What a disgrace to a Gofing Legend

[GolfSpy Dave]

I think selling Hogan clubs would increase Callaway's bottom line. Callaway is mostly known for their GI clubs, not so much for their forged ones. Hogan could fill a niche for Callaway that they previously had filled only with the X-forged.

The Hogan brand would not be needed for this though. A new hot set that multiple players are using would met the same need even with callaway branding. A Hogan name on a callaway club is still callaway. It would be interesting too to see the % of money they make on the GI and SGI irons vs. their player offerings. Say player clubs represent 10 million dollars and the others 200 million industry wide. Why try and fight for the smaller pie?

[Shambles]

The Hogan brand would not be needed for this though. A new hot set that multiple players are using would met the same need even with callaway branding. A Hogan name on a callaway club is still callaway. It would be interesting too to see the % of money they make on the GI and SGI irons vs. their player offerings. Say player clubs represent 10 million dollars and the others 200 million industry wide. Why try and fight for the smaller pie?

 

I think players clubs are a heftier portion of the market than your given. A lot of newbies want such sets to sort of advertise skills they don't necessarily have. However that problem is diluted because players clubs today are much easier to use than the miniscule clubs of long ago. I still remember how the ball seemed larger than my 3 Iron of long ago, and I was using the smaller English ball.

 

I suppose that Callaway wanted some Hogan owned patents, facilities/valuable employees and hope to access the built in market that the name brings. There are a lot of parts to any company.

 

 

Shambles

[GolfSpy Dave]

I think players clubs are a heftier portion of the market than your given. A lot of newbies want such sets to sort of advertise skills they don't necessarily have. However that problem is diluted because players clubs today are much easier to use than the miniscule clubs of long ago. I still remember how the ball seemed larger than my 3 Iron of long ago, and I was using the smaller English ball.

 

I suppose that Callaway wanted some Hogan owned patents, facilities/valuable employees and hope to access the built in market that the name brings. There are a lot of parts to any company.

 

 

Shambles

You may be right on the numbers, they were pulled out of the air.

I wonder where one could actually find numbers like that. IT would make an interesting read.

[Dave in Asia]

As a sort of amateur photography enthusiast, I enjoy reading a photography weblog called, the Online Photographer, which is hosted by Mike Johnston. I came across an article on the ownership of a 'struggling' camera manufacturer that has always been a real icon - Leica. While I know that supporters of the Hogan line of clubs are probably not as fanatical - present participants of this thread aside - as many 'Leicaphiles', this article nevertheless presents an interesting view and may give us thought as to whether relative behemoths like Callaway or TM could have ever been expected to save the enthusiast brands Hogan and Maxfli, respectively.

 

If you're interested in the website, you can read it here. For those who would rather just read the article, it follows:

 

The Future of Leica

 

Some while back, Michael Reichmann of The Luminous Landscape posted "An Open Letter to Leica" subtitled "A Modest Proposal for Reinventing the M Series." Not long after, Michael published a response by Thom Hogan of ByThom.com under the title, "Thom Hogan Considers—What's Next for Leica." Both Michael and Thom speculated about what sort of products they think Leica needs to offer in the future—to quote Michael's article, he's answering the question, "what should the next M series Leica be like?" A perfectly sensible question.

 

Far be it from me to argue with either Thom or Michael. (And I'm not; their opinions stand for themselves.) But as Michael said, "the ideas that I'm putting forward are worth a public debate."

 

So here's my modest little contribution to the debate. I think the future of Leica is now.

 

As the great Inigo Montoya would say, 'let me 'splain'

I'm neither a Leica insider nor a Leica user (well, I've been using an M7 right lately, but it's not mine, it's a loaner from a friend). And I'm only basing the following on logic, which can easily lead us astray. But here's where logic takes me:

 

1. Old, traditional camera company falls on hard times, is sold by its founding owners (the Leitz family) who don't want to preside over its demise, changes hands several times, flirts dangerously with bankruptcy.

 

2. Passionate and independently wealthy enthusiast buys company.

 

3. New owner sinks big money into said company. I mean big—according to rumors, on the order of a hundred million euros or more. Again, I'm not an insider, so I don't know this for a fact, but that's the story.

 

4. After some rough water and a few mistakes along the way, the new owner's team comes up with an outstanding and highly sensible 3-tiered range of products. There is:

 

a. The Leica M9, a "full-frame" digital replica of the historical company's best-known and best-loved (and, yes, iconic) product. Also, it's exactly what most enthusiasts wanted. Also, it's the second iteration of the concept, fixing the flaws and addressing the drawbacks of the first generation.

 

b. Below that, the Leica X1, a premium semi-compact with a large APS-C-sized sensor and a beautiful fixed lens. Astutely judged as, if you'll forgive the phrase, a casual camera for the serious user. Or as a smart (in both senses) fashion accessory for the casual user. Just as astutely, positioned so as to complement but not compete with the main product. Affordably* priced at ~$2k.

 

c. Above the M9, the all-new Leica S2, a clean-sheet camera system conceived from first principles. Well positioned to appeal to not one but two markets: the type of pros who need to be concerned about their image, particularly fashion shooters of various descriptions, and very-well-heeled amateur enthusiasts who want the latest and the best and the most prestigious. (An S2 on your shoulder is the only thing guaranteed to make an M9 owner envious!)

 

'Psst, buddy, wanna buy a loss leader?'

It makes utterly no sense to me when I encounter various hosers on sundry forums opining that "Canon should buy Leica" or "Panasonic should buy Leica" or somesuch similar nonsense. What, do they mean with its angel? Leica lost four-point-something million euros last year. Should Canon say, "sure, we'll buy Leica, just as long as Herr Kaufmann is included in the deal, and he promises to continue sinking tens of millions of euros from his family's personal fortune into what will no longer be his company"? How does that make any sense at all, to anyone? The answer to "X should buy Leica" is not only "No—no, it shouldn't," and it's not even "Shut up," although both those responses are perfectly reasonable ones. It's that the perfect guy already bought Leica. Leica's owner is a seriously rich guy who loves the marque and is a passionate photography enthusiast and is willing and able to lose huge boatloads of money lovingly nurturing the company and grooming its product line. Nobody could fantasize a better owner for Leica than Leica already has.

 

And that's where I come down on this "future of Leica" thing. You're holding out for the future? The current cameras just aren't good enough? So, what, you're going to hold off and wait until the next time somebody sinks €100 million into a money-losing company and comes up with an ideal product lineup?!?

 

Really?

 

My opinion: the future is now. Right now. 2010 is 26 years past 1984 and nine years past 2001. For anybody who ever wanted a digital Leica, 2010 is the top of the bell curve; the best time for the company since 1958 (i.e., the year before Nikon introduced the F); the perfect time to jump on board.

 

The company has already given us more than anybody ever had a right to expect—more than reasonable people were even hoping for ten and twenty years ago. Leica can't make enough M9's and X1's to even keep up with demand. B&H won't even let you pre-order an X1 (I think that means their current pre-orders exceed the number of units they're expecting in their next shipment—I'll try to check on that).

 

Finally, before anyone brings up the obvious: yeah, time will go on. History didn't end in 1992. Newer products will continue to replace older ones. Even Studebaker, once the largest maker of wheeled vehicles in the world, couldn't sell horse-drawn buggies past 1919. The years do keep coming. With luck, the current ownership of Leica will prosper, and its team will come up with products in the future that will be appropriate to future conditions. But...this is the golden hour. Where Leica is concerned, for all practical purposes, the future's here.

 

Mike

 

 

(BTW, I have a newbie posting question -- how do I get notified (by email preferably) if someone replies to my post? Or do I just need to subscribe to that particular thread? Thanks in advance.)

[Dave in Asia]

 

(BTW, I have a newbie posting question -- how do I get notified (by email preferably) if someone replies to my post? Or do I just need to subscribe to that particular thread? Thanks in advance.)

 

 

A quick search and I think I'm able to answer my own question -- 'configure post options'

[JohnBarry]

Make a custom, component line, for club builders and golf stores, for a total custom fit.

 

Or

 

Sell the Brand Name

[Jeeves]

My backup sticks are Apex Blades from like 1992... tough to hit, but when I am swinging good there is nothing better.

[GolfSpy Dave]

Very cool read Dave, thanks.

I think that the Hogan thing is a little different too because Callaway already owns the name, but is choosing not to make any product.

To have the rich Hogan fanatic buy the name and start making old school Hogan type clubs like with the cameras above, would be fantastic!

[NGage]

Hogan is just too difficult for me to figure out. He's an enigma wrapped up in a mystery. You hear so many good and bad things about him....it would have been interesting to really know who he was.

 

I wish I had taken the job I was offered at Shady Oaks back in '96 or '97.

[HoosierGolfer]

It's all about marketing. A LARGE number of people who took up the game in the past twenty years or so have no idea who BH is and even more so for the younger bunch coming up today, and a good many of those very young players are out of touch even now with Tiger as he has been around now on the big stage for close to fifteen years.

The new/young players of today are buying what is cool or in style and they are looking at Rory Mac....Ricky.....etc and buying what they play.

The Hogan brand was dead before Callaway bought it, they just closed the lid.

[GolfSpy Dave]

It's all about marketing. A LARGE number of people who took up the game in the past twenty years or so have no idea who BH is and even more so for the younger bunch coming up today, and a good many of those very young players are out of touch even now with Tiger as he has been around now on the big stage for close to fifteen years.

The new/young players of today are buying what is cool or in style and they are looking at Rory Mac....Ricky.....etc and buying what they play.

The Hogan brand was dead before Callaway bought it, they just closed the lid.

Strong point, indeed. My Willie McCovey baseball bat would not sell like a Derek Jeter bat today.

[Addicted2Golf]

It's all about marketing. A LARGE number of people who took up the game in the past twenty years or so have no idea who BH is and even more so for the younger bunch coming up today, and a good many of those very young players are out of touch even now with Tiger as he has been around now on the big stage for close to fifteen years.

The new/young players of today are buying what is cool or in style and they are looking at Rory Mac....Ricky.....etc and buying what they play.

The Hogan brand was dead before Callaway bought it, they just closed the lid.

 

 

So we're chalking this up to the ignorance of youth? Well, I must admit that it's a fair point. I was scanning radio and heard Billy Idol come on the local oldies station. Hearing that made me want to vomit.

[HoosierGolfer]

Clubs with a professional's name on them have come and gone over the years. It is all about how marketable the name is at any given time. I think the BH name has long passed but you never know I guess. They could do something with it down the road, but I don't see it happening any time soon.

I agree that there was a time when that name just said high quality clubs.

[JohnBarry]

Calling all My Spy staff and members of the forums, can someone take a guess at what buying the Ben Hogan Brand Name might cost. Not looking for guesses, but educated guesses.