--- title: "Three of golf's biggest YouTubers own the iron brand they play. None of the 49 tour bags we track has it" url: "https://ifrothgolf.com/read/creator-owned-golf-brands-takomo-equity" type: "opinion" topic: "irons" author: "ifrothgolf" published: "2026-08-08T00:00" publisher: "ifrothgolf" --- # Three of golf's biggest YouTubers own the iron brand they play. None of the 49 tour bags we track has it > Takomo made Grant Horvat and both Bryan brothers shareholders, not just ambassadors. That's a smarter deal than sponsorship and a harder one to read as a viewer — so here is what the number actually supports, and what it doesn't. In January 2025 the Finnish club maker Takomo did something no major manufacturer has done: instead of paying golf's biggest YouTubers to play its clubs, it made them part-owners. Grant Horvat became a shareholder alongside his playing deal, and days later George and Wesley Bryan joined him on the same terms. Takomo's own statement was refreshingly blunt about why: "As shareholders in Takomo Golf, these creators aim to champion the brand through their social channels." That is a genuinely clever piece of business, and it is worth understanding rather than being outraged about. But it does change what you are watching, and almost nobody writing about golf equipment has said so plainly. ## The number that frames it We maintain bag records for 49 tour players across the PGA Tour, LPGA Tour and LIV Golf, and we keep them dated and sourced. **Zero of those 49 bags contain a direct-to-consumer club.** Not one Takomo, not one Sub70, not one of the challenger brands that dominate value conversations online. The tour is the one place in golf where equipment is chosen almost purely on measured performance and money, and the challenger brands have no presence there at all. Set that next to the creator side, where Takomo irons turn up in bag after bag — Horvat, both Bryans, and others besides. The gap is not a scandal. It is a signal about which audience each brand can actually reach, and the honest reading is narrower than either the cynics or the ad copy would like. ## What the gap does not prove It does not prove the clubs are worse. Takomo's irons genuinely win value comparisons, MyGolfSpy has tested them against the major brands rather than ignoring them, and they land at a little over a third of the price of a set of [Titleist T100s](https://ifrothgolf.com/product/titleist-t100-irons) — roughly $650 against $1,800. A forged cavity-back from a small Finnish company can absolutely be the right iron for a mid-handicapper who was never going to be fitted anyway. There is also a real counter-signal that cuts against the cynical read. **Wesley Bryan is a PGA Tour winner and he plays Takomo irons in competition**, not just in videos — and he consulted on the brand's wedge line. A creator who owns equity and only uses the clubs on camera tells you nothing. One who tees them up for money in a tour event is putting his own scorecard behind it. What the zero actually reflects is distribution and fitting, not quality. Tour players get built, profiled and hand-selected clubs through a manufacturer's tour truck. Direct-to-consumer brands, by design, have no truck. That absence is a business-model fact, not a performance verdict — and it is the single most misread thing in the value-gear conversation. ## Where the creators were genuinely ahead Here is the part that complicates the easy narrative. On putters, creator adoption ran *ahead* of the tour rather than behind it. Only **2 of our 49 tour bags** carry a zero-torque-style [L.A.B. Golf putter](https://ifrothgolf.com/product/lab-golf-df3-putter) — J.J. Spaun and Adam Scott — while the same technology has been all over creator golf, and Brad Dalke has had a zero-torque Odyssey in play all season. Zero-torque was the breakout equipment story of 2025 and the tour has been the slow adopter. So creators are not simply a downmarket echo of the tour. On one category they were the leading indicator. That is exactly why a blanket "they're just paid to say it" filter is lazy — it would have had you ignoring the correct call. ## Takomo didn't invent this, it just did it to clubs The equity model is already the dominant one a rung up. Good Good has grown into a business somewhere around forty million dollars a year in revenue, and roughly three quarters of that comes from products rather than advertising or sponsorship — apparel and equipment sold under its own name, now stocked in hundreds of Dick's stores. Bob Does Sports built an apparel line off the back of a comedy channel. The creators who have made real money in golf did it by owning the thing they sell, not by renting their audience to someone else who owns it. Seen that way, Takomo's move is less a marketing wheeze than the obvious next step: if creators are going to own product anyway, a manufacturer may as well hand them a stake and get their distribution for free. The reason it lands differently with clubs is that club recommendations carry an implied performance claim. A hoodie is a taste. An iron set is a promise about your scoring, and that promise is worth checking against something other than the person making it. ## The thing I would actually do Judge the club, not the byline — but know which one you are being sold. Three questions do all the work. **Is the person recommending it an owner, an ambassador, or neither?** Ownership is a stronger incentive than sponsorship, because the upside is uncapped. It is also usually disclosed somewhere and almost never repeated in the video where the recommendation lands. **Do they play it when it counts?** Content and competition are different tests. Wesley Bryan clears that bar. Most creator gear deals never face it. **Were you ever going to get fitted?** This is the one that decides it. If the honest answer is no, a direct-to-consumer set at half the price is a sensible purchase and the tour's total absence of them is irrelevant to you. If the answer is yes, the fitting matters more than the badge, and something like the [PING i240s](https://ifrothgolf.com/product/ping-i240-irons) through a proper fitter will beat a mail-ordered bargain you never had measured. Takomo's move will get copied, because it works. Expect more creator equity and fewer plain sponsorships across the next two seasons. That is not a reason to distrust creator gear coverage — it is a reason to ask who owns what before you take the recommendation, the same way you would with any other financial opinion. ## The takeaway Takomo made Grant Horvat and both Bryan brothers shareholders in January 2025, not just paid ambassadors. Zero of the 49 tour bags we track contain a direct-to-consumer club — but that reflects tour-truck fitting and distribution, not quality, and Wesley Bryan plays Takomo in competition. Creators were also ahead of the tour on zero-torque putters, where only 2 of our 49 pro bags carry a L.A.B. The rule: ask whether the recommender is an owner, whether they play it when it counts, and whether you were ever going to get fitted. ## FAQ ### Does Grant Horvat own part of Takomo? Yes. Takomo announced in January 2025 that Horvat had become a shareholder in the company as well as playing its irons and wedges. George and Wesley Bryan were added as shareholders on the same basis days later. ### Do any tour pros play Takomo irons? Not in the 49 PGA Tour, LPGA Tour and LIV Golf bags we track — none contains a direct-to-consumer club. Wesley Bryan, a PGA Tour winner, does play Takomo irons in competition, but he is also a shareholder in the brand. ### Are direct-to-consumer irons worse than the big brands? Not necessarily. Independent testing puts brands like Takomo on par with major-brand irons at a fraction of the price. What direct-to-consumer brands don't have is a tour fitting operation, which is the main reason they're absent from professional bags — it's a distribution and fitting gap rather than a performance verdict. ### Is creator equity worse than a normal sponsorship? It's a stronger incentive, because the upside isn't capped at a fee. That's not inherently dishonest, and in Takomo's case it's publicly announced. The practical issue is that ownership is rarely restated in the individual video where a recommendation lands, so viewers see the endorsement without the context. ## Products mentioned - [Takomo 101 MKII Irons](https://ifrothgolf.com/product/takomo-101-mkii-irons) · $650 approx — The value case is real and it doesn't depend on who owns the company - [L.A.B. Golf DF3 Putter](https://ifrothgolf.com/product/lab-golf-df3-putter) · $550 approx — The one club where creator adoption ran ahead of the tour rather than behind it - [Titleist T100 Irons](https://ifrothgolf.com/product/titleist-t100-irons) · $1,800 approx — What the same money looks like at the other end of the market - [PING i240 Irons](https://ifrothgolf.com/product/ping-i240-irons) · $1,350 approx — The fitting-led alternative if you'd rather be measured than mail-ordered --- Source: [ifrothgolf](https://ifrothgolf.com) — independent golf-gear editorial. Canonical URL: https://ifrothgolf.com/read/creator-owned-golf-brands-takomo-equity Quote or cite freely with attribution and a link to the canonical URL.