“It changed the game.” The ProV1 story (25 years)

[A.G._Crockett]

If you’re an old guy and remember the first ProV1s, the belief was that there was a seam on the equator of the ball that gave you extra yards; all you had to do was tee the ball up with the ProV1 logo vertical and centered.  I have no idea if this was true or just urban legend. I suspect the latter.


But now almost 25:years later, I still tee my ProV1x with that logo vertical and centered.  Possible OCD, but still…

[Erik J. Barzeski]

If you’re an old guy and remember the first ProV1s, the belief was that there was a seam on the equator of the ball that gave you extra yards; all you had to do was tee the ball up with the ProV1 logo vertical and centered.  I have no idea if this was true or just urban legend. I suspect the latter.

It's an urban legend. They'd have been non-conforming if that was true.

[Jason_Bernardon]

I was a caddie during the halcyon days of the late 90s and early 2000s, so I’d like to think I observed just about all the equipment of the era first hand with the benefit of an extremely challenging Fazio as the barometer.


Based on what I saw and my first hand experience playing the original Pro V1 392, it was a drastic leap forward from preceding technology. I still remember my very first drive with it. I instantly felt like a better player.


The story from the 25th anniversary video about proshops selling their allocation even before putting the boxes on the shelves is true. I recall members quickly buying the available stock, not only to get their hands on the limited supply, but also to ensure the other money game players couldn’t get a supply of their own. Some event went so far to half jokingly accuse their playing partners of bribing the assistant pro for a direct supply.



The evolution of the driver, while always flashy, to me seemed incremental. It was not uncommon to see a 975D, GBB or TiSI  a few seasons past release. Not so for TaylorMade, the marketing machine.

[Sam Morrow]

I was a caddie during the halcyon days of the late 90s and early 2000s, so I’d like to think I observed just about all the equipment of the era first hand with the benefit of an extremely challenging Fazio as the barometer.


Based on what I saw and my first hand experience playing the original Pro V1 392, it was a drastic leap forward from preceding technology. I still remember my very first drive with it. I instantly felt like a better player.


The story from the 25th anniversary video about proshops selling their allocation even before putting the boxes on the shelves is true. I recall members quickly buying the available stock, not only to get their hands on the limited supply, but also to ensure the other money game players couldn’t get a supply of their own. Some event went so far to half jokingly accuse their playing partners of bribing the assistant pro for a direct supply.



The evolution of the driver, while always flashy, to me seemed incremental. It was not uncommon to see a 975D, GBB or TiSI  a few seasons past release. Not so for TaylorMade, the marketing machine.

In college my TiSI cracked and they sent me the Tech model (slate finish) and that driver combined with the ProV1 was a beast!

[Jim Sherma]

The TiSi and the TiSi Tech were great drivers. Had two TiSi's, one with the stock shaft and another with a Bi-Matrix shaft. Tried the Tech but it didn't knock the Bi-Matrix out of the bag. These were also very easy to hit off the deck. Does anybody else remember how small the TiSi fairway wood heads were. The 7-wood looked barely larger than a golf ball.


I remember the "seaming" craze with the early ProV1's. Always assumed that even if it was true at one point it would have been corrected very quickly.

[Thomas Dai]

Acquired some very early generation ProV1’s recently.
When hit with the same clubs they feel a lot firmer/sound more ‘clickier’ than the current and interim era models.
Atb

[Sam Morrow]

The TiSi and the TiSi Tech were great drivers. Had two TiSi's, one with the stock shaft and another with a Bi-Matrix shaft. Tried the Tech but it didn't knock the Bi-Matrix out of the bag. These were also very easy to hit off the deck. Does anybody else remember how small the TiSi fairway wood heads were. The 7-wood looked barely larger than a golf ball.


I remember the "seaming" craze with the early ProV1's. Always assumed that even if it was true at one point it would have been corrected very quickly.

Jim,


Our club couldn't sell the fairway woods so put them on deep discount, one of the pros told my Mom that I had the driver, that 3 wood sucked! It was about 8 swings before the Mizuno went back in the bag.

[Kevin_Reilly]

Our club couldn't sell the fairway woods so put them on deep discount

Good thing you didn't get visited by a Ping secret shopper, else your account would have been pulled.  My club lost its Ping account for several years for selling a single club below required price to a secret shopper.

[Sam Morrow]

Our club couldn't sell the fairway woods so put them on deep discount

Good thing you didn't get visited by a Ping secret shopper, else your account would have been pulled.  My club lost its Ping account for several years for selling a single club below required price to a secret shopper.

I worked for a club that had it happen!

[David_Tepper]

"require price"


Kevin R. -


Is it still legal for consumer goods companies to set minimum retail prices for their products? Is there a "restraint of trade" issue involved here?


DT

[Rob Marshall]

I was told this week at a proshop that if you sell Ping equipment at a price less than Ping sets, they will pull your ability to sell it.

[Pierre_C]

David,

Yes, it is legal for companies to set a minimum advertised price (MAP), but retailers are allow to set the final price. In theory, a retailer is able to sell below the MAP, but there are contractual penalties when a retailer sells below MAP.
2007 Supreme Court decision (5-4) in Legion Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. PSKS, Inc. answered whether it is illegal under Sec. 1 of the Sherman Act for a manufacturer to set mandatory minimum prices for its products.  The 5-4 decision overruled nearly 100 years of the anti-trust law outlined in the Sherman Act.

Majority opinion: Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, & Alito

https://www.duanemorris.com/alerts/alert2558.html
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2006/06-480

"require price"


Kevin R. -


Is it still legal for consumer goods companies to set minimum retail prices for their products? Is there a "restraint of trade" issue involved here?


DT

[A.G._Crockett]

I was told this week at a proshop that if you sell Ping equipment at a price less than Ping sets, they will pull your ability to sell it.

Ping has always done this; they simply won’t sell any more of their products to a retailer who sells below MSRP.  I believe Achusnet/Titleist/FootJoy is the same; a number of years ago, the PGA Tour Superstore had NO Titlelist/FootJoy products because they got “caught” selling ProV1s below MSRP. I can’t remember how long that lasted before the account was restored, but it was a significant period of time.


Retailers are, of course, very careful about this; many offer store credits for frequent purchases, but those can’t be used for Ping or Titleist products.

[Sam Morrow]

I was told this week at a proshop that if you sell Ping equipment at a price less than Ping sets, they will pull your ability to sell it.

Ping has always done this; they simply won’t sell any more of their products to a retailer who sells below MSRP.  I believe Achusnet/Titleist/FootJoy is the same; a number of years ago, the PGA Tour Superstore had NO Titlelist/FootJoy products because they got “caught” selling ProV1s below MSRP. I can’t remember how long that lasted before the account was restored, but it was a significant period of time.


Retailers are, of course, very careful about this; many offer store credits for frequent purchases, but those can’t be used for Ping or Titleist products.

Early to mid 2000s the original Superstores were selling Titleist balls so cheap that pros in Metro Atlanta were buying through them, not their reps.

[Eric LeFante]

There isn't enough credit for the distance boom given to the shafts, i.e. 43 inch 135 gram steel shaft vs 45.5 inch 65 gram shaft. I've seen side by side comparisons where a Tour players swing speed is +10 mph faster with today's shafts vs the shorter steel shafts. 

[John Emerson]

I used to love those precepts! I thought everyone was a sucker for paying the Pro-v premium while I was getting essentially the same ball for less.

[Sam Morrow]

I used to love those precepts! I thought everyone was a sucker for paying the Pro-v premium while I was getting essentially the same ball for less.

I like your style!

[Tags:]

Tags: