GC quad overpriced?

[Eldobo]

Ok so I have lots of thoughts on this so please bare with me... I'm very close to pulling the trigger on the GC quad. For me its really the only option out there for what Im looking for. I'm looking for game improvement. I plan to pair it up with the swing catalyst video recording. I want to take my handicap from an 8 to scratch. I already have a solid short game but my swing is a mess. I plan to do online coaching. I live in Canada so the winters here I don't play cause its too cold so this would be a game changer for me. My only hesitation right now is the price, 20k is alot of money for me, but I can afford it. My fear is that something new is going to come out within a year that does everything this does and it will cost a fraction of the price. Or in 2 years something like this will cost 4k. I know this is all new technology and new tech is always expensive so its bound to get cheaper as more competition enters the market. Garmin just released a promising looking device for $700 out of nowhere, it wont work for my application unfortunately. I know that no one here can predict the future but do you think? Is this product is overpriced now? Is this product at the end of its life cycle? Would hate to spend 20k and have this thing worth nothing in a few years or miss out on a better product at half the price next year. The only other option I have is to get a used skytrak and wait it out to see what comes up. I have a high swing speed and Im looking for exact accurate numbers so skytrak is not my ideal choice. Thoughts?

[GullLakeMi]

Good question. Following.

[Dax]

I am not sure the $700 Garmin is a good comparison, but your fears are legit as these high end product companies should each be working to improve their product and continually improve.

I have heard no rumours of a new FS product at the high end and suspect the QUAD is doing all they want it to do. With that said I believe they will come out with a lower priced unit this year and likely take the GC2 out of the product line. I also expect the newer product to be competitively priced, but likely will only provide ball data. This is all speculation on my part of course.

if you are on the fence, then the Skytrak would be a good thing to get in a wait and see scenario and you can then see what is released at the PGA Show this January. Alternatively, you could wait and see if a used QUAD comes out.

At the end of the day, there is nothing wrong with the QUAD. It is a solid product that will give you everything you are looking for and I am sure you will be happy.

[Dcdavis]

Here are my 2 cents take it for what it is worth.

I was recently in the same situation and I pulled the trigger on the Quad. What really helped me justify the concern of new technology coming out is how long the GC2 has been around and what it commands on the resale market even 10 years later. It’s hard for me to believe that Foresight would replace the Quad quickly. Just doesn’t seem like their business model. Especially with all of the recent adoption on the PGA Tour.

I spoke with my Foresight rep the other day to purchase some additional courses and he mentioned there are talks to replace the GC2. He also mentioned the engineering team was working on firmware updates for the Quad (ex. club data with no stickers).

I can also tell you I don’t regret the purchase at all. It has been a great improvement tool for ball striking. I actually had my first ever golf win at one of my club”s tournaments. I attribute a lot of that to the extra time I spent practicing on the Quad, with all of the data is provides as well as the level of accuracy for carry distances.

[Taco]

I’m not sure anyone is going to be able to give you the answer(s) you’re looking for, for amateurs it’s an indulgence and an expensive one at that. Only you will be able to square that. For me it’s on par with joining a private club to play at, buying a Ferrari instead of a Porsche or even Mustang , ProV1’s instead of found balls. I’m happy with my purchase and have no regrets, that said I had the very same concerns.

from a technology standpoint my assumption is that the scarcity of users drives the price as much as anything. Using the same Ferrari example, Ferrari sells less than 10k cars a year while Ford sells over 2million, the price reflects both the scarcity of products but also the scarcity of buyers. The price has to be high because margins have to be high. There’s no economies of scale like with an iPhone. All this is to say, the Quad is the Ferrari of launch monitors, the price is high, the risk is high, the depreciation is high, but the floor is also high… even an used old Ferrari is worth more than a new Ford.

btw, I have a Ford truck, not a Ferrari.

Not sure if this answers any questions you have but it’s might outlook and how I got comfortable with my purchase.

[fortysixandtwo]

Why not just get a gc2 and invest in lessons. A gc quad with ball data won’t bring you from 8 to scratch. Lessons to minimize your full swing misses and a super solid short game will get you to scratch. And you can’t get anywhere near a great short game improvement with any launch monitor..
Later on you can resell the gc2 and get a quad down the road..

[a98cr125]

First, everything is more expensive in Canada :-P The price of the high end cameras, battery, etc. have only gone up with recent constraints not down. Over the past few years they have actually added features and firmware updates to make Quad even better than when first released. Now they are adding more software like FSX Pro which is free for FSX license holders and working on a all-new FSX overhaul. I mean I think most sim focused players only need Quad and FSX not club data, putting analysis, etc. so that price alone in the US is $11k (Quad) + $3k (FSX), is $14k usd. That is no low price that is for sure but you are paying for the highest level of accuracy available right now that is portable and works outdoors too, even in the dark! There are many other good choices though and it all comes down to budget and level of accuracy you expect. SkyTrak and Mevo+ work great for so many people at that entry level $2k price, you just can't expect $14k results, they still work well. UNEEKOR is filling the gap between them and is just not portable. I could go on for a while but I would definitely not expect any high level of accuracy to come in much less. The Garmin R10 came out saying works with e6 and got people all excited, but you really need to read the details and seems like a smoking gun when the talk about the data. Large room for error in club data + - 2 degrees, yet they are saying that is how they are getting spin which is one of the most important indoor factors for accuracy. It also has no putting and surely can't read the ball impact so gear affect would cause a big miss for heel and tow shots. You get what you pay for, it never fails. Let's be honest, the Ferrari comment above, it's not a Ford, that hand build perfect paint and insanely high red line race car makes a Mustang look like your Grandma's pinto Now you can but a Ford GT to compete with it, that will cost you $500,000 if you can even get approved to buy it, used ones are $1,000,000 LOL Feel free to email me, I have connections everywhere, own everything basically, and enjoy helping people find what will best fit them.

Jay
Golf Simulator Videos
a98cr125@gmail.com

https://www.youtube.com/c/GolfSimulatorVideos

[Wizard of Coz]

0-60 and 1/4 mile yesssss!
3.4 that's just stupid fast
Whooping on combustion engine super cars!
At a fraction of the cost!

[a98cr125]

It really is. You have to drive one to appreciate it for the price for sure. If you are near any Ford stores see if they have a Courtesy One there, most do right now as they were sent to demo and not for sale yet. Take it for a spin! It will only be the regular not GT but still silly fast.

[SkeetShooter]

I think Ford went really far with their most recent iteration of the GT. It's honestly one of the most impressive track focused, street legal super cars out there. IMO, Ford is doing a quality job lately, and I think a lot of that comes down to focusing on core building strategies. Ditching their passenger car line was very smart, and its resulted in Ford coming to market with some great innovations, although I'm a bit miffed about them ditching the half-ton diesel variant.

Jay, any idea when you will see a Lighting near you? I have one on pre-order along with a CyberTruck.

[jpotas]

I own a Skytrak, and I suggest that you start with a Skytrak and see if it meets your needs. Every comparison I see shows that the Skytrak data is inline with the more expensive simulators. Spin data is very good since it is a camera system. The downside is no measured club data. The kicker is that they hold their value insanely well so you can always sell it and upgrade to the GC Quad later.

I am looking at upgrading to a Uneekor myself, club data and video for well under the GC Quad price. I don't know that I even need it, but it seems like I always want to tinker!!

[Baller]

I was in your shoes years ago. I ended up going with something less expensive. Then I upgraded again. Then I eventually, after wasting a boatload of money, realized I should've just ponied up at the start. I never would've looked back.

GC2 or Quad, no reason to think about anything else if you want real data.

We've always thought something would come along for less money. People have tried and we've all been let down. Anyone who enters this game and it at this level in the tech, it going to charge more. That's just how it is. Don't waste your time on cheap tech that you'll be disappointed with.

Spend that time on your game.

[Wizard of Coz]

I agree.....

[Morini]

Some great comments here. I have followed the GC2 and Skytrak since they first came out, and the price resilience astounded me at first. I now realize that the niche market size has a lot do with it. Also that the high quality imagers that make up the Foresight units have not been subject to consumer product level price drops.

In the end, you have to take a best case, worst case and most likely case scenario over your time horizon. Let's say 4 years. What will you be able to sell a quad for in 4 years? First of all, while consumer products such as the recent Garmin will come, I highly doubt that there will be huge price drops when it comes to Quad/TM4 level products. Even if the components dropped in cost dramatically, I don't see a used Quad dropping by more than 30% over the next 4 years. Let's round up to 40%. This is a worst case scenario, remember.

I am going to use U.S. pricing, and assume current price $13K for refurb Quad with club data. A 40% loss is $5200. That is $1,300 U.S. a year "loss", or about $110 per month. Peanuts in the big scheme of things for a serious game improvement golfer. If it makes your lessons and practice that much more productive, can easily pay for itself.

Now, let's talk regret aversion, as this is what this is really about. If an amazing new product came and did the exact thing as quad for one quarter the price, you'd kick yourself. But if you don't get the Quad and the new product never comes, you'll kick yourself for not getting it, and setting back your plan for improvement ... we all live on borrowed time as we all know. What would you do if the odds were 50-50? 75-25 either direction? 90-10 either direction. This will tell you what your priorities are and you can act accordingly.

I'd suggest used Flightscope, but it doesn't sound like you have the indoor space for it.

[Blaiser]

At some point, almost assuredly, the prices will come down as competition picks up. So not really a matter of if -- just when. The problem is it's just impossible to tell when that will be.

The car analogy above, while very fun, I think is a bit flawed because cars have a high amount of prestige and signaling. People don't actually buy a Ferrari so they can have the fastest car on the track -- because it isn't. They buy a Ferrari because of the name, and all that comes with the name.

Tech doesn't really have that sentiment, or at least not on the same level as non-tech products like clothes, furniture, cars...etc. With tech, consumers mostly care about performance.

So if another company puts out a product that is just as good as the Quad or TM at 1/4 the price, then Foresight and TM will be more or less forced to reply. I doubt many golf pro's and golf enthusiasts will shell out 2-3x the price for the brand tax. Even the iPhone is priced competitively, even though Apple has the brand appeal and loyalty.

Right now Foresight and TM get their asking price because they just perform better. Other companies are getting close, though. But I just don't believe that Foresight and TM can be like Ferrari or Rolex and continue charging high prices just because of their brand.

My complete guess -- 2 years before another product comes out that forces Foresight/TM's hands. But that's just my guess.

[Morini]

I think the high end LM is just too small a market for new entrants to make money in. Sure, the components will get cheaper, and sensors better ... but the development, testing and validation costs are HUGE for such a small and exacting market. The recent Garmin Approach R10 has club data for a very low price ... BUT they give accuracy as +- 2 degrees for face and path. That is useless for serious golfers. Maybe useless for non-serious golfers also, as marginally accurate club data without coaching and guidance is likely not helpful. As such, I think you will instead see quite accurate ball data in the $1-$2K range. But club data to actionable accuracy? Again, I don't see it because of the size of the market. Maybe if Uneekor makes a portable unit, and leverages their existing development expertise. Or the patent that Rapsodo filed a few years ago where the unit 3d scans the club head and then match up low res stereo image captures to get accurate club data. Now that is a clever way of bringing club data costs down. Will it be accurate, and if so, will they go through the expense of developing it commercially?

[Blaiser]

Oh I fully agree. For brevity sake, I just mentioned that the top players are "better" and that is why they get their asking price. There is obviously a lot of nuance to the term "better" as you have pointed out.

My point was that I don't believe they will ever be in a position to have the brand tax. Thus prices will fall with more competition.

You make a great point about the market being so small. It could very well be too small for proper competition to makes any waves in the near future.

[Morini]

That is the unknown. I don't think it would be rational for another player to enter the high end market ... unless they have something novel technologically up their sleeve that will blow away current price/performance. The Rapsodo device has the potential. I eyeball the hardware to come in quite cheap, maybe under $1,000 component cost. Accurate portable club data under $4K could catch on with the game improvement crowd who don't have space and can't afford Quad or GC2+HMT. It it caught on, then yes, might put downward pressure on Quad. As others have mentioned, likely that a GC2 replacement is on the horizon. Will it do club data?

[Baller]

Yeah, comment that it's not just about the parts. ES has built a couple units with the inexpensive parts and we've all learned from it.

You need the algorithm that tell those parts what to do with the data. Otherwise, the parts are just parts.

[Dax]

I think another component of a system that has not really been discussed above is the software side of things. I think this is a big undertaking that takes a pretty big investment from a product developer.

from a FS perspective, I think they have been promising an update for 2021 and nothing has been delivered yet and the months are running out. Same thing for TM, from what I understand the new firmware update is being developed from the ground up and I believe this was to be delivered at the end of February, but again we are a few months late. There is a lot needed to get these things correct. I remember when Trugolf was promising e6 2.0 a number of years ago and if I recall they were a year late from what they promised and in the end they just released e6 1.6, which fell way short of what they were promising when they discussed 2.0. The investment needed here is bigger than what many think.

[Morini]

Yes, relative to market size, software development is very expensive.

[delaloi]

Eldobo -

Like all things, whether the GC Quad is "worth it" depends on what you would otherwise do with the money.

If nothing too important, then get it. It really is quality. Club data is really important at your level, and GCQ is the best for that. You can practice at home every day. Put a "value" on that.

It's a great product and I am sure you will have no regrets buying it. Enjoy!

[StuartG]

Eldobo -

Club data is really important at your level, and GCQ is the best for that.

"Really Important" Sorry no, not even close. People have been successfully improving their swing for a long time before LM's even existed. It can help a little as long as one understands the data and numbers are just a consequence of what happens long before impact and what really caused the changes to the numbers. Good numbers do not mean good mechanics and bad numbers don't mean bad mechanics. For some it can actually be detrimental when they become overly focused on the numbers and they become a goal. But there is no improvements that can be done with the club numbers that can't be done w/o just some simple video and ball flight results.