It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
Base theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
You are correct that I was always dealing with them via the dealer. That is my entire point, in fact. The shop where I bought the guitar was responsible for liaising with Gibson.
Of course I'm asking that, it is literally the question I have been asking since last night, because if Gibson doesn't do that then it raises a question mark for Linny, and if they do in fact do it then it doesn't raise a question mark for Linny. And, to repeat myself yet again, the reason I ask the question is because it is the opposite of my personal experience and what my Gibson "authorised dealer" has told me.
Do I think Gibson would have sent a replacement? Well yes, I do, because I've had one from them. But the crucial bit is whether they would send it to you, personally, or to the shop.
The question has absolutely nothing to do with what answer you would have given them, it's about what Gibson was prepared to do. And on the one hand you're here with an attitude about my questions and all but calling them absurd, while simultaneously admitting you don't remember what Gibson said with regards to a replacement.
I'm not the only person in this thread to question whether Linny really went directly to Gibson when he was a customer of a shop. It's an important detail in his story. Yet, nobody has confirmed they've had a similar encounter with Gibson - so until they do, I will continue to have some doubt about it. That's reasonable, is it not?
Please don't suggest I don't want to believe you. You are doing the same thing I am doing, which is being led by our personal past experiences instead of immediately assuming the words of a stranger (Linny, in my case) — and I think you're right to do it.
Theres no need to buy one that isn’t finished well. Go play some, try some, research some, use return policies etc.
It’s weird. No one that buys a Les Paul with finish or QC issues has to keep it. Return it. No issue.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCg_imQDC4eUOjuBBRl2mBwA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LyQgllCIpqY
https://rozaliftwave.bandcamp.com/
Then I found a gap between the headstock veneer and neck and they just left it, you couldn't see any grain whatsoever on the back not even the maple it was that dark, it was a nightmare to get clean, lesson learned double the price next time, I've still got to sort the headstock that wasn't part of the job, to say I'm pissed off is an understatement.
(formerly customkits)
- Gibson didn't offer you a replacement and you didn't ask for one
- your experience doesn't validate Linny's version of events
I assume this is aimed at me? Although I don't know what I'm pretending over.
Haven't I been open that I have my concerns about what the video claims?
Haven't I used hyperbole to demonstrate that the photos of damage never once are shown to be on the actual guitar being held, and could belong to a completely different non-Gibson guitar?
Haven't I pointed out that his channel history, subscriber-to-views ratio, and line of business gives him an incentive to make a controversial video?
Have I not also pointed out that his subsequent (and latest) video is now taking aim at CTS pots, seemingly following the well-trodden path of using controversy to grow online?
Haven't I shared my own experiences and why they raise doubts for me?
Haven't I said why I am suspicious that he goes to a shop that can't get a single decent quality Gibson sent to it?
And maybe most importantly, haven't I made the effort to say the difference between "this guy is lying" and "this story needs some further details before I'll believe it"?
Eesh! Out of interest was this during the notorious 'flaking finish' phase a few years ago, which they originally tried to blame the players for?
I won't be doing anymore of these unless they're paying double and that's if I fancy doing it.
They did not accept this back from the original customer so they get all the flack they deserve imo.
(formerly customkits)
From what I read on the thread, the guitar went to your customer because the original owner didn't like the finish. Gibson's warranty is pretty clear on this in fairness, it's a lifetime warranty to the original owner but is non-transferable.
With regards to charging double, does this also apply to the Gibson style guitars that are advertised on your website? I do find it a little interesting that someone with your views on Gibson is happy to 'advertise' guitars that look like they're very much inspired by Gibson.. or am I misreading what a 'Royal 59' might be based on?
last point, elstoof has addressed.
My point still stands about gibson not dealing with the original owner, the finish just got worse and the headstock veneer gap was there from day one and they let that go.
(formerly customkits)
There is still a stark difference with Linny's situation though, where he's evidently trying to grow online channels and is making a bold claim that he can't find a single Gibson to his standards and Gibson can't send him one either — and we're not only supposed to believe this stranger who's appeared from nowhere, but I'm being downright unreasonable to point out that we don't necessarily need to rush to judgement off the back of the video.
https://edmorgan.info
It's called a Royal 59, PAF style pickups, maple top "vintage spec burst front", ABR 1 bridge, binding all round, knobs and switches all in the 'only' place you can put them on a single cut.
Yeah, you're right, sorry my bad, it's nothing like a Gibson.