ADVERTISEMENT
| 19
Over Pay And Under Deliver, Golf’s New Motto?
By Terry McAndrew
Golf has enjoyed a strong run
largely influenced by the high
tide raises all boats theory. In
the US, it was able to overcharge
for greens fees, private
memberships and equipment
when money was loose and fast.
Since the tide has disappeared
thanks to a recession, very few
are still interested in overpaying,
let alone when it comes to golf.
Even the absolute peak of the
pyramid, the PGA Tour has
been challenged to find new
or replacement sponsors for its
tournaments. When it comes
to making a choice between
cutting marketing budgets or
payroll, the decision has been
a simply one for corporate
America.
It’s been a long time since there
was a game-changing product
introduced, which hasn’t helped.
The gold standard for balls in
the US, the ProV1, is coming
up on its 10-year anniversary
since making its debut.
Oversized titanium drivers are
commonplace and no longer
carry the same sex appeal as
they did when they first became
the norm. The infamous 15-20
more yards in distance that
came with each new model no
longer seems to be the battle
cry, in part since the ruling
bodies have drawn a line in the
sand. Finding a game changer
is nearly impossible these
days despite all the hyperbole
about technology in golf
equipment. That isn’t intended
to shortchange the efforts of
equipment companies or their
research and development
arms. Simply put, recreational
players are bad for a reason and
nothing exists in a plug and play
application that can transform
their game into finding fairways
and greens that falls within
the rules. With the global
recession and the arms race
for equipment performance
appearing to have reached its
limit, it could be classified as the
perfect storm.
Meanwhile, the show ponies
on the PGA Tour continue
to parade the latest and
greatest gadgets but does it
matter anymore? Equipment
companies in particular pay
a lot of money to associate
with these players and in turn
expect validation with their
efforts. In order for this strategy
to potentially work, there must
be a quantum leap product
such as the original Big Bertha
driver, 2-Ball putter or ProV1
golf ball to excite consumers
to purchase and demand the
product. Spending $500,000 for
Tim Clark (no offense) to wear
a Srixon hat, as some believe
the deal to be, represents zero
fiscal responsibility even when
times are considered good.
The competition between
manufacturers became a
money-spending contest in
the late 90s early 2000s, when
it could be argued that sales
allowed for it at the time. The
cost of doing business has gone
up in part due to this behavior.
With all of the main players
having essentially full lines
of equipment, footwear, and
apparel its become a head to
toe to full bag deal that played
mightily to the player’s wallet.
Limited supply of extraordinary
players to endorse your
product + high demand by
manufacturers = exorbitant
payouts.
The strategy of validating
a product by tour player
usage remains useful but less
important in the advertising/
marketing mix today compared
to 10 years ago. The effect on
the average consumer buying
decision is debatable in part
since a compelling new product
isn’t as tempting as before. The
obscene expenses associated
with it ultimately drive up
the cost of the product to
consumers, which in the current
economy isn’t acceptable. It also
can be stated that effectively all
of the major available products
(past and present) are very
good and indistinguishable
in comparison to each other.
Equipment manufacturers are
essentially trapped in their
own viscous circle with respect
to this over priced s