Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums
Sign in to follow this  
Chunweh

New logo?

Recommended Posts

I see where you guys are coming from, but I'm not sure you should have changed the logo. The vintage look is what a lot of kramer fans love and the logo is a huge part of that! Also, it means that an 80's fan (for example) is more likely to go for an old used Kramer than a new one, because that is what he/she wants to hold in their hands! If you retain the same feel then you would get more people interested in buying brand new kramers.

 

Does this make sense? [biggrin]

 

Anyway i just think you would benefit from having a few more with the old logo (maybe the massive logo![biggrin] ) as I for one would instantly buy a new striker or Baretta if it had the full vintage look!

 

This sounds a tad silly but looks go a long way when people think of Kramer!

 

What do you lot think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i agree, but as a company gibson/kramer can't look back and live in the 80s; they have to be forward-looking and come out w/ something new and find new customers rather than old farts like me who still hold on to the 80s past [biggrin] they can't make it as a company if they just replicate models with old logo. new company, new logo. my .02 cents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i agree' date=' but as a company gibson/kramer can't look back .....................................

they can't make it as a company if they just replicate models with old logo. [/quote']

 

Ya, But isn't that EXACTLY what they have been doing with Gibson, since IDK the 50's? LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also am stuck in the 80's Kramer era. HOWEVER I think the new logo is welcomed. Remember that during the 80's Kramer were innovators!! They always were doing something different. My Pacer classic is on stage every night with me as is my Assault 211. One has the classic look while the other has great new look and is built very well. I love hte new 2010 line with both logos!....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i agree, but as a company gibson/kramer can't look back and live in the 80s; they have to be forward-looking and come out w/ something new and find new customers rather than old farts like me who still hold on to the 80s past [biggrin] they can't make it as a company if they just replicate models with old logo. new company, new logo. my .02 cents.

 

dont worry,buddy! im stuck in the 80's too and i wasnt even alive back then! but hey, im probably the only gu in my school who likes old music from the 80's...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I can't say that I even knew that Gibson changed the Kramer logo until I read this thread. The old logo was better. Just add this to the list of great marketing moves in the history of Gibson. seriously at this point Kramer only has one thing going for it...1980's heritage. You put a new logo on it and make guitas that aren't from the Kramer heritage, then why use the Kramer name. I mean seriously what weight does the Kramer name have on selling guitars in 2010? You might as well just call it Henry. You are trying to market it from nothing anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I can't say that I even knew that Gibson changed the Kramer logo until I read this thread. The old logo was better. Just add this to the list of great marketing moves in the history of Gibson. seriously at this point Kramer only has one thing going for it...1980's heritage. You put a new logo on it and make guitas that aren't from the Kramer heritage, then why use the Kramer name. I mean seriously what weight does the Kramer name have on selling guitars in 2010? You might as well just call it Henry. You are trying to market it from nothing anyway.

The Kramer pacer is awesome, i dont know what your talking about dude. [blink]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Kramer pacer is awesome, i dont know what your talking about dude. [blink]

 

 

Maybe I was a bit confusing in my ramblings, but what you just said totally agrees with what I said.

 

The Pacer is a historical, traditional Kramer guitar. That is exactly the guitar that Kramer should be making. However, under Gibson Kramer is now making guitars like the Assault 220 & 221 and the Pariah. Those guitars have no heritage with the Kramer brand and won't have lots of pull under that name.

 

In short I think Gibson is trying to make Kramer into something it never was. Don't misunderstand what I am saying in that I am not trying to say the products with the Kramer name on them are bad. What I am trying to say here is Gibson is resurrecting a brand name that has not done much for the past 20 years. While bringing this brand back they change the traditional logo and product offering. So why call it Kramer then? There is no brand identification with the logo and little identification with the product offering.

As such Gibson could call this brand offering anything they wanted to. I suggested the name Henry would provide as much brand recognition as how the Kramer guitars are being marketed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I was a bit confusing in my ramblings, but what you just said totally agrees with what I said.

 

The Pacer is a historical, traditional Kramer guitar. That is exactly the guitar that Kramer should be making. However, under Gibson Kramer is now making guitars like the Assault 220 & 221 and the Pariah. Those guitars have no heritage with the Kramer brand and won't have lots of pull under that name.

 

In short I think Gibson is trying to make Kramer into something it never was. Don't misunderstand what I am saying in that I am not trying to say the products with the Kramer name on them are bad. What I am trying to say here is Gibson is resurrecting a brand name that has not done much for the past 20 years. While bringing this brand back they change the traditional logo and product offering. So why call it Kramer then? There is no brand identification with the logo and little identification with the product offering.

As such Gibson could call this brand offering anything they wanted to. I suggested the name Henry would provide as much brand recognition as how the Kramer guitars are being marketed.

The way I see it, is that the non traditional Kramers basically picked up where the Epiphone superstrats left off. Not only that, but they are as high a quality or higher than a good portion of the old Epi superstrats...for a better price, even. If you want an Epiphone superstrat, you buy a Kramer. Personally, I think the Kramer name is going to sell that type of guitar better than Epi ever managed to. And I dont think it is coincidence that Epiphone ended their line of superstrats at about the same time they acquired Kramer.

 

With that said, I dont particularly like the new logo, and I dont think they should have changed it...at least on the traditional models, because those are the models that actual Kramer fans are more likely to buy. I can see changing the logo on the non-traditional models, I suppose, but I still think it is ugly.

 

And there is some brand identification to a point, and especially if you are looking at it from a combinded brand point of view. With the Kramer name, you know that your are buying a guitar from a company that has always specialized in superstrats. With the Gibson/Epiphone quality, you know that you arent getting a USA high-end guitar, but you are still getting a guitar that meets or exceeds the quality standards of Epiphone. Thats not a bad thing, escecially for the price point. Look at the selection of guitars you get in the $300 price range from Epiphone. Its pretty pathetic. And forget getting anything with a locking trem system or coil-splitting.

 

Kramer was dead before they left New Jersey, and even they were outsourcing to Asia near the end. Kramer had a huge track record of financial problems. If it wasnt for Gibson, Kramer would be long gone. Some people might actually prefer it that way. But personally, I'm thankful that they are carrying on the name if only to offer well built, affordable superstrats with quality somewhere between the Epiphone and Gibson brands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You've probably seen it by now, but here you go...

News-Header.jpg

Oh that...yeah, maybe cuz Gary is doing his own thing again? There are a few models of HIS stuff I wouldn't mind getting my hands on. Not the cheap Gibson owned Kramers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I hate to go all moderate on everyone, but I like both. I am a product of the 80s and I remember seeing my rock gods shredding away on Kramers with the block letters on a banana headstock. And the Gibson made Striker I own has them. But, having played it, It dosn't matter what logo it has on it cause it out plays ANY guitar I've ever picked up. The logo is just a logo, the quality is what will put Kramer back on top. I'm sure Gibson, who's name has been around since the early 1900s, and has the same logo, understands that the insturments make the brand not the other way around. Aside from financial issues, Kramer fell from grace because they were more trend than quality. Not that there weren't good guitars, but it was about the style. Metal and Hard Rock aren't as popular today as they were in the mid 80s so insturments that are built for that type of playing have become a niche market. Jackson, another big name for metal was bought by Fender. It only makes sense that Gibson should aquire Kramer. in order to compete in that market. My Striker FR-422SM is built for the demands of a metal player. It plays circles around the Jackson I had. I am fond of the old logo but I think Gibson is making the statment "this isn't your fathers Kramer!"

Maybe I was a bit confusing in my ramblings, but what you just said totally agrees with what I said.

 

The Pacer is a historical, traditional Kramer guitar. That is exactly the guitar that Kramer should be making. However, under Gibson Kramer is now making guitars like the Assault 220 & 221 and the Pariah. Those guitars have no heritage with the Kramer brand and won't have lots of pull under that name.

 

In short I think Gibson is trying to make Kramer into something it never was. Don't misunderstand what I am saying in that I am not trying to say the products with the Kramer name on them are bad. What I am trying to say here is Gibson is resurrecting a brand name that has not done much for the past 20 years. While bringing this brand back they change the traditional logo and product offering. So why call it Kramer then? There is no brand identification with the logo and little identification with the product offering.

As such Gibson could call this brand offering anything they wanted to. I suggested the name Henry would provide as much brand recognition as how the Kramer guitars are being marketed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the old logo of the K descending to the end of the headstock, or the other one without it, those logos kick ***, my SM1 has the sloping one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...