I've been thinking about this for the last few hours. Let me give you my first thoughts as a marketing executive: you don't always introduce new products only due to forecasted sales figures. Ibanez knows the 6-string market as well as anyone in this community, and their forecast probably reflects a realistic sales expectation. But I bet the introduction of a very high-end Signature version is much more a positioning effort (which probably will not have direct payback in the short or long term) coming off sales, but rather from brand image.
I assume that they intend to take steps to widen their brand footprint, and believe they can have a better presence in all segments, from today's already strong entry-level instruments and mid-priced high quality bass guitars. Now they start to stretch it to higher-end professional-grade, boutique-like instruments. Think of it as the natural extension from their last few years of launches: from standard
SRs,
ATKs,
Groovelines and
BTBs, then to the "newer"
SR Premiums and
Prestiges (and their
BTB single-cuts, that I didn't know they offered), more recently through their
Workshop, fanned-fret models, now to the super high-end Nitti model.
Perhaps this is also a good attempt to make sure they're not cornered into a position they seem to have put themselves into: too much focus on budget. I hate to say this, but I believe Ibanez offers too many models with
too much of a value-for-money. Think of it this way:
All products positioned rigt on the green line have the same perceived value-for-money. An economical, low priced bass (e.g. a GSR200), has great value for money, because it delivers what it's expected to, at a very low price. A Fodera Ying-Yang, which costs about 25 times more, might be seen as having the exact same value-for-money. It does cost 25 times more, but it has much more of whatever to want to assign to it, from workmanship, components quality, status, etc.
Where do I believe Ibanez wants to position itself with most of their non-entry level instruments? BELOW the green line. They try to deliver the same performance (call it quality, versatility, modern design, or whatever you appreciate in your axe) for a lower price than their more direct competitor in each segment. All products positioned below the green line have a better value-for-money than the products above the green line (which cost more, to deliver the same performance). Ibanez has been caught in a bit of a trap of staying for too long on the lower half of the chart. I guess they would love to own a bit more of the very profitable right-end of the chart, where production cost doesn't have a 1:1 correlation with price, and therefore much higher margins:
Wow, I wrote too much. I guess this post will get quite a few TL/DR, but I wanted to get it off my chest. I've been expecting this kind of move from my favorite bass guitar maker, and I may be seeing strategy where there's none, but it would make perfect sense for them.
...
