The Biggest NON-Story In the Golf Equipment World for 2017
News

The Biggest NON-Story In the Golf Equipment World for 2017

The Biggest NON-Story In the Golf Equipment World for 2017

I’ve decided to end the year with a recounting of what could have been the biggest story in the golf equipment world in 2017. The details were always sketchy, mostly unbelievable from a risk/reward perspective, and our attempts to investigate ultimately went nowhere. I’ve decided to tell it anyway because I think it provides the quintessential example of how absurd the golf equipment industry can sometimes be. To use a cliché, it exposes a bit of the seedy underbelly, while also detailing the lengths to which some companies go to control the media and the message.

I was originally going to tell this story on Twitter, and while I think it’s WAY too long for that medium, I’m going to try and keep it unpolished and simple. Perhaps that means this will have a bit of an old-school MyGolfSpy vibe.

The story begins with a tip that slid into my DMs on Twitter (that sounds naughtier than I’d like). The source isn’t someone I know personally, but I have every reason to believe that he’s been in the industry for a while, is connected to retail, and would certainly be in a position to have come across the information he passed along.

What he told me was that a rep from a golf company – we’ll call it Company A, was telling his accounts that a competitor (Company B), had deliberately placed non-conforming driver heads in its fitting carts in an attempt to dupe consumers into buying more of its clubs. With nearly every retail location offering some sort of launch monitor fitting experience these days, it’s easy to understand why winning the launch monitor distance battle is crucial to selling golf clubs.

As an aside, we’ve found plenty of evidence to suggest that some manufacturers routinely jack lofts above and beyond their already jacked lofts in their fitting cart irons, so it’s not like there aren’t some in the market who cheat to win. It’s a strategy that can work in the right environment (big box, in particular), but competent fitters are more likely to check lofts and bend the fitting cart irons back to spec, and to pay more attention to launch and spin, peak height, and descent angles than the guy who watches you bang balls at a less knowledgeable shop. Point being, cheating doesn’t guarantee winning.

So anyway, we’re confident that some companies re-jack their fitting cart irons, but juicing driver heads? That’s filthy. Should the story prove true and Company B were to be exposed, we’re talking really bad PR, probably lawsuits, and perhaps even the end of the business. We’re talking serious risk that likely exceeds the value of any reward.

At face value, the story was improbable, even absurd (welcome to the golf equipment world), but Company A’s rep was telling at least some of his accounts that not only was Company B cheating, but that his company (A) had acquired several of Company B’s fitting heads and almost all of them had tested over the USGA limit.

Holy shit…maybe…probably not.

Now would be a good time to point out that, as with any population, there are good golf sales reps and bad ones. The good ones shoot their accounts straight – they may even discuss the relative strengths and weakness of their products to help the retailer better understand who a given product will work best for. Bad reps lie. They don’t deliver, and they make excuses and tell stories to explain why their product isn’t competitive and why, ultimately, consumers are buying the other guy’s stuff.

So, do we have a rep revealing damning inside information, or do we have a guy talking shit to explain why his product isn’t selling as well as he’d hoped? That’s what we needed to find out.

After discussing the story internally, we decided to start with a two-pronged approach. First, we discretely reached out to several of the fitters and retailers we know and trust. We asked if they had noticed anything unusual (unrealistic/absolutely mind-blowing performance) from their fitting heads. We also asked them to do some quick testing of fitting heads against some of their on-the-shelf inventory to see if there was any appreciable discrepancy in performance.

At the same time, I attempted to reach a source inside Company A who I not only trusted but who I believe has the integrity to shoot me straight about what is obviously a delicate situation. In situations like this, speaking to the right person is everything. Much to my disappointment, the discrete and non-specific voicemail I left in his cell phone was returned via email by Company A’s PR department and consisted of little more than a reminder that any and all contact with Company A should be run through him.

Yeah…No. If this was twitter, the middle finger emoji would go here.

This brings me to my 2nd aside – PR, Chain of Command, and the Ignorance Gap.

The reality is that inside most any golf company, particularly large ones, the PR team is often out of the loop. What PR works on is often need to know. That is to say, PR learns about new products and other goings on when it’s time to prepare for release or when there’s a message to send out to the world. It would be unusual for PR to have advance and detailed knowledge of a next generation product, and PR would almost certainly have no idea if the guys in the lab are dropping the pendulum on a competitor’s fitting heads. While Company A has traditionally insulated and isolated its departments more than most, this kind of thing is true for most any company.

When I worked in IT, for example, the Marketing department wasn’t aware of what we were working on in the server room from one day to the next. I was clueless to what our Executive team was working on, and almost nobody outside of sales understood how products and services were bundled for customers. Point being, in every company, people have roles, and they don’t often know much about what people in other departments are working on. The golf equipment world isn’t any different.

So, given the sensitivity of the information, it would have been absolutely reckless for me to loop in somebody I was confident would be absolutely clueless about the situation.

With that in mind, let’s move to an aside within this aside. Golf companies – more accurately some golf companies not only love their chain of command, they expect everyone on the outside will abide by their internal guidelines. To a degree this isn’t wholly unreasonable. Communication is ultimately PR’s job, and if you’ve got media constantly banging away at your R&D and product teams, then work isn’t going to get done, and you’ve got a problem. That’s the theory anyway.

The reality is that golf equipment industry does a reasonably good job of keeping those guys insulated. In the US, there are probably fewer than a dozen golf media companies who routinely get direct access to Product and R&D. Most golf media simply haven’t made those contacts, doesn’t have the direct access, or don’t tell the kind of stories which require that access. Basically, I’d wager most of us leave the R&D guys well-enough alone, and the fact of the matter is that some PR people have an almost pathological need to feel in control.

That said, in general, we make an effort to follow the chain of command – at least as long as it makes sense to do so. I can’t say my experiences dealing with golf equipment PR absolutely mirror that of my colleagues at other outlets, but I’d wager that while the names may change, if you asked around you’d get a list of PR people who are exceptional, PR are people who are so bad they’re detrimental to the brands they represent, and plenty of in-between. In fairness, I’m sure PR would say the same about those of us in the media.

Perception is a two-way street, I get that.

Bottom line, when the day to day communication stuff is working and things are getting done, then I’m fine with the mandated chain of command. When things aren’t working, when PR isn’t getting it done, or when what I’m working on necessitates I speak with someone a little higher up, well, let me be clear – screw your chain of command. I’ll call, text, or email anyone I damn well please, whenever I please. No double-standard, I’d expect the same from anyone else if I’m not getting the job done.

And not for anything, any decent journalist will tell you that, when you’re looking for real information, when you’re looking to get the absolute truth about what is a potentially incendiary story, the last place you call is the PR department.

With this story sufficiently off-track, why not take an aside within an aside within aside to briefly dig deeper into the access golf companies provide to information. When you’re not on the naughty list – or when you’re kind of on the naughty list but the company that put you there still has the foresight to understand that even if it doesn’t like you, it’s probably still in its best interest to tell you its story – they’ll give you some time with either Product teams (a layer that exists somewhere between R&D and Marketing), their R&D guys, or they’ll rely on PR to retell the tech story. In many cases, it’s a 45-60 minute phone call, or some time carved out during a media event. Other companies almost always insist on sitting you down in a conference room for 4 to 6 hours with members of the R&D teams. There’s usually not much rah rah hyperbole inside R&D conference rooms. They give you every last seemingly innocuous engineering detail, and often a competitive breakdown before sending you out to the range or the golf course to try the product for yourself. The longer sessions include a lot of back and forth. They provide opportunities to ask real questions and to try and poke holes in what you’re being told. Generally, the longer sessions also produce more meaningful information, a more realistic assessment of what golfers are actually getting for their money, and ultimately a better story for our readers. It’s the difference between, for example, “we made some very specific modifications (x, y, and z), that may get some golfers just little bit more ball speed on low face contact”, and “HAMMERHEAD!”.

Overlapping with our previous aside and moving back to the chain of command stuff; it’s certainly noteworthy that the companies who ask us to sit down with engineers and not marketers are the same ones who don’t appear to be the least bit concerned when we reach out to engineers and other sources directly. When the foundation of the product is built on small but appreciable advancements and not hyperbole, I suppose it’s much easier to trust the R&D guys to tell it right.

So getting back to the meaty part of the story – I’ve got a serious accusation of big time fitting cart shenanigans, I’ve got an inside guy who ratted me out to PR, and I’ve got a PR guy who I’m all but certain wouldn’t have a clue about what might be going on in the lab. Basically, I’ve got nothing to go on.

Meanwhile, the fitters are starting to report back with their results. To a man, nobody can find anything to suggest juiced heads. I’m hearing things like, “it [Company B’s driver] wins its fair share, but it loses some too.” I’ve done some sniffing around at a couple of local shops and found nothing, and I’ve reached out to Company B (outside the proper chain of command, I might add) and have been told the story is horse shit.

Every bit of information I have suggests we’re dealing with a rep telling a story to discredit a competitor, but I figured, why not take another shot. I send an email up the ladder at to Company A, first asserting that I’ll continue to contact whomever I’m so inclined to contact, but that I’m hearing that they might have some info about a competitor’s fitting cart. I’m here if you want to talk about it. I never heard back.

MGS’s owner, Adam Beach, took the matter further up the chain, which resulted in perhaps the most absurd exchange ever. Apparently dubiously chalking up the returned call to a butt dial, the brief conversation ended with Adam being wished “Good luck in all your endeavors.” A fitting ending if ever there was.

As I said, I’m particularly fond of this story because, despite it being a giant waste of my time, it includes so much of the absurd, nonsensical, and sketchy side of the golf equipment industry. There’s a lot of good in this industry, but there remains plenty that shady AF.

This isn’t an isolated case. Golf companies constantly tell stories about their competitors. Tales of inventory manipulation and book-cooking, for example, are omnipresent. That’s a story for another day.

In this case, either we have an account rep telling a false and incendiary story to discredit a competitor (the probable scenario), or we have a company engaging in some seriously unethical shit to dupe the consumer (less likely – in this specific case). We have a golf company mandating an unreasonable chain of command request without regard for the reality that some things are well above PR’s pay grade, and you have MyGolfSpy doing things our way.

One way or the other, we have yet another example of the lengths some companies will go to win with apparently not much regard for where the consumer fits in the discussion.

For us, we have a good bit of time wasted on a huge story that ultimately went nowhere. That’s the nature of the business, and so sometimes all we can do is shake our heads and laugh.

Support Unbiased Testing.

DID YOU KNOW: If only 1% of MyGolfSpy readers donated $25, we would be able to become completely independent in 12-months. With every donation, you create change.

Would you be willing to help by giving a donation? Every dollar will help. Make a donation to support our independent and expert golf equipment research. A PayPal account is not required in order to donate.

Donate to MGS


Amount

Frequency

For You

For You

Golf Shafts
Apr 14, 2024
Testers Wanted: Autoflex Dream 7 Driver Shaft
News
Apr 14, 2024
A Rare Masters ‘L’: Day Asked To Remove Sweater
Drivers
Apr 13, 2024
Testers Wanted: Callaway Ai Smoke Drivers
Tony Covey

Tony Covey

Tony Covey

Tony is the Editor of MyGolfSpy where his job is to bring fresh and innovative content to the site. In addition to his editorial responsibilities, he was instrumental in developing MyGolfSpy's data-driven testing methodologies and continues to sift through our data to find the insights that can help improve your game. Tony believes that golfers deserve to know what's real and what's not, and that means MyGolfSpy's equipment coverage must extend beyond the so-called facts as dictated by the same companies that created them. Most of all Tony believes in performance over hype and #PowerToThePlayer.

Tony Covey

Tony Covey

Tony Covey





    This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

      RJB

      6 years ago

      All I can say is that I used to help out a rep for PING locally. They were VERY ADAMANT about the demos I was letting people use and they always were absolutely diligent about making sure I got every single one bag no matter what… and I was always wondering why the heck it was so important. So this is how I “lost” my little side gig from these guys.
      I did a demo at a VERY exclusive club in Westchester NY. One of the members was a big wig VP at CBS Sports and was hitting the i25 and POUNDING it 300+ each time… then even killing it FROM THE DECK. He stated that he wanted THAT club. That I would have to pry his dead hands from it… mind you he was a convincing 6’3″ and quite vocal… but in my experience with customer service – you give the customer what they want… so the pro was right there and stated he would just buy the equivalent club from PING and I could replace with that new one and his member could keep the one he was hitting… so I was like – of course – make the customer happy right?!
      NOPE! As soon as I did that they told me I was no longer doing any demo days and that my “services” were no longer needed. This was AFTER that CBS exec sent PING a long great note on how well I worked with him and that he was so happy with PING, etc.
      Then it dawned on me… hmmmmm I bet you this was a “non-conforming” club… Well I think that they all do it… and I was a part of it for a minute!!

      Reply

      Drew Vasquez

      6 years ago

      This website certainly has all the information I wanted about this subject and didn’t know who to ask.

      Reply

      Eric

      6 years ago

      I never buy a driver from a big box store. Never really used a launch monitor, testing a driver without hitting it outdoors seems pointless to me now considering how really close all the big name drivers are. That being said I always thought what’s to prevent a big box store employee from juicing the monitor for a certain OEM! Conspiracy! The launch monitors are great but I have a hard time believing 100% in them when they tell you got 17 yards of roll on a shot?? Can these things test fairway conditions too????

      Reply

      Timothy Eakin

      6 years ago

      A store in Brea, CA has all the launch monitors set to a default smash factor of 1.45 for drivers. Very unreal

      Reply

      Rod_CCCGOLFUSA

      6 years ago

      Your request for tech info being routed through the PR department replicates my experience at the last two PGA shows. The marketing boys are now running the floor booths. Requests for data are responded to with a stream of techno babble mixed with marketing hype (just ask what “twist face” means and see what happens). When I asked to talk to someone from R&D, they took my number and said I would get a call. Still waiting.

      Reply

      James W

      6 years ago

      I was in a big box store last summer and decided to hit some drivers.

      I found two that I hit somewhat farther than any others. One was Epic which was still at full retail and the other was a 2016 competitors model on sale for less than half of retail.

      I didn’t need a new driver when I went in but decided I needed one after seeing the launch monitor results.

      The salesman and I went to through the available stock and found what was supposed to be the identical head for the 2016 model but the shaft in the demo was not available. I hit the stock model and lost about 20% (270 yds reduced to 220) of my distance. They would not sell me the demo but agreed to let me test the demo shaft in the stock head. I still lost more than 10% (240 total distance) compared to the demo.

      In fairness the salesman told me the demo was an original model that was determined to be non conforming.

      I decided to stick with my 2014 X2.

      Reply

      stephenf

      6 years ago

      Well, _that’s_ interesting. It raises the possibility that the way nonconforming drivers find their way into demo stocks (or even fitting carts) could be that a rep or a manager forgets, or “forgets,” to get rid of models or individual clubs that were found to be nonconforming. Hm.

      Reply

      R0B

      6 years ago

      One more thing; If Company B was guilty of using non-conforming demo drivers now that the cat is out of the bag, wouldn’t they be pulling/replacing those from demo carts ASAP?

      Let us know shop employees & PGA pros!

      Reply

      R0B

      6 years ago

      More importantly, any guesses on who is we think is Company B?

      *How do you make a poll???

      Reply

      John

      6 years ago

      As a Seinfeld fan, I can appreciate a good story about nothing. Is anyone here a marine biologist?

      Reply

      Carnousty

      6 years ago

      As a carpenter who plays and loves golf I appreciate when an expert takes the time to expose how a multi-million dollar industry can exploit my deepest desires (ie distance and accuracy) in ways I would not imagine. I am the consumer of My Golf Spy and appreciate contrary opinions.

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      6 years ago

      First – really enjoying the “This story went nowhere, what a waste of my time comments”. By the conclusion of the 2nd sentence, I’ve told you that the story goes nowhere. You were warned. Not my fault if you didn’t want to listen and walk away.

      For those of you who have suggested we should have measured the heads ourselves. That was the difficult next step in the plan *IF* any evidence had emerged of any actual shenanigans.

      It’s not like you can walk into any golf shop and borrow a CT machine. They cost about $7000 each, you can’t get one without first obtaining a USGA or R&A license. On top of that, there are some additional rules and regulations surrounding acceptable use. Manufacturers, the USGA, and a few semi-independent labs, have them. I say semi-independent because in many cases these labs are retained as consultants by the OEMs. They’re often called in when companies start suing each other.

      Point being, maybe the USGA helps (probably not), maybe we track down an independent who won’t charge us an arm and a leg. We can’t really go to Company C and ask them to test Company B’s heads because somebody from Company A said some are non-conforming. Company C isn’t going to touch that, and for something like this we’d need to work outside the industry circle. Getting access to a CT machine for this type of thing ain’t easy.

      All of that is before we try and round up a reasonable quantity of fitting heads without it getting back to Company B because if it does, we’re almost certainly getting a letter and any retailers who helps risk losing their accounts.

      So while “just CT test them yourselves” sounds straightforward, it presents two obstacles, neither of which is particularly easy to overcome. And while neither is impossible (probably) to work around, given the effort, cost, and risk involved it didn’t seem like the prudent thing to do based on a completely unsubstantiated claim made by a sales rep.

      Reply

      stephenf

      6 years ago

      Could not agree more. People are weird. They have the text in front of them, they can see it’s not a tweet or a one-graf article, then they read it and b!tch about length. Or they read it after being specifically told about the nature of the thing, then b!tch about it being exactly what you said it was. Amazing.

      Also, it figures that you’d get the usual round of complaints about “just test it,” because “just do X” is always easy for the person who doesn’t have to handle the details or lay out the money. The less you know, the more you complain.

      I thought the piece was totally worthwhile as exactly what you said it was — a look behind the scenes into competitors in the industry.

      Internet comment lists are made for empty complaints. Stand on the sidelines, nitpick and gripe about what people actually in the arena are doing.

      Reply

      One Day At A Time

      6 years ago

      Out of pure curiosity, if I said:
      “I work full time managing, teaching, and merchandising. I have ordered 6 drivers since they launched in late 2017 in addition to the demo driver my rep brought me. The driver I ordered for myself was made in the USA and assembled in the USA, the others were made in China and assembled in China, and the ball speeds off three “identical” heads, with three distinct swings, ranging from 90mph to 117mph, were higher by every hitter with Clubhead #1, vs the other 3 Clubheads by 7mph-15mph. The smallest discrepancy was the 100mph-104mph swinger who was producing 144-150mph ball speeds with his driver, but 149-155mph with mine. The biggest jump was 10mph from our 90mph swinger. The same shafts were used by each hitter. We just swapped the heads”.

      Would it matter?

      Reply

      Bob

      6 years ago

      I really wish I could get the 10 minutes I spent reading this article back.

      Tony, I worked 7 years at one of the top retailers in the country. I would not remotely consider this to be true.

      I’m still trying to figure out if there was an actual point to your article. Were you drunk when you wrote it? No judgement if so!

      Reply

      Anonymous

      6 years ago

      It might not have been possible- therefore impossible to be true- until technology got to where it is now.

      Reply

      Gordon

      6 years ago

      Good read.
      Interesting situation to follow too.
      I work at a place where media will periodically reach out to the “expert” in a given field for a story. We absolutely are mandated to have them contact our PR staff, no way around it, or we could be suspended or fired.
      I will say, our PR staff is usually good about getting back to the “expert” and saying, it is okay to speak to this particular media person etc. Sometimes a supervisor must be on the call with the expert, but it’s not un-doable. It largely depends on the overall topic I guess.
      That would seem like a better approach than what some of these golf companies are taking.
      Also, I hope there is no truth to that rumor. Not sure a company could survive that type of thing in this marketplace.

      Reply

      Howard Garson

      6 years ago

      You missed one problem with making nonconforming demo heads. Many retailers still have playability guarantees. If a demo head was juiced and the customer was not getting that performance in the real world, those drivers would be coming back in droves. The retailer would not be happy.

      Reply

      Chris B.

      6 years ago

      On a similar theme, I have an acquaintance who formerly worked for a large sports good retailer in the uk. Said retailer made golf clubs under a previously prestigious brand name and sold them exclusively in their stores. The story here is that conforming heads went to the R&A for approval whereas shelf product was often considerably different to that which had received approval. Not necessarily non-conforming, but not far off.

      Reply

      Doug

      6 years ago

      Accurate title; this was kind if a pointless article. Surprised the datacratic truth digest didn’t actually grab a few fitting heads and test them? Might have been faster than writing this (long) article? And who is stupid enough to think that golf companies aren’t playing launch monitor games… is a 29 degree 7 iron enough to convince? ?? And lets be real, even if manufacturers aren’t cheating, they surely test and/or make hundreds of heads to find those that are barely legal for fitting carts. Who can blame them? Who knows what the cor is on the one you special order… Bottom line, evade the conspiracy that is being floated here, see a real fitter and only buy after you hit it on the monitor, including “fitting” orders. It’s the only way you know…

      Reply

      Donn Rutkoff

      6 years ago

      Problem is who made the non cinforming heads, how, how were they physically separated from the rset of the production line, then taken and spread around? Too many loose ends. Unless someone is taking the rejects from the production line, finding why rejected, and taking them out for distrib outside normal channels. It would take several senior officers or a very risky or ambitious line worker to do this.

      Reply

      Alan

      6 years ago

      First and most importantly, A HAPPY & HEALTHY NEW YEAR TO ALL !!!

      Now to the story. You seem to contradict info from some of your prior writings. In the debate of conforming vs. non-conforming drivers, as I recall, for the average Joe golfer with say a 90 mph SS, an 0.860 COR compared to a conforming 0.830 was only 4 to 5 yards. (sure more for the 110 mph pro average).
      So, even if EVERY head for company “A” was juiced, in every fitting cart, in every golf store throughout the US, it doesn’t sound like much of a competitive advantage.

      I think you get more variation depending on the ball that are used in the fitting bays. You could have brand new (hardly used) low spin balls that give you much better stats on a launch monitor in store “A”than in store “B” down the block that has beaten up (not recently replaced) high spin balls.

      There are just too many variables to place the sole finger of blame/guilt on hot heads. There are many ways a store can improve perceived performance on launch monitors versus the real green grass of a live course !!!!

      Reply

      Proof

      6 years ago

      I ordered a driver from company anonymous. The contracted and compensated Chief of my tribe who earns 90% of his money from “my tribe” but is…let me just say “endorsed” by company anonymous….me and my Chief, unknowingly, ordered the exact same…..*Golfing Club*……

      I’m not one to withhold my name, but seeing as it’s not an ideal time to ignore the laws of power, I’m just going to say, theres truth beyond what is insinuated….

      I’m going to stfu bc I’m not in a position to bring a cap gun to a tank fight.

      IMHO it’s not the fitting cart that’s juiced with company anonymous. It’s rather the opposite.

      See “Jon Jones supplement” google results, and then follow ALL of our money….

      Proof. Great, I know. MGS will have proof- keep donating. It’s only a matter of time. A matter of Integrity.

      Reply

      Nick Aquilino

      6 years ago

      Well I kind of got lost about half way through the article and I am not really sure what the story was supposed to convey. Aside that, I have been on the periphery of the golf business for about 50 years mostly writing patents but on a few occasions actually being part of a company.
      I can say without reservation, there are a lot of snakes in the golf industry, both individuals and companies. Historically every time a new innovation is developed, there are any number of competitors that attempt to steal or ride the coattails of the original developer.
      That is why patents and other IP is so important. I can remember when Callaway first came out with the Bertha design it was copied by so many competitors and the company soon changed their mind about protecting their products. There are other stories, too many to get into here, that are evidence golf companies have no regard for another’s products or innovations. They will lie, cheat and do whatever they can to get a competitive advantage. It is the nature of the business.
      Shifting gears, did you ever hit a driver, or any club for that matter, during a demo day and decide I got to have this. Then try and buy that club at the demo. No way will it be sold to the golfing consumer, no mater how many clubs are in the test barrel. Guess why? The demo clubs are always the best that can be made and usually are far superior to the ones that are subsequently ordered and obtained from the company. At the very least the shafts are superior and perhaps the heads also. Bottom line you cannot obtain the same club that was used at demo day.
      So even if the demo clubs are legal, they are the best of the best and used to sell a customer a similar but run of the mill, off the shelf product.
      Yeah, I do not trust many of the companies insofar as having a high level of integrity because they don’t.

      Reply

      Pat

      6 years ago

      OR the reps need their demos for tomorrow’s demo day and there’s nothing more to this story?

      Reply

      stephenf

      6 years ago

      Probably because I actually taught and played the game for a living for a while, worked both as a sportswriter and on the other side as an SID (which, if you’re not careful, can slide into a kind of PR role that actually doesn’t work well in that job and will get you a bad rep with outside media), and also was head technical writer for a physics-and-engineering research firm in the defense industry (we were small, a joint project of a large state university and the Army, at the time the only firm that had its own congressional budget line, involving constant liaising with the Pentagon), this story really ginned up some responses in what still passes for a brain between these ears. In no particular order:

      1. It strikes me that you’ve made a very serious and seemingly undeserved effort to protect Company B here and to be _really_ fair to them. Most people will say this is out of the need to stay clear of a defamation suit, or at least to avoid burning bridges once you became reasonably certain they hadn’t done what they’d been accused of. Maybe so, but it’s also true that this is exactly the kind of thing real journalists do in any field when it comes to potentially devastating information, and that almost _nobody_ does now. You could’ve avoided defamation simply by quoting the source from Company A, preferably while documenting the fact of the allegation by whatever means is legal in your state, and then taking no position on the matter yourself. In the course of your business, you’re simply quoting what one says about another, not vouching for the truth of it. It’s true that the person said it. But it’s also potentially destructive to Company B. So instead you do the responsible thing, go shake every tree you can, and instead of just being a microphone for whatever sh!t one person or entity wants to say about the other, you find out if there’s any particular reason to think the allegation is true. Or rather, in a case where the information is this potentially damaging, you find out whether it’s certain or nearly certain to be true.

      What I’m getting at here is how different (for instance) the political landscape would be if journalists acted this responsibly, instead of running with whatever allegation fit the running narrative(s) they want to push. “Hey, I’m just reporting what Unnamed Source X said.” And so forth.

      Every month it seems there are fewer examples of this kind of responsibility in the contemporary political media, sports media, etc. Instead, journalists routinely take the “hey, I’m just passing it along, I’m just a microphone” approach.

      So: This was handled well, is what I’m saying.

      2. I don’t get why companies would jack demo clubs in any way (including messing with iron lofts), unless they’re interested in a one-time sale that disappoints the customer once they lay out the cash. Seems short-sighted, and yet they do it — apparently not in this particular case with the juiced-up driver heads, but still. Do people come back and still keep buying from a company once they’ve paid $500 for a driver or $1200 for irons that turn out to be not particularly better than the ones they already had, and not as good as they tested out? Maybe I just don’t understand marketing.

      3. “Golf companies constantly tell stories about their competitors”: No kidding. Welcome to demo day, yeah? Always cracks me up. And they try to do it with a smile, sideways, damning with faint praise, passive-aggressive condescension, you name it. It’s hilarious. “Yeah, you know, X has really been great over the years, they had so many pros playing their clubs back in the day, they just really blazed a trail for the rest of us.” (They’re old news.) “They really focus on performance, and some people like that. We tend to put an equal emphasis on feel, which we think better players really like, but it’s true that that’s a smaller market.” (Play theirs if you’re an ordinary player who doesn’t mind crappy-feeling and -sounding clubs. Fine. I thought you were better than that, watching you hit some balls with your maybe-played-some-college-golf swing. But okay.) And so forth.

      4. The description of your experience with PR departments and the difference in what you get from them versus R&D engineers and scientists is, of course, right on the money. PR departments create alternate realities and shape the world like lawyers. They specialize in happy fabrications. They have no interest whatsoever in telling the unvarnished truth about anything. Which is not to say they _never_ tell the truth, but when they do, it’s only because it happens to coincide with the happy version of the truth. There’s no reason to expect truth reliably from them. In the scenario you describe, they’re a control mechanism to discourage investigation and to block or filter information, much the same way as a HR department’s job with an open position isn’t to hire you but to cut down the number of applicants to a manageable level for the person who _is_ going to hire you.

      Just a quick aside to SID days: I struggled with this attitude myself when I was hired as an SID for a small Midwestern university. The school was in transition from NAIA to NCAA Division II, and for a couple of years we had dual membership, which I bring up only to say that the place had been used to operating at a very local and smallish level (which was great in many ways) but was now moving up to what was then the toughest Division II conference in the nation, with a significantly higher level of media interest and informational demands.

      The guy they had in the position before me was a total PR schmoozer, and I’m not necessarily saying that as a criticism. He was great at it. He was a promoter, out having coffee with the boosters and the contributors, great at selling ads for media guides and so forth, all the stuff I was no good at and wasn’t particularly interested in. I was strong on the journalistic end, good with stats, etc., but very much behind the curve on marketing and glad-handing.

      For a while the administration really pushed for me to be more like the predecessor. Eventually I convinced my boss, the athletic director — who by the way was about as good a boss as you’re ever going to have, just a great guy — that although the previous SID was a good guy and very good at personal interactions with supporters, we had a really shoddy reputation among local and regional media when it came to getting the straight story in a nonpromotional way. As in, any releases they got were typically tossed in the trash, because they were so full of homerism, and media people don’t want to have to wade through stuff that’s not ready to run essentially intact. We had teams that were nationally ranked from time to time and yet got almost zero mention in the regional media in a larger town only 25 miles away, because people got so tired of sifting through the nonsense to get to whatever actual story was there. The school had never had anybody in that position that thought of anything from the perspective of the journalists that were expected to cover them. They complained all the time about not getting coverage — they actually seemed genuinely mystified about why they weren’t — but the truth is that they had spent year after year treating media like they were obligated to be little more than an extended PR operation of the university. Like, why are you asking questions? Why can’t you just print what we send you in the releases? They didn’t listen to what journalists were saying and what they actually needed.

      Eventually I was able to convince the AD that it was in our interest to repair our reputation by making the SID office more or less what a presidential press secretary ought to be — not an operation to distort or block or shape information, but an honest liaison with one foot in journalism and one foot in the university. I still think the best PR operations are like that, but they’re rare. Mostly now it’s just a matter of distorting, blocking, and shaping. But we (my assistant and I, plus a few well-chosen work-study students) were able to turn that place into a respected operation within the conference mainly because we were able to get the people to understand that talking only to ourselves hadn’t worked and was never going to work.

      Which brings us back to you. When a PR department does what they did with you, they’re essentially trying to reduce you to nothing but a conscript for them, just a way of turning MGS into an arm of their own office and thus extending their reach, and to block you from doing anything that’s not under their control and doesn’t further their narrative. All that does is to make the relationship antagonistic when it doesn’t have to be. But it’s not surprising. People with money at stake try to keep tight controls on everything and make people adjust to their world instead of adjusting to the world — or a legitimate question — as it is.

      I do wonder whether your contact unambiguously ratted you out, or whether the conversation came to somebody’s attention there, and they went to him and to the PR office. Could happen if somebody at the switchboard (or an assistant) recognized your name or the MGS name, or maybe he mentioned it to somebody he trusted wrongly.

      Either way, what an experience, getting warned off like that. I mean, if they want an adversarial kinda deal, I guess they got it.

      Reply

      Chris B.

      6 years ago

      Agree with number 3 and it happened to me 18 months back. Attended a fitting day with a well known oem and did see slight increases over my then current set, but not to an extent where a £700 -£900 investment was justified. Happened to mention that once my fitting was done I was testing a driver I had won (Benross HTX) against my current TM Jetspeed. Rep chuckled and suggested I was wasting my time as the Jetspeed would be superior despite being a couple of years old. I take great pleasure in saying he was well and truly wrong, the Benross matched the TM straight away and basically outperformed the TM once I had got used to it!

      The moral of this tale: Always make your own mind up based on how the club(s) perform for you, not the opinion of any oem rep.

      Reply

      stephenf

      6 years ago

      Strange, isn’t it?

      Nobody can know how a club is going to perform for a specific person. It’s ridiculous to say so. The industry has gotten so carried away with testing protocols and numbers on screens that there’s no doubt some of these reps actually believe they can predict how Player X is going to do with it. All you can really say is that is has potential. What actually happens in that player’s hands is a matter of actual, not virtual, reality. As you’ve proven yet again.

      On a related note, I am absolutely _stunned_ at the amount of money people lay out for clubs they’ve tested only into a net on a launch monitor. How does anybody know what the flight is going to be like? Where it’s going to peak? What it’s going to feel and sound like outside, where golf courses are? Eh, the hell with it. I’ll just hand over the 500 bucks. The numbers say it should be great. Pfft.

      Thomas Murphy

      6 years ago

      PR chain of command is all about legal liability. To a certain extent, if someone “higher up” responds directly, they are putting themselves into potential legal hot water. That style of command and control is common and generally the larger your company, the larger the compliance issues, and the tighter the ship. ..and the more mandatory training I have to take each year.
      The extended alternative here is like all social media stories, sales guy hears from a store, yeah your competitor’s stuff is hot, we are seeing unbelievable launch monitor data, its almost like the heads are juiced. …which turns into “I heard” sometimes stated in a way to see if maybe store B will “confirm” the story and we work our way along the confirmation bias and inuendo path. Thus coming to what: a non-story — coffee is for closers (and no, I don’t work in sales, marketing or PR. Though I have done stints in the first two.

      Reply

      Minnesota Nice

      6 years ago

      Even though this story started strong and ended fading out to a whimper, I still appreciate the anecdotal information even if nothing came of it. Tony, Adam, just keep doing you and delivering what you do.

      Reply

      Gisle Solhaug

      6 years ago

      You need to get hold of some of these demo heads and have them tested by the USGA or some other third party. You should have done that before releasing the story.

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      6 years ago

      What story? This is a non-story.

      Reply

      ChristopherKee

      6 years ago

      This is why I only play demo drivers! I like getting those extra yards you get at the fitting.

      Honestly though, my last 3 drivers where whatever I was fitted for then and there, I told them to pull one off the shelf and replace the fitting cart because I’m taking the demo one home.

      Reply

      Eagle20

      6 years ago

      Going forward could you please write your stories without profanity?

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      6 years ago

      No promises.

      Reply

      James T.

      6 years ago

      Well crap… all he said was “shit”.

      Joe Golfer

      6 years ago

      Eagle20, you’re probably not going to have much luck with such requests.
      I’m almost 60 years old. Articles never used to have profanity when print was king. Online is a different animal. Even accomplished newspaper writers often are surprisingly unfamiliar with common rules of grammar and punctuation and even spelling. And I’m not referring to things like twitter abbreviations. Even print articles that have editors to proofread them don’t bother in many cases.
      I tried to ask my 30 year old nephew to stop using profanity, at least when speaking with me, and he simply said that I should stop preaching at him, and that I should get into the 21st century, as “everybody talks this way now”.
      I’ve even seen such things as Twitter feeds of cute little animals doing silly things, which would be wonderful to pass along to young grandkids or whomever, but the person putting out the feed includes things like F-bombs in their GIF’s.
      Just something we’ll have to get used to, as the authors really don’t care anymore.

      Reply

      stephenf

      6 years ago

      I’m generally sympathetic to this view, although it’s less a big deal here IMHO because it’s such a specialized audience, not likely to be any kids in the deal, etc. Just as a fact, not as something I’m proud of, I happen to be as expert a cusser as anybody you’re ever going to find (even for somebody who’s mostly Irish and Scottish, with our special dispensation from God allowing it), but never around kids, only occasionally and at a far lower level around women, and not even around guys if I don’t know them and know they’re OK with it.

      Frankly, guys like your nephew are really irritating in this regard. No, not “everybody” does it. Not everybody has sex in high school or before marriage, either. Not everybody cheats on taxes or on a significant other. And so forth. Each person makes his own decision about whether to have no filter with profanity, and saying “everybody does it” is just an excuse for lazy vulgarity of the kind you see all the time online, at ball games it’s getting harder and harder to justify taking your kids to, and even from players like Tiger Woods, who couldn’t be bothered to control his profanity even while knowing he was on camera in front of however many thousand kids. Shoot, no. You adjust yourself to him, not the other way around. You “have to understand the modern athlete,” and whatever.

      I _don’t_ think our author is indulging in lazy vulgarity, for the record. It’s very low-level and selective here, to my ear. But I understand anybody who would wish it to be not even that.

      JKC

      6 years ago

      Wow, eagle20, what a pompous ass you must be. It is his story , he can a throw out a few “bad” words if he wishes. Use your mommy internet filter if you are so easily offended.

      Can’t imagine how big a beat down a round with you must be.

      Reply

      stephenf

      6 years ago

      The game needs fewer people like you. And it’s _you_ who are pompous in this exchange, acting like somebody who has the class to ask for less profanity isn’t worthy of the funbaggery you and your boys pump out when you play.

      Good thing you never had a chance to play with a guy like Jones, or Hogan, or Nicklaus, or even guys like Faldo, Norman, Price, etc., all of whom had the sense to curb their profanity in a public forum or while on camera. Even Snead kept his considerable (and often hilarious) skill at cussing out of the public’s ears. Somebody like Tiger Woods is undoubtedly more your speed. Far less a “beat down” because he refused for his entire career to avoid profanity when he knew kids were watching.

      This is where the game is going, alright. I just hope there’s anybody at all left in a generation or two who has a clue what the game actually was, and what it’s still supposed to be. If so, it won’t be because of somebody like you.

      As for the author here, I would agree with anybody who says it’s not that bad. But laying into somebody for questioning why there’s any profanity at all, and accusing him of needing a “mommy filter” and being no fun to have a round with, when you don’t even know the guy beyond the fact that he doesn’t agree with you about profanity? Classless. You’ve said volumes about yourself.

      Jerry

      6 years ago

      I’ve written this several times on MGS but will do it again. Take your current driver into your retailer and grab various drivers off the rack and a/b them into a good screen like at Golf Galaxy or any decent shop. Let the salesman or Pro if they have one make changes to lofts or shafts and see what goes longer and/or straighter. I do this every time I see a new club that looks enticing. I can’t imagine buying any other way. Some years ago I was challenged by a fitter that he could prove hitting a higher lift driver would outperform my then current driver. We did all the monitor stuff but no matter every change he made my own driver performed better. He finally gave up. No sale. For balls I usually buy a sleeve of a top new ball and take them out on a practice round and hit one or two along with my go to ball of choice, a ProV1x. See how they perform on several holes with distance, control, spin on greens and for as goofy as it may be, “sound”. TP5 turned out longer and but as the season went along I came back to ProV I think for play around the greens. Balls are funky stuff.

      Reply

      thomas murphy

      6 years ago

      this is why I like fitters like Club Chamion in US or ModernGolf in Canada. You start by warming up and baselining your own clubs. If you have been fit before things should not change a lot unless you have, that is what USGA is all about. As you age, new clubs with different shafts…may “restore” what was once yours. I believe the real changes come in forgiveness and mental confidence.

      Reply

      stephenf

      6 years ago

      Sound is _not_ “goofy,” my brother. It’s a critical element in feel, as researchers have established. IMHO it can absolutely be the deciding factor between clubs and balls that perform otherwise about the same. It’s why I can’t play the ProV1x even though it’s noticeably longer. How much difference in scoring can half a club make anyway, if it means you have to give up that sound feedback on scoring shots around the green? Not remotely worth it, to me.

      Reply

      HOWARD THEISMAN

      6 years ago

      I’m positive a few years ago Callaway (FT-5) had the ‘hottest’ drivers as demos. But, in fairness, If they were my products I’m sure I would
      check several to find the best of them before giving them the demo
      label. That’s why it’s usually impossible to buy the club you test, and
      why the one you buy just doesn’t seem as good.

      Reply

      Robert Warner

      6 years ago

      Tony, I usually really enjoy your comments, however, to quote you… “a good bit of time wasted on a huge story that ultimately went nowhere…..being a giant waste of my time”

      Reply

      Jmarkus

      6 years ago

      “nothing from nothing leaves nothing”
      Billy Preston

      Reply

      Milo

      6 years ago

      Sounds like a sales rep telling a little white lie,
      to get an edge, but if it’s not true.
      This rep & the company he works for can not be trusted.

      Reply

      Thomas Murphy

      6 years ago

      One bad rep doesn’t mean a company can’t be trusted. The hope would be that a story like this gets a message sent “down the chain” that our gear doesn’t need that type of “edge”.

      Reply

      Dave

      6 years ago

      Very interesting read . We will never know the real story will we . It’s possible . But man I would sure hope selling clubs is not like selling Cars can’t believe I said that .

      Reply

      NH Golfer

      6 years ago

      A golf rep dropping incendiary comments to a customer about a competitor? Who knew? There was a time when this type of thing was uncool. Unfortunately no longer!

      Reply

      Righthander

      6 years ago

      What did the article really say? I read it over again and it’s a very uninteresting read. I stand by my dealer and brand I’ve been with for years. If they have been taking advantage of me all these yrs, it sure hasn’t bothered you play. I think you need to get your facts down, give some numbers.

      Reply

      Tony Covey

      6 years ago

      This story was so uninteresting I read it twice!

      Reply

      stephenf

      6 years ago

      Yup.

      I remember once this picture of a girl who was so outrageously short of clothes I had to see it several times to determine the precise degree of outrageousness. In retrospect, I’m sure I did the right thing.

      Adam Smith

      6 years ago

      We should always remember Audi and their software program .

      Reply

      Jim

      6 years ago

      All the more reason for people to get fitted outside instead of on an inside monitor. Fact is, when you see the product perform on many different hits you can determine what club is right for you, the numbers are great , but the flight pattern, carry, roll, etc.. needs to be seen and compared with other options.

      Reply

      stephenf

      6 years ago

      Yes, yes, yes, yes, YES. I absolutely cannot believe people make these decisions without ever seeing the flight of one actual ball outside, where golf courses are. It’s a weird culture that has emerged in the industry, this “if it’s on the screen, this is how it’s going to be in live action” thing.

      I haven’t done tons of equipment testing since I got injured and have had to take a long hiatus from tournament play (also, I wasn’t particularly in the market for new stuff during the last couple of years I was playing a lot), but some of the monitors from eight-plus years ago I guarantee you were inaccurate with regard to carry numbers, predicted height, apex, etc. I was a plus-2 then (after regaining amateur status), and I know it not only from my own numbers but for a friend of mine I used to play partnership tournaments with, another plus-handicapper who played for a while as a pro. I don’t think I ever saw him get a carry number over 230 on a monitor, and most were in the low 220s and even the 210s. Go out and play on an actual golf course with him, and you’d see carries of 250-260. He got the sweet spot on the ball more than anybody else I ever played with a lot. Not crazy-long, but plenty long enough, and _way_ over a 225 kind of carry. I’ve seen this kind of thing too many times to think people ought to rely completely on monitors, although I understand the ones used today are generally better than they were even a few years ago.

      Reply

      Jack Wullkotte

      6 years ago

      I’m sorry, but that was the most useless and non interesting story I have ever taken time to read. It just rambles on and on with a bunch of nothingness.

      Reply

      Chris Nickel

      6 years ago

      There’s some serious irony here.

      Reply

      stephenf

      6 years ago

      ay-yup.

      Tom Harris

      6 years ago

      So, what are we (average joe golfers) left to believe? Critical thinking requires good information, unbiased, non-judgemental. If I get a fitting and I like the club, now what am I to think. I can’t trust the info that the manufacturer or the fitter is supplying??? I guess I will have to look to independent sources….thanks MGS for this info.

      Reply

      Bruce

      6 years ago

      So, I’m not sure why you bothered to share this story. No names, no companies, & ultimately no “meat” to the rumor.

      Reply

      stephenf

      6 years ago

      It’s known as responsible journalism rather than tabloidism, and it’s hardly ever seen these days. If you have an allegation that could seriously affect a company’s business, maybe even bring it down, cost people their jobs, etc., you don’t run it unless you’re at a very high level of certainty as to the truth of the allegation. If you run it in the “I’m just quoting what the guy said” mode, just the fact that you said it at all will affect buying decisions from people who operate on a better-safe-than-sorry standard. In a competitive environment, where those customers can simply go elsewhere, it’s irresponsible to do it.

      Reply

      stephenf

      6 years ago

      This is in notable and admirable contrast to the constant “unnamed sources said X and Y” stories that are the constant fare from major media orgs these days. Where the allegations are highly negative and there is no objective proof or even a drop-dead consensus of highly reputable named sources, it’s just wrong to run them.

      LP

      6 years ago

      A tenet of sales is to never speak badly of a competitor no matter what. You can probe a client to tell you what they don’t like about your competitor and position your company as a better fit but in this scenario it’s the client bringing up their issues and you providing a solution. As a sales rep myself (in a different industry) I have learned that relationships matter most and fabricating a story like this will get you burned in the end.

      Reply

      Carolina Golfer 2

      6 years ago

      There isn’t a “like” feature for blog comments. So I’ll just quote your post and say, I agree with this 100%. As a sales rep myself, in the golf industry, I never put down a competitor, but do as you say, probe more for the customer’s needs and show them how our facility can meet those needs and present a fair price that offers them value.

      Reply

      Randy Blankenship

      6 years ago

      I wouldn’t be surprised if the sales rep was told he/she could say whatever it takes to get an edge.

      Reply

      Joseph dreitler

      6 years ago

      If a rep was told to do so by a higher up, the company is in serious trouble in more ways than one. Any business person of longer than 2 days should have got the speech from their lawyers — making false claims about our products or our competitors not only can get us sued but it can cost us major damages such as our profits, costs of the suit, attorneys’ fees and a permanent injunction. 40 years of my life and I have tried numerous ones and most settle because the $$$ are too high. Rarely is it a senior person or officer who is responsible for the great idea of “ashcanning” a competitor or making false claims about your own shampoo and its dandruff stopping ability.

      Reply

      Charles DeVerna

      6 years ago

      a sales rep make up a “lie” to make a sale? shocker

      Reply

      Ric

      6 years ago

      Very good read, I’m not surprised ! All is fair when it comes to MONEY!!
      Or the Lack of Money.. Reminds me of my Racing days , you are legal until caught.

      Reply

    Leave A Reply

    required
    required
    required (your email address will not be published)

    This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

    Golf Shafts
    Apr 14, 2024
    Testers Wanted: Autoflex Dream 7 Driver Shaft
    News
    Apr 14, 2024
    A Rare Masters ‘L’: Day Asked To Remove Sweater
    Drivers
    Apr 13, 2024
    Testers Wanted: Callaway Ai Smoke Drivers
    ENTER to WIN 3 DOZEN

    Titleist ProV1 Golf Balls

    Titleist ProV1 Golf Balls
    By signing up you agree to receive communications from MyGolfSpy and select partners in accordance with our Privacy Policy You may opt out of email messages/withdraw consent at any time.