Gibson LPs with THAT logo selling well?

GuitarZero

I wouldn't say outstanding.  Good for the money.  The finish on the LPJ/SGJ/LPM was pretty low grade for a start and they felt cheap compared to an Epiphone of the same price, and often not as good either.

When the Epi Les Paul Tribute Plus came out it was priced similarly to the models I mentioned and was a better guitar overall.  Ok, so you didn't get the nitro finish, but it was great value.  It's popularity seems to have driven up the price a lot, but it's still a great guitar and in my opinion better than the Gibson low cost offerings.

Kuroblack

dindude said:

Three things id give credit to Henry for;

Still keeping Gibson MIA, not any easy thing to do with all the competition.
Giving lower priced options despite being MIA.
Keeping a nitro finish despite the two above.

Too much generic far eastern tat out there already, not adverse to it being made outside America, but it's harder not to just become Gibson shaped objects with the same neck shape, pickups, and finish as every other £700 guitar out there.

Good points there

underdog

GuitarZero;665999" said:

I wouldn't say outstanding.  Good for the money.  The finish on the LPJ/SGJ/LPM was pretty low grade for a start and they felt cheap compared to an Epiphone of the same price, and often not as good either.

When the Epi Les Paul Tribute Plus came out it was priced similarly to the models I mentioned and was a better guitar overall.  Ok, so you didn't get the nitro finish, but it was great value.  It's popularity seems to have driven up the price a lot, but it's still a great guitar and in my opinion better than the Gibson low cost offerings.

The difference being the Epiphone was made in Korea or somewhere, the Gibson isnt made somewhere with much cheaper labour. So the cheapy will always be able to have more bells and whistles. An LPJ is a good no nonsense gigging guitar with a big brand name on it for decent money. Which is outstanding.

jeztone2

I think it ll be China. Anyone tried a Chinese built Sigma acoustic? I was knocked out by the build quality.

I wonder if he's looked at how ESP do the Edwards LP's?

crunchman

Mexico is another option.  Fender make some pretty good guitars in Mexico, and some of the cheaper Martins are made there - and are very good.

gubble

This may have been mentioned before however I feel that for Gibson the only real option they have left is to reduce production significantly and concentrate on building traditional Gibsons with the highest possible level of quality. Sure they will be expensive but it will keep their brand as an object of desire.

If we went back to the late 50's what was the retail cost on a Gibson Les Paul in today's money? It was probably much higher than their offerings are today.

This way they could keep their brand kudos, massively reduce costs etc. There's always going to be a market for gibson's main staple of guitars and this way they could really sell home the handbuilt in america point whilst maintaining a level of exclusivity.

Brize

gubble said:

If we went back to the late 50's what was the retail cost on a Gibson Les Paul in today's money? It was probably much higher than their offerings are today.

In 1959 a Gibson Les Paul Standard plus case cost $307.50. In today's money that's $2,498.43, or £1,623.98.

gubble

Really? Wow i genuinley thought they'd be at least double that.

Show's what I know i guess.

 

FWIW i've not tried a 2015 Gibson. So i can't pass comment on anything other than the logo - which i dislike a lot !

crunchman

gubble said:

This may have been mentioned before however I feel that for Gibson the only real option they have left is to reduce production significantly and concentrate on building traditional Gibsons with the highest possible level of quality. Sure they will be expensive but it will keep their brand as an object of desire.

If we went back to the late 50's what was the retail cost on a Gibson Les Paul in today's money? It was probably much higher than their offerings are today.

This way they could keep their brand kudos, massively reduce costs etc. There's always going to be a market for gibson's main staple of guitars and this way they could really sell home the handbuilt in america point whilst maintaining a level of exclusivity.

This  might work short term, but long term you would lose out on up and coming youngsters playing your guitars.  Some of those would make it big and then the next generation would grow up wanting to play something else.  It's already happened to some extent.  how many of those horrible Airline guitars has the guy from White Stripes sold?

Neil

dindude said:

Three things id give credit to Henry for;

Still keeping Gibson MIA, not any easy thing to do with all the competition.
Giving lower priced options despite being MIA.
Keeping a nitro finish despite the two above.

Too much generic far eastern tat out there already, not adverse to it being made outside America, but it's harder not to just become Gibson shaped objects with the same neck shape, pickups, and finish as every other £700 guitar out there.

Good points.

Part of Gibson's mystique is US made with a nitro finish.

Make them in the far east with a poly finish and they could be anything.

Moving to another country to make Gibson's would just dilute the brand -  Fender USA's main competitor is Fender Mexico.

Looking at it from a marketing POV, Fender have diluted their brand over time, when you look at a Fender  model you have to ask, "US, Mex, Japanese, Chinese or what?"

Now Fender have to churn out thousands of guitars a week further diluting the brand's impact and putting themselves further and further into debt.

Looked at it from a purely marketing POV Gibson would commit suicide if they went offshore. 

Henry is certainly wise to that idea and would never let it happen.

People often laugh at him but he is an astute man IMO. Business wise he owns Gibson guitars and  is in a better position than the new head of the Fender that is owned by two giant private equity groups.

Chalky

Well, I asked in one shop today and they said they'd sold zero on Tuesday, zero for a 'long time', and thought the Gibson offer was a bit daft. C'mon @Kuroblack, hit me with your counter claim!

UnclePsychosis

stickyfiddle;665723" said:

ICBM said:



jeztone2 said:

The Coca Cola reference was a coincidence.



So to cut a long story short, what long-term cost-saving change can we expect from Gibson, disguised by a return to the "proper" spec that everyone wants?





3 words: Made In Japan.

The outbreak of barely-veiled racism that would erupt across the likes of TGP would be a sight to behold.

I almost want to see it happen purely
to see the seethe that it would generate!

Rox

crunchman said:

how many of those horrible Airline guitars has the guy from White Stripes sold?

Bloody hell - his career's down the pan if he's had to get a job in a music shop.

rsvmark

I Have tried the 2015 and 2014...... Preferred 2014. But long story short, consensus appears to be that we don't like the wide neck, tuners, logo, and a few comments about the nut correct? No comments about anything else that I can see.

Taking a step back, the consensus appears to be that sales have tanked in the UK. What about Europe, rest of world and U.S.? Does anyone know? Frankly, if sales are good everywhere else, no one is going to give a Flying V about us lot in the UK......

Kuroblack

Chalky said:

Well, I asked in one shop today and they said they'd sold zero on Tuesday, zero for a 'long time', and thought the Gibson offer was a bit daft. C'mon @Kuroblack, hit me with your counter claim!

not surprising - awful promo idea!

xSkarloey

gubble;666153" said:

This may have been mentioned before however I feel that for Gibson the only real option they have left is to reduce production significantly and concentrate on building traditional Gibsons with the highest possible level of quality. Sure they will be expensive but it will keep their brand as an object of desire.If we went back to the late 50's what was the retail cost on a Gibson Les Paul in today's money? It was probably much higher than their offerings are today.This way they could keep their brand kudos, massively reduce costs etc. There's always going to be a market for gibson's main staple of guitars and this way they could really sell home the handbuilt in america point whilst maintaining a level of exclusivity.

A company run along those lines exists in the form of Heritage, the former Gibson employees making product in the old Michigan Gibson factory.

To be honest, I couldn't see Gibson downsizing to that degree. There's too much at stake.

jeztone2

Well I had a quick go on a 2015 yesterday....I think the stumbling block is...that neck. It's somewhere between my classical guitar and a deep version of an Ibanez wizard neck. I just found it incredibly alien & uncomfortable.

Was too early to think about
Robot tuners. I'd want to rehearse a lot to see if they work. But I still say it's a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

The guitar was nicely finished, probably a lot better than other LP's I'd tried but...that neck....no!

Chalky

Agreed - its like the neck was designed by a non-Gibson employee.