Jump to content
Hamer Fan Club Message Center

Gibson files for bankruptcy


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 113
  • Created
  • Last Reply
5 hours ago, murkat said:

Nothing. Crickets.

I find that surprising. No change in the product line or availability it appears, not a peep from what amounts to the new owners. No Henry hilarity stories.

Seems odd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Apparently Henry still speaks for the company. That's not exactly encouraging.

https://www.musicradar.com/news/summer-namm-2018-gibson-to-return-with-simplified-guitar-line-up-says-henry-juszkiewicz

Quote

 

Summer NAMM 2018: Gibson to return with simplified guitar line-up, says Henry Juszkiewicz

In an exclusive interview with Guitarist magazine, the CEO details the company’s plans for the show, citing simplification rather than radicalisation as the motivation for new models.

“We will be introducing the new models for Gibson starting in June, in terms of exposure to consumers, and shipments will be taking place sometime in late summer in anticipation of a generally healthy fourth quarter,” he reveals.

We’ve done a lot of work on those models for eight months, so it is not something that has been impacted by our financial situation - we’ve had excellent reception from the consumers we’ve surveyed

Gibson CEO Henry Juskiewicz

“We’ve done a lot of work on those models for eight months, so it is not something that has been impacted by our financial situation, and we expect to carry through on those plans. We’ve had excellent reception from the consumers we’ve surveyed on test panels and so on, and many of the dealers have seen these new models and been very complimentary.

“I would say it’s not a radical shift but we have [made] a lot of effort to simplify product offerings. We feel, in the past, there have been too many new models and names and it was very confusing to the consumer, and so we’ve simplified that, we’ve really simplified and gone back to historical naming precedents, so it’s more subtle change than it is radical change.”

 

Sure. Very credible. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/2/2018 at 1:09 PM, rj2858 said:

Well, you are being overly fanboi-ish, and that bis evidenced by the classic straw man argument you present.

I don't have to be able to throw  a baseball 100 MPH to know that (insert name here) is not a "legendary" pitcher.

Criticism? I don't know that anyone has suggested that Joe isn't a talented player, and it's clear that Joe  is not the one bestowing "legendary" status on himself.

Seeing as you're from Boston, perhaps this will clear it up;

The Kennedys are "legendary" because you know their names,  they've been around for over 60 years, the media fawns over their every move, (except the ones that are embarrassing),

they've won political office over and over again (for reasons you'd have to explain to me), and two were victims of assassinations.

But in the end, there is nothing of significant substance there. In their case they may be "legendary", because it seems that any perceived greatness, is truly stuff of legend, not so much fact.

So, if Joe Bonamassa being a "players' player" makes him legendary, so be it, but all you're doing is making the Hall of Fame into the Hall of the Very Good.

*** Please note that I am not implicating Joe Bonamassa in the death of any innocent campaign worker, accusing him of rape, suggesting that he won a fixed Presidential election, or was a whore chasing drug addict who arguably didn't write a book that won a Pulitzer Prize, was deemed a war hero despite his errors in command, and whose other errors almost led to war with Russia.***

  

 

  I don't think I am being fanboi-ish  - as I said. I just think you are being overly critical, and he is a great player. You lost me with the story about the Kennedy's. I don't see what that has to do with the topic under discussion. As for the pitcher, I guess a guy who can accurately and consistently throw 100 mph pitches, and has good stats (which I think is somewhat of a reasonable, if tangential analogy here) is a great pitcher.  Although I am not a baseball fan, so grain of salt. As I said, I am not getting hung up on the word "lengendary," I think that is just a hyperbole.

On 5/2/2018 at 12:50 PM, kizanski said:

Oh yes, the "How many hit records do YOU have?" argument.
I said that he was unknown outside of guitar nerd circles, hence the word "legendary" is poetic license taken to the N-th degree.

Also, in the sense that he plays "some legendary music...none that he himself wrote," we share that same quality.

 

Yeah, I like that argument - why be overly snarky or critical of another hard working musician, who is out there walkin' the walk, rather then just talkin' the talk. I addressed the use of the word legendary. I play a lot of blues tunes.  I don't suppose I would claim equality with JB (or say, Muddy Waters) based on that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
5 minutes ago, Camstone said:

Very interesting as are the comments from Bonamassa that reflects the feelings of many customers.

I wish them the very best.  It’s a tough market even for an iconic name like Gibson so they’ll have to be good. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And they are adding Gibson users KebMo and Larry Carlton as advisors to their board......What a line up.....Larry, Mo and Curleigh!

http://www.gibson.com/Products/Electric-Guitars/ES/Gibson-Memphis/Larry-Carlton-ES-335/Features.aspx

http://www.gibson.com/Products/Acoustic-Instruments/Small-Body/Gibson-Acoustic/Keb-Mo-Bluesmaster.aspx

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, django49 said:

And they are adding Gibson users KebMo and Larry Carlton as advisors to their board......What a line up.....Larry, Mo and Curleigh!

That's pretty clever!

Seems like KebMo is usually playing a resonator. Or perhaps a Hamer Monaco.....

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the "enthusiast" part is really important, especially at the helm of a company like Gibson, that relies so heavily on brand-name recognition. You need someone who can look at a regular Les Paul guitar and says "that's cool", and who looks at the Firebird-X and says "What the ef?".  I mean, I can understand some of what Henry J was trying to do, but he was in the wrong business for that. He should have focused on the core of the brand, and tried expanding more into hardwoods that aren't mahogany, ebony, and rosewood.

I really do see a lot of parallel's with the Harley-Davidson brand, and how various corporate types have bungled things in recent years. Both ended up with some brand names that were really not "typical", but instead of really helping them flourish, they ran them into the ground. Kramer, Steinberger, Tobias, Valley Arts, Slingerland, etc etc. They had a great way to diversify their product line in a way that wouldn't really influence the "core" Gibson brand, but instead they back burnered them, selling them only on "musicyo.com" for a while.  Now the only Kramer and Tobias instruments you see are cheap imports on musicians friend.

I don't buy the idea that it would cause competition with Gibson. The type of player that is looking for a typical Kramer, Tobias, or Valley arts guitar/bass is NOT looking for anything that Gibson has historically built.

This is the same thing that happened with Harley-Davidson and Buell, as well as MV Augusta.

I miss the days (even though I was never alive for them) of Ted McCarty as head of Gibson, drawing up the Explorer, Flying V, and Futura, thinking that they looked kinda cool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/1/2018 at 6:07 PM, polara said:

 

I'm guessing a smaller, more focused company will emerge

 

They could rewind and start as a repair shop and re-develop from there. This, actually, is a proven concept 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...