Rabs Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 https://www.musicradar.com/news/fender-ceo-andy-mooney-gibsons-travails-are-all-of-their-own-making Fender CEO Andy Mooney has stated that fellow guitar giant Gibson, which faces the imminent prospect of bankruptcy, brought about its own financial troubles - and Gibson CEO Henry Juszkiewicz agrees. In an interview with Forbes, Fender’s head honcho stated, “We've been growing at a faster pace than the industry and enjoying that growth. Gibson’s travails are all of their own making; it’s nothing to do with the state of the industry.” And Juszkiewicz has taken responsibility for those mistakes, telling the New York Times his plan to transform Gibson into a music lifestyle company “wasn’t a great decision… It didn’t work out very well. I think it was a rational decision, but it turned out to be a very poor decision, and it’s a decision I made. "It is what it is.” Gibson CEO Henry Juszkiewicz: “Guitars from the ’50s are what the purists want, but we have to have something new and exciting” That said, the Gibson CEO was also quick to defend the company’s love-it-or-hate-it robot tuners, which he dubbed a “great technology”, thwarted when “the trolls took over the dialogue” - despite admitting, “My regret is we probably pushed a little too fast.” While Fender generated $500 million of revenue in 2017, Gibson is currently buckling under $520 million in debt, due in July 2018. Juszkiewicz continues, “It is accurate to say bankruptcy is a possibility in the sense that our bonds expire,” noting he may “have to pass the baton to someone who also has that dream.” “Part of this is evaluating financing options, and I have to look at what is best for the company, all of the stakeholders and myself.” In contrast, the secret to Fender’s success seems to be partly down to the launch of online learning platform Fender Play, which aims to encourage young guitarists, led by the statistic that 45% of all Fender guitars sold go to first-time players. Given Gibson’s top-dollar price tags (Juszkiewicz once told us, “I don't think our consumer actually wants an inexpensive Gibson”), the needs of the beginner may be something the company wishes to consider in its future plans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pin Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 https://www.musicradar.com/news/fender-ceo-andy-mooney-gibsons-travails-are-all-of-their-own-making Fender CEO Andy Mooney has stated that fellow guitar giant Gibson, which faces the imminent prospect of bankruptcy, brought about its own financial troubles - and Gibson CEO Henry Juszkiewicz agrees. That said, the Gibson CEO was also quick to defend the company’s love-it-or-hate-it robot tuners, which he dubbed a “great technology”, thwarted when “the trolls took over the dialogue” - despite admitting, “My regret is we probably pushed a little too fast.” So I'm a troll am I? Long live trolls! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merciful-evans Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 https://www.musicradar.com/news/fender-ceo-andy-mooney-gibsons-travails-are-all-of-their-own-making Gibson CEO Henry Juszkiewicz: “Guitars from the ’50s are what the purists want, but we have to have something new and exciting” That said, the Gibson CEO was also quick to defend the company’s love-it-or-hate-it robot tuners, which he dubbed a “great technology”, thwarted when “the trolls took over the dialogue” - despite admitting, “My regret is we probably pushed a little too fast.” He has no business using the word trolls, but he's right about needing something new and about pushing too fast. Gibson must continue to innovate as most of the diehard 1959 club could be gone within 10 years. In contrast, the secret to Fender’s success seems to be partly down to the launch of online learning platform Fender Play, which aims to encourage young guitarists, led by the statistic that 45% of all Fender guitars sold go to first-time players. Good marketing by Fender. But how many from that 45% will be buying another one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Farnsbarns Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 I think Henrey is under a lot of pressure and there may be an element of lashing out in this. Calling customers who don't like his robot tuners trolls makes no sense. The correct thing to do is offer those customers an option, which he's done, so that's that really. All good. I think this is the telling quote... Gibson CEO Henry Juszkiewicz: “Guitars from the ’50s are what the purists want, but we have to have something new and exciting” What you have to do is provide what customers want, at a price they're willing to pay. Again, I recognise that he has done that so again, great. This issue is clearly that Gibson has tried to transform itself into a consumer electronics company and done that by buying up failing brands with the hope of turning them around. Perhaps the end plan was to absorb the facilities and expertise and end up selling Gibson branded TEAC, etc, goods. Gibson must now dispose of the brand's it bought, even if that means accepting a loss, and concentrate on guitars (both modern and traditional). People talk about this as if it's specific to guitars and some great mystery. It's not. Some people like old, low ceilinged, thatched cottages and stay in that market when house hunting. Some people like classic cars and stay in that market. Some people like old fashioned guitars and, surprise surprise, that's what they buy. There are still those who want carbon composite, robot tuning, Bluetooth, enter any other new tech, guitars and as long as Gibson address the profitable areas of the market, producing desirable product for those areas, at a cost which is profitable and with a price point the market will bare, they're fine. The company is far from finished although Henry's stint as CEO might be over if the bonds are a big enough problem. It's interesting to note Henry accepting the decisions were bad, although he qualifies by adding that he thinks they were rational (I disagree as it happens but hindsight is 20:20 *more). Perhaps he's trying to engraciate himself with the bond holders in an attempt to remain as CEO. *. Why do I think the consumer electronics brand vision was not rational... Gibson was a stable and profitable guitar manufacturer. It wasn't broken. The brand's Gibson purchased were far from prime. Not a cultural or brand fit with what Gibson is. Consumer audio gear has become a fashion industry. It's nearly all crap, poor quality product with a trendy label on it (think beats, skull candy, etc) Has anyone seen anything which looks even vaguely like a change in direction within the brand's Gibson purchased? Has TEAC been repositioning itself in the market as a high end product? I don't see it. Actually, I have not encountered the brand in any way except when reading about Gibson. I've seen no promotion. No innovation, not even a presence. Guitar players are not strange. They're quite normal. They are a mixed bag. Some want A, B and C while others want X, Y and Z. What's strange is the 90% of the population who want some terrible headphones, regardless of the terribleness, blind, even, to the terribleness, as long as they have that B on the side. Guitar players are, by that comparison, a particularly educated market who seem to make largely rational buying decisions. I would like a robot tuning guitar. Not as much as I like a reissue Les Paul. I can not afford both and I can tune a guitar myself so it's a no brainer. Perhaps Gibson should be selling after market robot tuners I could buy and bolt into one of my cheaper beaters but they down own the technology so they can't. Gibson went into debt to make those purchases, giving the creditors leverage. This situation couldn't exist without that leverage being handed over. There were other obvious choices for diversification than consumer audio equipment. Choices which would have been closer to the core of Gibson's brand. Studio audio equipment,mixers, monitors, microphones, multi tracks, amplifiers. Keep it closer to guitars and musicians who know the brand. After a few years that will expand the horizons and you could then take a next logical step into consumer electronics but there needed to be a stepping stone to that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fortyearspickn Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 It's encouraging to see our English brethren are still concerned with Gibson's future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Farnsbarns Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 There's another point to be made about robot tuners. Let's pretend, for a moment, they could only do standard tuning. What would that do to the market size? It would shrink. Clearly as a lazyness tool it's not worth the money to the vast majority of people. Having established that let's think about alternate tunings and changing on the fly. How many guitar players use alternate tunings? I'd hazard a guess at less than one percent. You could argue that that has been driven by the difficulty which robot tuners overcome but... That makes robot tuning a slow growth market. Very slow growth. You're waiting for players who use multiple tunings to grow of the back of the availability of the tech. Then there's the real world applications. Of the very few guitarists who use alternate tunings the vast majority will do so for slide. They want that guitar set up differently. They need 2 guitars anyway. We've just lost a huge chunk of the tiny market. Then there is the flaw which seems needlessly present in all robot tuners. They will all tune from a sharp note, downwards. With the best coefficients of friction possible that's still going to leave the tuning unstable as lash is taken up. (Caveat. I cannot back this up, they might not be unstable but it certainly doesn't look right to me when I see the videos). Great idea, and clever (not Gibson's idea, unfortunately) but the cost, and other factors just limit the market. It's tiny. I would bet the vast majority of guitars sold with the kit have been bought for other reasons so the market is far smaller than it may appear. I would add that I, and I bet just about every other slightly techy person, though of robot tuners decades ago. I certainly didn't have the know how or resources to make it happen but it seems so obvious that a stepping motor can respond to pitch with some simple software. Sure, there's lots of refinement and the system is impressively small and non invasive but the idea itself wasn't a moment in time. It's just too obvious. Every guitar manufacturer would have thought about it over the years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karloff Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 It's Donny's fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-28 Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 Yeah damn Donny and his love of 50s wiring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zigzag Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 Henry J. is clearly not in touch with his customer base, and he has no vision for the future of his businesses. He overindulges in his successes and is in denial about his failures- and for those he wants to blame others. It is likely his company will be restructured by some holding company who will cut it to the bone, suck whatever profit they can out of it, mismanage it, fire or chase off valuable employees, then leave it for roadkill. I expect it will then be revived by someone who can afford to build it back up again and give it the love and respect it deserves. Hopefully, that happens sooner than later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badbluesplayer Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 Then there is the flaw which seems needlessly present in all robot tuners. They will all tune from a sharp note, downwards. With the best coefficients of friction possible that's still going to leave the tuning unstable as lash is taken up. (Caveat. I cannot back this up, they might not be unstable but it certainly doesn't look right to me when I see the videos). No, really? :lol: Do those things not tune up to pitch? If they don't, just give me about fifteen minutes to horse laugh along with every sophomore engineering student this side of Kamchatka. No, really? (another ten minutes of laughing) No. Just no way... God help them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merciful-evans Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 Then there is the flaw which seems needlessly present in all robot tuners. They will all tune from a sharp note, downwards. With the best coefficients of friction possible that's still going to leave the tuning unstable as lash is taken up. (Caveat. I cannot back this up, they might not be unstable but it certainly doesn't look right to me when I see the videos). It does look that way sometimes, but the tuners always drop flat of the target note before rising back up. So they work as you or I would tune manually. However... I do think it allows more slippage than a Grover or Schaller tuner, therefore retunes are more frequent. One plus point never mentioned is strings changes. They're very fast and easy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabs Posted April 9, 2018 Author Share Posted April 9, 2018 I expect it will then be revived by someone who can afford to build it back up again and give it the love and respect it deserves. Hopefully, that happens sooner than later. Sadly that may end up being someone who lives in China Not saying it will.. but the possibility of legitimate Chibsons is there... I hope not.. There is that comment from Henry that this has been done as a power play for ownership by the bond holders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidblast Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 Hmm,yea,,. ya know. I think I realized to never tune "DOWN" to pitch when I was about 12... (which was a long time ago)... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krock Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 Anyone else been keeping tabs of fenders most recent marketing efforts? Its fantastic, especially the cartoons they've done to accompany their new pedal line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NePb Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 If fender is cornering the new guitar player market, Gibson shouldn't really need to change much with Gibson itself, right? Starters, with few exceptions, are probably not buying MIA or MIM Fenders. It seems to me that this is done under the Squier brand and therfore, wouldn't Gibson need to make changes to companies like Epiphone or Kramer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidblast Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 Epi is to Gibson what Squire is to Fender. What should/would they change? Consider how much wiggle room is there with instruments purchased for around or under 200 dollars? I think not much... Gibson's investment in this whole "life style" debacle is what landed them in this kind of trouble. Clearly lost the focus on what kind of company they are, or were and tried to become something they were not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabs Posted April 9, 2018 Author Share Posted April 9, 2018 Epi is to Gibson what Squire is to Fender. What should/would they change? Consider how much wiggle room is there with instruments purchased for around or under 200 dollars? I think not much... Gibson's investment in this whole "life style" debacle is what landed them in this kind of trouble. Clearly lost the focus on what kind of company they are, or were and tried to become something they were not. The headstock shape? :) I kind of understand why they keep the Gibson shape as a Gibson only thing.. BUT I also cant help but wonder how Epiphones sales would change if they had a Gibson headstock shape? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidblast Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 The headstock shape? :) I kind of understand why they keep the Gibson shape as a Gibson only thing.. BUT I also cant help but wonder how Epiphones sales would change if they had a Gibson headstock shape? I wonder that too. a hunch says it would be a + change $$$ wise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanHenry Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 Wouldn't it have been nice if Gibson had just gone back into producing amps Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabs Posted April 9, 2018 Author Share Posted April 9, 2018 I wonder that too. a hunch says it would be a + change $$$ wise. The issue being what would that then do to Gibsons sales .. If they did ever do that, I think there would have to be a much clearer distinction in the lines... You can get some of the higher end Epis that may as well be a Gibson if it wernt for the headstock.. And I don't count those cheap what were they called S Line guitars that have Gibson on the head as that's where any similarity to a Gibson ends. I really don't quite know what they were thinking with those.. I think a lot of Epis would deserve to have Gibson on them way more than the S Lines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidblast Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 yea.. I don't think that is the solution either. way too much over lap in the two brands for sure. then again this is kind of the corner Gibson has painted themselves into. IT will be interesting to see how this plays out. Henry is probably out very soon, and who ever buys the brand, (which I think is likely) would hopefully try to get back to basics, and just see if a reboot with a far less complex array of offerings will work. 500mill is a lot of cheese and crackers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zigzag Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 There is that comment from Henry that this has been done as a power play for ownership by the bond holders. And why do you suppose that is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabs Posted April 9, 2018 Author Share Posted April 9, 2018 And why do you suppose that is? Cos it seems like they want him out... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zigzag Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 Cos it seems like they want him out... And why do you suppose that is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabs Posted April 9, 2018 Author Share Posted April 9, 2018 And why do you suppose that is? Is this a trick question or something? Did you not read what Henry himself said? Or do you want me to type it up all over a again? If you have some point you are trying too raise here please just come out with it.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.