win a ball from Bowling.com

Author Topic: Lord Field Bowling  (Read 21511 times)

UplandBowler

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 39
Lord Field Bowling
« on: June 10, 2012, 04:13:22 PM »
I see that Pat and Tony are now using Lord Field Balls.  It appears that Lord Field is using some Lane Masters cores:  Buzz, Impact, and Guaranteed.  Generally stuff made in Korea is cheaper than stuff made in the USA.  So, why is Lord Field Balls more expensive than Lane Master Balls?   


 

UplandBowler

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 39
Re: Lord Field Bowling
« Reply #1 on: June 10, 2012, 04:38:58 PM »
Just thinking that Lord Field is marketing towards the same customers that bought Lane Masters, instead of charging more, they probably should charge $125 a ball to get us to try them out. 

Am I wrong about the cores and the marketing strategy?

JOE FALCO

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6298
Re: Lord Field Bowling
« Reply #2 on: June 10, 2012, 05:41:10 PM »
I'd also like to try their bowling balls .. seems Ebonite set this pricing structure up and you now have to pay the price!
RIP Thongprincess/Sawbones!

UplandBowler

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 39
Re: Lord Field Bowling
« Reply #3 on: June 10, 2012, 05:49:10 PM »
I have no urgency to try out Lord Field Balls at this price.  Especially since I own balls with the cores they are selling.

charlest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24526
Re: Lord Field Bowling
« Reply #4 on: June 10, 2012, 07:18:08 PM »
I have no urgency to try out Lord Field Balls at this price.  Especially since I own balls with the cores they are selling.

A bowling ball is core + coverstock. If you have a Lanemasters ball, you do not have a Lord Field ball. Storm & Columbia are using Messenger cores in their Tropical Heat and in the Freeze. That does not mean they are throwing Columbia Messengers.

Just because the ball is made in Korea is no reason for it to be cheaper than any other balls. Several of the Lord Field balls are cheaper than the Lanemasters balls, at least on Buddies web site, where all LM balls were $154.95 or thereabouts last time they were available.
Besides shipping a 15/16 lb object from Korea to the US is not inexpensive. Heck, shipping a 15 lb. ball from East Coast to West Coast via UPS is almost $30 today.

Try a Lord Field ball or don't. I don't care, but what is the sense in criticizing them because they do not appear to be what you want them to be?
"None are so blind as those who will not see."

UplandBowler

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 39
Re: Lord Field Bowling
« Reply #5 on: June 10, 2012, 07:47:33 PM »
The cost to produce any item is substantially cheaper to produce in Korea.  US production is significantly higher because of various factors including wage and hour an environmental.  Selling a Korean product for higher then a high quality US product doesn't seem logical.  Might as well buy a high quality American product.  As for shipping costs, bulk shipping surely offsets single ball shipping.  With that said, it would seem logical to try to entice old Lane Master customer by offering them value, not by charging them more.  That business model has already failed.  Additionally, why charge more for a product with old cores that many of the Lane Master customers already have.  Do you really think Lord Field cover are substantially different then Lane Masters? 

charlest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24526
Re: Lord Field Bowling
« Reply #6 on: June 10, 2012, 08:40:36 PM »
The cost to produce any item is substantially cheaper to produce in Korea.  US production is significantly higher because of various factors including wage and hour an environmental.


By that logic shouldn't all Brunswick and Morich balls be significantly cheaper than those made in the 48 states, since it must be so much cheaper to make them in Mexico than in Texas or Utah or Kentucky???

Quote
Selling a Korean product for higher then a high quality US product doesn't seem logical.  Might as well buy a high quality American product.  As for shipping costs, bulk shipping surely offsets single ball shipping.  With that said, it would seem logical to try to entice old Lane Master customer by offering them value, not by charging them more.  That business model has already failed.

Due to the apparent failure of Lanemasters, why would you even think Lord Field are interested in enticing Lanemaster's old customers?

Quote
Additionally, why charge more for a product with old cores that many of the Lane Master customers already have.  Do you really think Lord Field cover are substantially different then Lane Masters? 

Is any one manufacturer's coverstocks "substantially" different than any other's?

The one Lord field ball I do have is substantially different from any of the 15 or more Lanemasters balls I have used since I started with them around 2004.
Once again, I repeat, a ball is not core and is not coverstock.
A ball = core + coverstock.
"None are so blind as those who will not see."

UplandBowler

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 39
Re: Lord Field Bowling
« Reply #7 on: June 10, 2012, 09:17:53 PM »
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. 

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.

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. 

I'm using my iPhone to make these post so sorry for any typos. 

« Last Edit: June 10, 2012, 09:30:02 PM by UplandBowler »

ImBackInTheGame

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1022
Re: Lord Field Bowling
« Reply #8 on: June 10, 2012, 11:37:52 PM »
lanemasters and lord field have nothing to do with each other.   The assets and naming rights to Lane Masters were sold to some other company called Genesis bowling.

charlest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24526
Re: Lord Field Bowling
« Reply #9 on: June 11, 2012, 09:09:53 AM »
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.

Quote
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.


Quote
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.

Quote
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.)
"None are so blind as those who will not see."

Pat Patterson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1852
Re: Lord Field Bowling
« Reply #10 on: June 13, 2012, 08:31:27 AM »
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.

Quote
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.


Quote
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.

Quote
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.)


Jeff,

Wow!  Thanks for the recognition it caught me by surprise.  it's odd sometimes to stumble upon your own name in someone else's posts.

Thanks again kind sir!
Pat Patterson

charlest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24526
Re: Lord Field Bowling
« Reply #11 on: June 13, 2012, 12:47:29 PM »
You deserve the recognition, Pat.
I hope Lord Field's equipment serves you at least as well as LM's did, hopefully better.
"None are so blind as those who will not see."

Gladiator1

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 67
  • Changing Bowling One Bowler At A Time
Re: Lord Field Bowling
« Reply #12 on: July 12, 2012, 10:48:59 AM »
backinthegame: The assets are still in limbo. Where do you guys get your information? All the assets are still with the trustee waiting to finalize the bankruptcy. I hate to be rude but the facts are this. None of the assets have been sold yet. They were being leased and as of January 2012 that lease was revoked by statutes. The hearing has been scheduled for selling off the assets but no entity owns anything right now. I just hate seeing all this information flying around and no one really knows. Yes, I have proof of my statements.

Upland: As for the price of the balls, we order all of our weight block materials and some of our resin from the USA. That is why the price is set where it is. We use distributors and that is part of the cost as well. The Korean economy is just like ours. They have to provide healthcare, retirement and vacations to their employees just like here in the US. Korea is not a 3rd world nation where there is cheap exploited labor. Their wages are very similar to ours. I hope this is good information for you.

All the weight blocks used that are similar to LM are not targeted at LM customers. I have only contacted 3 LM people and one is Pat and the other is Charlest. Other than that I have not contacted any LM shops directly. Some of them have gotten our emails but I have not made one phone call to any LM customers directly unless they contacted me from the emails.

Please, do know what you are talking about before posting here. I try to stay out of this stuff but it becomes hard to let you all think the info you are getting is correct when I know it is not. Don't take anything personal I'm just stating facts.

lanemasters and lord field have nothing to do with each other.   The assets and naming rights to Lane Masters were sold to some other company called Genesis bowling.
"Changing Bowling One Bowler At A Time"

Pat Patterson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1852
Re: Lord Field Bowling
« Reply #13 on: July 12, 2012, 11:14:51 AM »
backinthegame: The assets are still in limbo. Where do you guys get your information? All the assets are still with the trustee waiting to finalize the bankruptcy. I hate to be rude but the facts are this. None of the assets have been sold yet. They were being leased and as of January 2012 that lease was revoked by statutes. The hearing has been scheduled for selling off the assets but no entity owns anything right now. I just hate seeing all this information flying around and no one really knows. Yes, I have proof of my statements.

Upland: As for the price of the balls, we order all of our weight block materials and some of our resin from the USA. That is why the price is set where it is. We use distributors and that is part of the cost as well. The Korean economy is just like ours. They have to provide healthcare, retirement and vacations to their employees just like here in the US. Korea is not a 3rd world nation where there is cheap exploited labor. Their wages are very similar to ours. I hope this is good information for you.

All the weight blocks used that are similar to LM are not targeted at LM customers. I have only contacted 3 LM people and one is Pat and the other is Charlest. Other than that I have not contacted any LM shops directly. Some of them have gotten our emails but I have not made one phone call to any LM customers directly unless they contacted me from the emails.

Please, do know what you are talking about before posting here. I try to stay out of this stuff but it becomes hard to let you all think the info you are getting is correct when I know it is not. Don't take anything personal I'm just stating facts.

lanemasters and lord field have nothing to do with each other.   The assets and naming rights to Lane Masters were sold to some other company called Genesis bowling.


Well put, Tony!
Pat Patterson

Rev Titan

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
Re: Lord Field Bowling
« Reply #14 on: August 11, 2019, 11:42:16 PM »
I found a used Lord Field Blizzard Shock on Online for 36 bucks shipped. I hope I have use for it.
Let the good times roll.