-
I don’t think the actual destruction had anything to do with Gibson. They left them in the factory and they were to be demolished and written off as inventory, furniture, fixtures or equipment left behind. I have worked with outfits that do that type of demolition. They also dismantle, recycle, and sell what they can for scrap, or sell it to auction houses. The owner (in this case Gibson) would get a tax credit. Evidently the accountants and management didn’t think of that or it didn’t pencil out and they decided to walk away.
-
08-02-2019 02:30 PM
-
Both destruction videos private now. Poor guy probably didn't expect the reaction..
-
I think that documented action that Gibson took, distroying their own instruments is completely within the guidelines of the Company's way of doing things, most probably it was the cheapest way to get rid of the inventory covered by insurance.
I, for one, am not at all surprised.
Who's still not convinced that's Norlin 2.0?
-
Originally Posted by Alter
-
Originally Posted by Hep To The Jive
-
It was a poor decision (more likely a stupid oversight) to allow these videos to be publicly circulated. In this day of constant outrage by a public with too much time on their hands, this has become a public relations disaster for the new owners. Whatever they saved by destroying the guitars has probably been exceeded by these videos making their way through the Internet.
Just as Henry J. should never have entered the technology business, these bankers probably have no business being in the guitar manufacturing business.
Norlin 2.0 indeed.
-
I can't find the original Hep quote?
Ha, laughable weak Gibson guitars. Fender Telecasters would destroy caterpillar tracks.
Anyway, this looks really bad lol, esp. given the situation with endangered timber and how much shit the big G got into about that a few years back.
Anyway - complete PR disaster. Do Gibson even have PR? It's really hard to tell.
-
Originally Posted by LtKojak
-
Originally Posted by Alter
I'm certain some downloaded that video...it will likely reappear. It's simple to download any youtube or website video from most any website.
-
If he was contractually obligated not to leak it, he should be held accountable.
-
Spot on!
Originally Posted by Stringswinger
-
Spot on!
Originally Posted by pauln
-
Originally Posted by Jazzstdnt
-
Originally Posted by Jazzstdnt
-
Originally Posted by grahambop
So what would be the objective of "letting everyone know we did this"? Who is "everyone" and to what end? Companies do things for profit motives. Whats the upside for "letting everyone know we did this?". Did the "company guy" really say that, and if he did, was he going rogue/pissed at the company?
Doesn't make sense to me yet.
-
Originally Posted by jads57
-
Originally Posted by Greentone
-
Originally Posted by P.J.
(*This is a joke)
-
Gibson's press release said that they were unsafe. They were correct about that. That were dangerous to Gibson's reputation as a manufacturer of first rate guitars that makes responsible corporate decisions.*
*This is not a joke.
-
I wonder how they were unsafe.
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
-
They's unsafe on the eyes I'll tell you that much. Does anyone actually buy Firebirds? I noticed that they're in the current line-up, and they ain't cheap.
I've owned a fair number of Gibsons (solid body, semis, archtop, acoustic). They were all very nice. I dunno, maybe I'm missing the appeal. Am I supposed to squint and tell myself that they almost look like an expensive Fender or something?
-
All I know is that when a kid came up to me on my Friday night gig, and asked me if I was playing a Gibson, I answered, "NO!!!"
He told me it sounded good anyway.
-
Y
Originally Posted by TOMMO
-
Originally Posted by Jazzstdnt
5 Guitars - Neck Pickup - Jazzblues: Danocaster,...
Today, 04:40 AM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos