An issue with Rickenbacker

[GodsLove66]

OH!!! And have I mentioned yet that I've had to get OFFICIAL RIC PARTS like my V2 Bridge, for example, from CME and elsewhere that seem to have an endless supply of Ric parts because Rickenbacker themselves are "Sold Out"....Great, iconic basses, but WRETCHED customer service for sure!!

 

[burpgun]

online censorship is very common these days

Companies booting folks off their platforms for whatever reason they see fit isn't censorship, and getting blocked by a private person/company isn't censorship either.

 

[DigitalMan]

Private companies from TB to Twitter and anywhere in-between can moderate their content as they see fit, and it is NOT censorship. Claiming online censorship because a social media site bans someone for TOS violations is just grievance politics.

Actual online censorship is when the government itself intervenes and regulates/blocks content, as they do in China, North Korean, Iran, etc.

 

[Gunga Din]

In the UK and the EU, the warranty is with the retailer and is part of your statutory rights; a company can write whatever they like on their T&Cs, but that won't override the statutory rights.

Does Rosetti still handle them? They

I remember a couple of years ago on one of Rickenbacker's 4003S posts asking if they'd ever consider making a cream colored one like Chris's and getting torn with "That would drastically de-value the Chris Squire model and make it less special. That was the point of only doing a limited run" It was at that point I realized they couldn't give two s#!ts about us devoted customer base...That and releasing that ABOMINATION that is the Al Cisnero's signature model....(Yet no Mike Rutherford Doublenecks, Geddy Specials, or a PROPER 4005 that was elongated and only single bound in the back)

They did a second run, the one based on the fat-neck, short cresting wave V63 design.

Why did they not reissue the 4005 or 4002? Madness.

 

[Harper]

It was at that point I realized they couldn't give two s#!ts about us devoted customer base...That and releasing that ABOMINATION that is the Al Cisnero's signature model....(Yet no Mike Rutherford Doublenecks, Geddy Specials, or a PROPER 4005 that was elongated and only single bound in the back)

That Al Cisnero bass isn't for me, but a lot of people seem to like it. Maybe they couldn't make a deal with Mike Rutherford or feel there isn't a market for a sig model. Is Geddy's deal with Fender exclusive? It's weird to me when people complain about certain players not having signature models when there's tons of reasons they might not be doing it.

 

[Koshchei]

I remember a couple of years ago on one of Rickenbacker's 4003S posts asking if they'd ever consider making a cream colored one like Chris's and getting torn with "That would drastically de-value the Chris Squire model and make it less special. That was the point of only doing a limited run" It was at that point I realized they couldn't give two s#!ts about us devoted customer base...That and releasing that ABOMINATION that is the Al Cisnero's signature model....(Yet no Mike Rutherford Doublenecks, Geddy Specials, or a PROPER 4005 that was elongated and only single bound in the back)

I think that they do care -- they make great instruments after all -- and they do have a point about diminishing the exclusivity of the Chris Squire limited run. They sold those to devoted customers too, after all, and those customers have a vested interest in preserving the value of their very rare instruments.

Of course, there's nothing stopping you from stripping and refinishing one yourself -- the bones are there in every 4003S that they ship (this approach would arguably be more authentic than the limited run because Squire's RM1999 was stripped and refinished several times). Better hurry though - the skunk stripe 2022 models use a very different neck construction.

 

[fishdude101101]

Not to discount your experiences but just wanted to state that I've had excellent service from Music Man on a number of occasions... YMMV and FWIW.

I don't doubt it a bit, that many have there gear, love it, and do with the company. Just one of the one's I haven't had good luck with. Same with GK, love their amps, but their customer service never answers.

 

[burpgun]

I think that they do care -- they make great instruments after all -- and they do have a point about diminishing the exclusivity of the Chris Squire limited run. They sold those to devoted customers too, after all, and those customers have a vested interest in preserving the value of their very rare instruments.

Of course, there's nothing stopping you from stripping and refinishing one yourself -- the bones are there in every 4003S that they ship (this approach would arguably be more authentic than the limited run because Squire's RM1999 was stripped and refinished several times). Better hurry though - the skunk stripe 2022 models use a very different neck construction.

It's been decades since I've had any Ricks and I don't see that changing, but there is some merit to them managing what they make to defend the price of the instrument, even if it's in the secondary market. Think of how many other new instruments lose hundreds of dollars in value just for being used, even if they're in mind condition. If you owned the Chris Squire model, you'd be glad for the limited supply holding in the price should you want to sell.

 

[fishdude101101]

Seems like owning a Ric is the bass equivalent of suffering from Stockholm Syndrome.

More like owning a Harley before Indian was brought back by Polaris and they had to up their game for the first time in 2 or 3 decades.

 

[GodsLove66]

That Al Cisnero bass isn't for me, but a lot of people seem to like it. Maybe they couldn't make a deal with Mike Rutherford or feel there isn't a market for a sig model. Is Geddy's deal with Fender exclusive? It's weird to me when people complain about certain players not having signature models when there's tons of reasons they might not be doing it.

My point being there are DEFINITELY more obvious candidates out there to get Signature Models made for. And shoot, considering their production numbers and all, limited runs seem like they could ACTUALLY happen since they pump out limited specials all of the time anyways.

 

[GodsLove66]

I think that they do care -- they make great instruments after all -- and they do have a point about diminishing the exclusivity of the Chris Squire limited run. They sold those to devoted customers too, after all, and those customers have a vested interest in preserving the value of their very rare instruments.

Of course, there's nothing stopping you from stripping and refinishing one yourself -- the bones are there in every 4003S that they ship (this approach would arguably be more authentic than the limited run because Squire's RM1999 was stripped and refinished several times). Better hurry though - the skunk stripe 2022 models use a very different neck construction.

I see a SLIVER of merit in that, BUT I wasn't saying pump out another faithful recreation, merely the color all the while still using regular 4003 pickups instead of the horseshoe and toaster in their respective positions as well. ALSO!!! If dropping the Cream would "Devalue the Chris Squire Model" Shouldn't the 4003S in Naturglo have never happened as they'd "Potentially" devalue both the 4001v63 and The Paul McCartney Model? Either way I call BS on devaluing Chris's bass.

On the note of getting one remade, I TOTALLY would go for getting a 4003s remade into an 8 String Prototype with the potato headstock courtesy of Chris Capozza (aka The Growlyman) someday! Man does EXCELLENT Chris Squire and Macca conversions.

 

[JRT64]

All of this because the OP was disappointed that RIC stopped putting lacquer on their fretboards? I don't get it. There are still plenty of used and some new Rics on the market with the lacquered fretboards. I've owned(and sold) 4 Ric's in my lifetime, and actually, I think not putting the lacquer on the fretboards is an improvement. But for those that want it, they could make it an option on special order IF they wanted to. But that's just me. You will never be able to please everybody. But they didn't need to go off and block the OP either over just that either. But they have acted like this before. I wouldn't mind having a new 4003s, but I'm quite happy with the basses I have right now.

 

[Koshchei]

I see a SLIVER of merit in that, BUT I wasn't saying pump out another faithful recreation, merely the color all the while still using regular 4003 pickups instead of the horseshoe and toaster in their respective positions as well. ALSO!!! If dropping the Cream would "Devalue the Chris Squire Model" Shouldn't the 4003S in Naturglo have never happened as they'd "Potentially" devalue both the 4001v63 and The Paul McCartney Model? Either way I call BS on devaluing Chris's bass.

On the note of getting one remade, I TOTALLY would go for getting a 4003s remade into an 8 String Prototype with the potato headstock courtesy of Chris Capozza (aka The Growlyman) someday! Man does EXCELLENT Chris Squire and Macca conversions.

More than a sliver, I hope. Either they care about their customers or they don't, and I think that they do, and also, unlike Gibson who makes a "new and more authentic limited reissue than ever before" every year, Rickenbacker means it when they say "limited".

AFAIK, the Macca Ric is known more for being left-handed with a righty headstock, that drippy paint-bomb refinish circa the Magical Mystery Tour, and then getting stripped down to raw wood, like John's Epi Casino, not a shade of "you should see a doctor about that" white that they've never offered before, as on the Chris Squire.

You should go for it! I'd love to see it when finished!

 

[IronLung1986]

RIC is basically what everyone complains about Gibson being.

 

[MustangWally]

Private companies from TB to Twitter and anywhere in-between can moderate their content as they see fit, and it is NOT censorship.

Semantics really, but if my (admittedly limited) understanding is correct then 'moderating' by means of limiting or restricting content (as opposed to accepting all submitted content without restriction, aka 'free speech') takes a company from being a 'media' company into being a 'publisher' because they are not permitting all content/pov and thus altering what is posted, T&C's notwithstanding. That in turn would remove the protections of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. Lotta legal $$'s will be thrown at this over the next few years I would expect.

 

[truand85]

Semantics really, but if my (admittedly limited) understanding is correct then 'moderating' by means of limiting or restricting content (as opposed to accepting all submitted content without restriction) takes a company from being a 'media' company into being a 'publisher' because they are not permitting all content/pov and thus altering what is posted, T&C's notwithstanding. That in turn would remove the protections of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. Lotta legal $$'s will be thrown at this over the next few years I would expect.

Really? So if I send my latest TikTok sandwich making video to Warner Bros, they'll make a movie?

Here is a good article that will explain the fallacy Everything you need to know about Section 230

 

[WillyW]

The ironic thing is most of these forums generate significant revenue from people viewing, commenting ,and clicking on ads. Logic would tell me that that suspensions and banishment is like poking yourself in the the eyes to keep from seeing something offensive.

Seriously, when you ban or suspend a poster, it’s a loss of potential revenue, which is what they are trying to prevent by deleting offending posts or posters, but I’ll make a wager the most of them lose more revenue from loss of posters not posting from not being able to express themselves.

Pretty much I can handle just about any post, as long as it isn’t personal.

I have a couple ex-wife's that can vouch that banishment is more favorable than any potential revenue loss....

 

[MustangWally]

Really? So if I send my latest TikTok sandwich making video to Warner Bros, they'll make a movie?

Quite likely, and it would probably be better than the current garbage coming out of Hollywood! But I don't see how that has any relevance to our discussion here. And rejecting a submission to a company is not the same as moderating posted content to a public forum. Aw heck, who really cares anyhow? Now I just want to see your video dammit! Can you post a link to it here please? What kind of sandwich were you making?

 

[DigitalMan]

Semantics really, but if my (admittedly limited) understanding is correct then 'moderating' by means of limiting or restricting content (as opposed to accepting all submitted content without restriction, aka 'free speech') takes a company from being a 'media' company into being a 'publisher' because they are not permitting all content/pov and thus altering what is posted, T&C's notwithstanding. That in turn would remove the protections of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. Lotta legal $$'s will be thrown at this over the next few years I would expect.

That is an argument being made by some of the sorely aggrieved, but it is extremely unlikely to ever prevail. As it stands today, none of that is either law or precedent. But you could test the theory by posting something here in violation of the TB TOS and see what happens.

 

[Guzzi Toad]

... Rickenbacker means it when they say "limited".

I recall reading some thoughts by the late Tom Petty regarding this vis-à-vis introduction of the 660 and 660/12 models.

https://www.rickresource.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194195

*edit* In fairness to RIC, I don't think they've done that since (the continuation of a Limited Edition model that is.) Additionally, the Tom Petty LE's were 12 sting only. I do wish I could find the exact quote from TP regarding this.