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

221–230 of 280 posts

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#221

Post by terragon »

fgonzag wrote: post #87
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.

I've always had an idea that whoever loses a civil suit pays the other party the lower of the legal costs of both parties. So if small company A fights big company B, small company A would only have to pay twice it's legal costs, even if megacorp decides to spend smallcorp's yearly sales in the defense. If megacorp sues a small company, then small company can decide to fight it if they think they have a case and have…

That seems like a good idea and I can't come up with any obvious way in which it can be exploited.

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#222

Post by greenshackle2 »

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.

> it is standard to get an eye exam every year

I'm sure your ophthamologist will be happy to recommend getting exams as often as possible, like your dentist.

I've had the same prescription for 10 years. I had the same glasses for 10 years until I bought new ones for cheap on the internet this year using a 3 year old prescription.

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#223

Post by deadowl »

aluminussoma wrote: post #11

Costco sued J&J Vision Care a few years ago over anti-consumer behavior in the contact lenses industry (I characterize it as anti-consumer. The Vision Care industry characterizes it as pro-consumer). They dropped the lawsuit in 2016, probably because Johnson and Johnson discontinued the practice: https://www.law360.com/articles/800034/costco-drops-antitrus... Costco did support a different lawsuit by state of Utah ag…

Vermont gas distributors have the highest profit margins in the nation. The gasoline oligopoly here is committed to creating high barriers to entry. This includes buying their competitors just to remove the tanks on premise.

http://www.sevendaysvt.com/OffMessage/archives/2015/06/22/la...

Costco decided they were going to distribute gasoline at its Colchester, VT location. They spent years in court battles with Skip Vallee, owner of R.L. Vallee, Inc., eventually went up to the Vermont Supreme Court, which handed out a decision last year that Costco is permitted to build a gas station.

http://www.sevendaysvt.com/OffMessage/archives/2016/08/05/ve...

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#224

Post by jdhawk »

vhold wrote: post #95
hkmurakami wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can play for $20 or less at Muni courses. Hardly a status symbol tbh. If you mean private country clubs, well the most exclusive and high status of these are often social clubs rather than golf clubs (ex: Pacific Union and Bohemian Club in SF), and the activity of golf and the private club status symbol are separate things. Though... I have heard several times that "cycling is the new golf", and the $10,000 bikes…

I'm going to guess you live in or near San Francisco? Your view of golf is going to be skewed by that. While the Bay Area has extremely expensive and exclusive golf courses, it also uniquely has .. relatively.. affordable ones. But consider even $20 to play a game involving a stick and ball is actually still quite expensive to a child, so that's still a really high barrier to entry for a lot of people.

Outside urban areas, there are still plenty of small local country clubs that provide "unlimited" golf facilities for Members & their kids for affordable rates. $100-300/month depending on area, quality, etc...

GolfNow and other TeeTime booking sites allow for discounted rounds in your area.

Its not as cheap as Tennis & Basketball, but its not a game for the Rich and Famous only.

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#225

Post by thefalcon »

tehlike wrote: post #183
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

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

Having sold to CostCo before, I can attest that it forces inefficiencies out of the process very quickly. And they will not accept an inferior product, either. Also they have efficiency built into every aspect of their business, down to the specific layout of the shipping crates to be sent, to minimize worker labor for setup and display of product.

I don't see where the other (bad) edge of the sword is.

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#226

Post by jdhawk »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #65

Why not just make a $1 ball using all of the expired 1990's era patents from the top manufacturers. You'd make a mint. Name it the Patentless.

Probably because 1990's balls sucked, and were expensive to manufacture (wound cores?)

There are plenty of cheap golf balls using modern materials, designs, and manufacturing techniques out there. People just want to play what they see the pro's playing - because its one less thing they can blame their shitty performance on.

Club technology has not significantly changed in the past 10 years, but Golfers are always looking for an edge that does not require more practice...thus the constant new products.

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#227

Post by scott_karana »

shrewduser wrote: post #14
tedunangst wrote: post #7

I would have appreciated some more information about these patents. Like instead of telling me the lawsuit is all hot air, show me? I feel they deliberately omitted any facts which might allow me to form any opinion other than the one I'm supposed to have. (I'm happy to believe the lawsuit is bullshit, but not based on nothing but say so.)

the author probably understands it's just a quick google away for anyone interested.

Why even bother writing the article? More fleshed-out ones are probably also a google away. ;)

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#228

Post by OpenDrapery »

clubm8 wrote: post #37
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…

>I would highly, highly recommend that people learn to play golf. I wish it didn't have the stigma that it does with some people. Golf is like animé - it's the fans that make it insufferable.

Kind of like Ohio State football

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#229

Post by jnevelson »

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…

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

Re: A lawsuit over Costco golf balls

#230

Post by NoNotTheDuo »

perfectstorm wrote: post #189
driverdan wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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.
Post reply on HN