I don't see a lot of planning for many of their releases. They don't seem to build lines around a particular core or cover like most of the other manufacturers, and it's hard for me, someone who tries to pay attention, to see where each ball fits. There's not much that distinguishes the various lines, technology-wise (M80 is on both the mid- and high-end lines, the core in the Action series is found in a lot of other balls in other lines and has been around for quite a while, so "new" technology it isn't).
Brunswick puts Activator on its high-end balls. You can tell what's high-end because it's got some kind of Activator and either the Inferno core or the Zone core. The mid-priced line is built around the Bell core and PK18 (the only exception is the new Mammoth). Track's high-end stuff is all strong, high-tech asymmetrics. DT puts Soaker on their high-end balls and that's it.
I don't really see much of that from Columbia. Bully, Throttle, and Action were high-end, but I don't see a lot of brand-identification with C300's balls. I couldn't tell you whether an Apogee was a high-end ball or not without looking. It's got a brand-new asymmetric (read: expensive) core and M80, but it's really mid-priced. The Action also has M80 and an old core, but is high-priced. Why? What makes the Action more expensive than the Apogee? Seems more arbitrary, though I'm sure someone, somewhere plans and understands it.
The balls are fine. I know several people that swear by them. I had an Icon2 that I really liked. Just hard to figure out what's what.
SH