Legal battles between golf equipment makers are nothing new but the root of the latest conflict between two golf instruments may be: golf ball paint.
In a lawsuit filed this month, TaylorMade alleges that Callaway engaged in a “coordinated marketing campaign to mislead consumers and retailers…
The lawsuit, filed in the Southern California District of San Diego – near the headquarters of both companies – details actions allegedly taken by a Callaway sales agent, who during marketing illuminated balls from both companies under UV light and said the dark spots on the TaylorMade ball indicated an imperfection or defect.
The case, which was first reported by Front office sportsincludes a screenshot of the pitch (below) and a partial transcript of an exchange between a sales agent and a client, in which the agent suggests that the difference in paint coverage on golf balls can affect performance like mud on an elevator.
TaylorMade alleges that some Callaway salespeople “made misleading sales pitches that overemphasized the importance of UV light to paint coverage and golf ball performance,” and called TaylorMade balls “mud balls” during these shows. TaylorMade said in the suit that the difference in appearance under UV light can be attributed to the UV brightener – a “cosmetic additive” to the paint coat that “has no significant relationship to ball flight, distance, playability or other performance characteristics.”
TaylorMade alleges that Callaway commissioned more than just sales agents to do the job, alleging that the misleading representations of TaylorMade balls were made by Callaway employees, agents and promoters with ties to the manufacturer. The suit cited an article on a golf equipment website as an example of Callaway’s attempt to “mismarket” its balls against TaylorMade’s.
In the filing, TaylorMade opposes uncontrolled UV light testing, noting several different reasons — such as sun exposure — where testing can yield mixed results.
A representative for TaylorMade provided a statement to GOLF.com that read in part: “While TaylorMade respects Callaway and their golf products, we are disappointed in Callaway’s attempt to unfairly compete with TaylorMade.
“TaylorMade initiated this lawsuit to protect its name and reputation. We intend to dispute the claims made about our products and hold Callaway accountable in court for not only disparaging our brand and products, but more importantly, misleading consumers.”
Callaway issued this statement: “While we generally do not comment on matters pending litigation, we continue to advocate for the relevance of UV light related to the use of coatings on golf balls and believe this is appropriate information for the market.”
Ball manufacturers are doing everything possible to perfect their production processes, and decisions about paint coating – or internal sizing – do issue, in the same way that dimple arrangements or the number of dimples can affect the flight of the ball. Some balls have 348 dimples, some 376 and some 388. Applying multiple coats of paint to these different arrangements requires unlimited adjustments by highly skilled engineers.
