What would YOU do to save Gibson?

[A. D. Fairhurst]

Reissue the classic designs at a sensible price (ie: Ripper, 60s Thunderbird) with headstock reinforcements, better QC and prices on par with Fender.

 

[Jeff Scott]

The wrong Henry is running the company. This Henry would have been a better CEO. Doesn't hurt that he had the right last name, too.

 

[40Hz]

In a nutshell, I think the quote below sums up how Gibson got into the problems it’s in: a CEO who disagreed with everything its customer base wants and instead decided to pursue his own personal conviction that what the customers wants is wrong and needs to change.

This from an interview with Billboard:

[The industry is] stuck in a time warp, and the 'purists' have a very loud voice on the online forums. If you are a kid today, you have an iPad by the age of two, and if you're not offering new technology you're old. Kids today may think some music from the 50s is kind of cool here and there, but what other industry do you know that hasn't changed since the 50s? Those guitars from the 50s are what the purists want, but we have to have something new and exciting. Imagine if the camera had never changed. Innovation is a part of every business to some degree, but [the guitar industry] hates it. The kids demand it, and if you don't have it, they walk.

I think it’s funny how he fixates on the 50s when guitar really started only started getting über-popular in the mid to late 60s, and the period from around 1967 into the pre-MTV 80s was the actual era of the “guitar gods.”

The man obviously isn’t too up on the market and its history, nor does he care very much what it wants. He’s looking for something he can put his own name on for posterity. And if that means destroying his company trying to achieve that is what it’ll come down to, then so be it.

 

[Eyetalic]

- Hang Henry in the parking lot.
- Recall every new model since 1962
- Public apology for the Dusk Tiger, Firebird X, and every bass since the Thunderbird.
- Make one core line of Gibson classic designs and do not ever change them.
- Make all American males wear a t-shirt that says 'an Epiphone is not just as good as a Gibson'.
- Put a poster in the R&D dept. that says- Firebirds...long horn points DOWN.
- Did I say hang Henry Juszkiewicz?

I was going to comment, but you said everything and a little more.

 

[Johnny Znuff]

I would have Epiphone make Epiphones, only. Create a Gibson import variety with the proper headstock. Sell (import) Les Pauls for under a thousand. Continue to manufacture a line of American-made “classics” at higher price points... Try new ideas/ models on the import line.

 

[selowitch]

I would have Epiphone make Epiphones, only. Create a Gibson import variety with the proper headstock. Sell (import) Les Pauls for under a thousand. Continue to manufacture a line of American-made “classics” at higher price points... Try new ideas/ models on the import line.

In other words, become more like Fender.

 

[Wildcatter63]

Fire that damn egotistical idiot of a CEO. THEN kick the quality control up to where it should be for a brand that revived, as in as good as the custom shop needs to be company/line wide. (Not the Custom Line, the SHOP where the real specialty work for the likes of Slash get made so there are NO ISSUES when the guitar leaves the factory. PERIOD) While that is being implemented cut down on the number of product lines until it's down to what can be made perfect when it goes out that door. Don't add/re-open lines until then. Cut the number of "Les Paul" lines/products to something understandable and consistent so a classic one year is the same product the next. And put a rational tier-based pricing policy, some studio's costing more than some of the standards is nuts. Stop this making a Les Paul for every conceivable sub-market. Amazon and Wallmart do not need their own product lines with crap products at crap product price points so they can claim to have Les Pauls...

 

[ubermiguel]

1. Diversify. Henry’s been doing this, but poorly. The future is in DJ, producing and electronic music. Go there.
2. Improve quality. Those top-line guitars must be flawless. LPs, 335s, 175s, SGs. Raise prices if need be to do it.
3. Fix engineering issues. The headstock joint for one. The headstock angle for another.
4. Create a modest-price Gibson line. The money is in the masses. Gibson needs market where here. Nope, not Epiphone, Gibson. Make them in Korea, Mexico or Indonesia. Fender, PRS and Ibanez do this well. That Gibson brand has value, more than Epiphone; milk it.
5. Create new guitars. Not the stupid designs they seem to come up with, but 7- and 8-string electric guitars. They’ve got nothing in this space. Maybe basses, too — maybe.
6. Streamline the brand. Clear out the redundant versions.
7. Let Epiphone be Epiphone. They’ve had success here — the Jack Cassidy bass, the Wilshire guitar. Pare down the Gibson copies, and move those sales to a higher-priced Gibson import. Similarly, recapture the heratige of Tobias and Kramer and make them compete in the market.
8. Create a guitar music association. With Fender, PRS, Music Man, Ibanez and others, promote live and recorded guitar music.
9. Film, TV and cable product placement. Sponsor cool characters that play the guitar.
10. Sell direct. Double the margins and stop financing Guitar Center’s debt. Maybe open Gibson stores (like the Apple Store and the Nike Store).

Long time lurker on TalkBass here, logging in for the first time in years to give props to this comment, so many good ideas. My thoughts (echoing so man good ideas in the post):

(1) Quality control, quality control, quality control.
(2) Gibson must focus on (e.g.: only make) the core lines: Les Paul, SG, ES-355; but make them excellent, make them affordable, don't be afraid to make them overseas. If the quality is top notch people will care less about where they are made (seriously, has anyone played a PRS SE model? they are amazing for the price)
(3) Let Epiphone make anything instrument related except knock-offs of the core Gibson models. Experiment here but keep it affordable with solid QC. Analog keyboard? Give it a shot. Low wattage Skylark amp? Go for it. Interesting pedal. Do it.
(4) Re-establish strong artist relationships. The artists must become a core part of R&D and Custom Shop. Keep the Custom Shop in the USA (for the people that care about such things). The Custom Shop can make limited prestige models per year, but their key is making innovative instruments the best artists want. Innovations for two years are Custom Shop exclusive, after that Gibson can incorporate and try the mass market, two years after that Epiphone gets a shot on the innovations.
(5) Pump up International Artist relations; the growing markets are in Asia and India.
(6) I'm not sure about acoustic instruments, is it what Gibson does best? If not, drop them (for now).

 

[seamus bass]

Find another lester Paul, exploit, profit

 

[selowitch]

(6) I'm not sure about acoustic instruments, is it what Gibson does best? If not, drop them (for now).

I believe acoustic guitar sales are currently overtaking electric guitar sales.

 

[Eyetalic]

I was going to comment, but you said everything and a little more.

I think they've gotten way over priced. These are not violins or acoustic guitars that require careful design and construction, as well as materials to make an amazing instrument. On the electric solid bodies, the design is done and the parts are made by machine. The only things separating the Epiphones from the real thing are better materials and better tolerances. A Martin acoustic is worth $1500. An electric guitar/bass? Meh, $700. Maybe.

 

[ctmullins]

I appreciate and agree with all of the comments regarding increased quality control. But that’s easier said than done. If the QC issues are a result of poor employee morale (i.e., sloppy workmanship from dissatisfied workers), then that’s a company culture issue that will take time to fix. Or perhaps not so much time, if (as is asserted elsewhere in this thread) the root of the morale problem is Henry J himself. Most people who show up for a job want to do that job well, provided they have a pleasant and supportive workplace. Happy cows make the best milk...

If the QC issues are a result of antiquated or deficient manufacturing methods, then that too will take time to rectify. Hopefully they have people who understand Lean/Six Sigma/TQM methodologies and how to run Performance Improvement projects. I am involved in PI where I work, and rarely is there a silver bullet. Underlying causes of quality problems have to be first systematically identified, then remedied, with a plan in place to prevent reversion later. And that doesn’t come for free.

 

[Eyetalic]

In other words, become more like Fender.

I keep reading things where people use their fender squiers over expensive models because they sound the same, play just as well, and there's less risk of loss when gigging...

 

[selowitch]

I keep reading things where people use their fender squiers over expensive models because they sound the same, play just as well, and there's less risk of loss when gigging...

Yup. Makes sense to me. Especially the CV and VM models, which look, feel, play, and sound great!

 

[Mike Z]

What would you do if you had the wheel? Hypothetically, if you had the power to do anything to the company that you wanted to, what would you do to right the ship, save the day, and bring Gibson back to their former glory?

1. Stop blaming the music stores and look at yourself. If it was the music stores, you would see Fender, Yamaha, etc. saying the same thing.
2. Ensure a high quality instrument is made and shipped. Letting poor quality out the door of the factory is very detrimental to sales.
3. For God's sake, lower the price of your instruments.
4. Cut down the number of Les Pauls you make which will lower manufacturing costs and stop confusing customers with so many offerings. Look at Apple, they don't sell iphones in the number of combinations (model and colors).
5. Your corporate executives have screwed Gibson with all the debt financing. That tanks more large companies than most other things.
6. Rethink your business model. It is obviously not working.
7. Stop Whining, take ownership and blame of how you have let it come to this, and take control of the situation.

 

[praxiscat]

First off fender is not in the same position as gibson. They paid off half their debt, and have $100 million. They are healthy these days because the acoustic market and uke market is healthy. As is the amp and PA market. Fender is on the low and mid end of the acoustic market, so they are in much better shape there. Gibson really isn't competitive there at all, they are the ones selling neon green acoustics for $3k (no joke), and many of their acoustics are out of date with current trends. Most acoustic players are younger women, and they are selling $6k jumbo bodies. Their electric market is finally finding feet again. People are playing instruments again, including young people. Fender does a good job to follow the market and got better at doing market research. They stuck close to their core business of modern musical instruments and are healthier as a result.
But this is only part of the problem. Gibson's big issue goes beyond electric guitars. They got into consumer electronics in a major way and loaded up on debt. We can talk about gibsons quality assurance forever, or its engineering problems, but their biggest issue is a management one.
I should note, gibson is largely a boomer brand. While some non-boomers play them, most of us think of them as expensive and fragile guitars with questionable quality. As I got older with more money and more dedication, I also found other brands do the same things that cost less and have better quality. There is also the used market. I think fender does a good job at keeping the price of new instruments in reach even for their Americans. Gibson for some of their most basic instruments are completely out of reach. Nearly $5k for an ES-175 for example, which is supposed to be a working person's laminate jazzbox. But again these issues are nothing compared to the consumer electronics and management issues.

 

[selowitch]

Guitar is my secondary instrument behind bass. I wouldn't even consider a Gibson guitar at any price. It's PRS or Fender for me, all the way. Lately I've really been impressed by the import PRSes in the $500-$1,000 range. Really nice stuff.

 

[NOLA bass55]

I found this video interesting; Gibson viewed from a business perspective: .
Two things that stood out to me: 1. Gibson's crazy financing, they sell bonds rather than get bank loans. 2. Gibson no longer considers themselves as a guitar company but rather a lifestyle company. I also agree they should 'be more like Fender'.

 

[praxiscat]

In other words, become more like Fender.

Also improve quality, like fender. But yeah, gibson needs to be more like fender. There is no middle rung for gibson the same way fender has with MIM guitars. Which are really popular with musicians. The MIA became aspiration, and fender even kept many of those within economic reach (1.5k give or take). They also bother to do market research rather than making assumptions. Found out half the guitar market is women, who play acoustics largely, went more into acoustics as a result, updated the line too to be competitive.
Either way fender right now paid off half their debt and is on the verge of paying it all off. Gibson is on the verge of bankruptcy. The difference is business decisions. Fender decided to do market research in their core business, and improve quality control, and gibson decided to buy a bunch of consumer electronics brands that have been poorly managed and have struggled. They are in two different places as a result.

 

[NOLA bass55]

I would do nothing. I play Fenders.

LMAO me too, But I love razing Gibson players for not playing Fenders. If Gibson dies so does some of my fun.