Yes, hence why I said "and other developed countries," and also "the developed world."
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Fender - a new company model that would work
- Thread starter buldog5151bass
- Start date
I was just mentioning the number. I didn't see any other percentages except that their "largest retailer" is around 16% of their sales.
Someone said it here and I agree. Fender has to deal also with all their older models and products flying around on talkbass, Craigslist, eBay, etc. a lot of people want to save money and get a used one. Why settle for a $700 brand new guitar when you can get the same make if not the same colour for half as much or even less?
Indeed. A lot of this discussion is really kind of a sleepwalk through where the now present world economy is moving. IMHO, what Fender ( and many other manufacturers ) have done is obvious, offshore labor and sales of goods at all price points to increase sales, but then everybody has everything they want at an affordable price so those sales diminish. Market saturation, now comes damage control phase next, cut losses, streamline, pay out even less and keep the corporate profits maximized by direct sales. Ones that saturates, then next phase plan of action. Meanwhile, people talk about what they want how they want it and the middle class shrinks and more jobs disappear , less freely disposable income and, and, and...
You have to remember that the vast bulk of the market is lower end sales to first time beginners. Sure, some of those folks may shop the eBay. But most are going to wind up with a new squier/fender destined to spend the next thirty years in the attic of the kid's parents. It is a constantly refreshing market.
Yep. And the reissue and reliced models are meant to compete directly against the used market. I can't afford a '62 P Bass but I can afford a reissue. Look at the success of other legacy brands like Harley Davidson and Martin Guitars. The vintage market is their best advertising. For awhile Martin's slogan was "more people want to own a Martin than any other acoustic guitar."
Last edited:
That's an optimistic assertion, but I would hate to search for and count manually the number of posts on this site where veteran players enthuse over their impressions or collection of incredibly nice and serviceable low end basses.
Okay, I'll throw in my two-cents-worth. Please bear in mind, I'm neither an M.B.A. graduate, nor do I know the ins-and-outs of marketing and cost analysis. I'm an artist and a health-care worker, which, even in this context, means I see value in both form and function. What I do know is this;
One other personal note; if it weren't for either their reissues or their criminally-underexposed Blacktop series, I would never have settled on one straight-up Jazz to take the place of two others, nor purchased my one-and-only, brand-new bass. Under the strict limitations put forth by the OP, I could only get the former as a colossally-expensive vintage item. And the latter? It's likely I never would've thought of doing something like it. And if I had, it would have the all the potential to turn into a ferocious money-pit, even with Mexican or Asian made parts, with no guarantee it would even work properly or as well as their off-the-shelf model.
- I like variety and admire the innovation that creates it.
- To reject innovation and the possibility of any evolution of a product that carries with it so much esthetic and technical verve, is to welcome a slow-death.
- In other words, I believe with no variety and evolution, all that is left is stagnation.
One other personal note; if it weren't for either their reissues or their criminally-underexposed Blacktop series, I would never have settled on one straight-up Jazz to take the place of two others, nor purchased my one-and-only, brand-new bass. Under the strict limitations put forth by the OP, I could only get the former as a colossally-expensive vintage item. And the latter? It's likely I never would've thought of doing something like it. And if I had, it would have the all the potential to turn into a ferocious money-pit, even with Mexican or Asian made parts, with no guarantee it would even work properly or as well as their off-the-shelf model.
I'd make a few changes. That's just what I'd do… They'll be so surprised they'll all swallow their gum. They'll ask, when they see my strange animals come, "Where do you suppose he gets things like that from?
There were only a handful of AMERICAN makers. But throw in the Japanese and European imports, and there were both many makers and many models. From 1964 through 1968 it was almost like flavor of the week in the music stores.
Precisely. ^^^^ First-hand, endorsed proof of Squier Stigma. (TY for sharing)
I actually love the Squier I recently bought. I'm pretty sure they seriously picked up their game in the last few years, but it's possible I'm just more open minded (or got reaaaally lucky!). But, while I love it to pieces, I'm still guilty of feeling slightly saddened when I look up at the headstock and see that big, swirly "SH*T" ... oh wait, I mean "SQUIER" text...
It is getting pretty confusing :/ Maybe that's the key - make thousands of product lines, so the consumer can't possibly choose, and just goes "WHAT'S THE NORMAL ONE? Oh, there's one called standard!? Gimme that!". Case closed. ADD MORE PRODUCT LINES TO PUSH PEOPLE INTO BUYING YOUR STANDARD SERIES SO YOU ACTUALLY END UP MAKING YOUR WEIRD LINES 1 WEEK A YEAR, AND SPLIT THE REST BETWEEN STANDARD P AND J. Genius. I think I've got this Fender CONSPIRACY cracked
Oh, by the way, you left out Anniversary Edition Vintage Modified Modern Player MIJ Pawn Shop Deluxe Squire (Active, Roadworn, with "simulated vintage wind" pickups and pre-mojo'd neck). I pretty much ordered one just based on the name.
That's what happens when you just keep printing money. They need to do what the Government does with cash. Collect up all the old stuff, and burn it
Sure - and most were crap. That's why when I started playing, there was really three choices for bass: Fender, Gibson and Rick. I was 100% open minded about it, but I never liked the feel of those medium scale Gibsons (and they all sounded so muddy - YES - I owned one, so don't start with me
)... I told my parents I wanted either the blonde Rick 4001 or the blonde J bass hanging on the wall at Apex music in El Cajon - the Fender was $35 cheaper than the Rick so that's what got. Imagine that - $350 for a new 4001. True fact.Anyway, All the "other" basses were just junk. Firewood. Blech. So there IS a reason why Fender, Gibson and Rick are still around. They made real instruments (even as awful as that '77 Jazz bass was... I really should have insisted on the Rick!!!)
Sure - and most were crap. That's why when I started playing, there was really three choices for bass: Fender, Gibson and Rick. I was 100% open minded about it, but I never liked the feel of those medium scale Gibsons (and they all sounded so muddy - YES - I owned one, so don't start with me
Anyway, All the "other" basses were just junk. Firewood. Blech. So there IS a reason why Fender, Gibson and Rick are still around. They made real instruments (even as awful as that '77 Jazz bass was... I really should have insisted on the Rick!!!)
Not going to get into a snarkfest with you, Harry; I have too much respect for you based on your body of posts to TB. But how many of those "crap" basses do you have first-hand experience of?
To quote Sartori from post #69 in this thread:
In the 60s, there was Fender, Gibson, Rickenbacker... Guild... Hofner... Mosrite... Hagstrom.... and really not many others.
To which I would add Ampeg, Danelectro, Harmony, Kay, Custom Kraft, Dan Armstrong, Electra MPC, Eko, Framus, Goya, Burns, Vox, Standel, Kustom, National, Supro, Kapa, Hoyer, Klira, Multivox/Marvel/Premier, Alamo, Gretsch, Baldwin, Magnatone, Epiphone, and others I probably am forgetting. All sixties basses -- and at least five of these were producing basses in the fifties -- and none of them of the Japanese import "badged" bass variety. My list is all American or European product.
And yes, some were crap, but some were/are pro-level instruments. And many of the ones considered crap were considered so because we kids were too ignorant to know anything of set up. Even just shimming th neck in some cases would have made a huge difference. My take on the sixties when compared to now is that then we had many, many makers who each made only a few models of bass (which still resulted in a large total which became ghastly once the Japanese imports are figured in), whereas now we have fewer makers but with more different bass models per maker.
And I once passed on a well-maintained Gretsch 6070 bass for $150, and the next year passed on the same bass at $75. True fact. But I was sixteen and stupid. What did I know?
I think what I'd like to see is, instead of model variety, have more option variety for existing models.
Say, I wanted to get a MIA standard Jazz - instead of searching MIM standard, active, MIA deluxe, Modern Player, Squier, American Vintage, American Special - I'd just like to be able to get a MIA standard jazz with specs (options) that I can choose - neck material, fret board material, fret board radius, nut material, hardware color, body finish, body color etc, etc. That would be a hell of a lot more useful for me as a bassist.
Say I wanted an Olympic white standard jazz with maple neck and alder body. Pretty common, right? Then I want block inlays, a rosewood board, a brass nut, hip shot tuners, a BadAss II bridge and red tort guard. I want metal control knobs and cream pickup covers and matching headstock color (to the Olympic white body). 60s spacing on the pickups. I want a 12" radius on the fret board, and the truss rod access at the heel. If I'm willing to pay $1499 for a bass like this, why won't Fender offer the options? Order it through a dealer, or online - but have those options available at standard pricing. Sure, this may be a 'custom order' - but isn't this the future? Two of my favorite smaller companies, Spector and Carvin offer this to some degree - but one would think Fender's clout would be able to keep costs down.
Sigh. Wishful thinking I suppose.
Say, I wanted to get a MIA standard Jazz - instead of searching MIM standard, active, MIA deluxe, Modern Player, Squier, American Vintage, American Special - I'd just like to be able to get a MIA standard jazz with specs (options) that I can choose - neck material, fret board material, fret board radius, nut material, hardware color, body finish, body color etc, etc. That would be a hell of a lot more useful for me as a bassist.
Say I wanted an Olympic white standard jazz with maple neck and alder body. Pretty common, right? Then I want block inlays, a rosewood board, a brass nut, hip shot tuners, a BadAss II bridge and red tort guard. I want metal control knobs and cream pickup covers and matching headstock color (to the Olympic white body). 60s spacing on the pickups. I want a 12" radius on the fret board, and the truss rod access at the heel. If I'm willing to pay $1499 for a bass like this, why won't Fender offer the options? Order it through a dealer, or online - but have those options available at standard pricing. Sure, this may be a 'custom order' - but isn't this the future? Two of my favorite smaller companies, Spector and Carvin offer this to some degree - but one would think Fender's clout would be able to keep costs down.
Sigh. Wishful thinking I suppose.
Fair enough. I'm thinking more along the lines of the many, many oddball Euro / asian quasi fenders/gibbys that were floating around. And while Hofner is still around, Dan Armstrong was nothing to get excited about (yes, I owned one of those too, many years later). I played several of the names you list and I found them lacking. Cheap parts, muddy sound... heck, muddy sound WAS the sound unless you put some effort into it, back then.
I don't ever recall playing a Gretsch... but if they were as well made as their drums, they were at least decent. Every drummer I've played with who had Gretsch tubs sounded great and was usually a good drummer.
Aha! So that's why I was such a lousy drummer when I started learning in high school…I didn't have the right brand of drum kit!!
To an extent, thought not everyone is as savvy about combing CL and ebay as TBers are. A lot of people want to buy an instrument, they go down to the nearest guitar store or they go to amazon, and many are very distrustful of buying used. I know my mom was when she asked about buying me a bass one christmas and I suggested something on the TB classifieds. This factor also accounts for some of Fender's many models, too. The "road worn" and "pawn shop" series instruments and amps are explicitly designed and marketed to appeal to people who want something that seems old and beat-up and has "mojo," or something weird and quirky as though it were an abandoned idea from the 60s that no one knows about. And again, since they continue to make them, I assume that they're actually selling.
I just want a Steve Bailey 6 fretted in candy tangerine with a maple fingerboard with white moto blocks and pickguard. That's it.
I do think that there can be problems when one company tries to be everything for everyone. I don't think Fender has been doing that to the extent that some people claim (ie: they don't do 5,6,7 string in modern styles, offer much from aftermarket electronics, etc...). They have their core items and variants thereof and it would seem that they probably don't want to keep expanding the product line to increase sales, now they have to streamline their process and distribution network to find efficiencies that will bring them back to financial health.
I wouldn't be surprised to see them sell of more of their subsidiaries... they recently agreed to move Guild to Cordoba music, and could do the same with others. This streamlining would probably do more for the bottom line than reducing Fender/Squier offerings.
I wouldn't be surprised to see them sell of more of their subsidiaries... they recently agreed to move Guild to Cordoba music, and could do the same with others. This streamlining would probably do more for the bottom line than reducing Fender/Squier offerings.
Yeah, +1,000 on the cheesy Eastern Euro stuff. Those WERE from the Bizarro world. And the Japanese space-age instruments were about the same. Funny about the Japanese product. They
went from making very bad pre-lawsuit copies or originals in the sixties to very good lawsuit copies in the seventies to very VERY good original-design instruments up to around 1985 and now back to mostly making P and J copies (along with dang near everybody else. Did Fender's patents and licenses expire, or did they just let them lapse?) I personally am wearied just by the over-saturation of Fender-ish basses.
A friend of mine had a nearly new Dan Armstrong. The weight was off-putting, and there was nothing else about the bass that to me could redeem that. And yeah; Magnatones, Supros, Voxes,
and Ekos (and Fender, of course) excepted, "muddy" pretty much was the order of the sixties. My second bass was a Vox Cougar, third was an Epiphone Newport with the chrome mudbucker;
my fourth was a first-generation EB-2 with the black pickup and banjo tuners and --surprise! -- no mud at all with that one. Yet on YouTube is a demo of a first-generation Newport with that same pickup, and the sound is jaw-droppingly muddy.
I have no experience of the Peter Tork Gretsch but have three of the bigger old models as well as two 5540s. The big Gretsches are immense and therefore have stage presence to the max as well as usable tones. But they don't age well, especially in terms of binding and neck set.
I think Marko may be onto something with Fender letting go the subsidieries. I don't see a lot of profit being made there. I wonder how much of Fender's "business model" over the last quarter-century would have been Leo's model? I doubt he was temperamentally suited to be a corporate CEO.
