Bloomberg Article on Gibson's Wood Issues

[ZuWa]

Bloomberg BusinessWeek Article on Gibson's Wood Procuring Issues.

[Unionman]

Bloomberg BusinessWeek Article on Gibson's Wood Procuring Issues.

 

 

I had no idea, previous to this article and The New York Times article, that the CEO's politics were right-wing. This has been very illuminating, thanks for the link.

[ZuWa]

I had no idea, previous to this article and The New York Times article, that the CEO's politics were right-wing. This has been very illuminating, thanks for the link.

 

'Right Wing" often means "less government", and I can certainly understand why Gibson's CEO would feel this way at this time. Having items confiscated and not returned over the course of two raids without any charges being filed is not how our legal system is designed to work. It's designed to prevent that kind of thing from happening. The system needs time to work properly and I'm confident this situation will be resolved in Gibson's favor, but something seems wrong here.

[Searcy]

" Juszkiewicz is an unexpected catalyst for this controversy. He is not politically active; he donates occasionally to both Tennessee Democrats and Republicans in Congress and calls himself a Bill Clinton fan. He has also been at the forefront of environmental oversight in his industry. He worked closely with the Rainforest Alliance, a nonprofit conservancy, to create the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), which certifies the legality and good stewardship of participants along the timber supply chain. Some 360 million acres of forest and 22,000 vendors—from logger to retailer—in 107 countries now receive FSC approval. Juszkiewicz served for many years on the Alliance’s board of directors but stepped down in 2009, shortly after the first federal investigation into his company. In 2003, Greenpeace’s Paul, seeing Juszkiewicz as someone who promoted responsible logging, asked him to organize his counterparts at Fender, Martin, Taylor, and Yamaha into a coalition to help save Sitka spruce forests in southeastern Alaska. The guitar makers joined forces, making the case to a local tribe that FSC compliance would pay huge dividends."

 

Clearly a right wing dikc...

[milod]

I think at this point that as much as illuminating the Gibson ordeal, we're illuminating national politics in a way that reflects often an escape from rational thinking into a matter of reusing sound bytes; on both sides.

 

The thing that bothers me most about the Gibson issue here is that nothing has been done in court, and as I understand it, "discovery" is being sandbagged by the prosecution. It's bad enough that functionally we have what should be a civil matter being addressed as a criminal matter. Meanwhile Gibson property is being held by the prosecution which seems ipse facto to be punitive.

 

As for HenryJ and Bill Clinton, I've worked twice in a private office situation with Clinton when he was governor. I ended up with a great respect for him as an individual and as a politician - and even as much a degree of "liking" one might get from such a short exposure to another. That emphatically does not mean by any criteria that I'm a left wing person in my own politics. Former Democrat Majority Leader Tom Daschle used to refer to us as a "political odd couple," but I call him more than acquaintance; I call him a friend with whom I've shared dinner and wine.

 

I think it appears, true or not, that politics are indeed involved in the Gibson case, but I'm less certain that it's right vs. left wing unless we're talking about a hidden agenda in the bureaucracy that seems set on tearing down a rather nice mid-size American manufacturer that has quite a high profile.

 

The Bloomberg article didn't really tell me much, and nothing that changes my opinion. I do know that there are some relatively highly place folks in the current administration who have been convinced that HenryJ is some sort of modern Mephistopheles. Personally I rather doubt it. OTOH, I suppose that operating in states with business environments that aren't pro-union might make some folks who believe unions are mandatory for all workers (as in "Workers of the World Unite") automatically against him and the company.

 

To get a bit political, though, I think both "parties" here in the U.S. and in other Anglophone nations nowadays have a bad tendency to pass laws that make little sense because they're in reaction to this or that - and the unintended consequences do tend to bite all of us in ways unimagined in the halls of legislation.

 

m

[ZuWa]

I don't see this as a political issue. No one benefits politically if Gibson goes down the tubes. I see it as enforcement of the Lacey Act run amok.

 

I'd love to know why Gibson was targeted for this enforcement. What was Gibson doing that was any different than Fender, PRS, etc.

[milod]

Warren...

 

It became a political issue due to the plain fact that governmental bureaucracies are political entities regardless of partisan tilt. That's due in large part to the internal function of any bureaucracy.

 

My understanding followed by a bit of reasoning is that probably some disgruntled ex Gibson employee got hold of a sympathetic ear in the bureaucracy and that led to a feedback loop that Gibson had to be breaking the law and should be damaged, if not broken. Another possibility is that some zealous lower-end bureaucrat saw something he thought would help his career by jumping onto - and found a sympathetic ear with similar motives.

 

Up the political food chain, yes, I think that the folks involved in investigation and prosecution of the case have become convinced that Gibson is a "bad guy." Some of that may well be tinged by regional perspectives and partisan politics at this point.

 

I think the reason it hasn't come yet to court regardless of damage to Gibson's ability to keep hiring people and producing goods is that prosecutors are trying to put ducks in a row to prove this or that allegation of wrongdoing - and that they're not having a particularly easy job of it.

 

m

[badbluesplayer]

 

Read the affadavit here if y'all are interested.

[ZuWa]

The affidavit was a good read. I agree with milod that someone inside Gibson may have initiated the complaint to the gov't.

 

The only discrepancy I see that the feds had up front was that some wood was possibly misrepresented as smaller than 6mm and it may have been larger than 6mm.

 

There is also a lot of verbiage so the magistrate would permit the gov't to confiscate Gibson's computers, hardware, and software. I presume this was so they could attempt to find something really worth prosecuting since they didn't really have much going in.

 

Someone brought the gov't in with allegations of major funny business. Since no charges have been brought, maybe the "informer" misled the gov't regarding Gibson's wood importing business?

[Searcy]

The 6mm issue is only important if the wood is veneer. Gibson claims the wood is a finished guitar part which would make the 6mm issue moot.

 

At worst it seems like a mistake in paper work. What I would like to hear is what F&W claims the motive for this criminal clerical error is.

[sneakerpimp]

...I agree with milod that someone inside Gibson may have initiated the complaint to the gov't.

 

would that be for the first raid or the second raid?

[ZuWa]

This thing will have to play out through our legal system. Unfortunately there will always be corrupt folks in foreign countries that will do anything to make a few bucks, even if it means taking plants or animals that are protected. A company like Gibson has to rely on the judgement of these very people to get the raw materials to conduct their business. Something has to give, and maybe this lawsuit will define the groundwork for how companies that need protected materials can operate in the future.

[stein]

While the article seems long winded and lacking in substance, I am glad it brings it up again.

 

The longer this thing goes, the more I think that there is not more hidden, at least not against Gibson. I get the feeling that if all were exposed now, F&W would be looking pretty silly.

 

I suggest that the real reason this is taking so long is that the F&W wants this to die down, and the case they are putting together has more to do with damage control of their own actions than building a case against Gibson.

[Searcy]

While the article seems long winded and lacking in substance, I am glad it brings it up again.

 

The longer this thing goes, the more I think that there is not more hidden, at least not against Gibson. I get the feeling that if all were exposed now, F&W would be looking pretty silly.

 

I suggest that the real reason this is taking so long is that the F&W wants this to die down, and the case they are putting together has more to do with damage control of their own actions than building a case against Gibson.

 

That's exactly what it says to me. This case is now 4 years old and still no charges have been filed. I think these F&W clowns over stepped in 2009 and ended up making a case they can't prove. Then they get a tip in 2011 and run in great guns (cutting power to the camera system...? Really?)to finally grab that smoking gun that have needed and now that has fallen short too. So they sit...

 

If I'm wrong then give Henry his day in court already and let him pay his fine...

[stein]

As it stands right now, the evidence is firm that the F&W have overstepped.

 

The complaint against the govt. that they are able to punish a company without just cause or a court case is already a matter of public record.

 

Furthermore, the complaint isn't just that what they have done is illegal, but they have used the courts, and the law, to MAKE it legal. Specifically, that a govt. agency can enforce policy through the use of power, without having to convict of a crime. Everything public and known to this point proves this to be true.

 

So, it seems that regardless of a conviction against individuals in the Govt, or a conviction against the govt., the implication is that heads are gonna roll. If the F&W were to present a case and evidence of Gibson being guilty of something, chances of it being enough to justify the actions of the Govt. are likely such that no one involved could afford to be connected politically.

 

My prediction is that by the time this gets to a conclusion, those involved on the govt. side will be shifted around to the point it can be made to appear that they have 'cleaned house'. I doubt we will ever see this go to court.

 

This will fade into obscurity, and no more will happen. Just a prediction.

[Unionman]

'Right Wing" often means "less government", and I can certainly understand why Gibson's CEO would feel this way at this time. Having items confiscated and not returned over the course of two raids without any charges being filed is not how our legal system is designed to work. It's designed to prevent that kind of thing from happening. The system needs time to work properly and I'm confident this situation will be resolved in Gibson's favor, but something seems wrong here.

 

 

According to this article, the CEO aligned himself with right-wing politicians:

 

'The August factory sweep and seizures quickly became a rallying point for citizens agitating against regulation, “big government,” and Barack Obama. Fox News ran 24 stories on it in the following two weeks, three times more than any other network, calling it a politically motivated offensive carried out because of the plant’s use of nonunion workers and Juszkiewicz’s support of conservative politicians. In recaps of the raid, the federal agents were described as wearing SWAT attire, their guns drawn. Representative Marsha Blackburn, a conservative Republican from a district just outside Nashville, brought Juszkiewicz with her to Obama’s jobs speech to Congress in September. He sat in House Speaker John Boehner’s box.

 

Gibson ramped up its own “This Will Not Stand” campaign, filling its website with videos of employees and musicians decrying the assault on American jobs and values. “How much tyranny will you accept?” Jon Schaffer of the metal bands Iced Earth and Sons of Liberty barks in one video. In early October, at a “We Stand with Gibson” demonstration in Nashville, Juszkiewicz took the rostrum surrounded by “Don’t Tread on Me” flags and alongside Blackburn and the leaders of the Tea Party Express and Tennessee Tax Revolt.'

 

Since 'the government' is the main protector of workers, it's a common target of fantatical capitalists, especially from Right to Work for Less states. So this incident was and is obviously being spun by the right and its dupes as an attack on working people.

[stein]

Umm,,no, I believe the article in the link is quite clear in communicating the difference between Henry's political agenda, and those of the right wing as a whole. The article does not infer that Henry is a right wing guy at all, just that the ISSUE at hand has been embraced by the right wing.

 

The issue of govt. being too big and expensive, and overstepping to harm American companies has long been one of the right wing complaints. So naturally, most of the politicains and news agencies that come to his aid in making this public are going to be from the right.

 

Henry himself has made his intentions clear that he wants to get the word out. His political agenda is that this is wrong.

 

I have seen and listened to lots of interviews of Henry about this, and never once have I heard him give any indication of being for the left or the right. And in fact, in interviews with those heavily leaning toward the right, when more of a 'spin' is placed on it, he seems reluctant to agree to an answer that puts an 'anti-left' spin.

[pippy]

...What was Gibson doing that was any different than Fender, PRS, etc...

That's a very good question and I'd been wondering the same thing since the story first broke. However, according to the article and with respect to Fender, Martin and Taylor;

 

" The same coalition of guitar manufacturers that went to Alaska to protect Sitka spruce was asked to try something similar in Madagascar, where illegal trade has long plundered the country's natural resources. Scott Paul says Malagasy rosewood and ebony are considered the Beluga caviar of tone woods, and the hope was that guitar makers would motivate growers and loggers there to operate legitimately. The consortium visited in June 2008. Every company but Gibson, however, decided not to do business in Madagascar, finding the trade too risky. Gibson ended up importing ebony from a logger named Roger Thunam in northeast Madagascar who had recently been arrested for illegally trading in precious woods."

 

I'm certainly no lawyer but that would appear to me to be the hinge-pin of the government's second raid against Gibson. If it can be shown, in court, that Gibson were knowingly buying stocks of wood from illicit sources then it becomes difficult to put up a case for their defence.

 

"...Moreover, says Juszkiewicz, Gibson went on the trip with the purpose of reforming the Malagasy market..."

It may well be true, as claimed in the article, that Gibson were trying to establish a legitimate source on the island. Until such a source had been discovered, however, Gibson were being, at best, naiive in procuring stock from a dealer who "had recently been arrested for illegally trading in precious woods".

 

Unless, of course, it can be shown that, with respect to the Gibson shipment at least, Thunam was operating within the terms of the regulations currently enforced.

 

P.

[stein]

PIPPY:

 

I think you have the first and second raid mixed up: the first raid was for the Madagascar wood, and the second was for Indian wood.

 

This is heresay, only from my memory of what I have read: my understanding is that the first raid was concerning a shipment from a German importer, in which the paperwork FOLLOWED the wood. This German importer was found to have got wood from this guy who was also known to have got wood which did not comply.

 

I tend to believe Gibson on this, because they have claimed the wood was legitimate, and they asked for it back. Seems if it wasn't, Gibson would be putting themselves at risk and embarrassment if they felt they could get busted for it, especially after a year and a half in the possession of the FEDS and an investigation.

 

The second raid happened right after Gibson had asked the court for the wood returned from the first raid.

 

But back to what you were saying: When you spell it out like that, it really seems like a situation where Gibson may have pissed off the wrong people. If a sort of unofficial blacklist was there, or an effort was being made to force someone into a position by denying business, perhaps Gibson making efforts on their own outside the group could be taken as undermining?

 

Perhaps if not the cause, perhaps enough to ensure that they are the ones who get thrown under the bus?

[pippy]

PIPPY:

I think you have the first and second raid mixed up: the first raid was for the Madagascar wood, and the second was for Indian wood.

You're correct, stein; Sorry! I meant to type 'first raid' and had a brain-fart. My bad.

 

 

I think you're on the right track thinking about how interesting to find out who, ultimately, is the great motive force behind these seizures and the timing of same. It could be simply that, as claimed, the authorities are merely enforcing the revised version of the Lacey Act and Gibson have been found to be in contravention of the Act twice now.

 

I only wish that it could come to court so the matter can be laid to rest.

 

My own feeling (FWIW) is that some sort of amendment to the Lacey Act is required because otherwise the situation for manufacturers in America who make products from non-native wood sources has become all-but untenable. I understand the need for protecting endangered sources (whether animal, vegetable or mineral; and I actually work with many clients who must comply with the CITIES treaty) but to put the onus of ensuring all stages of procurement of all materials from all suppliers and their go-betweens comes from sustained sources is nigh-on impossible; especially for a small-scale US-based manufacturer.

 

If there can be a system put in place where some sort of 'farm-assured' status can be bestowed upon enough suppliers in the necessary countries then things would be fine but this, in turn, could just lead to more problems where a corrupt cartel could gain control of the supply chain, Mafia-like, in the country of origin.

 

P.

[stein]

That brings up another point:

 

I think we are headed that way, but in American politcs, especially lately, growing pains usually mean a struggle for control. Companies, or corperations, or organisations, will lobby the govt. To make laws and set up organisations in their favor.

 

Often, a new Gov't agency is created, or in this case, power given to a Govt. agency. (F&W expanding into trees and forestry).

[Searcy]

I think one thing that's interesting about all this is how the Feds are stressing that amendments to the Lacey Act aren’t needed because "no guitars have been confiscated under the Lacey act and and Gibson is just using scare tactics". In truth many instruments have been seized under the Lacey Act and CITIES. Hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of pianos are sitting in government warehouses right now because of these laws so the amendment is certainly something to think about.

[Unionman]

Umm,,no, I believe the article in the link is quite clear in communicating the difference between Henry's political agenda, and those of the right wing as a whole. The article does not infer that Henry is a right wing guy at all, just that the ISSUE at hand has been embraced by the right wing.

 

The issue of govt. being too big and expensive, and overstepping to harm American companies has long been one of the right wing complaints. So naturally, most of the politicains and news agencies that come to his aid in making this public are going to be from the right.

 

Henry himself has made his intentions clear that he wants to get the word out. His political agenda is that this is wrong.

 

I have seen and listened to lots of interviews of Henry about this, and never once have I heard him give any indication of being for the left or the right. And in fact, in interviews with those heavily leaning toward the right, when more of a 'spin' is placed on it, he seems reluctant to agree to an answer that puts an 'anti-left' spin.

 

 

 

The article mentions the CEO's 'support of conservative politicans' and associating with Boehner and Blackburn.

[milod]

Another point is that the way this becomes partisan political by some folks. It became political because of factors behind the scenes in the bureaucracies - not per se "partisan political" except that the bureaucracy hollers for help from "upstairs" when its toes are stepped on in public as it was in the two Gibson raids.

 

If it were a GOP administration and GOP-appointed federal attorneys, you'd have seen a different game where Democrat elected officials would have gotten in the act and portrayed it as the big nasties going after a poor little company. Yes, I've seen that happen, too.

 

"Big government" problems depend on whose ox is being gored. In this case it's a private business employing hundreds of people. In the case of "No Child Left Behind," it was a matter of local and state governments whose ox was gored. The GOP "NCLB" is now out, and an equally costly and restrictive new game is being phased in.

 

In both case, IMHO, we've got a matter of bureaucracies playing to political constituencies. The bureaucracies themselves will mold to fit whichever party is in power to maintain and expand their organizations.

 

This would not be, I'll add, the first law or regulation to be modified when it appears it is causing increasing problems. The difficulty arises whether the problems themselves bring as much "noise" as the "noise" that brought the law or regulation in the first place.

 

E.g., our local city-owned community center's indoor pool had to spend thousands to put grates over drains because of a few tragedies in less-managed pools where parents weren't watching children in swimming pools that were closed and being drained. More kids are drowned annually in toilet stools and buckets, but a new law required the grates and brought a big batch of spending for public and privately-owned pools.

 

You can like the idea or dislike it, but the statistics indicate to me that "noise" brought the law. It also brought costs that cut into paychecks for employees and probably "scholarships" for kids among the 50 percent or so "in poverty."

 

You can hate HenryJ all you want, and for whatever reason - but in this case too, you also have to recognize the complexity of the law, the damage to the company and its employees, and how anyone in similar crisis types of situations will grab for help where possible. In this case it's going to be folks with political connections that might help draw "noise" favoring Gibson.

 

Granted, I'm from a small state but you'd be surprised how often I've seen die-hard Republicans get great help from Democrat Senators on business issues - and die-hard Democrats similarly get great help on their issues from Republican Senators. In larger states that personal connection isn't there. It just ain't always "politics."

 

m

[Searcy]

The article mentions the CEO's 'support of conservative politicans' and associating with Boehner and Blackburn.

 

I wouldn't bother arguing with Artisan there Stein. He's kind of a one note solo.