Mark Agnesi Already Having an Impact at Gibson

Discussion in 'Bad Dog Cafe' started by Bones, Jun 17, 2019.

  1. WetBandit

    WetBandit Friend of Leo's

    Posts:
    3,265
    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2016
    Location:
    Somewhere
    Yup, and in reality Gibson should produce the best Les Paul, but that's not always the case.

    And when you have to mortgage your house to buy one, it really makes that goal they have of being "the most played guitar brand in the world" a complete and empty pipe dream!

    Not bragging, but I could buy 2 new LP standards right now and be alright.... but I would never, because sadly they aren't worth what they are charging.

    It's the horrible attitude and lack of foresight/investment in future players by making quality guitars financially accessible to the masses, without them being stripped down to the point of non recognition.

    PRS Does it in Korea, Fender does it in Mexico... why can't Gibson do something similar instead of acting like and being proud that their guitars are "out of reach" and are merely an aspiration for the majority.... (that seems real smart)

    And when the day comes you have saved up all your peanuts to join the cool club and you go to claim your prize you find a poor finish, a bad fret job, a volume pot that "never stops turning" or even mile high action...

    All for the reasonable price of 3k...

    Its Shameful.

    The above description is from an experience I had with 2 new Firebirds year before last... they were appalling, truthfully.
     
  2. Chunkocaster

    Chunkocaster Poster Extraordinaire

    Posts:
    9,725
    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2018
    Location:
    In space with Ziggy
    The real driver for Gibson to go the legal route on any opposition is because dollar for dollar they cant compete against the opposition. They have decided not to make the best Les Paul at a 1k to 2k price and they would rather use the brand name and a wide array of stepped priced offerings to milk as much profit as possible out of the consumers. If that's not working out for them it's of their own doing. Their most revered offering today was a competitively priced standard back in the day.
     
    Last edited: Jun 21, 2019
    knopflerfan likes this.
  3. WetBandit

    WetBandit Friend of Leo's

    Posts:
    3,265
    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2016
    Location:
    Somewhere
    You have many good points.

    If the current Les Paul Standard was $1900 or 2k I wouldn't be terribly upset.

    The thing that gets under my skin is when on the rare occasion I go to a guitar store and I pull a LP standard of the wall and I find obvious issues that aren't present on a $700 PRS SE (I don't even like PRS) or MIM fender... then, as Kulbla Kraus says "there's the rub"

    Makes me wonder what I would be paying for if not great craftsmanship and attention to detail.

    Finding a sloppy glue joint as petty as that sounds, isnt so petty on a 3k guitar.

    It bothers me because I care about the brand... and moneygrubbers are ruining it, not realizing that making it more accessible will net far more sales and money.

    Gibson have had an exclusionary outlook on things for far too long.

    Why try and make people feel ashamed rather than included or invited?

    Mark says in the video, "stop taping over our logo, call us we want to work with you" perhaps no one actually wants to work with Gibson, because of there sour, snobby attitude?

    Instead of it being about making music and having fun, they treat it like a cork sniffing foray into high society lol...

    The line "play authentic" makes my stomach turn, and skin crawl.

    Maybe if "authentic" didn't cost a fortune to deliver in underwhelming fashion maybe folks would consider it and Dean wouldn't be a "problem".

    Of course Dean isn't a problem and has never been... they just want someone to blame for there own failure spawned out of greed.

    Build a quality instrument at a reasonable/competitive price and sales will come...
     
    Chunkocaster likes this.
  4. Geoff738

    Geoff738 Poster Extraordinaire

    Age:
    57
    Posts:
    7,991
    Joined:
    May 11, 2007
    Location:
    Toronto
    Well, he’s certainly got folks talking about Gibson!

    I’m guessing most casual guitarists, the ones who don’t haunt the forums, wont know and if they did, wont care.

    As I believe has been referred to above Disney is rather rabid about bringing on the lawyers to protect its trademarks and I think that stuff gets a general shrug. To the extent it is thought about at all. The brand doesn’t take a hit at all.

    Monster cable is one in a more closely aligned industry. I’d personally never buy their product because of what I consider some fairly dubious litigation but this Gibson stuff isn’t new either, as I mentioned upthread re Kauer and I know of at least one replica builder who got a cease and desist and I know another who doesn’t advertise a model he makes that isn’t even an exact replica just to avoid getting a letter. And the cease and desist was years back.

    Going public on social media maybe wasn’t the brightest way to go about it, but once the writ is served the word is out anyways.

    I think Dean was chosen because they’re US based it seems, the shapes seem to be exact clones, although obviously not the head stocks, they’re big enough but not too big. But they also stopped making them. I think. If they’d been making them right through from the late 70s Gibson would have a harder argument I think. Gibson can plausibly, although perhaps not successfully legally, argue this is a relatively new attack on its trademarks. I certainly am not someone with any knowledge of US trademark law though.

    Personally it’s hard for me to see how this builds brand loyalty, but if Gibson decides this is the way to go and wins, it isn’t that hard to put a notch or two somewhere or shape the cutaway a bit different and carry on. I actually have a T-shirt that says so many guitars so little time and of the twenty or so pictured on it all are slightly altered from « standard » shapes. If some T-shirt maker can come up with a couple dozen distinct shapes Dean and whoever else can too. The world will keep spinning.

    Cheers,
    Geoff
     
    Owenmoney likes this.
  5. Greg_L

    Greg_L Tele-Holic

    Posts:
    969
    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2018
    Location:
    Texas
    , Yeah but what's he supposed to say? He's an employee. "We here at Gibson really want to be an average overpriced hunk of wood that may or may not relieve itself of it's cranium at some point". I don't think they're gonna say that. What business doesn't claim to want to be the best, most popular in the world? Who conducts business with the mission to just be okay at best? The answer? No one, because those businesses are out of business.

    The video was unnecessary, but it wasn't as bad as the furor surrounding it. Internet outrage is a very real phenomena, and always overblown. Every youtube dope with a channel has made a commentary video about it. The quality...another subjective, overblown problem. Or at least it's no worse than it's always been! Maybe there's a way we can get people that are actually very happy with their Gibsons to spew it all over the internet. You don't see that though. You only see the bitching. Some guy doesn't like the way the neck feels on his sight-unseen internet purchase Gibson so he bitches about it all over cyberspace. Anyone that knows anything about guitars, and particularly Gibsons, knows that you must put your hands on one before you buy it. They all feel different. Buying one any other way is a gamble and sensible people know that going in. Even cookie-cutter bolt-together parts guitars like Teles and Strats have a feel to them, and no two people prefer the same thing.

    Most likely. I don't know what's protected and what isn't, nor do I care. I just assume Gibson will lose most of their lawsuits.....and internet experts that aren't Gibson players anyway will rejoice in the schadenfreude and the world goes on.
     
  6. Greg_L

    Greg_L Tele-Holic

    Posts:
    969
    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2018
    Location:
    Texas
    Have you never heard of Epiphone? Your rage is not helping you.

    Reading your posts, you are not being reasonable or "playing authentic". Lol. See what I did there? Pretty awesome.

    Seriously, your rambling gripes read like a lot of sour grapes and axes to grind. You have a personal problem with Gibson. Cool. More power to you. I will never try to tell you how to feel about anything. It just rings pretty hollow when you just keep ranting and ranting.
     
  7. Bones

    Bones Telefied Ad Free Member

    Posts:
    22,289
    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2005
    Location:
    Luddite Island, NY
    The problem with Epiphone is that they are not a "clone", while their 335 and other semi-hollow and hollow guitars are very good to excellent, their Les Pauls and SGs are nothing like the real deal from the hardware, to the electronics to the headstock shape.

    You can buy an MIM telecaster and the hardware specs are the same as a US vintage piece, the pickups and electronics are usually very good and reliable ,the headstock is the same, the name on the headstock is the same. If they changed the headstock on Epiphone Les Pauls and put the Gibson name on them, they wouldn't be able to make them fast enough. As it is now the higher end Epiphone Les Pauls price point is getting close the the lower end Gibsons. Where an MIM Fender is still a long way away from a USA model.

    If I were Gibson, I would start with the signature model Epiphones to test the market for Gibsons made overseas. An overseas made Gibson Slash model would sell like hotcakes.
     
    WetBandit likes this.
  8. Keefsdad

    Keefsdad Tele-Holic

    Age:
    63
    Posts:
    688
    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2018
    Location:
    Toronto Canada
    I guess we're supposed to forget about the Gibson Hendrix model;)
     
    bender66, studio1087 and WetBandit like this.
  9. WetBandit

    WetBandit Friend of Leo's

    Posts:
    3,265
    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2016
    Location:
    Somewhere
    Epiphone is not Gibson.... same as Squier is not Fender... Fender does offer what I would consider a budget minded guitar in the MIM range, that still says Fender on the headstock, and is being built by a Fender employee.

    Having a hard time defending poor decisions by Gibson... so you resort to the apathy approach, very crafty.
     
  10. WetBandit

    WetBandit Friend of Leo's

    Posts:
    3,265
    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2016
    Location:
    Somewhere
    I can guarantee Dean's Lawyers will quickly throw a reminder out there for judicial consumption.
     
    Keefsdad likes this.
  11. fasteddie42

    fasteddie42 Tele-Afflicted

    Age:
    31
    Posts:
    1,515
    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2016
    Location:
    Tip of the Mitt

    or the gibson branded stratocaster and superstrats...
     
    WetBandit likes this.
  12. regularslinky

    regularslinky Tele-Afflicted

    Posts:
    1,471
    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2004
    Location:
    NEPA USA
    Found the video and, as others have said, it’s actually worse than I expected. Suing Dean and the rest for frivolous claims is just the beginning.

    Agnesi claims that Gibson owns a trademark on every aspect of every Gibson design, headstock to body shape, then says something like: “people in the TV and movie industries, we want to work with you. And by the way, taping over the headstock is not enough to get out of the copyright infringement”.

    Translation: we are prepared to sue everybody that ever put any guitar similar to ours in a movie or tv show.

    Gibson’s business plan appears to be to squeeze every last penny of value from its brand through litigation and intimidation. They are suing Dean and other builders, and threatening the media. They probably have lawyers looking into whether they can sue us for typing the word “Gibson” on an internet post.

    All of that energy could be put into building better guitars. That’s not the priority.

    I hope Gibson fails spectacularly, then someone who cares about building guitars buys what’s left of the name and does good things with it.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
    knopflerfan likes this.
  13. studio1087

    studio1087 Telefied Silver Supporter

    Posts:
    25,307
    Joined:
    May 10, 2003
    Location:
    Near Milwaukee
    Squier is much better than Epiphone.

    Squier guitars have attractive head stocks that always fit inside of cases.

    Ok. Back to Gibson.

    Gibson Gibson Gibson.
     
    Bruxist likes this.
  14. WetBandit

    WetBandit Friend of Leo's

    Posts:
    3,265
    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2016
    Location:
    Somewhere
    Heck my number 1 is an Epi Dot studio (I got a good one)

    But by comparison in large, alot of the Squier range does seem to be much more consistent in quality than epiphone in my experience.

    I had an Epiphone SG400 "custom" 66'
    That was an absolute dog with certain issues that couldn't be corrected without extensive surgery... then my buddy got one of the exact same model (different color) that was really nice.

    Ok, now I'll LOL
     
    studio1087 likes this.
  15. Greg_L

    Greg_L Tele-Holic

    Posts:
    969
    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2018
    Location:
    Texas
    I've already told you, repeatedly, I'm not defending Gibson. I couldn't care less what they do. I've carried that apathy since...forever. I'm not a brand cheerleader. They do not get my money. I'm just not buying the obviously biased and truly questionable nonsense some of you keep spewing. That's not defending Gibson. That's pointing out hypocrites and emotional ramblings.
     
  16. Greg_L

    Greg_L Tele-Holic

    Posts:
    969
    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2018
    Location:
    Texas
    Why is the USA Fender so much more expensive than a MIM if it's the same guitar? Same parts, same name, same headstock? Why aren't all the Fender honks gobbling up Mexican guitars? If you buy an expensive Gibson you're at least getting a much higher end guitar than it's Epi counterpart. If you buy a USA Fender, you're just some goof that spent too much money when you could have bought a MIM and got the same thing..
     
  17. Bones

    Bones Telefied Ad Free Member

    Posts:
    22,289
    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2005
    Location:
    Luddite Island, NY
    Hard to say, I haven't owned a USA Fender in Years, over $2k for a bolt on neck, makes no sense to me. I can but a used MIM 50s Baja and with a few inexpensive mods, have a guitar that is every bit as good as a 50s RI but with a neck that I absolutely love.
     
    Bruxist and Owenmoney like this.
  18. Whatizitman

    Whatizitman Poster Extraordinaire

    Posts:
    5,248
    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2018
    Location:
    WV
    USA manufacturing and labor costs, for one.

    But really I think the popular consensus is the polar opposite of this. Good Epis are very often describes as at least as good, if not better, than low end Gibsons. OTOH, high end Gibson’s are rarely described as thousands of dollars better than a good Epi.

    I like Fenders and Gibsons about the same, so I tend to look at bang for buck. Squiers and MIMs are great bang for buck guitars, that are close in both specs and looks to USA fenders. It’s a different story with Epiphones. Headstock shape matters. It just does. More so than headstock logos. Sometimes thousands of dollars difference when both are taken into account.

    People want a real Gibson headstock so much, Gibson can get away with not reinforcing the headstocks, and still charge more. Clearly, quality has little to do with Gibson pricing.
     
  19. Greg_L

    Greg_L Tele-Holic

    Posts:
    969
    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2018
    Location:
    Texas
    That's pretty much what I'm saying. Fender is charging over $2k for "USA" parts guitars. That's all they are. To Fender's credit, or discredit, their guitars are just bolt-together partscasters with official names on them. That's why so many people can build their own Fenders that are better quality for much cheaper. They're kit guitars, even from the factory. But that's okay at a pro-Fender site. The bias, brand loyalty, and hypocrisy is what I take issue with. I'm not trying to defend Gibson as much as I'm calling out the nonsense.
     
    Owenmoney likes this.
  20. Greg_L

    Greg_L Tele-Holic

    Posts:
    969
    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2018
    Location:
    Texas
    I truly have no idea what goes into Gibson pricing. Brand name and status probably plays a lot into it. I assume that a typical Gibson is much more time consuming and difficult to complete than a $2k+ bolt-together slab body "USA" Fender. But their mid-range pricing and line up is fairly equal. Both have overpriced stuff, both have lower end stuff. The only difference is that lower end Fenders still give you the name and headstock. But how does a Fender fanboy rationalize paying over two grand for the same USA parts guitar as the sub-$1000 MIM or Squier??
     
IMPORTANT: Treat everyone here with respect, no matter how difficult!
No sex, drug, political, religion or hate discussion permitted here.