Are DTC Companies Unique? ... read more

[GolfSpy_APH]

Haywood posted a comment on their IG about being frustrated with brands copying their products and it being frustrating as some companies clearly copy and just rip off what they do. 

I have a feeling I know who they are talking about, but it got me thinking about the larger discussion and topic. 

Do we think DTC companies should use their own designs? R&D and all of that? Do you care that several use what look to be clear molds and similar products to others? Does that matter to you if they are basically a copy of others? 

Do you think the copy practice is dangerous to the DTC market or do you think it will lend itself to the leaders rising and those other brands being left with fewer customers and more? 

What do you think?

[vandyland]

53 minutes ago, GolfSpy_APH said:

Do you think the copy practice is dangerous to the DTC market or do you think it will lend itself to the leaders rising and those other brands being left with fewer customers and more?

Performance wins out but I do think that 4-5 DTCs all using the same mold with the only differentiator being badging or some milling is overall damaging to the entire industry. It commoditizes the space and then they are just competing on price or customization. For entry level clubs, it is not a problem and solves maybe the high entry cost to golf. But for true equipment nerds like us, the DTC has to be doing something compelling with their design methodology to make it appealing. I use Maltby clubs because I have bought into the Maltby Design principles AND the fact that the clubs look good AND they perform similarly to major OEM irons in my experience. 

The driver space is interesting because I think there is both a lot of actual and perceived technological acumen possessed by the Major OEMs that is hard to overcome from a DTC standpoint. I am sure I could play a Maltby driver and be okay but every bad shot I would wonder "Would my Mizuno have done that?"

For wedges, I don't think there is that much tech there and is a good space for a DTC manufacturer to do custom grinds or something else to suit a player. 

Putters are also interesting. I am a LAB guy so I believe in their tech. But if someone has a blade putter, I feel like a DTC can do a good approximation of that as there is really only the neck, milling and weighting to sort out there. If you start getting into mallets and counterbalancing and zero torque, that takes a good amount of acumen. 

[russtopherb]

Corners have to be cut someplace to offer the products at the low prices they do. Using the same molds as a lot of other brands appears to be the main place where that's happening with a lot of DTCs. 

Are they unique? Depends on who we're talking about. But for the most part, I lean towards no. 

[GolfSpy_APH]

5 minutes ago, russtopherb said:

Corners have to be cut someplace to offer the products at the low prices they do. Using the same molds as a lot of other brands appears to be the main place where that's happening with a lot of DTCs. 

Are they unique? Depends on who we're talking about. But for the most part, I lean towards no. 

You say corners have to be cut, but we have seen brands like Sub 70, New Level, Vice (although again I don't consider them DTC) and Haywood all create their own designs in house and see them through to launch. They are built in house and it would seem customers trust those brands a bit more. MacGregor is another and I am sure there are more brands, but those are just the first ones top of mind. 

Caley and Takomo 01 or 101 series look identical. And we know both have drop ships from China, Takomo does have some other series that don't necessarily look the same as others. Ram had another one that looked awfully similar and there was one other brand that I don't remember the name of. 

I did also see Caley take a page from the Takomo playbook with the SIGNED! posts on IG... even their websites looks awfully similar! 

https://caleygolf.com/?srsltid=AfmBOoq0MnViRHcFDRNCcPtdrP1GqDItGUv0fmvRowO6ENXtaiDL8_bz

https://takomogolf.com/?srsltid=AfmBOoruL9_FjbSeLx_ld0jGSSm1VcoY6-V6ZO-YLSOF-Wu0y0Kb1c6p

I am not at all saying this is bad (even if I think it seems weird), but when you have some brands that are clearly doing their own thing and refining their products and still providing great prices it is kinda too bad to see some others just go down the copy paste route. 

[GolfSpy_APH]

This isn't just clubs either, it goes across other products and I don't know necessarily know who is first or what, but I can only assume from the Haywood post this may have something to do with it. 

 

I dunno what to make of all of it truthfully, but will say it doesn't help the consumer that much. 

[Shankster]

This happened in the late 90’s too.  There were all sorts of knock off brands.  You could get Pal Joey’s that looked just like Cobra clubs.  There was a TM knock off, a ping… not dtc, but definitely had a small impact on the big brands sales I would assume.

[GolfSpy_APH]

4 minutes ago, Shankster said:

This happened in the late 90’s too.  There were all sorts of knock off brands.  You could get Pal Joey’s that looked just like Cobra clubs.  There was a TM knock off, a ping… not dtc, but definitely had a small impact on the big brands sales I would assume.

I do think there is a difference between knockoffs and open source copies. You can get a Temu MEZZ for $140 or something... will it do the same thing? Doubt it, but they are there. 

Good point though and valid comp. 

[KC Golf]

2 hours ago, GolfSpy_APH said:

Haywood posted a comment on their IG about being frustrated with brands copying their products and it being frustrating as some companies clearly copy and just rip off what they do. 

I have a feeling I know who they are talking about, but it got me thinking about the larger discussion and topic. 

Do we think DTC companies should use their own designs? R&D and all of that? Do you care that several use what look to be clear molds and similar products to others? Does that matter to you if they are basically a copy of others? 

Do you think the copy practice is dangerous to the DTC market or do you think it will lend itself to the leaders rising and those other brands being left with fewer customers and more? 

What do you think?

I think this is just terrible.  DTCs already are underdogs, but to be knocked off by other DTCs is brutal. Josh is trying hard to build a great business in Canada. So it’s just makes entrepreneurs like him think twice about building a brand in golf.

In contrast, DTCs knocking off OEMs in my view is fair game if they are not stealing proprietary info or patents.

The knock off items like bags, you would think they would be a bit more creative.  I have seen websites or IG pages that are complete knockoffs as well.

I think customers should use their dollars to buy from the better DTCs vs the low end copycats, but not sure that many golfers will do that, which is a shame.  I think quality and performance is better with the higher end DTCs, so I think paying slightly more is worth it.  

[Dan1247]

This is something you see across multiple industries. Many brands products are made in the same factories, just with their branding. Heck, it's been brought up many times on this site about how few ball manufacturing facilities there are. For entry level clubs, I don't necessarily see it as a bad thing if it can lower the cost. Speaking from experience most entry level golfers won't necessarily know all the nuances about the different kind of irons nor care. They just want something cheap to get started and will upgrade later. As per the DTC tier discussion these companies that buy the same molds are usually seen as lower tier companies. The ones that design their own are definitely seen as better.

I will say the similarities between the irons provided by Caley, Takomo, and others is part of the reason I looked at other DTCs.

[tony@CIC]

Is the situation any different then DTC golf ball brands being manufactured in the same factory? I'm all for competitiveness and open markets as long as they don't counterfeit products. 

[JB2334]

23 minutes ago, Shankster said:

This happened in the late 90’s too.  There were all sorts of knock off brands.  You could get Pal Joey’s that looked just like Cobra clubs.  There was a TM knock off, a ping… not dtc, but definitely had a small impact on the big brands sales I would assume.

Knock-offs were huge when I was a teenager in the late 90's. Pal Joey was one...remember King Snake or Canterbury Big Bursar? My clubs were stolen at one point, and I bought a set of Titleist DCI knock-offs (Title Tour or something like that) to replace the real thing. Decent clubs, but nowhere near the same feel.

I think there's good and bad involved with DTCs using same/similar molds and some that closely resemble clubs from the big brands. They are no doubt increasing access to the game by providing high quality equipment at half the cost, even less in some cases - but it's not like they just throw copied clubs out into the market - they need to maintain good quality control standards, get good reviews, and pour a ton of capital into effective marketing. I would have probably never heard of Maltby or Haywood if not for MGS and other sources that provide in-depth content...but I've definitely heard of Takomo, Caley, and Sub70 because they market their products aggressively and get great reviews from influencers and golf nerds alike.

I think the golf equipment market resembles the prescription drug market - Titleist, Callaway, TaylorMade, et al are the legacy companies that put millions (if not billions) into R&D to produce their equipment, and need to price their product at a level the still renders a profit. Their efforts have been rewarded with millions of consumers buying their products based on name recognition alone. At some point, others are going to be able to produce very similar products in looks and sometimes even quality, and sell them at much lower prices...but the legacy companies typically spend several years reaping the profits on their initial investment before that happens. TaylorMade perfected the hollow-body, injection molded iron in 2017 with the P790, and they had a good 3-4 year run before DTCs really started using the same design principles, and they're still selling more of their clubs than all the DTCs put together.

[haywoodgolf]

2 hours ago, vandyland said:

Performance wins out but I do think that 4-5 DTCs all using the same mold with the only differentiator being badging or some milling is overall damaging to the entire industry. It commoditizes the space and then they are just competing on price or customization. For entry level clubs, it is not a problem and solves maybe the high entry cost to golf. But for true equipment nerds like us, the DTC has to be doing something compelling with their design methodology to make it appealing. I use Maltby clubs because I have bought into the Maltby Design principles AND the fact that the clubs look good AND they perform similarly to major OEM irons in my experience. 

The driver space is interesting because I think there is both a lot of actual and perceived technological acumen possessed by the Major OEMs that is hard to overcome from a DTC standpoint. I am sure I could play a Maltby driver and be okay but every bad shot I would wonder "Would my Mizuno have done that?"

For wedges, I don't think there is that much tech there and is a good space for a DTC manufacturer to do custom grinds or something else to suit a player. 

Putters are also interesting. I am a LAB guy so I believe in their tech. But if someone has a blade putter, I feel like a DTC can do a good approximation of that as there is really only the neck, milling and weighting to sort out there. If you start getting into mallets and counterbalancing and zero torque, that takes a good amount of acumen. 

Can assure you that a few DTC brands do use the same tooling (usually drop shipping companies) but for companies like us, New Level,  we design and develop our own products and tooling. 

We did start off with open source for one set of irons, 5 years ago, and have never hidden from that because as you start a business, funds don't always allow for certain aspects. Being a business wanting to do things 'right', as we have grown, so has our ability to design, develop, test and have our own tooling for products. 

[JB2334]

1 hour ago, GolfSpy_APH said:

This isn't just clubs either, it goes across other products and I don't know necessarily know who is first or what, but I can only assume from the Haywood post this may have something to do with it. 

I didn't think any of the club manufacturers actually make their bags in house. I know Sun Mountain makes (or used to make) Titleist's bags - they just slap their name on them. I would guess unless there is something proprietary in the bag design on the clubmaker's end, the bag manufacturer sells the same design to whoever wants their name on the bags.

[Dan1247]

23 minutes ago, JB2334 said:

TaylorMade perfected the hollow-body, injection molded iron in 2017 with the P790, and they had a good 3-4 year run before DTCs really started using the same design principles, and they're still selling more of their clubs than all the DTCs put together.

Reminds me of the craft beer market. For all of those small breweries you see, where Sam Adams is still considered small, they only make up 13% of the market combined. Now imagine how much smaller DTC brands make up of the golf club market because you can't just go to the store and buy it.

[vandyland]

11 minutes ago, haywoodgolf said:

We did start off with open source for one set of irons, 5 years ago, and have never hidden from that because as you start a business, funds don't always allow for certain aspects. Being a business wanting to do things 'right', as we have grown, so has our ability to design, develop, test and have our own tooling for products.

I remember when I first saw a set of the Haywood Signature irons and thought they were absolutely beautiful, ditto for the wedges. At that time, there were a lot of busy iron designs and I was longing for something that was cleaner looking. Then the CBs came out and were also quite attractive. Overall, I have always really liked the Haywood aesthetic and love that you all are doing your own designs. I don't have any real hesitation on the forged items and I have owned or currently play New Level, Ben Hogan and Maltby. 

I have always wondered how the DTCs view the different sections of the bag and which mountains are the hardest to climb to win over customers. Is it the Drivers/Woods? Are those the hardest products to sell vs OEMs? 

[cnosil]

1 hour ago, KC Golf said:

 

The knock off items like bags, you would think they would be a bit more creative.  I have seen websites or IG pages that are complete knockoffs as well.

 

From my understanding there are few bag manufacturers.  For example rumor has it that Vessel makes all the high end bags.   When looking at the details I would agree that they make them. 

[PrayingForPar]

Seems like every industry deals with this, but it's what creates a competitive market in which the product must stand up to the competition. Not saying it is right, but when two companies have almost identical products and they both have similar marketing tactics, it comes down to which product performs better.

For example, I don't honestly know which ball company referred to their ball model with X, but assuming it is Titlest, I don't think they are going to launch an attack on all companies making similar products and adding an "X" in the name of their high spinning ball. The ProV1 is obviously the best and anyone can try and rip it off if they want to try.

[fozcycle]

I have not seen comparisons to Ben Hogan irons in the dtc market. How about Edison wedges? There is no other.

 

[Josh Parker]

I forget what site I found at one point, but I could have gotten just about every iron type out there based on the catalog.  I found irons that looked like sub70, haywood, etc.

 

 

Edited 12 hours ago by Josh Parker

[MattWillGolf]

36 minutes ago, Josh Parker said:

I forget what site I found at one point, but I could have gotten just about every iron type out there based on the catalog.  I found irons that looked like sub70, haywood, etc.

 

 

I used get the Golfsmith catalog back in the day. Some of their offerings looked like the 845, an Eye 2 and a DCI. 

[Josh Parker]

3 minutes ago, MattWillGolf said:

I used get the Golfsmith catalog back in the day. Some of their offerings looked like the 845, an Eye 2 and a DCI. 

Yeah.

I found the website again but dont want to throw it out there.  I think for alot of these DTC companies, it comes down to marketing. Some go thru the process of creating their own products and some use open source.  They all have a spot 

[MattWillGolf]

I don’t think all DTC companies are created equal. I’d put Haywood and New Level in the top category of DTC offerings, rivaling the major OEMs. Takomo tried to buy their way in by handling out influencer sponsorships like crazy but I found their offering to be rather limited if you know your specs and want something other than stock. The bottom end may offer value in the beginner space as an option to the likes of the Callaway Edge set at Costco.

[CF_P]

I am a recreational golfer, only breaking 100 on occasion.  I currently game a set of Takomo 101's.  Still, copying designs undermines the hard work that goes into R&D, innovation, and creating something unique in the market. Personally, I’m not a fan of companies that just replicate others' efforts without bringing something new to the table.

Maybe there's a bigger discussion to be had around accessibility in golf. As much as innovation is important, so is making the game more financially accessible. If more affordable products—whether original or inspired—bring more people into the sport, that’s a win for golf as a whole.  One could argue that purchasing second hand is also a better option.

However, there is definitely a line between making golf more accessible and flat-out copying. In the long run, I think the brands that invest in genuine R&D and creativity will stand out and continue to grow, while those just copying will likely fall behind. Ultimately, consumers recognize quality, value, and originality over time, and that's what will keep the leaders at the forefront.

[Shrek74]

18 hours ago, cnosil said:

From my understanding there are few bag manufacturers.  For example rumor has it that Vessel makes all the high end bags.   When looking at the details I would agree that they make them. 

Vessel apparently doesn't make all the high-end bags. Maple Hill Golf apparently went out and found who does though - https://maplehillgolf.com/revelation-golf-ceo-premium-cart-bag/.

[Shrek74]

I've commented about this in another post, so I'll try not to completely rehash everything I said before.

I do feel that Sub70, Haywood, and New Level are the 3 tops brands due to the fact they are absolutely designing/creating their own clubs and actually putting R&D dollars into having their own designs.

We all know that companies like Takomo, Caley, Ram, MacGregor, among others have or are still using open molds to create their products. These are the companies I'm not a fan of due to the fact they are purely slapping a logo on something and calling it a day. They're ripping off someone else's hard work and investment and often times selling for less money since they didn't put that time/money/effort into them beyond a logo. Those companies will not get my money any longer (I had a set of 101's, sadly) nor will I recommend them to others.

Some of these companies (they know who they are) are trying to utilize YT influencers to push their products instead of using that money to actually create their own. I realize social media and these influencers are a new way of advertising, especially to the younger generations who can't spend 5 minutes without their phones. That's not really my issue, per se. What is, is the fact that they're using that instead of actually designing and making their own equipment. They'd rather spend big bucks to sign these influencers instead of on R&D.

I do feel this copy/paste trend is having a negative impact on the DTC space. More and more people are starting to see this process for the various cheaper DTC clubs and are sadly labeling all DTC this way. They feel "what some do, all must do." That hurts DTC's, especially the good few.

[frazzman80]

I thought patents prevented things like this from happening. If you have a patented or a copyrighted design and someone rips it off you send cease and desists and/or sue them and make them go away.

If you don’t have a patented or copyrighted design and you are using the same mold from the same manufacturer then that is the game you are playing and you can’t be upset when another company puts their name legally on an open design. 

Building a brand on other people’s designs is a strategy, but it’s a risky one. Building a company on your own product ensures you aren’t copycatted by competitors.

[DougJ]

I don’t buy DTC clubs, I have to field test for look and feel, on a range, not a simulation net either. Story about that another time!!

and, from what I have heard, getting $$ money returned is difficult at best, my golf buddy spent 4 months and many many phone calls to get his money (are you reading this Warrior?).

Demo days and fitting are still king

DougJ

[agram57]

R&D is one of the things that drives up the price of a product so, DTC companies doing their own sort of defeats the purpose. That being said, how a product looks on the outside might not tell the whole story so, just copying the look might not give you all the performance of the original. If you get acceptable performance at a lower price than the big brand names then DTC is a good deal for you. As long as they don't infringe on any trademarked features I don't see any issue with producing clubs that look like some others. You pays your money and you takes your chances.

[tripolirt]

On 10/22/2024 at 8:01 AM, GolfSpy_APH said:

Haywood posted a comment on their IG about being frustrated with brands copying their products and it being frustrating as some companies clearly copy and just rip off what they do. 

I have a feeling I know who they are talking about, but it got me thinking about the larger discussion and topic. 

Do we think DTC companies should use their own designs? R&D and all of that? Do you care that several use what look to be clear molds and similar products to others? Does that matter to you if they are basically a copy of others? 

Do you think the copy practice is dangerous to the DTC market or do you think it will lend itself to the leaders rising and those other brands being left with fewer customers and more? 

What do you think?

 

[Coulter]

2 hours ago, Shrek74 said:

I do feel this copy/paste trend is having a negative impact on the DTC space. More and more people are starting to see this process for the various cheaper DTC clubs and are sadly labeling all DTC this way. They feel "what some do, all must do." That hurts DTC's, especially the good few.

I came here to say the same thing. I’m a huge fan of sub70 and any time someone asks about the brand I typically get some form of an eye roll and feel that being a DTC brand makes them a far inferior product. I have to refer people to the most wanted testing to prove that’s not the case.