Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

qz.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 280 posts

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#181

Post by tamcap »

ada1981 wrote: post #155
eps wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A risk of ending up with halos is not worth it.

If you get LASEK vs. LASIK halos aren't a problem. I had LASEK done perhaps 8 years ago, and my eyes went from 20/400 to 20/15 overnight. The entire procedure was incredible including an HD prescription profile generated by scanning your entire eye. The process is $4k-$5k but with financing comes down to about the same you spend on glasses or contacts annually. No risk of halos as there is no "flap" cut like with LAS…

Please share more info, I'm intrigued. tamcap / gmail

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#182

Post by Declanomous »

Humdeee wrote: post #180
eddieroger wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always hear stories about Costco being great to their employees, but now seeing that they're so pro-consumer as well makes me feel even better about shopping there pretty regularly. I'm not even their target market, but it's one of my favorite stores.

Costco is very pro-consumer. Management will not stock an item if they feel it's priced too high. Their Kirkland Signature brand is also pretty good quality I've found. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Costco#Sales_model

I worked for an insurance broker in the small business sector for a while generating new lead sources. Costco was one of the organizations I was talking to. They were very emphatic that they did not want to provide insurance through brokers, because they felt a broker was unable to guarantee the level of service they wanted.

I was very impressed by that. Our CEO, not so much. I'm sure he still thinks Costco hates money.

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#183

Post by tehlike »

Humdeee wrote: post #180
eddieroger wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always hear stories about Costco being great to their employees, but now seeing that they're so pro-consumer as well makes me feel even better about shopping there pretty regularly. I'm not even their target market, but it's one of my favorite stores.

Costco is very pro-consumer. Management will not stock an item if they feel it's priced too high. Their Kirkland Signature brand is also pretty good quality I've found. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Costco#Sales_model

To me this sounds like a double edged sword. Though, i do like costco personally and shop there frequently.

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#184

Post by Declanomous »

ChrisBland wrote: post #160
hkmurakami wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ehh, you can get perfectly serviceable balls for even cheaper than the costco ball. I bought 10 dozen Top Flite Gamer balls as my winter ball (you tend to lose more balls in the winter due to plugging into the ground, taller rough, etc.) for $9.99/dozen on Christmas sale. I play $48/dozen balls regularly as well, but I'm perfectly content playing the $1 ball. MSRP-wise, Pinnacle balls have been a perfectly fine ball…

Avid golfer here, while I agree with your premise on the threat to Titleist that KSIGS present. I went out and played 4-5 rounds with the Kirkland Signature and it couldn't hold a candle to the tournament balls I normally play. For a competitive golfer, the ball just is not up to par. For your weekend warrior, its a perfectly fine ball and probably better than the prov1(x) as the cover is much harder and won't wear o…

As a perpetually novice golfer, I'm flattered that you think I can keep track of golf balls long enough for the durability to matter.

Plus I have yet to find a ball that will survive an encounter with a cart path, unless you fancy hitting range balls.

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#185

Post by nommm-nommm »

ohbleek wrote: post #150
nommm-nommm wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This makes no sense, unless you were a kid why would you have to get your glasses "re-done" every year? I've been wearing the same prescription for a decade and the same plastic frames for seven years. I go to the ophthalmologist every two years to get my optic drusen looked at and my corrected vision is fine. If I didn't go for my drusen I would have no reason to go. If your vision is so unstable that you were getti…

I'm not sure where you get your Informaton but for one, in order to re-order contact lenses you must have a current rx (within 1-2 years) and it is standard to get an eye exam every year. Many people have eyesight that progressively gets worse and require a new rx yearly.

If your vision is so unstable you need a new RX every year your LASIK isn't going to last very long. Hence you probably are a very poor candidate for LASIK and it makes no sense from a strictly financial sense.

Unless you wear contacts, which can get pretty expensive, but probably not as expensive as LASIK that lasts 10 years.

I'm not sure why you'd get an eye exam every year unless you were having problems or needed a new prescription.

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#186

Post by phil21 »

gambiting wrote: post #112
grinich wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The complication risk of modern LASIK is actually nearly identical to wearing contacts every day.

Sure. But halos seem pretty common - every person I know who got LASIK done in the past 10 years experiences got them to some extent, my dad almost had a nervous breakdown because for the first year after the surgery the halos were so bad he couldn't really drive at night - they sort of faded away with time but he said they were always there and in hindsight, he wouldn't have selected surgery.

Certainly a risk. This is one of those areas where watching the latest tech development is worthwhile, as it's moving rapidly.

I got a laser-only procedure done about 5 years ago now, and it's been the best decision of my life. I had halos for about 6-12mo, but I also had minor halos before the surgery too - so I really haven't noticed much of a difference.

One thing you should either really really do, or really really don't do (I still can't decide) is walk the Vegas strip at night the day after surgery like I did. You will have major halos/starbursts at that point, and it's the closest to a random private laser show as I've ever gotten in life. I suppose drugs may be less risky and cheaper though...

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#187

Post by nommm-nommm »

phil21 wrote: post #179
nommm-nommm wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This makes no sense, unless you were a kid why would you have to get your glasses "re-done" every year? I've been wearing the same prescription for a decade and the same plastic frames for seven years. I go to the ophthalmologist every two years to get my optic drusen looked at and my corrected vision is fine. If I didn't go for my drusen I would have no reason to go. If your vision is so unstable that you were getti…

I got LASIK, and I had stable vision. It's saved me thousands of dollars now. Not everyone is as careful and/or inactive as you :) I've lost more pair of prescription sunglasses at the bottom of the ocean/lakes within a few years than you seem to have owned in total over the course of a decade. Basically glasses to me meant $500/yr in replacements due to breakage or losing them in various situations. Yes, completely…

I was replying to the person who needs new glasses because of unstable vision and strictly from a financial perspective.

I know it's common for adults to change vision but usually once a year is a frequency more seen in children and teens. At least from my experience talking to people and being in an ophthalmologist chair since infancy. I was a frequent flyer at the ophthalmologist's office as a child (once a month was common for a while) and I had lots of questions.

EDIT: I haven't actually heard a lot about the elderly so I don't know their typical frequency of vision change. The only data point I have is a 60 year old I knew who got LASIK and was back in glasses in about 2 years.

On an unrelated note, I went to the same ophthalmologist for 20 years and it was eerie how it never changed. The ophthalmologist always looked the same, he always had the same staff and they looked the same, and the office didn't change. After a while it was like stepping into a time machine when I went there.

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#188

Post by eddieroger »

Declanomous wrote: post #182
Humdeee wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Costco is very pro-consumer. Management will not stock an item if they feel it's priced too high. Their Kirkland Signature brand is also pretty good quality I've found. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Costco#Sales_model

I worked for an insurance broker in the small business sector for a while generating new lead sources. Costco was one of the organizations I was talking to. They were very emphatic that they did not want to provide insurance through brokers, because they felt a broker was unable to guarantee the level of service they wanted. I was very impressed by that. Our CEO, not so much. I'm sure he still thinks Costco hates mon…

Interesting. Maybe it's not so much that Costco hates money, they just love their customers more. It's possible, and apparently works.

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#189

Post by perfectstorm »

driverdan wrote: post #174
electrum wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Get LASIK. Having perfect eyesight and not having to deal with contacts or glasses is worth every penny.

Myself and many of my former coworkers got LASIK last year. Use or lose HRA = cheap LASIK. Everyone seemed very happy, myself included. Halos are no worse than with contacts (maybe better). After recovery use of eye drops for dryness is no more frequent than with contacts. If you live in the northeast US consider getting it done in Canada. I knew a few people who went to Toronto to have it done for half the price.

How much was it in Toronto ? I was quoted $5k+ in the South Bay area.

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#190

Post by [deleted] »

ChrisBland wrote: post #160
hkmurakami wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ehh, you can get perfectly serviceable balls for even cheaper than the costco ball. I bought 10 dozen Top Flite Gamer balls as my winter ball (you tend to lose more balls in the winter due to plugging into the ground, taller rough, etc.) for $9.99/dozen on Christmas sale. I play $48/dozen balls regularly as well, but I'm perfectly content playing the $1 ball. MSRP-wise, Pinnacle balls have been a perfectly fine ball…

Avid golfer here, while I agree with your premise on the threat to Titleist that KSIGS present. I went out and played 4-5 rounds with the Kirkland Signature and it couldn't hold a candle to the tournament balls I normally play. For a competitive golfer, the ball just is not up to par. For your weekend warrior, its a perfectly fine ball and probably better than the prov1(x) as the cover is much harder and won't wear o…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN