Opinion & Analysis
Why Today’s Clubs Are More Affordable Than You Think
If you’ve read my previous ramblings pieces, you’ve probably noticed where I see myself fitting in as a writer on this site. I’ve fantasized about a career in golf, but ultimately I’m just a regular hack with a sincere passion for the game who one day thought to himself, “You know what? I’m going to give this a go. I’m going to follow a passion and see what happens.” Look at me now, riding this whole blogging roller coaster.
With that being said, I now feel like we can all be friends and I can come to you with the following confession: I originally set out to write this piece by pointing my finger at the equipment manufacturers. “Look how much these golf clubs cost!” I thought to myself. “Who do you think you are? People have real concerns like mortgages and college funds!” Then as I sat down to write with literally a blank screen, the engineer in me took over and I thought to myself, “Let’s do this the right way. Let’s collect some data so that we can make an informed, objective decision.” Below is what I found on this journey.
The first place to start was by establishing a benchmark from which to evaluate the prices of today’s golf clubs. That part didn’t take long to figure out. It’s got to be the Ping Eye 2’s. Nearly every golfer from every walk of life (myself included) had a set of Ping Eye 2 irons in the 80’s and 90’s. Heck, tons of people still game a set today. Calling it a successful set of irons would be the understatement of the century. So, I proceeded to call up Ping and make my first official contact in the industry: its internal company historian. Yes, they have one of those.
I called Ping HQ and explained that I was a writer and I was looking for information on the Ping Eye 2’s. The voice on the other end said, “You should probably talk to our company historian. Hang on, I’ll transfer you.” A very polite man picked up the phone. I introduced myself and explained that I was working on a piece for GolfWRX. We exchanged some small talk and I learned this gentleman started working as a photographer for Ping in 1986 and has been the company historian since 2005. I proceeded to ask him if he could tell me what the retail price was for Ping Eye 2’s when they were released. “Hmm,” he said. “No one’s ever really asked me that one before.” That’s when I figured I was on to something.
He rummaged around his office and found some old price books. Some of the highlights I jotted down were that the Ping Eye 2 Plus irons cost $90 per club in 1996. Ping Eye irons were $55 each in September of 1981, and in 1980, a Ping Anser would have set you back $34. He was unable to find a price book from 1982 (the year the Eye 2 was released), but we exchanged some more small talk.
“I have it in my mind that the price of that club was $65 with a steel shaft,” he said. “I feel pretty confident about that.” After some more chit chat, he offered an anecdote: “I remember not long after I started working here, they asked me to come down to the shop floor to take some pictures because they had just gotten to a point where they were making 10,000 irons a day!” This was in 1986, which was probably very close to the peak of popularity for the Eye 2’s. Everything about that conversation told me I’d found my benchmark.
OK, story time is over. WARNING: MATH CONTENT FOLLOWS!
According to the U.S. Census, the median household income in America in 1982 was $20,171. I’ll skip through the boring details (though I do have the calculations if this causes an uproar) and say that household was left with $15,733.38 in their pockets after they paid taxes (assuming they were “married filing jointly”). Now, if said median household contained a golf addict who chose to splurge on a set of Ping Eye 2’s, an eight-club set (standard 3-PW, for example) at $65 each would have cost him or her $520. This would’ve been 3.3 percent of net income at the time. If you’re not a numbers person and all this just whizzes right by your head, just remember 3.3 percent. That’s how much of annual income the average guy (or gal) in America would have had to shell out to get the best golf clubs in the world in 1982.
I feel like I need a quick side note here. Please don’t make this about taxes and/or politics. This website is not the place for that discussion. I included that data only because it’s relevant to the actual topic at hand. Stay focused.
OK, let’s fast forward to today. In 2015 (I’m using the most recent data I could find here), the median household income in the U.S. was $56,516, which came out to $48,961.10 after paying taxes (again, assuming “married filing jointly” status). As previously discussed, the Ping Eye 2 essentially set the benchmark at 3.3 percent of net income 33 years earlier. That same percentage of the median household’s net income in 2015 comes out to $1,618.20.
Kind of surprising, isn’t it? At least that’s higher than what I thought. Ultimately, what this means is that if the “average Joe” in the U.S. spent less than $1,600 on his new set of clubs in 2015 (which I’ll wager the vast majority did), it was a smaller piece of his annual income than what his father presumably spent in 1982. See? Look at me now. I basically just justified your next club purchase for you. You’re welcome. I knew we could be friends.
Most of you already know this, but here’s a quick cross section of some things that are hot today:
- TaylorMade’s new P-790 irons were announced this week. They cost $1,299.99 for an eight piece set with steel shaft.
- The new Mizuno MP-18 range is set to be released to the public next month will cost $150 per club, which comes out to $1,200 for a set.
- Titleist’s 718 iron lineup was just announced this week, and it ranges in price from $999.99 (AP1) to $1299.99 (MB, CB, AP2, AP3) with steel shafts. The company’s premium T-MB irons will cost $250 per club, or $1999.99 per set.
What does that say about the really high priced jobs? Glad you asked!
- Callaway Epic and Epic Pro Irons are priced at $250 each, so an eight-club set comes out to $2,000. This is approximately 4.1 percent of the median household’s annual income in the U.S.
- PXG irons will set you back about $300 each, so an eight-club set would come out to $2,400. This comes out to 4.9 percent of the median household’s annual income in the U.S.
I understand this isn’t completely apples-to-apples because these are 2017 prices evaluated against a 2015 income, but it gives you a pretty good feel for where they stand.
It goes without saying that the market ultimately determines a price for everything… you know, that whole supply and demand thing. Everything from golf clubs to toilet paper is ultimately worth what the customer is willing to pay. Only you can decide if you think it’s worth the premium that Callaway, PXG, Titleist and others are charging. Some companies are definitely aiming at a price point that our market has not previously seen before, but in the end, it’s the wallets of consumers who will decide if they’re off their rockers or not.
As for the vast majority of products on the market today? All things considered, they are incredibly well-priced. The product you’re getting for your money in this day and age absolutely smashes arguably the most ground-breaking set of irons of all time, especially when you factor in the overwhelming amount of custom fitting options available today. It’s a great day to be alive… and playing golf!
- LIKE258
- LEGIT51
- WOW21
- LOL21
- IDHT6
- FLOP7
- OB9
- SHANK270
19th Hole
Vincenzi’s 2024 Wells Fargo Championship betting preview: Tommy Fleetwood ready to finally land maiden PGA Tour title
The PGA Tour season ramps back up this week for another “signature event,” as golf fans look forward to the year’s second major championship next week.
After two weaker-field events in the Zurich Classic and the CJ Cup Byron Nelson, most of the best players in the world will head to historic Quail Hollow for one of the best non-major tournaments of the year.
Last season, Wyndham Clark won the event by four shots.
Quail Hollow is a par-71 measuring 7,521 yards that features Bermudagrass greens. The tree-lined, parkland style course can play quite difficult and features one of the most difficult three-hole stretches in golf known as “The Green Mile,” which makes up holes 16-18: two mammoth par 4s and a 221-yard par 3. All three holes have an average score over par, and water is in play in each of the last five holes on the course.
The field is excellent this week with 68 golfers teeing it up without a cut. All of the golfers who’ve qualified are set to tee it up, with the exception of Scottie Scheffler, who is expecting the birth of his first child.
Past Winners at Quail Hollow
- 2023: Wyndham Clark (-19)
- 2022: Max Homa (-8)
- 2021: Rory McIlroy (-10)
- 2019: Max Homa (-15)
- 2018: Jason Day (-12)
- 2017: Justin Thomas (-8) (PGA Championship)
- 2016: James Hahn (-9)
- 2015: Rory McIlroy (-21)
Key Stats For Quail Hollow
Strokes Gained: Approach
Strokes gained: Approach will be extremely important this week as second shots at Quail Hollow can be very difficult.
Total SG: Approach Over Past 24 Rounds
- Akshay Bhatia (+1.16)
- Tom Hoge (+1.12)
- Corey Conners (+1.01)
- Shane Lowry (+0.93)
- Austin Eckroat (+0.82)
Strokes Gained: Off the Tee
Quail Hollow is a long course on which it is important to play from the fairway. Both distance and accuracy are important, as shorter tee shots will result in approach shots from 200 or more yards. With most of the holes heavily tree lined, errant drives will create some real trouble for the players.
Strokes Gained: Off the Tee Past 24 Rounds:
- Ludvig Aberg (+0.73)
- Rory McIlroy (+0.69)
- Xander Schauffele (+0.62)
- Viktor Hovland (+0.58)
- Chris Kirk (+0.52)
Proximity: 175-200
The 175-200 range is key at Quail Hollow. Players who can hit their long irons well will rise to the top of the leaderboard.
Proximity: 175-200+ over past 24 rounds:
- Cameron Young (28’2″)
- Akshay Bhatia (29’6″)
- Ludvig Aberg (+30’6″)
- Sam Burns (+30’6″)
- Collin Morikawa (+30’9″)
SG: Total on Tom Fazio Designs
Players who thrive on Tom Fazio designs get a bump for me at Quail Hollow this week.
SG: Total on Tom Fazio Designs over past 36 rounds:
- Patrick Cantlay (+2.10)
- Rory McIlroy (+1.95)
- Tommy Fleetwood (+1.68)
- Austin Eckroat (+1.60)
- Will Zalatoris (+1.57)
Strokes Gained: Putting (Bermudagrass)
Strokes Gained: Putting has historically graded out as the most important statistic at Quail Hollow. While it isn’t always predictable, I do want to have it in the model to bump up golfers who prefer to putt on Bermudagrass.
Strokes Gained: Putting (Bermudagrass) Over Past 24 Rounds:
- Taylor Moore (+0.82)
- Nick Dunlap (+.76)
- Wyndham Clark (+.69)
- Emiliano Grillo (+.64)
- Cam Davis (+.61)
Course History
This stat will incorporate players that have played well in the past at Quail Hollow.
Course History over past 36 rounds (per round):
- Rory McIlroy (+2.50)
- Justin Thomas (+1.96)
- Jason Day (+1.92)
- Rickie Fowler (+1.83)
- Viktor Hovland (+1.78)
Wells Fargo Championship Model Rankings
Below, I’ve compiled overall model rankings using a combination of the five key statistical categories previously discussed — SG: Approach (27%), SG: Off the Tee (23%), SG: Total on Fazio designs (12%), Proximity: 175-200 (12%), SG: Putting Bermuda grass (12%), and Course History (14%).
- Wyndham Clark
- Rory McIlroy
- Xander Schauffele
- Shane Lowry
- Hideki Matsuyama
- Viktor Hovland
- Cameron Young
- Austin Eckroat
- Byeong Hun An
- Justin Thomas
2024 Wells Fargo Championship Picks
Tommy Fleetwood +2500 (DraftKings)
I know many out there have Tommy fatigue when it comes to betting, which is completely understandable given his lack of ability to win on the PGA Tour thus far in his career. However, history has shown us that players with Fleetwood’s talent eventually break though, and I believe for Tommy, it’s just a matter of time.
Fleetwood has been excellent on Tom Fazio designs. Over his past 36 rounds, he ranks 3rd in the field in Strokes Gained: Total on Fazio tracks. He’s also been incredibly reliable off the tee this season. He’s gained strokes in the category in eight of his past nine starts, including at The Masters, the PLAYERS and the three “signature events” of the season. Tommy is a golfer built for tougher courses and can grind it out in difficult conditions.
Last year, Fleetwood was the first-round leader at this event, firing a Thursday 65. He finished the event in a tie for 5th place.
For those worried about Fleetwood’s disappointing start his last time out at Harbour Town, he’s bounced back nicely after plenty of poor outings this season. His T7 at the Valero Texas Open was after a MC and T35 in his prior two starts and his win at the Dubai Invitational came after a T47 at the Sentry.
I expect Tommy to bounce back this week and contend at Quail Hollow.
Justin Thomas +3000 (DraftKings)
It’s been a rough couple of years for Justin Thomas, but I don’t believe things are quite as bad as they seem for JT. He got caught in the bad side of the draw at Augusta for last month’s Masters and has gained strokes on approach in seven of his nine starts in 2024.
Thomas may have found something in his most recent start at the RBC Heritage. He finished T5 at a course that he isn’t the best fit for on paper. He also finally got the putter working and ranked 15th in Strokes Gained: Putting for the week.
The two-time PGA champion captured the first of his two major championships at Quail Hollow back in 2017, and some good vibes from the course may be enough to get JT out of his slump.
Thomas hasn’t won an event in just about two years. However, I still believe that will change soon as he’s been one of the most prolific winners throughout his PGA Tour career. Since 2015, he has 15 PGA Tour wins.
Course history is pretty sticky at Quail Hollow, with players who like the course playing well there on a regular basis. In addition to JT’s PGA Championship win in 2017, he went 4-1 at the 2022 Presidents Cup and finished T14 at the event last year despite being in poor form. Thomas can return as one of the top players on the PGA Tour with a win at a “signature event” this week.
Cameron Young +3500 (DraftKings)
For many golf bettors, it’s been frustrating backing Cam Young this season. His talent is undeniable, and one of the best and most consistent performers on the PGA Tour. He just hasn’t broken through with a victory yet. Quail Hollow has been a great place for elite players to get their first victory. Rory McIlroy, Anthony Kim, Rickie Fowler and Wyndham Clark all notched their first PGA Tour win at Quail.
Throughout Cam Young’s career, he has thrived at tougher courses with strong fields. This season, he finished T16 at Riviera and T9 at Augusta National, demonstrating his preference of a tough test. His ability to hit the ball long and straight off the tee make him an ideal fit for Quail Hollow, despite playing pretty poorly his first time out in 2023 (T59). Young should be comfortable playing in the region as he played his college golf at Wake Forest, which is about an hour’s drive from Quail Hollow.
The 26-year-old has played well at Tom Fazio designs in the past and ranks 8th in the field in Strokes Gained: Total on those courses in his last 36 rounds. Perhaps most importantly, this season, Young is the best player on the PGA Tour in terms of proximity from 175-200 in the fairway, which is where a plurality and many crucial shots will come from this week.
Young is an elite talent and Quail Hollow has been kind to players of his ilk who’ve yet to win on Tour.
Byeong Hun An +5000 (FanDuel)
Byeong Hun An missed some opportunities last weekend at the CJ Cup Byron Nelson. He finished T4 and played some outstanding golf, but a couple of missed short putts prevented him from getting to the winning score of -23. Despite not getting the win, it’s hard to view An’s performance as anything other than an overwhelming success. It was An’s fourth top-ten finish of the season.
Last week, An gained 6.5 strokes ball striking, which was 7th in the field. He also ranked 12th for Strokes Gained: Approach and 13th for Strokes Gained: Off the Tee. The South Korean has been hitting the ball so well from tee to green all season long and he now heads to a golf course that should reward his precision.
An’s driver and long irons are absolute weapons. At Quail Hollow, players will see plenty of approach shots from the 175-200 range as well as some from 200+. In his past 24 rounds, Ben ranks 3rd in the field in proximity from 175-200 and 12th in proximity from 200+. Playing in an event that will not end up being a “birdie” fest should help An, who can separate from the field with his strong tee to green play. The putter may not always cooperate but getting to -15 is much easier than getting to -23 for elite ball strikers who tend to struggle on the greens.
Winning a “signature event” feels like a tall task for An this week with so many elite players in the field. However, he’s finished T16 at the Genesis Invitational, T16 at The Masters and T8 at the Arnold Palmer Invitational. The 32-year-old’s game has improved drastically this season and I believe he’s ready to get the biggest win of his career.
- LIKE4
- LEGIT1
- WOW0
- LOL0
- IDHT0
- FLOP0
- OB0
- SHANK0
19th Hole
Vincenzi’s LIV Golf Singapore betting preview: Course specialist ready to thrive once again
After another strong showing in Australia, LIV Golf will head to Sentosa Golf Club in Singapore looking to build off of what was undoubtedly their best event to date.
Sentosa Golf Club sits on the southern tip of Singapore and is one of the most beautiful courses in the world. The course is more than just incredible scenically; it was also rated 55th in Golf Digest’s top-100 courses in 2022-2023 and has been consistently regarded as one of the best courses in Asia. Prior to being part of the LIV rotation, the course hosted the Singapore Open every year since 2005.
Sentosa Golf Club is a par 71 measuring 7,406 yards. The course will require precise ball striking and some length off the tee. It’s possible to go low due to the pristine conditions, but there are also plenty of hazards and difficult spots on the course that can bring double bogey into play in a hurry. The Bermudagrass greens are perfectly manicured, and the course has spent millions on the sub-air system to keep the greens rolling fast. I spoke to Asian Tour player, Travis Smyth, who described the greens as “the best [he’s] ever played.”
Davis Love III, who competed in a Singapore Open in 2019, also gushed over the condition of the golf course.
“I love the greens. They are fabulous,” the 21-time PGA Tour winner said.
Love III also spoke about other aspects of the golf course.
“The greens are great; the fairways are perfect. It is a wonderful course, and it’s tricky off the tee.”
“It’s a long golf course, and you get some long iron shots. It takes somebody hitting it great to hit every green even though they are big.”
As Love III said, the course can be difficult off the tee due to the length of the course and the trouble looming around every corner. It will take a terrific ball striking week to win at Sentosa Golf Club.
In his pre-tournament press conference last season, Phil Mickelson echoed many of the same sentiments.
“To play Sentosa effectively, you’re going to have a lot of shots from 160 to 210, a lot of full 6-, 7-, 8-iron shots, and you need to hit those really well and you need to drive the ball well.”
Golfers who excel from tee to green and can dial in their longer irons will have a massive advantage this week.
Stat Leaders at LIV Golf Adelaide:
Fairways Hit
1.) Louis Oosthuizen
2.) Anirban Lahiri
3.) Jon Rahm
4.) Brendan Steele
5.) Cameron Tringale
Greens in Regulation
1.) Brooks Koepka
2.) Brendan Steele
3.) Dean Burmester
4.) Cameron Tringale
5.) Anirban Lahiri
Birdies Made
1.) Brendan Steele
2.) Dean Burmester
3.) Thomas Pieters
4.) Patrick Reed
5.) Carlos Ortiz
LIV Golf Individual Standings:
1.) Joaquin Niemann
2.) Jon Rahm
3.) Dean Burmester
4.) Louis Oosthuizen
5.) Abraham Ancer
LIV Golf Team Standings:
1.) Crushers
2.) Legion XIII
3.) Torque
4.) Stinger GC
5.) Ripper GC
LIV Golf Singapore Picks
Sergio Garcia +3000 (DraftKings)
Sergio Garcia is no stranger to Sentosa Golf Club. The Spaniard won the Singapore Open in 2018 by five strokes and lost in a playoff at LIV Singapore last year to scorching hot Talor Gooch. Looking at the course setup, it’s no surprise that a player like Sergio has played incredible golf here. He’s long off the tee and is one of the better long iron players in the world when he’s in form. Garcia is also statistically a much better putter on Bermudagrass than he is on other putting surfaces. He’s putt extremely well on Sentosa’s incredibly pure green complexes.
This season, Garcia has two runner-up finishes, both of them being playoff losses. Both El Camaleon and Doral are courses he’s had success at in his career. The Spaniard is a player who plays well at his tracks, and Sentosa is one of them. I believe Sergio will get himself in the mix this week. Hopefully the third time is a charm in Singapore.
Paul Casey +3300 (FanDuel)
Paul Casey is in the midst of one of his best seasons in the five years or so. The results recently have been up and down, but he’s shown that when he’s on a golf course that suits his game, he’s amongst the contenders.
This season, Casey has finishes of T5 (LIV Las Vegas), T2 (LIV Hong Kong), and a 6th at the Singapore Classic on the DP World Tour. At his best, the Englishman is one of the best long iron players in the world, which makes him a strong fit for Sentosa. Despite being in poor form last season, he was able to fire a Sunday 63, which shows he can low here at the course.
It’s been three years since Casey has won a tournament (Omega Dubai Desert Classic in 2021), but he’s been one of the top players on LIV this season and I think he can get it done at some point this season.
Mito Pereira +5000 (Bet365)
Since Mito Pereira’s unfortunate demise at the 2022 PGA Championship, he’s been extremely inconsistent. However, over the past few months, the Chilean has played well on the International Series as well as his most recent LIV start. Mito finished 8th at LIV Adelaide, which was his best LIV finish this season.
Last year, Pereira finished 5th at LIV Singapore, shooting fantastic rounds of 67-66-66. It makes sense why Mito would like Sentosa, as preeminent ball strikers tend to rise to the challenge of the golf course. He’s a great long iron player who is long and straight off the tee.
Mito has some experience playing in Asia and is one of the most talented players on LIV who’s yet to get in the winner’s circle. I have questions about whether or not he can come through once in contention, but if he gets there, I’m happy to roll the dice.
Andy Ogletree +15000 (DraftKings)
Andy Ogletree is a player I expected to have a strong 2024 but struggled early in his first full season on LIV. After failing to crack the top-25 in any LIV event this year, the former U.S. Amateur champion finally figured things out, finished in a tie for 3rd at LIV Adelaide.
Ogletree should be incredible comfortable playing in Singapore. He won the International Series Qatar last year and finished T3 at the International Series Singapore. The 26-year-old was arguably the best player on the Asian Tour in 2023 and has been fantastic in the continent over the past 18 months.
If Ogletree has indeed found form, he looks to be an amazing value at triple-digit odds.
- LIKE3
- LEGIT3
- WOW1
- LOL2
- IDHT0
- FLOP2
- OB0
- SHANK0
In Tampa, there is a golf course that boasts carts that do not work, a water range, and a group of players none of which have any chance to break 80. The course is overseen by a staff of crusty men who have succeeded at nothing in life but ending up at the worst-run course in America. However, this place is no failure. With several other local courses going out of business — and boasting outstanding greens — the place is booked full.
While I came for the great greens, I stayed to watch our resident instructor; a poor-tempered, method teacher who caters to the hopeless. At first, it was simply hilarious. However, after months of listening and watching, something clicked. I realized I had a front-row seat to the worst golf instructor in America.
Here are some of my key takeaways.
Method Teacher
It is widely accepted that there are three types of golf instructors: system teachers, non-system teachers, and method teachers. Method teachers prescribe the same antidote for each student based on a preamble which teachers can learn in a couple day certification.
Method teaching allows anyone to be certified. This process caters to the lowest caliber instructor, creating the illusion of competency. This empowers these underqualified instructors with the moniker of “certified” to prey on the innocent and uninformed.
The Cult of Stack and Jilt
The Stack and Tilt website proudly boasts, “A golfer swings his hands inward in the backswing as opposed to straight back to 1) create power, similar to a field goal kicker moving his leg in an arc and 2) to promote a swing that is in-to-out, which produces a draw (and eliminates a slice).”
Now, let me tell you something, there is this law of the universe which says “energy can either be created or destroyed,” so either these guys are defying physics or they have no idea what they are taking about. Further, the idea that the first move of the backswing determines impact is conjecture with a splash of utter fantasy.
These are the pontifications of a method — a set of prescriptions applied to everyone with the hope of some success through the placebo effect. It is one thing for a naive student to believe, for a golf instructor to drink and then dispel this Kool-Aid is malpractice.
Fooled by Randomness
In flipping a coin, or even a March Madness bet, there is a 50-50 chance of success. In golf, especially for new players, results are asymmetric. Simply put: Anything can happen. The problem is that when bad instructors work with high handicappers, each and every shot gets its own diagnosis and prescription. Soon the student is overwhelmed.
Now here’s the sinister thing: The overwhelming information is by design. In this case, the coach is not trying to make you better, they are trying to make you reliant on them for information. A quasi Stockholm syndrome of codependency.
Practice
One of the most important scientists of the 20th century was Ivan Pavlov. As you might recall, he found that animals, including humans, could be conditioned into biological responses. In golf, the idea of practice has made millions of hackers salivate that they are one lesson or practice session from “the secret.”
Sunk Cost
The idea for the worst golf instructor is to create control and dependency so that clients ignore the sunk cost of not getting better. Instead, they are held hostage by the idea that they are one lesson or tip away from unlocking their potential.
Cliches
Cliches have the effect of terminating thoughts. However, they are the weapon of choice for this instructor. Add some hyperbole and students actually get no information. As a result, these players couldn’t play golf. When they did, they had no real scheme. With no idea what they are doing, they would descend into a spiral of no idea what to do, bad results, lower confidence, and running back to the lesson tee from more cliches.
The fact is that poor instruction is about conditioning players to become reliant members of your cult. To take away autonomy. To use practice as a form of control. To sell more golf lessons not by making people better but through the guise that without the teacher, the student can never reach their full potential. All under the umbrella of being “certified” (in a 2-day course!) and a melee of cliches.
This of course is not just happening at my muni but is a systemic problem around the country and around the world, the consequences of which are giving people a great reason to stop playing golf. But hey, at least it’s selling a lot of golf balls…
- LIKE18
- LEGIT2
- WOW0
- LOL4
- IDHT1
- FLOP4
- OB1
- SHANK24
Dave Portnoy places monstrous outright bet for the 2024 Masters
John Daly stuns fans into silence with brutal opening tee shot on PGA Tour Champions
Things got heated at the Houston Open between Tony Finau and Alejandro Tosti. Here’s why
Justin Thomas on the equipment choice of Scottie Scheffler that he thinks is ‘weird’
Tiger Woods arrives at 2024 Masters equipped with a putter that may surprise you
‘Absolutely crazy’ – Major champ lays into Patrick Cantlay over his decision on final hole of RBC Heritage
Report: Tiger Woods has ‘eliminated sex’ in preparation for the 2024 Masters
Two star names reportedly blanked Jon Rahm all week at the Masters
Report: LIV Golf identifies latest star name they hope to sign to breakaway tour
Neal Shipley presser ends in awkward fashion after reporter claims Tiger handed him note on 8th fairway
Peter Kuest WITB 2024 (May)
Peter Kuest what’s in the bag accurate as of CJ Cup Byron Nelson. Driver: TaylorMade Stealth 2 Plus (8 degrees)...
Kelly Kraft WITB 2024 (May)
Kelly Kraft’s what’s in the bag accurate as of the CJ Cup Byron Nelson. More photos from the event here. ...
Taylor Pendrith’s winning WITB: 2024 CJ Cup Byron Nelson
Driver: Ping G430 LST (9 degrees) Buy here. Shaft: Accra TZ Six ST 3-wood: Ping G430 Max (15 degrees) Buy here....
Ben Kohles WITB 2024 (May)
Driver: Titleist TSR3 (9 degrees, D1 SureFit setting) Shaft: Fujikura Ventus Blue 6 X 3-wood: TaylorMade Stealth Plus (15 degrees)...
-
19th Hole2 weeks agoJustin Thomas on the equipment choice of Scottie Scheffler that he thinks is ‘weird’
-
19th Hole2 weeks ago‘Absolutely crazy’ – Major champ lays into Patrick Cantlay over his decision on final hole of RBC Heritage
-
19th Hole3 weeks agoReport: LIV Golf identifies latest star name they hope to sign to breakaway tour
-
19th Hole3 weeks agoBrandel Chamblee has ‘no doubt’ who started the McIlroy/LIV rumor and why
-
19th Hole1 week agoLET pro gives detailed financial breakdown of first week on tour…and the net result may shock you
-
Equipment3 weeks agoJason Day on his recent switch into Srixon ZX5 and ZX7 Mk II irons
-
19th Hole5 days agoGary Player claims this is what ‘completely ruined’ Tiger Woods’ career
-
Whats in the Bag1 week agoTeam McIlowry (Rory McIlroy, Shane Lowry) winning WITBs: 2024 Zurich Classic
BC
Sep 22, 2017 at 8:23 am
Great, fun article.
Something I did to offset the higher prices was purchased custom clubs…but only the longer irons. 5 iron – 9 iron… If purchased at the correct time, the options are more affordable for the “feel” irons like the PW, 50º, SW and 60º… and for the 4 irons, I replaced that with a driving iron… The prices are still insane, but if you can time the purchase of the “feel” irons and get them on sale or at golf shows, you can really cut down the costs. Take a year or two to get the set to where you need it. But, that gives you plenty of time to master each club. Usually takes a good 100-200 solid hits with a club before you really start to call it your own. I agree with many of the comments to not believe the hype. Get the clubs that make you play at your comfort level. Confidence is so much more important that ego. I’m in marketing… I understand what these big name companies try to do each year. 20 MORE YARDS! pbbbbt…….no. More forgiving?… yes.
JR
Sep 21, 2017 at 8:57 am
More to the point is that these new irons that come out every year are obsolete before they’ve even hit the shops. I’ve worked in R&D and I know that truly innovative products do not come along three times a year. All the big manufacturers are doing is tinkering with the tech, throwing some jargon around to explain it and giving the aesthetics a make-over. Foam-injected clubheads, for example – they’re nothing new. I had a set of Taylor Mades in the late 80’s that featured this technology. That’s what makes this tussle with PXG all the more amusing – Taylormade were doing this stuff when Bob Parsons was still dreaming of making his own clubs.
At the end of the day, equipment is only as good as the guy using it but if you can afford this super-expensive kit and that’s what you want to do with your cash then good luck to you. Personally, the best money I’ve ever spent on gear and the only thing I can honestly say has definitely taken shots off my score is my laser range finder. If you haven’t got one you should.
BC
Sep 22, 2017 at 8:25 am
awesome. I agree with the rangefinder! Great call.
Chris
Aug 30, 2017 at 8:15 am
Woods are even “cheaper” than Irons today compared to before. I remember paying more than 700 dollars for a TP driver and around 550 dollars for a Callaway hawk eye Ti 3-wood on SALE.
birdy
Aug 29, 2017 at 1:43 pm
Few things to also consider…
Technology improvements also come with a more efficient manufacturing process and reduced costs. OEM’s can now produce superior equipment at lower costs. Their profits may actually be higher even as the pace of cost of equipment hasn’t kept up with inflation or increased wages. Its not like you look at a flat screen tv and think, it should cost $6k today since wages have increased from the days when a tv used to cost 4k.
Also, there is something call substitution in economics. If costs of golf increase to a point where an alternative activity becomes more more reasonable you may lose golfers. just because clubs are ‘cheaper’ now doesn’t mean that other suitable substitutes for golf have also increased in price.
And what about things that we buy that have outpaced inflation. this factors into our disposable income. for example….cost of kids sports and their equipment, healthcare costs, cost of food, and college tuition.
J Zilla
Aug 28, 2017 at 11:14 pm
I’d be kind of curious to know what percentage of golfers were buying high end clubs like Ping Eye 2’s at the time.
In my completely uninformed opinion it seems like golfers today of all skill levels are buying expensive clubs from the top manufacturers.
I feel like back in the 80s and before, a larger percentage of golfers would be playing cheapo full sets from the local sporting goods store or hand me downs (forget about getting fit back then!) and not typically buying high end sets like the Ping Eye 2.
Nowadays the cheapo set doesn’t really exist. You have to buy a minimum $750 Titleist, TM, etc. (well new at least)
I suppose as things were more hand made and there were less technological jumps or exotic materials being used, there probably wasn’t all that much difference between a premium set and a cheapo set of Spaldings or even clubs that were 20 years old.
Brad
Aug 29, 2017 at 10:46 am
I remember what a golf store owner told me about the new Ping Eye clubs when I asked him the same question in the early 1980s. He said he just sold 4 sets to a Japanese man who ships them back to Japan and sells them at triple the cost. Ping had to ration the clubs internationally while selling to the domestic market in the early days. The world is awash in USD and the Japanese were on top of the world in the 1980s.
Jim
Aug 28, 2017 at 3:46 pm
What dennis said. (Way up top) Don’t ever buy new clubs. Buy good used ones for 1/2 the price or less.
Jiminy
Aug 28, 2017 at 2:12 pm
Who buys these clubs? Idiot gearheads so they can brag how good they feel and how much farther they hit the ball, which is all neurotic lies. And the filthy rich who don’t have to look at the ticket prices on the clubs. Everybody else is saying no or giving up on golf because it’s too expensive and too time consuming. Golf participation is plummeting and the OEMs are just skimming off the last $$$$ from what’s left in the marketplace.
dennis
Aug 28, 2017 at 2:06 pm
I have to laugh every time I hear any type of golf associated person discuss the price of clubs and try to justify it. I worked for a golf shop for 3 years. I became a Callaway VIP and bought a set of Apex clubs for a great price. When I moved I stopped working altogether and after a few years decided it was time for new sticks. I coukd not believe the prices…………average of $900 for a set of 8 steel irons. I sold my Callaways on Craigs List, bought heads, shafts and grip components, and built my own “custom” clubs. I compared them with my old Callaways and the only difference was I hit my custom made clubs a bit longer (loft increase issue I am sure) and straighter. Now, pricing as follows:
Head $15.00
shaft $9.00
grip $6.00
Total cost per club = $30.00 each, or $240.00 for 8.
No way can anyone justify overhead of $660.00.
Ron
Aug 28, 2017 at 4:20 pm
The extra you’re paying for is the ridiculous player contracts
Shanks Happen
Aug 28, 2017 at 12:50 pm
Let’s be honest. They are charging that much for a set of irons or a driver because they can. The guys who demand to get the newest will buy it. The guys who either don’t want to or can’t pay for it now will wait 6-8 months and get it for $50-250 less. All of this is factored in. For all the “new” technology in clubs, the tooling methods and (for the most part) materials remain the same. At this point, the biggest part of the cost of a golf club is marketing and over-padding to make money on the club in 6-8 months when you drop the price or drop a new club on us.
Peter Schmitt
Aug 28, 2017 at 11:24 am
Thanks for the comments, folks. I expected this to gather some of the reactions seen here. I will agree with many of you in that there are many different ways to go about calculating this and tons of factors to consider. However, no one would’ve wanted to read a PhD thesis (myself included). It is interesting food for thought, however, which is why I thought it worth sharing. Cheers!
Tom54
Aug 28, 2017 at 9:22 am
There have always been pricy clubs. I recall paying $750 for some Ping eye 2 beryllium model in the mid-80’s which was a lot. Even in early 90’s I was a huge Nick Faldo fan and had to have a set of Mizuno mp-29’s. Those were $1000. Also the early model of Snake Eye wedges were $200 which is more than a current Vokey wedge which are the best out there. I even recall getting a Taylormade 425 tp driver which retailed for $799. Some models have stayed relatively expensive and some have sort of stayed within reason. It is still exciting to see new clubs coming out Everyone has an idea what they are willing to spend. Look in any bag at your average course and you will truly see it all.
John Krug
Aug 28, 2017 at 8:34 am
Can we have an article on the increasing cost to join a Trump golf club?
Peter Schmitt
Aug 28, 2017 at 11:17 am
I am in no way saying I am the standard by which all others should be measured in this department, but I am a former Marine, and therefore not a complete wimp. Having said that, I’m not touching that one with a 10-foot pole haha!!!!
Steve S
Aug 28, 2017 at 8:18 am
Interesting article. As a fellow ME I appreciate the approach and expected the criticism of that approach. You could have used a much more complicated analysis and probably come up with a similar answer. For me the cost component that is not usually considered the additional cost of doing business today. Advertising and marketing costs are a greater percentage of most businesses today along with human resources costs. These were much lower as a percentage of your business in the 1980’s. I still won’t buy a brand new set of irons because the technology really doesn’t have that big of an effect on my game. 10 year old irons are about the same as current models as far as results with my swing speed. I do see a difference if I go back to a 20 year old set, however.
So if you can have the discipline to buy a new set every 10 years your really only spending the equivalent of 2-3 rounds of golf a year on clubs.
Michael
Aug 28, 2017 at 5:56 pm
I’m a retired professional engineer and I still play a decent game with my green dot, +1″ Ping Zing 2’s, and the only thing I do to them is change the grips. I laugh at my playing buddies struggling with their new clubs and assuring us they have to get used to them.
I know my game and can control my clubs for consistent results. I don’t need an extra phantom 12 yards costing me $2000 and bragging rights with my new play toys. I play and perform; and not showing up with brand new toys to impress and intimidate. Men can revert into childhood with new toys.
Rich Douglas
Aug 27, 2017 at 10:28 pm
Adjusted for inflation, something that cost $520 in 1982 would cost about $1350 today. A set of Ping G irons costs $700 today, and a set of Ping G400s are $900. So, a vastly superior club at a remarkably lower cost. Nice.
Ken Y.
Aug 27, 2017 at 7:38 pm
I don’t think affordability is simply just a % of median income. Although that may be the way manufacturers price their products. You have to consider the costs of necessities. You obviously have your food, water, and shelter, but I doubt mobile phones and internet were common household expenses; which I would argue is a necessity in modern society. And speaking of shelter, how much is the average rent now vs. 80s? Basically, the point I’m trying to make is that people now have greater income, but a smaller discretionary budget. Thus, making golf clubs seem much more expensive even though it may track closely with inflation and median income. The article is a good start, but I think it’s only scratching the surface and too early to say “all things considered.” I don’t know if I’m right, but just my guess.
Mike
Aug 27, 2017 at 12:52 pm
$56,516 median income per household? You must split that number.
Husband’s income = $30,000. Wife’s income = $26,000. Get the picture?
Millennials will not justify buying such expensive sport equipment and then get dinged for another $50+ for one round of golf taking 5 hours (30 minutes playing and 4.5 hours standing around and gossiping and complaining about slow play). Besides, the wife will not permit such a purchase where she and the kids gets nothing from it.
Non-athletic millennials prefer to play video games, watch TV and playing Texas Holdem Poker and sitting on their butts. Get the picture?
Golf is dying from self-inflicted wounds and economic reality.
ooffaa
Aug 28, 2017 at 5:43 pm
you nailed it !!!
AceW7Iron
Aug 27, 2017 at 8:22 am
IMO…The tool itself can only carry so much value to the golfer and over a certain price point for a player to game overly expensive equipment is just to show others you can afford it (much like owning a new Tesla)
Ive been out gunned by partners playing A GGB Warbird driver,irons produced in 1977 and a bullseye putter. My point? Equipment has a set value to each and every player out there and there are not many that see value in a $2000 set of irons when they can play just as well with a $300 set.
One other thing…Everything else has gone up in price since those Ping Zings and some things more than others. Think housing…In 1996 you probably had more expendable income because shelter was more affordable. In todays market you will fork out a greater % of your income on the “necessities” which in reality leaves “less” for golf equipment. Why do you think Dicks,Golf Galaxy and the now defunct Golf Smith are/were struggling to stay afloat?
Rich Douglas
Aug 27, 2017 at 10:30 pm
Actually, the opposite is true. Take food. A few decades ago, the average family spent 25% of its disposable income on food. That is now down to 10%.
ROY
Aug 28, 2017 at 12:44 pm
Dicks,Golf Galaxy and the now defunct Golf Smith – the internet
Mat
Aug 27, 2017 at 6:05 am
Hey Schmittie,
Just a suggestion… stop being so patronising.
Woody
Aug 26, 2017 at 9:48 pm
This article confirms what I’ve been saying for years, golf is an expensive sport. This is from hand crafted wood clubs to what we have now. It always will be, get over it. I don’t have a lot of money, but pinch pennies in a lot of areas in my life to play. thank god I live in America which affords the middle class the ability to play.
birdy
Aug 28, 2017 at 9:32 am
Few things to also consider…
Technology improvements also come with a more efficient manufacturing process and reduced costs. OEM’s can now produce superior equipment at lower costs. Their profits may actually be higher even as the pace of cost of equipment hasn’t kept up with inflation or increased wages. Its not like you look at a flat screen tv and think, it should cost $6k today since wages have increased from the days when a tv used to cost 4k.
Also, there is something call substitution in economics. If costs of golf increase to a point where an alternative activity becomes more more reasonable you may lose golfers. just because clubs are ‘cheaper’ now doesn’t mean that other suitable substitutes for golf have also increased in price.
And what about things that we buy that have outpaced inflation. this factors into our disposable income. for example….cost of kids sports and their equipment, healthcare costs, cost of food, and college tuition.
ADIDAG
Aug 26, 2017 at 8:28 pm
Did you say golf(works) or golf w.r.x.
when you called Ping….
I just gotta know
ADIDAG
Aug 26, 2017 at 8:24 pm
This is some bull schmitt
Peter Schmitt
Aug 26, 2017 at 10:45 pm
Everything I write is a piece of Schmitt 😉
ADIDAG
Aug 27, 2017 at 9:13 am
Well keep em coming!!!!!!!!!
Bert
Aug 26, 2017 at 7:59 pm
Let’s see move manufacturing to China, Taiwan, and assembly in Mexico and you increase your profits. Since it’s so much better to manufacture off shore, perhaps the prices should have actually gone down.
Caroline
Aug 27, 2017 at 12:22 am
Add to that the fact the casting process is much more efficient now, and the specs for clubs are basically in every companies computer..just move the weight a bit, put in different pieces of plastic every year, cut the groves a bit different each year….may as well just give in and come back out with the Eye 2 because irons have NEVER really got any better…if it cost $10 to make an Eye 2 iron the first year they could have that down to $5 dollars now.
Rich Douglas
Aug 27, 2017 at 10:32 pm
Costs do NOT determine prices. Market forces do. Costs determine PROFITS.
Bert
Aug 28, 2017 at 8:29 am
Good Point – as well as greed. Remember the price points for clubs are “fixed” by the manufactures; that’s why retailers cannot compete, they must sell at the price “fixed” by the big boys.
Lim E Cheik
Aug 26, 2017 at 7:43 pm
You can thank the Chinese for the reasonable pricing.
Adam Crawford
Aug 26, 2017 at 5:21 pm
That’s was fun read. Definitely puts a different perspective on the idea that equipment is expensive. Well done, Peter!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Aug 26, 2017 at 9:57 pm
I’m about to buy some 718 AP2’s and was slightly disheartened by the price hike, but I’ll use this article to keep the wifey from getting to upset lol.
Like every article written on here there will be people picking apart every scenario, but I enjoyed it. And for the guys saying moving production over seas, and then complaining price points ect., yes moving club making over seas is cheaper for OEM’s and then us, but if they didn’t i imagine clubs here would be way more expensive. Also it’s all done basically by machines for the most part, so whether they’re cast/forged here or there, the product would be basically the same. Whether you pay someone $20 an hour here, or $5 an hour there the product would basically be the same. OEM’s want to make money, we want to spend the least amount for the best equipment, we can’t have it both ways.
Great article because it was different than the typical articles here. I hope there’s more like it to come.
Shane
Aug 26, 2017 at 4:00 pm
1200-2000 plus for irons is nuts, especially since the ole trusty Eye2s can be had for next to nothing and still perform as good as anything out there. Do not and am not trying to start a debate or argument of any sorts either, too many good deals to be had as long as you know what works for ones self. New is nice but not at today’s prices!!
Rich Douglas
Aug 27, 2017 at 10:39 pm
I used to feel that way, but there have been a few significant improvements since the Eye2.
Perimeter weighting in forged irons is an improvement. So is the use of multiple materials and welding instead of being limited to either casting or forging one metal. Softer metals than 17-4 steel are now used in casting. Perimeter weighting is more radical, increasing MOI. Moving weight ports as the heads change throughout the set improve launch angles. Slots in the top, bottom, and sides to increase COR (for more distance). All this and more for a cheaper (adjusted for inflation) price? Brilliant!
birdy
Aug 28, 2017 at 9:41 am
i lol every time someone says the eye2s perform as well as any of the new stuff on the market.
chris franklin
Aug 26, 2017 at 3:45 pm
An article based on false premises.
The prices quoted for Eye 2’s would have been Ping’s suggested retail price,check back in old golfing magazines and in golf shop adverts ‘ring for quote’ was the norm.
Almost nobody paid suggested retail.
The real nitty-gritty is how ridiculously high prices are asked for clubs that are mass produced in Chinese factories with no craftsmanship and mediocre quality,the EOM get away with it because perceptions of quality have changed enormously over the last few decades and the fact that your clubs look crap after one season is irrelevant because a new model from your favourite maker will soon be on the market.
There are massive profits being made from clubs and associated products like clothing and shoes,polyester shirts are ‘in’ because cotton is now expensive,plastic/nylon shoes are ‘in’ because making proper leather shoes requires an element of skill rather than a cheap sewing machine and a tube of epoxy.
If you want to produce something eye-opening then work out what a current Ping iron head would cost to produce,cost of a shaft and grip and add a bowl of rice and compare with what they want for the finished product.
Mat
Aug 27, 2017 at 6:01 am
Racist much?
Rich Douglas
Aug 27, 2017 at 10:48 pm
A bowl of rice? Really? That’s your take on overseas manufacturing? Your assertions about quality are incredibly baseless as well, but the rice bowl comment is the winner (loser) by far.
As for “massive profits,” the market determines prices which, after deducting costs, determines profits. If people didn’t pay those prices, then golf equipment companies would have to either (a) lower prices to meet demand or (b) go out of business.
Adjusted for inflation, golf clubs are much cheaper than they were in the 1980s. And companies are struggling. Retailers like Golfsmith are disappearing. Nike got out of golf clubs and balls. Later this year, adidas will dump TM. (To a private equity firm, so watch out for TM!) All of this belies your view that fat-cat golf equipment companies are raking it in and abusing the consumer.
I’m sure there is a community college near you that offers Macroeconomics 101. I’m sure you can even buy the textbook used if you’re concerned about publishers gouging you….
Bert
Aug 28, 2017 at 7:10 pm
So why can’t I use my 10% off coupon to purchase Ping, TaylorMade, or Titleist?
Bert
Aug 28, 2017 at 7:52 pm
Try using your 10% off coupon on a set of Pin, TaylorMade or Titleist clubs.
Alfriday
Aug 26, 2017 at 12:59 pm
The relative price of irons may not have changed much since 1984. What has changed?
The Ping Eye 2 clubs were made from 1984 to 1990. They were replaced by the 2+, which were manufactured from 1990 to 1998. If a golfer kept up with the latest and greatest, the player would buy two sets of clubs in 14 years.
Rob L
Aug 26, 2017 at 12:31 pm
My new BFF!
Michael Pasvantis
Aug 26, 2017 at 11:39 am
What’s most interesting when it comes to irons is how few iron shots we actually hit over the course of 18 holes. Ever since I’ve gotten my game golf system I’ve been tracking stats and club performance etc. What I started doing was taking a closer look at what shots I hit throughout the round. In a typical round where I shoot between 80-84 I usually only hit about 10-13 real actual full iron shots (4-Pw) not counting short chips/pitches hit with my PW and many times, depending on course and situations, I will not hit 1 or 2 of my irons at all. Putts were obviously the most coming in at 30-34 per round, 14 shots with my driver, then my irons at 10-13 followed by short chips and pitches and fairway wood/hybrid shots. Seems like a lot of money to drop on a part of your game that statistically doesn’t account for as much as we think.
Jack
Aug 28, 2017 at 3:01 am
I agree with that. People say the driver costs a lot while you don’t hit it often, and I’d say it’s the second most used club you got. Well unless you miss every green and have to chip every time. Then the wedges come in to play a lot. But just because there are so many irons people assume you use it more. But then, you don’t use the irons more than 10-13 times? Are some PAR 3’s really long or some approach shots really long or short?
TigerMom
Aug 26, 2017 at 11:20 am
From an inflationary standpoint, $520 in 1982 would have grown to $1317 in 2017. Seems like not much has changed from that perspective. http://www.in2013dollars.com/1982-dollars-in-2017?amount=520
Mat
Aug 27, 2017 at 6:03 am
That’s finally the number I was looking for. All of this tax business was garbage.
Boo Strongly
Aug 26, 2017 at 10:38 am
This is what happens when someone who doesn’t understand Economic principles tries to write an article about Economics.
Mike
Aug 26, 2017 at 3:51 pm
Totally agree,clueless.
Gdyfbd
Aug 26, 2017 at 9:49 am
Can’t argue with the math, but they seen to have taken a big leap forward in cost recently, drivers also, sure there were expensive drivers 10 years ago but now a base model like an m2 is really expensive
Davewn
Aug 26, 2017 at 11:56 am
The original, “Ruger Titanium” Great Big Bertha retailed for $500 in the mid 90’s and was impossible to keep in stock. Aside from loft, Callaway’s crappy, one size fits some, stock ultralight shaft was the only option. That translates to roughly $800 in today’s money, FWIW.
Melo
Aug 26, 2017 at 9:40 pm
Except that the GBB was an enormous upgrade over any and every driver before it. If you had a driver right now that was clearly head and shoulders above everything else, people would be lining up to buy it at 799.
Shortside
Aug 28, 2017 at 8:59 am
That’s a fact Jack!. Another fact. TM Supersteel Burner irons MSRP in 1999 was $720 for 3-PW w/steel shaft. 2017 M2 is $799.
Mat
Aug 27, 2017 at 6:06 am
They were behind the curve during the Great Recession. Now margins are normal.