Endorsement Cues/Products

AOyster

AOyster

Banned
We all hopefully know that the endorsement of products, most specifically as with cues in the billiard world is totally money (marketing) orientated.

When it all comes down to a spectrum of references as a broom stick on the low end and a robot on the high end, products such as Cuetec with it's highest endorsements are on the top of the list on the LOW END.

Hopefully we all here agree with that fact.

I am curious as to the similarity in other sports products, i.e. golf, tennis, bowling, etc.

Such analogies I refer to here are bowling as I just watched and golf as I always watch.

Golf, as with TW (that's Tiger Woods not Tim White) is Nike and through my findings over the years they are similar to Cuetec.

Bowling...well, I left home at age 17 throwing out a room full of trophies. Today, bowling balls are now created with offset balances for ultimate spin. Research tonight has shown that again, the balls used on tour are not the best only the most marketed.

Are the products that aren't endorsed really so much better in other sports as with billiards? :rolleyes:
 
Endorsement of products is not totally money oriented in society. In professional situations it is more often the case because that is precisely the reason that the relationship exists.

There are several factors at work here. One is that most manufacturers believe that they produce a better or revolutionary product so they seek ways to promote it and what better way that to tie it to a high-profile person. Most professional athletes are trying to maximize thier income while not diminishing their performance so they readily try new equipment in the hope that it will fit their needs and provide some extra income.

They often modify the equipment to suit them but then who doesn't?

Which brings up the second factor of how like the off-the-shelf equipment is what the athletes use? My answer is why should we care? The only thing that should matter is whether the customer is receiving the value and performance that they are happy with. Since the purpose of marketing is to introduce the product an endorsement by a professional athlete does that. If I then try the product and find it doesn't suit my needs then I don't buy it. I did that with CueTec. I tried it, found that I could play all right with them but don't actively use them. I do recommend them however as a decent and durable cue.

People however endorse products all the time privately without financial compensation. We all do it. When I tell you something is good then I am just trying to pass on my experience without any financial motivation.

I work for Fury cues though. So what if I tell you a Fury is a good cue? Is that an unbiased review? Yes and no. If you know the person well then you can be the judge if they are just in it for the money or not.

In my case I reccomend Fury cues because It is my personal experience they can stand up to inspection and comparison and so I have no qualm about the product. When given the chance I reccomend our brands without putting the other brands down because I want to see our company succeed and our people stay employed so that is the financial motivation.

Whether any other cue is "better" or "worse" than a Fury however ultimately lies with the person who needs a pool cue. They are the ones who should gain the neccesary experience to make that determination for themselves.

My job and the job of my company is to introduce them to our brand so that we are part of the choices they have.

Now you have said that in your findings the Nike equipment is similar to Cuetec (low end in your opinion). My point is that players such as yourself will take the time to try the spectrum and make your own judgements as to what is high end for you and what is low end. Other people will try the Nike clubs and find them to be suitable for their needs and will happily play hundreds of rounds with them. They don't care if there are other clubs that are "better" or "worse". They like Tiger, he endorses Nike, they tried the clubs, they like them, get to the course.

All life is a shell game. Don't you know that yet? :-)
 
Hey John,

Thanks for the reply. In fact, I not only use Nike clubs, I also play with a broom stick...Well, actually I do on some occasions just to prove a point because I once said I'll beat you with a broom stick to a player who kept bugging me to play him for money. That happened and the story not only stuck it has continued for many years.

Before that was a great story of my joking around that I'll play you with my finger. One day I glued a tip to a thimble and played someone with it. Kinda funny but it worked.

This post was spontaneous when I watched a bowling event and noticed the difference in bowling balls now. Technology has really changed or has the creative marketing changed the most was my point here.

I can say that during classes every week I get the chance to try all different cues that students bring to classes. I do a segment where I set up every students cue in a line and use each one on a single shot with the same formula, 0-2-1R/L and the results are clearcut. Using those same results it is always clear which one hits closest to that point. Using the adjustment of each a shot can be made fairly close to the same with each but with greater compensation. In all the years of this and thousands of shots with various cues, one still stands out as the most accurate, which is the one I use and for that reason only.

I was searching for any one here who might play other sports and notice this same thing. Nike vs. Cue-tec etc.

After thinking about it, anyone want to buy my set of Nike clubs....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top