Identify the SX vs. Fender in the mix thread

[savit260]

So you don't want American workers to get paid fairly?

So how exactly did you extrapolate that from what was posted?

Who gets to determine what "paid fairly" even means?

I'm willing to bet the U.S. employees of FMIC make a decent wage with better benifits than many U.S. workers have. I'm sure that's built into the price of the instruments as well. ...

 

[savit260]

That said, I personally prefer the sound of SX/Lollar to stock Fender. It is brighter, crispier, ringier.

Now the question is, do I really need two Laklands then? (jk)

I would attribute a good amount of what you are saying to brand spankin new, right out of the pack strings that were on the SX.

 

[denchiq]

I would attribute a good amount of what you are saying to brand spankin new, right out of the pack strings that were on the SX.

fair enough.

 

[Vic Winters]

Actually they can't charge as much as they want. I'm guessing that was hyperbole.

I don't know if you need another explanation besides economics for the Geddy Lee pricing. What other explanation would you accept?

Generally speaking, there is so much that goes into pricing that many choose to either ignore or dismiss it's not funny. Where were the GL's made over their lifespan? What did it cost year by year to do so? Did any manufacturing standards change in that time? I remember when Mike Tobias had his shop in California and the regs changed on how he could finish instruments... and that cost his company money and by some of the logic here if he had to do a big bump it's not legit.

It's also interesting that many don't have problems with something like a Lakland Skyline that sells for as much as a US Fender IIRC.

Nearly doubling the price of an instrument and then dropping that price about a quarter within a year? Especially when none of their other instruments saw such a drastic change price wise. The Geddy is one of Fender's best selling basses of the past decade. I believe it's safe to say that they sell it at a higher price because they can.

Look at it this way, the Aerodyne like the Geddy is CIJ. However the Aerodyne is $200 cheaper and has seen less price fluctuation. Yes I know the Aerodyne is basswood while the Geddy is alder. However the Aerodyne has unique hardware, routing, binding and a carved/radiused top. A Geddy is a standard jazz bass but with a different neck profile and a BAII. One would assume that the more unique bass would be more costly to manufacture.

Any manufacturing changes, taxes, etc. applied to the Geddy would also apply to the Aerodyne seeing as how they're the same brand, have the same country of origin and are being shipped to the same places.

 

[Dark Horse]

Nearly doubling the price of an instrument and then dropping that price about a quarter within a year? Especially when none of their other instruments saw such a drastic change price wise. The Geddy is one of Fender's best selling basses of the past decade. I believe it's safe to say that they sell it at a higher price because they can.

Look at it this way, the Aerodyne like the Geddy is CIJ. However the Aerodyne is $200 cheaper and has seen less price fluctuation. Yes I know the Aerodyne is basswood while the Geddy is alder. However the Aerodyne has unique hardware, routing, binding and a carved/radiused top. A Geddy is a standard jazz bass but with a different neck profile and a BAII. One would assume that the more unique bass would be more costly to manufacture.

Any manufacturing changes, taxes, etc. applied to the Geddy would also apply to the Aerodyne seeing as how they're the same brand, have the same country of origin and are being shipped to the same places.

Aerodyne vs. Geddy -

The radiused top is no big deal - it is CNC'd. Hardware for the Aerodyne is made by Fender.

Fender has to pay Geddy for each bass sold.

And Fender has to BUY Badass bridges for each Geddy bass, instead of manufacture them.

That + the alder easily makes up for a $200 retail price difference (which is about $100 wholesale difference).

$.02

 

[Brad Johnson]

Nearly doubling the price of an instrument and then dropping that price about a quarter within a year? Especially when none of their other instruments saw such a drastic change price wise. The Geddy is one of Fender's best selling basses of the past decade. I believe it's safe to say that they sell it at a higher price because they can.

I would bet they looked at the market and competition in addition to demand and cost to produce when pricing them.

Look at the price of the Marcus Miller 4 against the five.


I recall squealing all around when Fender did price increases over the last year or so. It put their pricing in lkine with their competition but few people wanted them to.

Look at it this way, the Aerodyne like the Geddy is CIJ. However the Aerodyne is $200 cheaper and has seen less price fluctuation. Yes I know the Aerodyne is basswood while the Geddy is alder. However the Aerodyne has unique hardware, routing, binding and a carved/radiused top. A Geddy is a standard jazz bass but with a different neck profile and a BAII. One would assume that the more unique bass would be more costly to manufacture.

Why? If cost of parts offsets lower build quantities, it could cost the same.

Any manufacturing changes, taxes, etc. applied to the Geddy would also apply to the Aerodyne seeing as how they're the same brand, have the same country of origin and are being shipped to the same places.

Unless they're identical that is not necessarily true. Is there one place alone in Japan that builds both basses? Which bass do they make and sell in larger numbers? Are all parts made where they're assembled? And so on.

It's not necessarily as simple as one might think.

 

[Brad Johnson]

So how exactly did you extrapolate that from what was posted?

It's easy... US basses are made by labor that costs more. In facilities that cost more. Run by people who cost more. They have to be paid from somewhere and the likely source is from the income made on sales. Something has to give to get to where some of you want prices to be and it could very well be workers' salaries that take the hit.

Who gets to determine what "paid fairly" even means?

The worker and employer. That's how it usually works.

I'm willing to bet the U.S. employees of FMIC make a decent wage with better benifits than many U.S. workers have. I'm sure that's built into the price of the instruments as well. ...

It is... into the prices you don't like.


As far as betting what they get paid, what are the stakes? There are people who are willing to bet this and that but no one ever puts anything up.



Besides, who gets to determine what's decent?

 

[Brad Johnson]

Aerodyne vs. Geddy -

The radiused top is no big deal - it is CNC'd. Hardware for the Aerodyne is made by Fender.

Fender has to pay Geddy for each bass sold.

And Fender has to BUY Badass bridges for each Geddy bass, instead of manufacture them.

That + the alder easily makes up for a $200 retail price difference (which is about $100 wholesale difference).

$.02

Not at all complicated.


Personally I never got complaining about pricing. What's the point... complain enough and they'll lower them despite sales figures.

Like it, buy it. Don't? Why not keep moving?

 

[savit260]

It's easy... US basses are made by labor that costs more. In facilities that cost more. Run by people who cost more. They have to be paid from somewhere and the likely source is from the income made on sales. Something has to give to get to where some of you want prices to be and it could very well be workers' salaries that take the hit.

Yup, not exactly rocket science here.

The worker and employer. That's how it usually works.

Yup,

... and I'm sure that's the case for other localities other than the U.S. as well

It is... into the prices you don't like.

:

... as I was saying ....

Where did you extrapolate that from? I've not said once in this thread that Fenders were over priced.

Do you think I would have bought my 2008 American Standard Precision if I thought it was overpriced?

As I've said previously in this thread, I currently own Four Fenders. All of which provided a decent value (required IMO) for the money at the time of their purchase.

 

[Brad Johnson]

Yup, not exactly rocket science here.

I know but apparently it needed repeating.

Yup,

... and I'm sure that's the case for other localities other than the U.S. as well

Lower wages, lower production facility costs can and often do equal lower prices.

... as I was saying ....

Where did you extrapolate that from? I've not said once in this thread that Fenders were over priced.

Do you think I would have bought my 2008 American Standard Precision if I thought it was overpriced?

As I've said previously in this thread, I currently own Four Fenders. All of which provided a decent value (required IMO) for the money at the time of their purchase.

Post 603. Let me know if I misunderstood you. That's what I was responding to. The brunt of the post you agreed with was about Fenders being overpriced.

 

[savit260]

Post 603. Let me know if I misunderstood you. That's what I was responding to.

This ^

Lucas. THand clearly "gets it".

Very close to what I would have written myself.

Yes, you completely misunderstood.

Notice that I used the words "very close". That's not the same as "exactly".

Take out the few parts about Fenders being over priced, and I could have written the rest myself.

IMO, the MAJORITY of the post I was refering to has to do with the difference in price being about the level of attention to detail.

Note that I even BOLDED the part that I found to be particularly on point from the original post.

I think 1200 for a new MIA Fender is a rip-off, yes. I believe 750-850 would be fair.

I think SX is a huge value for the money, and with some(sometimes a lot) TLC, it can do the same job as Fender, with very few people able to know the difference. But there are differences, tone just isn't a big one.

The wood is the same, if we are talking alder bodies and not Sadowsky's chambered bodies. IMO, IME, SX keeps the price low with cheap labor, cheap,cheap,cheap screws, cheap pots and wiring, and minimum attention to fretwork & nut work. If SX were MIA(paying for American labor), and improved these shortcomings,which are at the present-time up to the buyer to fix, they would probably cost what a MIA Standard Fender should cost...$750-850.

OTOH, the SX bodies alone are worth the price of the whole bass, and truthfully, the tuners alone would probably come close to making it worth it. IME, the tuners are very good, eventhough the chrome plate on them looks a little cheesy.

So, IMO, the price of the SX is justified, but the current MIA Standard Fender price is not. Is Fender ripping you off? No, you argree to that price when you buy one, no one is making you do that.

I don't own a Sadowsky, so I can't speak from experience about them, but I do know that time = money. And IME, it can take a lot of time and care, and skill to make any bass it's absolute best all-around. So, if you think Fender's price for the MIA Deluxe series is fair and you buy one and then take it to a luthier for special upgrades,(like custom shaped neck, chambering the body to make it lighter, an EQ made to spec, etc.)how much would this extra work add to your initial investment of $1700? Probably close to Sadowsky's price, if not more.

I come from the time when everyone modded their Fender's w/o a 2nd thought. I think the point is you get that same foundation to build on w/o as large of initial investment from SX. They are very similar to CBS Fender's, some are even better out of the box.

EDIT TO ADD: $750-$850 is pretty damned close what I'd expect to pay for a new American Fender after doing my homework and hunting down the best deal.

I paid $800 out the door with case and candy for mine not too terribly long ago. I wouldn't expect to pay much more today, after doing my homework.

 

[Brad Johnson]

Fine. The gist of his post (how many times does he go back to his opening point?) is that Fenders are overpriced. Then add in the hypothetical about buying one and taking it to a luther for a rebuild/redesign... wow. Then you talk about what you'd expect to pay which is less than what he said a Fender costs...

but you're not agreeing that they're overpriced.

BTW you didn't bold very much. How ''very close" did he actually come if you don't agree with at least half of the post?

This is the thread that just keeps on giving

Gotta run.

 

[Dark Horse]

This is the thread that just keeps on giving

Feels like we all need a penicillin shot after reading it !

 

[THand]

....
EDIT TO ADD: $750-$850 is pretty damned close what I'd expect to pay for a new American Fender after doing my homework and hunting down the best deal.

I paid $800 out the door with case and candy for mine not too terribly long ago. I wouldn't expect to pay much more today, after doing my homework.

He's trying to build strawmen again, that's all.

I said I think 1200 was too much for a AS Fender, yes, and I still think that. I know I could round up a new one for 750-850, if I were in the market...why should I pay more than what I think the value is?

I also said they aren't ripping off people, if their customer's choose to pay 1200, I'm not going to say they were ripped off. I'm just going for a better price that's in line with what I know I'll be getting. That's my right and responsibility as a customer to decide what my personal budget will be along with resonable expectations. I know 750-850 is reasonable.

Just more strawmen & hair-splitting, IMO. Basically, I could do the same thing by saying he is against buying a used instrument, because that is cheating the current employees of (insert brand) out of their wages. But I won't do that

BTW, my current Fender count is 3, so I'm not anti-Fender by a long stretch...I'm just frugal

 

[savit260]

Fine. The gist of his post (how many times does he go back to his opening point?) is that Fenders are overpriced. Then add in the hypothetical about buying one and taking it to a luther for a rebuild/redesign... wow. Then you talk about what you'd expect to pay which is less than what he said a Fender costs...

but you're not agreeing that they're overpriced.

BTW you didn't bold very much. How ''very close" did he actually come if you don't agree with at least half of the post?

This is the thread that just keeps on giving

Gotta run.

IMO (required IMO) the general gist, and MAIN POINT of that post was about the difference in price being attributed to the difference in the level of attention to detail between the budget stuff, and more expensive stuff, and that the SX OWNER can add all the attention to detail themselves as they see fit.

That's how I read the post.

That's what I was agreeing with.


At current "street prices" the Fenders are still a reasonable value IMO, but I'll be damned if I pay asking price for any mid rangeto high end bass. There's plenty of wiggle room in those prices from all the mid to high end stuff.

There's no reason you can't negotiate a better price than street price.

 

[THand]

IMO (required IMO) the general gist, and MAIN POINT of that post was about the difference in price being attributed to the difference in the level of attention to detail between the budget stuff, and more expensive stuff, and that the SX OWNER can add all the attention to detail themselves as they see fit.

That's how I read the post.

That's what I was agreeing with.

That IS the point. Exactly!

He seems to have a problem with me personally, so that means he MUST find fault in you agreeing with anything I say. Whatever.That's his personal problem.

Brad, you're right!

 

[Brad Johnson]

He's trying to build strawmen again, that's all.

I said I think 1200 was too much for a AS Fender, yes, and I still think that. I know I could round up a new one for 750-850, if I were in the market...why should I pay more than what I think the value is?

I also said they aren't ripping off people, if their customer's choose to pay 1200, I'm not going to say they were ripped off. I'm just going for a better price that's in line with what I know I'll be getting. That's my right and responsibility as a customer to decide what my personal budget will be along with resonable expectations. I know 750-850 is reasonable.

Just more strawmen & hair-splitting, IMO. Basically, I could do the same thing by saying he is against buying a used instrument, because that is cheating the current employees of (insert brand) out of their wages. But I won't do that

BTW, my current Fender count is 3, so I'm not anti-Fender by a long stretch...I'm just frugal

And here we go again with the strawman BS.


you:
"I think 1200 for a new MIA Fender is a rip-off, yes. I believe 750-850 would be fair".


Okay, you think it's a rip-off and you mentioned it's price and what you think is fair... a much lower price. And that in no way resembles the idea` that it's "overpriced". Because a rip-off based on the price being too high does not mean you think it's overpriced. It means you think it's priced okay... just too high. But not over.

And you're clearly not saying it's a rip-off with that leading statement. Quite the contrary. You just think it's priced okay, just about right and 1200 for it is a rip-off too. And you say you can get a new one for the price you said you like but you talk about the higher price which isn't okay... but not overpriced.

Yeah, it's me.

This is some flat out hilarious stuff. I don't expect you to respond directly to it so don't worry, I won't be surprised when you just say strawman again instead.


Thanks... you're right. Again.

 

[Brad Johnson]

That IS the point. Exactly!

He seems to have a problem with me personally, so that means he MUST find fault in you agreeing with anything I say. Whatever.That's his personal problem.

Brad, you're right!

Keep dreaming.

I don't know you, why would I have a problem with you? I just think you say some funny stuff on the web and then contradict yourself. You're not alone... a few of you apparently are "misunderstood". Frequently.

 

[Brad Johnson]

IMO (required IMO) the general gist, and MAIN POINT of that post was about the difference in price being attributed to the difference in the level of attention to detail between the budget stuff, and more expensive stuff, and that the SX OWNER can add all the attention to detail themselves as they see fit.

That's how I read the post.

That's what I was agreeing with.


At current "street prices" the Fenders are still a reasonable value IMO, but I'll be damned if I pay asking price for any mid rangeto high end bass. There's plenty of wiggle room in those prices from all the mid to high end stuff.

There's no reason you can't negotiate a better price than street price.

You ignored the heck out of a large part of it. That's why I thought it was funny that you'd say you agreed with someone's post (a blanket statement if there ever was one) when in fact you disagreed with their initial basic premise as stated and much of the rest of it while saying they were very close without noting the half you didn't agree with.

Personally I wouldn't do that. It's confusing at the least.

 

[savit260]

You ignored the heck out of a large part of it. That's why I thought it was funny that you'd say you agreed with someone's post (a blanket statement if there ever was one) when in fact you disagreed with their initial basic premise as stated and much of the rest of it while saying they were very close without noting the half you didn't agree with.

Personally I wouldn't do that. It's confusing at the least.

I probably should have been more clear on which parts I was agreeing with, but when I read that ,( I did BOLD what I considered to be the MAIN point and focus) the parts about being over priced just simply didn't register as being the "important" part of the post.

To me, IMO, etc. etc. the "important" part , and general point of that post was centered around the differences in the "attention to detail" and how that's relevent to the pricing.

I was responding quickly on my way out the door, and didn't have time to parse that particular post at the time, as I thought the point of it was pretty darned clear (at least in my mind)

You and I CLEARLY had a different interpritation of what the focus of that post was.
IMO.

At the time I posted my reply, I didn't honestly expect to get into a debate over what I consider to be a "secodary, less important" part of the post, and considering the time constraints I was under, figuered "mostly agree" would cover it.

Clearly I was wrong on that point.