And guess what…? No Scotty Cameron. I hope he dominates the sh-t out of this week and this year.

Hey Bushy…do you have a black mop wig by chance.:)

HAHA^^ No…

I’m not a Nike hater by any means but I still don’t see them as a real golf brand. They just want to buy cred by signing the big names. All those years with Tiger & they still don’t have the cred!

I am a bit the same way, not that their gear is no good, which is clearly not the case and that they are not a real golf brand but that they are a company built on simply buying out the best then establishing themselves in different sports. What annoys me more is that the public is so stupid to fall for the idea that this form of marketing has some kind of impact on their life when they buy something of theirs.

Took the cake for me when I started see a couple of surfers in the last couple of years with swooshes on their surf boards, next they will be manufacturing surfboards and putting out surf clothing.

Good on Rory though, can not blame him for taking the money; will be interesting to see how he goes.

Kerbox,
They would be silly not to make surfboards.
They are a sports brand, not just a golf brand

I just hate how Tiger has used Nike for years and finally, by opportunity, I get some VR’s and Rory has to copy. Pfft!

Kerbox,
They would be silly not to make surfboards.
They are a sports brand, not just a golf brand

2011 C Grade Champion Vic ISG Round #4 OOM Keysborough Golf Club
2012 B Grade Champion Paterson River ISG OOM Round #3
2012 ISG Matchplay Champion

http://www.golflink.com.au/...

They doing a left hand model

I’m not a Nike hater by any means but I still don’t see them as a real golf brand. They just want to buy cred by signing the big names. All those years with Tiger & they still don’t have the cred!

I am a bit the same way, not that their gear is no good, which is clearly not the case and that they are not a real golf brand but that they are a company built on simply buying out the best then establishing themselves in different sports. What annoys me more is that the public is so stupid to fall for the idea that this form of marketing has some kind of impact on their life when they buy something of theirs.

Took the cake for me when I started see a couple of surfers in the last couple of years with swooshes on their surf boards, next they will be manufacturing surfboards and putting out surf clothing.

Good on Rory though, can not blame him for taking the money; will be interesting to see how he goes.

Try this tLink...might serve you better with a few ‘facts’.

Why though, is the public stupid for buying products from Nike? Because they’re not a real golf brand? What makes a real golf brand? RAM? Golden Bear? Top Flite? Nikes strategy in all areas of sport has been to get in and get in at the top. So this time they’ve got the 2 big fish so to speak. Does that differ from Titleist’s strategy of buying up 1000’s of little fish to market the ProV as the #1 ball in golf? You say your not a hater yet make comments like that.

I’m not a Nike hater by any means but I still don’t see them as a real golf brand. They just want to buy cred by signing the big names. All those years with Tiger & they still don’t have the cred!

I am a bit the same way, not that their gear is no good, which is clearly not the case and that they are not a real golf brand but that they are a company built on simply buying out the best then establishing themselves in different sports. What annoys me more is that the public is so stupid to fall for the idea that this form of marketing has some kind of impact on their life when they buy something of theirs.

Took the cake for me when I started see a couple of surfers in the last couple of years with swooshes on their surf boards, next they will be manufacturing surfboards and putting out surf clothing.

Good on Rory though, can not blame him for taking the money; will be interesting to see how he goes.

Try this tLink...might serve you better with a few ‘facts’.

Why though, is the public stupid for buying products from Nike? Because they’re not a real golf brand? What makes a real golf brand? RAM? Golden Bear? Top Flite? Nikes strategy in all areas of sport has been to get in and get in at the top. So this time they’ve got the 2 big fish so to speak. Does that differ from Titleist’s strategy of buying up 1000’s of little fish to market the ProV as the #1 ball in golf? You say your not a hater yet make comments like that.

“If your not improving, your going backwards.”

I should have spelled it out better but I just meant mostly when they were a clothing/shoe brand, I am just amazed at this untouchable like image they created for themselves by buying the most elite athletes and that the psychology of it actually works consumer wise while offering absolutely nothing useful.

Do not have a problem with the practicality of their golf products, because they actually serve a purpose and if any of their gear improved my game I would probably use it, although these days there is very little between most brands product wise and I probably would lean towards more traditional brands who have been doing it for much longer and it is their core business.

Just looking at Nike and the mass psychology of marketing on a broader scale. At the end of the day they are such a massive brand that to expand they probably had no choice to force their way into other markets.

I never said I am not a hater, generally I hate most forms of advertising and people in the delusion making business, modern consumerism and the influence of advertising on the masses is pretty tragic, Nike is a great example, Red Bull is even worse.

Do I recall that you said you are not a Nike fanboy in another discussion? Is that why you gush over just about every Nike thread on this forum and jump all over any kind of negativity?

Titleist does not need to advertise that they have the best ball in golf last time I checked.

Thanks for the link by the way, I had no idea Nike owned Hurley, shows how tragic surfing has become as well, I guess I still had some glamours old school view of surfing being my favourite sport but it is just as sold out as anything these days.

Also shows half the time you do not know who owns what these days, massive conglomerates consuming everything they can and having endless labels.

It’s a bad case of tall poppy disease and old fashioned golf snobbery, nothing more.

I still can’t get over the whole “Nike is not a real golf brand” crap. What makes a “real” golf brand?

The naysayers should surely level that sort of subjective claim at TaylorMade (the self proclaimed “No 1 brand in golf”) before Nike. TM is owned by global giant Adidas. Adidas got up to its same old tricks when it bought out Adams, like it did when it bought out Reebok. Kill the opposition by acquisition.

By way of contrast, Nike has a history of growing organically. It’s happening to its golf brand. One only has to look at what it did with skateboarding. In 2002’ish Nike decided to get involved in skateboarding. Nike wasn’t considered a core skateboarding brand among the skateboarding community. It was an extremely tough market to crack & skateboarders can be very anti-anything that’s perceived to be “establishment” or “mainstream”. Through clever marketing & promotion Nike has grown to be a huge name in skateboarding.

Watch this space.

I can’t believe people would argue about golf brands being a real golf brand only because they use that golf brand.

I’m not a Nike hater by any means but I still don’t see them as a real golf brand. They just want to buy cred by signing the big names. All those years with Tiger & they still don’t have the cred!

I am a bit the same way, not that their gear is no good, which is clearly not the case and that they are not a real golf brand but that they are a company built on simply buying out the best then establishing themselves in different sports. What annoys me more is that the public is so stupid to fall for the idea that this form of marketing has some kind of impact on their life when they buy something of theirs.

Took the cake for me when I started see a couple of surfers in the last couple of years with swooshes on their surf boards, next they will be manufacturing surfboards and putting out surf clothing.

Good on Rory though, can not blame him for taking the money; will be interesting to see how he goes.

Try this tLink...might serve you better with a few ‘facts’.

Why though, is the public stupid for buying products from Nike? Because they’re not a real golf brand? What makes a real golf brand? RAM? Golden Bear? Top Flite? Nikes strategy in all areas of sport has been to get in and get in at the top. So this time they’ve got the 2 big fish so to speak. Does that differ from Titleist’s strategy of buying up 1000’s of little fish to market the ProV as the #1 ball in golf? You say your not a hater yet make comments like that.

“If your not improving, your going backwards.”

I should have spelled it out better but I just meant mostly when they were a clothing/shoe brand, I am just amazed at this untouchable like image they created for themselves by buying the most elite athletes and that the psychology of it actually works consumer wise while offering absolutely nothing useful.

Do not have a problem with the practicality of their golf products, because they actually serve a purpose and if any of their gear improved my game I would probably use it, although these days there is very little between most brands product wise and I probably would lean towards more traditional brands who have been doing it for much longer and it is their core business.

Just looking at Nike and the mass psychology of marketing on a broader scale. At the end of the day they are such a massive brand that to expand they probably had no choice to force their way into other markets.

I never said I am not a hater, generally I hate most forms of advertising and people in the delusion making business, modern consumerism and the influence of advertising on the masses is pretty tragic, Nike is a great example, Red Bull is even worse.

Do I recall that you said you are not a Nike fanboy in another discussion? Is that why you gush over just about every Nike thread on this forum and jump all over any kind of negativity?

Titleist does not need to advertise that they have the best ball in golf last time I checked.

I just can’t see how Nike is different to any other multinational company out there, pushing dreams to invariably make money. Is it because they are the best at it?

I think that has to be it.

As for Titleist not having to advertise….? That’s the biggest joke I have ever heard. Check your latest golf digest magazine or simply watch a Golf Channel show, every spare minute is “Titleist, the number one ball in golf…” Golf Channel is sponsored by Titleist you know, as well as the PGA Tour coverage.. That’s their trick-getting you without you even knowing…

It’s all the same sh!t, different smell.

I’m not a Nike hater by any means but I still don’t see them as a real golf brand. They just want to buy cred by signing the big names. All those years with Tiger & they still don’t have the cred!

I am a bit the same way, not that their gear is no good, which is clearly not the case and that they are not a real golf brand but that they are a company built on simply buying out the best then establishing themselves in different sports. What annoys me more is that the public is so stupid to fall for the idea that this form of marketing has some kind of impact on their life when they buy something of theirs.

Took the cake for me when I started see a couple of surfers in the last couple of years with swooshes on their surf boards, next they will be manufacturing surfboards and putting out surf clothing.

Good on Rory though, can not blame him for taking the money; will be interesting to see how he goes.

Try this tLink...might serve you better with a few ‘facts’.

Why though, is the public stupid for buying products from Nike? Because they’re not a real golf brand? What makes a real golf brand? RAM? Golden Bear? Top Flite? Nikes strategy in all areas of sport has been to get in and get in at the top. So this time they’ve got the 2 big fish so to speak. Does that differ from Titleist’s strategy of buying up 1000’s of little fish to market the ProV as the #1 ball in golf? You say your not a hater yet make comments like that.

“If your not improving, your going backwards.”

I should have spelled it out better but I just meant mostly when they were a clothing/shoe brand, I am just amazed at this untouchable like image they created for themselves by buying the most elite athletes and that the psychology of it actually works consumer wise while offering absolutely nothing useful.

Do not have a problem with the practicality of their golf products, because they actually serve a purpose and if any of their gear improved my game I would probably use it, although these days there is very little between most brands product wise and I probably would lean towards more traditional brands who have been doing it for much longer and it is their core business.

Just looking at Nike and the mass psychology of marketing on a broader scale. At the end of the day they are such a massive brand that to expand they probably had no choice to force their way into other markets.

I never said I am not a hater, generally I hate most forms of advertising and people in the delusion making business, modern consumerism and the influence of advertising on the masses is pretty tragic, Nike is a great example, Red Bull is even worse.

Do I recall that you said you are not a Nike fanboy in another discussion? Is that why you gush over just about every Nike thread on this forum and jump all over any kind of negativity?

Titleist does not need to advertise that they have the best ball in golf last time I checked.

It may appear that I am a Nike fanboy, however I’m more a Rory fan than a Nike fan but I do use alot of their stuff.

I just can’t see how Nike is different to any other multinational company out there, pushing dreams to invariably make money. Is it because they are the best at it?

I think that has to be it.

As for Titleist not having to advertise….? That’s the biggest joke I have ever heard. Check your latest golf digest magazine or simply watch a Golf Channel show, every spare minute is “Titleist, the number one ball in golf…” Golf Channel is sponsored by Titleist you know, as well as the PGA Tour coverage.. That’s their trick-getting you without you even knowing…

It’s all the same sh!t, different smell.

“If your not improving, your going backwards.”

I guess I do try to give more credence to brands who built themselves from scratch simply on reputation building useful quality gear and who specialise in their area, over someone that simply buys out the most elite athletes in a sport to create an image then works their way into the market; but I am probably being nostalgic.

And of course Nike becomes more of a target for me because of their ability to push bullshit on the masses and be so successful at it.

I did not mean that Titleist do not advertise that they have the best ball in the game, only that they do not have to advertise it from what I am aware. Not that I would ever pay for a dozen brand new when I can get a dozen mint off ebay for $20 lol

Yes a lot of the same sh*t, different smells.

TheTrueReview a lot of people do aim it at TM, apparently we should have gotten 10-15 yards each year for the past 5 years and should be hitting out 3 woods 300 yards by now. Being owned by Adidas explains a lot though about their advertising tactics.

TheTrueReview a lot of people do aim it at TM, apparently we should have gotten 10-15 yards each year for the past 5 years and should be hitting out 3 woods 300 yards by now. Being owned by Adidas explains a lot though about their advertising tactics.

Fair comment. But to go further … Puma buys out Cobra. No one says “bastards, they’re trying to buy a golf brand”. Fila buy Titleist & Footjoy from Fortune Brands. No one says “bastards”. Nike try to grow organically & increase its presence by sponsoring Rory McIlroy. All of a sudden the critics come out.

TheTrueReview a lot of people do aim it at TM, apparently we should have gotten 10-15 yards each year for the past 5 years and should be hitting out 3 woods 300 yards by now. Being owned by Adidas explains a lot though about their advertising tactics.

Fair comment. But to go further … Puma buys out Cobra. No one says “bastards”, they’re trying to buy a golf brand. Fila buy Titleist & Footjoy from Fortune Brands. No one says “bastards”. Nike try to grow organically & increase its presence by sponsoring Rory McIlroy. All of a sudden the critics come out.

I just wanted to make all that smaller and really cool to look at :)

Yeah kerbox I totally get what your saying. If you look at it from a business perspective Nike has been in the club/ball game barely 15 years… Obviously they were giants in their other idustries prior to sponsoring Tiger and had to play catch up to try and develop their equipment in an already competitive market. I think the only way for that to be successful was to pay an emerging superstar like Tiger to market to the majority of customers out there. It’s pretty clear that they are successful at implementing their strategy as Nike inc are a very rich and powerful organisation and Nike Golf is only going to get stronger in the future.

In the end I am a fan of all the top brands. My bag is a testement to that. But somehow the whole Nike is garbage-not a real brand debate just annoys me…

Bump… that does look cool, good work.

I posted this in another thread but anyway here they are again …

What I would like to know is, how many Number 1 golfers in the world have changed their club sponsor, who & from what to what, & did they improve as a golfer or did they take the money & run?

Earning $68,000 plus a day without swinging a club, will soon stuff your golf game up.

If Rory didn’t change for the money, why would/did he change?

I hope someone can find the answers.

A change is as good as a holiday.

How can you get better then no.1 ?

I reckon the deal is because of money, he’s earned it in my books.

What I would like to know is, how many Number 1 golfers in the world have changed their club sponsor, who & from what to what, & did they improve as a golfer or did they take the money & run?

golf an infinite journey

Didn’t Greg Norman change to/from Cobra when he was No. 1?

The change didn’t seem to harm his game.

Will take time to adjust, gear is fine, winner last week PGA Tour 23 under and 7 under already today using Nike equipment.Surprised Rors uses their putter so early though.

Nike method major winners hmmm 2

Scotty camerons = shit loads

I have hit a method…Felt ok but didnt putt well with it

Never had a bad SC putter…Owned, A Del mar and laguna 1.5

Sorry but they crap over the method I tried.

Dave1 .. U talk utter shit.. Apparently everything u ever buy is fantastic, for a few months .. And then it’s shit coz u can’t use it after a while . . U need to read back through some of your post and realise what friggin shit u talk ..