Gibson's reasoning for running their retailers offline is now unveiled.

[Robert S.]

Re: Gibson's reasoning for running their retailers offline is now unveiled.

BTW, I made $20k last year so don't assume I'm some rich dork spouting off. I have whatever I have because of personal choices and a strange sense of priorities.

[Quencho092]

Re: Gibson's reasoning for running their retailers offline is now unveiled.

when i want to buy something i think of how many hours i have to work to pay for it. I work for the Princeton Review in staff at the office and they pay 8 bucks an hour. Thats 225 hours of work for an LP!!! Im glad i only worked 125 for my strat, and compared to almost every other LP in guitar center, it rocked!

[Mincer]

Re: Gibson's reasoning for running their retailers offline is now unveiled.

Many things in life are too expensive for me to buy but I don't say they suck because I can't afford them.

If you put away $50 a week you can have a LP in 9 months. For $10 a week you can have a LP in just over 3 years that will last you a lifetime. That doesn't seem too harsh. And thats a new Std, you can get used Studios much cheaper.

I dont think I said they suck because they aren't affordable. Hell I paid a lot more than the cost of a LP Custom for my Brian Moore. Teaching guitar and playing for a living, this was lots and lots of hours saving. I think I have the same priorities as you do!
But that truly was a custom guitar, built by 2 people, with special electronics and pickups and switching that Gibson doesn't offer. My gripe is, why the huge price jump between the studios and standards and customs, and why is a guitar so expensive and you have to go change the pickups after spending $2k?
Again, I don't understand why an expensive guitar has subpar pickups. Or why an expensive guitar needs any adjustments at all- you think for that much money, they can spend the extra 10 minutes (or include a setup in the price) making every guitar play as good as yours does.
Gibson isn't the only company doing this- Taylor has jumped on it too...

[Robert S.]

Re: Gibson's reasoning for running their retailers offline is now unveiled.

No, you didn't say they sucked and I wasn't addressing you directly as much as I was replying those those that complain about the cost of Gibson guitars and perceived quality issues.

There are stinkers everywhere no matter how much you pay. I'm sure BMW has sold more than one car that had issues. Anything made by man sooner or later has issues.

Pickups are a preference and the vast majority of Gibson guitar owners like their pickups just fine. Just because we like SD better does not make Gibson pickups inferior.

The added labor of adding binding is the reason they cost more. Binding is still finished and most likely installed by hand.

Production guitars have stock type electronics. You and I are switch hounds, the extra electronics confuses the average guitar buyer.

Having a guitar made for you I would assume the set-up would be tight. After being shipped and set out in a crowd for awhile, store bought guitars often need a tweak.

I've played a few Moores and they are fine guitars. They sound great but it aint my sound. To each his own.

[lastwinj]

Re: Gibson's reasoning for running their retailers offline is now unveiled.

BTW, I made $20k last year

u sure about that? guitar repairs, gigs....... hehehhe. just messin.

germ

[54stratlover]

Re: Gibson's reasoning for running their retailers offline is now unveiled.

Jeez, what can you buy these days without someone thinking you're a sellout for supporting a corporate giant?

I do like the idea of supporting small, handmade guitar companies, but those sure ain't cheap either. Not to mention that when their design slightly slips out of style, you're stuck with a guitar that's worth 1/5 of what you paid for it. Anyone out there playing any 70's Alembic guitars? 80's Steinbergers? Those sure seemed like a better deal than a Gibson when they came out, but how about now?

I'll set this straight right now, I love Gibsons!!, just like I love fenders, just like I love etc. etc. etc. I like guitars like I like women, I DON"T DESCRIMINATE.
You know the thing that was really stinking to me concerning gibson and their internet policy, it reminded me of wall-mart like load of B.S. (see last gibson thread concerning gibson wanting to tell the gibson story and getting rid of individual pictures on the internet.) I'm still not sure that it was a legit story, or at least I'm not sure it ws portrayed correctly. BUT, were there is smoke there is fire.
My favorite gibson retailer Music-Machine www.guitarsale.com never took down their pictures. My #2 favorite gibson website "Wildwood" has never taken down their individual pictures either. This made me suspicious of the story.
This Amazon thing concerns me to an extent, because it adds a little legitamacy to the previous gibson thread, except that the way Evan explaines it Gibson would have no real part in the Amazon thing, just like Seymour having no part in the Amazon sales of S.D. pups. (More on this later)
5 or so years ago Music machine was a little music store, no different than thousands of other stores around the country. They had 3 or 4 gibsons behind the counter along with maybe 20 other guitars around the store. When internet sales became the big thing. Music machine was a little ahead of the power curve, and started marketing gibsons hot and heavy. He even commisioned a couple lines of his own (stinger & real feel). When I recently went there, his inventory was mind numbing. $$$Millions$$$ of dollars of inventory. That is a lot of guitars bought from gibson. When they walked me through their warehouse area in the basement I estimated they had close to 500 or more new gibsons in cases. Music machine is dedicated to gibson. They were the #1 gibson seller last year. They hit the shows all over the country as well as selling on the internet. (now we are finally getting to my point.) NEXT

[54stratlover]

Re: Gibson's reasoning for running their retailers offline is now unveiled.

When I read the last thread concerning the "gibson" thing, I was a little concerned. I thought it may be possible that Gibson was F*****G their buddies at the altar of G.C. "the wal-mart of the music industry." (I know, I know, there are no friends in business) Namely music machine, wildwood, daves, and a few others. It may be possible that gibson was trying to hinder the Amazon thing. Look at the amazon site, It sucks! As compared to the sites that actually show the guitar you are buying. Hell the amazon site doesn't even show the right color guitar with each advertisment. The Amazon site isn't promiting the gibson story. When one goes to Dave's, Music-machine, and such, the gibson story is on the faces of everyone working at the store. I know G.C. has econimically blackmailed a few manufacturers in the past PRS, FENDER, and I'm sure there are more. They usually entail a G.C. exclussive made in Indo-china something or other. Or availabe only at G.C. The thing is, if the compony doesn't play ball, G.C. boycotts their whole line of product. A lot of sales lost.
I'd like to think that gibson isn't hindering their faithful retailers at the altar of M.F. and G.C.

Oh P.S. If you want to try a good gibson. Go somewhere were that they do an initial set up. Here is you clue. It aint at G.C. Anyone that says "I tried a les paul at G.C. and it sucked" I ignore a good share of there posts. If you are stupid enough to think that any product at G.C. is a good representation of the product, then i would also guess that much of the rest of the advice you give is worthless. G.C. isn't the only place that doesn't care much about their guitars either. Oh, gibsons don't set up their guitars at the factory because one size doesn't fit all. If you buy a gibson from a reputable dealer, they do a "personalized" pro set-up when the guitar is sold to you. The guys that set-up the guitars are trained at the gibson factory.

[LesStrat]

Re: Gibson's reasoning for running their retailers offline is now unveiled.

I don't feel Gibson has lost any quality in the last 14 years or so.

See below.

My issue with the Gibson Les Paul Standard isn't affordability per se....it's my determination that the quality I'm getting isn't worth the price they're charging. As you pointed out, Gibson will charge what the market will bear.
However, I'm not paying what they're asking.

/\I agree.

I'd like to know what the real reason is why some of you don't like Gibson guitars.
....Bob

The real reason? See above. I have yet to see a LP (especially in the $1500-2000 range) without a finish flaw. I am not suggesting that the guitars did not play well or sound good. I am saying that for the price they could employ better quality control at the factory. IMHO.

Do LP's have good tone/playability? Of course. Will I pay that price for a flawed insturment? Not with my money.

Robert, as always you bring a lot of wisdom to the discussion. The only thing I disagree on is the number of flawed instruments leaving the Gibson warehouse. It is much higher than should be tolerated for their asking price.

Too many other manufacturers can get the finish right for less money. I don't think it's too much to ask that Gibson do the same, given their MSRP.

Pickups? I agree with those of you who question pup quality (Fender is worse than Gibson in this regard). For a better instrument (hand-made) with killer stock pups, contact:

https://www.melanconguitars.com

He will design the guitar and pups to your specs.