What would YOU do to save Gibson?

[Marc DLarosa]

Leave My Tobias alone!!!

 

[-Asdfgh-]

Sad to see Gibson where they are at the moment, but I'm sure they will pull through.

A novel idea, and it is novel because I have no business sense, would be to pull most models. Made a Studio and Standard Les Paul, ES-355, SG, Firebird (maybe), Thunderbird and EB/SG bass. Produce a few seasonal models, such as an LP Junior, but keep a close eye on how these sell. Pick up the phone to as many dealers and find out what is actually going out the door, versus what is sitting on a stand for 4-5 years.

For all that people complain about Gibson's pricing, their budget stuff is currently fairly nasty. The Firebird Zero looked like a badly assembled kit guitar, and I don't personally like the faded/satin stuff either. A finish that looks like it comes off on your jeans? Eh nah!

Push the outlandish stuff onto Epiphone, but again keep a closer eye on what is out there. Gibson have two destinct market areas for their guitars; orthodox blues/rock/jazz guys and metal guys. They've been letting the metal guys down, really. Modern metal guitarists are moving towards designs like Strandberg (headless, multi-scale fanned fret stuff) and 7 strings are fairly common as a whole. Gibson's stab at metal instruments seem to be either aimed at the long-dead Nu Metal genre or clumsy in general.

Finally, look at what Eastwood do! They will build a short run of extinct historic instrument designs if people back it first. Gibson could run Kickstarters for extinct designs. No point in reissuing a 1964 Thunderbird II bass in Pelham Blue perhaps, but there is a stronger argument for doing so if you have 200 backers with cash up front. Cut out the dealer and engage more directly with your customer this way. Relatively low-risk, as you get an idea of what will be popular and what wont. Dealers may never ask for an EB-2D reissue, but 250 guys off forums might want them. Maybe you only need thirty backers? Who knows!

I suspect morale is low, explaining some of the quality control issues.

 

[physics]

That's like 1 trillion Gibsons for every person on earth.

That just might be enough sales to get them out of the hole they're in.

 

[-Asdfgh-]

I remember when the wife and I visited Gibson, while in Nashville... lots of expensive guitars, hanging...

... that's all I got out of it.

I'd lower prices...

Lowering prices might mean more automation and fewer staff unless overall Gibson operations can result in costs per guitar similar to those of Asian imports. By overall I mean building Gibson's fgir $1500, and onshoring Epiphone at around $500. Maybe a lower tier too, and around $175, offshore. Onshoring Epiphone might then keep employment numbers up.

All that would need a massive capital injection, and that's pretty unlikely in most buy out scenarios. More likely would be Cort making Gibson Tribute or something, with only a very few left in the USA making Gibson Heritage.

 

[physics]

Take all the engineers sitting around designing robotuners and have them figure out why single cutaway guitars with haphazardly positioned afterthought strap buttons result in neck dive. Hint, free body diagram.

Some of those engineers who can't do free-body diagrams might have been students of mine who had a hard time understanding the concept.

 

[Marley's Ghost]

They are using the media to posture so the bankers are under more pressure to come up with favorable terms for debt restructure. The company is making money, the debt is the problem.

 

[leonard]

I would make the Epiphone Casady bass under the Gibson brand in the USA.

 

[ThinCrappyTone]

Cort making Gibson Tribute or something, with only a very few left in the USA making Gibson Heritage.

This is interesting... It's easy to picture Gibson getting bought out by some giant Asian conglomerate, and then building most of their stuff overseas, with only high end or custom shop models being made in the US. But that would really confuse things with Epiphone. I wonder how that could be handled to make it work.

 

[40Hz]

As it stands right now, Gibson absolutely need to do two things immediately: get its debt restructured; and get a new CEO.

One thing is fairly certain. Mr. Juszkiewicz won’t be around much longer. Either Gibson (a) will shut down and that will be that; or (b) it will remain open but Mr. Juszkiewicz will have to relinquish his position and the lion’s portion of his shares as a condition of getting Gibson’s debt restructured; or, (c) it will shut down but then reopen post-bankruptcy under entirely new ownership and management.

I give Gibson slightly better odds than 50/50 of remaining in business. And if it does you’ll see a significant portion of Gibson’s manufacturing operation moved outside the USA. (Although I suspect it’ll all move elsewhere eventually no matter what.)

I give Henry Juszkiewicz a zero chance of surviving this fiasco.

 

[LAST_C]

To me, they need to lower their price in order to sell more units and increase cash flow.

Also, QC is a BIG issue. A friend of mine bought a Gibson Les Paul (I think he paid around 3k for it) and had to return it twice because of factory defects. That affects the brand name and the trust people have in the company.

Also, why would I buy a Gibson Thunderbird for 2k, when I can get an Epiphone with similar construction and electronics for $549.00?

It's true that for the professional musician there's no comparison between the two. (maybe?) but for the average Joe, or the semi-pro that only gigs 3-4 times a month, (like me) $1,500 is a huge difference.

Nothing new on this post, I'm mostly agreeing with most folks have said here.

 

[J-Bassomatic]

Offer a rebate on headstock repair?

 

[TinIndian]

Henry has to go, 1st and foremost.
Divest itself of anything that is not about building quality instruments.
Fix all Quality issues.
Get a core group of products and learn how to do them well and efficiently.
Stop trying to sell your customers things they do not want, unless offered as an option.
Put a realistic pricing structure in place so you can compete head to head with Fender.
Stop running your plant like a sweat shop.

 

[dukeorock]

I would think most would find it sad that any American company that lasted over 100 years would go under. It’s just a sad thing.

 

[Mosfed]

You do realize Gibson BOUGHT and acquired Guitar Center back in 2015 I believe, another thing they do poorly.

Say what? Where do people come up with this stuff?

 

[mdlewis]

They are using the media to posture so the bankers are under more pressure to come up with favorable terms for debt restructure. The company is making money, the debt is the problem.

Thanks, Mr. Ghost for nailing this. Interest rates are headed up for a variety of reasons which will make debt more expensive for those are severely leveraged.

My guess is that the changing demographics that have been exhaustively beaten to death on this board coupled with the increased competition plus their debt have made their existing model tenuous. I don't know which line generates most of their profit, but I can tell you that I know many older folks who have never seriously played go and out and drop several grand on a LP just because they now can. They have money but this is a limited market - like we used to say 10 years ago - the average age of a Cadillac owner is deceased. They need to build new markets by providing them with what those markets want - as for as TalkBass is concerned that seems to be better quality, lower prices, more lefties, more Thunderbirds and maybe even a tort pickguard option? As near as I can tell, my generation's favorable opinion of Gibson has not uniformly transferred to the kids.

While I feel for the employees, there are few options for such a mismanaged company that don't involve a lot of personnel disruptions. I say let the company die. As for me, I'd sell off parts of the company, simplify and make it smaller focusing on sustainable markets that I know something about. I'm sure that someone in the bluegrass area would be interested in buying the remnants and resurrect a company that would actually do the name proud.

 

[Andy Daventry]

I'd like an EB2.

Yeah, I know.....

 

[BOOG]

With all due respect, it's only a crime if you allow the nostalgic aspect to infiltrate your mind that strongly.
Almost everything evolves animals, plants, your living environment and yes music with that fashion associated with it...It evolves.

IMHO both Fender and Gibson have become cartoons of themselves to some degree.

You can a higher quality USA made instrument for the same price of a Les Paul, that are in the same vien as a LS.

Go to NAMM and look at all the new builders coming.

I appreciate what these companies have done but...

It's time...

I don't disagree with you but, like it or not, nostalgia is a big part of the industry.
Note: I am not a professional musician so, our perspectives are different. However, I respect your opinion and perspective and I believe it is very relevant and your points are valid.
I for one would hate to see either of the "big two" go down the tubes. There's a lot of history in Fender and Gibson and their early days of easily accessible distribution has contributed to more musicians and more music over the past half century or better. So, yes, it does infiltrate my mind and hundreds of thousands of others whether admitted or not.
Again, our perspectives are rightfully different and I think yours is the one that the manufacturer needs to strongly consider for their own future.
But, what do I know...?

 

[howlin]

Sell the guitar division to Fender and laugh my a$$ off all the way to the bank while all the purists fall into a DEEP collective funk and bemoan “the good ole days!” into eternity as if any of this really matters...

 

[buldog5151bass]

Fewer models, fewer options, better quality. If people want "Gibson" on the headstock, they already know what they want.

Get an office on the 11th floor with a window that opens. If anyone suggests something like the auto tune headstock, ask them to open said window, and push.

 

[Marc DLarosa]