Gibson may be purchased by a Chinese investment consortium...

[Boston Joe]

But .....how will it feel to know your playing an Asian Gibson. We will likely convince ourselves that pre Asian Gibson’s sound better, even if they don’t. No different than picking up a perfectly made import in GC and liking it ... until we look at the headstock.

Honestly, if it's a good instrument at a decent price, I'd be happy to play a Chinese made Gibson. My Chinese-made Ibanez is a fantastic guitar. The build quality rivals my old American-made PRS at half the price. Or look at Mr. Wu's work. Fantastic stuff. A Gibson factory with a bunch of Mr. Wus in it would not be a terrible thing. (And hire Ms. Lora to manage the Custom Shop!)

[rpguitar]

I despise the wave of xenophobia and anti-globalism in the US, but I don't like to see American companies - or any company with a heritage in a particular place - acquired by foreign interests. I would be no happier if Canadian Godin or Spanish Ramirez was bought by a Chinese conglomerate.

I am totally at peace with a Chinese company like Eastman that produces great quality, interesting instruments at competitive prices. But I'm not at peace with Gibson being managed by executives in Shanghai. Nope.

Hopefully the seller's market will kick up a notch though. I have a few Gibbies I will probably offload eventually.

[Jabberwocky]

They all cringed when Rockefeller Plaza was sold to the Japanese. They all cringed when Waldorf Astoria became Chinese. They all cringed when Marv Lamb and his brothers sent Heritage on The Road to Singapore. Sadowsky's made in Tokyo, Gretsch in Matsumoto, what's made in America anymore?

[rlrhett]

As soon as they take over, they will pass a new law that gives them ownership of the company for ever.

I heard that Henry J. joked to a group of high profile donors that he thought “ownership of the company for ever” sounded like a good idea.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[ptchristopher3]

They all cringed when Rockefeller Plaza was sold to the Japanese. They all cringed when Waldorf Astoria became Chinese. They all cringed when Marv Lamb and his brothers sent Heritage on The Road to Singapore. Sadowsky's made in Tokyo, Gretsch in Matsumoto, what's made in America anymore?

Hi Rene,

Point taken about offshore ownership and offshore manufacture in this and other industries. They do, nonetheless, seem to succeed, to various extents.

But Gibson does not sell just the guitar, they sell a brand experience to which personalities are attached.

”it’s a Hutchins”

”it is a “crimson’” (because branding dilution made “custom” lose its sheen)

I suppose one could take a Sadowsky, Collings, Benedetto, and Gibson “jazz” guitar and propose cost allocation to the instrument itself, then the name, then the names of players associated with the guitar - maybe total it as the brand experience.

A Chinese owned company, and possibly even a superior manufacturing system, might still lose much of the brand caché even to a self-described non-xenophobe.

“Buy those Crimsons now boys!” Sounds like a forecast of lost brand image even with a continued market presence.

The challenge for an offshore owner will likely be to attach continued “american” personalities to the manufacture of the guitars, in the hope of keeping the illusion of continuity alive. The image of continuity at Gibson has survived so far.

I think it was Minneapolis envelope maker Harvey MacKay who said (more or less), “As soon as you attach a personality to a proposition, people stop reacting to the proposition and start reacting to the personality.”

Haha, and look what happens once the buyer goes a step further and attaches their own persona and ego to their purchase of the brand name product. It gets personal, and oddly so.

A Chinese owner could very successfully attach american personalities to a continued manufacture of Gibson guitars and have ostensibly discriminating buyers quite happy with their new “Crimson, or whatever the custom name may be” guitar made by ace luthier, “Billy Apple Pie, or some sort of american name”.

I certainly join those who predict a successful continuation of the Gibson line of guitars. A little careful reading of the market and analysis of the reasons for the cherished nature of the brand, combined with some notably improved design and QC work sounds very do-able to me.

It will be interesting.

[NSJ]

They all cringed when Rockefeller Plaza was sold to the Japanese. They all cringed when Waldorf Astoria became Chinese. They all cringed when Marv Lamb and his brothers sent Heritage on The Road to Singapore. Sadowsky's made in Tokyo, Gretsch in Matsumoto, what's made in America anymore?

It’s a mandate I tell you, a Mandate! But from where ? ***



***About the only one I can exclude at this point is poor old Wang Ching Wei, Who was last seen in the red light district of Tokyo

[JGinNJ]

I've never owned a Gibson, nor do I much care for them, especially at their premium price. I think what's happening to them is what happens to companies that are not managed well enough to produce a quality product at a competitive price. Yes, it's a crowded market, and plenty of other brands have come, gone, been reconstituted or absorbed. Gibson, though, has the advantage of their brand name. If they squander that, they'll become like so many other legacy brands, just another guitar from the same factory in China or Korea.

[ptchristopher3]

HI JG,

That makes me wonder about D’Angelico. Even after making a mess of it a few times over the past dozen (or so) years, they have established a better product than is typical from Korea.

I do not think the Gibson name will go in that direction. But it seems that one can use high quality Asian manufacture and remain a notable level above the typical (and quite good) quality of such factory output - then associate this higher quality with the brand. In this case I mean D’Angelico.

But indeed, as you mention, the new Gibson owners could manage to somehow squander the brand name.

[JGinNJ]

I think Gibson already tried that with owning the Epiphone name. Not an unusual strategy- Martin has their lower end guitars made in Mexico. But they are very careful about quality, and people know the best ones are made in the US.

D'Angelico is a small player in comparison, but I agree, their archtops are a cut above Epiphones- I have both. I think where D'A might be going wrong is getting into lower priced acoustics and their new cheaper line of archtops. Selling all of them at deep discount on-line and at GC is undermining the brand pricing, too.

[LtKojak]

They all cringed when Rockefeller Plaza was sold to the Japanese.

The Mitsibishi-group defaulted on the stablished mortgage of that acquisition ten yers later. Not a good deal for the japanese, although I always thought at that time that all those crazy Real Estate acquisitions and even crazier real vintage American instruments was a way to laundry Jakuza's money.

They all cringed when Waldorf Astoria became Chinese.

This deal was made by the chinese GOVERMENT, and the project is to convert from a hotel to luxe condos destined to host the traveling chinese state visitors and bureaucrats.

They all cringed when Marv Lamb and his brothers sent Heritage on The Road to Singapore.

Not true:
Heritage Guitar Purchased by Local Investors | Reverb News

The company gave to BandLab Technologies, a Singapore-based music retailing and distribution company, the task to boost Heritage sales abroad, worldwide.

Sadowsky's made in Tokyo,

Only the archtops. The rest of the production of guitars and basses and the final assembly and setup of the archtops is all performed by actual luthiers in NY.

Gretsch in Matsumoto

Wrong. They're made in the Terada factory in Kanie.

One Fujigen-Gakki factory is located in Matsumoto.

what's made in America anymore?

I'm pretty sure cornflakes are still made in America.

[John A.]

... snip
A while ago Chinese started making Leica and Hasselblad part for part duplicate cameras that matched the German originals under the closest scrutiny, even duplicating the threading standards. Then they used this mastery of the technology to improve designs on consumer and pro gear at a fraction of the price.

Nitpick alert: Hasselblad is Swedish, but owned for quite a while by a series of Asian holding companies (the current one is Chinese).

John

[ptchristopher3]

I think Gibson already tried that with owning the Epiphone name. Not an unusual strategy- Martin has their lower end guitars made in Mexico. But they are very careful about quality, and people know the best ones are made in the US.

D'Angelico is a small player in comparison, but I agree, their archtops are a cut above Epiphones- I have both. I think where D'A might be going wrong is getting into lower priced acoustics and their new cheaper line of archtops. Selling all of them at deep discount on-line and at GC is undermining the brand pricing, too.

Indeed, if we had been in the meeting at D’Angelico we could have noted that if they consider themselves to have made somehting of the brand name (nevermind the irony there) then why take it downmarket to the garden variety MIK, MII, MIC market with the lower cost archtops.

But it must be hard to look at potential revenue and decide to not expand the line under the D’Angelico name.

[John A.]

This deal was made by the chinese GOVERMENT, and the project is to convert from a hotel to luxe condos destined to host the traveling chinese state visitors and bureaucrats.

Maybe/sort of. The Waldorf Astoria is owned by the Anbang group, a Chinese insurance/financial services conglomerate. From what I understand, state-owned companies are major shareholders in Anbang, but the whole question of where to draw the line between "government" and "corporation" is often unclear with Chinese enterprises. They've announced that the W-A will be split, with part converted to condos, and part remaining a hotel (same thing happened at some other luxury hotels, notably the Plaza, though not at the hands of Chinese owners). Way earlier, the Sheraton hotel on the far west side in Manhattan was bought by the Chinese government (IIRC, early 80s) and converted into a consulate and diplomatic residence. There hasn't been much local notice of these sorts of events. We NY'ers are used to the local real-estate gonifs ripping off foreign suckers ... uh, I mean, partnerships between prestigious local real-estate firms and outside investors eager to own a piece of big apple glory. Yeah, that's what I meant ...

John

[savofenno]

I'm watching this one with great curiosity. One thing I learned about having worked with Asian factories (in my time at Ibanez) and Chinese craftsmen and luthiers (in my time after) is Chinese build cheap and good because that's what American parent companies want. I have also seen Chinese luthiers build flat top guitars that humble American companies like Martin and Taylor. Eastman does this but it's not what they're generally known for, but they have the chops. I've also seen Chinese archtops that are seriously more meticulously crafted and every bit the professional instrument of the highest standards-bar none. You don't see them over here because importers just want them for cheapness.
A while ago Chinese started making Leica and Hasselblad part for part duplicate cameras that matched the German originals under the closest scrutiny, even duplicating the threading standards. Then they used this mastery of the technology to improve designs on consumer and pro gear at a fraction of the price.

If China wanted to make a 1939 L-5, or a copy of a Matisse that would fool a museum, or an original design that Jimmy D' would've been proud of, believe me, they can do it. They put together a space program in record time by deciding they needed to. Now for a Chinese operation to buy Gibson for the sake of making an end run around all legal departments of Norlin Gibson... no lawsuits if you own the parent company, they could do it.

Somebody in China just has to think it's an idea that makes sense. They could build Gibsons like you haven't seen in decades, and you could see them at a much more competitive price. So I'm watching this one with great interest.

David

I believe Hasselblad was originally a Swedish brand, though they used mostly Carl Zeiss Jena`s optics, even on The Moon.

[Greentone]

I've never owned a Gibson, nor do I much care for them, especially at their premium price. I think what's happening to them is what happens to companies that are not managed well enough to produce a quality product at a competitive price. Yes, it's a crowded market, and plenty of other brands have come, gone, been reconstituted or absorbed. Gibson, though, has the advantage of their brand name. If they squander that, they'll become like so many other legacy brands, just another guitar from the same factory in China or Korea.

I wager that if you had owned one or a few, you would feel differently. Gibson guitars--especially archtops--were the ne plus ultra of their form. I play other guitars than Gibson, these days. That said, for jazz I don't believe that you can ever go wrong with an ES-175, a Tal Farlow, an ES-350, etc. AND, I really don't think you can find a better guitar for jazz than a decent L-5CES. (I say this without regard to price. If you are constrained by price to less expensive guitars, then there are perfectly commendable reasons to play Ibanez, Aria, etc., guitars--and I do.)

[Hammertone]

This is fun! True/Not True!
I'll take Heritage Guitars for $500, Bob.

From Heritage Guitar Purchased by Local Investors | Reverb News :
"Heritage has been building guitars in the same space, with the same tooling and methods, since 1985."

"Same space" is true, but "same tooling and methods" is not true. The way in which the tops and backs on carved instruments are produced is very different from the way they were done by Gibson. Oooooh...what do I win! More importantly, do I need to pay income tax on the value of my prize?

Back to the subject, it would be cool if a Canadian investment consortium gains control of Gibson, eh? Robert Godin has demonstrated some solid business chops in that area. In that case, call it a "Canadien investment consortium" - we could get the Caisse in on it!

[ptchristopher3]

I wager that if you had owned one or a few, you would feel differently. Gibson guitars--especially archtops--were the ne plus ultra of their form. I play other guitars than Gibson, these days. That said, for jazz I don't believe that you can ever go wrong with an ES-175, a Tal Farlow, an ES-350, etc. AND, I really don't think you can find a better guitar for jazz than a decent L-5CES. (I say this without regard to price. If you are constrained by price to less expensive guitars, then there are perfectly commendable reasons to play Ibanez, Aria, etc., guitars--and I do.)

Hi Greene,

Thanks for the objective summary of a widely held viewpoint.

This is the sort of thing that might have driven Henry J bonkers. There is a segment of the market that values the brand experience and the guitars as the once and maybe future ne plus ultra.

And many feel that the only reason not to share their view and peak experience must be that one can not afford to do so, or one lacks the taste to do so.

So, spending more only makes it an even loftier experience - to some extent.

It is a short leap to, “Those who do not feel this way must ‘covet’ my taste and finances.”

I think Henry J looked at this and was certain that this brand experience could be widened.

And we got Les Paul speakers.

Funny stuff.

[Papawooly]

Not going to happen...
Ask Hock Tan....

[ptchristopher3]

Back to the subject, it would be cool if a Canadian investment consortium gains control of Gibson, eh? Robert Godin has demonstrated some solid business chops in that area. In that case, call it a "Canadien investment consortium" - we could get the Caisse in on it!

I know it was a joke, but in my view Godin has done exactly not what Gibson has been doing in recent decades.

Without the burden of historic brand ethos, Godin seemed free to genuinely innovate.

Would he really want to try to flog $10,000 guitars, and somehow expand the Gibson name? This seems to have been a marketing nightmare for Gibson of late.

*******************

Oooooh, Godin could hire marketing charlatan Clotaire Rapaille (hired by MANY people who should know better but were desperate to find the amazing secrets of breathless brand attachment.) Just ask Ville de Québéc about his amazing skills.

[Hammertone]

Oooooh, Godin could hire marketing charlatan Clotaire Rapaille (hired by MANY people who should know better but were desperate to find the amazing secrets of breathless brand attachment.) Just ask Ville de Québéc about his amazing skills.

Rapaile? He's a 'tit-'taters piker compared to Roger Taillibert. Now THERE'S a charlatan who knows what he's doing.
French architect Roger Taillibert, designer of Montreal's Olympic Stadium... - UPI Archives
Summer Olympics: 40 years on, Quebeckers are still footing the bill - The Globe and Mail

[Hammertone]

I know it was a joke, but in my view Godin has done exactly not what Gibson has been doing in recent decades. Without the burden of historic brand ethos, Godin seemed free to genuinely innovate. Would he really want to try to flog $10,000 guitars, and somehow expand the Gibson name? This seems to have been a marketing nightmare for Gibson of late.

He could do what he did for years, ghost-building for famous brands in a highly efficient factory environment. The Caisse and the Ontario Teachers' Pension Fund could easily bankroll the transition, Gibson could stick to its knitting, QC would go way up, no one would know anything about it, the guitars would still be "made in USA" and Henry & Dave could stick around as figureheads to take all the credit.

[blackcat]

Sadowsky refers...................

'Only the archtops. The rest of the production of guitars and basses and the final assembly and setup of the archtops is all performed by actual luthiers in NY.'

Bit like Fibonacci in the UK then?

[ptchristopher3]

He could do what he did for years, ghost-building for famous brands in a highly efficient factory environment. The Caisse and the Ontario Teachers' Pension Fund could easily bankroll the transition, Gibson could stick to its knitting, QC would go way up, no one would know anything about it, the guitars would still be "made in USA" and Henry & Dave could stick around as figureheads to take all the credit.

So you already have your takeover plan established. Grow the creepy John Waters mustache and get on the plane to Nashville.

[Hammertone]

Please....Snidely Whiplash moustaches...
Nyahahahahaha....

[Max405]

I wager that if you had owned one or a few, you would feel differently. Gibson guitars--especially archtops--were the ne plus ultra of their form. I play other guitars than Gibson, these days. That said, for jazz I don't believe that you can ever go wrong with an ES-175, a Tal Farlow, an ES-350, etc. AND, I really don't think you can find a better guitar for jazz than a decent L-5CES. (I say this without regard to price. If you are constrained by price to less expensive guitars, then there are perfectly commendable reasons to play Ibanez, Aria, etc., guitars--and I do.)

One of the reasons we love you Greentone...