• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

What would YOU do to save Gibson?

#241
gjohnson441496 said:
That was my point. Gibson has a bunch of guitars with various names that look alike. Fender has a bunch of guitars with various names that look alike. The difference is that fender has bass guitars that bass players like, whereas Gibson has bass guitars that most bass players don't like. Also, Fender's price range to quality has sustained it, whereas Gibson's price range is inflexible. Given the choice between a $3000 Les Paul or an Epiphone, your average consumer will buy the Epiphone, or a Fender/PRS/Gretsch etc., and in some cases (PRS excluded) at the same cost but superior to the Epiphone. Or, they'll buy that same $3000 LP used from Craigslist. That $3000 Gibson LP doesn't have a much cheaper option, but at least with Fender there's gradual steps in price without having to go to the Squier brand. MIA, MIM, Elite, Standard, Special are all branded Fender as opposed to Gibson/Epiphone.

For the record, I'm not knocking Epiphone or Squier. I'm looking at it from a consumer POV.
Click to expand...

First off, it's a shame if they do go under. I've worked for several companies and when morale is bad, like someone else mentioned, things go downhill fast. Service goes, quality goes, and the corporate big wigs wonder why since they cut payroll or benefits why morale is bad. On paper it should have been a good thing for their bonuses, but they don't understand how important the front-line employees are.

I agree with this quote above. Maybe this is one of the reasons they are going into the crapper. My guitarist friends would never buy an Epiphone, but have no problems playing a MIM Fender or a non-US made PRS. Weird. I'm not a Gibson bass player, but if I had the cash I'd buy some of those Alex Lifeson model guitars.

It seems like they're too spread out with their fingers in too many pies. What to do to save Gibson? Maybe sell off some of the other non-Gibson guitar brands for starters and focus on making stringed instruments again. Look at Taylor. They seem to be doing this right.

Here's something interesting, I don't know if anyone else mentioned:

From Wikipedia: Although it is well known for its guitars, Gibson's largest business is in fact electronics. Gibson offers consumer audio equipment devices through its subsidiaries [Invalid or Expired Link Removed] (Philips brand), Onkyo Corporation(Onkyo and Pioneer brands), TEAC Corporation (Teac and Esoteric brands), Cerwin Vega and Stanton,[6] as well as professional audio equipment from KRK Systems and TEAC Corporation/TASCAM and music software from Cakewalk.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mikewalker
#242
I gotta say that back in the day there was a HUGE difference between a Silvertone and a Fender. Now, check out a samick or pretty much anything on Rondomusic and compare it to the most expensive basses you can find with similar features. What you'll find is the main difference is the quality of the wood or other "artistic" touches. And when you compare a Mike Lull to an SX, sure, the Lull is better, but not in the same way that a Rolls or Porsche is better than a Kia. That's a problem when your customers are poor enough to care how much the bass actually costs. And that's most of them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gjohnson441496, mikewalker, troy mcclure and 1 other person
#245
I suspect dealer relations were also a key factor. I remember 10-12 years ago, when I was buying a crapload of Fenders from the nearest Gibson dealer in Hagerstown, Md., how the mom-and-pop owners complained about the newly-ridiculous amount of inventory Gibson was demanding that dealers carry. For those guys it was either $250K or $500K annually, can’t remember which.

But even for a guy who was the only Gibson dealer in (an admittedly rural) tri-state area, that was a lot. So much that he soon (this was right before the 2007 crash) couldn’t sustain those kind of sales and lost his license.

That was the last time I was able to inspect a Gibson outside of a Guitar Center. And I have always hated going to Guitar Center. And maybe I’m wrong about this, but I imagine that many people who don’t hate going to Guitar Center can’t swing $3,000 instruments. And maybe lots of those who can, who might even be inclined, would never buy one sight unseen.

As for the rest, you guys already covered it. As a bass player I’m perfectly content with two American Fender guitars, a Strat and a Tele. If I ever want humbuckers I’ll get an Epiphone or a PRS SE.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mikewalker
#246
Expand their QA/QC department. There are too many guitars making it to market with misaligned hardware, and finish issues.

Update their construction to where they actually use a scarf joint and a volute so head stocks don't break off by breathing on them too hard.

Align the price with the quality, by either increasing the quality of the guitars to match the price or lower the price to match the guitars.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ThinCrappyTone
#247
Eric Swaim said:
Absolutely nothing. They are not too big to fail, regardless of their tradition in the music industry. Sometimes the ship sinks and we should just leave it.
Click to expand...
I'm reminded of a guy who made custom pickup canopy's for pickups back in the early 1990's. They were wood framed and aluminum skinned, like a camper, and came in all sorts of sizes and colors. But I looked at them and their cost, and looked at the fiberglass pickup canopy's that were significantly sleeker and far cheaper, as well as far lighter.

Sure, he was still selling them but I saw it as a clear example of a business that survived beyond its time. More and more, his only customers were the "old school" canopy people. They're all dead now, or in retirement homes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mikewalker
#250
Hopkins said:
Update their construction to where they actually use a scarf joint and a volute so head stocks don't break off by breathing on them too hard.
Click to expand...

Quoted for truth. Outdated construction methods have only damaged their precious reputation. It’s so easily fixable, so why don’t they? :rollno:
 
#251
twocargar said:
First off, it's a shame if they do go under. I've worked for several companies and when morale is bad, like someone else mentioned, things go downhill fast. Service goes, quality goes, and the corporate big wigs wonder why since they cut payroll or benefits why morale is bad. On paper it should have been a good thing for their bonuses, but they don't understand how important the front-line employees are.

I agree with this quote above. Maybe this is one of the reasons they are going into the crapper. My guitarist friends would never buy an Epiphone, but have no problems playing a MIM Fender or a non-US made PRS. Weird. I'm not a Gibson bass player, but if I had the cash I'd buy some of those Alex Lifeson model guitars.

It seems like they're too spread out with their fingers in too many pies. What to do to save Gibson? Maybe sell off some of the other non-Gibson guitar brands for starters and focus on making stringed instruments again. Look at Taylor. They seem to be doing this right.

Here's something interesting, I don't know if anyone else mentioned:

From Wikipedia: Although it is well known for its guitars, Gibson's largest business is in fact electronics. Gibson offers consumer audio equipment devices through its subsidiaries [Invalid or Expired Link Removed] (Philips brand), Onkyo Corporation(Onkyo and Pioneer brands), TEAC Corporation (Teac and Esoteric brands), Cerwin Vega and Stanton,[6] as well as professional audio equipment from KRK Systems and TEAC Corporation/TASCAM and music software from Cakewalk.
Click to expand...

Wow. I didn't know they had their fingers in so many pies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: physics
#252
They should train the entire production team on Total Quality Management, and then make all necessary adjustments in people, processes and equipment in order to ensure that only quality merchandise gets shipped.

I bought my first Gibson ever in 2016, a beautiful new Les Paul Standard. I had to try out at least a dozen of them across four dealers to find one that was made well enough to buy at any price. And the one I bought is definitely not perfect, it has some of the same minor cosmetic flaws that many of the others had. But at least they are only minor cosmetic flaws (such as the plastic cavity covers aren't exactly the same shape as the holes they fit into, or aren't centered, so there are gaps around the edges.) The instrument itself is a wonderful instrument, it plays and sounds great. But at that price, ALL of them should have been wonderful, and as I said, none of the others were worthy of buying. (I do have to admit I have high standards. But I'm the customer, so I'm allowed to.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: mikewalker
#255
I'm okay with whatever the free market determines their fate to be, but I have no animosity towards Gibson or any of their employess - including the management. When they make a product I want, I'll buy it. That's how it's supposed to work.
 
#256
ZenG said:
Surgically remove Epiphone from Gibson and let it stand as an independent company with a new CEO.

Sell the rest of Gibson to Fender....where it will it be systematically disassembled and fade into obscurity.
Click to expand...

This isn't really fair. You can still buy a Jackson, Guild and Gretsch drums. Can you say the same about Oberheim, Trace Elliot (now at Peavey) or Tobias? Yes I know about MTD but for years, Henry doggedly refused to let Mike T. use his own name even after the non-compete clause ran out and Gibson wasn't producing Tobias product. But I get it; this is a bass forum and you guys particularly feel the loss of SWR and GB. The point is that Gibson is no saint on this point either.
 
#259
Paulabass said:
How NOT to save your company- The Les Paul LPJ. In an attempt to make a Les Paul for $770 they created a guitar so bad that it poisoned the name, even among very young buyers.
It was almost unsanded, they finished by rubbing it with a poodle turd. Frets were simply snipped off at both ends, and left unfinished.
A hundred and something years of reputation gone overnight in a vain attempt to lower prices at the cost of quality/prestige/playability.
Most common comment from potential buyers- Is it supposed to be so rough?
By the way- This is not sour grapes, I own over 30 Gibson guitars, including a Murphy, and about ten other CS's.
Click to expand...

Finishing is very expensive in the USA... but isn’t it better as you say not to offer a guitar at that price point than one that is poorly finished? Fender launched the Highway One line in the early 2000’s did a fairly good in offering “Made in US” claim build at a lower that American deluxe prices ... I think the necks were made in Mexico and assembled in US and the bodies were satin. I have. P bass of that era and it’s great.
 
#260
shortscalesrule said:
I did my part for Gibson by buying a Memphis Les Paul Bass, which of course had to be a whole lot below the street price before I could swing it (not to mention the MSRP--does anyone actually pay that?). I like the bass very much and it came with a good quality case, as an instrument at this price point should.
I suggest a campaign to draft Paul Allen (he who bankrolled the Music Experience thing in Seattle) for new CEO. He's got $$,$$$,$$$, he knows how to run a company, and he likes guitars.
Click to expand...
That's actually a really good idea. I wonder if anybody knows Paul Allen and can mention it to him.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back