Acoustic Guitar Magazine Cover Story: Guild!

[Jeff]

As to Fenders "lack of presence" at Arlington....wasn't the show knee deep in old Strats and Teles?

And Gibsons by the gross, I mean hundreds if not thousands of Gibsons. Gibsons everywhere.

 

[fronobulax]

And Gibsons by the gross, I mean hundreds if not thousands of Gibsons. Gibsons everywhere.

Did the Gibson "booth babes" look like this?

 

[capnjuan]

..And Gibsons by the gross, I mean hundreds if not thousands of Gibsons. Gibsons everywhere.

S'where all that maple tonewood goes that friends cut... cj

 

[jwsamuel]

After reading again, i have to say that i dont like the way they present the westerly plant and the way they make it seem like the "state of the art" corona plant was a step up.

I believe the plant itself was a step up. That doesn't mean that Fender took advantage of it and produced better guitars. But the physical plant in Corona was better than what they had in Westerly.

Jim

 

[jwsamuel]

This article has a severe bias toward FMIC. It reads like something the company should have paid advertising space for. Journalism it is not. Much closer to a long-winded press release.

Acoustic Guitar has long given up credibility it has as an objective magazine. It exists purely to help advertisers sell products. Just take a look at their so-called reviews. They never give a bad review to any guitar or product. I once asked them about that and the editors said their policy is that if a review is bad, they will not print it and they only print good reviews. They tried to spin it as better for readers to only talk about good guitars. To me, it does nothing to help readers avoid dogs and only serves to protect manufacturers.

So was the article pro FMIC? You wouldn't expect them to criticize an advertiser, would you?

Jim

 

[jwsamuel]

If I'm not mistaken, Nashville has a fair amount of moisture in the air -- what does that say about Gibsons?

Does it say that Henry J is all wet?

Jim

 

[jwsamuel]

We can rest knowing that people like Hans are taking the time to put together in depth and factual writing...that is, until FMIC gets their hands on him and fills his pockets full of cash.lol :lol:

Have I mentioned that I am writing a book that will expose everything wrong with FMIC?

Unless they notice that my pockets are empty. :mrgreen:

Jim

 

[West R Lee]

:wink: So let me see if I have this straight Dave. Fender had no idea that it would cost more in labor to build Guild guitars in California? Hmm, so might that imply that they lacked in business prowess? That takes us right back to the age old question....why move production from Westerly in the first place? I've heard all the reasons.......Westerly needed to be retrofitted because the equipment was old. So why not bite the bullet and fix the place up?

I anticipate some nice guitars coming out of Tacoma, heck....they already are.

After all the discussion here, I still find myself trying to understand. Hideglue, was the equipment at Westerly falling apart? Were they paying you $50 an hour? Did the Rhode Island government have environmental regulations that strapped the hands of the factory to the point it was no longer economical to build guitars there?

Oh well, I guess it doesn't much matter anymore, I just enjoy the discussion

West

 

[guildzilla]

Like you, West, I still struggle to understand the relocation from Westerly. FMIC had underwritten a very impressive revival of the Guild line in the late 90's - the wide range of acoustics, the inspired Bluesbirds, the reissue Starfires. And the promotional material was so much better than it had been. It seems to me that Guild was at the top of its game during that period. The guitars from that period are so reliably excellent.

I guess they just weren't making enough profit fast enough. Once a belief like that is entrenched at the corporate level, any change is perceived as necessary and correct. All other factors disappear like so much smoke. My regret is they didn't stick with the plan they initially had with Westerly and with the Custom Shop. In retrospect it looks like such a fine plan.

That said, my primary beef in this thread was the short cutting of journalistic integrity in the magazine story. I viewed it as a single-source story and felt the subject and the importance of a cover story deserved more.

Like all of you who posted, I give FMIC credit for promoting the Guild brand. I don't want to see it burn out or fade away. I didn't mean to kill any joy over this cover story, which is evidence of an effort to promote Guild guitars.

 

[jwsamuel]

Like you, West, I still struggle to understand the relocation from Westerly.

I don't think there was any more to it than FMIC wanted to consolidate locations for more efficiency and cost savings. If they had enough capacity at one plant, why operate two? Then when FMIC purchased Tacoma, it made sense to have one plant for acoustic production and one for everything else.

Jim

 

[kentukblue]

After reading again, i have to say that i dont like the way they present the westerly plant and the way they make it seem like the "state of the art" corona plant was a step up.

I believe the plant itself was a step up. That doesn't mean that Fender took advantage of it and produced better guitars. But the physical plant in Corona was better than what they had in Westerly.

Jim

I see what your talking about. I guess I was expecting the writing to reflect upon the instruments that were being produced during these eras and not about the condition of the belt sanders in the shop (even though that kind of stuff is interesting).

 

[West R Lee]

Think you just hit the nail on the head Jimbo.

West

 

[Sabatini]

If I'm not mistaken, Nashville has a fair amount of moisture in the air -- what does that say about Gibsons?

Does it say that Henry J is all wet?

Jim

Actually, what it says about Gibson is they were smart enough to move acoustic production out of Nashville to Montana, which truly does have stable humidity, compared to most of the U.S.

 

[jpilzer]

Hi, I thought that I would make a few comments both on the AG article and the discussion of why there were so few new Guilds at Arlington.
The story had a few errors of fact, but the most egregeous ones were errors of omission. For example all of the Gruhn designed Guild flat tops were ignored. These were some of the most innovative guitars made. The early Fender years also produced some fine guitars as Tim Shaw and others tried to make guitars that improved on traditional Guilds, but were true to them.
Guild left Westerly, I was told by folks involved in the decision, becuase the plant needed upgrading and there was room in Corona that was not being used. The problems in Corona were many. They just could not build consistantly good acoustics there. Many came to regret closing Westerly and the purchase of Tacoma was the answer to the problem. The Tacoma guitars are really fine. The red spurce traditional guitars are some the best Guilds ever and the Contmporary series, while they do not sound like Guilds of yore, are fine additions to the line. But to say that Fender rescued Guild is a bit over the top.
As to the lack of new Guilds on display, the problem is that people demand such deep discounts to buy them, which some dealers are willing to give, that you can't make any money selling them. As I noted to many of you in Arlington, the focus is on how cheap can you get something. That is fine, but the consequence is that carrying new guitars just makes little economic sense for a dealer. When buyers want to buy a $2000 guitar for no more than $1200 (which I have been told was one fellow's rule), a dealer will have to put his/her money elsewhere.
For example, the new D-40 is a great guitar with specs similar to the pricey Martin D-18 GE. At a street price of $1500 it is a bargain for a player and there is enough profit to make carrying it worthwhile. At a sale price of $1200 there isn't.
Dealers do this from a love of guitars and to make a profit. I for one cannot afford to stock guitars as a public service. I try to price my guitars fairly so that neither the buyer nor I are ripped off. However, a reasonable profit is essential. The ebaying of America has worked to defeat that idea. We are, I fear, becoming a national flea market. I believe that as loyalty to American made products continues to decline we may see the American made guitar go the way of American made electronics.
This is not meant to be an apologia or start yet another rant about greedy dealers. It is just simply the economics of the issue.

 

[West R Lee]

Thank you for your input Jay and it's good to see you on the site. I certainly enjoyed talking with you at the show. You're CD is great...............thank you.

West

 

[Scratch]

Played your cd on the way home from Arlington, Jay. Very nice indeed and also very nice to meet you there.

 

[jwsamuel]

For example, the new D-40 is a great guitar with specs similar to the pricey Martin D-18 GE. At a street price of $1500 it is a bargain for a player and there is enough profit to make carrying it worthwhile. At a sale price of $1200 there isn't.

As the owner of three recent Guilds, this trend in pricing has me concerned. The selling prices of Guilds has declined since I bought mine, particularly among those dealers who sell on eBay. As the prices for new guitars drop, so to do the prices of used Guilds, which in turn puts more pressure on the price of new Guilds. My concern is that as the prices drop, more and more dealers will stop carryying Guild and that will lead to the brand's demise.

Jim

 

[fronobulax]

As the prices for new guitars drop, so to do the prices of used Guilds, which in turn puts more pressure on the price of new Guilds.

<Threadjack>

I'm afraid I don't follow your reasoning which seems almost circular. Falling new prices push down used prices. Falling used prices pull down new prices.

I have a self inflicted sense of deja vu when I say this but I also think there are people in the market who would not substitute a new guitar for a used one or visa versa. Thus the link between new and used prices might not be as strong as is implied. I would also postulate that it is not appropriate to lump players, collectors and investors into one market. Most people I know have no more than two guitars and are not constantly buying and selling, for example.

<Threadjack>

 

[HoboKen]

Ok......bottom line........
When you really are trying to build tools for the soul of those who really care about a great quality acoustic guitar sound....aka...."form follows function" ....and the sound quality is a tonal balance of the function of treble and bass for all kinds of music, you are already at what I call "Bean-Counter Odds" with those in your company who see only the beauty of mass production of "tools for the masses," i.e., cookie-cutter strats stamped out and bolted together. There is a science to building a good guitar.....and then there is an art to building a great guitar. Could it be that Donnie Wade is surfing for the art in the soul of the company on a sea wave of scientists?

Just a question to be pondered.


HoboKen

 

[jwsamuel]

I'm afraid I don't follow your reasoning which seems almost circular. Falling new prices push down used prices. Falling used prices pull down new prices.

Okay..here's how it works....When the price of new guitars drops, sellers of used guitars have to drop their prices to sell. After all, not as many people will buy used when they can get new for only $100-200 more. Now, when the used prices drop to $400-500 less than new, the used guitars become more attractive to the people looking for a good value. They will buy used to save money, even though they would prefer to buy new if the prices were closer together.

Now, to get sales and compete with the used guitars, retailers have to discount guitars even more to make new guitars more attractive to buyers than used.

It happens to cars, I don't see why guitars would be any different.

Jim