The golf marketing industry is one of the largest growing industries today and has only become such a big deal recently, generally speaking. With big name stars and recognizable faces such as Tiger Woods, Phil Mickelson, Fred Couples, and Michelle Wie, golf is becoming one of the fastest growing and most popular sports in the world today.
These big name stars are not only recognizable to the public and golf fans around the world, but they also serve as key marketing tools for the game’s most prevalent golf club manufacturers such as Titleist, Taylor Made, Nike, Bridgestone, and others. In essence, these big name stars serve as “billboards” on the golf course. When golf fans sit down on the weekend and turn on their TV to tune into a golf tournament, the network coverage usually shows the big name players in primetime. These things are for sure: Tiger Woods will be wearing a Nike shirt, hat, and be carrying a Nike golf bag. Phil Mickelson will be doing the same with Callaway equipment. Other big name players will be representing their manufacturers of choice in the same way; usually manufacturers they have signed multi-million dollar contracts with to do so.
So the question is, does this marketing technique really work? And perhaps the even more debatable question becomes, do big name PGA Tour stars play certain golf clubs because they truly feel they are the best clubs, or do they play them solely on the grounds that they are being played the most money to play and market that particular brand of equipment? This is a subject of much debate within the golf marketing industry and among golf fans worldwide. There are valid arguments on each side and I will explore these arguments in the pages to come.
In 1999 Tiger Woods had been on the Professional Golf Association (PGA) Tour for three years. An instant sensation, he had rewritten the record books at the 1997 Masters, the game’s most prestigious tournament, and introduced to the masses a fresh version of a game they had believed to be stale. For one he was, and probably is (though the gap is beginning to close), the best athlete to have had success swinging a club. This is a title he takes seriously. He’s the youngest player to reach number one in the world, and he is poised to leave a more lasting legacy: to rewrite golf history by outstripping the old benchmarks set by his idol Jack Nickalus. Upon turning professional in 1996, he had signed a contract with Nike to wear their apparel and Titleist to play their clubs (Industry Data). Titleist was the brand Woods was most familiar with; the brand he had grown up playing. In 1996, without a tour card, Woods could not afford to experiment with new clubs (Tiger Woods). He had to play what he could rely on in the interest of job security. 1999 found Wood’s job quite secure. The switch to Nike clubs could be seen as an effort to cash in on some of his success. Top pros changing manufacturers at the height of their careers is not uncommon today. Phil Mickelson recently left Titleist to play Callaway clubs. Fred Couples, still very marketable at this point is his career, left Taylor Made Maxfli to sign with Bridgestone (Press Release). These big name signings are a major aspect of these companies’ marketing campaigns, but consumers are not gullible. Will they play a club simply because their hero does, or are they still going to search for the clubs that suit them best? In other words, is the implicit celebrity testimony these players give when they carry a certain bag or wear a certain hat (or even simply profess to carry a certain club, although the marketing is usually what occurs on television – much less explicit) effective, or is it a charade?
I brought up this debate with a friend of mine a couple of weeks ago.His older brother is trying to make it onto the PGA tour. He turned pro last year, and in his first big tour event, the Bay Hill Invitational, he made the cut. Since then he has had trouble getting sponsor’s exemptions. He is currently trying to succeed playing the mini-tour circuit. There are several of these tours: the Nationwide is the most prominent, but also the Grey Goose and the Hooter’s Tour to name a couple more. Success on one of these latter tours can propel a player to the Nationwide; success on the Nationwide can propel a player to the big tour. These men are also endorsed by club manufacturers, but the contracts are far less lucrative. Dan described to me the process Billy underwent last summer before he finally chose to play Bridgestone irons. It was a process characterized by tireless club testing. Billy cannot afford to sacrifice playing comfort for a little bit more money. His income right now is determined solely by how well he plays. Moreover, he cannot afford to pursue financial gain through endorsements; product loyalty is his current source of financial gain.
I play golf, I am good, I take it pretty seriously, and I know a lot about the game. In a nutshell, I am a savvy consumer. When I see a big name player sign a lucrative endorsement contract, I know that the money offered was probably heavily factored into the choice of equipment. I take this information with a grain of salt. Just because I see Tiger Woods play Nike irons does not mean that I will. And I see evidence that I am not alone.
- good specific topic
- misspelled Jack Nicklaus' name
- a title would have been nice
- no grammatical errors--very rare
- references are too general ("Tiger Woods," "Press Release," apparently referring to Birdgestone) What were the dates, where did you read it them? Readers might like to check them out to verify or to see what else they had to say on the subject.
- You set out the issue well enough, "Will they (consumers) play a club simply because their hero does....", You say you wouldn't, and you see evidence that you are not alone. However, I don't see any of that evidence in your paper. You drew your conclusions from your own experiences as a "savvy consumer." However, if you become a marketer, Reid, you're going to need to do some market research, i.e. survey other consumers, even some not so savvy ones who also spend money. Interesting that Billy Hurley didn't seem to be swayed by the money, yet you conclude that the money offered was probably heavily factored into the choice of equipment of other players. While the timing of equipment changes by other professionals you mention does seem to indicate they were following the money, that's just conjecture. Unfortunately, unless they tell us their motives, we'll never know for sure. Therefore, it's OK to make such conjecture. Good idea to acknowledge that that's what it is, though.
- Overall, good paper, interesting read. However, you didn't follow the format, font, spacing, etc., requested in the Oct 4 email that announced the project. Therefore, it did not truly meet the minimum length requirement. Grade for paper = 85