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

241–250 of 280 posts

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#241

Post by abritinthebay »

rincebrain wrote: post #66
abritinthebay wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assuming they can. I can't - they don't fix my eyesight. That's actually quite common. Dalies are great if you can have them but they don't fix all conditions.

What about your vision is such that dailies can't correct for it, but other contacts can? Is it that you can't make use of "soft" contacts in general for this, or just (presumably) that making contacts to correct for this would be sufficiently costly for daily disposibles as to be infeasible?

Irregular thickness of the cornea.

Literally impossible to correct with soft lenses.

It's hard lenses or a (risky) cornea transplant really (other options like intacs could help but not fix it)

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#242

Post by mcguire »

blhack wrote: post #32
vhold wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact there is a high barrier of entry might be one of the only appeals golf has at all? Playing it is a status symbol. Although, I think maybe that elite status symbols themselves may be on a downswing, maybe because of the growing awareness of wealth inequality? Super rich people used to ride around in stretch limos and people found it interesting and exciting, now there's a growing perception that's disgusting…

>The fact there is a high barrier of entry might be one of the only appeals golf has at all? This is ridiculous. Golf is a sport that you can play from when you first start walking, until nearly the day you die. That's the appeal. It requires extreme concentration in a way that I've never experienced in any other sport I've ever played. I would highly, highly recommend that people learn to play golf. I wish it didn't…

Is it possible to play solo? (I understand that the avow won't count, but...)

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#243

Post by [deleted] »

blhack wrote: post #32
vhold wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact there is a high barrier of entry might be one of the only appeals golf has at all? Playing it is a status symbol. Although, I think maybe that elite status symbols themselves may be on a downswing, maybe because of the growing awareness of wealth inequality? Super rich people used to ride around in stretch limos and people found it interesting and exciting, now there's a growing perception that's disgusting…

>The fact there is a high barrier of entry might be one of the only appeals golf has at all? This is ridiculous. Golf is a sport that you can play from when you first start walking, until nearly the day you die. That's the appeal. It requires extreme concentration in a way that I've never experienced in any other sport I've ever played. I would highly, highly recommend that people learn to play golf. I wish it didn't…

[deleted]

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#244

Post by abritinthebay »

djeikyb wrote: post #113
rincebrain wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about your vision is such that dailies can't correct for it, but other contacts can? Is it that you can't make use of "soft" contacts in general for this, or just (presumably) that making contacts to correct for this would be sufficiently costly for daily disposibles as to be infeasible?

kerataconus, which involves mild to severe astigmatism and a deformed cornea. from what i've read, it's a bit of both. there's a couple of newish soft contact designs i've heard of, but also there's the cost. at a point, glasses don't even provide sufficient correction.

It's not astigmatism but it's often misdiagnosed as such first due to similar presentation of symptoms.

I actually have Pellucid which is often mistaken for Kerataconus so I did the whole shebang of diagnosis!

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#245

Post by scott_s »

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…

> For a competitive golfer, the ball just is not up to par.

Well done.

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#246

Post by scott_s »

rlonstein wrote: post #208
blhack wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The fact there is a high barrier of entry might be one of the only appeals golf has at all? This is ridiculous. Golf is a sport that you can play from when you first start walking, until nearly the day you die. That's the appeal. It requires extreme concentration in a way that I've never experienced in any other sport I've ever played. I would highly, highly recommend that people learn to play golf. I wish it didn't…

> It requires extreme concentration in a way that I've never experienced in any other sport I've ever played. I'm not a golfer but you might compare that concentration to what is required for archery, which I'm learning, and high power rifle marksmanship, which I learned when I was young. Golf's stigma doesn't approach that of shooting sports, depending on one's location/social circles.

I think any sport which requires performing a discrete task is going to be similar. I have never golfed, or tried archery or shooting in a sport setting, but I have been powerlifting for a few years. I assume the concentration aspect is similar.

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#247

Post by mcguire »

saidajigumi wrote: post #6
xupybd wrote: post #2

This shows everything wrong with IP today. There should be no place for legal bullying. Especially when it's as simple as crushing competitors under litigation costs.

Especially the cynical practice of filing known-baseless patent suits as described in the article. That behavior should get the company heavily fined, and land the responsible corporate actors in prison.

We only have the defendant's word that it was baseless.

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#248

Post by scott_karana »

praptak wrote: post #91

Why don't consumers boycott the trolls out of existence? It's not like there is a huge cost of switching golf balls, right? And the consumer base isn't companies whose deciders spend someone else's money.

The feedback loop is poor, even if you ignore biases.

How do consumers know their favourite brand is filing lawsuits, much less know if they're frivolous?

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#249

Post by quadrangle »

nulagrithom wrote: post #204
Freak_NL wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That small business' response here is hard to fathom. Either the reporting is bad, or they quietly settled for a nice sum off the record (to prevent other businesses from getting ideas).

The article makes it sound so light-hearted: > “We laughed when we got the lawsuit. We knew we made it.” So, what? They were just like "lol we're getting sued"? I have a hard time believing they were perfectly OK with the situation...

As someone working on a non-profit startup, I regularly half-joke that our long-term expectations are to make just enough impact that the vested interests who prefer the status quo will take notice enough and do whatever to make us disappear. If you start out with this awareness, you might not be okay being right about it, but maybe not totally outraged at the inevitable injustice…

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#250

Post by mgkimsal »

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…

> The process is $4k-$5k but with financing comes down to about the same you spend on glasses or contacts annually.

My eyes aren't perfect, but I've spent about $500 on glasses in 10 years. How much do others spend? I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around financing $5k for eyes (not saying it bad, just not close to my experience).

Post reply on HN