-
Platinum Sponsor
1 2009 GBT Technologies, LLC
www.GolfBallTest.org
First Release July, 2009
Are Second-Hand Golf Balls a Good Choice For the
Performance-Minded Golfer?
A Study of Relative Performance and Golfer Purchasing
Perceptions
The Science of Golf Ball Selection
Contact Information: Jim Campbell Managing Partner GBT
Technologies, Inc. www.GolfBallTest.org
[email protected]
-
Platinum Sponsor
2 2009 GBT Technologies, LLC
www.GolfBallTest.org
Introduction It is estimated that more than 500 million to 750
million new golf balls are sold every year on a worldwide basis 1.
It is also estimated that somewhere between 125 million and 500
million+1 recycled or second-hand golf balls are recovered and sold
to golfers worldwide golf balls primarily culled from ponds and
lakes on golf courses (a.k.a. Lake Balls) 2. It is not known how
many additional Lake Balls are retrieved and played by ordinary
golfers during the course of their rounds. And while the exact
number of new and used balls sold in the market remains elusive,
what is clear is that billions of new golf balls have entered play
over the past few years around the world; and many of those end up
lost and found as Lake Balls that are teed up again and again.
Today, there are a staggering number of golf balls marketed to the
average player at prices ranging from less than $1 per ball to more
than $4+ per ball (or $50-$58/dozen) new. The online recycled golf
ball retailers sell the highest graded (Grade 5A / like new)
Tour-level/branded golf balls, such as the 2009 Titleist Pro V1, at
$32 per dozen, and other high grade (Grade 4A) Tour-level recycled
golf balls, such as the 2008 TaylorMade TP/Red LDP, with only a
minor abrasion or nick at less than $15/dozen2. Other lesser known
brands or older vintage (Grade 5) recycled golf balls may sell
anywhere from less than $1 per ball to upwards of $3+ per
ball2.
So, with the opportunity to pay up to 50% off retail price, are
these second-hand Lake Balls a worthwhile choice for most
golfers?
We set out to study the relative performance differences between
new golf balls and golf balls sold as the highest grade recycled
product. We also set out to identify the perceptions
golfers-as-consumers have in purchasing a recycled golf ball versus
buying one new. In particular, we set forth the following
objectives in undertaking this study:
1. Determine if recycled (in particular, lake balls) golf balls
have discernable performance and playability factors versus balls
purchased new at retail;
2. Determine how performance factors change according to
reported grade levels of balls; 3. Assess golfers perceptions of
value from recycled versus new golf balls; and, 4. Identify
information, methods or tools that can be provided to the
golfer-as-consumer in helping them
make more informed value-for-money decisions. 1
Estimated range provided, as exact market data is not published
for new and second-hand golf balls sold. Some estimates of the new
ball market range from 240 million new balls sold in the United
States (GolfDigest.com, May 2009) to 60 million dozen/720 million
new balls sold worldwide (TheGolfChannel.com, 2009). Answers.com
estimates that the golf ball market is worth about $550 million,
with over 850 million golf balls manufactured and shipped every
year. In a story reported in the North County Times, it is
estimated that more than 2.5 billion golf balls are lost each year
(quoting GolfWorld magazine using National Golf Foundation data).
2
Industry practices of recovering and remarketing golf balls from
a pond or lake suggest that although a large number of balls may be
recovered by divers and through other means in any given year, a
portion of these balls may not be readily marketable except as
range or shag balls or otherwise, only at highly discounted prices
to new - given their age, condition or emergence as older brand
types competing with newer technology offerings. Also, as new
models are introduced on a regular annual cycle by major
manufacturers, brand new older model balls are often deeply
discounted to liquidate inventories, which make such new balls
competitive to recycled balls of the same make and model type.
Since it can take anywhere from 6-12 months for a new ball model to
show up as a recycled alternative, recyclers are always lagging the
market for new balls. So, even though the amount of recovered balls
may be a high number, what is remarketed will also include a
proportion of very good, but lesser known or older model, balls
that must be sold at a much lower price or otherwise liquidated in
bulk, trapped in slow moving inventory stock, or even abandoned.
Nonetheless, recyclers appear mainly constrained by supply in their
marketing of premium near-new Grade 4/5 Tour-quality balls, such as
the 2008 and 2009 Titleist Pro V1;
-
Platinum Sponsor
3 2009 GBT Technologies, LLC
www.GolfBallTest.org
and otherwise constrained in marketing other quality high
performance balls given the ball buyers lack of knowledge or brand
awareness in alternative balls that can be an excellent
value-for-money option for many golfers.
Our Approach and Methodology All testing protocols and results
were developed, administered and analyzed by GolfBallTest.org in
association with GolfBallSelector.com. We focused our data
collection and analysis on three critical macro level ball
performance factors: (1) distance; (2) control/spin; and (3) feel.
We also addressed structural integrity factors, such as
compression, weight, roundness and cover hardness; and addressed
surface cover integrity and color differences. For our initial wave
of testing, we selected three popular Tour-level balls from the
2007 and 2008 model years:
Titleist Pro V1x (2007)
Bridgestone Tour B330 (2007)
Nike ONE Platinum (2008)
Pole and Seam Identification Markings Courtesy of The Digital
Ball Catalog
TM at GolfBallSelector.com
We used brand new golf balls straight from the package and
compared them to a random sample of recycled golf balls. We
acquired our second-hand balls from a leading retailer who sources
most of their balls from ponds and lakes. This is a random sample,
so we do not know how long the balls may have been in the water, or
on the shelves before or after use; and we do not know how many
times a given ball may have actually been hit prior to arriving at
our test facility. In all cases, however, we only tested the
highest grade available for second-hand balls (validated as Grades
5A and 4A by GolfBallTest.org); and we did not test any refinished,
refurbished or re-manufactured golf balls.
-
Platinum Sponsor
4 2009 GBT Technologies, LLC
www.GolfBallTest.org
We tested the two highest Quality Grades described below on the
GolfBallTest.org Quality Grade Scale:
5A = Top Grade. Like New golf ball in overall appearance and
performance. No surface blemishes. No cover discoloration.
Virtually indistinguishable from a shiny new ball in every way.
Equivalent to Grade 1, Grade AAAA, Grade 5A, Mint Balls, 1
st Quality or Pearls on some sites.
4A = Very High Quality Grade. Similar in appearance to a 5A
quality grade golf ball, except for minor cover abrasion or
blemish. Very little to no change in cover color or shine.
Described on some retailer sites as AAA, Near Mint, Near Perfect,
Grade 4A, 2
nd Quality, Grade 2 or Grade B.
Here are examples of 4 different grades of recycled golf
balls:
Golf Ball Surface Condition Grading
Courtesy of GolfBallSelector.com Performance Bench Testing A
frequent question we are often asked is: Does a golf balls
compression or weight change after it has been sitting in the
water?
Compression and Cover Hardness Tests: We conducted compression
testing using the same ATTI compression and TECLOCK Type C cover
hardness measurement devices and in approximately the same
environmental conditions as when testing new balls.
ATTI Compression Testing Device
-
Platinum Sponsor
5 2009 GBT Technologies, LLC
www.GolfBallTest.org
Courtesy of GolfBallSelector.com
TECLOCK Type C Cover Hardness Testing Device Courtesy of
GolfBallSelector.com
Compression and Cover Hardness Testing: We benchmarked the
findings against reference compression and cover hardness ratings
assembled at GolfBallSelector.com. This table shows the raw test
data for the second-hand Lake Balls:
The reference measurements for the new balls and the differences
to the averages for the recycled balls are:
Compression 5A Grade New Recycled Difference Titleist Pro V1x
100 101 1 Unit (~ 1%) Bridgestone B330 115 114 1 Unit (< 1%)
Nike ONE Platinum 105 105 No Difference
-
Platinum Sponsor
6 2009 GBT Technologies, LLC
www.GolfBallTest.org
Compression 4A Grade New Recycled Difference Titleist Pro V1x
100 101 1 Unit (~ 1%) Bridgestone B330 115 116 1 Unit (< 1%)
Nike ONE Platinum 105 106 1 Unit (< 1%)
Cover Hardness 5A Grade New Recycled Difference Titleist Pro V1x
78 78 No Difference Bridgestone B330 80 81 1 Unit (~1%) Nike ONE
Platinum 77 75 2 Units (
-
Platinum Sponsor
7 2009 GBT Technologies, LLC
www.GolfBallTest.org
Weight Testing Logo Pole Logo Blank AverageTesting Procedure
> Facing Up Reversed Facing Random Weight
Ball Year Grade Source 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th Grams
Bridgestone B330-S 2007 4 C3 Select 45.55 45.56 45.55 45.55
45.55 45.55
Bridgestone B330-S 2007 5 C3 Select 45.75 45.75 45.75 45.75
45.75 45.75
Bridgestone B330-S 2007 New New 45.72 45.72 45.72 45.71 45.71
45.72
Bridgestone B330 2007 4 C3 Select 45.69 45.69 45.69 45.69 45.69
45.69
Bridgestone B330 2007 5 C3 Select 45.62 45.62 45.62 45.62 45.62
45.62
Bridgestone B330 2007 New New 45.72 45.72 45.71 45.71 45.71
45.71
Nike ONE Platinum 2008 4 C3 Select 45.53 45.54 45.53 45.53 45.53
45.53
Nike ONE Platinum 2008 5 C3 Select 45.52 45.52 45.52 45.52 45.52
45.52
Nike ONE Platinum 2008 New New 45.56 45.55 45.55 45.56 45.55
45.55
Titleist Pro V1x 2007 4 C3 Select 45.8 45.81 45.81 45.81 45.81
45.81
Titlesit Pro V1x 2007 5 C3 Select 45.85 45.85 45.85 45.85 45.85
45.85
Titlesit Pro V1x 2007 New New 45.78 45.78 45.78 45.77 45.77
45.78
Notes
Grade 4 and Grade 5 recycled balls provided by C3SELECT and
validated by GolfBallTest.org
Weight testing per methodology of USGA and R&A Rules Ltd:
"Weight and Size Test Procedures"
Weight measurements recorded using Ohaus SP 602 (Scout Pro)
Scale
Weight Testing Result: We found no more than 0.05% difference on
average between new and second hand balls our sampling. Further,
the maximum observed difference in gram weight of new to second
hand of -0.21% (new balls slightly heavier) and 0.16% (new balls
were slightly lighter):
Weight Differences Across Make and Model - We also were
interested in how much variation there was across manufacturers
balls; so we tested ALL New Balls coming straight out of the box
and conducted the USGA 5-sided protocol on the:
Bridgestone B330 / B330-S / B330-RX and e7+
Titleist Pro V1 / V1x
Srixon Star-X
Srixon Star
Nike ONE Vapor / ONE Tour / ONE Tour D
Callaway Tour-i
-
Platinum Sponsor
8 2009 GBT Technologies, LLC
www.GolfBallTest.org
In this sample, we found one ball that was 0.24 grams (+0.13%)
heavier than the mean of the sample group; and 4 others that were
between 0.11-0.13 grams (~0.055%) lighter than the mean of the
sample group.
Additional Weight Testing: We are currently testing a larger
sample of each of the balls (NEW) to evaluate consistency in
weights that a customer may experience. Some ball experts have
hypothesized that weight inconsistency can result from possible
variations in manufacturing process and/or from impact from
environmental conditions, such as temperature and humidity, that
the ball faces prior to sale.
Technical Note: Recently, 2 manufacturers voluntarily recalled
their golf balls when they were found to be out of conformance with
USGA specifications. How much does weight matter? Well, based on
ballistics modeling and our flight equations, we estimate that the
performance difference between a balls weighing in at 45.5 vs.
45.92 (all other construction and aerodynamics and other
performance characteristics held equal) will result in 0.82 yards
more carry and approximately 1.2 total yards (carry and roll) when
flying a heavier ball.
Roundness Testing: We next conducted roundness test of our
sample of new and second hand golf balls using the USGA
specification that requires that a ball passes/does not pass
through a specific diameter ring gauge. In our test we checked for
roundness by passing each new and second-hand ball in the sample
through a golf ball measurement gauge of 1.680 inches in diameter
multiple times to confirm that each ball falls within the
specification set forth under The Rules of Golf (Rule 5, Appendix
III)
Accu-Chek Golf Ball Gauge- Manufactured by OK Automation
Courtesy of GolfBallSelector.com
In each and every case every ball passed the roundness test.
-
Platinum Sponsor
9 2009 GBT Technologies, LLC
www.GolfBallTest.org
Findings from Bench Testing: These bench tests indicate
essentially no difference in compression readings between new and
second-hand balls in the sample; and only the Nike ONE Platinum
showing any difference in cover hardness; and that is less than 3%
degradation in new vs. old and within the estimated margin of
error. We also found no significant difference in the weight of the
new versus the second hand Lake Balls in our Grade 4A and 5A
sample; but a variation of almost 0.8% in weight when different
balls are compared across different manufacturers and model types.
Given that the Lake Balls we used were validated on cover
integrity, with no cuts, it is unlikely that water penetrated the
cores. It is also unlikely, in the balls we tested, that water
penetrated the skin/mantle layers or affected the
construction/compression. Moreover, we used only Grade 4A/5A balls,
where the cover color is near that of new. If the covers were
yellowed or otherwise compromised, this might be an indication of
long submersion time in a pond or lake and could be a sign of
possible penetration or damage. In our case, the color tests were
indicative of a short duration or soak time that did not impact
performance. Some R&D experts in the golf ball industry believe
that golf balls can pick up moisture and may become excessively
heavy and out of conformance with USGA Rules after soaking in the
water and being returned to play. Further, experts state that
consistency (in weight) is a key consideration in playing a new
versus second-hand lake ball. Further testing should focus on the
consistency of weights across a sample of all new balls from each
manufacturer to detect manufacturing and other possible
environmental affects (e.g. humidity capture in stocking the balls)
prior to purchase and usage of the ball by the golfer
Ballistics Testing We conducted robotic testing of the new and
recycled golf ball sample set using a Miya Swing Robot 3 in a
controlled indoor testing environment.
Miya Swing Robot 3 and Max Out Golf Launch Monitor Courtesy of
GolfBallSelector.com
We tested each ball in the sample using a Driver, 6-Iron and
Sand Wedge.
For the Driver, we used a TaylorMade Model r7 425TP 9.5 loft
with a Graphite Design PM902 shaft.
-
Platinum Sponsor
10 2009 GBT Technologies, LLC
www.GolfBallTest.org
For the 6-Iron, we used a Mizuno Model MP-60 with a True Temper
Dynamic Gold shaft.
For the Sand Wedge, we used a Zodia 56 degree with a True Temper
Dynamic Gold shaft.
We collected ballistics data using the Max Out Golf patented
IGMS system to measure performance outputs and used a consistent
player Ball Speed/Launch Angle set up for all the new and recycled
sample ball testing.
IGMS Launch Monitor Data Capture/Output Courtesy of
GolfBallSelector.com
Findings from Driver Ballistics Testing: The maximum observed
difference between a new and a Grade 5A recycled ball was 3 yards
total distance (carry plus roll) for the Nike ONE Platinum (2008) a
1.2% measurement difference over the test range of 244 - 247 yards
and within the testing error range. The maximum observed difference
between a new and Grade 4A recycled ball was < 2 yards total
distance (carry plus roll) for the Titleist Pro V1x (2007) ball.
This is less than 0.8% measurement difference over the test range
of 255- 257 yards and within the testing error range. All other
differences in total driver distance were less than 0.8%
Findings from 6-Iron Ballistics Testing: The maximum observed
difference between a new and a Grade 5A recycled ball was 1.5 yards
total carry for the Nike ONE Platinum (2008) as well as for the
Bridgestone Tour B330; however one was 1.5 yards longer and one was
1.5 yards shorter than its new ball counterpart and both less than
1% difference versus the test range of approximately 163 - 167
yards. All other differences in total 6-iron distance were less
than 0.9% with the Grade 4A balls showing even less difference than
the Grade 5A sample golf balls.
-
Platinum Sponsor
11 2009 GBT Technologies, LLC
www.GolfBallTest.org
We also tested observed spin using the launch monitor and found
no appreciable systematic decay in spin tendency in moving from a
new to a second-hand Grade 4A or Grade 5A ball, using the 6-iron.
The maximum observed difference between a new and Grade 4A recycled
ball was < 2 yards total distance (carry plus roll) for the
Titleist Pro V1x (2007) ball. This is less than 0.8% measurement
difference versus the test range of 255- 257 yards.
Findings from Sand Wedge Ballistics Testing: In our study, we
found no performance difference in the test data between new and
either Grade 4A or Grade 5A balls for distance or for spin using
the Sand Wedge. The maximum deviation from new to Grade 4A/5A for
spin is less than 0.6%.
Golfer Perceptions on Performance and Value In addition to our
data capture and analysis, our study findings are drawn from: daily
interactions (Q&A) we receive at GolfBallTest.org, discussions
we have with members at GolfBallSelector.com, interviews and
discussions with regular golfers who have made the switch from new
to second-hand golf balls, discussions with golf equipment
representatives (fitters and wholesalers), and from our discussions
with professional golfers, PGA professionals, and owner/operators
of leading recycled golf ball companies. Except for a minority
group of players, who will only play new balls (and who tend to be
highly brand loyal), most performance-oriented golfers are open to
hearing the evidence about relative performance of new vs.
recycled. Moreover, once such an audience has the opportunity to
physically inspect (and better yet, hit) the recycled product, they
are highly likely to make some purchases through an online outlet,
via eBay, or in a traditional pro shop/golf retailer providing a
second-hand golf ball even if for practice or just for trying out a
new brand or model. Key considerations for converting this
performance-oriented buying group from interested to committed (and
growing the overall second-hand golf ball market) center around
shipping costs and evidence of trust/quality in their purchase.
Online trust factors influencing this buy decision include such
considerations as: differences in reseller claims on grading
levels; color consistency/shine and general cover condition (and
general lingering doubts about bait and switch). We have also found
that online recycled golf ball purchases also tend to improve in
likelihood when independent, credible information/guidance is
provided to the golfer on which ball is the right ball for them. We
have also found that to a lesser extent, some players are looking
only for second-hand balls that are free of player marks and
corporate/school logos or they want to pick the recycled balls for
themselves at a physical store/outlet. Increasingly, more and more
golfers report they are interested in purchasing recycled product
in support of their commitment to the environment. When asked if
the average golfer seeking value-for-money would increase their
purchase of recycled balls given third party Performance Certified
validation or warranty, many answered yes while others said that
once
-
Platinum Sponsor
12 2009 GBT Technologies, LLC
www.GolfBallTest.org
they found a supply source that was trustworthy, they were
likely to stay with that vendor and make repeat purchases, but
would still appreciate seeing some form of validation process in
place. Some interviewees indicated they would pay up to $5/dozen
more for a validation seal on recycled golf balls. When asked if
brand matters in the secondary recycled market, few respondents
could name a brand, but they thought there were labels and that
well known retailers and sports outlets carried them in the leading
brands. Our respondents also said that price information (stability
in prices); and the ability to compare prices across online and
offline retailers/vendors was important; but only if they knew they
were actually comparing the same type and quality of golf ball.
Lastly, when offered the opportunity to test a number of
second-hand balls prior to purchase, many respondents liked the
idea of inspecting/trying a recycled ball before making a larger
ball purchase; as well as trying different varieties of balls that
are offered in a large, sometimes confusing, array of makes, models
and performance claims.
Summary In this study, we set out to determine if second-hand
Lake Balls have discernable performance and playability factors
compared to balls purchased new at retail. We also sought to assess
golfers perceptions of value of recycled versus new golf balls; and
identify information, methods or tools that can be provided to the
golfer-as-consumer in making more informed value-for-money
decisions. In our sample, bench testing on factors such as
compression, weight, roundness and cover hardness and our
ballistics testing on flight characteristics (including distance
and spin) - indicated no appreciable difference between the highest
quality Grade 4A/5A recycled golf balls we sourced and new golf
balls. Our study of golfer perceptions on relative performance and
value-for-money in using a recycled golf ball over a new golf ball
indicates a high interest level in using a recycled or Lake Ball
with factors such as online trust and shipping costs from online
vendors important considerations. Increasingly, performance-minded
golfers, who play frequently, seem to be using second-hand golf
balls to reduce their costs to play and to support their interest
in helping the environment. Golfers also reported more interest in
switching from new to recycled or in trying recycled some of the
time if they had some performance validation/seal attached to the
balls they were getting; and if the balls they are buying are the
same make, model and year as those they buy new. Some golfers say
they would pay up to $5 per dozen to have their lower priced
reclaimed golf balls validated by a 3rd party or sold under a seal
of approval or warranty. Lastly, our study of golfers finds that
they would like to try recycled balls prior to making a large
purchase and they would like to have more information, more tools
in supporting their buying decision; and the opportunity to try
more than one type of ball to see what the right/better ball may be
for them.
Next Steps
-
Platinum Sponsor
13 2009 GBT Technologies, LLC
www.GolfBallTest.org
Further work in this area should apply the analysis techniques
to a larger universe of golf balls and expand the testing below the
tour level to other high performance amateur and average
performance player balls. Testing may also be done on lesser grade
balls (below 5A/4A) to determine when and if material performance
decay occurs. Other analysis should focus on environmental factors
and their impact on ball performance, such as exposure to extreme
heat/cold. Additional perceptions studies may help determine which
factors and information may help convert the interested buyer and
expand the overall market for second-hand balls, such as:
Does an independent testing/warranty help reduce any negative
perceptions about Lake Balls?
What type of information should be presented to a would be ball
buyer (e.g. data; visual pictures/features/ samples of scuffing and
yellowing to the cover to provide better disclosure of grading and
pricing differences?
What brand elements would help consumers reduce performance
concerns or anxiety they may have in buying golf balls in the
secondary marketplace (especially online)?
Does packaging and presentation matter?
+++++++ About GBT Technologies, LLC and GolfBallTest.org GBT
Technologies is a company established in 2007 to focus on
delivering decision support services to the golf industry. GBT
Technologies invented and built GolfBallSelector.com - a
vendor-neutral web-based business designed to help golfers select
the best golf ball for them based on their unique swing
characteristics and game characteristics. GBT is also involved in
component parts testing, technology acquisition/mobilization and
creation of new technology-enabled businesses for the golf
equipment, media and information technology elements of the golf
industry. Independent testing; data analysis and reporting on golf
ball technology advances/ industry activity is administered through
GolfBallTest.org.
About GolfBallSelector.com GolfBallSelector.com, heralded by
GOLF Magazine as one of the best innovations in golf, is an
interactive online golf ball fitting system that helps golfers
select the right golf ball, based on their unique player profile
and game objectives. GolfBallSelector.com matches a golf ball to
the golfers unique swing characteristics and game objectives
through an innovative online fitting process. The Golf Ball
Selector System finds the optimum combination of spin rate, ball
construction, cover hardness, aerodynamics and other factors to
meet each individual golfers performance objectives generating a
list of recommended golf balls custom-fitted to each player. The
GolfBallSelector.com online system is supported by independent
testing of 74 leading golf ball models.