Equipment Fails

[smahon87]

Surely part of the answer to that is 'have Tiger and Rory playing our clubs' - which they managed. How did they not reach the top two if it wasn't because their clubs just weren't as good as other brands?

I think a lot of it had to do with traditionalists who had more confidence in choosing a well established brand like TM, Ping, Titleist etc. particularly when price was more or less the same. My own father wouldn't touch a Nike club and was always trashing them. I think he blamed them for Rorys loss of form too with no real evidence.

The other thing they badly got wrong IMO was the look of the clubs. A lot of golfers don't want "loud" clubs like the VRS and especially the Vapor were. Nike have this strange obsession with the "volt" colour and stick it on everything across all sports but it really looked bad on the irons and drivers IMO. The bright blue head with volt Nike symbol was eye catching on tv but your average golfer doesn't want that. If I'm struggling with my driving the last thing I want is to be pulling out a flashy club in front of playing partners.

 

[Grant85]

Tiger's irons have always (more or less) been copies of his old Mizuno MP29s, and the Titleist and Nike irons he used certainly were.

I am not sure Nike pulled out because their products were considered bad, a few players kept them in the bag after the company stopped, Tommy Fleetwood in particular, but more because they couldn't make the sort of money they wanted from a market in which they were not dominant. The Vapor Fly, blue with the yellow swoosh near the bottom of the shaft, was a pretty decent club. The Nike VR Pro were also well liked.

I think this is the case.

I'm sure Nike were making money, but they just got fed up with the millions required for R&D and sponsorship deals in an uber competitive market where 4 or 5 other companies had similar business models. They also possibly assessed the golf market as a mature one that wasn't really getting bigger.

Think of other markets - they might sign a deal to make Barcelona kits... once the deal is done they are the only company who can make those kits and you have a fairly captive audience for 5 years, or however long the deal lasts. Realistically they are only competing with Adidas for the top kit deals for most big clubs. With Umbro, Puma & a few others tending to play in smaller markets.

In Golf, Nike could sign the best 3 or 4 players in the world as brand ambassadors, but there are still TM, Callaway, Titleist playing at a similar level with a stable of top players, not to mention Ping, Cobra, Cleveland / Srixon, PXG, Mizuno, Wilson, Honma etc all in and around the same market, getting sponsorship deals and releasing and marketing equipment.

I'd guess Nike made the decision, 'we'd be better off spending £100M sponsoring a top club to make their kits for the next 5 years and make a gazillion dollars selling shirts with a 1,000% mark-up, compared with squeezing everything we've got to make relative pennies on a $300 driver'

 

[Ethan]

Surely part of the answer to that is 'have Tiger and Rory playing our clubs' - which they managed. How did they not reach the top two if it wasn't because their clubs just weren't as good as other brands?

They probably thought that player usage would drive sales better than it does. I think if they had stuck with it, they would have become one of the top brands, up with TM and Callaway, and ahead of Titleist for equipment (but not balls).

 

[Foxholer]

This analysis could help!
https://www.businessinsider.com/why...nd bags.&text=Nike was one of the,Tiger Woods.

 

[Deleted member 29109]

They probably thought that player usage would drive sales better than it does. I think if they had stuck with it, they would have become one of the top brands, up with TM and Callaway, and ahead of Titleist for equipment (but not balls).

Some Nike kit was every bit as good as anything else for the average golfer. I played the Ignite 410 for years still have it in fact. But it's now been replaced by a Ping as its a but unforgiving with my current swing. I still use a Covert 3 wood.

The pro combo irons are still consider a classic and one of the best iron sets by many.

Like others have said. They just weren't traditional looking enough for many. And a lot of people couldn't get round the trainer manufacturer making golf clubs. But will funnily enough by TM products.

 

[HampshireHog]

The perception was the Stage 2 was the same club with a different paint job, nobody bought it, people who had paid full price for RBZ1 were annoyed, retailers were shafted because they had stock they could no longer shift at full price.

That may be true of the woods but the Irons were a massive upgrade RBZ1 irons were horrible chunky affairs with a massive sole. Still using my RBZ2 irons today and only upgraded the woods for M4’s a couple of years ago maybe they were only a coat of paint away from their predecessors but a fantastic buy for me upgrading from a R7 Driver And R5 fairways.

 

[DanFST]

Some Nike kit was every bit as good as anything else for the average golfer. I played the Ignite 410 for years still have it in fact. But it's now been replaced by a Ping as its a but unforgiving with my current swing. I still use a Covert 3 wood.

The pro combo irons are still consider a classic and one of the best iron sets by many.

Like others have said. They just weren't traditional looking enough for many. And a lot of people couldn't get round the trainer manufacturer making golf clubs. But will funnily enough by TM products.

Vouch for that, I have 3 Covert 3 woods with blueboard shafts. As it's the best club i've ever hit.

(I've taken out temporarily for a sim to match my other metals, but not sure it will last)

 

[Deleted member 15344]

I guess it was you want to class as a fail ?

Is it new ideas that have bombed ? Or is it just new equipment that didn’t sell well

Boom Boom was perfect example of an idea that bombed

Things like the SLDR sold very well

No idea how the square drivers got on but didn’t seem to last

But it’s hard to think of recent ideas that have failed but there will be things that just don’t sell

TM Aeroburner for example
Nike Covert Driver

 

[Deleted member 18588]

I believe Nike, rather like Adidas with TM, came to realise that the golf market was of insufficient size to be worthy of the time and expense needed to achieve No 1 or 2.

If I remember correctly the figures I saw suggested that the worldwide golf market is smaller than Nike's turnover.

 

[USER1999]

An epic fail was Honma thinking JR could play their clubs.

 

[Jimaroid]

An epic fail was Honma thinking JR could play their clubs.

JR's form dipped more because of Sean Foley than his clubs, so I'd put both him and the clubs in the fail bin. At least they've split now, might be too late for JR's chances though.

 

[Deleted member 3432]

Stack and Tilt.

 

[Imurg]

Odyssey Red Ball putter...
Anyone ever seen one?

 

[sunshine]

Things like the SLDR sold very well

No it really didn't.

The M1, which replaced the SLDR, had far higher sales.

 

[sunshine]

Like others have said. They just weren't traditional looking enough for many. And a lot of people couldn't get round the trainer manufacturer making golf clubs. But will funnily enough by TM products.

A bit like Titleist, which is owned by Fila!

 

[DanFST]

No it really didn't.

The M1, which replaced the SLDR, had far higher sales.

SLDR was the No.1 selling premium Driver in 2014. (Premium is over $299)

 

[Deleted member 15344]

No it really didn't.

The M1, which replaced the SLDR, had far higher sales.

The M1 did sell well but from what I recall ( maybe wrong ) but the SLDR also sold very well - certainly more than its rivals at the time

I thought the M2 sold better ?

 

[sunshine]

The M1 did sell well but from what I recall ( maybe wrong ) but the SLDR also sold very well - certainly more than its rivals at the time

I thought the M2 sold better ?

Can't remember the stats for M1 v M2, but the M1 was the direct replacement for the SLDR, whereas the M2 replaced the Jet Speed

 

[sunshine]

SLDR was the No.1 selling premium Driver in 2014. (Premium is over $299)

Again I can't remember the exact stats, but the SLDR sales were well below TM's expected performance for its premium driver. You've got to consider that in 2012 TM had over 50% share of the metal woods market, so the SLDR may have been the no.1 seller, but the volumes were way down. M1 marked the start of the recovery.

 

[DanFST]

Again I can't remember the exact stats, but the SLDR sales were well below TM's expected performance for its premium driver. You've got to consider that in 2012 TM had over 50% share of the metal woods market, so the SLDR may have been the no.1 seller, but the volumes were way down. M1 marked the start of the recovery.

"The strong momentum behind SLDR comes on the back of another strong year for TaylorMade, with the business gaining #1 status in Metalwood in 2013 for sell through in both Sales Value and Units across UK, Germany, France and, for the first time, in Sweden."

And then following up the loft up guarantee campaign in 2014: Sales in the UK market increased by 77% during the first month of the promotion and due to this we decided to extend the Loft Up Guarantee offer until 31st August 2014 so more golfers can take advantage of this fantastic offer,” commented Jason Howarth, Category Director, TaylorMade-adidas Golf.

Overall it definitely wasn't a flop at all. In fact i can't even remember what the other metal-wood was called, so that can't be taking the sales. Also not sure why I'm defending the SLDR so much.