- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: What do you guys think of Gibson’s ongoing tactics towards other guitar manufacturers?
Posted on 2/26/20 at 9:48 pm to Blizzard of Chizz
Posted on 2/26/20 at 9:48 pm to Blizzard of Chizz
quote:
Btw, if you’re a consumer of guitars you should be against this. It’s only going to drive smaller companies out of business or drive up the prices of other guitars if it continues
So the judges are siding with gibson?
1
Posted on 2/26/20 at 10:29 pm to SEClint
quote:
So the judges are siding with gibson?
In many cases Gibson is losing the legal battles, but that’s not the point I was making. Legal battles cost money and many of these smaller companies are being forced to do legal battle with a billion dollar company. Even if they don’t drive a smaller company out of business, that company still has to cope with the legal costs associated with Gibson’s current tactics. That means increased prices for their guitars. The other side of course is Gibson trying to force companies into signing licensing deals for “Gibson” shapes. That’s another cost that now has to be factored into the price of a guitar because of licensing fees..
in short Gibson is disrupting the entire guitar market with this idiotic course they are on because their parent company has zero interest in making quality guitars. They only care about pushing the value of the Gibson brand up and then dumping the company for profit.
The Guitologist on YouTube does a great job breaking it down. Check out his interview with the owner of Keisel Guitars. LINK
This post was edited on 2/26/20 at 10:37 pm
Posted on 2/27/20 at 7:40 am to Blizzard of Chizz
They only care about pushing the value of the Gibson brand up and then dumping the company for profit.
BINGO. Gibson doesn't have a leg to stand on in court - the results of their suit against PRS regarding their Singlecut 15ish years ago gave any and all defendants plenty of appellate precedent on which to stand. Kiesel, Dean, any of the other "little guys" don't need big legal money if one/them has a legit legal leg on which to stand ... a prevailing defendant in a civil matter can seek and be granted full legal reimbursement from a plaintiff(s).
But who cares about what happens in a court of law? Gibson's only real challenge in the big picture is meeting all bankruptcy oversight while winning favor via a successful PR campaign, which is what this shite is all about. In the case of the latter, all it takes is one investor, one person or one capital investment conglomerate, buying the "we have a new way of doing business" schpiel and subsequently buying the company at a value exceeding pre-bankruptcy value and assuming any carry-over liabilities, financial and otherwise. For the win.
BINGO. Gibson doesn't have a leg to stand on in court - the results of their suit against PRS regarding their Singlecut 15ish years ago gave any and all defendants plenty of appellate precedent on which to stand. Kiesel, Dean, any of the other "little guys" don't need big legal money if one/them has a legit legal leg on which to stand ... a prevailing defendant in a civil matter can seek and be granted full legal reimbursement from a plaintiff(s).
But who cares about what happens in a court of law? Gibson's only real challenge in the big picture is meeting all bankruptcy oversight while winning favor via a successful PR campaign, which is what this shite is all about. In the case of the latter, all it takes is one investor, one person or one capital investment conglomerate, buying the "we have a new way of doing business" schpiel and subsequently buying the company at a value exceeding pre-bankruptcy value and assuming any carry-over liabilities, financial and otherwise. For the win.
Posted on 2/27/20 at 8:03 am to TheFretShack
CLICK HERE for guitar manufacturer lawsuit summaries including the Gibson vs. PRS suit to which I referred. For those who don't want to read a lot or confusing stuff, it's a good capsulized legal precedent (a few paragraphs) on which the latest round of threatened little guys will stand ... and ultimately win, if this latest round actually gets beyond C&Ds, PR campaigns and assorted smoke and mirror BS.
Posted on 2/27/20 at 9:06 am to Zappas Stache
quote:
Is any guitar maker doing a straight copy of a Les Paul?
Not a straight copy, but I thought my guitar player's PRS was a Les Paul until I looked closer at it.
Posted on 2/27/20 at 9:35 am to TheFretShack
I think the biggest takeaway from this is the fact that the Les Paul guitar shape is incredibly popular with guitar players around the world and yet Gibson has managed to alienate a massive amount of them with horribly quality control and outrageous prices. Their awful business model has allowed a whole host of smaller builders to do what Gibson should be doing, building great guitars at affordable prices. If I want that style of guitar, I have dozens of better options
Posted on 2/27/20 at 11:04 am to kingbob
Everything king bob said.
You can take the same money you’d spend on a Epiphone and get a Michael Kelly or some other boutique guitar. And have a much better guitar.
Take the $400 the Epi needs in upgrades and now you can get a really good boutique guitar. I wish more people did this and really put the hurt on Gibson.
I have an AMI guitar, which long story short is a Sigma and they try to replicate all the famous designs. D-28, j 45 etc. my $500 Ami will hold its own against a $2k j-45.
A lot of people just pay for the name on the headstock when your money can go much further with different guitars.
You can take the same money you’d spend on a Epiphone and get a Michael Kelly or some other boutique guitar. And have a much better guitar.
Take the $400 the Epi needs in upgrades and now you can get a really good boutique guitar. I wish more people did this and really put the hurt on Gibson.
I have an AMI guitar, which long story short is a Sigma and they try to replicate all the famous designs. D-28, j 45 etc. my $500 Ami will hold its own against a $2k j-45.
A lot of people just pay for the name on the headstock when your money can go much further with different guitars.
Posted on 2/27/20 at 1:31 pm to lsu1919
quote:
You can take the same money you’d spend on a Epiphone and get a Michael Kelly or some other boutique guitar. And have a much better guitar.
This is exactly why Gibson is in the bind they are in. They developed a long established reputation of producing overpriced junk instruments and other manufacturers who actually give a damn about producing quality instruments at affordable prices have filled in market demand.
Page 2 of 2
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News