Gibson... again...

[gln1955]

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!

Intertubes? Hell, we had picture tubes. If you looked at them wrong, the picture went all wonky. And this was before they invented color. And we liked it just fine...

 

[dangnewt]

Intertubes? Hell, we had picture tubes. If you looked at them wrong, the picture went all wonky. And this was before they invented color. And we liked it just fine...

My dad had a remote control - he said "Dangnewt - get up, turn the dial to the game, adjust the rabbit ears, and get me a beer." Kids today have it soooo easy.

 

[40Hz]

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.

I don’t think that would be a good idea from a marketing perspective. Guitars are luxury items. They sell as much (or more) for their cachet as they do any real merits. So a fault is a fault. It invariably takes some of the luster off a gilded rose.

Branding your rejects as Epiphones would only hurt the Epiphone name. I don't think knowing they were originally destined to be Gibsons but didn’t make the cut would be a compelling sales point. Gibson's name alone isn’t magical enough to change that.

Besides, Epiphone has worked very hard to over the years to dispel the notion their products and commitment to quality isn’t up to snuff. And they’ve done that mainly by their deeds rather than words.

My S.O. owns really nice gear. Much better stuff than I do. For Gibsons she has a 50s era ES-125TC and a stunning vintage Les Paul Custom. And when she’s shopping she will spend literally hours trying out a dozen different instruments before she decides to get something if she does. And she’s fortunate in that price is not a big concern for her when she’s buying a guitar. So when she went shopping for an ES type guitar you’d think she’d come home with a 335 or something. But she ended up choosing an Epiphone ES-339 Ultra. And later on, when she wanted something snarlier to round out her tone pallet and began looking at SGs and the then new Nighthawk, she ended up buying an Epiphone Blueshawk instead.

As she put it, Epiphone made the guitar she wanted that Gibson wouldn’t sell her. And talking to other Epiphone owners I’ve heard similar sentiments. So I don’t think rebranding Gibson’s seconds as Epiphones would do much for either Gibson or Epiphone.

 

[Yup]

Another video just came up. Second video is same guys explaination and his thoughts.(edit: starts at 16:10)

 

[AboutSweetSue]

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

I don’t understand why you’re apologizing.

 

[giacomobass]

I don’t understand why you’re apologizing.

I guess I was just trying to be polite.

 

[Ostie]

Confiscated by who? The international counterfeit guitar and garlic compliance team? ICE?

Okay, maybe they are demonstrating how tough Gibson basses are: “takes a licking and keeps on ticking!”

 

[Jeff Scott]

“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).

Hmm, they missed a few; those $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ Les Pauls I have checked out on occasion over the years at local music stores.

Seriously, for the prices they charge for those, one should expect perfection. The PRS Custom 24 I owned a few years ago was nothing short of perfection at 1/3 the price.

 

[Booty Shaman]

Just think about how many school music programs could have benefitted from these instruments. This is just the worst aspect of capitalism.

 

[Booty Shaman]

That’s small potatoes. The Fortune 500 company I’ve worked for the past 23 years destroys millions of $$ in broadcast/studio electronics and installation components annually to prevent leakage into the second-hand market. It’s a common practice and not just happening at Gibson. Business is business and it’s just a product.

When my employer was in the PC business, they would donate unsold A-stock to developing nations education programs until some crap-hole country on the African Continent attempted to blackmail the donor operating company for a better deal. That ended donations. Full-stop. After that event, even employee access to obsolete models disappeared. So it goes. A few hundred guitars ain’t squat.

Not just a product - it is taking valuable resources and just throwing them away. I find this practice criminal and destructive to our dying planet.

 

[Alkali Ike]

Giving new students a very complicated and flaky “instrument” that’s known to be a POS may not be a very good way to get them into music. “The best thing about learning on this guitar is you don’t even need to know how to tune it (except when it doesn’t tune itself correctly).”

 

[-Asdfgh-]

Guitars are luxury items.

Given the number of really cheap guitars that sell I am unconvinced that's true in general. It's true of Gibsons, perhaps.

Anyway, my comments were partly tongue-in-cheek, but there probably is a way of making use of the minor failures to meet standards. It used to be 'sell them anyway'!

 

[40Hz]

Given the number of really cheap guitars that sell I am unconvinced that's true in general. It's true of Gibsons, perhaps.

Has nothing to do with the actual sales price.

A luxury is something that isn’t essential but is still desirable. One characteristic of luxuries is that increases in income result in an increase in their demand and consumption.

Musical instruments fit that definition to a tee.

 

[Jeff Scott]

Musical instruments fit that definition to a tee.

Unless, it's a tool of one's trade.

 

[40Hz]

Giving new students a very complicated and flaky “instrument” that’s known to be a POS may not be a very good way to get them into music. “The best thing about learning on this guitar is you don’t even need to know how to tune it (except when it doesn’t tune itself correctly).”

Agree. A pro can get away with anything if it’s playable. A beginner needs all the help and freedom from discomfort possible. A beginner can benefit from pro level gear far more than a professional needs it.

 

[Wisebass]

And this was before they invented color. And we liked it just fine...

Back in the days, when the lawn was black and white!

greetings

Wise

 

[-Asdfgh-]

A luxury is something that isn’t essential but is still desirable. One characteristic of luxuries is that increases in income result in an increase in their demand and consumption.

That definition seems to cover almost everything including toilet paper!

 

[40Hz]

Unless, it's a tool of one's trade.

True. You can argue a limited case exception for anything in economics. But when speaking in terms of general macroeconomics like I am, guitars are a luxury.

 

[40Hz]

That definition seems to cover almost everything including toilet paper!

Not really unless you want you start splitting definitions endlessly. I’m not up for it today. So I’ll pass.

 

[-Asdfgh-]

Not really unless you want you start splitting definitions endlessly. I’m not up for it today. So I’ll pass.

To some extent it was an attempt at humour. But certainly if I have the money I use reams of the stuff or buy the extra quilted. Now that is luxury.