gibson bankruptcy discussion thread

For guitars of the straight waisted variety (or reverse offset).
Post Reply
User avatar
Despot
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 5759
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2012 9:11 am
Location: Wexford, Ireland

Re: gibson going under.

Post by Despot » Thu Apr 26, 2018 7:29 am

Re: amps ... there are a few reasons I think.

First off - Gibson were never known for amps the way that Fender were. Even in the 'golden age' of rock music Gibson guitars were associated with Fender and Marshall amps mostly. iirc a lot of Gibson circuits were more or less clones of Fender circuits too ... which didn't help. And I've owned two vintage Gibson amps from the '50s ... they're great amps, but a lot of the reason why I had them was that they were underpriced compared to their Fender equivalent models.

Secondly there's a limit to what people are prepared to pay for an amp.

In general I've found that the pyramid of spend is guitar - amp - other stuff ... but heavily skewed to the guitar end of the spend. I've always thought that this was a bit short sighted - your amp is your ... well ... amplifier after all. Without a decent sounding amp your beautiful old guitar is going to sound a lot more ordinary than it should. I've always felt the same way about buying rubbish cables as well ... you spend thousands on gear and then get the cheapest possible cable to save beer money? Mad.

But this does limit Gibson's ability to get into amp manufacture in-house. If they were to try to make stuff in the US it would be impossible to compete with the rank and file Fender or Marshall stuff that would be their natural competition. And add to that the fact that Gibson doesn't have the vintage pedigree to use to attempt to sell their new amps ... and that's a tough market.

Plus ... I think folk are more settled with amps. You find the one that works for you and then you sort of stick. I've found Princeton Reverb and Swart AST Combo to be my two - I haven't bought a new amp in a good while (other than buying another Princeton last year or the year before). I can't see myself needing another - whereas guitars ... well ... if I weren't in saving mode right now I'd still be lusting after guitars.

User avatar
Grey
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 2023
Joined: Fri May 20, 2011 11:58 am

Re: gibson going under.

Post by Grey » Thu Apr 26, 2018 8:02 am

I can't argue with that, but it still doesn't seem any less implausible to me than some of their other business decisions. (How are those "fitness headphones" working out? https://www.engadget.com/2015/01/05/gib ... sain-bolt/)

This is strictly a layman's perspective on the issue but if Gibson said "we're going to make amplifiers again" I could at least imagine some interest there. I didn't mean they should try and capitalize on their old amps because as you say, I doubt many people remember them to begin with, but as a guitar company I could at least see that as a logical branch.

It didn't really work out when they briefly acquired Orange in the 90's though so maybe my read on it is totally wrong. Or maybe if they put their own name to something instead of buying and licensing all of these smaller brands that would be the switch?

User avatar
Larry Mal
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 19673
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 4:25 pm
Location: Saint Louis, MO

Re: gibson going under.

Post by Larry Mal » Thu Apr 26, 2018 8:40 am

Despot wrote:
Thu Apr 26, 2018 2:46 am
The J35 was a fine sounding guitar - I honestly loved how it sounded over any of the more expensive Gibsons in the store. Once past the fuzzy warm feeling of New Purchase though I started to have issues - and I was astonished to see that Gibson had effectively hobbled the guitar through the tile/angle of the bridge, which made it impossible to have even action across the strings without doing some dubious bias sanding to the saddle. I first thought it was a fault in mine ... only to find that it was how all J35s were made. Clearly Gibson were trying something subtle to make the J35 (the 'entry' level) less attractive than stuff like True Vintage models against which it was competing. It was a shame really.
I can say that once you source a new saddle that takes that out of the equation, the guitar becomes wonderful to play. I think you might have seen on another thread of mine that I had someone make me a custom saddle that is simply radiused the way the fingerboard is and that took me something like three minutes to sand and fit, once I did, all was good.

MacNichols' is the company, by the way. Nice guy. Not only did he do this for me but he did it as part of a "return".

I have no idea why they would have put such a saddle on there as they did, clearly the guitars are setup for the showroom floor and the potential buyer is supposed to just imagine what it would play like if it played well. I can tell you that my own imagination failed me on any number of times when I would pick up a J-15 or what have you and put it right back.
Back in those days, everyone knew that if you were talking about Destiny's Child, you were talking about Beyonce, LaTavia, LeToya, and Larry.

User avatar
Arthon
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 1839
Joined: Sun May 08, 2011 2:33 pm
Location: Montréal, Québec

Re: gibson going under.

Post by Arthon » Thu Apr 26, 2018 9:31 am

Despot wrote:
Thu Apr 26, 2018 7:29 am
Plus ... I think folk are more settled with amps. You find the one that works for you and then you sort of stick. I've found Princeton Reverb and Swart AST Combo to be my two - I haven't bought a new amp in a good while (other than buying another Princeton last year or the year before). I can't see myself needing another - whereas guitars ... well ... if I weren't in saving mode right now I'd still be lusting after guitars.
Not me!

I have bought and sold more amps then guitar. I have tried most of the major brand. I know I tend to gravited around Fenders and Oranges but I find it difficult to be satisfied with a amp or two. Each musicla project need a different amp, but I can do nearly all the music I want with a Jazzmaster. Right now, I dont even have my prefered amp, a Princeton Reverb.

But you are right with the point that it will be difficult for Gibson to compete against Fender since it's about the same circuits. They will need to be sould at a lower price point; it's impossible since Gibson is all MIA and most Fender amps are made in Mexico.
The Blues Cartographer
(sorry for the spelling, I speak french)

User avatar
Despot
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 5759
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2012 9:11 am
Location: Wexford, Ireland

Re: gibson going under.

Post by Despot » Thu Apr 26, 2018 11:47 pm

Grey wrote:
Thu Apr 26, 2018 8:02 am
I can't argue with that, but it still doesn't seem any less implausible to me than some of their other business decisions. (How are those "fitness headphones" working out? https://www.engadget.com/2015/01/05/gib ... sain-bolt/)

This is strictly a layman's perspective on the issue but if Gibson said "we're going to make amplifiers again" I could at least imagine some interest there. I didn't mean they should try and capitalize on their old amps because as you say, I doubt many people remember them to begin with, but as a guitar company I could at least see that as a logical branch.

It didn't really work out when they briefly acquired Orange in the 90's though so maybe my read on it is totally wrong. Or maybe if they put their own name to something instead of buying and licensing all of these smaller brands that would be the switch?
Oh I agree entirely Grey - it would make a lot more sense than the ass backwards bullshit choices they have made in the last decade ... but unless they were able to come up with something unique and compelling, they couldn't really compete at fender's pricepoint.

The problem here isn't that Gibson can't make good guitars, or that they don't ... it's that Gibson need to make money right now. Not sustainable profits - but a metric feck tonne of money in order to be able to pay back their debts. Memphis would have been sustainable profits - especially the way it was going. But you can see the desperation.

Case in point - that ES345 I bought.
It's a historic model. Historic appointments for a '60s guitar (specific case, specific neck shape, construction, light weight centre block, pickups, wiring etc). So ... stuff that's over and above a 'standard' model. In Gibson's traditional pricing structure (Junior-Special-Standard-Custom-Historic), it would be the top of the line ES model and would have been priced accordingly. Except it wasn't - I bought it, new, for less than the price of a standard ES335 ('57 classics, modern spec). The reason for this is that my guitar is technically a 2016 model. Things have obviously changed since then in terms of pricing - in two years the need to generate cash has become so pronounced that a thousand euro has been added to the price of the closest historic model from 2018 to mine. 1,000 euro. Nothing else has changed - same construction, parts etc. Gibson have just added a grand.

So instead of having a really nice guitar that was affordable at a push (over and above a standard ES335 - what I mean is that if you were in the market for a 335 then you could potentially have considered a historic model without breaking the bank), it's now being marketed as the ES equivalent of those collector choice Les Pauls that run to 5, 6 or 7 grand (the price seemingly based on what Gibson think people will pay for a particular model over another).

That's got to hurt sales. What you make up in individual sales you lose in bulk. A historic ES345 at 3k price is ... well, it's a lot ... but it's cheaper than buying 'affordable vintage' - stuff like Norlin era ES3x5s. Once that price gets pushed up over 4.5k euro (as it currently stands on Thomann for 2018 historic models) you're into the price range of slightly nicer vintage - stuff like late '60s ES345 or ES3355. There's a vintage ES355 from '67 for sale on reverb right now for 6k. Yeah, it's more money ... but I'd be more inclined to save up and wait for a nicely priced vintage guitar than to pay what Gibson is currently asking for a historic model.

So what Gibson have to do is make money, quickly. Memphis won't do that. In fact it probably costs money right now given Gibson's cash grab. So it's shuttered with the production of their guitars moved to Nashville. Right ... next step?

Sell more guitars.

How do Gibson do that? They've tried the 'Made in USA with pride' tag and ... well ... it's not working enough. So I can see Gibson starting to cut corners again - they're going to find ways to cut the unit production price and probably they'll cut the sale prices to try get people buying again. Anything that's 'needlessly' costing money will go. What we saw before the last time Gibson did this under Norlin Beer and Concrete Co was the following:
- Cheaper wood
- Cheaper pickups
- Cheaper construction

(by the way - that most hated Norlin era change ... the volute ... I actually like that. I've never had the headstock snap off a guitar with a volute ... or a maple neck Gibson for that matter! Both are fine by me).

User avatar
Despot
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 5759
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2012 9:11 am
Location: Wexford, Ireland

Re: gibson going under.

Post by Despot » Thu Apr 26, 2018 11:57 pm

But here's the elephant in the room.

Spotify.

Everyone seems to be talking about the death of guitar music. I read an interesting piece earlier this week (I forget where) that suggested that the reason is streaming music. The central argument was that with music streaming people tend to let stuff play as background music to whatever they're doing - whether it's pottering around the house cooking dinner (which is what happens at mine), or walking around with headphones. Guitar music tends to demand attention in a way that more electronic/non-guitar based music doesn't.

And I've found this to be true for me when I examined my own playlists and listening habits on Spotify after reading the article. My playlists have graduated from being heavily guitar band dominated to including all sorts of stuff that popped up on Spotify playlists or played through once my own playlist had finished - stuff that I actually quite like, but would never have gravitated towards if I was buying music. When I think about the music from the last 12 months that I've really liked ... very little of it has been traditional guitar band music. There's been some ... but mostly it's been different stuff. I actually found more interesting music in the last 12 months than I have in years (I'm a late joiner of Spotify - I've been using it since Jan '17). It's just that precious little of it is guitar based.

It's swings and roundabouts though - people spoke about the death of guitar music in the '80s and that turned out to be nonsense. Besides, what's wrong with a broader musical spectrum to enjoy? Nothing .. except it's not really going to help Gibson in the short-medium term.

The next generation will come through and grow bored with the current generation's musical choices ... as ever it has been. Whether it's going to lead to a revival of indie-rock or some new thing is anyone's guess though...

User avatar
mediocreplayer
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 1331
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 12:59 am

Re: gibson going under.

Post by mediocreplayer » Fri Apr 27, 2018 8:14 am

Despot wrote:
Thu Apr 26, 2018 11:57 pm

Everyone seems to be talking about the death of guitar music. I read an interesting piece earlier this week (I forget where) that suggested that the reason is streaming music. The central argument was that with music streaming people tend to let stuff play as background music to whatever they're doing - whether it's pottering around the house cooking dinner (which is what happens at mine), or walking around with headphones. Guitar music tends to demand attention in a way that more electronic/non-guitar based music doesn't.
I agree that listeners' horizons are broader now (which is great), but I do not agree with the article you are citing, especially the part in bold. I think it is something guitar types say to feel good about themselves, by attributing some vague intellectual quality to their music compared to music that you can just hear in the kitchen.

There are much cheaper / cooler / more portable ways to make music these days than guitars. It is probably not more complicated than that.

User avatar
Larry Mal
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 19673
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 4:25 pm
Location: Saint Louis, MO

Re: gibson going under.

Post by Larry Mal » Fri Apr 27, 2018 8:48 am

Or maybe people just heard enough guitar music and the guitar really isn't all that much better than other instruments and frankly it's kind of weird that it's as ubiquitous as it is.

Centuries went by with people make wonderful music with no guitar in it and then all of a sudden it was in everything. Homogenization not being better for music than it is for anything else.
Back in those days, everyone knew that if you were talking about Destiny's Child, you were talking about Beyonce, LaTavia, LeToya, and Larry.

User avatar
sookwinder
Mods
Mods
Posts: 11179
Joined: Mon Sep 11, 2006 6:47 pm
Location: Melbourne Australia

Re: gibson going under.

Post by sookwinder » Fri Apr 27, 2018 6:10 pm

there is a simple reason that the guitar became so popular (even in the 30s) ... it is portable, it can be used for both soloing and accompaniment (acoustic or electric) and typically can be used to play the entirety of the piece of music being played. Unlike same timpani, trombone, [insert other instrument name here].

yes a keyboard can play both lead and rhythm, but as a keyboard player I can tell you they aren't in any manner or shape portable.
I have 7 keyboards with 4 metres of my couch that I watch TV from, but when I am in the "creative" mood when relaxing in front of the TV it is a guitar I grab.

Portability is the key.
relaxing alternative to doing actual work ...

User avatar
Larry Mal
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 19673
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 4:25 pm
Location: Saint Louis, MO

Re: gibson going under.

Post by Larry Mal » Sat Apr 28, 2018 4:30 am

Well, portability, sure. But also economical. A guitar is no more portable that horns are, and a horn section can play chords and leads. But horn sections have more people to pay.
Back in those days, everyone knew that if you were talking about Destiny's Child, you were talking about Beyonce, LaTavia, LeToya, and Larry.

User avatar
Despot
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 5759
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2012 9:11 am
Location: Wexford, Ireland

Re: gibson going under.

Post by Despot » Mon Apr 30, 2018 12:05 am

mediocreplayer wrote:
Fri Apr 27, 2018 8:14 am
Despot wrote:
Thu Apr 26, 2018 11:57 pm

Everyone seems to be talking about the death of guitar music. I read an interesting piece earlier this week (I forget where) that suggested that the reason is streaming music. The central argument was that with music streaming people tend to let stuff play as background music to whatever they're doing - whether it's pottering around the house cooking dinner (which is what happens at mine), or walking around with headphones. Guitar music tends to demand attention in a way that more electronic/non-guitar based music doesn't.
I agree that listeners' horizons are broader now (which is great), but I do not agree with the article you are citing, especially the part in bold. I think it is something guitar types say to feel good about themselves, by attributing some vague intellectual quality to their music compared to music that you can just hear in the kitchen.

There are much cheaper / cooler / more portable ways to make music these days than guitars. It is probably not more complicated than that.
Maybe I should expand on that a bit - it's not that I'm saying that guitar music is sort of worthy of more attention, or that it's on an intellectual pedestal of some sort - I guess what I was saying is that subjectively I find it harder to 'zone out' if I'm listening to guitar based music than if I'm listening to electronic music, or instrumental stuff. I guess I could zone out just as easily listening to calmer acoustic music - so my comments were based purely on my playlists.

The main playlist that I listen to (a 'song of the day' playlist that I share with friends - which we add to whenever we remember to do so) is all over the place - you've got the typical guitar type music on there that I add (and two other friends who are players), then you get all sorts of other stuff that the non-musicians add. Mostly I end up liking the stuff that the non-players add far more than the guitar based stuff that we add.

Case in point - the last ten songs on the playlist (and who added them) are:
Mr Tillman - Father John Misty (me)
Brighter - Cass McCombs (me)
Seagulls (stop it now) - Bad Lip Reading of Star Wars (Lady Despot - it cracks her up)
Thirty - The Weather Station (muso friend - quite like this song)
Bum Bum Bum - Cass McCombs (another muso friend)
Truth - Kamasi Washington (non musician friend - awesome track)
Causing Trouble - Saint Sister (non musician friend)
Charles Bradley - Changes (non musician friend)
Elvis Costello - Welcom to the working week (me)
The Japanese house - Face like thunder (non musician friend)

The tracks that were added by the non-musicians are mostly stuff that I wouldn't seek out myself, but which meshed in nicely with the playlist and work well as 'life soundtrack' music. Stuff that I put on when I'm cooking dinner, or out for a walk. I've started to ruthlessly cull anything that folk put on there that drags me out of what I'm doing or is attention seeking.

Anyway ... sorry for going off topic a good bit. I just wanted to make clear that I've no musical elitism or feeling of protectionism when it comes to guitar music - I don't think that it's intrinsically clever or worthy of more effort or attention, I just find that certain types of guitar music drag me out of what I'm doing an I start listening to them to figure out how they're played. They have their place - my 'Run Fat Boy' playlist is full of stuff that's guitar orientated as that's the stuff that helps me keep going on a run - when I'm doing that I actually need something to drag me out of the mechanics of left foot/right foot!

Final point - I can anticipate that folk will point out that guitars feature a lot on the tracks above - I'd agree, even on the non-musician added songs. What I would argue is that the non-musician tracks aren't, at their core, guitar orientated music. On those songs guitars are just another instrument on the track - not the core of it. Take the guitar away from Welcome To The Working Week and you've lost a lot of the song. Take it away from Mr Tillman ... would you even notice? It's that shift in emphasis in music that I think has led to a drop in sales - as others have said, you can make music now with a multitude of devices or instruments without ever needing a guitar - for a lot less money too.

User avatar
ThePearDream
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 2072
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2017 6:18 am
Location: Detroit
Contact:

Re: gibson going under.

Post by ThePearDream » Tue May 01, 2018 6:09 am

Doug
@dpcannafax

User avatar
Jaguar018
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 8045
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2008 6:48 am
Location: Burbs of Washington DC

Re: gibson going under.

Post by Jaguar018 » Tue May 01, 2018 6:37 am

^ From that article, it looks like they have everything lined up. Hope they can recover and get a better business model going forward.

User avatar
shadowplay
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 25930
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 4:30 am
Location: Glasgow. Scotland
Contact:

Re: gibson going under.

Post by shadowplay » Tue May 01, 2018 7:06 am

Jaguar018 wrote:
Tue May 01, 2018 6:37 am
^ From that article, it looks like they have everything lined up. Hope they can recover and get a better business model going forward.
In the rag trade I've found that these sort of 'administration' deals royally shaft the minor creditors, local service providers and freelancers, hoping they don't have the resources to lawyer up and fight back.

D
Are you loathsome tonight?

User avatar
Despot
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 5759
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2012 9:11 am
Location: Wexford, Ireland

Re: gibson going under.

Post by Despot » Tue May 01, 2018 7:33 am

Sad to hear, but not entirely surprising. Hopefully the company will survive restructuring as much as possible, but I do think it'll have some wilderness years ahead of it. I forsee off-shoring of manufacture as being very high on the agenda of those who come along to rescue the company - and by that I mean offshoring of the Gibson brand rather than trying to sell more Epiphones.

What I am really sad about is the likelihood that this means the end of Memphis (at least). I can see US made guitars continuing - but I can't see Memphis surviving. And that's such a shame given the quality of their production in the recent past. A real shame.

Post Reply