Fender - a new company model that would work

[buldog5151bass]

I hear about Fender’s new marketing ideas everywhere – most of which suck IMO (stupid signature models, thinking about getting rid of dealers). They have become bloated, and their catalog is far too full of useless BS. They used to be the world leader – too much competition for that today, but I think there are things they could do to become leaner, meaner, and increase sales AND reputation. Here is how I would revamp their catalog:

Two bass/base models – the P and the J. @#$%% the Dimension bass, the Coronado, etc.

Three main price points – Squier, Standard, and MIA. Obviously, that does not include custom shop, which is an animal of a different color.

For each Squier and Standard:

pick country of origin - don’t care – the intent is to standardize. Each bass receives basic set up in US before being shipped to stores.

They come in a choice of about 6 colors (black, white, sunburst – pick three more for standard).

Squier available 4 string, left and right. Standard available 4 and 5, left and right. Squiers have maple fingerboard, Standards maple and rosewood.

That’s it. Get rid of other options, including signature models, other pups etc. Make these better quality – should be able to do this while still bringing price down.

MIA:

Choice of about 9 colors – more available on special order for additional price.

Available 4 and 5, left and right

Rosewood and maple fingerboards, graphite necks.

Options include P/J pup setup, active.

Only these options should allow price to come down, while keeping AC up.

Beyond that, just custom shop.

Many people will complain that there are not enough options. But the sought after vintage models have lots fewer options than this. Smaller menus allow higher/more consistent quality, lower price, and make it possible for stores to carry them easier.

This is what Fender was when it was king. I would bet these models, even right now, are over 90% of their sales. Why all the bloat for minimal sales?

 

[devinp17]

For each Squier and Standard:

pick country of origin - don’t care – the intent is to standardize. Each bass receives basic set up in US before being shipped to stores.

They come in a choice of about 6 colors (black, white, sunburst – pick three more for standard).

Squier available 4 string, left and right. Standard available 4 and 5, left and right. Squiers have maple fingerboard, Standards maple and rosewood.

Nice. I'm not a big MIA guy so I can't really comment on that. But if they drop all the sh!t and the prices, I could see myself eventually getting a MIA P. I also agree with adding more colors... Some of them only have like 1 or 2 to choose from. Thanks, I like these ideas.

 

[birdman14]

Personally, I see a few issues with this idea. In the past few years, Fender has introduced a number of brilliant new models and reissues. I personally love that they are offering a Bass VI again (It is most definitely not a one-trick pony), the Starcaster Bass for the first time, a modernized Coronado, and expanded their Mustang offerings. Not to have these offerings would undermine customers choice. Also, by looking at the recent sale threads, and the best selling instruments on music sites, it seems that Squiers are doing as well, if not better than fenders offerings. Also, i would say quality control is as high as it has been in a while, I really don't see any need for fender to completely change what they're doing if it's been working fine. Many people pine for BITD, but as soon as fender does that, people will start complaining that they can't get the options they want anymore. Perfect example, if you were to do your proposed idea with the Jazz bass, you would end up offering either a rosewood or a maple neck, and then offer dots or blocks and bindings, as well as matching headstock or else people people will complain. That's going to increase your manufacturing cost significantly to retool depending on the blocks vs. dots. Finally, your comment about the feasibility of stores to carry these instruments, I would actually say it hurts them. For my area at least, a given store will probably sell 3-4x the number of mexican standards and squiers to American instruments, so it would make little sense to cut down on the number of low end options.

 

[buldog5151bass]

Compare it to McDonalds v. Five Guys or In-and-Out. Smaller menu, higher quality.

Birdman:

- those neck features are some of the fluff I want to get rid of. Go back to the 60s - those options did not exist. What would you rather have - a better and more consistent instrument at a cheaper price, or a few more cosmetic options?
- I agree they sell more of the cheaper instruments - again, by cutting down on options, they can make a better instrument at a cheaper price. Since there are fewer options, it is easier for the store to carry the entire line.

And obviously it is not working fine if they are considering changing their model to sell direct.

Fender was about quality, not about cosmetic fluff.

 

[birdman14]

But I'd say that "cosmetic fluff" Is what is helping sell instruments. Personally, I would much rather have B&B to dots on a jazz. And I think this move to direct is a reflection of the times, not the specific brand. Despite the supposed economic recovery, many people still don't have the extra cash to spend on new instruments, and for many kids there isn't an iconic bassist for them to really look to. You figure that from the early 60s all the way till the 90s, people had bassists like McCartney, JPJ, Dee Dee Ramone, Jaco, and Flea to look up to, where recently, it seems that a lower percentage of people are picking up the Bass (or instruments in general). I did think your idea for the MIA stuff is a pretty good idea though. What fender could do is offer the standard 60's versions of their core models (Jazz, Precision, Mustang because I love them, and maybe the Jaguar since they already have them), and then charge extra for non-standard options. These options would obviously have to be limited, because otherwise the custom shop would take a hit. Then maybe you could offer Maple for an additional 50 bucks, have sunburst be a standard, make any other color be a 50-100 dollar upgrade (depending on amount of work, like metallics), and then have the deluxe option be an upgrade of a couple hundred dollars. In fact, just offer the blocks as a 150 dollar upgrade on the neck. Things that you would want to stay consistent, such as the radius, the nut width, and the bridge styling.

 

[Burwabit]

I think they would do well on the MIAs to offer a few standard colors then a few "colors of the year" that are unique and rotate. To me, this keeps it exciting.

 

[Coolhandjjl]

There are already thousands and thousands of the Fender standards available on the used market, Fender really has to keep coming up with new bells and whistles to turn peoples heads towards new ones.

 

[buldog5151bass]

And that is where we disagree. To me, the number 1 thing is playablilty. I don't care what my neck looks like from the front - I'd trade cosmetic choices for a cheaper, better instrument. This would bring down the price, and raise the quality of all levels. If there is no bassist to look up to, then why is Fender going out of their way to come up with new "signature models" that are nothing more than cosmetic changes to a bass at a premium?

Squier - a good beginner instrument, and would be more consistent, which is one of the issues.
Standard - a good gigging instrument (remember, Clapton's "Black Beauty" strat was just an off the shelf model) - the majority of the instruments would be this level
MIA - for the pro, or someone who wants to look/play like one
Custom shop - for those who have the money to burn.

 

[Luke19Boarder]

I think I disagree with pretty much every one of these ideas. I'll get into it later, just subbing to the thread for now.

 

[birdman14]

Alright, fair enough. And it's not like everyone has to have the same opinion, that's what give the market variety.

 

[mpdd]

playability is the main thing, i shouldn't have to buy a new bass and then need a neck shimming and nut work to have a good player with medium action

 

[tbz]

Compare it to McDonalds v. Five Guys or In-and-Out. Smaller menu, higher quality.

I'm not really sure if that's anywhere near an apples to apples comparison. Especially since the raw materials for any bass are going to be fairly consistent, whereas a Burger and a Chicken sandwich differ in at least one major raw material component.

Reduced overhead due to standardization on raw materials is the reason why Five Guys and In N Out use that model of fewer items.

Since raw materials stay the same almost no matter what model of bass, it's likely easier to facilitate multiple models on that operating paradigm.

A raw chunk of alder gets turned into a P bass, Jazz or Mustang by a CNC machine running a template that's likely a decade old.

It doesn't cost more to make alder chunk #44435 into a Mustang than it would a p bass. Therefore again, as raw materials do not differ between models I don't think downsizing would produce significant savings.

Also it might be worth noting that there is a noticeable price difference between McDonalds and Five Guys, which does allow for additional quality, outside of any efficiency gains, etc.

 

[One Drop]

Even by the '60s Fender offered a choice of neck widths and a large choice of custom colours, and constant slight cosmetic changes to entice buyers and keep up at least the appearance of innovation.

 

[buldog5151bass]

tbz - I think it is an appropriate comparison. I compare all the new models, along with the crazy options, to the chicken sandwiches, salads, etc. Fewer models, fewer price levels IS "Reduced overhead due to standardization on raw materials".

Five Guys offers a hamburger that is FAR superior to McDonalds, at a similar price. In the same way, Fender could produce a much better instrument, and be the industry standard, as they once were. If you want a salad, go to Warmoth.

 

[jnewmark]

Interesting thread, but are'nt you guys leaving out the other half of Fender's business, namely the amp side? Fender does not exist by P basses alone ! Their guitar amps especially must be a big part of their profits. Guitar players drool everytime Fender comes out with a new tube amp.

 

[buldog5151bass]

For the most part, Fender has NEVER been a player in the bass amp market. Their guitar amps have always been considered prize -even their bass amps are better loved by guitarists. If I were them, I would concentrate on what they do best.

 

[verycoolname]

While I do agree that Fender needs to streamline its offerings (discussed here) I don't think they should, as you put it, "@#$%% the Dimension, Coronado, etc." By eliminating these models they alienate customers who want something other than a Precision or a Jazz...some people want to be different.

The only Fender model I own is an AEB, and the two Fender models I GAS for (Jaguar and Mustang) are not "base models." If Fender cut out these offerings I personally wouldn't want to buy anything from them (okay, maybe a Precision, but it wouldn't be a "must have" for me)...and even if I did GAS for a P it would be an American Special (because of the thinner neck), which I assume would cease to exist in your proposed model.

Maybe it makes me an elitist hipster, but I would personally not care for Fender if they only offered Precisions and Jazzes...variety is the spice of life. I do however think that they should cut down the total amount of each model. For example, there'd be 3 Jaguar models (Squier, Standard, MIA), 3 Mustang models, 3 Precision models, etc.

 

[buldog5151bass]

I admit my idea was radical, and never said I knew it all (or even most). But I think they are bloated, and heading further down the path. The constant adding of new price points, and the "signature models" which are just cosmetic changes, not to mention not the bass that the endorser plays, are just the latest examples.

And I sure as @#$@#% got some discussion going.

 

[MarkoYYZ]

I think there's a middle ground between your suggestions and what makes most sense - but you're basing the assumption that Fender's troubles have come from the expanded product line and not somewhere else. For all we know, the added products - despite some extra logistical needs - are generating positive revenues as they prevent the product line from becoming stale.

The far greater probability is that their downstream costs are where the problems lie, in terms of servicing the thousands of dealers they have and getting paid. That's the area of operations they're addressing because it's been found to be a problem. If it was a matter of streamlining the product line to increase the bottom line they would happily do it - but the problem is not that simple.

You're thinking as a consumer and this is a valuable thing for them to consider, of course. You're also implying that McDonald's isn't making money while Five Guys is, which is more like comparing Fender to G&L, really.

 

[buldog5151bass]

No, actually, I am thinking from their side (of course, with my limited knowledge as to their numbers). I would love to have every option available, and every model. But I think that by something along this line, they could deliver a better product at a better price. A few less bells and whistles, but as I said, I don't think that is what made them the #1 guitar/bass company for decades.