|
Tom,
I was in the advertising agency business for 35 years, doing
everything but the books...art, production, media, copywriting, creative
direction, creative strategy, PR and sales...mostly B to B, but had some
interesting small consumer and retail clients in sporting goods and the
tourism business. I especially enjoyed working with Old Town Canoes in
Bangor and the Sojourner Inn in Teton Village...out your way..back in the
'60s. We even had the Colorado Potato Growers Assoc. for a while when we had an
office in Denver.
What you say about ad pressure is absolutely true. Our PR people called
pubs every day to arrange for clients' PR placement. We'd provide articles to
editors, or information on topics of their choice, based on our
clients' new technologies. But, most of the trade pubs weren't gun-shy of
opposing ideas, like the Golf pubs seem to be. They'd write for one idea in one
issue and the competing idea in the next, discuss the subjects
professionally and let their audience decide which was better for them.
Once they wrote up one idea, they knew they'd get a lot of help with the other
one...more technology to fill their space and keep their audiences interested.
The floorcovering industry was a continual dogfight...new machines, techniques
for dying or tufting, new colors and styles every month, shows, promos...lots of
fun. Space-dye was competing with Tak-dye in those days.
If OEM club construction quality, value, etc. were compared in the
Golf media, as they should be, the OEMs might be at a distinct
disadvantage in competing for the club customer. No doubt they'd lose some
business. They seem to be trying to keep that from happening by
forcing the golf pubs to ignore custom clubmaking completely and to constantly
equate "custom clubs" with "cheap clones." IMO, until the Golf pubs realize that
they might increase their subscription base considerably and be able to increase
their ad rates by including custom clubs, as well as bring in new
advertisers, I'd guess you'll get small print at the rear of the book at best.
The threat of losing OEM ad dollars and their subsidized pros, who the pubs
depend on for many articles, is not a minor issue. Yes, it was the top brass who
were "chicken" in my dad's day, too.
Sounds like you are going the right direction to me, though I always hated
to sneak in the back door. :-) I wish you a lot of luck with your efforts.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2003 2:32
PM
Subject: RE: ShopTalk: Top Clubmakers /
GD / Dr. Loft
Harry and
Bernie:
You guys are both
aware that any magazine, regardless of its subject area is somewhat to sort of
to very much handcuffed by its advertisers. In the magazine business
there is an old adage that is often tossed around that goes, �does
advertising breed editorial, or does editorial breed advertising�.
And the only industry in which I have seen magazines basically stick their
noses up to their advertisers are some of the computer magazines, when I have
seen reviews of computers or peripherals or software that make negative
comments once in a while.
I can tell you that
over the years in my career going back to the 80s I have written as a guest or
regular contributor for Golf World, Golfweek, Golf Shop Operations, GOLF, Golf
Digest, Golf Illustrated and others. In every case except for Golf
Digest, I have been either kicked out or told to tone it down, when something
I wrote about the truth of golf equipment incurred the wrath of an
advertiser. The funniest one I remember was when I wrote an article on
forgings for Golf World long before the Golf Digest people bought the
magazine. Something in the article upset the then president of Ben Hogan
company and I was asked to fly down to Ft Worth where Hogan used to be HQ�d,
to explain my piece to the president and their officers. The meeting
started with the president literally throwing the issue at me that had my
article in it, using what I considered to be a very childish manner of letting
me know what he thought about my writing. Well, I got up to walk out
because I don�t ever need to have to deal with people like that, but then he
cooled down. Net result is that there are a lot of people in the
industry who believe that their ad dollars bring with it a right to tell a
magazine what to write, and whether the magazine listens or not is simply a
matter of how much they need the ad dollars.
In Golf Digest�s
case, I have worked with them for now nine years, much in the capacity of what
you, Bernie, mentioned about your father�s role. Their equipment editors
will call me for ideas, or run statements made by this or that golf equipment
company by me to see what is fact or fiction, or ask me to write articles once
in a while when their editors do not feel they want to or are qualified to
do. Each of the three equipment editors I have served under in the past
9 yrs with GD have been superb guys who desperately want to write the facts
about equipment. But they too have some handcuffs on in terms of putting
pictures or comments of clubs in there that are a balance between those made
by their bigger advertisers and some from companies who don�t advertise as
much. I think from what I have seen, they do that in a decent
balance. And they usually go to the OEMs for �quotes� because they
believe that the readers would listen to a name from a big company � but then
they have used my quotes a lot over the years too, so that does not say that
they only go to OEM people for a comment. Then too, the big equipment
companies are calling these guys almost daily to keep up the pressure for more
mentions of their equipment. That part often really tires them out
because it is so fraught with politics and pressure.
I can tell you that
off the record, the equipment editors do respect the better clubmakers, but
for them to really write about this side of the industry, they need some
groundswell of interest so that they can justify the interest from their
readers to the big cheese editors. That was why I suggested to GD that
since they know people do buy custom clubs, just like they know people take
lessons, why not do a list of top custom clubmakers like they do a list of top
swing teachers. It made sense to the equipment editor so he and I are
slowly starting to lobby the big cheeses there to consider it. No doubt
such a list would have to include pros or clubmakers who fit with OEM carts
too, but anything that would publicize custom clubmaking would help. And
that is the approach that I am trying to take on this or always try to help,
so you see in the end, I politic them too for my preferred side of the
industry!! Only not with as much ego as the OEMs are known to use when
they do it. But I do have to qualify that and say that some of the
OEM equipment guys are decent people who don�t always think that they need to
be first in line all the time. To dream of a golf industry where
everyone is a truly nice person is probably a little too unrealistic, but I
can say that the majority of the equipment editors for the various magazines
like Mike Stachura at GD, Mike Johnson at Golf World, Jim Achenbach at Golf
Week, Laurie Dovey at Golf Illustrated � these are some of the best and most
well rounded and open minded for sure.
TOM
W
-----Original
Message-----
From: Harry F.
Schiestel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 10:06
PM
To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: ShopTalk: Top Clubmakers / GD /
Dr. Loft
My son
and I cancelled our 3 year subscription to GD, due to the conflicting
instructional coverage, and some teachers are mere
hacks.
I do
intend to purchase the Nov. 2003 issue, just to read your published article,
unless its posted in full on the internet.
Regarding the
Top Clubmaker List, great idea if you could ever get a major magazine
to support your concept.
"Now my next project
with GD is to convince them they need to publish a booklet and side article on
top clubmakers just like they do for top teachers of the golf swing every
year."
What criteria and
process would you recommend, to select clubmakers worthy of such honourable
distinction?
I get
the feeling that 1 of the 2 awards processes now is based almost solely on how
many dollars you spend with the parent company.
How
would Golf Digest / yourself make such a clubmaker list creditable, for
our industry at large? I do very much like
this idea.
My
swingspeed is 90 mph, and I'm playing a 14 degree 400 cc
driver, Aldila One 65-R Mid Launch, 47 inches long, 307 grams total
weight.
With a
low total weight, the extra 2 to 3 inches in length was very easy to
swing. I'm hitting more fairways than I did at 44 or 45
inches.
After
playing golf now for 7 years, I had personal long best drives on 4 of the the
first 6 holes I used the driver. After 2 months the honeymoon is still
on. On hole one, I would roll into the gully once a year. Now
I carry the gully almost every time I play. I've worked on my balance a
lot in the last 2 years as well. Between the driver upgrade, and better
swing mechanics, I've gained on average about 45 yards in 2 years. Then
I built new fairway woods (new heads, reused same shafts) and gained another
20 yards with the same loft. On a par 5, that equates to approx. 60 to
70 yards. I'm starting to get the opportunity to putt for a
birdie. Through clubmaking, the game is NOW getting a little easier to
play! WOW!
Thanks
Bernie for the over length driver suggestions. With anticipation
Tom, I can hardly wait to get my hands on your recent GD
article.
-----Original
Message-----
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Tom Wishon
Sent: October 14, 2003 3:59
PM
To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: ShopTalk: Golf Digest
Higher loft articles
SNIP /
SNIP
Now my
next project with GD is to convince them they need to publish a booklet and
side article on top clubmakers just like they do for top teachers of the
golf
swing
every year. The initial response on this idea from Mike is positive,
but now it has to go to the higher ups, which is always tough in the face of
remembering where their ad dollars come from. But I�ll keep plugging
because this side of the industry deserves a lot more respect and things
like that could help a lot.
Thanks,
TOM
W
-----Original
Message-----
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 10:11
AM
To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: ShopTalk: Golf Digest Higher
loft articles
I read these articles with great
interest since this advice will be followed by many customers. Interesting
that in the charts an 11* driver with 115 MPH clubhead speed showed a carry
of 259 yards. Of all my customers that have been fitted I have only found 3
who could acheive this kind of clubhead speed and they all claim at least
280 yard carry! Most have clubhead speeds in the 75-85 MPH range and
claim carry distances of 190-200 yards! I guess everyone is
lying!
Most interesting part of this subject article is the
contribution by Tom Wishon which discusses the angle of attach. This part
was unfortunately the LAST page of the entire article and had the most truth
in it. This information will be (IMHO) the most overlooked because no 90 MPH
clubhead speed player would fess up to needing a higher loft to acheive
greater distance And a player with this clubhead speed "certainly" gets way
more than 208 to 212 yards carry!
My conclusion is to fit "macho" players
with "wuss" drivers...........now I need to find 11-12* loft drivers with
just the number "1" on the soles! This head combination with shafts that do
not have designations of L,A,R,S,XS will be future of successful
selling!
Your opions
please?
|
