also, the impact of oxygen free cable at guitar frequencies is dubious at best.
They would sell them at twice the price, I am guessing. Most likely to someone that will never use them on a stage.
Producing a high margin product for an already existing market segment doesn't sound like such a bad idea to me, but what do I know?
On the surface sure, but that's a wild over-simplification of Gibson's position. you have to factor opportunity costs, managing and borrowing against debt to manufacture products etc etc -and where to spend you money to produce actual products -sinking money into a tiny super high end segment when your core competency of Guitar and instrument manufacturing has eroded due to the mismanagement, and market changes has to be considered. Sure they want to be diverse and get the complimentary business, but that's part of what got them in this predicament to begin with.
Nah. I'd say they just sold the name and distribution network for the cable manufacturer. Easy money.
If it was a Gibson branded toaster or blender, I would share your opinion. This is a guitar cable, Fender has been selling branded cables as long as I've been playing. Gibson also positions themselves as a premium brand, so a premium cable makes all the sense in the world.yeah, that's a good point -but that's how they got into a quality hole in the first place -spread thin, poor oversight, contract mfgs, trying to be ubiquitous in the lifestyle segment etc etc . -although Mogami components are a terrible example of that granted -as it's truly premium.
We'll see if this new guy get's them focused.
If it was a Gibson branded toaster or blender, I would share your opinion. This is a guitar cable, Fender has been selling branded cables as long as I've been playing. Gibson also positions themselves as a premium brand, so a premium cable makes all the sense in the world.