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

261–270 of 280 posts

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#261

Post by dclowd9901 »

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

The Kirkland Signature brand is actually typically rebranded goods from industry mainstays. Their beer, for instance, is rebranded Gordon Biersch, which is pretty good beer, by all accounts.

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#262

Post by ada1981 »

mgkimsal wrote: post #250
ada1981 wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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).

I was spending a few hundred a year on exams, contacts and backup glasses.

Outside of that, having the equivalent of HD vision is worth every penny.

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#263

Post by bobbington »

Freak_NL wrote: post #111
annnnd wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to article this is not the case here: > “We weren’t infringing. But we couldn’t afford to fight the case,” he says. Instead, his company settled the 2015 claims with Acushnet by agreeing to get out of the golf-ball business altogether; it received no payment from Acushnet, nor did it pay.

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 CEO may have already made a couple million and was happy to retire with handsome profits.

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#264

Post by ada1981 »

jnevelson wrote: post #229
ada1981 wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I'd be very interested in hearing more as well. Email is username @ gmail. Thank you!

sent.

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#265

Post by ALee »

Two things to keep in mind:

1) Acushnet is trying to keep Costco from entering the market, but once Costco sells a significant number of its golf balls, Acushnet will have to deal with the economic ramifications.

2) Streisand effect - this lawsuit plays really well for Costco, namely that it gives them a lot of free publicity and hype around their supposedly amazing golf balls.

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#266

Post by 2muchcoffeeman »

Neliquat wrote: post #171
2muchcoffeeman wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The land use is what I dislike most about it. There are a few golf courses in Sydney in prime locations. All that land that can't really be used for anything else. The worst one is in Little Bay, next to the ocean. Countless balls hit into the ocean.

So more apartments is nicer to you than some grass and trees?

That would still be better than a large piece of land that relatively few people will use. At least we'd get a few public parks and other facilities.

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#267

Post by odbol_ »

dclowd9901 wrote: post #261
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

The Kirkland Signature brand is actually typically rebranded goods from industry mainstays. Their beer, for instance, is rebranded Gordon Biersch, which is pretty good beer, by all accounts.

For a while, the Kirkland Signature brand "Canadian Whiskey" was just repackaged Crown Royale. Same whisky at half the price.

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#268

Post by hackuser »

bmcusick wrote: post #240
hackuser wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What happens if your small business sues Google? Right or wrong, you are betting the business on that case. If you lose, Google's legal costs will consume your entire business. That said, it's hard for your small business to sue Google anyway.

Except that my rule makes it easier to sue Google if you have a good case . The whole point of "Loser Pays" is to filter out the frivolous, weak, and marginal cases. But it also makes it easier to file the strong and meritorious cases, because you know you're going to win (eventually), and they'll pay for it. Of course because the strong cases get settled out of Court, the overall effect is that a lot fewer cases wil…

> if you have a good case.

Your confidence in the legal process' accuracy in sorting good cases from bad is greater than mine. Any case is risky, IMHO.

> The Court system is overburdened

I agree; it should be much better funded. It's denial of justice to everyone.

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#269

Post by nojvek »

NoNotTheDuo wrote: post #230
perfectstorm wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Christ, come to KC for your surgery. I paid just over $3k for my eyes to be done a few years ago. Was one of the best purchases I've ever made.

I paid $200 in India for LASIK 7 years ago when I was visiting grandparents. Perfect vision till today, no problems.

I generally find US prices 20X for most routine procedures.

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#270

Post by wayn3 »

nojvek wrote: post #269
NoNotTheDuo wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Christ, come to KC for your surgery. I paid just over $3k for my eyes to be done a few years ago. Was one of the best purchases I've ever made.

I paid $200 in India for LASIK 7 years ago when I was visiting grandparents. Perfect vision till today, no problems. I generally find US prices 20X for most routine procedures.

what happens in india when they screw it up?
Post reply on HN