The Canadian Guitar Forum banner

1 - 20 of 379 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,533 Posts
A lot of things weren't a good idea at all. I fail to see how a company that charges so much for guitars of average construction cannot be profiting. The Godin Group a company seems to be doing well, and all handmade in Canada and at reasonable prices.
Mismanagement? Lazy, unproductive, complacent workers?
Too many rejects and re-works ?

I don't want to see the company go down even though I'm not a Gibson buyer. I think it would be funny Epiphone was sold off and then bought them out.

It would be nice to see another guitar maker buy the brand, clean house and straighten things out but I think they might be far too gone for that.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,462 Posts
A lot of things weren't a good idea at all. I fail to see how a company that charges so much for guitars of average construction cannot be profiting. The Godin Group a company seems to be doing well, and all handmade in Canada and at reasonable prices.
Mismanagement? Lazy, unproductive, complacent workers?
Too many rejects and re-works ?

I don't want to see the company go down even though I'm not a Gibson buyer. I think it would be funny Epiphone was sold off and then bought them out.

It would be nice to see another guitar maker buy the brand, clean house and straighten things out but I think they might be far too gone for that.
Godin uses different and less expensive parts and components than Gibson, their finishing is a cheaper process and they don’t have to follow traditional designs to avoid their customers freaking out. Imagine a non-nitro Gibson! There would be much wailing and gnashing of teeth.

Gibson’s core guitar business is sustainable, as it says in the article. It’s the other businesses they’ve bought that are getting them in trouble.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,487 Posts
How do you have a Billion dollar in revenue and not have money to pay debts? Actually, why do they even have debt with that much revenue? Smh
 
  • Like
Reactions: StratCat and bolero

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,487 Posts
I understand math guys, its rhetorical. obviously its a case of gross mismanagement/stupidity
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,379 Posts
How do you have a Billion dollar in revenue and not have money to pay debts? Actually, why do they even have debt with that much revenue? Smh
1) It's the power of "brand". Gibson has a long and proud history. Investors are right to feel some confidence in that. They are considerably less right to feel confidence in Juszkiewicz and the rest of the senior execs at Gibson, who appear to have a history of bad decisions.

2) I think we now know why Gibson didn't make an appearance at NAMM - cost-cutting.

3) I would be insterested to know just how much money was sunk into the development of the various experimental models that had close to zero uptake, like the Dusk Tiger, the Robot guitars, Firebird X, Zoot Suit SG/LP, et al. The expanded range of finishes also tends to soak up resources. Successful restaurants know that you can't survive by offering a huge menu. You offer a reasonable range of dishes to attract customers, and keep a lid on offerings to reduce inventory/supply needs and waste. In recent years, Gibson/Epiphone has gone nuts offering an ever-broader range of products. It's not worth tooling up for something that isn't going to pull in a wad of customers. Overall, I suppose, a huge menu of niche products will likely appeal to a large number of customers, but even if your restaurant is full, and you've misjudged how many people are going to want this dish or that one, you're going to have a lot of stuff in the fridge going bad before it gets used. It's also fair to note that guitars are not "consummables" that people use and throw out. Even when a guitar changes hands via Craigslist/kijiji, that's a guitar that got purchased instead of buying a new one. AFAIC, Gretsch and Rickenbacker have taken the smarter path: introduce the intermittent new model, but stick to a known manageable range of products whose production costs can be optimally designed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
662 Posts
I guess the best possible outcome would be that the company is sold to a group that actually has an interest in producing quality guitars that their fan base actually want. Easier said than done...

Every company that I’ve ever worked with that had issues with quality, output or decision making, it tended to start right at the top and trickle down to the bottom; if there’s problems in the warehouse, it’s usually caused by the person sitting on the throne or one of his/her lackies.
 
1 - 20 of 379 Posts
Top