to black or at least darker crown color. Who knows though, maybe my tastes will change . . .

[golfnut-2X]

this is typical golf club manufacturer distance hype. how many taylormade woods have we bought to face in the next 6 months they come out with something newer and supposedly longer (i have several times). the pros are paid to say it goes farther. rbz has been on a big marketing campaign.

you guys know that more goes into carry / distance for a specific club than just the club head. the shaft is very important. also the weight. most of these guys are just increasing shaft length and making it lighter so you swing faster which naturally will produce a higher ball speed for greater distance but it doesn't mean the rbz club head is any longer - the average joe walks away thinking its the clubhead / brand. you can get a similar effect by getting a 16* 3wood reshafted with a 40g shaft and a winlite 25g grip 3 inches over standard. i wouldn't be surprised like drivers the actual loft is not the stated loft on the 3wood and its higher than 15 degrees since most people don't have the swing speed to optimize distance off the deck with 15*.

to trully know if the club head produces faster ball speeds you need to know the cor or smash factor. then you can compare club head to club head without the bs games with the shaft, shaft length, and weight. unless they are making the faces out of titanium at max cor I doubt its the club head. personnlly i would love to see a titanium 16* max core 3wood with a thin face profile - i am sure it would be expensive but it would be nice.

i would be interested in the rbz fans to produce any data on the club head cor / smash factor.

[Splitter]

[quote name='golfnut-2X' timestamp='1329351350' post='4294141']
this is typical golf club manufacturer distance hype. how many taylormade woods have we bought to face in the next 6 months they come out with something newer and supposedly longer (i have several times). the pros are paid to say it goes farther. rbz has been on a big marketing campaign.

you guys know that more goes into carry / distance for a specific club than just the club head. the shaft is very important. also the weight. most of these guys are just increasing shaft length and making it lighter so you swing faster which naturally will produce a higher ball speed for greater distance but it doesn't mean the rbz club head is any longer - the average joe walks away thinking its the clubhead / brand. you can get a similar effect by getting a 16* 3wood reshafted with a 40g shaft and a winlite 25g grip 3 inches over standard. i wouldn't be surprised like drivers the actual loft is not the stated loft on the 3wood and its higher than 15 degrees since most people don't have the swing speed to optimize distance off the deck with 15*.

to trully know if the club head produces faster ball speeds you need to know the cor or smash factor. then you can compare club head to club head without the bs games with the shaft, shaft length, and weight. unless they are making the faces out of titanium at max cor I doubt its the club head. personnlly i would love to see a titanium 16* max core 3wood with a thin face profile - i am sure it would be expensive but it would be nice.

i would be interested in the rbz fans to produce any data on the club head cor / smash factor.
[/quote]

You could have saved 10 minutes of writing with 5 minutes of reading.

It's already been stated about a ZILLION times that TM is claiming .810 COR

I won't claim to be a metallurgist, but I don't think it really matters to the ball if it's steel @ .810 COR or Titanium @ .810 COR. I'm sure someone will correct me tho...

[golfnut-2X]

@splitter - are you always that rude and ignorant? your rude comment added no vaue to the thread. if its only 0.810 cor then its not max cor at 0.830. to be longer than existing 0.830 cor 3wood heads its not the rbz face - if it is any longer its got to be a longer and/or lighter club to generate more speed independent of the face. the titanium .830 will go further not just because of the cor but the material is lighter than steel and therefore may be swung faster.

[thegooddoctor]

[quote name='Naylor09' timestamp='1329033637' post='4265283']
I tested my cb2 16.5* next to a rbz 17* on a track man out side and here are my numbers averages. Shaft in my cb2- stiff proforce v2 rbz- matriz RUL stiff
ball speed cb2-162 rbz- 158
swing speed cb2-106.2 rbz 105.9
carry distance cb2-279 rbz- 271

By far the closest fairway wood to my cb2 ive ever hit. Which did impress me maybe with the right saft it would be simular
[/quote]

CB2 best fairway wood of all time, compact yet very easy to hit

[Splitter]

[quote name='golfnut-2X' timestamp='1329356525' post='4294759']
@splitter - are you always that rude and ignorant? your rude comment added no vaue to the thread. if its only 0.810 cor then its not max cor at 0.830. to be longer than existing 0.830 cor 3wood heads its not the rbz face - if it is any longer its got to be a longer and/or lighter club to generate more speed independent of the face. the titanium .830 will go further not just because of the cor but the material is lighter than steel and therefore may be swung faster.
[/quote]


My dog thinks I'm always rude and ignorant. Ugly too, but you can't see that so you're forgiven for missing it. Congrats, you're now in the same category as my dog.

You asked this: "i would be interested in the rbz fans to produce any data on the club head cor / smash factor"

Not this: "is it .830?"

So you got an answer to the question you asked. It's .810. I didn't say it's maxed out. I took my time to give you the answer to the question you asked even though its spattered across the internet for you to find.. Why are you mad?

And why would anyone who thinks lighter shafts are "typical golf club manufacturer hype" care about the wee bit of weight a titanium vs. steel face would get you in club weight (for speeds sake)? Wouldn't that just be the hype you purport to dislike?

Now, if you said "a titanium face would give them more weight to move around to increase MOI".... Maybe that would be an argument..

Depending on how much the difference actually is. Again, no metallurgist here.

Oh well.. This is what you get for helping people. Have a nice day...

[SHIVAN]

I've got what I suppose is a newsflash: [u][i][b]Most[/b][/i][/u] golfers are not using a fairway club that has a COR 0.810, or higher.

Most golfers can not produce 150mph ballspeed, even from their 46" driver. They'd need to be 100mph, or faster SS. Sorry, but that's not most golfers.

TM knows it is speaking to the masses here. People playing a five year old stock steel headed Burner, or whatever.

[SHIVAN]

COR is material independent. It's also a metric used to rate things like baseballs, softballs, and bats for both sports.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coefficient_of_restitution

[jabrch]

[quote name='SHIVAN' timestamp='1329359288' post='4295101']
I've got what I suppose is a newsflash: [u][i][b]Most[/b][/i][/u] golfers are not using a fairway club that has a COR 0.810, or higher.

Most golfers can not produce 150mph ballspeed, even from their 46" driver. They'd need to be 100mph, or faster SS. Sorry, but that's not most golfers.

TM knows it is speaking to the masses here. People playing a five year old stock steel headed Burner, or whatever.
[/quote]

DING DING DING....

It was significantly longer than my 07 Burner. It (RBZ 15 degree) was about 7 yards longer than my F11 Ti 13.5*. It had better dispersion than either. It was much better on mishits than the F11. It was consistently longer than my 07 Burner.

Maybe it's not for everyone. Maybe it's not better than the TEE CB2. Maybe no better than a 910F with the right shaft... But none of that matters to me...

IT WAS BETTER FOR ME THAN WHAT WAS IN MY BAG!

[easyyy]

I got 14 yards over my high tech super charged R11 15* 3 wood gamer. 14 on average at Tmag the other month. I brought my gamer not know ing I would test against them but to play golf. So when I started to hit the new 3 wood I went to grab the gamer to compare. averaged 14 yards.

[Sooner7x]

[quote name='DTown3011' timestamp='1328890395' post='4252447']
[quote name='Vindog' timestamp='1328879680' post='4251283']
[quote name='GooseHook' timestamp='1328879450' post='4251265']
OP has a valid point, but a couple things to keep in mind:
[list=1][*]The 3w is 43.5" long, and the club has a light overall weight, so players may gain a couple mph in their swing.[*]The design may lead to better ballspeeds all over the face, so those who "are killing it" may just be experiencing something more forgiving than their current fairway wood.[/list]
[/quote]

good points
[/quote]

But if they gain a few MPH in their swingspeed, isn't that a good thing assuming dispersion is the same? Isn't that one of the things a longer shaft and lighter overall weight is designed to do?

Also, better ballspeeds all over the face = more forgiveness, which is a good thing for ALL golfers.
[/quote]


Why would you assume dispersion is the same with a longer shaft?

[Naylor09]

[quote name='poizster' timestamp='1329075200' post='4268017']
[quote name='Naylor09' timestamp='1329073636' post='4267761']
[quote name='poizster' timestamp='1329034253' post='4265295']
[quote name='Naylor09' timestamp='1329033637' post='4265283']
I tested my cb2 16.5* next to a rbz 17* on a track man out side and here are my numbers averages. Shaft in my cb2- stiff proforce v2 rbz- matriz RUL stiff
ball speed cb2-162 rbz- 158
swing speed cb2-106.2 rbz 105.9
carry distance cb2-279 rbz- 271

By far the closest fairway wood to my cb2 ive ever hit. Which did impress me maybe with the right saft it would be simular
[/quote]

Your getting a 279 carry with 106.2 SS and 162 BS, those numbers don't jive.
[/quote]
i know thats what i was thinking too maybe some wind was behind me. Normal course conditions i usually hit my 4 wood 265-270 total
[/quote]

It's nice to see your gamer was longer then the RBZ. I'm sure the same would be the case for Wishon golf. Did you hit enough shots with the RBZ to see if the dispersion was any tighter? I'm not sure how it could be with the shaft being longer. I will try this club eventually but the bulk of my testing will be on the course off the deck.
[/quote]
I wish I could have hit more this data was from 7 balls each and dispersion was tighter by a good amount (don't know the exact #'s but it was 12 yards+) with my cb2 because i was swinging a heavier shaft that fit me better, but the RBZ feels good I just like my cb2 better and i like the smaller head personally. Still the best fairway wood ever made IMO

[SHIVAN]

I now have:

1) 15º Titleist 910F with an 8C4 tipped 3/4".

2) 14º Taylor Made R11TP with an R11TP Motore F3 80x

3) 15.5º Taylor Made RBZ with an R11TP Motore F3 80x

4) 15º Tour Edge CB4 Tour on order

Can anyone tell me if there was this much hand wringing when TEE did this EXACT marketing tactic in 2009?

[url="http://www.touredge.com/Media/09pressreleases/XCG3fairwaypr.pdf"]http://www.touredge....G3fairwaypr.pdf[/url]

I am intending to put them to the test on the range, and the course.

I also have several low sub-5 players I play with to be my guinea pigs too. We'll see how it goes.

[M-Stamp]

When you make an argument, don't forget that the .830 COR limit only applies to drivers!

[Arafel]

[quote name='M-Stamp' timestamp='1329368630' post='4296925']
When you make an argument, don't forget that the .830 COR limit only applies to drivers!
[/quote]

NO.....it doesn't.

.830 max on all clubs. The RBZ is .810.

This is they type of ignorance that leads people into believing that a 3 wood can be longer than a driver.

A properly setup driver will always out perform a 3 wood. This is why you don't see anyone hyping either of the RBZ drivers. They are maxed out at .830 COR like every driver TaylorMade has made for the last 8 years or any driver for that matter.




Tour Edge Exotics did do this promotion years ago but the lemming weren't told to go jump off of a cliff by TM so only hardcore enthusiasts knew about these TEE clubs. Maybe if TEE gave their clubs a stupid name, it would have got the average hacker's attention. They should have named their woods something like Deep Ballz or Big Ballz or Soaring Ballz or Cannon Ballz or Ballz Deep or .....whatever....

It's my experience that the TEE clubs are little longer than the RBZ and the RBZ is a little longer than your typical FW wood if all of the clubs are set up in a similar manner. You probably won't see any gains if you are a slow swinger with clubs that are set up the same.

Also Tour Edge didn't give everybody a $25.00 gift card and a dozen free balls to help [s]bribe[/s] nudge everyone into saying how great their clubs are. TEE is more of an engineering company compared to TM's marketing machine.

[SHIVAN]

I'm probably wrong, but I thought it said that the COR or CT limits applied to "driving clubs" 15º or lower in loft??

Did I misread that somewhere, or make it up?

[DFinch]

I was surprised to see no ball speed increase and no distance gain today on Trackman. I expected to have the "Oreo cookie" setup this year (RBZ between two I20's), but it just didn't show me the numbers I expected.

I'll still give he tour model a shot when it becomes available.

[Splitter]

[quote name='sustain' timestamp='1329370520' post='4297149']
[quote name='M-Stamp' timestamp='1329368630' post='4296925']
When you make an argument, don't forget that the .830 COR limit only applies to drivers!
[/quote]

NO.....it doesn't.

.830 max on all clubs. The RBZ is .810.

This is they type of ignorance that leads people into believing that a 3 wood can be longer than a driver.

A properly setup driver will always out perform a 3 wood. This is why you don't see anyone hyping either of the RBZ drivers. They are maxed out at .830 COR like every driver TaylorMade has made for the last 8 years or any driver for that matter.




Tour Edge Exotics did do this promotion years ago but the lemming weren't told to go jump off of a cliff by TM so only hardcore enthusiasts knew about these TEE clubs. Maybe if TEE gave their clubs a stupid name it would have got the average hacker's attention. They should have named their woods something like Deep Ballz or Big Ballz or Soaring Ballz or Cannon Ballz or Ballz Deep or .....whatever....

It's my experience that the TEE clubs are little longer than the RBZ and the RBZ is a little longer than your typical FW wood if all of the clubs are set up in a similar manner. You probably won't see any gains if you are a slow swinger with clubs that are set up the same.

Also Tour Edge didn't give everybody a $25.00 gift card and a dozen free balls to help [s]bribe[/s] nudge everyone into saying how great their clubs are. TEE is more of an engineering company compared to TM's marketing machine.
[/quote]

TEE makes great clubs, but lets not insult people people for not buying what they don't know about. TEE is one of the few companies that markets worse than Adams and even the average golf store employee barely knows about them. How can the average guy buy something amid the marketing clutter from some "unknown" like TEE when no one except Internet boards are talking about them? Don't blame the consumer, blame the CEO of TEE who won't give his marketing team a budget.

When TM got to 810 they were smart enough to throw a party and announce it. And they did it with a name most people thought would kill the product line. Despite what people think, you can't paint a club non standard white, give it a funny name and have it magically sell. They are selling like crazy ( at least here) and will probably continue to do so because they actually work for a lot of folks.

I had a TEE 15* and my TM 17HL is just as long but more accurate. Maybe the shaft gives it just enough kick, maybe the sweet spot on the TM is wider... Maybe im the exception? Who knows?

About the only thing for certain is that TM is going to sell a ton of these while Nike, Adams and TEE stand around saying "we did it first!" during their board meetings. Oh... and that the negative posts will continue.

I can hardly wait to read the rants next year when they drop the .820 bomb.

[M-Stamp]

[quote name='sustain' timestamp='1329370520' post='4297149']
[quote name='M-Stamp' timestamp='1329368630' post='4296925']
When you make an argument, don't forget that the .830 COR limit only applies to drivers!
[/quote]

NO.....it doesn't.

.830 max on all clubs. The RBZ is .810.

This is they type of ignorance that leads people into believing that a 3 wood can be longer than a driver.

A properly setup driver will always out perform a 3 wood. This is why you don't see anyone hyping either of the RBZ drivers. They are maxed out at .830 COR like every driver TaylorMade has made for the last 8 years or any driver for that matter.




Tour Edge Exotics did do this promotion years ago but the lemming weren't told to go jump off of a cliff by TM so only hardcore enthusiasts knew about these TEE clubs. Maybe if TEE gave their clubs a stupid name it would have got the average hacker's attention. They should have named their woods something like Deep Ballz or Big Ballz or Soaring Ballz or Cannon Ballz or Ballz Deep or .....whatever....

It's my experience that the TEE clubs are little longer than the RBZ and the RBZ is a little longer than your typical FW wood if all of the clubs are set up in a similar manner. You probably won't see any gains if you are a slow swinger with clubs that are set up the same.

Also Tour Edge didn't give everybody a $25.00 gift card and a dozen free balls to help [s]bribe[/s] nudge everyone into saying how great their clubs are. TEE is more of an engineering company compared to TM's marketing machine.
[/quote]

Well, Wishon Golf made some fairway woods that reached .830 COR a few years ago. And I assume somebody out there would have developed a fairway wood exceeding .83 COR, which I assume would be possible with technological advancement. But I don't recall hearing that USGA or R&A officially ruling out any fairway woods. I don't see any fairway wood models in the 2012 USGA non-conforming drivers list, either. I think it's more logical for USGA to apply the COR rule to any type of club including fairway woods and hybrids, but I don't think they officially added it to the Rules of Golf book, unless that happened in the last couple years.

[M-Stamp]

If the RBZ has ONLY .810 COR, there is just no way the RBZ can hit 15 yeards longer than ANY major brand comptitors if the weight and length are the same!!!

Now, if TM says they achieved .830 COR with the new RBZ, I would be all over.

[golfnut-2X]

@shiva - now were talking. love to see the results of your test with lower hcps.


@dfinch - thanks for the comparison on trackman. so to conifrm rbz 3wood no difference for you on trackman?


i am not a tm hater. i have bought into a number of their hypes before and have some of their older clubs. i agree with someones post above is that they are very good at marketing, the market segment is probably higher hcp and their clubs are older than 1 yr. my guess.

i am in a market for a new 3 wood. before i downselect the ones i will test just want to get through all the marketing bs. the test data above is very helpful and appreciated.

there are some component club manufacturers that are making titanium 0.830 cor 3 woods. they just don't have the marketing machine like tm. i think alpha has one.'

@splitter - don't want to start an argument since i respect eveyrone on this great forum. you can have an opinion. just how you come across on this medium was rude - more how not what you said.

[swizbeatz]

It is no longer than a properly fit 3 wood but significantly longer for the masses who have never been fitted and are playing older clubs.

[M-Stamp]

[quote name='swizbeatz' timestamp='1329405044' post='4299211']
It is no longer than a properly fit 3 wood but significantly longer for the masses who have never been fitted and are playing older clubs.
[/quote]

That is true, and if that's the case, all TM can say in their ads is "Our new RBZ 3 wood is significantly longer for people who have never been fitted and are playing older clubs."

[SHIVAN]

[quote name='M-Stamp' timestamp='1329395306' post='4298181']
If the RBZ has ONLY .810 COR, there is just no way the RBZ can hit 15 yeards longer than ANY major brand comptitors if the weight and length are the same!!! [/quote]

I don't want to sound like a broken record, but their claim, in the ad, pretty big letters in the stores too, so not really "fine print", is assuming a minimum 150mph ball speed. 17yd gain for "better players".

Fact is they have video after video of people hitting them on a range, with pro tracer, and they were gaining 10-47yds with what looked like your average, horrible fairway wood swing. Thinning it. Chunking it. Swinging too hard. Sawed off finishes. Etc, Etc.

Some of the folks, like Win McMurry, obviously are not swinging anywhere near 100mph, and she gained a truck load of yards, and ball flight was superior.

As I already said, a [u][i][b]majority[/b][/i][/u] of golfers are not using .809+ COR fairway woods. Some very, very small percentage may be using Wishon .830's or TEE .830's, but there are supposedly 50,000,000+ golfers worldwide. Do you think that TEE or Wishon has more than a 10% market share between them? I don't. Let's say Wishon and TEE combine for 20% of all fairway woods for all 50,000,000 golfers. That leaves 40,000,000+ using something WAY less than .810 COR.

How many of the 40,000,000 produce 150mph ball speed, even with a driver? They are banking on the general person looking to buy the RBZ is NOT a TEE or Wishon user.

So TMAG's claim is plausible, given their defined parameters. Just because User A saw no gains, or lost yardage does not negate real data. The plural of anecdote, is [u][i][b]not[/b][/i][/u] data. The only true way to test this is take impartial testers, enough to make a statistically valid sample size, have them hit all the clubs on monitors. Baseline the data, and compare it. Short of that, it makes for a cool story on the course, on the range, or on an internet forum.

[Huffer]

I demo'd the R11, the R11s, the RBZ, and the Titleist 910F 3 woods and was consistently 5 to 7 yards longer with the RBZ (with the same dispersion). 7 yards doesn't sound like much but I bought it (every little bit helps) and it's now in the bag!

[Arafel]

[quote name='SHIVAN' timestamp='1329406222' post='4299387']
[quote name='M-Stamp' timestamp='1329395306' post='4298181']
If the RBZ has ONLY .810 COR, there is just no way the RBZ can hit 15 yeards longer than ANY major brand comptitors if the weight and length are the same!!! [/quote]

I don't want to sound like a broken record, but their claim, in the ad, pretty big letters in the stores too, so not really "fine print", is assuming a minimum 150mph ball speed. 17yd gain for "better players".

Fact is they have video after video of people hitting them on a range, with pro tracer, and they were gaining 10-47yds with what looked like your average, horrible fairway wood swing. Thinning it. Chunking it. Swinging too hard. Sawed off finishes. Etc, Etc.

Some of the folks, like Win McMurry, obviously are not swinging anywhere near 100mph, and she gained a truck load of yards, and ball flight was superior.

As I already said, a [u][i][b]majority[/b][/i][/u] of golfers are not using .809+ COR fairway woods. Some very, very small percentage may be using Wishon .830's or TEE .830's, but there are supposedly 50,000,000+ golfers worldwide. Do you think that TEE or Wishon has more than a 10% market share between them? I don't. Let's say Wishon and TEE combine for 20% of all fairway woods for all 50,000,000 golfers. That leaves 40,000,000+ using something WAY less than .810 COR.

How many of the 40,000,000 produce 150mph ball speed, even with a driver? They are banking on the general person looking to buy the RBZ is NOT a TEE or Wishon user.

So TMAG's claim is plausible, given their defined parameters. Just because User A saw no gains, or lost yardage does not negate real data. The plural of anecdote, is [u][i][b]not[/b][/i][/u] data. The only true way to test this is take impartial testers, enough to make a statistically valid sample size, have them hit all the clubs on monitors. Baseline the data, and compare it. Short of that, it makes for a cool story on the course, on the range, or on an internet forum.
[/quote]


If a slow swinger is seeing extra yards it has nothing to do with the extra COR and everything to do with a long and light shaft and a very poor fit for their previous 3 wood. The harder you hit it the more you'll benefit from the extra COR.

All things being equal a Dustin Johnson type swinger will see extra yards (17 on avg) compared to any previous model of TaylorMade fairway woods. Slow swingers won't see much of anything in extra yards if everything is equal.

Sorry, these are just the facts.

[ram01002]

I have no problem with the statements regarding distance gains, but what really bothers me is the notion that TM can't put an adjustable hosel with the same face technology. I'm sure they are going to come up with a "breakthrough" in 2013 that allows this technology in an adjustable hosel . . . and that "breakthrough" is already finished, just waiting for all of us idiots to purchase this year's fairway wood, and then come crawling back next year for the adjustable hosel version.

[Arafel]

[quote name='ram01002' timestamp='1329408667' post='4299699']
I have no problem with the statements regarding distance gains, but what really bothers me is the notion that TM can't put an adjustable hosel with the same face technology. I'm sure they are going to come up with a "breakthrough" in 2013 that allows this technology in an adjustable hosel . . . and that "breakthrough" is already finished, just waiting for all of us idiots to purchase this year's fairway wood, and then come crawling back next year for the adjustable hosel version.
[/quote]

As has been observed thousands of times TM is quite the marketing company. They are the George Lucas of golf clubs and know how to squeeze maximum profit from a [s]franchise[/s] line of clubs.

[Splitter]

[quote name='ram01002' timestamp='1329408667' post='4299699']
I have no problem with the statements regarding distance gains, but what really bothers me is the notion that TM can't put an adjustable hosel with the same face technology. I'm sure they are going to come up with a "breakthrough" in 2013 that allows this technology in an adjustable hosel . . . and that "breakthrough" is already finished, just waiting for all of us idiots to purchase this year's fairway wood, and then come crawling back next year for the adjustable hosel version.
[/quote]

Sometimes things are as simple as they look, sometimes not.

If tooling is going to add $20+ per head to each club but they're working on a new adjustable hosel, would you add the hosel now or wait? When the new hosel came out would you be pissed you bought the old hosel? I don't know that's the case it's just an example.

The point is that EVERY company that makes product does this. All companies have "product roadmaps" and things get added or pulled for good and bad reasons. And as a consumer we NEVER know the real reasons. TM is like every other company in this regard.