win a ball from Bowling.com
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3

Author Topic: Bad year for what manufacturers?  (Read 4692 times)

MrPerfect

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 703
Bad year for what manufacturers?
« on: April 02, 2010, 05:09:57 AM »
This is open about any manufacturer, but specifically I was curious if people thought the reason the Big B seemed to be having a bad year on tour was depth of the arsenal available to their tour players? Or the quality of the balls they are producing? They are doing great this week, so hopefully we can see one of them right the ship.
Logged

 

MrPerfect

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 703
Re: Bad year for what manufacturers?
« Reply #16 on: April 03, 2010, 05:24:45 PM »
quote:
Now compare that to Brunswick of the 90s when they had every bowler under the sun on staff and how many pros made the show week in and week out.

When Brunswick let all of the pros go and kept only a few that shows how little of importance the PBA is at this point. (at least to Brunswick, although the world isn't far behind when you look at ratings)

Most of the topics of late are how bad the shows are, what does the PBA tour need to and on and on.

No one watches the PBA on TV enough in terms of wanting to advertising your product. Your better off making youtube videos and commercials that way. Remember when they use to make commercials for bowling balls? That all stopped for a reason.
--------------------
" men lie, women lie, numbers don't "


The reason is a lack of good ideas and insight in the bowling industry, and everyone wanting to do everything on the cheap because we've apparently been dieing for years now, but yet here we still stand.

It's a bit like what caused the recession, it's all in our heads.
Logged

MrPerfect

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 703
Re: Bad year for what manufacturers?
« Reply #17 on: April 03, 2010, 05:28:54 PM »
I saw something that Norm Duke said and I think it explains us as an industry and a consumer base...he was explaining how he would never ever tell anyone he was a bowler almost out of shame.

Everything I see in terms of advertising and negotiations seems like we go into everything thinking that way. It's hard to prove to people that you are valuable to them if you don't even think you are valuable.
Logged

sdbowler

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4066
Re: Bad year for what manufacturers?
« Reply #18 on: April 03, 2010, 06:06:32 PM »
One thing you all are forgetting is that EVERY company has years where they are low on the pole for shows and wins. Just a few years ago Brunswick dominated. A few years ago Ebonite/Hammer did. I remember when the Track Heat came out Track was tearing the tour up that season. Columbia has had it's day up top, so has Storm/Roto Grip. I guess what I am saying is that it goes in streaks. Many great players are using the Storm family and many more using the Ebonite family. Not many using Brunswick or 900G. I am not the smartest person but if the greater numbers are with Storm familiy of equipment and also the Ebonite family I am going to put my money on them for having better years. I know not always the case but it sure helps. Also too you have to keep in mind all of the older balls that some of the players may have around.
--------------------
Kyle
Logged

GrinderMan

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 59
Re: Bad year for what manufacturers?
« Reply #19 on: April 03, 2010, 06:18:01 PM »
quote:
Shows by manufacturer:
Storm       - 19
Columbia   - 12
Rotogrip   -  8
Ebonite      -  8
Hammer      -  7
900Global   -  6
Brunswick   -  6
Track      -  1



So basically:

Ebonite       - 28
Storm          - 27
Brunswick   - 6
900 Global  - 6
Logged

Crankenstein300

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1296
Re: Bad year for what manufacturers?
« Reply #20 on: April 03, 2010, 07:21:23 PM »
Brunswick could use a "gotta have it" ball that matches up for the tour shots and oil like they did back in the Absolute Inferno/Vapor Zone days. Then the Big B staffers (which weren't huge in numbers then either) and the independents would all flock to those balls. I remember Amleto and Duke winning titles with the Absolute when they were independants.
Logged

kidlost2000

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5789
Re: Bad year for what manufacturers?
« Reply #21 on: April 03, 2010, 07:54:09 PM »
A big part of sponsoring on tour is to generate revenue/interest for your product. Does it really work that much anymore with so few people watching?

Is that a wise investment of money? Many companies seem to think not. You could not be a PBA sponsored company and advertise for the cheap on the TV shows in commercials. You would have product placement any week you wanted and it would cost less.

You could even sponsor a tournament and have your name plastered everywhere along with your promo spots on the telecast like the Dexter foot work of the pros or whatever you decided to call it.

It would cost your company less and actually get more out of your product. Be honest who watched the show with a different shot on each lane and thought wow that is a great promotion for those bowling balls?


--------------------
" men lie, women lie, numbers don''t "

Edited on 4/3/2010 7:55 PM
Logged
…… you can't  add a physics term to a bowling term and expect it to mean something.

kidlost2000

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5789
Re: Bad year for what manufacturers?
« Reply #22 on: April 03, 2010, 07:54:32 PM »
Mr. Perfect if you think the PBA is here for ever on tv and ect and that it can't fail just remember what happened to seeing the WPBA and Senior PBA on tv. If things continue on this pace the PBA will be next.

Hope I'm wrong.
--------------------
" men lie, women lie, numbers don't "
Logged
…… you can't  add a physics term to a bowling term and expect it to mean something.

MrPerfect

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 703
Re: Bad year for what manufacturers?
« Reply #23 on: April 03, 2010, 08:50:31 PM »
quote:
Mr. Perfect if you think the PBA is here for ever on tv and ect and that it can't fail just remember what happened to seeing the WPBA and Senior PBA on tv. If things continue on this pace the PBA will be next.

Hope I'm wrong.
--------------------
" men lie, women lie, numbers don't "


I'm talking about bowling, not the PBA.
Logged

MrPerfect

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 703
Re: Bad year for what manufacturers?
« Reply #24 on: April 03, 2010, 08:56:20 PM »
quote:
Brunswick could use a "gotta have it" ball that matches up for the tour shots and oil like they did back in the Absolute Inferno/Vapor Zone days. Then the Big B staffers (which weren't huge in numbers then either) and the independents would all flock to those balls. I remember Amleto and Duke winning titles with the Absolute when they were independants.


I think they would have had one this year with the 3.5 if it wasn't for the buzz the Mission has created. Overall the C-System balls have seemed to be winners.
Logged

baer300

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 541
Re: Bad year for what manufacturers?
« Reply #25 on: April 03, 2010, 09:06:42 PM »
I was just at Baltimore yesterday. I saw alot of Brunswick balls going down the lane. There weren't too many non staffers not throwing Brunswick.

By the way that was some great action going on towards the last couple of games last night.
--------------------
Adam Baer
Brunswick Regional Staff
Vise Regional Staff
The opinions expressed are solely those of the writer and not of Brunswick Corporation
Logged
Adam Baer
Track Regional Staff
Vise Regional Staff

kidlost2000

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5789
Re: Bad year for what manufacturers?
« Reply #26 on: April 03, 2010, 10:13:54 PM »
I see. In terms of bowling in general it will always be around. Leagues may not ever be what they once were, but there will still be bowling.

As far ar Brunswick on tour it may not make a lot of TV shows but that has less to do with product and more to do with whom and how many throw it.

Technically Track was suppose to be geared towards higher average bowlers and be the premium product of the Ebonite family.

How well has that worked on the PBA this season?

The Mission came in with a loud roar but it seems to have dwindled as of late. Seen very few in my area throw it and lots of people on the different boards saying it is ok but not Ebonites best release to date like they had hoped. I would say in terms of general public the Hammer stuff has been huge this season.
--------------------
" men lie, women lie, numbers don't "
Logged
…… you can't  add a physics term to a bowling term and expect it to mean something.

Strider

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6757
Re: Bad year for what manufacturers?
« Reply #27 on: April 03, 2010, 10:23:38 PM »
quote:
Technically Track was suppose to be geared towards higher average bowlers and be the premium product of the Ebonite family.

How well has that worked on the PBA this season?
--------------------
" men lie, women lie, numbers don't "


What do you base this on?  About 5-7 years ago, and probably before Ebonite's acquisition, Track had quite a few high end asymmetric releases and may have been considered more "high end" than Ebonite.  Since that time, Track seems to be relegated to the back of the bus.  Ebonite has been kind of hit or miss, Columbia seems to be on the rise, but Track seems to be an afterthought.  I can at least see a direction with the other two, but what is Track's reason to be?  Not that they're making bad products, but I just know how or why a ball is released with Track's name on it.
--------------------
Penn State Proud

Ron Clifton's Bowling Tip Archive
Logged

baer300

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 541
Re: Bad year for what manufacturers?
« Reply #28 on: April 03, 2010, 10:56:37 PM »
quote:
quote:
Technically Track was suppose to be geared towards higher average bowlers and be the premium product of the Ebonite family.

How well has that worked on the PBA this season?
--------------------
" men lie, women lie, numbers don't "


What do you base this on?  About 5-7 years ago, and probably before Ebonite's acquisition, Track had quite a few high end asymmetric releases and may have been considered more "high end" than Ebonite.  Since that time, Track seems to be relegated to the back of the bus.  Ebonite has been kind of hit or miss, Columbia seems to be on the rise, but Track seems to be an afterthought.  I can at least see a direction with the other two, but what is Track's reason to be?  Not that they're making bad products, but I just know how or why a ball is released with Track's name on it.
--------------------
Penn State Proud

Ron Clifton's Bowling Tip Archive



Alot actually almost all of the Ebonite family staffers were throwing Track stuff all day yesterday(Barnes, Oneill, Jones and Scroggy a little)
--------------------
Adam Baer
Brunswick Regional Staff
Vise Regional Staff
The opinions expressed are solely those of the writer and not of Brunswick Corporation
Logged
Adam Baer
Track Regional Staff
Vise Regional Staff

kidlost2000

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5789
Re: Bad year for what manufacturers?
« Reply #29 on: April 04, 2010, 02:11:21 AM »
quote:
quote:
Technically Track was suppose to be geared towards higher average bowlers and be the premium product of the Ebonite family.

How well has that worked on the PBA this season?
--------------------
" men lie, women lie, numbers don't "


What do you base this on?  About 5-7 years ago, and probably before Ebonite's acquisition, Track had quite a few high end asymmetric releases and may have been considered more "high end" than Ebonite.  Since that time, Track seems to be relegated to the back of the bus.  Ebonite has been kind of hit or miss, Columbia seems to be on the rise, but Track seems to be an afterthought.  I can at least see a direction with the other two, but what is Track's reason to be?  Not that they're making bad products, but I just know how or why a ball is released with Track's name on it.
--------------------
Penn State Proud

Ron Clifton's Bowling Tip Archive





Thats Ebonites words after buying Track and pushing it to be their higher end product line for the Ebonite family. That was also another reason for the number system.

I don't doubt they throw Track during the week, it was more in reference to TV appearances.
--------------------
" men lie, women lie, numbers don't "
Logged
…… you can't  add a physics term to a bowling term and expect it to mean something.

MrPerfect

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 703
Re: Bad year for what manufacturers?
« Reply #30 on: April 04, 2010, 09:01:26 AM »
quote:
quote:
quote:
Technically Track was suppose to be geared towards higher average bowlers and be the premium product of the Ebonite family.

How well has that worked on the PBA this season?
--------------------
" men lie, women lie, numbers don't "


What do you base this on?  About 5-7 years ago, and probably before Ebonite's acquisition, Track had quite a few high end asymmetric releases and may have been considered more "high end" than Ebonite.  Since that time, Track seems to be relegated to the back of the bus.  Ebonite has been kind of hit or miss, Columbia seems to be on the rise, but Track seems to be an afterthought.  I can at least see a direction with the other two, but what is Track's reason to be?  Not that they're making bad products, but I just know how or why a ball is released with Track's name on it.
--------------------
Penn State Proud

Ron Clifton's Bowling Tip Archive



Alot actually almost all of the Ebonite family staffers were throwing Track stuff all day yesterday(Barnes, Oneill, Jones and Scroggy a little)
--------------------
Adam Baer
Brunswick Regional Staff
Vise Regional Staff
The opinions expressed are solely those of the writer and not of Brunswick Corporation


Yeah, this is why I don't know why they don't move one of their major staffers to Track, because the majority of the Hopkinsville brand prefers their stuff when the camera's aren't on. If they aren't going to move one of the big dogs they should focuse their attention on getting a consistent young guy like Ciminelli.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3
« previous next »