-
Guys before I get a tone of abuse, please understand that we all have different opinions and this is the place to give each other the space needed to work them out. Whether you like them or not.
What I have to say could be totally wrong and if it's too inflammatory then lets just let it die.
I can assure you 100% that this is not a trolling thread. I will state that I am not a big Gibson fan. Not because I don't love the original designs, who wouldn't but rather I just hate the company and the way it operates.
Once again this my my honestly held opinion and it will be offensive to some but thats what forums are, places of agreement and disagreement and I sincerely hope I don't offended anyone too much.
Well lets go and see where this ends up.
After seeing some of the new Gibson ES175 VOS 59's I have become quite annoyed and disappointed again by Gibson's actions.
Es-175 second hand prices have fallen by nearly a quarter over the last 2 years (this trend may not hold).
I have been under the impression that the Gibson Es-175 has had its day in the sun. In most part due to the insanely high price for what is, essentially a budget guitar even by Chinese standards (the 90's re-issue probably excluded, just).
Gibson seem to be in some sort of disarray over the model too but I think for reasons of greed and disingenuous marketing strategies.
First is the original 50's model. Then the 60's version. Then the Norlin version. Then a reissue from the 90's onwards and now another re-issue VOS 59 and now the 90's 'Re-issue' is called the custom shop because costume shop, means $$$ but actually doesn't mean anything special, like it used to. (Granted thats cynical but as a marketing strategy pretty spot on).
I suspect the marketing department has been working over time trying to figure out how to extract the maximum from people who are soley obsessed with the name on the headstock.
In spite of this, the general consensus seems to be still moving away form the 175 and I think thats why Gibson re-introduced the classic VOS 50's model.
They realised people weren't that interested in the models from the 70's to the 80's and the collectors models from the 50's and 60'd where becoming stupidly expensive.
Then in the 90's Gibson decided to make the guitar look more luxurious, in part to explain to people why they were paying so much, for a budget laminate guitar (hence the flamed re-issue series).
This didn't work though because people actually liked the model less in general due to the tone and price, essentially they wised up to it being mutton dressed as lamb, if you pardon the expression and of course other companies moved in, to offer a better value product.
So they pulled out the old marketing ploy of 'listening to their fans' (which means for the last 40 years they didn't bother), which is essentially code for (how can we exploit this group that is not buying our current product and or moaning about it) which are by and large people, who have fonder memories and experiences of early Gibson Es-175's. These people are also probably Gibson die hard fans.
The double bonus is
1. Please these guys and you will re-envigorate your core base. Also they will be so pleased you 'listened to them' and gave them what they wanted, as if they are part of the brand. Sort of like Stockholm syndrome I guess.
I'm sure the guitar does sound good but lets be honest, who couldn't make a guitar just as well and sound just as good for about a third the price?
2. Because these people are easily exploited (sorry couldn't think of a better word), we can charge them a higher price for a lesser guitar. Notice they charge just under what you could buy an average 50's one for in the first place. Actually if you in the UK slightly more on some occasions.
It's a double win for Gibson. In marketing a strategy terms, brilliant!
The current price on a new VOS is £3250 (sunburst 1 pick up)
The Custom shop (re-issue? who knows anymore) is £2899 for a sunburst (two pick-ups more expansive hardware, finish and woods).
You might not agree with my 'value' issue on this guitar but their (Gibson) reasons, actions and prices speak for themselves. Im not saying the Es-175 is a bad guitar, just way over priced and that I find Gibson marketing strategies somewhat disingenuous/dishonest.
I do realise that I am being highly cynical but after everything you see in the business world these days, its hard not to be.
The es-175 used to be a simple budget throw away after the gig guitar. What ever happened? The guitar certainly hasn't changed but capitalising on the price sure did. Thats enough reason for me to stay away with my money and give it to someone else who deserves it. So many struggling builders who could make these guitars in a sinch, we really should be given them their dues and chance to make a living, not some greedy cynical corporation that seems to be more concerned with marketing and BS over making an honest guitar for honest money.
The truth is, if you keep given them money, you keep ripping off yourself (imo).
The Es-175 VOS 59 in my estimation should be about $1500 to $1750 new. That would fall in line with the original price, of the original it is now essential an exact copy of. Why are we being asked to pay $4,499? and why are you paying it?
I just can't get my head round it.
Thanks for your time guys and I hope I haven't been too much of a douche in writing my thoughts.
Last edited by GoergeBenson; 07-23-2014 at 12:07 PM.
-
07-23-2014 11:57 AM
-
(puts he's ES-175 down and grabs a bucket of pop corn)
-
Thanks for expressing your thoughts, they seem reasonable and that is what this forum is for.
(minus the self indulging prima donnas that are to be ignored when they go off on a rant of how they are offended by something someone says when most of the time they need to not hold themselves in such high esteem!)
Anyway, I too think the guitars are fine instruments but are currently overpriced for what they are.
Can I afford one? yes, but I still think the price is high for the instrument.
That is just an assessment of 'value to price' 'not to be confused with whining or complaining etc....'
On the other hand, this is a cut throat business and one must always be thinking of ways to stay afloat. Whether it be multiple versions of an instrument or charging what the market will bear.
That is just the way it is.
Gibson has the name and they will use it to the utmost, just like any other seller out there.Last edited by jazzimprov; 07-23-2014 at 01:55 PM.
-
You have the right to your opinion as anyone.
A lot of people accept to pay more for a name on a headstock and it seems I am one of them...or would be if I had the money
If I would win the lottery and could have any guitar built for me, without question it would be a Gibson Custom Shop probably a personalized ES 350 25.5...yes a laminated !
-
GB, I totally agree in all your points. But why bother? It seems that between the lines there is a lot of frustration, that you'd love to have a real Gibson ES-175, just for half the price. But you're totally right, you'll get virtually the same for a lot less $$ somewhere else. So what keeps you from buying another brand?
Currently I am getting frustrated over the price for a Crimson Custom Shop Tal Farlow, which is basically the same laminated guitar in 17". £4200,- is just ridiculous for a laminated archtop. Maybe I'll buy a Heritage 550 one day.
-
I understand your desires. I just don't like it when they are blatantly exploited.
Originally Posted by vinlander
You have the right to your opinion as anyone.
A lot of people accept to pay more for a name on a headstock and it seems I am one of them...or would be if I had the money
If I would win the lottery and could have any guitar built for me, without question it would be a Gibson Custom Shop probably a personalized ES 350 25.5...yes a laminated !
It seems Gibson spotted an opportunity to do nothing but exploit their fans and supporters with the ES-175 VOS.
They priced it so cynically, just below the originals value (which was made through their rarity and age) and just above the standard "custom Shop' model.
So essentially they are selling you an honest guitar at a dishonest price because they know you don't have any choice.
And it in no way reflects the real cost or value of the instrument.
-
From my perspective, I have never seen the point in whining so much (as SO many people do) about Gibson's current prices. Just buy a used one from among the dozens (hundreds?) available on the secondhand market. It would be one thing if such a market didn't exist, leaving you with only one choice - buying new from the manufacturer. But that's not the case at all. So have at it.
P.S. The VOS 175 is there so that Gibson can compete with its own history. That's been a hallmark of the company's strategy (and Fender's) for decades. They finally picked the 175 for the treatment, that's all. Looks like they nailed it, too. But I'd still rather have a "real" old one.
-
Actually I have owned and sold 'real' Gibson Es-175's. Originally Posted by Drifter
I have also had two Tal Farlows and one was Crimson, played and sounded amazing. But I bought those guitars for £1750 respectively.
Your essentially right, why bother but I did and I'm slightly happier for it. Gets it off my chest so to speak :-)
-
Stuff is worth what people will pay for it.
now, I've said before, I think Gibson's research and development team is run by idiots (robot guitars, dusk tigers, zoot suits, etc.) but I think they made a good call on this one. People will buy it. People are buying it.
-
Im not whining about the price as more the blatant opportunism. Originally Posted by rpguitar
If an American made guitar costs x and they have to sell for y, so be it.
Its just another example of exploiting and slapping the faces of the very mouths that have fed you over the years.
Theres cynical and theres just plain and outride offensive. Maybe thats why I'm annoyed.
Thanks for the comment.
-
I enjoy reading your posts GoergeBenson. I dont always agree, but theres nothing wrong with that.
I have a 2003 ES-175. I bought it used a couple of years ago for $2500. It had never been setup, truss rod had never been adjusted. The neck pickup was tilted towards the bridge, the bridge pickup was mounted very close to the strings. There are tool marks all over the binding and theres a weird, random, triangle in the binding on the back of the cut-away; like the binding was not cleanly finished.
I had five days to try the guitar and could return for a refund. So, straight to my friendly neighborhood luthier. He leveled the neck pickup, lowered the bridge pickup, built a new bone nut (to accommodate my 13 flats), adjusted intonation, etc. My bill from him was $200 and I had two days left on my five day return policy.
In those two days I decided that the ES 175 was a tank. Its the kind of guitar that I could take into the shower, drag behind the car, get buried in the backyard by the dog, and it plays in tune and sounds exactly the same; every time.
My grips are all shallow stuff, tool marks and flame maple (not a fan). Could I have gotten more guitar for my $2500? Maybe, hard to say without spending six months playing the myriad of laminant top guitars on the market these days. Although I should have looked closer at the ES 165, the used Sadowskys and the higher-end Eastmans.
But I dont know that anything else would hold the status that my ES 175 holds with me today. Its quickly become a very reliable, old friend. Picking up my ES 175 is kind of like holding my wife's hand, I know what I'm getting, its comforting, steady, and gives me a degree of confidence.
-
I hear you Jabba but my point is that I find it disrespectful to treat people like this.
Sure you can't replace a Gibson if you want a Gibson but you can at least, expect them throw you a bone once in a while, can you?
Just exploiting people because you can, has never sat well with me and selling a lesser guitar because of desirability and getting away with it, is the thing that annoys me about people with money and the people wanting that money.
I hope that makes sense.
Apart from the fact they can, why is this guitar not in line with the original prices, since it tries to be the original?
And yes I'm sure we would all like to buy a new VOS 59 because it will probably sound better than most of the other versions.
It just seems to me the Asian companies get the point. keep making the guitars better and more affordable, when Gibson goes in the other direction. Exploit your fans as mush as you can because your lucky enough that 70-80 years ago essentially another company had some really good designs.
(Thats rhetorical but you get my point)
:-))
-
You can choose not to have an ES-175 and still play jazz. I for one am glad that it is still in production and in demand for those who want it. It will be a sad day if Gibson were to stop making the ES-175.
As I said a few years ago in a thread about the Sadowsky Jim Hall vs. the modern day post 1959 ES-175 it is a rite of passage. It is what one builds his or her jazz guitar experience upon. A touchstone, so to speak. One can only speak of other archtops in comparison to the ES-175 and the L-5CES. Hard to say that of any other archtop.
And it is affordable if you know where to look. I have not known anyone to lose money on a used ES-175. MF was selling the ES-175 VOS 1959 Reissue used for $2495. Please note that it has a solid maple rim.
-
Look, Gibson makes a killing selling reissue Les Paul's to guys hacking their way through 3-chord songs and who get wet dreams over case candy. It was inevitable that they would try to slay the market in some other way too. It's a business. Don't buy one if you don't want one. There are so many other great choices out there in the guitar market. Painter (when he was producing), Holst, Andersen, Baker, many more...those are just the ones I'm familiar with from my own research.
One thing that does allow Gibson to charge a premium is the high degree of liquidity. Their guitars are blue-chip. Now, I don't buy at all that they make good investments (other than the oldies), but as a commodity they are blue-chip. A known good. Easy to sell.
How many forumites here have bought and sold a 335 in the nearly 2 years that a Holst carved 335 has been on G-base for around $2K? Surely it sounds better and is better built than a 335, and it costs less...so what gives? Who knows...but the answer helps explain why Gibson VOS guitars sell well and for big bucks.
For the record, I am not a Gibson hater. I own a chambered Les Paul which I love, but I bought it brand new for a great deal...and in my view nobody has come up with a better solid body (um, even though chambered) guitar yet than a good (read: not too heavy) Les Paul.
-
I don't feel that there's emotional space in my life to get too worked up over stuff like this. Don't like a product? Don't buy it. I mean it's so basic and neutral when viewed with that perspective. Gibson isn't torturing 10 year old girls in a third world country to bake maple fretboards and solder Robot tuner circuits. Their guitars are iconic, often beautiful, and for the most part, damn good when taken as a whole. They make a lot of players happy and produce scads of recorded and live music around the world, for decades at that.
I can think of other guitars at price points that I think are incongruous - I'll mention only the Fender Custom Shop and its multi-kilobuck Stratocasters, since I don't want to rag on smaller builders here. But if you want to complain about prices, there are many targets.
Goerge, it does seem from various threads that you have a bone to pick with Gibson, so I should probably just abstain from participating in these discussions. I know you own some carefully picked Asian archtops, and they can be excellent, good value, quality, etc. - but they don't do it for me. I'll play what I want, and you play what you want. I'm happy to listen to the music in either case because that matters more than what you own. But I think that bitching about guitar companies is a waste of time.
I should start hunting for an ES-175 now, just for kicks...
-
Henry J prices Gibson guitars in general as high as the market can bear...just as the Japanese do with their guitars. If the ES-175 could sell for higher it would be silly to price it lower. The day when the sales drop below its production capability is the day the price is too high. The flip side to it is that Gibson can only produce and sell X number of ES-175 a year. Lowering the price won't bump up sales numbers appreciably. Expanding the production facility won't bump up sales appreciably. So, you get an equlibrium. Just my simple non-MBA way of looking at things.
Note that a Made in Japan Tokai FA-235 retails for about USD2000 to USD2300 before sales tax. Not that low either compared to an ES-175 SB Memphis for $3150 brandnew. And that's about the price of a used ES-175. If Tokai could sell it higher they would. But even in Japan the Japanese pony up for a Gibson ES-175 when they can afford it. The choicest Gibson Les Paul Historics and archtops are often found in Tokyo...and increasingly, Shanghai.Last edited by Jabberwocky; 07-23-2014 at 01:38 PM.
-
Seems like the argument:
1. If you don't want to pay for it then don't buy it ----leads to.....
2. Therefore don't comment on what you think is an instrument that has a higher price than value, leads to...
3. Therefore you are whining and complaining is "off".
This is not to be 'confused' with the idea that a company can choose any price it thinks it can get for an instrument
Of course they can but observations can still be made about business practices and value to price from their perpective.
Now I don't think Gibson 'owes' anyone anything with regards to their pricing.
They have made their place in "Guitardom History" for a good reason.
But, if someone has valid/interesting points to make about this then go at it, especially a company that has such an illustrious history. It is obviously their viewpoint only.
The great line in Chess where you "play the moves, not the player" should hold true here.
just my .02 cents.....
-
Heritage is a smaller company, has the old time Gibson craftman building the guitars, has better quality control, and is just a much 'cooler' company.
Why anyone would buy a Gibson instead of a Heritage is mystery to me.
-
I probably should have qualified myself better.
This is about what I consider to be disingenuous marketing and exploitation of people. In the reverse people with too much money easily allowing themselves to be exploited and possibly (although not the main or even side point, how that effects the rest of us who are trying to be a little sensible).
For the record I don't hate Gibson. I just don't have blinkers on and I like to be treated with dignity and respect. I give my money to this who have earn it. An honest guitar for honest money, or a little extra for those who are struggling or need the income like Independent builders.
Yes I agree I'm howling at the moon somewhat but that is the title of the thread, to point out that I am getting very cynical over Gibson and especially since the release of the VOS 59 Es-175 and are others? and how has it effected their view of Gibson and their consideration of buying their product?
My previous and current Gibson's are
The others I don't have pics of. So can the comments like 'Sour Grapes' and 'You hate Gibson' now be put to rest?
And I bought a Chet Atkins Epiphone Elite and it was so much better than the Gibson version. So Gibson shut them down instead of hailing their success and letting us enjoy better instruments at a better price. Again coming back to my point really, why do we keep paying them to do this?
Why people don't have a sense of being exploited I don't know, especially when its so blatant. Even if I had a million pounds I wouldn't but a new Gibson because they haven't earn my money and certainly through their business practices not my respect.
Thanks :-)
-
How to market a product honestly: here's our American made instrument, made by entitled American workers who belong to a union, are over-payed by EU standards, have health insurance (which they wouldn't need if those boorish Americans would model themselves after Europeans socially), and it may very well have some quality control issues. Our board of directors has decided that rather than offer a public service by breaking even on the selling price, which would be the cost of labor (darn unions!), raw materials, and overhead, the price will be set to include a profit. We're frankly ashamed as a company that we strive to earn a profit, but there you have it, we're greedy and expect to enjoy a first-world lifestyle, the envy of blue-collar workers everywhere.
Would that be better?
-
It's hard to fault a man for doing what he needs to do to put spaghetti on the table even Henry J. Difficult to feel that people buying $4k guitars are being victimized. In the end names like Gibson, or Fender have lots of brand equity which accounts for the difference in price.
-
That is why until I can afford a Gibson TF I will stick to play my cheap modded EmpRegent Originally Posted by SuperFour00
But I will not even try to get anything in between because I wanna a damn TF and will never be statisfied with anything else.
-
I think we understood what you meant. It's more that some of us don't agree. This discussion pops up every now and then on many internet fora. On watch fora, debates of bloated prices for Panerai watches with ordinary ETA movements is running perpetually. Originally Posted by GoergeBenson
Gibson - like everyone else who runs a business - is in it for money. Gibson has always been in it for money. It IS cynical. It's business. It's not charity.
The right price is the price the market will bear. Period. It has absolutely nothing to do with material and production costs. Since people are willing to pay what Gibson charge for those 175s, it must be worth it for the buyers. As long as some people are buying the 175s they produce at the asking price, it's completely irrelevant what you and I would be willing to pay in case we wanted to buy one. It's as simple - and cynical - as that.
-
one last note.
in 1959 a new 175 was about $350 w/brown/pink case.
it might not equal $4400 today, but $350 wasn't exactly chump change back then.
I don't think Gibson was ever in the business of strictly selling affordable guitars.
if you wanted affordable you bought a lower line model.
today's lower line models are the Epiphones
-
No I agree there were not. Originally Posted by wintermoon
But the Es-175 was that 'affordable' guitar and it was their 'lower line' model. Obviously there is now no 'lower line' model and no 'affordable' guitar,
yet correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm looking at a guitar that is and claims to be a 1959 es-175 (the originally affordable model)
Of course I do understand how markets dictate prices etc but still, kinda makes you think, what on earth happened? lol
Reply With Quote
“Shearing style”
Today, 05:26 PM in Comping, Chords & Chord Progressions