Did you guys see this message from Henry

[Valeriy]

OK, I surrender! LOL ...Your are absolutely Right! I'm Wrong! I'm STUPID and just don't understand

Business 101!

...

 

Charlie Brown , you're not stupid. And even now you are quite objective as regards too large (and often, maybe, unnecessary) variety of models in Gibson guitars. I'm totally on your side.

Though in defense of Gibson I can say concerning that variety of models that it was a search, the study how to solve some problems common to electric guitars especially guitars with humbuckers that, mainly, are typical in Gibson guitars. Just this search was not entirely successful, but it is another question.

[charlie brown]

Hey, I don't have any problem with their "limited editions," like the "Tributes,"

and such. They've done things like that, for years. Special runs, etc. But,

the "Core" versions...especially those that are essentially just a "Standard,"

with a different name...IMHO, have gotten too numerous. But, Hey...that's just me!

I fully admit, my "age" probably has a lot to do with all this. I'm getting even

more "Keep it Simply, Silly," than even I used to be. And, I've always been pretty

consevative. So...???

 

CB

[Valeriy]

Well... :) , yet I read some opinions from guitar players etc, I don't think that all of them were conservative

[Valeriy]

By the way, among the said guitar players there was also Henry <_< . I mentioned earlier that in the transition to digital guitars Henry said that conventional analog pickups (or guitars, precisely I don't remember) are imperfect. Although I also believe that digital guitars is a risky direction

[milod]

I'm not all that certain that Henry is entirely wrong, although there's obviously tendency among guitar players nowadays to be pretty "conservative" in that the majority of Gibson and Fender electrics are still late 1940s and 1950s basic designs and there really aren't that many active pups compared to the how many millions and/or billions of passive magnetic pups. Acoustics kinda ditto in that most, including those with "new" AE abilities, are basically pre 1960 designs, perhaps excluding Taylor types - and some added cutaways to the older basics.

 

And... there are plenty of acoustic pickers who wouldn't have an AE if you gave it to them. Classical pickers are "worse."

 

I'm not certain I really understand that, in that I've a hunch that plenty of decent players could make great jazz on a tele and we've already seen some "country" on a classical - and except for fears of feedback, what's wrong with a flattop or archtop doing rock if you're at all creative?

 

m

[Valeriy]

Milod, I think, Henry, finally, will go back to the analog pickups (guitars) and make them more advanced, it is possible. Even it is possible to make an electric guitar, solid body, no semi-acoustic (with conventional magnetic pickups) that will be with a sound as from acoustic guitar or nearly.

[kaleb]

I'm open to the Carvin business model, but with some tweaks. Keep dealers, but have more options for one model rather than 1000000 different versions of what is essentially the same model.

 

Make just ONE Les Paul Standard, but give the customers options for different pickups, hardware, and wood choices, for example.

 

Here's another: If I want a Flying V, I should be able to choose 58' style, 67' style, 75' style, and/or 84' style, etc.

 

Henry is a GREAT businessman. I'm grateful that he saved the brand and that his skills have kept the company alive and well for over 25 years. I'm grateful that everything with the Gibson name on it is made right here in the USA. I'm grateful that Gibson continues to thrive (despite the fed raids and what-not...I actually think they're preventing Gibson from being the best they can) and is not going bankrupt or falling down in any way. I simply think more passion for the quality of the instruments should be a bigger focus than it is. I know that Henry wants more market share, and that's fine, but I say screw that! He shouldn't have to please anybody except for himself, his partners, the people that work for him, and us. Take some pointers from Hartley Peavey, who, in my opinion, is a perfect example of how to run a musical equipment business. Every dime is re-invested back into the company, not into some stockbroker's pocket.

[Valeriy]

I'm open to the Carvin business model, but with some tweaks. Keep dealers, but have more options for one model rather than 1000000 different versions of what is essentially the same model.

 

Make just ONE Les Paul Standard, but give the customers options for different pickups, hardware, and wood choices, for example.

 

 

To tell the truth, I have one development for Les Paul Standard with two humbuckers and the 3-ways switch. I also mentioned earlier that solved a problem when brightness of the sound disappears when blended sound from two humbuckers. And do not need to twist pots to catch a good sound, it appears immediately. As matter of fact, I even tried to turn to Gibson with this design, but seems, I was mistaken for a consumer, it didn't help even when I told that I continue the work of Les Paul . But I do not lose the spirit :) .

[rct]

Henry is a GREAT businessman. I'm grateful that he saved the brand and that his skills have kept the company alive and well for over 25 years. I'm grateful that everything with the Gibson name on it is made right here in the USA. I'm grateful that Gibson continues to thrive (despite the fed raids and what-not...I actually think they're preventing Gibson from being the best they can) and is not going bankrupt or falling down in any way. I simply think more passion for the quality of the instruments should be a bigger focus than it is. I know that Henry wants more market share, and that's fine, but I say screw that! He shouldn't have to please anybody except for himself, his partners, the people that work for him, and us. Take some pointers from Hartley Peavey, who, in my opinion, is a perfect example of how to run a musical equipment business. Every dime is re-invested back into the company, not into some stockbroker's pocket.

 

Both Hartley and Henry run private companies that are in business for only one reason.

 

The problem is that the "...not going bankrupt or falling down in any way..." is just too much assumption to make, because they are private companies their reporting requirements are minimal. Borrowing to finance operations has been the business plan dujour of the day for a long time, for all business. Problem with private companies is that one day they are selling Teles and the next day the doors are chained shut. When Fedner had their weird little flirt with going public some of their debt was made public, and it is sobering.

 

This business seems, to me, to have gotten quite literally to the end of its' road. I go in the store and I see either 239 dollar squiers or 4000 dollar PRSii. I just don't see how it can continue without more credit and borrowing to keep these companies going until some day when it all turns around again, but I don't see it turning around again. The whole world is different now. In 1975 I would have needed quite a few hands to count all the folks, friends, skewlchums, acquaintances I knew that got a thrill out of a beat strat or a shiny new Les Paul. Today? Well, that's why I'm in here all the time, I know hardly anyone, young or old, that loves them things I do except you mugs, or in usenet, or over in some of the other forums in the old days.

 

It seems an odd time for guitars. I hope it is me seeing it, not the thing itself. I hope Henry and these guys and whomever is running the other company can keep it up. Chris Martin is a seriously nice and down to earth guy, and I don't see him borrowing too much to keep that place going, and hopefully they can stay at it until there is more work and money for people to buy guitars with.

 

Rest of the companies I'd rather they fell off the money cliff, get back to where it should be, three American guitar companies is really about all we need.

 

rct

[GibSinCity]

Just saw this....

 

To the 4henry forum and interested people: I must apologize that I have not been active in the forum for some time. I found it difficult to keep up with it and had hoped I would get time at some point to catch up. It is clear to me that I will not be able to put the time and energy into it that you deserve.

 

I am therefore shutting down this site. I am still listening to you and I am very interested in hearing your concerns and issues. I read a report on issues that come into our customer service hotlines, and I get correspondence from you and try to respond quickly.

 

I will try to find some way that I can maintain a dialogue with you even with a busy schedule and lots of traveling.

 

I appreciate your interest, concerns and support. I and everyone at Gibson appreciate the fact that you care.

 

More to come.

 

Henry

 

 

 

Maybe he has his hands full with other business issues...

 

http://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Gibson-Guitar-Company-Reviews-E6869_P2.htm?sort.sortType=OR&sort.ascending=true

 

"I have been working at Gibson Guitar

 

Pros – The new COO is amazing. A total visionary and creative genius who will end up running the company. Hopefully sooner than later!

 

Cons – Current CEO is out of touch with the consumer, retailers, and employees. His misguided frustration trickles throughout the company and has eroded morale.

 

Advice to Senior Management – Support the COO he will lead us out of the mess that the CEO has made.

 

No, I would not recommend this company to a friend"

[MissouriPicker]

FACTS:

We do not know the future.

Gibson is making great guitars.

Henry is an easy target.

[charlie brown]

FACTS:

We do not know the future.

Gibson is making great guitars.

Henry is an easy target.

 

 

All True! I just hope they can, and will, continue making "Great Guitars!"

(Just not too many versions, of the same model! )

 

CB

[pippy]

...Make just ONE Les Paul Standard..........

 

If I want a Flying V, I should be able to choose 58' style, 67' style, 75' style, and/or 84' style, etc.

All due respect, kaleb, but frankly that's a ridiculous proposition. Even with the offer of 'options' on the former to make just ONE type of Les Paul Standard but FOUR types of Flying V?....

C'mon, be realistic.....

 

I agree that the current LP range seems excessive (there are no fewer that 105 Gibson LP models listed) but many here would prefer the Standard as it was in '57 with the ABR-1 & Stop-tail but still with the P-90s; most would probably prefer the '59 with PAFs and a 'burst over a flame-top. I happen to prefer the '60s neck profile. Some might like the simplicity of the '53 McCarty bridge. Others may like the historic nature of the 'original' Standard with trapeze tailpiece (I do). That's five.

How many types of Custom should there be? '54; '57 three-pup; '57 two-pup; '60 ditto. Any others absolutely neccesary? I don't think so, therefore counting the 2- and 3 pup versions that's another five.

Junior and Special single and double cuts. Another four with the choice of a 3/4 scale model of each for students and youngsters? Say six.

So covering the period '52 - '60 we could quite happily have 16 model variants.

Notable 'new' versions which might be considered as useful would include the DeLuxe, the Studio and Axcess. One fully 'Chambered' version would certainly be a good idea as would the current slim-body Les Paul 'Lite'.

 

So there we have twenty-one models. All, IMHO, useful and deserving of a place in the Gibson USA line-up.

 

Whilst that is a far cry from the 105 versions listed earlier it must be noted that 'only' 43 of that figure are Gibson USA; the rest are Custom Shop.

Looking it it this way the 'USA' figure is just over double my 'Basic Model' list. When we consider the USA total also includes the likes of the 'Melody Maker' LP - which isn't really a LP at all - the ratio of 'Basic' to 'Offered' becomes more reasonable still.

 

If USA were to concentrate on those 21 and let the CS do all the Signature models, 'specials' and 'customer one-off' examples we would all think everything was pretty much OK.

And in truth we're not really that far from that situation right now.

 

Just MHO.

 

P.

[milod]

I guess I'm not surprised by personality targeting of HenryJ but...

 

It does seem interesting to me the heavy emphasis on the LP in discussion. Little or nothing on acoustics and other instruments, especially the ES lines, etc.

 

Also, to me the LP Junior is a not really as much a variant of the LP as it is of the SG. Both are board guitars of different shape as opposed to a multiple layer, multiple wood species heavier instrument concept. In full disclosure, I really like the SG shape and concept and would be more likely personally to get a P90 Jr type guitar than a LP.

 

I also think "we" here are ignoring the effect of Epi on the marketplace and what I think is a better separation of price/name for Gib/Epi than Fender/Squier.

 

Remembering the bad old days quite well, I think "we" today simply don't get it that we're in a guitar glory day compared to roughly 1950-65. Yes that's when "our" electric designs burst on the scene, but today's overall quality in the guitar marketplace is so incredibly much better that there's no comparison. Even the "Walmart" guitars are better on average than a lot of less expensive "crap" available in that early time period. Even the little pink 3/4 $50 stuff can be playable, at least a coworker's 9-y-o daughter's example was.

 

m

[kaleb]

All due respect, kaleb, but frankly that's a ridiculous proposition. Even with the offer of 'options' on the former to make just ONE type of Les Paul Standard but FOUR types of Flying V?....

C'mon, be realistic.....

 

I agree that the current LP range seems excessive (there are no fewer that 105 Gibson LP models listed) but many here would prefer the Standard as it was in '57 with the ABR-1 & Stop-tail but still with the P-90s; most would probably prefer the '59 with PAFs and a 'burst over a flame-top. I happen to prefer the '60s neck profile. Some might like the simplicity of the '53 McCarty bridge. Others may like the historic nature of the 'original' Standard with trapeze tailpiece (I do). That's five.

How many types of Custom should there be? '54; '57 three-pup; '57 two-pup; '60 ditto. Any others absolutely neccesary? I don't think so, therefore counting the 2- and 3 pup versions that's another five.

Junior and Special single and double cuts. Another four with the choice of a 3/4 scale model of each for students and youngsters? Say six.

So covering the period '52 - '60 we could quite happily have 16 model variants.

Notable 'new' versions which might be considered as useful would include the DeLuxe, the Studio and Axcess. One fully 'Chambered' version would certainly be a good idea as would the current slim-body Les Paul 'Lite'.

 

So there we have twenty-one models. All, IMHO, useful and deserving of a place in the Gibson USA line-up.

 

Whilst that is a far cry from the 105 versions listed earlier it must be noted that 'only' 43 of that figure are Gibson USA; the rest are Custom Shop.

Looking it it this way the 'USA' figure is just over double my 'Basic Model' list. When we consider the USA total also includes the likes of the 'Melody Maker' LP - which isn't really a LP at all - the ratio of 'Basic' to 'Offered' becomes more reasonable still.

 

If USA were to concentrate on those 21 and let the CS do all the Signature models, 'specials' and 'customer one-off' examples we would all think everything was pretty much OK.

And in truth we're not really that far from that situation right now.

 

Just MHO.

 

P.

 

I didn't mean 4 different V models. The "styles" I was talking about are options. One Flying V model, choose the style you want, choose pickups, hardware, etc, and we're good to go.