Manufacturer Merry go round

[Stuart81]

Over e=here in England I have heard a number of people mention that before Woods' up turn in form Nike were ready to offload there prized asset in order to attempt to prize Rory McIlroy & Ryo Ishikawa to join. Also what was interesting was that Callaway were ready to step in for Woods?

 

Anyone heard anything thing like that ?

 

I personally could not see it happening certainly not now the season has started but it would be quite a deal

[Tony Covey MGS]

Can't say we've heard anything definitive, but I can't say I'd be shocked to see Nike let Tiger go.

 

Here's the reality: Tiger only helps move product when he's winning...and winning a lot. He's certainly not helping Nike out with his jovial personality. At this point the Tiger decision (if you want to call it that) will ultimately be a calculated gamble. If the belief is that he's finally about to turn the corner again and start running off major victories then you stick with him. However, if you believe as I do that his best days are behind him, and all this Sean Foley Zen crap is just a weak cover-up for what is otherwise a miserable personality, then the time has come to cut the proverbial bait.

 

Generally speaking I think Nike needs to get younger as a brand. They've conceded the youth movement to Cobra-PUMA, and their most bankable star isn't bankable anymore, and yeah...probably is a better fit for Titleist (though Callaway would certainly go after him). Rory would make them younger.

 

Nike has some great personalities on its roster. Stewart Cink is a great personality, as is Johnny Vegas...problem is those guys just don't win a whole lot (or even finish near the top), and again...that's what sells clubs.

 

With Rickie locked up for the long haul, Rory is absolutely the guy I'd try and sign...he's young, infinitely talented, and while perhaps not overly bubbly he's genuine and personable (a bit like Phil in that respect), and ultimately he has the tools to help a golf company move product. Ryo would give them a talented golfer who hits a specific demographic (Asian).

 

All of this makes a real case for the TaylorMade model. While there would no doubt be an argument over who their most bankable star is (Dustin, Sergio, even Natalie or Paula), at the end of the day the face doesn't matter. They manage to put their clubs, and most importantly their woods (Drivers are the most visible and identifiable) on TV. Even when their guys don't win, the get more exposure than anyone...and that DEFINITELY sells clubs.

[Stuart81]

Have to agree with the Nike assessment, for me Nike have always focused on Woods and never (or don't have the budget) to look beyond Tiger. From a European perspective the guys we see with Nike products are Simon Dyson Richard Finch week in week out but on a global scale representing the Euro Tour you have Paul Casey Charl Schwartzel. The guys mentioned just don't make you want to rush out to buy Nike products.

 

I have to say they missed a trick with Fowler but I think they could get Rory away from Titleist especially if he is their number 1 star and gets the same treatment Tiger has.

[JBones]

I have to say they missed a trick with Fowler but I think they could get Rory away from Titleist especially if he is their number 1 star and gets the same treatment Tiger has.

Nobody will ever get the same treatment as Tiger. There will never be another Tiger, just like there will never be another Micheal Jordan. As talented as these young guys are, nobody will bring in as much as Tiger, except for maybe Ricky Fowler. Fowler appeals with his style, not his game, he is going to bring in more clothing sales than club sales. Nike has pretty much ran on Micheal Jordan and Tiger Woods for the past 25 years. What those guys have done for that company will be unmatched by anybody or any company EVER.

[RookieBlue7]

Nike will never let Tiger leave. They also were never interested in Rory. He's not the type of player that fits their brand. Calloway also doesn't have the money to sign Tiger.

 

Every year there's a Tiger rumor that's just that, a rumor. As a brand, if Tiger leaves before retiring, Nike's golf division is done. There's not another player on the planet that sells as much equipment as he does.

[Stuart81]

Can't believe you think that Rory doesn't fit the player type Nike would be after, they would love to have him, I am also surprised by how much hype there is over Rickie Fowler on these threads. I am a big Fowler fan and want to see him at the top with the likes of McIlroy, Noh, Ishikawa etc but inmo Rory is on another level to the other guys out there.

 

Not quite the pin up image but Rory has the game to break records, although I don't think he will maybe more Majors than any other European player

[Tony Covey MGS]

Nike will never let Tiger leave. They also were never interested in Rory. He's not the type of player that fits their brand. Calloway also doesn't have the money to sign Tiger.

 

Every year there's a Tiger rumor that's just that, a rumor. As a brand, if Tiger leaves before retiring, Nike's golf division is done. There's not another player on the planet that sells as much equipment as he does.

 

What I'd argue is that once upon a time there wasn't a player who sold more equipment than Tiger. While it may still be true today, on volume, I'm fairly certain he doesn't move nearly the product he used to. The Tiger effect on equipment sales is over. If he starts winning again, that will change, but right now, I'd rather have Fowler.

 

What was unique about Tiger is that ge got by on winning alone. When you look at Michael Jordan, and other sports icons who have been big gets from an advertising perspective, they backed up their games with winning personalities.

 

Part of a larger discussion is that the biggest product movers will always be NBA and PGA pros. The other team sports have too many guys on the field at a time for one guy to kill it at the level that a golfer or basketball player can. The one possible exception that comes to mind is David Beckham. While his footprint is small here, globally he dwarfs everyone.

 

Whether or not Rory fits the Nike brand...hard to say. They were Tiger for so long, I'm not sure if they know what their image is right now. They do need fresh blood, I think, and based who is on the scene right now...if I had to pin the hopes of my company on a single face, I'd take my shot with Rory.

 

This discussion also illustrates why TaylorMade is so successful at Tour-based marketing. Rather than have a single face of the brand, they spread themselves out quite a bit. They've done this across all tours to such a degree that it's a rarity for anything to be won without a TM club in the bag...and when you include Champions and LPGA tours, they hit at nearly a 100% rate.

 

 

Divide and Conquer as they say.

[Tony Covey MGS]

Can't believe you think that Rory doesn't fit the player type Nike would be after, they would love to have him, I am also surprised by how much hype there is over Rickie Fowler on these threads. I am a big Fowler fan and want to see him at the top with the likes of McIlroy, Noh, Ishikawa etc but inmo Rory is on another level to the other guys out there.

 

Not quite the pin up image but Rory has the game to break records, although I don't think he will maybe more Majors than any other European player

 

I don't think may would argue that Rory isn't the more talented player, but golf companies want to sell product (and tour players are still at the top of the pyramid of influence). Rory will win more tournaments over his career, and he may very well prove to be the most dominant of the new generation of golfers, but he simply doesn't move the needle like Rickie Fowler can.

 

PUMA (and now Cobra) has created an entire culture around Rickie. While not everyone buys into the orange (and other bright PUMA colors), there is a huge contingent of golfers on board, and the culture itself is growing. Toss in that Rickie has the talent to win any tournament he's in...well...if he can win a few majors (or TPC-type events), Cobra is going to win big because of it.

[RookieBlue7]

Can't believe you think that Rory doesn't fit the player type Nike would be after, they would love to have him, I am also surprised by how much hype there is over Rickie Fowler on these threads. I am a big Fowler fan and want to see him at the top with the likes of McIlroy, Noh, Ishikawa etc but inmo Rory is on another level to the other guys out there.

 

Not quite the pin up image but Rory has the game to break records, although I don't think he will maybe more Majors than any other European player

 

 

Why doesn't Rory fit their mold? Because he's a small market player in America. He also doesn't show his face outside of the golf course, and the only time he's really publicized is when he's near the top at big tourneys, or when he's running his mouth about something. Tiger, while he'll talk smack, backs it up. He's also a global icon from a marketing perspective. And, I'd be willing to bet that he still moves the needle as far as sales go nearly 3:1 over anyone. Look at the Method alone. It was selling, but not that well. He puts one in play at the British Open and the stores couldn't keep them on the shelves. He switches to the 003 headshape, same thing. And this was when he was doing nothing virtually last season. Why do you think manufacturers put Diamana shafts (even though they were made for variations) in their clubs? Because that's what he played. Nike put out a limited edition set of irons that were identical to Tiger's specs, and they sold like hotcakes, who cares if the vast majority of players buying them couldn't hit them? Rory doesn't have that impact globally. Rickie Fowler is probably the only one out there today that comes close. But as it stands, Nike is hitching their horse to their prized stallion and going for the ride until Tiger decides he's done with them (which will be never). Look at Michael Jordan. He's been out of basketball how long? And he still has the #1 selling shoe.

[Tony Covey MGS]

Why doesn't Rory fit their mold? Because he's a small market player in America. He also doesn't show his face outside of the golf course, and the only time he's really publicized is when he's near the top at big tourneys, or when he's running his mouth about something. Tiger, while he'll talk smack, backs it up. He's also a global icon from a marketing perspective. And, I'd be willing to bet that he still moves the needle as far as sales go nearly 3:1 over anyone. Look at the Method alone. It was selling, but not that well. He puts one in play at the British Open and the stores couldn't keep them on the shelves. He switches to the 003 headshape, same thing. And this was when he was doing nothing virtually last season. Why do you think manufacturers put Diamana shafts (even though they were made for variations) in their clubs? Because that's what he played. Nike put out a limited edition set of irons that were identical to Tiger's specs, and they sold like hotcakes, who cares if the vast majority of players buying them couldn't hit them? Rory doesn't have that impact globally. Rickie Fowler is probably the only one out there today that comes close. But as it stands, Nike is hitching their horse to their prized stallion and going for the ride until Tiger decides he's done with them (which will be never). Look at Michael Jordan. He's been out of basketball how long? And he still has the #1 selling shoe.

 

What has to be considered with Rory is that he's young and he has a higher ceiling than anyone in the game right now. If you're dropping big bucks on Rory it's because you're in it for the long haul, because you believe he's the closest thing out there to the next Tiger. If (I believe WHEN) he starts winning regularly, he'll spend more time in the US. He's a quiet guy for sure, but when he speaks he give well thought out answers. He's never evasive, and thus far hasn't behaved like ...excuse the lack of elegance...a giant douche. Tiger is one of a kind. Rory could be the next Arnold or Jack.

 

If I'm Nike and was 100% certain I could drop Tiger and sign Rory, I'd do it. But I say that because I think his best days are well behind him, and from an ROI perspective, he's never going to generate enough revenue to offset what he's getting paid (Rory would certainly be cheaper). If you believe he's still got a handful of majors left in him, then you have to keep him.

 

I get what you're saying with MJ and ongoing shoe sales, but the difference is that prior to MJ, Nike was the #1 shoe on the planet. On that side of the business, they don't have to compete with anything akin to a TaylorMade, Titleist, or even Callaway. It's an easier market for them, and the chance of making a meaningful mistake is much lower.

[Matt Saternus]

I hear what you're saying, T, and I understand that winning can change a lot, but Rory doesn't have "it". You can call Tiger a giant douche, and I might not even disagree with you, but he's got "it". Jordan, another giant douche, had it. I don't think you can develop, teach, or learn it; you've got it or you don't. I love golf, but watching Rory is just watching golf. Watching Tiger is different.

 

I think this connects back to a topic we had going a while back about golfers lacking personality. Too many clones on tour, and, sorry, but Rory is right off the assembly line. Tiger is different, and different is better (as long as you win).

[RoverRick]

I tell you who the next big deal is. Bud Cauley. He qualified and played in the US Open. Made the cut finished 63, played in 8 events last year, made every cut, finished 116 on the money list. This year he has made 4 of 4 cuts and one top 25. No wins yet but they will come. He also beat Rickie Fowler on the amateur level.

 

I have no idea how it actually works, but it seems like Titleist sponsors everyone unless they can get a gig somewhere else. They may pay pretty big bucks but I have never heard of anyone going back to Titleist. Just the people who go away from them to the more lucrative contracts at the other OEMs.

[RookieBlue7]

I tell you who the next big deal is. Bud Cauley. He qualified and played in the US Open. Made the cut finished 63, played in 8 events last year, made every cut, finished 116 on the money list. This year he has made 4 of 4 cuts and one top 25. No wins yet but they will come. He also beat Rickie Fowler on the amateur level.

 

I have no idea how it actually works, but it seems like Titleist sponsors everyone unless the can get a gig somewhere else. They may pay pretty big bucks but I have never heard of anyone going back to Titleist. Just the people who go away from them to the more lucrative contracts at the other OEMs.

 

 

I can tell you no one touches Titleist's tee up money on the putter market. Of course no one else touches TaylorMade in any of the other markets as far as tee up money.

[Tony Covey MGS]

I hear what you're saying, T, and I understand that winning can change a lot, but Rory doesn't have "it". You can call Tiger a giant douche, and I might not even disagree with you, but he's got "it". Jordan, another giant douche, had it. I don't think you can develop, teach, or learn it; you've got it or you don't. I love golf, but watching Rory is just watching golf. Watching Tiger is different.

 

I think this connects back to a topic we had going a while back about golfers lacking personality. Too many clones on tour, and, sorry, but Rory is right off the assembly line. Tiger is different, and different is better (as long as you win).

 

Matt - I think the "it" that Tiger has is different. He wins (or at least he won) more than anybody else, and often did it by golf's equivalent of blowout margins. Winning, for Tiger, was the whole of "it".

 

When you look at MJ, and before him, Magic, and before him (though probably not as quite the marketing force) Muhammed Ali, what they all had in common was an infectious charisma. The only thing infectious about Tiger is (insert your favorite venereal disease here).

 

I could be wrong, but Rory displays hints of a quiet charisma. As he matures it might become something bigger. It might be nothing.

 

Watching Tiger is only different because he was such a supreme talent. If he doesn't win, he's nothing from a marketing standpoint. Comparing Tiger to MJ, and Muhammad Ali (pre-Parkinson's)...those guys continued to move the needle after their careers were over.

 

Unless his attitude changes dramatically (transforms himself into an Arnold Palmer type), the minute Tiger's career is over, so is his ability to move product.

 

20 years from now, nobody is going to refer to hm as "Mr. Woods" and that, I think, speaks volumes about how he's actually perceived.

[Matt Saternus]

Matt - I think the "it" that Tiger has is different. He wins (or at least he won) more than anybody else, and often did it by golf's equivalent of blowout margins. Winning, for Tiger, was the whole of "it".

 

When you look at MJ, and before him, Magic, and before him (though probably not as quite the marketing force) Muhammed Ali, what they all had in common was an infectious charisma. The only thing infectious about Tiger is (insert your favorite venereal disease here).

 

I could be wrong, but Rory displays hints of a quiet charisma. As he matures it might become something bigger. It might be nothing.

 

Watching Tiger is only different because he was such a supreme talent. If he doesn't win, he's nothing from a marketing standpoint. Comparing Tiger to MJ, and Muhammad Ali (pre-Parkinson's)...those guys continued to move the needle after their careers were over.

 

Unless his attitude changes dramatically (transforms himself into an Arnold Palmer type), the minute Tiger's career is over, so is his ability to move product.

 

20 years from now, nobody is going to refer to hm as "Mr. Woods" and that, I think, speaks volumes about how he's actually perceived.

 

T, I think you and I are going to have to agree to disagree. Jordan's "personality" was a creation of Nike's marketing department (sound familiar?). There's no question he still sells shoes, but what has he (the person) done since he quit playing? Magic and Ali I'll grant you, they're a different sort. As to whether or not Tiger will move product after he's retired...what golfer does? Arnie has a new clothing line, but what's he done for Callaway? Is Jack moving lots of drivers?

[GolfSpy Tim]

Totally agree that with Tiger, he has to be winning.

 

But, I don't see Nike letting him go.

 

They need someone younger and more hip for sure, but they need a huge star as well, and for now, Tiger is still that. He's a face that reminds you that Nike is still in the game.

[Tony Covey MGS]

T, I think you and I are going to have to agree to disagree. Jordan's "personality" was a creation of Nike's marketing department (sound familiar?). There's no question he still sells shoes, but what has he (the person) done since he quit playing? Magic and Ali I'll grant you, they're a different sort. As to whether or not Tiger will move product after he's retired...what golfer does? Arnie has a new clothing line, but what's he done for Callaway? Is Jack moving lots of drivers?

 

Still disagreeing (agreeably so)...Jordan had a natural charisma on the court, that Tiger simply doesn't have on the golf course. Jordan could be intense, but a good bit of the time he looked like he was enjoying himself. Tiger, more often than not, makes professional golf look like some sort of prison release program.

 

There's no arguing that Tiger hasn't broken down some barriers. Golf is no longer exclusively a rich white man's game. And our generation is probably the first to experience a golf personality that truly transcends the game itself (and puts the sport on the front page). Tiger may be the test case for marketing longevity after playing days are over. Too bad about the waitresses, porn stars, and fire hydrants. Of course, we all love a good redemption story...I'm just not sure we'll ever see it.

 

One example we've missed up until this point is Greg Norman. Not sure how much of the success has to do with the man as opposed to the recognizable logo, but the Greg Norman line is the #3 brand in golf apparel (behind Nike and Adidas).

 

Nike doesn't need Tiger to sell shirts and pants, they need him to sell clubs...and he's not really doing that right now, and the longer term prospects don't look good. In fairness, the same can probably be said for every other golfer on the planet. I can't imagine Mickelson is moving much product for Callaway. Luke Donald is probably helping Mizuno right now, but again TaylorMade's divide and conquer appears the most effective.

 

BTW...did anyone else notice Tony Romo hiding a TaylorMade fairway wood under a Mizuno headcover? Must have a staff deal with Mizzy.

[Matt Saternus]

I'd be much more inclined to agree with parts of what you say if you stopped bringing up Jordan. As someone who spent their first 25 years deeply entrenched in the game, I'm not sure what anyone finds likeable about that guy other than the level at which he played the game.

 

The other problem with our conversation is that we lack numbers. You can say Tiger doesn't sell clubs, I can say that he does, but without the data, it's moot.

 

Ultimately, I guess it comes down to taste. Some people like Coke, some like Pepsi. I like Kobe, you might like LeBron. I love Tiger, always have, likely always will. I love that he's an unrepentant competitor, that he doesn't want to win, but he wants to win by a soul-crushing amount. I don't care AT ALL about his personal life, never will. I don't care that he doesn't have that ****-eating Phil Mickelson grin when he plays or that he doesn't sign autographs. Honestly, I like that he doesn't. He's there to win, period. For some people, that stuff factors in negatively, and that's perfectly fine.

 

One last thing: I am SHOCKED about Norman's clothing line being #3. You could have won a LOT of money from me with that bet.

[Tony Covey MGS]

I'd be much more inclined to agree with parts of what you say if you stopped bringing up Jordan. As someone who spent their first 25 years deeply entrenched in the game, I'm not sure what anyone finds likeable about that guy other than the level at which he played the game.

 

The other problem with our conversation is that we lack numbers. You can say Tiger doesn't sell clubs, I can say that he does, but without the data, it's moot.

 

Ultimately, I guess it comes down to taste. Some people like Coke, some like Pepsi. I like Kobe, you might like LeBron. I love Tiger, always have, likely always will. I love that he's an unrepentant competitor, that he doesn't want to win, but he wants to win by a soul-crushing amount. I don't care AT ALL about his personal life, never will. I don't care that he doesn't have that ****-eating Phil Mickelson grin when he plays or that he doesn't sign autographs. Honestly, I like that he doesn't. He's there to win, period. For some people, that stuff factors in negatively, and that's perfectly fine.

 

One last thing: I am SHOCKED about Norman's clothing line being #3. You could have won a LOT of money from me with that bet.

 

Matt, Matt, Matt, Matt, MATT...time for you to own to not liking Jordan b/c he went to North Carolina.

 

As for Tiger not selling clubs...what I probably should have said is that he doesn't sell club to anything close to the extent that he did a few years ago. He certainly moves more product than any other Nike golfer, but probably it's not enough when you consider what Nike is paying him. But what can Nike really do? They're guys are good for a major or two every season it seems, but if it's not Tiger it almost doesn't matter. Based on the recent commercials, it looks like AK is plan B.

 

As for the Greg Norman thing...only know that because I spent an hour chatting with their top sales rep while waiting for my flight out of Orlando.

[RoverRick]

I have never understood how Tiger sells clubs. It is not like I can play well with his clubs. Everything he actually plays with is custom made just for him. Now I will say that the VR line of recent years is the first Nike that I have considered, but that is based on how they look, not because Tiger plays them. To me, the fact that Tiger plays Nike is a detriment to Nike. I am a Tiger wantabe. I want to play like Tiger, I just don't want to advertise that I want to look like Tiger.

 

Unfortunately, I am much closer to looking like Tiger, except for 11 years, skin color, 100 pounds, and apparently can grow facial hair better, than playing like Tiger.

[GolfSpy Tim]

I have never understood how Tiger sells clubs. It is not like I can play well with his clubs. Everything he actually plays with is custom made just for him

 

I think we're about to see the same thing happening with CobraPuma.... custom irons they are not even offered to the general public, but it works

[Matt Saternus]

Matt, Matt, Matt, Matt, MATT...time for you to own to not liking Jordan b/c he went to North Carolina.

 

As for Tiger not selling clubs...what I probably should have said is that he doesn't sell club to anything close to the extent that he did a few years ago. He certainly moves more product than any other Nike golfer, but probably it's not enough when you consider what Nike is paying him. But what can Nike really do? They're guys are good for a major or two every season it seems, but if it's not Tiger it almost doesn't matter. Based on the recent commercials, it looks like AK is plan B.

 

As for the Greg Norman thing...only know that because I spent an hour chatting with their top sales rep while waiting for my flight out of Orlando.

 

No no no, he went to Carolina because he has no redeeming personal qualities. You're getting the causality backwards.

[Stuart81]

I can see both your points of view Golfspy Matt & Golfspy T, but do you not think that Golf is a sport that although we respect the past we are always striving for tomorrow's technology now, which is why when Tiger retires Nike Golf will suffer in my opinion because we as golfers will move on and wait for the new Taylor Made R26S

 

Nike golf don't bring out many clubs without Tiger using them that have much buzz about them

 

Stuart

[Matt Saternus]

I can see both your points of view Golfspy Matt & Golfspy T, but do you not think that Golf is a sport that although we respect the past we are always striving for tomorrow's technology now, which is why when Tiger retires Nike Golf will suffer in my opinion because we as golfers will move on and wait for the new Taylor Made R26S

 

Nike golf don't bring out many clubs without Tiger using them that have much buzz about them

 

Stuart

 

I think you're absolutely right. We respect the legends of the game, but we want to play like the guys who are on tour right now. As such, we will buy the equipment that they are paid to play, because we think that the equipment will help us play like them.

 

My favorite line about golf stores: "We don't sell golf clubs...we sell hope."

[bstone21]

I don't see Nike letting him go now. Tiger is clearly on his way back and is contending in and will be winning tournaments again in a matter of time. The timing just no seem right. If they were going to cut him it would have been during his long layoff.

[Shambles]

To the best of my knowledge the value of a sponsored player to the sponsor is proportionate to the face time that player has in the media. I believe Tiger has that in spades even these days that he is not winning. I also doubt Nike had a golf presence before they undertook to pay Tiger the greatest amount ever paid to a rookie who had not even won anything yet. Tiger had a guarantee of Fifty Million the day he turned pro and played his first tournament as a pro. I believe he delivered because, again to the best of my knowledge, Nike didn't have a golf presence to speak of until Tiger carried the name. As a matter of fact, I'm of the opinion that Nike Golf exists because of Tiger but I have no proof thereof. Before Tiger, Nike was just the upstart shoe maker to me. The Swoosh today is seen as a trademark for athletic equipment, not just Golf. I think Tiger was a major force in getting the Swoosh easy recognition. Again, I have no proof and my belief is suspect because I am a golfer who has long paid attention to Tiger. ( I call it a swoosh these days but it has long been and still looks like a check mark to me ).

 

Wilson was once the go to brand for any athletic equipment, not just golf, but they lost the marketing drive somewhere along the way and in doing so also lost market position. Perhaps Nike will make a move in that direction, but Mizuno is very active and Taylor Made appears to be trying to flood every golf niche it can.

 

Tiger has served his function of exposing Nike to the world. Whether Nike has used that exposure to it's advantage is another matter and no longer the concern of Tiger.

 

 

Shambles

[Matt Saternus]

Shambles: That's a really interesting take. Is it Tiger that's failing to move product or is it Nike? I hadn't thought of it in those terms before. Not sure I have an answer, or even a concrete thought.

[RoverRick]

To the best of my knowledge the value of a sponsored player to the sponsor is proportionate to the face time that player has in the media. I believe Tiger has that in spades even these days that he is not winning. I also doubt Nike had a golf presence before they undertook to pay Tiger the greatest amount ever paid to a rookie who had not even won anything yet. Tiger had a guarantee of Fifty Million the day he turned pro and played his first tournament as a pro. I believe he delivered because, again to the best of my knowledge, Nike didn't have a golf presence to speak of until Tiger carried the name. As a matter of fact, I'm of the opinion that Nike Golf exists because of Tiger but I have no proof thereof. Before Tiger, Nike was just the upstart shoe maker to me. The Swoosh today is seen as a trademark for athletic equipment, not just Golf. I think Tiger was a major force in getting the Swoosh easy recognition. Again, I have no proof and my belief is suspect because I am a golfer who has long paid attention to Tiger. ( I call it a swoosh these days but it has long been and still looks like a check mark to me ).

 

Wilson was once the go to brand for any athletic equipment, not just golf, but they lost the marketing drive somewhere along the way and in doing so also lost market position. Perhaps Nike will make a move in that direction, but Mizuno is very active and Taylor Made appears to be trying to flood every golf niche it can.

 

Tiger has served his function of exposing Nike to the world. Whether Nike has used that exposure to it's advantage is another matter and no longer the concern of Tiger.

 

 

Shambles

 

I agree that Tiger is still delivering for Nike. We associate Tiger and Nike, if you see Tiger and do not see that swoosh then something seems wrong about it. Conversely, when you see the swoosh do you think of Tiger?

 

By 1980 Nike had half the market in all things sports except golf. Golf shoes of that era were for lack of a better term, Sunday School Shoes with nails in the bottom. Not atheletic style shoes. As a matter of fact, I would say that pro golfers were not considered atheletes. Tiger apparently did not get the memo that he was supposed to be out of shape and spend most of his time smoking cigarettes and drinking beer. Of course, we all know now Tiger likes to spend his free time on more "athletic" endeavors. Micheal Jordon was there number one guy but Bo Jackson and the "Bo Know" campaign was huge back then.

 

But by the mid 90's Nike wanted to be the champion of all things sports, especially golf, and they saw in Tiger something that frankly no one else, besides Earl Woods, thought was justified. $50,000,000 for 5 years just to turn pro, wear Nike clothes that he helped design, and eventually play with Nike golf equipment once they build it to his liking. And they would let him have the final approval of all things. Of course, the final approval initially was Earl Woods, who not only created his son, he created the legend of Tiger Woods. This was scoffed at early on but eventually the media got on board and put Tiger on the same pedestal as his father.

 

Nike has tried with others to duplicate the Tiger appeal. Michele Wie has not turned out as well. Anthony Kim has not delivered either since he hurt his thumb. Tiger still gets the Nike Swoosh on TV more than when the Dallas Cowboys added it to there jerseys.

 

Nike Golf has come along way with there clubs also. I can not see them getting rid of Tiger, because quite frankly, they have no one else. Titleist and Taylormade seem to take a shotgun approach to spokespeople. They both run commercials that have 3 to 20 PGA players talking about how great their products are. Nike and the others stick with one person carrying the weight.

[GolfSpy Tim]

Shambles, love that take.

 

We see this all the time with businesses given opportunities to really make a HUGE move, and I think Nike has had that, and hasn't done anything noticeable to use what Tiger has done for them.

[RoverRick]

Shambles, love that take.

 

We see this all the time with businesses given opportunities to really make a HUGE move, and I think Nike has had that, and hasn't done anything noticeable to use what Tiger has done for them.

 

Tim, I have to disagree. Nike did not even make golf clubs before Tiger. Actually, I think the may have for a few years and quit in 1984. But they were not in the golf market prior to Tiger. The reviews on the VR line on this site are great.

 

I personally never cared for some of the other offerings by Nike, but the VR Pro line really appeals to me visually. I actually bought a VR Pro driver but hurt my back and never took it to the course, and sold it before I had recovered. Since then I have not had the urge to buy a new driver. As for the VR Pro combos, I would look seriously at those, if I were looking. I would have to play with them. I had forged Callaway Prototypes that I was in love with until I made the mistake of playing the Titleist ZB's and they felt so much better. But if I change irons or get a second set for Europe, I will try the Nikes.

 

Not because of Tiger directly. But because the reviews and the looks.

 

 

Nike's problem is that without Tiger no one else has stepped up and won anything. Stewart Cink will make an appearance before long, he always does, but he is not as photogenic as Tiger. Anthony Kim may be but he is have his own troubles recovering. Paul Casey is not recongnizable. And Michele Wie is taking longer to develop, but the bottom line is even if all these play great, Tiger is a bigger and better story even when he does not play great.