Brand Stamps Visual Appeal

[Tiftaaft 724]

Just curious if it is only me... but do the company brand stamps on balls play a part in your decision to "game" it?  Which brand stamps feel "elite" and which turn you off from just the looks? 

Not meaning brand quality comparisons , just completely due to aesthetics?  

Back in the Balata days, I played the Rextar religiously (made in the early early days of Bridgestone golf), I could have played Titleist Balatas, but absolutely loved the "look" of the Rextars.  Felt better teeing them up, seeing the logo in the fairway (or the rough as the case may have been) and rolling them on the green.  Confidence booster.  But then I also had an affinity for Acushnet Club Specials.  By comparison, I could never enjoy looking down at a Slazenger...  great ball in the day, just couldn't stand the look.  Showing my age a little too much here.

Today's ball array is significantly more broad, lots of choices... I gravitate toward the Titleist "standard"  and have a similar good feeling looking down at Callaway.  Working on getting used to Snell. But have to say it is a challenge (no offense to Dean... awesome ball performance wise).

Probably just me

~Tim

Edited June 16, 2021 by Tiftaaft

[ForeRightAgain 32]

Brand stamps play no difference if i play a ball or not.  Especially since I mark up my balls in a very unique, some might say, crazy way.

[RTurcott 19]

Great topic, something I joke about with buddies on the course to be honest and one of the reasons I currently play a Titleist ball. For me, I stay away from Callaway strictly due to aesthetics. Whenever my buddies find a Callaway in the bush (regardless of model) they toss it over to me and yell "here's your favourite ball'!

I have tried the Chrome Soft balls and like the feel I just can't get used to the look. I also struggle to look at Vice and Kirkland from a more budget friendly option. 

If Titleist ever got way away from making the AVX, I would consider the ProV or TP5 (although the Callaway feels better for me). Both brands make a ball that suits my eye and I like the feel however I haven't found another ball that performs and feels for me like the AVX. 

Your Not Alone

[DStar 1,305]

I have to agree that some logo's just don't appeal, aesthetically. 

I liked the story behind the Titleist logo and the style of the logo as I used to do some calligraphy when I was younger. It just has a nice flow to it..

I like how their balls play too

 

 

[ChuckZ 199]

The brand on the ball never made a difference, not something I look at when I am putting or setting it on a tee.  It has always been the brand behind the ball, the R&D, the quality, the performance and the customer service.  That is why I play Titleist golf balls.  Specifically the Prov1.  With respect.  A Titleist loyalist, here.  

[doodlegolf 7]

I don't like to add alignment lines, etc. to my ProV1's, just a red circle around the number for identifying purposes. When putting, I use the alignment line the manufacturer puts on the ball. That said, the new ProV1 with the thinner lines is a bit more difficult for me to see with my 62 year old eyes. The last two generations (especially '17-'18 with the longer black arrows) were easier to see. As far as the Titleist script logo goes, I like it's clean, classic, unobtrusive style.

[CRW 223]

No, and I don’t really notice them on golf balls when playing. 
 

I do hate to look at some club designs/colors and shaft bands/labels. For example, I love the DG Tour Issue shaft band, but hate the standard DG shaft band. It seems cheap and lazy and I think DG could do better. 

[808nation 1,788]

I've been gaming the TP5 Pix balls so no I have no issues with branding.  This ball just makes it faster to recognize my ball when near other balls and I don't line up my putt so it does not bother me at all.

[Agent 87 36]

I'm plying TP5. However I  like to see just white on a putt.  I'd love a ball with one small logo nothing else.

[Tiftaaft 724]

7 hours ago, crw said:

No, and I don’t really notice them on golf balls when playing. 
 

I do hate to look at some club designs/colors and shaft bands/labels. For example, I love the DG Tour Issue shaft band, but hate the standard DG shaft band. It seems cheap and lazy and I think DG could do better. 

I agree with the DG shaft band... I used to take mine off back in the day.  A little more difficult with graphite shaft graphics.  

[Headhammer 3,157]

I would say that I select a ball based on Branding, but I would not game Truvis or the Rickie Fowler designed ball as I find them too busy.

[Hook DeLoft 704]

There are so many good balls that an aesthetic choice can make sense. For instance, I can’t perceive any performance difference between the ProV1 and the Srixon Z Star. If I found the look of one objectionable, I would play the other. As it is, I buy whichever I can get on sale. On the other hand, I am sure there is a Bridgestone ball I would like, but I don’t like the little B. It makes the ball look unbalanced. 

Back in the day, the lower compression Titleist balls had red numbers. Today, it is the opposite with the ProV1 models. I wish that was still the case. I like the red number on the X, but prefer the feel of the regular ProV. 

[ForeRightAgain 32]

On 6/20/2021 at 5:27 PM, Hook DeLoft said:

...On the other hand, I am sure there is a Bridgestone ball I would like, but I don’t like the little B. It makes the ball look unbalanced. 
 

Funny, I actually like the solo B.  I like the simplicity of it.  Doesn't mean I'll play it because of the way the stamp is.  But still like it a lot

[Tiftaaft 724]

29 minutes ago, ForeRightAgain said:

Funny, I actually like the solo B.  I like the simplicity of it.  Doesn't mean I'll play it because of the way the stamp is.  But still like it a lot

Definitely got to see that solo B rolling on the U.S. Open coverage watching Bryson putt.  I don't care for the look when I'm playing it... (and I choose not to for reasons above), but I have to hand it to Bridgestone... you can tell what brand that ball is be the big black marking... good marketing.  Actually I'm disappointed I don't care for the looks more... as I mentioned... my first quality "purchase by the box" ball was the Rextar by Bridgestone.  I also had the Bridgestone Whopper driver... I miss those days.

[Tyler86 414]

Did Bridgestone sub out the packaging design to Trojan for those?

[Tiftaaft 724]

I just realized something about myself.  Not proud to admit it... but I'm drawn to balls with double digit numbers on them.  Combine that to throwing out balls for the way the logo's look... I may need to seek medical attention

[Brian A 1,399]

I like my ball to be minimalist with things on it, even to mark it, I just put a green dot on the number. Too much of a logo or other printing I find distracting 

[DejaGolf 7]

Older thread, great topic.  I haven't played Titleist balls for 50 years because the Titleist script always looks crooked to me. Just can't set the ball down and make it straight. Even when I hide the logo by turning the ball to a white space on top, I "feel" the crookedness of the logo script on the bottom.  I also have wedges that my eyes just cannot square up--put that with a Titleist ball and it's a really bad day.

[MGoBlue100 2,605]

Fun topic!  I do struggle with the size of the "Snell" logo.  It seems as if it's everywhere on the ball.  I play Bridgestone "almost" exclusively, and I do like the solid "B".

[Tiftaaft 724]

21 minutes ago, DejaGolf said:

, I "feel" the crookedness of the logo script on the bottom. 

Haha, and I thought "I" had a problem.  Actually, I understand your comment about the script of Titleist, I used to feel that way, I guess I became used to it.

7 minutes ago, MGoBlue100 said:

I do struggle with the size of the "Snell" logo.

I can't disagree with that.  If it were a more compact logo, I would feel better about it.