Gibson Acquires Mesa/Boogie

[JimmyM]

Guys, like it or not, time marches on, and the only thing that's constant are death, taxes and change. People get older, they want to take it a little easier, or maybe they want to retire, or maybe they want to move onto something else. Or maybe they just don't have the capital to do what they really want to do with the brand. Not every change is a harbinger of doom.

 

[dabis]

I didn't read the whole thread, too many replies, so if I'm duplicating some one else's question, my bad, but...answer this:

Can you name many (any) brand that got ~better~ once it was "acquired" by another brand?

MusicMan. Maybe it's me because never played a pre-Ernie Ball Stingray but I suspect not...

 

[baxter_x]

That ship sailed in 1967.

Isn't it what we say about Fender too? Also, the all tube amps are still there.

 

[fishdude101101]

Maybe...but as the owner of an original Blue Line and recent SVT, I would truly argue "better." Yes, Ampeg might not exist if it weren't bought and sold like a $2....well you know.

I don't know enough about Yamaha to say anything intelligent or well-informed about them, so I must defer to your judgement on that one.

Yamaha makes quality products in every industry they touch. From basses to consoles to motorcycles

 

[fishdude101101]

Ampeg. Hartke. Line 6.

When these companies get bought out, my perception of them changes. I don't know why but it makes me less likely to buy their stuff. Just today I was thinking of getting a GK because they are still independent I think.

 

[Jazz4Me]

They had to turn things around to survive. A name can only carry you so far. There was a time when quality at Fender was not what it is now. They even ceased production in the USA. They turned that company around, it’s a work in progress that never ends. Gibson is doing the same.

Fender didn't halt production because of quality issues. When CBS sold Fender to Schultz and team, the Fullerton facilities were't included in the deal. CBS sold those separately. While Schultz and team had stockpiled necks and bodies, they had to scramble to find a new facility. The turnaround began when CBS hired Schultz but Dan Smith has speculated that he and Schultz were brought in to straighten things out enough to make the company saleable and CBS had planned to sale it all along.

 

[frankie5string]

Yamaha makes quality products in every industry they touch. From basses to consoles to motorcycles

Except kitchen cabinetry. They carved that venture out and sold it to JIP... ;-) Yeah, that one surprised me, too.

 

[lug]

G&L - BBE Sound
Musicman - Ernie Ball

 

[/\/\3phist0]

G&L - BBE Sound
Musicman - Ernie Ball

Fender post Leo

Wait, is there a pattern here?

 

[beans-on-toast]

Fender didn't halt production because of quality issues. When CBS sold Fender to Schultz and team, the Fullerton facilities were't included in the deal. CBS sold those separately. While Schultz and team had stockpiled necks and bodies, they had to scramble to find a new facility. The turnaround began when CBS hired Schultz but Dan Smith has speculated that he and Schultz were brought in to straighten things out enough to make the company saleable and CBS had planned to sale it all along.

There were design issues related to changes that they made. In hindsight, players didn’t like them. I bought a Stratocaster which came from the last US run before them moved to Japan (as I recall). They removed the typical chrome dish that held the jack, instead it was flat mounted on the pick guard. The finish on the neck and body was a thick polyester. They also mucked with the tremolo design. It simply didn’t turn out to be a good instrument and I wound up selling it a couple of years later. To this day, instruments from that era have a bad reputation. They were cutting production costs and didn’t know what players wanted.

 

[fishdude101101]

G&L - BBE Sound
Musicman - Ernie Ball

The culture of the buying company is very important.

 

[Al Kraft]

When these companies get bought out, my perception of them changes. I don't know why but it makes me less likely to buy their stuff. Just today I was thinking of getting a GK because they are still independent I think.

I know what you mean. My initial reaction for whatever reason is rarely if ever positive when I hear the news of mergers or acquisitions. I mean the logical assumption it that it happened purely for business/financial reasons and not in response to customer demand.

On the other hand, unless a company can remain on a sound financial footing and in the hands of appreciative, respectful new stewards when the old guard wants to retire or throttle back a bit, we lose the company entirely. I can't even begin to list the number of legendary local businesses I've seen simply fold up when the owner wanted to step back or retire.

At least we have a chance to see Mesa continue forward to a new chapter in its corporate life. Hopefully Gibson will keep what's good and help out in areas where Mesa would like to have invested but couldn't afford to. Without sounding like I don't care at all, let me just say that Gibson's financial future depends on this working out well more than mine does. I'm hoping that thought, when viewed in the context of the broader Mesa customer base, will be especially motivating for them.

 

[jnewmark]

Guys, like it or not, time marches on, and the only thing that's constant are death, taxes and change. People get older, they want to take it a little easier, or maybe they want to retire, or maybe they want to move onto something else. Or maybe they just don't have the capital to do what they really want to do with the brand. Not every change is a harbinger of doom.

And having to play Brown Eyed Girl in a cover band.

 

[bassdude51]

Usually, when a company is bought, not much changes at first. Same factory, same workers, same management.

For the first few years of CBS Fender, there was little change. Even Leo stayed on as an advisor.

Well, time will tell for Mesa/Gibson. Probably pre-Gibson Mesa stuff will become collectible.

Seems like Gibson has been on "shaky ground" financially the past few years. Perhaps look for Mesa to switch hands again. Who knows?

A lot of companies now are just a name.

It's interesting to note that originally, Mesa was nothing more than a Fender Princeton amp that had been modified.

I've seen photos of the original Mesa "chicken shack" with a pile of Fender Princeton amp parts in a trash heep.

Humble beginnings.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After thought. Look for Mesa to go out of the USA for manufacturing.

 

[MordBass]

Usually, when a company is bought, not much changes at first. Same factory, same workers, same management.

For the first few years of CBS Fender, there was little change. Even Leo stayed on as an advisor.

Well, time will tell for Mesa/Gibson. Probably pre-Gibson Mesa stuff will become collectible.

Seems like Gibson has been on "shaky ground" financially the past few years. Perhaps look for Mesa to switch hands again. Who knows?

A lot of companies now are just a name.

Thats a very fair point. One of my previous employers (dine-in theater) was family owned and then got bought by a corporation. Everything was totally normal and we continued to offer great service to our guests like we always had... until about a year later. Thats apparently the amount of time it took them to decide on where to cut costs.
On the product end, they reduced the amount of fries with meals by 25%... then the amount of wings per order... then switched to a lower grade patty for the burgers... no more free refills on $4 soda... etc. On the service end they started reducing the amount of coverage we were budgeted so service suffered dramatically. First the extra wells on the wings of the buildings were no longer occupied by bartenders so the staff had to take a walk for any beer or alcohol... the amount of servers per theater was reduced... etc.

People were fuming of course and a lot stopped showing up but the advantage to service/food based industries is that your memory can play tricks on you. Enough time has passed for their current guests to consider things normal so the situation has adapted. Sadly, thats not the case with physical products as you can always weigh the current against the previous.

Fingers crossed that Mesa gets to continue doing what they do best.

 

[beans-on-toast]

Seems like Gibson has been on "shaky ground" financially the past few years.

They've had record years, including last year. That's why they are acquiring. Their group includes Gibson, Epiphone, Kramer, Steinberger, KRK (professional audio), and Mesa/Boogie.

 

[sleepingEB0]

Gibson went bankrupt because they spent 500 million on home theater and last i checked all the normies are using 1984 google/Apple/Amazon spy devices to listen to music at home. Woopsies!
Good idea, bad timing. Being a guitar only company in 2060 not a great idea. Investing in traditional home stereos at the start of smart devices is bad timing.

But let’s also consider that their creditors GAVE THEM a 100 million dollar more Loan because they were confident they could pay it back. Why?

New business model stripped down to all the profitable parts of Gibson
1. Guitar sales rose 10% in a decade of industry decline, and that figure predates 2020 which was a huge huge huge year for guitar sales.
2. Gibson owns 40% of the premium guitar market
3. Despite the QC meme (which dates back to the Norlin era when there was bad quality) being the e-celeb YouTube analysis source of the bankruptcy those guitars from the firebird X through the bankruptcy actually have held their value extremely well if not gone up. looking at a cross section of the line up Prices on reverb seem to be ~-15/+20% of MSRP. I owned a $750 SG that currently sells at a $1000.

There is a big disconnect between Gibson the business, Gibson the 100 year old brand, Gibson customers and guitar ‘fans’ or whatever we call them. Gibson the business is currently managed by different people with different goals in a different financial situation and market than the trace Elliot thing or when Norlin was In charge or CME.

Clearly Gibson isn’t the Gibson isn’t ran by Ted McCarty and making guitars in Michigan.

As for the analysis and predictions. Clearly Gibson customers are buying the guitars as much as ever or business types woudlnt have gambled 100 million on it. Used sales also indicate that the customers are more than happy to buy the ‘bad quality control’ guitars of the last decade. I’ve personally made some money to attest to that.

So as for the non Gibson guitar guys? I don’t get it but it’s the brand everyone loves to hate and also armchair CEO. Usually they will tell you bad quality control, they went in to the store and played a Les Paul and found the Indonesian dean single cut was better. Sure, sure. I suspect budget had nothing to do with that.

Nobody with a $2500 budget is going to go into a guitar store and take home a Les Paul with QC issues. And we are ignoring that you can take your pick of any of the 15 les Paul’s in stock and chose the one you like best without QC issues. OR you could take 10-20% off sticker and deal with a smudge on the binding. OR you could send it to Gibson to get it replaced under warranty. I’ve done it all, no issue, ezpz, friendly to deal with Gibson. They even let me keep some case candy stuff. It’s not 1975 anymore.

The funniest thing I’ve read on forums is guys who pretend their smudge in the binding or whatever on a gold top $2,500 meant they had to get a PRS single cut gold top instead for $3900. $1400 extra dollars instead of asking to see a few other examples? Thankfully the bass community is far more practical when shopping and far less invested in the image / ego / secret mojo aspect.
And no actual Gibson customer is cross shopping Indonesian plywood because it has better QC. On the flip side no rational person is actually going to spend $1400 extra to avoid minor QC issues. The reality is they probably weren’t seriously interested in Gibson to begin with, which is fine, they just want to talk guitar, and Gibson is a massive brand and everyone’s got something to say.

I’ll sum up my blog here in one sentence to make it clear. Just because someone posts they had a bad Les Paul 25 years ago doesn’t mean anything about the future of Mesa amps, or even about the general quality of Gibson guitars from any era.

I’ll also remind everyone that it seems the Mesa bass amps already witnessed a ‘peaceful transfer of power’ to use a buzzword. Andy designed the subways not Randy and they are very popular.

 

[Jazz4Me]

There were design issues related to changes that they made. In hindsight, players didn’t like them. I bought a Stratocaster which came from the last US run before them moved to Japan (as I recall). They removed the typical chrome dish that held the jack, instead it was flat mounted on the pick guard. The finish on the neck and body was a thick polyester. They also mucked with the tremolo design. It simply didn’t turn out to be a good instrument and I wound up selling it a couple of years later. To this day, instruments from that era have a bad reputation. They were cutting production costs and didn’t know what players wanted.

Yeah, those were in '83 a few years prior to the sale. Schultz and team still didn't have autonomy in all decisions. They were able return to the 4 bolt neck and lost the bullet truss rod but gave us the cost cutting Strat std with only one tone control, the pick guard mounted jack, and a less then stellar tremolo. '83 also gave us the original elite models with active circuits, push button pickup selectors, and perhaps the worst term ever made. I was playing a '78 strat which as mediocre as it was, was still better. I traded that strat towards a used 90' PRS Custom 24 and went without a strat until I bought a '62 AVRI over a decade later.

 

[beans-on-toast]

Yeah, those were in '83 a few years prior to the sale. Schultz and team still didn't have autonomy in all decisions. They were able return to the 4 bolt neck and lost the bullet truss rod but gave us the cost cutting Strat std with only one tone control, the pick guard mounted jack, and a less then stellar tremolo. '83 also gave us the original elite models with active circuits, push button pickup selectors, and perhaps the worst term ever made. I was playing a '78 strat which as mediocre as it was, was still better. I traded that strat towards a used 90' PRS Custom 24 and went without a strat until I bought a '62 AVRI over a decade later.

On the 80’s one I installed a chrome jack dish, added a Floyd Rose tremolo, and a split coil dual pickup at the bridge position and a mini-toggle. It was the times I suppose.

 

[fishdude101101]

I know what you mean. My initial reaction for whatever reason is rarely if ever positive when I hear the news of mergers or acquisitions. I mean the logical assumption it that it happened purely for business/financial reasons and not in response to customer demand.

On the other hand, unless a company can remain on a sound financial footing and in the hands of appreciative, respectful new stewards when the old guard wants to retire or throttle back a bit, we lose the company entirely. I can't even begin to list the number of legendary local businesses I've seen simply fold up when the owner wanted to step back or retire.

At least we have a chance to see Mesa continue forward to a new chapter in its corporate life. Hopefully Gibson will keep what's good and help out in areas where Mesa would like to have invested but couldn't afford to. Without sounding like I don't care at all, let me just say that Gibson's financial future depends on this working out well more than mine does. I'm hoping that thought, when viewed in the context of the broader Mesa customer base, will be especially motivating for them.

I hope it all works out. Mesa has passionate customers for a reason. Hopefully Gibson does try to trade them for a different group of customers.