Brooks Koepka moving to Srixon??

[xBAGGS 49]

46 minutes ago, GolfSpy MPR said:

I think @ncwoz asks the most pertinent question: is anyone actually hearing anything about a deal, or is he just playing the clubs?

In terms of marketing value, I agree with those who say this isn't going to launch Srixon up to the Callaway/Taylormade/Titleist/PING echelon, but on the margins, where Srixon lives, I suspect it matters. The kinds of guys who read golf forums, the kind who actually would know what sticks Brooks has in his bag, who also know that he's switching to them from those Mizunos, those are the guys who go into a fitting and say, "Yeah, lemme hit those too."

I don't think the idea is that people are going to flock to the store to get what Brooks has in his bag. It's about incrementally changing how seriously avid golfers take your brand. On that, assuming some kind of return to form for Brooks, I have to see this as a significant good thing for Srixon, deal or no deal.

I wonder what Srixon's ROI will be on this contract, if there is one.  Probably a question of what any player endorsement ROI is... besides Tiger, Rory, DJ, maybe Rickie.  Brooks is a great player, major winner, consistent 'cupper, but does he move the needle as a player?  Are kids growing up saying I want to be Koepka...  maybe they are... but he just doesn't intrigue me as much as others without as many majors.  Would there be value in trying to grab a young gun to see if something pans out?  Or do they just get too much money thrown at them...

TOO MANY QUESTIONS!! i digress...

[RickyBobby_PR 5,292]

1 hour ago, GolfSpy MPR said:

I think @ncwoz asks the most pertinent question: is anyone actually hearing anything about a deal, or is he just playing the clubs?

In terms of marketing value, I agree with those who say this isn't going to launch Srixon up to the Callaway/Taylormade/Titleist/PING echelon, but on the margins, where Srixon lives, I suspect it matters. The kinds of guys who read golf forums, the kind who actually would know what sticks Brooks has in his bag, who also know that he's switching to them from those Mizunos, those are the guys who go into a fitting and say, "Yeah, lemme hit those too."

I don't think the idea is that people are going to flock to the store to get what Brooks has in his bag. It's about incrementally changing how seriously avid golfers take your brand. On that, assuming some kind of return to form for Brooks, I have to see this as a significant good thing for Srixon, deal or no deal.

They hover around the 3-5% of market share iirc from the last time a friend shared sales data. That’s where cobra and Mizuno hangout. Brooks probably doesn’t move them out of that range.

 

[GolfSpy MPR 10,193]

5 minutes ago, xBAGGS said:

I wonder what Srixon's ROI will be on this contract, if there is one.  Probably a question of what any player endorsement ROI is... besides Tiger, Rory, DJ, maybe Rickie.  Brooks is a great player, major winner, consistent 'cupper, but does he move the needle as a player?  Are kids growing up saying I want to be Koepka...  maybe they are... but he just doesn't intrigue me as much as others without as many majors.  Would there be value in trying to grab a young gun to see if something pans out?  Or do they just get too much money thrown at them...

TOO MANY QUESTIONS!! i digress...

I have zero business expertise. So this is totally unfounded opinion

I wonder, though, if Brooks playing Srixon without a contract has more value to Srixon than if were under contract. I'm sure the bean-counters at Srixon have their spreadsheets with that answer. But it doesn't seem crazy to me to think that

Extra sets of Srixon irons sold with Brooks playing w/o contract * MSRP

might be a bigger number than

Extra sets of Srixon irons sold with Brooks playing w/ contract * MSRP - Brooks's contract

[c_zoid 112]

your not wrong

[xBAGGS 49]

2 minutes ago, GolfSpy MPR said:

I have zero business expertise. So this is totally unfounded opinion

I wonder, though, if Brooks playing Srixon without a contract has more value to Srixon than if were under contract. I'm sure the bean-counters at Srixon have their spreadsheets with that answer. But it doesn't seem crazy to me to think that

Extra sets of Srixon irons sold with Brooks playing w/o contract * MSRP

might be a bigger number than

Extra sets of Srixon irons sold with Brooks playing w/ contract * MSRP - Brooks's contract

Thats an interesting perspective...  I guess the same scenario was played out with Mizuno.  I would say anyone with major wins, playing your irons for free, would be a win.  Nothing invested other than some free irons.  

[RickyBobby_PR 5,292]

19 minutes ago, GolfSpy MPR said:

I have zero business expertise. So this is totally unfounded opinion

I wonder, though, if Brooks playing Srixon without a contract has more value to Srixon than if were under contract. I'm sure the bean-counters at Srixon have their spreadsheets with that answer. But it doesn't seem crazy to me to think that

Extra sets of Srixon irons sold with Brooks playing w/o contract * MSRP

might be a bigger number than

Extra sets of Srixon irons sold with Brooks playing w/ contract * MSRP - Brooks's contract

Without a contract all anyone will see when Brooks plays is a Nike bag, scotty cameron putter and stitch headcovers.  I don’t recall the announcers talking much about his Mizuno irons during broadcasts so not sure they would with the srixons other than maybe this week that he has new irons in the bag.  How would Srixon benefit from a non contract with little to possibly no exposure?

If he signs a deal then I would expect him to probably have a bag deal to help with the exposure.

The issues I see either way that work against Srixon.

1) they have limited retail space so outside of a pga tour superstore, Edwin watts and some green grass shops the public doesn’t get to see them.  I spent a few years working for the local rep doing demo days and even when we went to the same courses/private clubs every year people still never heard of the brand.

2) I look at Nike as an example. At their peak they had the three biggest names in men’s and women’s golf on staff with Tiger, Rory and Wie. With those names they failed to gain enough market share to sustain them growth. They were never able to crack into the top tier of clubs despite possibly have some of the best irons in the players category.  If those names aren’t moving the needle not sure a Brooks type will.

My local range which is pretty busy most days carries their clubs and they sit on the racks most of the season. They may sell 1 set of the 5 and 1 set of the 7 series in a season

 

[Lacassem 9,249]

43 minutes ago, GolfSpy MPR said:

I have zero business expertise. So this is totally unfounded opinion

I wonder, though, if Brooks playing Srixon without a contract has more value to Srixon than if were under contract. I'm sure the bean-counters at Srixon have their spreadsheets with that answer. But it doesn't seem crazy to me to think that

Extra sets of Srixon irons sold with Brooks playing w/o contract * MSRP

might be a bigger number than

Extra sets of Srixon irons sold with Brooks playing w/ contract * MSRP - Brooks's contract

That and what are they doing *if the sales are better with him not under contract* to keep him there? Are they utilizing him for data and what he would like to see in the clubs? 

[xBAGGS 49]

17 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

If he signs a deal then I would expect him to probably have a bag deal to help with the exposure.

The question would be if Nike would pay more for the bag vs what Srixon would pay for the bag.  I am not familiar with contacts but there seems to be many high profile players utilizing another sponsor on the bag rather than iron/woods OEM.  If Srixon ponies out the money then i could see Srixon on the bag but i would doubt they beat out what Nike would pay.  That little check mark means a lot in marketing.

[RickyBobby_PR 5,292]

13 minutes ago, xBAGGS said:

The question would be if Nike would pay more for the bag vs what Srixon would pay for the bag.  I am not familiar with contacts but there seems to be many high profile players utilizing another sponsor on the bag rather than iron/woods OEM.  If Srixon ponies out the money then i could see Srixon on the bag but i would doubt they beat out what Nike would pay.  That little check mark means a lot in marketing.

Brooks I believe is no longer on his Nike contract for the bag but even if he is the way I understand the contract situation with Nike is that he would get to keep a portion of the contract related to the bag if he signed with another company so he essentially would double dip to an extent. As part of the Nike decision to leave golf they were able to sign wherever they wanted while still getting their Nike contract.

However I do think the equipment and bag deal he had Nike hard goods is over based on him signing in 2016. Unless he had a 10 year deal like rory.

[xBAGGS 49]

19 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

Brooks I believe is no longer on his Nike contract for the bag but even if he is the way I understand the contract situation with Nike is that he would get to keep a portion of the contract related to the bag if he signed with another company so he essentially would double dip to an extent. As part of the Nike decision to leave golf they were able to sign wherever they wanted while still getting their Nike contract.

However I do think the equipment and bag deal he had Nike hard goods is over based on him signing in 2016. Unless he had a 10 year deal like rory.

Cool!  Good to know!

[HackquilleOnealy 0]

I think this thread shows how much people generally disdain koepka.  he's on a very short list of golfers who have won two majors in a single season in the last 20 years.  harrington, McIlroy, spieth and tiger.  not to mention back to back in the us open and pga.  and then he was injured.  he really should have never said he would rather be pro in any other sport.  he couldn't even make it a few years on top as a golfer- i would hate to see him in the NFL.  He should definitely fire his publicist that made him say all that stuff about "why he was so emotionless" how its all because he's a calculating genius.  He could have just said its because i play better golf keeping all emotion in check and keeping my heart rate steady

 

and i am sure koepka sold way more 900 tours than would have otherwise sold.  maybe they *let him go to srixon because he sent one of the lamest clubs they ever made to the top of the popularity charts.  the ebay sales on those POS irons will show you how much younger golfers love brooks

Edited January 21 by HackquilleOnealy

[RickyBobby_PR 5,292]

8 hours ago, HackquilleOnealy said:

I think this thread shows how much people generally disdain koepka.  he's on a very short list of golfers who have won two majors in a single season in the last 20 years.  harrington, McIlroy, spieth and tiger.  not to mention back to back in the us open and pga.  and then he was injured.  he really should have never said he would rather be pro in any other sport.  he couldn't even make it a few years on top as a golfer- i would hate to see him in the NFL.  He should definitely fire his publicist that made him say all that stuff about "why he was so emotionless" how its all because he's a calculating genius.  He could have just said its because i play better golf keeping all emotion in check and keeping my heart rate steady

 

and i am sure koepka sold way more 900 tours than would have otherwise sold.  maybe they *let him go to srixon because he sent one of the lamest clubs they ever made to the top of the popularity charts.  the ebay sales on those POS irons will show you how much younger golfers love brooks

What in this thread makes you think people have any disdain for koepka? For me I have nothing against him and like his game but when it comes to selling clubs there aren’t many pros that move that needle.

Tiger Woods moved the needle a little for Nike golf hardwoods but even his success wasn’t enough to get the brand to compete in market share with the big names in golf. SomE of it probably has to do with Nike marketing strategy of the athlete vs the gear. Fans like Rickie Fowler but even his personality and relatively decent career isn’t enough to make a dent in the market share cobra has in clubs and even with the success of Bryson and cobra doing pretty good with one length sales they still maintain the same market share they had before. 
 

A brand like Srixon is a relatively unknown brand outside of golf forums and their lack of retail space doest help. Someone posted in the Srixon thread yesterday about wanting to try the new irons but finding a place that has them is almost impossible. So how can one expect a brand to see a significant increase in sales of the person using them doesn’t boost sales to begin with and two the clubs he has can’t be found to demo?  And guys that buy off the shelf can’t get them unless they order online and why spend the same price on clubs plus shipping and having to wait to get them when you can buy callaway, TaylorMade or titleist right then and there in a store.0

 

[RickyBobby_PR 5,292]

Well so much for the Srixon ball. He’s back to using the prov. Still has the irons in the bag. 

[bens197 6,206]

Sadly, I am surprised to see the lack of discussion following BK’s win with ZX7’s. 
 

I always liked how he said not being under contract gave him freedom to play what he thought was best at the time. For a multiple major winner to switch from JPX to ZX line is a pretty big deal considering a lot of no-contract guys love that Mizuno line. 
 

Hopefully this win helps him return to form with his swing confidence.

[RickyBobby_PR 5,292]

4 minutes ago, bens197 said:

Sadly, I am surprised to see the lack of discussion following BK’s win with ZX7’s. 
 

I always liked how he said not being under contract gave him freedom to play what he thought was best at the time. For a multiple major winner to switch from JPX to ZX line is a pretty big deal considering a lot of no-contract guys love that Mizuno line. 
 

Hopefully this win helps him return to form with his swing confidence.

He’s not going to give free promotion to Srixon for the irons just like he doesn’t for the Tm woods or scotty putter.

Other than a henrik stenson’s 3w, tiger’s putter and maybe one or two others once a new equipment season starts like the guys switching to new stuff in Hawaii and that’s usually when new contracts are announce the commentators really don’t talk about specific equipment so saying Brooks uses Srixon irons after using mizuno after nike left the market isn’t going to come up.

Srixon has questionable marketing strategy and they didn’t capitalize on Brooks win by posting on social media a pic of his irons and saying these are used by the winner of the waste management open.  Shaft brands and several of the equipment brands will do something along those lines to draw that attention.

Takeaway from forum members across all the various platforms most people don’t care what specific model of equipment is in a pros bag

[jlukes 13,221]

23 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

 

Srixon has questionable marketing strategy and they didn’t capitalize on Brooks win by posting on social media a pic of his irons and saying these are used by the winner of the waste management open.  Shaft brands and several of the equipment brands will do something along those lines to draw that attention.

 

Hell - TM did it regarding the WM Winner using the SIM2 Driver

[GolfSpy MPR 10,193]

4 minutes ago, jlukes said:

Hell - TM did it regarding the WM Winner using the SIM2 Driver

Total speculation: might be an indication that some kind of conversations between Brooks and Srixon continue, or that Srixon wants to keep that door open.

[RickyBobby_PR 5,292]

35 minutes ago, jlukes said:

Hell - TM did it regarding the WM Winner using the SIM2 Driver

Yeah the are one of the brands that does it all the time. UST, PX/TT and Fujikura do it a lot. Titleist and Callaway from what I recall will too

[RickyBobby_PR 5,292]

32 minutes ago, GolfSpy MPR said:

Total speculation: might be an indication that some kind of conversations between Brooks and Srixon continue, or that Srixon wants to keep that door open.

Srixon doesn’t do any “advertisement” of non contract winners using their equipment. I don’t see much from them even when ball/hat/glove contract players win. But over all their marketing is kind of weak IMO for their equipment compared to the rest of the brands

[bens197 6,206]

1 hour ago, GolfSpy MPR said:

Total speculation: might be an indication that some kind of conversations between Brooks and Srixon continue, or that Srixon wants to keep that door open.

It’s difficult to watch a company with a great product line and some solid Tour staff float along and coast.

The ball is as good as anything. The irons are top tier and their hybrid iron has a cult following. 
 

It could be the best product nobody knows about simply because they don’t pump their marketing.