Gibson - behind the curtain

[Jimi75]

Some of us here wonder sometimes what's going wrong at Gibson and why Gibson is making headlines with bad quality, high prices etc.

Here's a fine financial times articel that's worth a read and gives good inside:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/cad42764-3...b5df10621.html

[Commodore 64***]

The list of rock stars that have played Gibson guitars through the years includes icons such as Keith Richards, Allman Brothers, Chuck Berry, Steve Miller and Joan Jett.

There has to be some better examples than Joan Jett and Steve Miller, lol.

[oldguy]

Good article. I enjoyed the comparison to Fender's business model in the article.
Gibson instruments, the ones I grew up with, will always be special to me.
Les Pauls, 335's-45's-55's, Firebirds, Explorers, Flying V's, SG's.
I would like to see the brand survive, but with the excellent offerings from Heritage in good ol' Kalamazoo, as well as the quality instruments offered by the luthiers in Japan and Korea at a lower price point, who knows? Henry J's running the show at Gibson, his word is law. It will be interesting to see how it plays out.

[Brian Krashpad]

Henry J is a tool.

[progrmr]

As a living room rockstar, I think it's too bad that the Epiphone quality has diminished over the last few years. With high quality, inexpensive brands like the Squier classic vibes and SX guitars I'm surprised Epiphone does as well as they do.

Even though both Fender and Gibson rely on their premiere lines to make real money, the $300-$500 range is surely important to their bottom lines. I would love to enjoy more Epiphone and Gibson products but for the $$$ in both the entry/intermediate and premiere range there are better values to be had IMO.

[MAXIFUNK]

Seems to me they are heading towards being restructured and the CEO being ousted. Improved quality controls across all of their brands and a better price point for Gibby's would go a long way to solve the lack luster sales. The flood really hurt them as well.

I have a few Gibby's on my GAS list but with out a major wind fall I doubt I'll ever buy them 3 to 5 Grand is butt load of money. When I can go buy a Fender American Deluxe for $1499.99 USD that is only $100.00 more than the Les Paul Studio Deluxe I want which is going for $1399.99 USD. Which is really a base model with one slight modification and 60's slim profile neck.

Because one thing is for sure you can not live of your brand name alone forever just ask Pontiac.

[helliott***]

Good find, Jimi. I hope my recently acquired 339 isn't a product of the poisoned workplace!

[Tig***]

Seems to me they are heading towards being restructured and the CEO being ousted.

Pay no attention the that man behind the curtain!

[MAXIFUNK]

Pay no attention the that man behind the curtain!

THEY MUST BE IN OZ!

[Duffy]

So, what it boils down to is that Gibson is screwing everybody, refusing to reveal their important financial information, abusing management and workers, distancing themselves from their traditional small dealerships, and operating as a private, secretive company, without a board of directors or public stock holders and getting away with it.

Gibson has been practicing unethical business practices that have made the headlines recently and the fact that they hid the design and manufacturing process of weight relieving and chambering the bodies of the Les Pauls while advertising them a "solid body" electric guitars, is particularly unsavory. While a lot of people are happy with their chambered LPs the fact is that Gibson did it to make them lighter and make them appear to be constructed of the superior and rare light weight varieties of mahagony that are now becoming difficult to acquire. Gibson uses heavier mahogany that is cheaper and easier for them to get - they lightened it up using secret "proprietary" manufacturing methods, and sold it to a blind public as if it was the same as in the "good old days", when they knew it wasn't. Mysteriously, Gibson has a lot of happy customers and even those who praise the chambered body guitars.

Personally I'll take a heavy, honestly solid Agile LP copy before I'll buy a bottom of the line chambered Gibson LP studio. This is just my opinion. I had an SG Faded solid body that I liked a lot but my Epiphone SG copies sound and play just as well.

After reading the article it seems that Gibson is considered a good risk to the lenders who seem pacified enough to put up with the opaque financial disclosure situation and the supreme command structure of the top managment.

I won't buy a Gibson because I respect Gibson or think they are a superior guitar; I'll buy one for sentimental reasons or the status of brand recognition. I have no respect for Gibson as a company. Less and less guitar players are probably buying Gibsons, but a probably predominant number of professional guitar players you see in DVDs and on TV and at shows are playing Gibsons. It gives the impression that Gibsons and Fenders are the guitars of professionals and, therefore, professional level guitars.

So you can get a professional level Gibson and ignore the business paradime and the suspected and overt unethical practices and just enjoy your guitar, oblivious to all that. After all, all we want is good guitars and we don't care what the companies are doing, Chinesse labor exploitation not withstanding. But we don't want to feel "ripped off" and that is how a lot of people feel about Gibson's pricing, especially during hard economic times.

At least Fenders are affordable and are supporting the small dealers, while making high quality guitars.

That was a good article, from the perspective of business professionals and their analysis of Gibson as a business entity, looking from the outside in. From what it sounds like, you can't even think about seeing inside the company's financial core: it's a private corporation and does not have to disclose all of its records, profits, worth, etc. If the current regime runs it into the ground very few will know or see it coming until it's too late.