Thanks Charlest for the discussion it's nice to see others logic. As for the cost of Brunswick and Morich balls, you have to consider they already have brand name recognition and a loyal customer base, so they can charge a higher rate. Lord Field has no brand recognition.
Two problems with pricing yourself too cheaply in the market are that thereafter you will get many customers who will not understand why you raise the prices to put yourself on equal footing with others and to make a decent profit, PLUS, there are also many people out there who believe you get what you pay for; so, if you price your products cheaply, they'll think the products are not as good as others which are priced higher.
Next, I believe Lord Field is looking to obtain the Lane Master customer base and hopefully grow onto it. Why else would they use Lane Master cores and two piece construction? Why else would they put Tony and Pat on staff? The only explanation is they see a market void that was created by Lane Masters dissolution. I concede that they want to grow beyond Lane Masters and see that they want to develop asymetrical cores.
You may find many of these answers on BowlingBallExchange.com where Tony, who is a manager and ball designer, and was hired, not "put on staff", went into greater detail about the entry of LF into the US ball market.
Let me try a couple of shorter explanations. They did use a couple of what you think of as LaneMaster cores in a couple of their balls (like Columbia and Storm used a copy of the Messenger core) because they liked the way they performed when wrapped by their own coverstocks. (FYI LM got their resins from Europe, art of the reason whey LM balls were so expensive). The cores actually come from Japan and were first used by AZO, not LM. LM continued to buy them from Japan when LM bought AZO out here in the US. Anyway, both LM and now Lord Field had to get permission from the Japanese designed of these cores to use them. As you say, they (through, as far as I know, Tony's influence) will start using some asymmetric cores in the near future.
As far as using Pat as a staffer, that was both Pat's and their decision. Pat is a great bowler and he wanted to use a company (my guess) that will have a continued presence here in the US. Any company would be glad to have Pat on staffer. He is not only a great bowler, he is an excellent communicator as you can tell from reading his reviews here.
The only explanation is they see a market void that was created by Lane Masters dissolution.
While it can be perceived as that, I think Lanemaster's problems in the marketing segment of this business points out a major failure that I believe Lord Field would have not be associated with. While LM's making of their balls by hand created great quality control, it lacked many other essential aspects of ball manufacturing essential to progress and success.
I concede that they want to grow beyond Lane Masters and see that they want to develop asymetrical cores.
And, I agree with you that balls are a combination of cover and core but the cores that Lord Field are using have been paired with numerous different covers and I doubt they are significantly different. So, as a potential customer, I see no reason to spend more money to buy a Lord Field Ball at this time. I would like to tryout a Lord Field ball but not at their current prices.
Well, cover is theoretically 70% of ball reaction. While asymmetric cores can change that percentage to certain degree, coverstock still rules. Don't cheat yourself by closing a blind eye to a potential.
Keep in mind that in spite of writing all this, I would not yet say I am a fanatic about LF balls, but I am becoming a fan. I do not rush blindly into anything. Very often, many people love one of a company's balls and will therefore run blindly and buy up 3 or more others, assuming if one works that they all will work for them. I know that is not true.
I am currently using an Exodus, the solid resin, non-particle, and find it to be a very versatile and flexible tool, possibly one of the best I have ever used. I say, possibly, because I can't, won't jump to any conclusions.
If you find new LF balls too expensive at Buddies price of $135, $140 and $145 delivered,
]http://www.buddiesproshop.com/c-1-bowling-balls.aspx#Filter=[ManufacturerID=66*ava=1]and MGBowing.com's prices of $120, $135, $145
http://www.mgbowling.com/proshopbrands/lord-field/balls/,
then wait until someone has a good used one to try for a less expensive price.
(FYI I've bought from both places; both have proven very reliable.)
