The story never ends......

[BigKahune]

Buc - Very scary stuff. Thanks for the link

 

I did some checking. In my area (Elderly), the only retail store front on Gibson's dealers list is Best Buy. Having been in there serveral times, they do not carry the full line. Curiously, there's another store front here that is not on the dealers list but carries some Gibson product, but again nowhere near even half the line. If you don't live in a large city in southern Michigan (GC), you're gonna have to drive quite a few miles to get a look at some Gibsons (again, not the whole line). It can be difficult to find a shop that stocks a new Gibson you're interested in so you can look it over and play it.

 

My point is, because a dealer in used Gibson's doesn't have to deal with Gibson's quirky distribution, stock and warrenty demands, Gibson is foolishly encouraging the used market while the retail market continues to shrink. You can see right here on this forum. Many of the "I got a new Gibson" posts are actually about the purchase of a used Gibson.

 

In the face of a big time used market, Gibson has resorted to ramping up reissues, tributes, signatures, and specials, and has built up a collectors market. However, they're producing so many of these, it's becoming a joke.

 

My concern is 10 years ago, if I wanted to check out some new Gibson's in person, it wasn't a problem - now, I've got to figure out who has the stock I'm interested and then plan a road trip. I'm not liking it and I'm thinking it's got to be hurting their retail.

 

Just one facet of their recent problems - quirky distribution demands, late audit report, credit downgrade, FBI raid for illegally imported wood, the launch of ridiculously over priced and stupid looking apparel, bad business decisions, etc, etc, etc.

[dem00n]

I never thought guys with acoustic guitars can be so harsh.

Its like gibson spit in their face.

[PickitPaul]

My concern is 10 years ago' date=' if I wanted to check out some new Gibson's in person, it wasn't a problem - now, I've got to figure out who has the stock I'm interested and then plan a road trip. I'm not liking it and I'm thinking it's got to be hurting their retail.

 

[/quote']

 

 

But Gibson makes like 50-60 guitars a day (probably less now in this economy) a much smaller number than Martin or Taylor. I think they don't care if many guitars are available out there, because the demand would be too much for them to keep up with. Compared to other guitar factories - they just don't make as many per year. I think I heard that Gibson was talking about expanding the acoustic division in Montana, but didn't do it for whatever reasons.

[ajsc]

"My point is, because a dealer in used Gibson's doesn't have to deal with Gibson's quirky distribution, stock and warrenty demands, Gibson is foolishly encouraging the used market while the retail market continues to shrink. You can see right here on this forum. Many of the "I got a new Gibson" posts are actually about the purchase of a used Gibson."

 

 

Martin has said for many years that their biggest competitor are used Martins!!

[McDuff]

I never thought guys with acoustic guitars can be so harsh.

Its like gibson spit in their face.

 

People with acoustics can be pretty harsh. It is like with everything else, when you finally get that mellow kid who is quite to freak out it is going to be big...Also this kid is made out of wood I guess. I don't know my head isn't up to metaphors now.

 

Either way this looks a tad scary, I hope quality improves in the end though. I really would like to get a new Gibson soon and upgrade from the epi I have at the moment.

[Modac]

I doubt that the Montana Division produces a large enough percentage of Gibson's total output to be the object of so much scorn, never mind being the anchor that is dragging down the good ship Gibson.. Gibson builds a lot of things besides acoustic guitars. I'll bet they could sell their yearly output of Bozeman guitars in Europe and Japan.

[pohatu771]

See, I'm not terribly concerned with Gibson as a company. They can continue to exist, or not. If they shut down, Bozeman will go on. The people there have the ability to produce excellent instruments. It was an operational factory before Gibson bought it, and it will be an operational factory after Gibson goes away.

 

Heritage is an example of that - when you have dedicated craftsmen, it doesn't matter. The Kalamazoo factory is still producing great Gibson guitars - they just have a different name on the headstock. I can see acoustic guitars coming out of Bozeman under the Bozeman or Ferguson or whatever name you want. Maybe Heritage would buy it and start doing the Heritage HA-45 and HA-200.

 

I'm not loyal to Gibson. I just like my J-45.

[Gilliangirl]

What do ya think it would cost to buy Gibson out? (rifling through pockets) How much money do y'all think we could come up with in the next few days? Who's with me, huh? Who's with me!!?? :- I'll go check the behind the cushions on the couch. Oh! And under the seats in the car!

[Paul E]

Buc thats a good article that I read before. I didn't see anything from the employees in Bozeman, just Nashville. The acoustic division being halfway across the country can have a different outlook from the employees being so far from the main corporate headquaters. A happier worker makes a better product.

[kebob]

I find it a bit curious that Gibson doesn't really have any lower-end, affordable models like say, Martin, Taylor and Larrivee do. Whatever business model they are operating from, it seems to be a lot different from the other biggies in that regard.

[pohatu771]

I find it a bit curious that Gibson doesn't really have any lower-end' date=' affordable models like say, Martin, Taylor and Larrivee do. Whatever business model they are operating from, it seems to be a lot different from the other biggies in that regard.[/quote']

I find that a bit curious too - they spend the money to buy Garrison, transition the factory into making the Songmaker series, and then discontinue it. They were selling at half the price of a Bozeman instrument.

 

They do/did have several Epiphones, though. There's the standard issue models, which I've never been terribly fond of, the Masterbilt line which is quite nice, and the Epiphone Elite/Elitist models that I have limited experience with. The Elitists were discontinued quickly, though.

 

The Masterbilt guitars are as nice as Martin's X-series, in my opinion.

[rar]

I'll bet they could sell their yearly output of Bozeman guitars in Europe and Japan.

 

Pre-economic downturn, Japan alone would have happily taken every guitar built in Bozeman if Gibson had been willing. Nowadays, maybe not.

 

-- Bob R

[rar]

It was an operational factory before Gibson bought it' date=' ... [/quote']

 

No, Gibson built the factory. If you're thinking of little ol' Flatiron, the Gibson operation is like 30 times larger.

 

-- Bob R

[dhanners623]

I find it a bit curious that Gibson doesn't really have any lower-end' date=' affordable models like say, Martin, Taylor and Larrivee do. Whatever business model they are operating from, it seems to be a lot different from the other biggies in that regard.[/quote']

 

Not to name-drop (but I will anyway) but in '05 or so I spent a day hanging out with Steve Earle in New York (long story) and we talked some about guitars. He said he was trying to get Gibson to do a Steve Earle signature model that would be a bare-bones slope-shoulder and would go for $1,000 or so. He wanted it to be affordable.

 

That's the last I ever heard of it. But I see where Martin has come out with a Steve Earle signature model, which goes for $3,000-plus. So much for affordability.

 

Still, Kebob, you make a great point and I have to wonder why Gibson hasn't gone that route. Maybe they consider the Epiphones to be their entry-level model. I will say this -- a couple of weeks ago, I bought an Epiphone "Inspired by the 1964" Texan (I've long wanted a Texan but the vintage prices were more than what I could spend at the time) and it has a solid top and back, laminated sides and is one of the finest sounding slope-shoulder guitars I've ever heard. I've been stunned by it. And it comes with a Shadow Sonic Nanoflex system, which has sounded great plugged in. All this for $450. The only problem with it is that it has a poly finish and just looks too @#$%*! new. With the sound it's got, it should look like a vintage instrument that was played hard but well-taken care of.

 

Granted, the Epiphone is made in Asia, but you do have to question why Gibson couldn't figure out some way to do something like this. The lower-end guitars haven't hurt the reputations of Martin or Taylor; rather, they have gotten customers in the door, and when they outgrow those guitars, they'll probably step up to another Martin or Taylor.

[DanvillRob]

I find it a bit curious that Gibson doesn't really have any lower-end' date=' affordable models like say, Martin, Taylor and Larrivee do. Whatever business model they are operating from, it seems to be a lot different from the other biggies in that regard.[/quote']

 

Now, I know this may be an unpopular position...but.... I don't want Gibson to make "lower-end affordable models" ESPECIALLY with atheir Logo on it..... I want Gibson to ONLY make guitars that are considered "high end", much like I don't want Jaguar to make a $20K car, (like the Mercedes 190E).... If I'm spending the money to drive a Jaguar, I want EVERYONE to know it's a high-end vehicle! Actaully, that's what drives me nuts abut Fender.... the average citizen might recognize a Fender Strat...but they would have no idea if it was made in Mexico or Japan or Indonesia or Corona, CA!

[Hoss]

I find that a bit curious too - they spend the money to buy Garrison' date=' transition the factory into making the Songmaker series, and then discontinue it. They were selling at half the price of a Bozeman instrument.....

The Masterbilt guitars are as nice as Martin's X-series, in my opinion.

[/quote']

 

As pointed out- Gibson does have a line of inexpensive guitars. They just don't put 'Gibson' on the headstock. Personally, I like that. It keeps things clean. And from a business point, it's probably a lot easier to track expenses and unit profitability.

 

As far as the Garrison plant, I'd heard that there was a big problem finding and retaining employees. For whatever reason, Canadian workers weren't motivated by the wage and benefits that Gibson was offering. (Off to China....)

[DanvillRob]

As pointed out- Gibson does have a line of inexpensive guitars. They just don't put 'Gibson' on the headstock. Personally' date=' I like that. It keeps things clean. And from a business point, it's probably a lot easier to track expenses and unit profitability.

 

[/quote']

 

 

Hoss, you said it much more eloquently than did I......

[bkharmony]

I find it a bit curious that Gibson doesn't really have any lower-end' date=' affordable models like say, Martin, Taylor and Larrivee do. [/quote']

 

They do. They're called Epiphones. I don't understand the confusion on this point.

 

Also, don't forget these:

 

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Maestro+by+Gibson+-+6-String+Full-Size+Acoustic+Guitar+-+Black/7934658.p?id=1151657218189&skuId=7934658

 

I bet that's working out great for them.

[BigKahune]

I find it a bit curious that Gibson doesn't really have any lower-end' date=' affordable models like say, Martin, Taylor and Larrivee do. Whatever business model they are operating from, it seems to be a lot different from the other biggies in that regard.[/quote']

 

I agree.

 

But hey, you can snag a Maestro by Gibson (6-string parlor-size) for $69

 

Now that's low end affordability -

 

right down to the dirt floor bottom.

[ksdaddy]

I wish Gibson would make a stripped down satin finished no-frills slope shoulder like the WM-45. I hate the model designation though... Working Man's 45? I would have just called it the J-10 or something.

 

I heard they lost money on every WM-45 because they had to go through the same steps as they would a Hummingbird or J200. I wince every time I mention that because I just can't swallow it. But hey.. they're in Montana building guitars and I'm in Maine talking about building guitars, so I guess they'd know.

 

I just tend to look back at the 1930s and the L series and such, and how they cranked them out at fairly low prices and filled a market need. I know they have their imported lines doing the same thing now but it's just not the same.

[DanvillRob]

I wish Gibson would make a stripped down satin finished no-frills slope shoulder like the WM-45. I hate the model designation though... Working Man's 45? I would have just called it the J-10 or something.

 

I heard they lost money on every WM-45 because they had to go through the same steps as they would a Hummingbird or J200. I wince every time I mention that because I just can't swallow it. But hey.. they're in Montana building guitars and I'm in Maine talking about building guitars' date=' so I guess they'd know.

 

I just tend to look back at the 1930s and the L series and such, and how they cranked them out at fairly low prices and filled a market need. I know they have their imported lines doing the same thing now but it's just not the same.[/quote']

 

Maine? I didn't know they even allowed guitar playin' in Maine!

[bkharmony]

Maine? I didn't know they even allowed guitar playin' in Maine!

 

When guitars are outlawed, only outlaws will have guitars.

[Red 333]

I wish Gibson would make a stripped down satin finished no-frills slope shoulder like the WM-45. I hate the model designation though... Working Man's 45? I would have just called it the J-10 or something.

 

I heard they lost money on every WM-45 because they had to go through the same steps as they would a Hummingbird or J200. I wince every time I mention that because I just can't swallow it. But hey.. they're in Montana building guitars and I'm in Maine talking about building guitars' date=' so I guess they'd know.

 

I just tend to look back at the 1930s and the L series and such, and how they cranked them out at fairly low prices and filled a market need. I know they have their imported lines doing the same thing now but it's just not the same.[/quote']

 

When I toured the Collings factory this summer, their Head of Production (that might not be the right name for it) said something that put this in perspective for me. He said that the biggest factor in determining a guitar's price was not the materials used, but the time spent making the guitar. He said, while there was a difference in price between one kind of wood and another, between plastic and abalone, single ply and multi ply bindings, types of tuners, etc., there wasn't a giant difference (though it all adds ups, of course). It was the extra labor it took to work with certain woods or materials, and especially to create a higher degree of ornamentation, that added most to the price of the guitar.

 

During the tour, it was evident why Collings are far more expensive than Gibsons. At Gibson, a very skilled person uses just a few strokes to clean the binding after the guitar has been sprayed. It's done (impressively) in seconds. At Collings, I saw the binding scrapers take what must have amounted to hours to do the same task, as they employed what must have been hundreds if not thousands of tiny, tiny, painstaking strokes. That was impressive in it's own right, because they were REALLY determined and dedicated to scrape that binding super-precisely, but you pay for all the extra labor that perfection demands.

 

I don't think the WM was constructed any differently than a J45 (same bracing, set neck with carved dovetail joint, etc.), so the time it took to make (before finishing) was probably about the same. Certainly, very similar wood and hardware was used (no cost-saving prefab plastic or stratabond parts like the low cost Martins). Gibson intended to sell the WM45 for less because, primarily, they would spend less time on the finishing steps: not spraying sunbursts, not applying as many coats of laquer, and spending less time on buffing and final finishing. In practice, that was probably a lot harder than it looked in theory.

 

By the way, some of those WM45s are really beautiful looking and sounding instruments.

 

Red 333

[Red 333]

Here's a disscussion on the AGF of the financial/quality state of Gibson acoustic guitars. The usual mix of bashers and defenders of the Gibson flame. For me' date=' the two things that stand out is consumer distrust of Gibson's consistancy and sticker shock at Gibson's pricing...

Gibson's Demise on the AGF

 

 

 

I think the thread proves Gibson's consistency. Many of the comments are along the lines that you have to play ten Gibsons to find a good one. Well, those are the observations of Taylor players. They are used to and prefer a guitar that sounds far different from a Gibson. I think you can summarize the whole thread as, "I played nine Gibsons that sounded different from my Taylor before I found one that does sound like it, so something is wrong with Gibson."

 

These players may not have prefered or have been used to what they heard when they played those nine guitars, but it doesn't mean a Gibson player would judge those guitars poorly, as we may prefer that sound profile (and doesn't it seem unlikely they played ten, given all the the comments about how few Gibson there are to play?). Some of us could relate the same expriences auditioning Taylors or other brands (not likeing nine of ten we played), as our preferances are different.

 

But if nine of ten sounded the same (whether we liked them or not), that's consistent.

 

Red 333

[pohatu771]

Reading most of that AGF thread, I wonder how bad it really is for independent dealers. There's one store I'm familiar with that has two locations in suburbs on the opposite sides of Buffalo. They're small stores, but half of the instruments in there are Gibsons and Epiphones - all the higher-end models, also. Most of the Epiphones in stock were Masterbilts and Elitists, with a few of the entry-level instruments to fill in the space. I can't see them selling an awful lot of them (though they matched, and sometimes beat, Guitar Center prices right on the tag), but they're still in business.

 

I wonder, too, if Henry Juszkiewicz does some "divine intervention" with one of my favourite places, House of Guitars. I can't speak for them and their dealer contract, but they advertise guitars at below Guitar Center prices on a weekly basis. They were selling Faded Flying Vs for $450 for six months last year, until they ran out. Not only have they kept their contract, they get awards several times a year from Gibson and Epiphone, both as a store and for individual staff members.