NPG Episode 39: Has Callaway Golf Lost Their Mojo?

[GolfSpy MPR]

2:44 - TaylorMade Driving Relief
13:55 - Has Callaway Golf Lost Their Mojo?
20:33 - The Truth About Made-For Shafts
45:10 - Vokey's Wedge Works K-Grind
1:03:24 - What Is The HYPE METER?
1:07:00 - #MyTubSpy
1:16:07 - CBD Debacle

 Listen to NPG:

• SoundCloud: https://soundcloud.com/mygolfspy/no-putts-given-39
• iTunes: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/has-callaway-golf-lost-their-mojo-npg-39/id1356729135?i=1000475503226

Watch NPG:

• YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64PZdCt5U6M

[fixyurdivot]

Just listened to most of the podcast - another great discussion, particularly around the stock vs. custom built for shafts. The composite golf shaft market seems very similar to that of fly fishing rods.  As a former, part time hobby, custom rod builder, I had the opportunity to see a little of what went on behind the curtains.  A handful of rod blank mfg's. produced the vast majority of rods marketed by the big name brands.  True, they defined key design requirements that result in the rods performance, and its look, but those differences more often than not were not significant.

Anyway, I digress.  What was not discussed is whether the vast majority of players would honestly see a performance difference between the mass produced version shafts and the custom built version?  Numerous head to head blind tests of fly rods result in a mid range (price) rod coming out on or near the top.  In both markets, those mid point products have to offer great performance relative to the competition in order to survive. Further, they typically are refined to meet the needs of that giant region under the bell curve - where both performance and price crossover. Perhaps it's just my dubious of marketing DNA showing through here, but it seems that the custom built composite golf shaft industry is at least 97% hype... at least for 97% of golfers. 

 

 

[BrownBearGolf]

Great analogy. 

[aerospace_ray]

The Truth about made for shaft minutes definitely got my attention. Interesting information regarding the talent that recently left Callaway. That could have repercussions for a company if they don't replace that level of creativity/talent and/or adapt their business models to compensate accordingly.  

[Greenside]

On the discussion about "made for" vs. "after market" shafts: I have been fit for drivers three times since 2009, and in all cases one of the stock shafts gave me best or "near best" numbers. Granted, I only have 87 MPH driver clubhead speed. But, I'm not going to pay an extra $350 upcharge for a driver shaft that gives me six more yards in distance.

A related issue is swing precision. My swing is not as precise as someone who is a 2 HDCP. Thus, they would likely benefit more from the narrow performance window of a-m than me.

Also, the "made for" shafts, as you correctly remarked, are often last year's after-market shaft. This is like in the early 2000s in personal computers: last year's "screamin' machine" is this year's stock model. The year 2 item, be it a computer or golf shaft, has lower costs in part because of economies of scale and leveraging past R&D.

Related topic: you needed to get a better handle on explaining fixed costs vs. variable costs, and economies of scale. One of the biggest fixed costs is R&D, as you all have noted.  If we have the R&D all done for a Speeder X1 after-market, we may tweak it as a shaft profile that fits a lot of people that will play our new driver, and call it the Speeder X2A. But, as a "made for" shaft we will sell 20 million of them rather than 1 million of last year's a-m Speeder X1. The economies of scale for the 20-fold leap in numbers sold makes for a lower per-unit cost.

Finally, will a respected shaft maker risk putting junk materials into a "made for" shaft?

When someone shows me an after-market shaft, once I see them hit the ball, I sense the a-m benefit is often 80% prestige and 20% performance.

[Quigleyd]

14 hours ago, Greenside said:

On the discussion about "made for" vs. "after market" shafts: I have been fit for drivers three times since 2009, and in all cases one of the stock shafts gave me best or "near best" numbers. Granted, I only have 87 MPH driver clubhead speed. But, I'm not going to pay an extra $350 upcharge for a driver shaft that gives me six more yards in distance.

A related issue is swing precision. My swing is not as precise as someone who is a 2 HDCP. Thus, they would likely benefit more from the narrow performance window of a-m than me.

Also, the "made for" shafts, as you correctly remarked, are often last year's after-market shaft. This is like in the early 2000s in personal computers: last year's "screamin' machine" is this year's stock model. The year 2 item, be it a computer or golf shaft, has lower costs in part because of economies of scale and leveraging past R&D.

Related topic: you needed to get a better handle on explaining fixed costs vs. variable costs, and economies of scale. One of the biggest fixed costs is R&D, as you all have noted.  If we have the R&D all done for a Speeder X1 after-market, we may tweak it as a shaft profile that fits a lot of people that will play our new driver, and call it the Speeder X2A. But, as a "made for" shaft we will sell 20 million of them rather than 1 million of last year's a-m Speeder X1. The economies of scale for the 20-fold leap in numbers sold makes for a lower per-unit cost.

Finally, will a respected shaft maker risk putting junk materials into a "made for" shaft?

When someone shows me an after-market shaft, once I see them hit the ball, I sense the a-m benefit is often 80% prestige and 20% performance.

 

There is a difference between made for and stock. Stock is just a no up charge shaft. Many times there is no difference between a stock and an aftermarket shaft. Then there is made for. These are watered down shafts that look like aftermarket shafts but under the paint they are not the same. 

 

[Quigleyd]

I enjoyed this podcast. i am curious though, regardless of Callaway possibly losing "mojo". Have they lost any steam? They are still the market leader right? 

[Greenside]

On 5/27/2020 at 2:05 PM, Quigleyd said:

There is a difference between made for and stock. Stock is just a no up charge shaft. Many times there is no difference between a stock and an aftermarket shaft. Then there is made for. These are watered down shafts that look like aftermarket shafts but under the paint they are not the same. 

I'm familiar with Speeder shafts, and the made-for of year Two of a model looks similar to the year One after-market custom shaft, but are not exact duplicates. Likewise, the specs are similar, but not exact. (Given, the specs for the year Two made-for shafts often have less detail available than that for the year One aftermarket version.)

As I noted earlier, made for varieties of shafts are often selected for the sub-groups most likely to buy a particular club. Again, those who could benefit from a more specific shaft can get it, sometimes for upcharge, sometimes not.

I've been fitted for drivers several times, and the made-for gave numbers equivalent to performance of aftermarkets. And, the fitted "made for" always gave me a driver that outperformed my previous model.

So, could you please define "watered down?" Not really sure what you mean.

Finally, a repeat of a May 27 question: Will a respected shaft maker risk putting junk materials into a "made for" shaft?

[Quigleyd]

4 hours ago, Greenside said:

I'm familiar with Speeder shafts, and the made-for of year Two of a model looks similar to the year One after-market custom shaft, but are not exact duplicates. Likewise, the specs are similar, but not exact. (Given, the specs for the year Two made-for shafts often have less detail available than that for the year One aftermarket version.)

As I noted earlier, made for varieties of shafts are often selected for the sub-groups most likely to buy a particular club. Again, those who could benefit from a more specific shaft can get it, sometimes for upcharge, sometimes not.

I've been fitted for drivers several times, and the made-for gave numbers equivalent to performance of aftermarkets. And, the fitted "made for" always gave me a driver that outperformed my previous model.

So, could you please define "watered down?" Not really sure what you mean.

Finally, a repeat of a May 27 question: Will a respected shaft maker risk putting junk materials into a "made for" shaft?

The current best example is the ventus shaft in the sim drivers. It is not the same shaft as the after market shaft. It has the same name, same bend profile but is. It the same construction, not the same materials, lacks the velocore. Hence watered down.

[Greenside]

@Quigleyd,

I found a Stock vs. Premium shaft thread from February.

https://forum.mygolfspy.com/topic/36489-stock-vs-premium-shafts-from-the-same-oem/?do=findComment&comment=596553

The Ventus shaft is an example. Basically, the aftermarket Ventus contains the Pitch 70 carbon fibers which give it an extra low-torque, low-spin profile. The "made for" Ventus lacks the Pitch 70 weave.

One thread respondent @chisag is a +1.2 HDCP who gives personal examples of the differents. He notes that for those with medium swing speed, the "made for" structure is probably a good thing. And, I'm one of those guys with sub-90 MPH driver CHS that would benefit from the "made for" shaft version. Those {low torque  +  low spin} shafts give me superb line, but fly low and don't carry 200 yards. I need adequate spin to get the ball launched properly.

chisag further noted that along with swing speed, how aggressive you are at transition affects your Ventus shaft choice.

If you want to make the case that the whole aftermarket vs. made-for reality is fuzzy to most golfers, I agree. But, average golfers like me can do quite well with "made for" shafts - as long as we select them through fitting.

[cnosil]

So, could you please define "watered down?" Not really sure what you mean.
Finally, a repeat of a May 27 question: Will a respected shaft maker risk putting junk materials into a "made for" shaft?

But, average golfers like me can do quite well with "made for" shafts - as long as we select them through fitting.

You seem to understand what is being said. No one is questioning the quality of the shafts. Made for shafts are great and use less costly materials to make the shaft cheaper to make and cost effective for OEMs to package as part of their clubs. You are also correct they work great for lots of players.

The biggest problem is when the made for shaft has the exact same paint scheme as a high dollar aftermarket shaft. The Ventus is the latest example; Both are high quality shafts but they are constructed differently with the only visible difference being the word velocore not being on the made for.

It is kind of like buying a kit car that looks like a Ferrari, but has a VW chassis and engine. Unless you look beneath the paint you think you have the Ferrari but in reality you have a serviceable automobile with quality parts that gets you from point A to point B.

[Quigleyd]

9 hours ago, Greenside said:

@Quigleyd,

I found a Stock vs. Premium shaft thread from February.

https://forum.mygolfspy.com/topic/36489-stock-vs-premium-shafts-from-the-same-oem/?do=findComment&comment=596553

The Ventus shaft is an example. Basically, the aftermarket Ventus contains the Pitch 70 carbon fibers which give it an extra low-torque, low-spin profile. The "made for" Ventus lacks the Pitch 70 weave.

One thread respondent @chisag is a +1.2 HDCP who gives personal examples of the differents. He notes that for those with medium swing speed, the "made for" structure is probably a good thing. And, I'm one of those guys with sub-90 MPH driver CHS that would benefit from the "made for" shaft version. Those {low torque  +  low spin} shafts give me superb line, but fly low and don't carry 200 yards. I need adequate spin to get the ball launched properly.

chisag further noted that along with swing speed, how aggressive you are at transition affects your Ventus shaft choice.

If you want to make the case that the whole aftermarket vs. made-for reality is fuzzy to most golfers, I agree. But, average golfers like me can do quite well with "made for" shafts - as long as we select them through fitting.

Never said a made for shaft was bad or wouldn’t work for anyone. Just that it is dishonest marketing.