If a picture can be worth a thousand words, a logo can be worth a fair bit more. Like millions. Or billions.

The total golf economy of 2011 was responsible for nearly $70 billion in spending. As such, every OEM wants a share of this monetary pie and the way the consumer perceives an OEM has as much to do where the dollars are spent as anything.

With that in mind, let’s take a look at the stories behind and the images of a select few of the most recognized golf brands in the world.

Titleist

It would be a mistake to refer to the iconic logo as a font. Simply, it is a custom script and can’t be found as an option in any Word document. Thus, the mantra of “often imitated but never duplicated” might apply.

As a logo, the script is simple, clean and classic. There is a timeless element, which is no doubt a function of the fact that the logo hasn’t changed since its inception. The name Titleist is derived from moniker title holder or one who owns the title — the champion. Titleist has been a ball-first company since Phillip W. Skipper Young, an MIT grad, took X-rays of his ball and found the internal elements to be a bit off center. The result is the most dominant ball company in the world. It also makes a pretty decent line of woods, irons, hybrids and putters. You know what they say about something that ain’t broke.

My take: For many, Titleist IS golf. Like the logo, the resulting product is clean and classic. The target consumer for Titleist is one who isn’t necessarily looking for the loudest or boldest product, but a product that is going to perform and won’t ever run the risk of being labeled “gimmick” or flashy. The primary risk in this model is losing a consumer who is attracted to something a bit more caffeinated, but those who are always looking for the “next best thing” probably aren’t attracted to Titleist in the first place.

However, with such a large lead in the ball portion of the industry (nearly 50 percent marketshare), minor refinements and adjustments to the rest of the line are all the company needs at this point. The profits from this area allows the company to hold true to the manner in which it would like to develop and market the club portion of the company. The loyalty (and thus revenue stream) has been firmly established with the ball, and while other OEMs try to put a dent in Titleist’s market share, it’s like trying to drink the Atlantic through one of those twisty straws.

TaylorMade

The name conjures up images of a fine suit made to the exact specifications of the awaiting customer. However, this iteration is the largest golf OEM today, buoyed by a dominance in the metalwoods portion of the industry to the tune of nearly 35 percent. This company has profit like the desert has sand.

In 1983, TaylorMade introduced the first Burner series driver and the logo used was a red circle with a martini glass shaped “T” in the middle. Four years later, TaylorMade added irons to the product offerings and changed to a script logo. The current logo, a white “T” against a black background is cut in the shape of a driver. The simple contrast breeds an even simpler message. It’s all about the driver. Yes, yes it is.

In 2003, TaylorMade introduced the now-legendary R510 TP driver and accompanying TP crest to denote clubs more suited to the low-handicap player. TaylorMade went away from this visual designation after the R9 TP irons, although it has continued to offer a TP line of premium shafts. There are rumors, however, that the TP crest might make a revival moving forward and with it opportunities for the public consumer to play more of the equipment TaylorMade’s Staff Players actually use. Either way, the move will be calculated and likely quite profitable. If this does happen, expect TaylorMade to go full throttle and expect the public to show up with open wallets.

My take: TaylorMade knows exactly what it is doing and it is laughing all the way to the bank, because no one plays on the emotional vulnerability of the consumer golfer better than TaylorMade. The vast majority of humanity is never going break par, hit a smooth 7 iron 185 yards or putt like Tiger. But, it’s quite likely we will bomb a drive or two, hit the occasional sprinkler head and end up 300 yards down the fairway. Distance is intoxicating and TaylorMade is dedicated to reminding us of this time after time and dollar after dollar.

In an industry where the last decade has seen very few true “game-changing” innovations, TaylorMade continues to out-market and out-sell pretty much everyone else. What you think is true is far more important to TaylorMade than what is actually happening. It’s comfortable with its identity and its ability to market and shape the behavior of the willing consumer is unparalleled in the industry. When you’re on top, you’re going to take an inordinate amount of criticism. The upside is, well, everyone is still looking up at you.

Callaway

In 1988, Callaway Hickory Stick USA became Callaway Golf Company and the “Old English Callaway logo” introduced golfers to the Callaway golf brand and core S2H2 technology. The script is reminiscent of all things old, English, St. Andrews, sheep, pastures and the feathery. In 2002, the company added the chevron as an accent marker and has used this modified logo since. The chevron itself dates back to the Middle Ages, and as a French term generally refers to supporting beams (rafters) of a structure. The symbolic element is one of protection and part of the reason this image is often used on military uniforms.

My take: Appealing to the history of the game is an effective and cheap way to purchase authenticity. People like playing golf clubs made by real golf companies and what’s more real than a golf company with a logo that looks like it’s been around since Old Tom Morris was yelling at Young Tom Morris to get his chores done?

In the 1990s, Callaway struggled to create a mass presence as the logo, image and associated players (Johnny Miller, Jim Colbert) didn’t exactly enthuse the general consumer. Annika Sorenstam was undoubtedly a huge draw for females, but that in and of itself didn’t create mass revenue. The addition of Arnold Palmer to the Callaway staff in 2000 certainly increased credibility, but didn’t score many “youth” points. That said, during the last decade, Callaway has made a concerted effort to maintain top-shelf staff (Ernie Els, Phil Mickelson, Jim Furyk) while attracting new/younger talent (James Hahn, Morgan Pressel, Luke List, Patrick Reed). In the last 15 years, Callaway seems to have positioned itself quite nicely, and given its recent legal tiffs with TaylorMade, Callaway is poised to fight for every inch…or yard as the case may be.

Adams

From 1991 until the summer of 2013, Barney Adams and Adams Golf leveraged the momentum created by the original Tight Lies fairway woods into a full-fledged golf equipment company. The logo during this time was fairly non-descript and featured a red triangle followed by the name of the company. The logo itself was quite underwhelming and didn’t really promote anything in particular relative to the company.

However, in 2012, Adams was acquired by TaylorMade and then just a couple months ago the logo changed as well. This time to a script-type font, somewhat similar to that of Titleist.

My take: I’m not exactly sure what Adams is trying to achieve with the new logo, but as an image, I like it. There is certainly more personality to the logo and with it and more emotion than the mechanical triangle and text which it replaced. Given TaylorMade’s recent acquisition and the ensuing questions as to what would happen with Adams, I find the move curious.

Generally, a new logo is accompanied by an effort to rebrand or at least modify how the brand is perceived. So, the question is, “What is Adams going for?” If Adams is going to remain an entity unto itself, how will this logo help it achieve this identity? Some might see the new script as classy and simple; a nice ying to TaylorMade’s edgy yang. Others might see it as a cheap version of the Titleist script and still others might think it looks more like a baseball team than golf company.

Right now there are just too many variables to know exactly where Adams is headed, but wherever they are going, the new logo is clearly part of the plan.

Nike Golf

Nike might not have the storied golf history of a Ping, Titleist or Wilson. But it does have one of the most recognized and studied logos in the history of western civilization. The company was started by Bill Bowerman and Phil Knight in the 1960s, but Nike didn’t enter the golf arena until 1998. Interestingly enough, Nike had already committed $40 million to Tiger Woods in 1995, although it had no balls or clubs of its own. That soon would change.

The story of the swoosh, Nike’s iconic logo, is a bit more interesting. In 1975, Carolyn Davidson (then a student at Portland State) was paid $2 per hour to design a logo for Nike. Seventeen and a half hours and $35 later, the swoosh was born. Originally, Phil Knight wasn’t totally sold on the logo, but thought it might grow on him. Good call!

Eventually, Carolyn was given 500 shares of Nike stock for her efforts. So I guess you can look at it one of two ways: $30,000 is a lot of cash for less than 20 hours of work, or Phil Knight got the best deal since the U.S. Government purchased the Louisiana Territory.

My take: Nike’s success prior to entering the golf market is both a bastion and hinderance. The vast amounts of capital Nike accrues allowed it to sign the most marketable figures in golf: Tiger in 1995 and Rory just last year. It also allows Nike to sign golfers to a complete deal: bag, clubs, balls, hat, glove, clubs, etc. If a player is Nike, he or she is all Nike. This is great for the players and club pros who rep the company.

The challenge is winning over the general consumer and the hurdle for some is to see Nike as a legitimate golf company. Given the level and quality of product available from other OEMs, why would someone choose to play Nike over company __________? That’s the question.

Ping

Onomatopoeia. Kind of what you’d expect from an OEM rooted in engineering. It is what it says it is. Furthermore, what’s more simple than the sound of John Solheim’s quest to create a better putter? Ping. That’s it. The moment of impact. Pure and simple. A bit metallic and it resonates.

Ping’s personification as “PING Man” seems to be equal parts man, Gumby and penguin. Whatever it is, John Solheim created it by bending wires and ultimately liked what he came up with. The unique design is reminiscent of a time when logos were not computer generated and the result of thousands of dollars of market analysis and advertising firms. Nothing is contrived and every design feature is purposeful. Both the PING script and PING Man are unmistakable and like their products, I don’t see Ping changing either unless there is a bona fide reason to do so.

My take: Ping is as authentic an OEM as we have in the major marketplace today. Profit is still the final analysis for any enterprise, but there are a variety of ways to get there. Ping gets there by staying true to its time-tested model. Engineer the living daylights out of a product and make sure it works. When it does, people will buy it. What you see is what you get. Form follows function for Ping, and the results are hard to deny.

From the Anser putter and perimeter-weighted irons to custom-fit everything, Ping has authored several of the most lasting and copied designs of the last several decades. That said, the cost for function-first designs is often lackluster aesthetics and critics of Ping are quick to note that until recently, many irons (see Eye 2) weren’t going to win any beauty contests. For my money, the the S55, Ping Gorge wedges and Anser Forged irons are a far cry from the Ping shovels of the 1990s.

It seems like everyone has a kid on the honor roll and the bumper sticker to prove it. Our culture, for better or worse, exhibits a heavy reliance on exposure and given the varied social media, 24/7 news coverage and 756 TV channels, we know the flavors of OEMs like Baskin Robbins.

Marquee players become synonymous with an OEM. Tiger = Nike, Hunter and Bubba: = Ping. Phil: = Callaway and the list goes on. At the end of the day, consumers purchases more than the product itself. They purchase a piece of the identity of the OEM. Why else do Titleist hats sell so well?