Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

The (seemingly) Unique Epi Business Model


Ron G

Recommended Posts

First an assertion: The Epiphone division of Gibson sells a product line that exists

mainly of foreign-made, less-expensive facsimiles of USA-made Gibson branded

products. This appears to be a very unique marketing concept. Fender does something

similar with Squier but sells Fender branded MIM guitars which are closer in price

to many popular Epi's. I can't think of any other companies that have a similar marketing

strategy of selling cheaper virtual clones under a different brand; can you? My curiosity

extends to products other than guitars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rickenbacker had a line of cheap guitars. Sorry but I can't remember the name at the moment. Sometimes the only difference between the Ric and the cheap copy was the buffing of the finish.

 

Martin had Sigma

 

Ovation had Applause

 

Gibson had Kalamazoo

 

and Takamine has their G series.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This isn't exactly apples to apples but I have a friend that has worked in the domestic and overseas electronics industry for decades and most electronic are actually manufactured by a very few companies although there are hundreds of retail brands in stores.

 

The big difference is you don't know the actual manufacturer or who sponsers the "budget" brand. The foreign car market did it in reverse with the advent years ago of Lexus, Acura, etc, all luxury cars made by "budget" maufacturers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't think of any other companies that have a similar marketing

strategy of selling cheaper virtual clones under a different brand; can you? My curiosity

extends to products other than guitars.

Isn't that what Takamine does with its Jasmine line? And Ovation with Applause and Martin with Sigma?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First an assertion: The Epiphone division of Gibson sells a product line that exists

mainly of foreign-made' date=' less-expensive facsimiles of USA-made Gibson branded

products. This appears to be a very unique marketing concept. Fender does something

[i']similar[/i] with Squier but sells Fender branded MIM guitars which are closer in price

to many popular Epi's. I can't think of any other companies that have a similar marketing

strategy of selling cheaper virtual clones under a different brand; can you? My curiosity

extends to products other than guitars.

 

I have thought about this too and then thought about what's in my collection. They make some nice stuff but also stuff that is never quite right. SGs have the knobs in the wrong spots and the bevel is never right, the acoustics in the standard line have the longer necks.

 

They want to give you a taste but never quite there on most models and I think that is not an accident.

 

The perfect example for me would be the Lennon EJ160. The ones the Beatles played were the plywoods with ladder bracing so Epiphone could have come close with one of their plywood AJs as it is supposed to be the Lennon Sig. No they put a solid top and a longer neck. Something unique I guess and mine finds some use but I still had to buy the Gibson to get the right sound. This one they could have made very close to correct cheaper but didn't. They could have charged the same price and made even more ROI.

 

Most of my Epiphones are signatures that are only Epiphones or LE. I have the Supernova, Jorma, John Lennon, Valensi, 65 G400, early AJ45s, Riviera. I have 2 casinos and that has to be Epiphone rather than a Gibson 330.

 

The Masterbuilts are nice guitars but I have mixed results on mine, DR500 great, AJ500 problems. My Elitist not looking to cause an argument but a Gibson MIJ that says Epiphone with poly finish.

 

The Epiphones are a great value for the money. My Jorma can hang with my 335 stock, but my Supernova is a fancy painted Dot that needs new PUs. I like the Epiphone line for price and value, stuff Epiphone only, or the hunt for those ones greater than the sum of their parts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry previous for the long rant,

 

Godin guitars in Canada has a whole line of guitars: A&L, Simon and Partick, Seagull, Norman.

 

I may have missed one.

 

The auto companies have done this for years.

 

Ford Mustang = Mercury Capri

 

Ford LTD = Mercury Crown Victoria

 

Dodge Challanger = Plymouth Barracuda

 

Sears with their brand line of towels etc good, better and best, labeled that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Byrds, I thought of those, too but they're parallel/re-badge marketing. Epi is a wholly owned subsidiary strictly dedicated to selling cheaper clones. Kinda different. Even the GE/Hotpoint gig doesn't really fit the bill. Godin's scheme is just plain confusing.

 

BTW: Ford Crown Vic/ Mercury Grand Marquis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ron is right... you don't see Chevy Cobalt for $15k and a Pontiac Cobalt $9k .. you see a Chevy Cobalt and a Pontiac G5.. both the same platform but enough trim/body differences to make them their own and priced within a $100 of each other.

 

Gibson has the Les Paul Standard at $2200beans (MF) and the Epiphone at $600 (MF); thus all the confusion

 

With Fender… they’re all called Fender, whether it’s a standard, MIM or a Squier

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rickenbacker had a line of cheap guitars. Sorry but I can't remember the name at the moment. Sometimes the only difference between the Ric and the cheap copy was the buffing of the finish.

 

Martin had Sigma

 

Ovation had Applause

 

Gibson had Kalamazoo

 

and Takamine has their G series.

 

Good examples, Rot. But not nearly on the scale of Epi.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't that what Takamine does with its Jasmine line? And Ovation with Applause and Martin with Sigma?

 

and Guild did with Madeira (and now with the GAD series)...and Hamer did with the Slammers...and ESP with LTD...and Hofner has the Icon series...and as mentioned, Fender with Squier, Martin with Sigma..and so on and so..the idea is to have a product at each marketing niche. Not a thing unique about it with Epiphone except that Epiphone was once an autonomous brand that Gibson now owns the rights to so it labels its imports "Epiphone" as it also lends a bit of credibility using an esteemed name from the past...and Epiphone doesn't stop there...it also uses "Masterbilt" to sell cheap Chinese acoustics that have as much connection to the originals as I have to Genghis Khan.

 

It's all simply marketing and of course they're not going to sell a clone of an iconic guitar at a lower marketing level because they know people will pay for accuracy and will pay dear as long as there's a limitation on the availability and there's an inherent or at least illusionary pride of brand ownership built in. Sure the Elitists are high quality knock offs but they're not going to sell an exact copy of what was once say a 1965 Sheraton or Casino and especially not a Gibson Les Paul, headstock and all, as their standard fare because they know at some point they can sign up someone from the past cheaply enough or with enough value-added to their name (Lennon-McCartney) to endorse it and make it profitable to actually market the clone..and everyone who owns the close but not cigar guitars can then decide how accurate they want their knock off and how much they're willing to pay. They're absolutely not going to sell a clone or even a really close version of one of the current selling Gibson-branded products because that cuts into the domestic line profits. They keep it close enough to keep you wanting more but still close enough for you to be able to be satisfied with some access to the originals at a much lower price point. Yeah, today that Elitist Les Paul is enough but some day may come when it just isn't enough any more.

 

Epiphone also isn't the only former domestic brand name used to now sell imports. Today's Gretsch guitars even though Fred Jr. is involved are just near to close Asian knock-offs of original models. The now-deceased English luthier Tony Zemaitis' guitars are being copied and sold out of Japan and strangely the George Washburn company whose name has been used for about thirty five years to sell Asian guitars is now making and marketing USA-made custom shop level guitars so there's one in reverse. You can even find D'Angelicos being knocked-off now in Asia but none of this does anything to help the originals. Most people are willing to pretend and get off cheap rather than be concerned about the intrinsic quality behind the headstock name. Don't kid yourself. The Fender game with its different lines isn't any different than Gibson using Epiphone except that the Gibson name perhaps remains a bit more insulated from the association with Epiphone. Gibson wants you to think there's only a slim difference if they're selling you an Epiphone but they want to make it perfectly clear there's a serious distinction between the two brands if they're selling you a Gibson. Fender puts it all out there and says "You can own an actual Fender-branded guitar from different quality and marketing levels but we're leaving it up to the consumer to sort all the differences out and make their choice"...which is perhaps a bit more honest a way of doing business...

 

Bottom line: Epiphone was previously established as an esteemed brand and that perception, whether accurate or not to the current product, is now used to sell a line of lower-cost imports with absolutely no connection to the guitars or their quality and build level that originally established the credibility of the brand. That concept is being used to today to sell everything from toasters to televisions so I can understand why Gibson would also use it. It's called marketing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Al, I think your description that the Gibson brand is "insulated" speaks to what I am

saying about their marketing model. The marketing levels concept that you describe is

all over the place but the sharp line between USA-made-Gibson and Asian-made-Epi still

seems somewhat unique, at least to me. And yet with that "insulation" the Gibson

references made to Epi products (like TRCs) is quite obvious and does seem to push the

idea that with an Epi, you're somehow getting a Gibson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And yet with that "insulation" the Gibson

references made to Epi products (like TRCs) is quite obvious and does seem to push the

idea that with an Epi' date=' you're somehow getting a Gibson.[/quote']

 

Or it pushes the idea that you are getting a good quality instrument.

Anybody who thinks they are getting a Gibson when they buy an Epi is just ignorant. And hasn't done any type of research at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oups goofed on the Ford Grand Marquis thing.

 

The long rambling point I was trying to make was the same as Iconoclast that Epiphone is not making exact copies of Gibsons. They kind of look the same and have that vibe but they are different.

 

That is not to say that they are not good in their own right. I play Epiphones but don't expect them to be direct copies like a Dot vs my 335 no comparison, a G400 vs my SG not the same. I like my Jorma as it is something unique to the Epiphone line and it stands well on its own.

 

That EJ160e they could have made out of plywood like Lennon's and the right scale legnth for less than they make the one in the line, they had the correct tooling in Korea from the 90s AJ45s. They chose to make it something different so you still have to buy the Gibson if you want that sound.

 

The Epiphone AJ200s is a nicer sounding guitar so I don't think they would have lost anything by making the Lennon sig EJ160 closer to spec, but that would cut into Gibsons J160 sales.

 

The Elitist I have is the Valensi not a copy of anything in the Gibson line. It is as nice as any Gibson period. I also played the Elitist Casino and it was the same but not so great I wanted to trade in my 2 MIKs to get that instead. If the Casino was my main guitar I would have possibly.

 

Other guys here have the Elitist SGs, Dots and LPs so they can compare and have. I'm not embarassed to play or have Epiphones. I alternate shows and band pratice with my SG, 335 with my 65 G400 and Jorma all the time.

 

With the Elitist line I think you get the quality and sound/tone of a Gibson but it is not an exact duplicate for less. I like some of the Epiphone stuff that stands on its own rather than copies of Gibsons. The Beatles had Epiphone Casinos so I want the Epiphone Casino not a 330.

 

Epiphones can get you the vibe and with some upgrades, to the stock line, the tone but they are not Gibsons, and in some cases that is not a bad thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The long rambling point I was trying to make was the same as Iconoclast that Epiphone is not making exact copies of Gibsons. They kind of look the same and have that vibe but they are different.

 

That is not to say that they are not good in their own right. I play Epiphones but don't expect them to be direct copies like a Dot vs my 335 no comparison' date=' a G400 vs my SG not the same. I like my Jorma as it is something unique to the Epiphone line and it stands well on its own.

 

[/quote']

 

I think this is the real deal Byrds. I have played Gibsons and Epiphones for almost the entire 40+ years I've been playing and have never really considered seriously the two. I'm not hung up on the cost or status of any guitar but on whether or not I like the way they play and sound.

 

While I agree there are some similarities, they are just that similarities. I believe that they are merely marketing tecqniques to get the more budget challenged buyers into the family with the hope that they will step up in the future, the same as Fender and all the rest. Good strategy, noone hurt except those that do seriously make the comparisons, IMHO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the point can be made that G/E does, in fact, have a rather unique

marketing powerhouse. One venerable name captures a huge piece of the high-end

market while the other venerable name captures a huge piece of the "budget" market,

while using the Gibson name to full advantage. Those who question or criticize the

company's marketing decisions should keep in mind that G/E really has no reason to

do it differently. And to compare the quality of the respective guitars is just plain silly -

the Epiphones are produced by company design to be budget guitars. Oh...and

I don't think Epi's are marketed as a strategy so one will eventually buy a Gibson; just

getting their share of an enormous market for budget-priced guitars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True. They mostly have it right, as evidenced by the sales numbers. About the only area where they completely blew it was the Elitists. Too chickensh*t to put Gibson headstocks on the 'Gibson' models (335, LP, SG, Thunderbird, EB-3)... but then they tried to charge Gibson prices. Ooops, that didn't work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting topic. I was only going to add that in one instance where the model is slightly different, a large portion of the market is driven not only by online sales (which is still a new phenomenom), but endorsements of major artists, the modifcaation/do-it-yourself industry, and last but not least....(and this one is really important)

 

the soft sell that you can take one of these guitars, and with a few modifications, make it "just as good" as the American counterparts. I don't even think Fender has quite gotten that one down yet (but they're working on it...in fact, I wouldn't be suprised if Epiphone's business model is scrutinized and copied in the coming years as far as the instrument market goes.)

 

But you know something? Part of this market is literally.....the reality that the Stars just happened to be aligned when Epiphone was relaunched. Yes, the archtop revival got them to a certain place, the solid body guitars got them a bit further, and all of it has been reinforced with key artist endorsements (and they've been good about this so far)....but to a certain degree, Epiphone is obviously going to be one of the first choices for any of these kids who have started looking into a guitar purchase after playing Guitar Hero/Rock Band.

 

(Yes, I think those games are also driving sales.)

 

And, ironically enough...yes, Slash, who is one of the main characters in Guitar Hero, just happens to have endorsements by Gibson...and more importantly, a guitar that a beginner could afford (or, his or her parents)

 

Epiphone.

 

(And unlike Squier, or even MiM Fender or the other products listed...Epiphone does have a history associated with it, and some major endorsements. No offense to Squier, but Avril Lavigne isn't going to exactly do a whole lot to push Squier products out the door...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name=..........

(And unlike Squier' date=' or even MiM Fender or the other products listed...Epiphone does have a history associated with it, and some major endorsements. No offense to Squier, but Avril Lavigne isn't going to exactly do a whole lot to push Squier products out the door...)[/quote]

 

But the products that Epiphone is currently selling have absolutely no connection historically or otherwise to those original models or endorsers. In fact, the current products Gibson sells also don't have any historical connection to the original Gibson company, be it Orville's company, CMI or even Norlin. Brand names are often a commodity sold like any other. Buying the name gives the right to sell a product with that name and there's no requirement to maintain the quality or image of the original. Witness the purchase of Maytag by Whirlpool and also take notice of how many esteemed and venerated names from the past are used today to sell products with no connection to the historical company..."Black And Decker".."Sunbeam"..."Emerson"...I've seen the Polaroid name on cheap televisions..The Jensen speakers that are sold today have no connection to the original Jensen speaker company..they even use the Tung Sol and Mullard brands to sell cheap copies of the original tubes. Someone buys the name and decides to use that brand recognition of the past to sell whatever they come up with.

 

The original purchase of the Epiphone name by CMI was done with the intention to sell basses (which Epiphone had a strong reputation for where Gibson did not) and when Uncle Ted (McCarty) discovered he had also obtained a treasure trove of component parts to go along with a quickly expanding market which was limited by the company's commitment to protected sales territories of its dealers, a new business model was created...the lateral product line which had been used by auto makers but not so much in other consumer goods marketing At the point in time when this was done the idea of "discounting" was still not part of our culture or economy. I'm sure it's hard to conceive of a time when there weren't Wal*Marts and K Marts but once upon a time to get a deal or a discount you had to have a brother in law or uncle or cousin who could "get it for you wholesale". In the retail musical instrument business at this point the list prices still had some realistic meaning. If it listed for $300 it usually sold for $300. The "deals" came in the form of "customer service"( another long-forgotten concept these days)and personal attention as well as "add-ons" at the time of sale.

 

By the 60's retail had changed and everyone was expecting a bargain or a deal...and the idea of protected sales territories dissolved making Epiphone an expensive redundancy in now-Norlin's bottom line. The name had long been established and the rights were now Norlin's (after the sale of CMI et al in 1969) and Norlin was a corporate entity not real concerned with tradition or history so it first used the Epiphone brand on imported instruments which would have shamed Anastasios and Epaminondas but Norlin's only real concern was getting a product to market to compete with all of the other Japanese imports of the time and using the Epiphone brand name gave Norlin immediate brand recognition. They also used to Gibson brand name to sell a product whose integrity was compromised by the bottom line focus of those years. In retrospect I'm certain there was a sense of survival that required the cost-cutting and drop in the quality of components but it didn't do anything to enhance the Gibson product image. In 1986 Henry J and company, who to their credit, initially restored the quality level of Gibson and Epiphone products (though not without profit as a prime motivator) and gave new credibility to both brand lines.

 

We as human beings will tend to romanticize our personal choices of products so that if we choose a particular brand of something whether it's coffee or cars or guitars, it simply must be the best brand or product if we picked it as ours. Even though in reality most products at a price point or within a marketing niche are going to be more similar than different in terms of quality of components and manufacture. When one stands back and analyzes things from an objective view this becomes pretty apparent but that doesn't stop us from wanting to believe in our choices as superior. I have always tried to be self-critical of my choices so that I do truly get the best value for my spent money so while yeah, I own the Gibsons and the Fenders or the whatevers but I don't for one minute believe there's anything magical about the brand names or am I so intoxicated with the brand imagery or history that I'll pay more for one over another without there being something of substantive advantage . The particular product is what it is and one has to remove the emotional involvement from it to take stock of what is going on with the product. We also have to understand that to some degree our brand loyalties and perceptions are manipulated by the very brands and companies we have this affinity for. The same fierce affection we witness here for Epiphones is present on the Ibanez or Fender forums for those products as well.

 

From an entirely objective and analytical point of view and from my knowledge and experience I think the Epiphone products are a worthy values within their marketing scope. I don't think there's any fantastically exceptional values or over-achieving instruments to be had in the Epiphone line but I think they're a safe and steady bet for their price points and market demographic. I fully admit to having an affection and nostalgia about the brand but I'm certainly not going to allow that to affect any analysis of product quality or value. Anyway....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote=..........

(And unlike Squier' date= or even MiM Fender or the other products listed...Epiphone does have a history associated with it, and some major endorsements. No offense to Squier, but Avril Lavigne isn't going to exactly do a whole lot to push Squier products out the door...)

 

But the products that Epiphone is currently selling have absolutely no connection historically or otherwise to those original models or endorsers. In fact, the current products Gibson sells also don't have any historical connection to the original Gibson company, be it Orville's company, CMI or even Norlin. Brand names are often a commodity sold like any other. Buying the name gives the right to sell a product with that name and there's no requirement to maintain the quality or image of the original. Witness the purchase of Maytag by Whirlpool and also take notice of how many esteemed and venerated names from the past are used today to sell products with no connection to the historical company..."Black And Decker".."Sunbeam"..."Emerson"...I've seen the Polaroid name on cheap televisions..The Jensen speakers that are sold today have no connection to the original Jensen speaker company..they even use the Tung Sol and Mullard brands to sell cheap copies of the original tubes. Someone buys the name and decides to use that brand recognition of the past to sell whatever they come up with.

 

The original purchase of the Epiphone name by CMI was done with the intention to sell basses (which Epiphone had a strong reputation for where Gibson did not) and when Uncle Ted (McCarty) discovered he had also obtained a treasure trove of component parts to go along with a quickly expanding market which was limited by the company's commitment to protected sales territories of its dealers, a new business model was created...the lateral product line which had been used by auto makers but not so much in other consumer goods marketing At the point in time when this was done the idea of "discounting" was still not part of our culture or economy. I'm sure it's hard to conceive of a time when there weren't Wal*Marts and K Marts but once upon a time to get a deal or a discount you had to have a brother in law or uncle or cousin who could "get it for you wholesale". In the retail musical instrument business at this point the list prices still had some realistic meaning. If it listed for $300 it usually sold for $300. The "deals" came in the form of "customer service"( another long-forgotten concept these days)and personal attention as well as "add-ons" at the time of sale.

 

By the 60's retail had changed and everyone was expecting a bargain or a deal...and the idea of protected sales territories dissolved making Epiphone an expensive redundancy in now-Norlin's bottom line. The name had long been established and the rights were now Norlin's (after the sale of CMI et al in 1969) and Norlin was a corporate entity not real concerned with tradition or history so it first used the Epiphone brand on imported instruments which would have shamed Anastasios and Epaminondas but Norlin's only real concern was getting a product to market to compete with all of the other Japanese imports of the time and using the Epiphone brand name gave Norlin immediate brand recognition. They also used to Gibson brand name to sell a product whose integrity was compromised by the bottom line focus of those years. In retrospect I'm certain there was a sense of survival that required the cost-cutting and drop in the quality of components but it didn't do anything to enhance the Gibson product image. In 1986 Henry J and company, who to their credit, initially restored the quality level of Gibson and Epiphone products (though not without profit as a prime motivator) and gave new credibility to both brand lines.

 

We as human beings will tend to romanticize our personal choices of products so that if we choose a particular brand of something whether it's coffee or cars or guitars, it simply must be the best brand or product if we picked it as ours. Even though in reality most products at a price point or within a marketing niche are going to be more similar than different in terms of quality of components and manufacture. When one stands back and analysis things from an objective view this becomes pretty apparent but that doesn't stop us from wanting to believe in our choices as superior. I have always tried to be self-critical of my choices so that I do truly get the best value for my spent money so while yeah, I own the Gibsons and the Fenders or the whatevers but I don't for one minute believe there's anything magical about the brand names or am I so intoxicated with the brand imagery or history that I'll pay more for one over another without there being something of substantive advantage . The particular product is what it is and one has to remove the emotional involvement from it to take stock of what is going on with the product. We also have to understand that to some degree our brand loyalties and perceptions are manipulated by the very brands and companies we have this affinity for. The same fierce affection we witness here for Epiphones is present on the Ibanez or Fender forums for those products as well.

 

From an entirely objective and analytical point of view and from my knowledge and experience I think the Epiphone products are a worthy values within their marketing scope. I don't think there's any fantastically exceptional values or over-achieving instruments to be had in the Epiphone line but I think they're a safe and steady bet for their price points and market demographic. I fully admit to having an affection and nostalgia about the brand but I'm certainly not going to allow that to affect any analysis of product quality or value. Anyway....

 

These are excellent points, Iconoclast, but to be fair....Analysis and history is one thing...but I don't know if embracing a position based upon dispassion truly offers the best perspective when it comes to the renaissance of Epiphone.

 

Is this a question in terms of brand loyalty? I'm not so sure. These things tend to go in cycles. And to a degree, I know that Epiphones are often debated here by a lot of people who are very knowledgeable not only about electric and acoustic guitars, but the industry ingeneral...

 

But I really don't see this group as the main consumers of Epiphone products.

 

IMHO the main consumers of Epiphones are kids. In other words, kids who take note of what is being played by artists ranging from My Chemical Romance to Fallout Boy to the White Stripes and a lot of the older rockers.

 

And...many of these people are playing Gibson.

 

Cross that in with some keen analysis of the market, guitars that can be had at a reasonable budget, and great advertising from the trade magazines....as aforementioned, the stars just lined up for Epiphone. I think it started with Gibson's renaissance in the early 90's when people began to move away from the Japanese shredder guitars and towards more traditional looking instruments, but by the mid-to-late 90's the Epiphone movement had legs all its own.

 

And, it's still going strong.

 

Part of me likes to take into consideration exactly what Epiphone IS...and you're right...it has little or nothing at all to do with what Epiphone WAS. But it's a brand name. To point: One major push Epiphone got a few months back was a sterling review by Guitar World of the Les Paul Ultra II with the nanomag pickup in conjunction with a large portion of their magazine that was dedicated to the history of Epiphone.

 

What are the chances of ever seeing that with Squier?

 

IMHO: A guitar is a guitar. There's good and bad ones. I don't even know if model and price tag are any guarantees towards a quality instrument, especially in today's day and age of online buying and purchasing a guitar sight unseen.

 

But as far as Epiphone's success? Oh, I know, sometimes people hate the personal stories, but I'm going to tell one anyway.

 

A coworker from my old job wanted to buy his son a guitar. This coworker (a drummer from ages ago) knew enough about guitars to know that he wanted "A Gibson". We talked about it...(and this was even before I owned an Epiphone.)

 

"I want to buy my son a guitar.."

 

We talked about budget, and at the time, I tried to talk him into buying a knockoff or really cheap guitar in case his sons ended up abandoning it. He wasn't persuaded, and was insistent upon getting a Gibson.

 

Then he saw the prices Gibson is charging for their instruments...

 

The next time we talked, I told him about Epiphone, which yes, is a Gibson daughter company. He was intrigued enough to go on Ebay, and after some searching he found an SG model for about 400 dollars for his son. (I don't know the exact model, but it was a sunburst.)

 

I think this is a perfect example of a target audience for Epiphone. Part of it is being driven by the market, and what tones are popular (yes...to point...how many hot, young artists are driving people to go out and buy Fender?) but at the same time....a part of this is being driven by nostalgia....

 

And, I don't think it's necessarily for Epiphone, but for Gibson, which unfortunately is a product many people with average means can't afford, or will not purchase unless they are really, really into their music or are collectors. (I wonder if Gibson sensed this, and that was the reason for releasing the Studio line of guitars...and the models under a 1000 dollars.)

 

So, sure, there's a history...but what I think is driving sales now? It's a desire to play a Gibson product.

 

And, Epiphones are the substitute which most people can afford...(so, yes, another point to toss into the fire.) And, I don't know if it's really a case where the average buyer is extremely knowledgeable on the history or Gibson, or Epiphone other than arguably knowing what guitar a specific artist played.......

 

And to a degree, when I step away, and remember myself when I was 15 years old and desperately wanted an electric guitar...I can't help but feel that unless some semblance of passion is empathized with, there may not be a complete understanding as to why Epiphone's sales have grown dramatically in the past few years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think they may use limited runs, the custom shop guitars, to use as a market gauge for future models; or possibly fill a larger than expected demand. I can imagine a marketing formula could be pretty easily developed from data on which model/option/color sold how rapidly over some length of time, then used to predict what numbers might be sold of various reissues, features and finishes. Actually, it would be pretty stupid not to at least try to predict how to build a product that would sell, if not steadily over time, perhaps quickly over a shorter time.

 

Edit

 

That could be a reason for not announcing those special runs ahead of time, or even limiting the market where some particular combination would be sold. There's a LOT of data available if sales of those guitars are tracked. Enough that some companies would even price it close to or even below cost, if they felt that tactic could gain some data not available any other way. In any event, advertising could have unwanted impact on the data and sometimes its best to have a flat market as a base line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First an assertion: The Epiphone division of Gibson sells a product line that exists

mainly of foreign-made' date=' less-expensive facsimiles of USA-made Gibson branded

products. This appears to be a very unique marketing concept. Fender does something

[i']similar[/i] with Squier but sells Fender branded MIM guitars which are closer in price

to many popular Epi's. I can't think of any other companies that have a similar marketing

strategy of selling cheaper virtual clones under a different brand; can you? My curiosity

extends to products other than guitars.

 

Personally, I think you're all missing the point. Epiphone guitars today are a much better value and in many cases, a much better guitar than Gibsons. Unlike all other products where we have accepted products made in other countries, "seniors" still think the only "real" guitars are made in the USA. If you're looking for an investment, that still may be true. But if you're looking for a great guitar that doesn't have the quality issues that Gibson has (not to mention the cost) then an Epiphone is the perfect choice.

 

And BTW - Epiphone is not just making Gibson "copies." Many of Epiphone models like the Casino, Sheraton, Wilshire as well as the Ultra, Ultra-II, Masterbilts, and Prophecy guitars are unlike anything Gibson is doing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Personally' date=' I think you're all missing the point. Epiphone guitars today are a much better value and in many cases, a much better guitar than Gibsons. Unlike all other products where we have accepted products made in other countries, "seniors" still think the only "real" guitars are made in the USA. If you're looking for an investment, that still may be true. But if you're looking for a great guitar that doesn't have the quality issues that Gibson has (not to mention the cost) then an Epiphone is the perfect choice.

 

And BTW - Epiphone is not just making Gibson "copies." Many of Epiphone models like the Casino, Sheraton, Wilshire as well as the Ultra, Ultra-II, Masterbilts, and Prophecy guitars are unlike anything Gibson is doing.

 

[/quote']

 

Oh No!!!......What are you trying to do?!?!? =D> Build up the...

 

iconoclasteroj8.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...