Gibson... again...

[-Asdfgh-]

Some of you need a glass of get over yourself juice. If I ran Gibson, I would do the exact same thing with those pieces of crap. If you don't destroy them, then you can't write them off. If you can't write them off, then you will post a gigantic loss and make for a terrible bottom line.

You can donate to charity abroad so it doesn't damage the domestic market, and still write them off. Unless they are so egregiously bad people in the recipient country never buy a Gibson again.

 

[-Asdfgh-]

Those guitars were written off. Not a bad idea to have evidence the items were destroyed. Personally I thought the video was hilarious and some of you guys need to lighten up. From the press release it seems to be some part of the electronics didn't meet ROHS. Without ROHS, you can't sell the items here or ship them anywhere else. Can't give them away either because they'd all end up on reverb as "new".

There are charities that refurbish things, including guitars, for transport and donation to third world countries. I know because I have assisted, although not with guitars. One of these could have stripped out the non-compliant elements and made them fit for shipping to a third world nation at no cost to Gibson. Gibson was lazy.

 

[giacomobass]

Gibson stated, “an isolated batch of Firebird X models built in 2009-2011 which were unsalvageable and damaged with unsafe components. This isolated group of Firebird X models were unable to be donated for any purpose and were destroyed accordingly.”

Yeah, a fine example of corporate BS... I don't believe a word, sorry.

 

[-Asdfgh-]

I know I said I was out, but it occurred to me that this is worth mentioning to those who love telling other people what to do with their money...

The Gibson Foundation has donated over $30 million worth of gear to charity so far, and they're donating a guitar a day to charity for a year.

So tell me, whiners...what have YOU done for charity? Donated a pile of used crap that nobody wants to Goodwill so they have to throw it away instead of you?

Personally, I donate a significant amount of my income to charity each year (*), plus I've donated old IT gear and bought brand new clothes in the January sales to donate to Africa. The last one is fun and I recommend to people as you get to have a guilt-free bit of retail therapy as at the end of the day you give it all away.

Involvement with organisations that refurbish IT gear for donation to Africa is why I know that organisations exist that do this thing, including ones that collect musical instruments. Indeed, I have an excess of instruments and have a one-in-one-out policy in operation, so my bitzer bass, if that has to go, will very likely go to one of the musical instrument charities and then to Africa, although I might take the nice Kent Armstrong pickups out first.

* Unfortunately my wages are not keeping pace with inflation and we are going to be hit by higher pension charges so I may have to cut back as I'm the only breadwinner. I am not happy about this, but we'll see how it goes.

 

[-Asdfgh-]

For whatever reason, they were destroyed. My wife works for a school district doing lunches, they throw out a ton of food every day. She works in a school that has an 80% use of the free/reduced lunch program because of poverty. Can't give the food away, lawsuits and regulations and the like. It's tragic, it's bullcrap, it's how it is.

It's pretty hard to refurbish perishables. You could argue that the average Gibson guitar is perishable, I suppose.

 

[giacomobass]

Yep. Stamped with a 2 in the wood on the back of the headstock. [...]
It’s no secret there were more than a few in open circulation. It wasn’t something only employees and endorsees owned.

They don't do that anymore, apparently.

“I’ve seen them take, daily, 10, 20 ES guitars that were painted and ready to go, and just cut ’em up because there was some teeny-tiny little blemish.” (the ex-employee who posted the original video and the one below, from his phone interview quoted here).

10-20 guitars per day. For just one model. Do the math.

As others here have noted, the reason why Gibson routinely destroys instruments with small imperfections is because today they aim at being perceived as the company making only perfect guitars, so that they can keep their prices up accordingly. But even from a business standpoint, I don't see how marking as seconds guitars with "teeny-tiny little blemishes", as they used to do in the past, and marketing them at a discount, even a relatively small one, could hurt their image or profits. Quite the opposite, in fact: I believe both would benefit from a change of strategy, at this point.

 

[-Asdfgh-]

Personally, I donate a significant amount of my income to charity each year (*), plus I've donated old IT gear and bought brand new clothes in the January sales to donate to Africa. The last one is fun and I recommend to people as you get to have a guilt-free bit of retail therapy as at the end of the day you give it all away.

Involvement with organisations that refurbish IT gear for donation to Africa is why I know that organisations exist that do this thing, including ones that collect musical instruments. Indeed, I have an excess of instruments and have a one-in-one-out policy in operation, so my bitzer bass, if that has to go, will very likely go to one of the musical instrument charities and then to Africa, although I might take the nice Kent Armstrong pickups out first.

* Unfortunately my wages are not keeping pace with inflation and we are going to be hit by higher pension charges so I may have to cut back as I'm the only breadwinner. I am not happy about this, but we'll see how it goes.

By the way, I'm not trying to suggest I'm a Saint, just saying that you can object to what Gibson did and be someone who donates to charity - it's not a binary choice.

 

[-Asdfgh-]

There's some irony that when Gibson tried something innovative it fell flat (even flatter after the video).

One of my activities this weekend will be reworking an Epiphone LP studio to make it more modern or something - 72 different pickup options and a sustainer pickup. I'll have the magnets, coil winder, and breadboard working on the sustainer on another guitar first as I have to build something to fit a carved top after I've got it working.

 

[-Asdfgh-]

They don't do that anymore, apparently.

“I’ve seen them take, daily, 10, 20 ES guitars that were painted and ready to go, and just cut ’em up because there was some teeny-tiny little blemish.” (the ex-employee who posted the original video and the one below, from his phone interview quoted here).

10-20 guitars per day. For just one model. Do the math.

As others here have noted, the reason why Gibson routinely destroys instruments with small imperfections is because today they aim at being perceived as the company making only perfect guitars, so that they can keep their prices up accordingly. But even from a business standpoint, I don't see how marking as seconds guitars with "teeny-tiny little blemishes", as they used to do in the past, and marketing them at a discount, even a relatively small one, could hurt their image or profits. Quite the opposite, in fact: I believe both would benefit from a change of strategy, at this point.

Given complaints about Gibson QC it's hard to believe it destroys guitars for minor flaws.

 

[giacomobass]

you can object to what Gibson did and be someone who donates to charity

...or doesn't, for that matter. It's called freedom of expression.

The other delegitimizing argument: "You don't own a business, or know how to run one". (Which in my case is also not true).

Given complaints about Gibson QC it's hard to believe it destroys guitars for minor flaws.

Maybe they do so for just the more expensive flagship models? The Memphis ES-335 is a 2.5K € guitar. I can easily see why a customer wouldn't want to find even the tiniest imperfection on such a pricey instrument, unless of course it were marketed as "B-stock" and discounted accordingly.

 

[SteffanB]

This is the same company that hasn't introduced a decent bass in how many years? This is the same company that introduced the Jimi Hendrix signature guitar? It's obvious this company was and is run by a bunch of boobs.

 

[dangnewt]

and then Peavey is auctioning off all of their old stock, so if you want to sell a Peavey, better do it today.
Gibson was always way above my price range, 5k bucks, I'll buy land before I buy any guitar.

Fortunately, the value of my beloved Peaveys should survive this.

I'm a sucker for auctions so I looked at the inventory - only 24 basses in 6 lots - looks like customer returns. There does appear to be 2 USA Millenniums in the mix. There are a few bass amps and cabs too, but it is mostly electronics, PA speakers, guitar amps and components (speaker cloth, capacitors, loose speakers, tuners, etc)

 

[40Hz]

They don't do that anymore, apparently.

I was given to understand Gibson stopped allowing seconds sometime in the late 80s coinciding with Juszkiewicz and Berryman taking the helm. I remember reading somewhere that it was Henry’s decision that going forward Gibson would only produce “perfect” guitars.

And as someone noted earlier, for the prices Gibson was charging, it was becoming difficult to justify minor blemishes on instruments in that price range.

 

[dangnewt]

Recreational outrage......

This belongs in the Dad Band Name Thread!

That said, I hear that Massachusetts will have a referendum on legalizing recreational outrage in 2020 - Vote Yes on 2!

 

[kasken]

That said, I hear that Massachusetts will have a referendum on legalizing recreational outrage in 2020

Isn't that their largest export? I mean, look at their Congressional leaders...

 

[kasken]

Isn't that their largest export? I mean, look at their Congressional leaders...

Although one could say, since they are in Congress, they practice professional outrage.

 

[-Asdfgh-]

...or doesn't, for that matter. It's called freedom of expression.

The other delegitimizing argument: "You don't own a business, or know how to run one". (Which in my case is also not true).

Also not true for me. It did fail which was a learning experience, as they say.

Maybe they do so for just the more expensive flagship models? The Memphis ES-335 is a 2.5K € guitar. I can easily see why a customer wouldn't want to find even the tiniest imperfection on such a pricey instrument, unless of course it were marketed as "B-stock" and discounted accordingly.

People seem to complain about the QC, hence my surprise as people still find blemishes, or do they say.

 

[-Asdfgh-]

I was given to understand Gibson stopped allowing seconds sometime in the late 80s coinciding with Juszkiewicz and Berryman taking the helm. I remember reading somewhere that it was Henry’s decision that going forward Gibson would only produce “perfect” guitars.

And as someone noted earlier, for the prices Gibson was charging, it was becoming difficult to justify minor blemishes on instruments in that price range.

Maybe they should do what chip manufacturers do - QC the product then put it in a bin that matches its quality and mark it with a name to match. So the good ones are Gibsons, the ones that don't make the grade become 'USA Epiphones'. That would potentially improve the cachet of the Epiphone brand which might allow them to up the prices across the Epiphone range by 5% (figure pulled out of my nether regions). Or you create some new brand like Hardly Benton, er Gibson.

 

[dangnewt]

First of all, I doubt that any of the destruction pictured was performed primarily "for fun" purposes. Having said that, there's nothing stopping anyone from having fun in their daily job even if that job entails crushing a ton of guitars that should've never been produced in the first place.

Correct, it was work. The guy was the facilities head and was instructed to destroy the guitars. They didn't tell him how. I listened to the interview with the guy and he wasn't asked why he went with a giant excavator. Maybe the excavator is a friend or relative and was willing to run over the guitars for free. One of the guitarists in my old band was a General Contractor with dozens of employees and a lot of fun equipment - I could totally see bringing a load of stuff to be destroyed and making an event out of it.

I think that this could have been a great PR move: "Gibson excises the demon of bad design decisions with a backhoe".

But they just forgot to be the ones to release the video... oops

That thought crossed my mind. A combination of Ford's Quality is Job 1 campaign with Hanes Underwear Inspector 12. At worse, Gibson could have monetized the views with ads. Something which the former employee who posted the video wisely chose not to do.





Note to all the youngsters on this thread - we didn't need any stinking intertubes when we were in our teens and 20's - we watched commercials for fun, and we liked it. Now get the heck off my lawn!

 

[Shanannigan]

With how resourceful Les Paul was, I wonder how he would feel having his name associated with this company now.