Why Are Eastman Archtops So Polarizing?

[Jabberwocky]

Yup, TOTA. Applied to a person, such loose talk is called character assassination. Tells you just enough for your imagination to run wild and draw its own conclusion. But the messenger always says subsequently, "But I never said that!"

I walked into a whorehouse once when I was lost in a strange city to ask for directions. "I saw him walk into a whorehouse!" True, of course. More than once I had dinner with a friend who is a gay man. "He had dinner with a gay guy." True, of course.

But the messenger means to seed your mind to draw its own wild conclusions.

Imagination is a wonderful thing.

PS Since the IRW fingerboards come from India, I guess they could be Made in India too. Oh, the ebony comes from Madagascar. Guess they're Made in Madagascar now. Rare earth metals like Neodymium and Cobalt for magnets come from China. There you go, Made in China! All technically correct but that's not what they really meant to imply.

[2bornot2bop]

It was suggested there were more than simple parts being acquired from China for Gibson guitars....that's what the WHATTTT???? was to my reaction.

I didn't challenge it because it came from a respected source. It's not appropriate to spout the name of the person I had this private conversation with for he operates a major guitar business.

So, shoot the messenger all you want. I thought the fact that a major archtop distributor mentions that another major archtop maker is stamping made in america on parts made in China was newz. If it's not worthy newz to you, so be it.

[Top of the Arch!]

You get exactly what I mean! Granted ,its a free country "still,at this point"to say what you want but, I dont know,maybe we should THINK about what we say before the words leave our lips. I get this kind of thing all day long with people coming in my shop with the half truths etc.You wouldnt believe the stories I heard when Gibson got "busted for using STOLEN wood"Some of the employees were held at gunpoint no less. Really? When I asked the guy where he got that info from he said he heard it from someone at another guitar store,but he didnt have any first hand knowledge. How about reading the facts before opening the mouth. When I was a kid, and this will be the last Ill say on this as I get a bit jacked up about this sort of thing. As I said,when I was a kid,I had gone to the gas station on Sat. morning with my father to gas up. The guy pumping gas starts to tell my old man about a fight that broke out at the local bar the night before,after he was done,he looked at me and said,"if you dont know what your talking about,keep your mouth shut, people will think youre an a$$hole". My old man tended bar at that place on Fri. nights,I remember him telling my mom at breakfast what happened and it was nothing like the other guy said. Sorry for the rambling but I get a bit jacked. Im done. T.O.T.A.

Yup, TOTA. Applied to a person, such loose talk is called character assassination. Tells you just enough for your imagination to run wild and draw its own conclusion. But the messenger always says subsequently, "But I never said that!"

I walked into a whorehouse once when I was lost in a strange city to ask for directions. "I saw him walk into a whorehouse!" True, of course. More than once I had dinner with a friend who is a gay man. "He had dinner with a gay guy." True, of course.

But the messenger means to seed your mind to draw its own wild conclusions.

Imagination is a wonderful thing.

PS Since the IRW fingerboards come from India, I guess they could be Made in India too. Oh, the ebony comes from Madagascar. Guess they're Made in Madagascar now. Rare earth metals like Neodymium and Cobalt for magnets come from China. There you go, Made in China! All technically correct but that's not what they really meant to imply.

[2bornot2bop]

So I guess its just "hearsay"then?

Newsflash: Everything on the 'net is hearsay. Deal with it!

[Top of the Arch!]

Why wouldnt it be appropriate to say their name? It would give them a chance to clarify,therefore lending integrity to the story.

It was suggested there were more than simple parts being acquired from China for Gibson guitars....that's what the WHATTTT???? was to my reaction.

I didn't challenge it because it came from a respected source. It's not appropriate to spout the name of the person I had this private conversation with for he operates a major guitar business.

So, shoot the messenger all you want. I thought the fact that a major archtop distributor mentions that another major archtop maker is stamping made in america on parts made in China was newz. If it's not worthy newz to you, so be it.

[SamBooka]

Just like no one wants to admit that Les Pauls will soon be built in Boulder.
Speculation and conjecture.

[Patrick2]

If I may jump in here and join the discourse . . (it seems to be much more entertaining than the discourse I'm involved in on another thread . . LOLOLOL)

I know who the dealer was that mentioned to 2b, that "parts of the L5 were being built in China" and I know what parts that person is referring to.

Right off the bat, it's totally bull shit. The rumor was started by an "unnamed source" and then regurgitated by said dealer . . while the dealer never bothered to reveal the source of the rumor or confirm it. It was claimed that the body of the L5 was being produced in China, because Gibson no longer had the resource of talent available to them to effectively carve the body. Once again . . this is total bull shit. The "bull shit" aspect of it was totally confirmed by people I've spoken with at Gibson, also by Walter Carter and George Gruhn . . and further by people who have toured the facility and seen L5CES' being carved.

I was very disappointing for me to hear, as far back as last year, who the dealer was that's "regurgitating" this unfounded rumor. It is indeed a well respected dealer. I do owe him (the principal) a call to ask him if he's even aware that the rumor is coming from his people. He's one of the true gentlemen of our business.

[2bornot2bop]

Why wouldnt it be appropriate to say their name? It would give them a chance to clarify,therefore lending integrity to the story.

It wouldn't be appropriate because as you so eloquently stated it would be "hearsay."

Can you imagine the suggestion that modern, famed L5's, are outsourced?

"According to a former plant employee who worked in the factory and retired because he didn't care for the way things were now being done...stated "bodies of L5's, super 400's, 175's, Legrands, were made in china and then shipped to america, neck fitted and assembled here, and stamped made in the USA."

That's 3rd hand hearsay at best, and what would be the point of publishing the name of someone about information which is completely unverifiable...but just the same that information, story, came as big newz to me.

As to how that pertains to this thread, it sheds a different light on Chinese made Eastmans.

[Jabberwocky]

I seem to remember this conversation happening once before, said by the same person and rubbished by the same person.

So, it didn't really happen yesterday unless it was Groundhog Day.

Doesn't the dealer in question have initials JW?

[Jabberwocky]

Chinese Whispers anyone? It is really quite appropriate now in more ways than one.

[Bluedawg]

I seem to remember this conversation happening once before, said by the same person and rubbished by the same person.

So, it didn't really happen yesterday unless it was Groundhog Day.

Doesn't the dealer in question have initials JW?

Maybe they've cried Wolfe on this one too many times.

[Jabberwocky]

Maybe they've cried Wolfe on this one too many times.

Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! HAH! I'm your foil, the straight man. I didn't see that coming. HA! HA! HA! HA!

A good belly laugh invigorates the spirit. Thanks, Bluedawg.

[Top of the Arch!]

It would give the person who said it a chance to CLARIFY what was said. Therefore its NOT hearsay!Unless hes telling you hearsay,at that point ,Elvis is probably doing the inlays and the entire thing is ersatz!.

It wouldn't be appropriate because as you so eloquently stated it would be "hearsay."

Can you imagine the suggestion that modern, famed L5's, are outsourced?

"According to a former plant employee who worked in the factory and retired because he didn't care for the way things were now being done...stated "bodies of L5's, super 400's, 175's, Legrands, were made in china and then shipped to america, neck fitted and assembled here, and stamped made in the USA."

That's 3rd hand hearsay at best, and what would be the point of publishing the name of someone about information which is completely unverifiable...but just the same that information, story, came as big newz to me.

As to how that pertains to this thread, it sheds a different like on Chinese made Eastmans.

[2bornot2bop]

It would give the person who said it a chance to CLARIFY what was said. Therefore its NOT hearsay!Unless hes telling you hearsay,at that point ,Elvis is probably doing the inlays and the entire thing is ersatz!.

Nonsense. The only thing quoting anyone's name would allow is for someone to call up and complain based upon a private conversation I had with him...and I'm not going there. It was said....I tell it like it is. I'm not alarmed by it as you seem to be...let it ride brother.

[Top of the Arch!]

Ive got no problem letting it ride.It just didnt seem right to make the statement. To me at least.I personally would not have said it. No problem Carry on!

[Darwin_Hoel]

Well Patrick, I choose uninformed because I have never been "informed" about this issue from anyone so I guess that would make it impossible to be ill informed. It is still however an opinion based on the reaction of several folks, but just an opinion. That being said I'm totally open to other ideas. As far as the matter being as shallow as I represented it..... The current opinions of China that I hear from people everyday and also on the news would seem to support, at least to some degree, what I said. People certainly can be shallow in this world. I'm glad to know that you are not.

I'm really trying my damnedest to stay away from this thread due to my affiliation with an American guitar company. But, posts like this make it extraordinarily diffucult. I'll just post this well intended reply to your comments.

If you think the matter is as shallow as indicated by your post, then you are either uninformed, ill informed or both.

[Spook410]

I think Darwin Hoel's earlier post pretty clearly reflected the way things are. It was neither uninformed or ill-informed.

We have chosen, through our democratic process, to have open trade relationships. Many, including those that legislate these agreements, believe that overall, these benefit the economy. If Gibson cannot sell archtops for $3K-$5K and Fender has no market for a $1500 Strat, this may be bad for them and their US work force, but it doesn't play on the world stage. Guitar companies are tiny compared to GE, Ford, GM, Boeing, and Lockheed Martin. Policy will be developed to benefit the latter.

Losing some American guitar manufacturing capacity is not to be celebrated and I hope they adapt as well as Martin and Taylor seem to have when faced with competition from the likes of Takamine and Alvarez. However, the market is what it is and we won't be seeing trade barriers erected to protect guitars.

[Patrick2]

I think Darwin Hoel's earlier post pretty clearly reflected the way things are. It was neither uninformed or ill-informed.

We have chosen, through our democratic process, to have open trade relationships. Many, including those that legislate these agreements, believe that overall, these benefit the economy. If Gibson cannot sell archtops for $3K-$5K and Fender has no market for a $1500 Strat, this may be bad for them and their US work force, but it doesn't play on the world stage. Guitar companies are tiny compared to GE, Ford, GM, Boeing, and Lockheed Martin. Policy will be developed to benefit the latter.

Losing some American guitar manufacturing capacity is not to be celebrated and I hope they adapt as well as Martin and Taylor seem to have when faced with competition from the likes of Takamine and Alvarez. However, the market is what it is and we won't be seeing trade barriers erected to protect guitars.

I wish it was that simple Spook. US companies don't usually have a problem competing with other nations . . . and our goods usually sell well abroad. But, when we're having a country flood our market with sub par products being sold for well below what manufacturers here in the US can compete with, due in part to artificially low exchange rates of the dollar vs the yuan due to the Chinese govt's intentional depressing of their currency . . . then, yeah, I'm resentful of that. The Chinese have been getting away with using their currency manipulation as a market wide export subsidy for quite some time now. Their yuan is purposely being held to values of 25% or so less than the market value of the US dollar. This is in spite of specific restrictions against such tactics by IMF and WTO.

You mention all of the goods made in China that we here in the US see and use every day. Why do you think that is? Do you think that it's only due to below poverty level wages being paid to these workers who, as darwin hoel points out "are only trying to feed their families"? Do you think it's because the Chinese workers are better at producing a quality product that the US work force? I don't think so.

The Chinese govt answers to no one. They do what they want to do. If that means selling sub par goods or consumables tainted with lead, or production factories not forceably held to the same excessively expensive safe work standards as demanded by OSHA, here in the US . . or the overly expensive environmentally friendly standards mandated by the EPA herein the US . . then they will do so. And in doing so, they keep the costing of their products far lower than our companies can copmpete with. Do you think their production capabilities are being burdened by the same regulations as what our companies here in the US are faced with?

No man, it's not protectionism to insist upon a "somewhat" level playing field. Beijing has moved slightly in the right direction over the past year or so. But, not nearly enough.

[Top of the Arch!]

Patrick,you are very well informed and in touch .You are one of the few who see the "BIG PICTURE", I will salud you when I have my cocktail this eve. T.O.T.A.

[mangotango]

The Chinese govt answers to no one. They do what they want to do. If that means selling sub par goods or consumables tainted with lead, or production factories not forceably held to the same excessively expensive safe work standards as demanded by OSHA, here in the US . . or the overly expensive environmentally friendly standards mandated by the EPA herein the US . . then they will do so. And in doing so, they keep the costing of their products far lower than our companies can copmpete with. Do you think their production capabilities are being burdened by the same regulations as what our companies here in the US are faced with?

Yup. Two words - "Chinese Drywall".

[Spook410]

Good morning Patrick,

Some US Manufacturers and various labor unions took the position of the 'level playing field' forward when NAFTA was passed. They were opposed by a national Chamber of Commerce waving dollars. The dollars won and we continue to lower tariffs and make new agreements.

We export a lot of manufactured goods. Airplanes, telecomm gear, and cars are each in the tens of billions of dollars each year. We are not going to do anything to diminish those exports.

Two things are going to stay the same:
- We are not going to control the rules in other countries
- We are going to have open trade.

As part of a proposal this year, I worked through export rules to deliver a air control center to a country in the middle east. I was kind of struck at just how simple they were. There were lots of rules relative to restrictions on national security items, but when it came down to hazardous materials, work conditions for the American worker, or protection of the planet, there were no restrictions. None. Not for the host country. Not from our side. BTW, the value of that single project was 20% the total valuation of Fender.

So, is it fair, is it right, is the playing field level? No. However, it is what it is. And many would argue that it is as it should be for the overall benefit of our economy.

[Patrick2]

[quote=Spook410;267705]Good morning Patrick,

Some US Manufacturers and various labor unions took the position of the 'level playing field' forward when NAFTA was passed. They were opposed by a national Chamber of Commerce waving dollars. The dollars won and we continue to lower tariffs and make new agreements.

Our issues aren't with NAFTA. The "North America Free trade Agreement" has nothing at all to do with China manipulating it's currency to their advantage

We export a lot of manufactured goods. Airplanes, telecomm gear, and cars are each in the tens of billions of dollars each year. We are not going to do anything to diminish those exports.

We are currently at a huge . . immense trade deficit against China for the very reasons I stated in my prior post on this matter. The US vs China trade deficit is the largest in the entire world! It's also a major contributor to the global economic slow down. It's also responsible for litterally millions of lost US jobs. You've obviously not done any research on this matter (thus the uninformed commet towards Darwin Hoel) . . so I've made it easy for you. Just click on this link . . .

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL33536.pdf

Two things are going to stay the same:
- We are not going to control the rules in other countries
- We are going to have open trade.

I don't have a problem with either of those things. Just level the playing field. Impose the same type of restrictions and hurdles that are causing this huge trade imbalance between our two countries (China and USA) and stop devaluing the yuan.

As part of a proposal this year, I worked through export rules to deliver a air control center to a country in the middle east. I was kind of struck at just how simple they were. There were lots of rules relative to restrictions on national security items, but when it came down to hazardous materials, work conditions for the American worker, or protection of the planet, there were no restrictions. None. Not for the host country. Not from our side. BTW, the value of that single project was 20% the total valuation of Fender.

While there were no regulations, rules, restrictions on the part of the country in the middle east . . . ask the USA manufacturers of the components of the air control center what they had to deal with.

So, is it fair, is it right, is the playing field level? No. However, it is what it is. And many would argue that it is as it should be for the overall benefit of our economy.

How could a huge trade deficit, created by currency manipulation as previously mentioned, possibly benefit our economy?? We are buying more shit from China then we are selling them. Their policies and procedures/actions have cost our country millions of jobs. How is that good for our economy?

[2bornot2bop]

We are currently at a huge . . immense trade deficit against China for the very reasons I stated in my prior post on this matter. The US vs China trade deficit is the largest in the entire world! It's also a major contributor to the global economic slow down. It's also responsible for litterally millions of lost US jobs. You've obviously not done any research on this matter (thus the uninformed commet towards Darwin Hoel) . . so I've made it easy for you. Just click on this link . . .

Don't you believe there would be greater legitimacy to your argument if it included the fact that one of the greatest impacts to US "jobs", or at least middle class jobs, has been OUTSOURCING, and tax laws that encourage it by allowing businesses to benefit from outsourcing while asking real taxpayers to pick up the bill through tax breaks to businesses who outsource. Isn't that part of the complete truth?

Outsourcing to China, Mexico, and elsewhere, has for several decades contributed towards the demise of the middle class, stagnant middle class wage growth for the past 30 years, and a complete erosion of a once strong and sizable manufacturing base in the US.

How could a huge trade deficit, created by currency manipulation as previously mentioned, possibly benefit our economy?? Why are buying more shit from China then we are selling them. Their policies and procedures/actions have cost our couintry millions of jobs. How is that good for our economy?

Clearly your argument would be lost upon ears in the boardroom of the Walmarts of the world.

Your arguments are valid, but surely you can't believe the country can create true trade balance while at the same time encouraging business to export/outsource US jobs overseas. Isn't it obvious?

[Klatu]

Please take this political nonsense elsewhere.

[Patrick2]

Good morning Patrick,

Some US Manufacturers and various labor unions took the position of the 'level playing field' forward when NAFTA was passed. They were opposed by a national Chamber of Commerce waving dollars. The dollars won and we continue to lower tariffs and make new agreements.

We export a lot of manufactured goods. Airplanes, telecomm gear, and cars are each in the tens of billions of dollars each year. We are not going to do anything to diminish those exports.

Two things are going to stay the same:
- We are not going to control the rules in other countries
- We are going to have open trade.

As part of a proposal this year, I worked through export rules to deliver a air control center to a country in the middle east. I was kind of struck at just how simple they were. There were lots of rules relative to restrictions on national security items, but when it came down to hazardous materials, work conditions for the American worker, or protection of the planet, there were no restrictions. None. Not for the host country. Not from our side. BTW, the value of that single project was 20% the total valuation of Fender.

So, is it fair, is it right, is the playing field level? No. However, it is what it is. And many would argue that it is as it should be for the overall benefit of our economy.

Don't you believe there would be greater legitimacy to your argument if it included the fact that one of the greatest impacts to US "jobs", or at least middle class jobs, has been OUTSOURCING, and tax laws that encourage it by allowing businesses to benefit from outsourcing while asking real taxpayers to pick up the bill through tax breaks to businesses who outsource. Isn't that part of the complete truth?

Outsourcing to China, Mexico, and elsewhere, has for several decades contributed towards the demise of the middle class, stagnant middle class wage growth for the past 30 years, and a complete lack of manufacturing base in the US.



Clearly your argument would be lost upon ears in the boardroom of the Walmarts in the world.

Your arguments are valid, but surely you can't believe the country can create true trade balance while at the same time encouraging business to export/outsource US jobs overseas. Isn't it obvious?

Greg: chill bro , . . . the election is over. All of that BS nonsense about tax breaks for shipping jobs over seas is no longer needed. Also, the issues are much deeper than the big box store greed. The conversation about China's unfair business tactics relavent to my resentment of the Eastman brand of guitars is based upon facts . . . not the BS rhetoric and hyperbole that was regurgitated ad nausum during the campaign.