Curlington
Member
My affinity for the Guild brand has gotten me to thinking about brands, history, reputations, and values. A little research was eye-opening.
Of course, a brand telegraphs information to the consumer. For example, “McDonalds” tells me what will be on the menu, the price roughly, and presumably a minimum level of safely and cleanliness. On the other hand, a local business with a name to which I have no association, like “Mary’s Kitchen,” tells me only that it is probably a diner. It is roughly the same dynamic for a factory production guitar company and a local luthier.
I have liked Guild since my youth. I got my first Guild because I had little money and it was the best I could afford. My friends had them. I remember those days very fondly. So, I associate Guild with my youth and with value.
You can look up the history of almost any long-running brand, and you will see there is a lack of continuity. Quality, reputation and sales may go up and down. The Company is bought and sold. Designs, trends, and products come and go. The company divests, diversifies, and/or reinvents itself. Otherwise, it stagnates, falls behind, and/or is bought out.
Even in closely-held family companies like Martin and Taylor, there is no true continuity. The owners, managers and craftsmen come and go. Material availability, technology, research and fashion drive the demise of old features and products and the introduction of new ones. Why does one buy a brand like Martin or Taylor? I heard a young guy in a music store say he wanted a Big Baby because “everyone knows Taylors are the best.” Because your favorite artist plays that brand? Because Martin was indisputably the best when I was young?
Then there is the proprietary information. Bracing patterns, trade secrets and the like enable the trademark Martin, Gibson and Guild sound.
Which brings me back to Guild. The very early Guild years were really special, but most of us cannot afford those now. Alfred Dronge founded Guild in 1952, focused on archtop jazz guitars. He oversaw the production of excellent instruments and the move to Hoboken in 1956. Guild continued to expand, and in 1966, was sold to electronics giant Avnet Corporation and production began to move to Westerly, Rhode Island, completed in 1969. Guild had an evolving focus on folk, rock and blues acoustic and electric guitars, and 12 strings. Presumably, Dronge stayed on as a manager, but died in 1972.
The instruments from Hoboken are generally more sought after than those from Westerly. The 60's more than the 70's. Why? Did the quality decline that much in the move to Westerly? Was the Avnet management all that inferior? You never hear about an “Avnet” Guild. Are pre-1972 guitars more desirable because Mr. Dronge was still a manager until then and his skill resulted in production of a superior product? Carlo Greco was the General Foreman of the Guild Guitar Company from 1959 until 1977. Are pre-1977 Guilds more desirable because of Mr. Greco’s involvement until then?
Is it that craftsmanship and worker dedication was declining in general throughout the county through the 50’s, 60’s and 70’s, so that, the older the instrument in general, the better it was staring out?
The decline of the acoustic market in the late '70s caused economic pressure. The acoustics seemed to get heavier. This is the era in which I latched onto Guild “value.” The 70’s Guild still seem to be pretty highly regarded.
The 80’s ushered in the synthesizers, disco, etc., and the economy tanked. Martin, Guild and other acoustic manufacturers suffered.
In 1986, Guild was purchased by a partnership called the Guild Music Corporation, but it declared bankruptcy two years later. I think George Gruhn was a minority shareholder. In 1986, well-known luthier Kim Walker started making prototypes for new models for the Guild Guitar Company, in 1987 he was head of R&D and the custom shop, and in 1988 was supervising production as the assistant plant manager.
Interestingly, we call these the Gruhn/Walker years, not the bankrupt Guild Music Corporation years. These Guilds are some of the most highly regarded.
In 1989, the Fass Corporaiton, which would later become US Music, purchased Guild.
From the mid '80s to the early 90’s, Guild imported Madeira acoustic guitars based on existing Guild designs but manufactured in Asia, and did the same with electrics. In the early 2000’s, Guild electric guitars manufactured in Korea were reissued under the DeArmond brand. Also in the early 2000s, Guild acoustic guitars imported the GAD-series from China. Did this dilute the Guild brand? Objectively, why are American made acoustics so desirable? Why are imports seen as a negative? Why is it different from, say, the auto industry?
The Fender Musical Instruments Corporation purchased Guild in 1995. In late 2001, Guild production was moved to Corona, California. In 2004, Fender acquired the assets of Tacoma Guitars and moved acoustic production to Washington State. In 2008, Fender acquired Kaman Music Corporation and moved acoustic production to Connecticut. Which of these factories is the most desirable? Time will tell. Does the factory really matter? There was a continuity of bracing and other trade secrets, and management during these moves. Sure, some craftsmen were left behind, but workers change jobs and retire regardless of where the factory is located.
To me, it is not the change in factories, per se, but the dumping of product on the market that severely wounds the brand. Granted, I have been the beneficiary. How many people got burned by believing in the Corona and Tacoma factories, paid street price, and then watched the crazy discounting and wished they had delayed the purchase. How many people bought GADs on the strength of the brand without realizing they are Chinese? Does it really matter as long as Guild’s trade secrets went into making the GADs and gave them something of the Guild sound?
Interestingly, many have said that the pre-Fender Guilds are more desirable. Others say that the post-Fender but per-Corona are more desirable because of Fender quality control.
Considering all the changes over the decades, it is pretty silly to make a blanket statement that Westerlies are the best.
Why is Fender perceived to be the big bad corporation with no soul? Like all big corporations, it sometimes seems out of touch. But, is it really all that different from the various owners that produced the Westerlies?
In 1951, Leo Fender introduced the Broadcaster, the prototype solid-body guitar that would eventually become the legendary Telecaster. In 1965, he sold his company to corporate giant CBS. In 1981, CBS recruited a new management team to re-invent Fender. In 1985, a group of employees and investors purchased the company from CBS, as Fender Musical Instruments Corporation, but the sale included only the name, the patents, and the parts that were left over in stock. Initially, Fender imported their guitars from offshore manufacturers who had proven their ability to produce affordable, viable instruments. But the quest for even more control over quality soon led to the construction of Fender's flagship domestic factory in Corona, California. Fender grew dramatically in sales and stature, manufacturing and distributing virtually everything for guitarists, including amplifiers and mixing boards, and is a world leader in the manufacturing and distribution of electric guitars and amplifiers.
Fender may be a large multinational corporation, but its roots are recent and fairly modest. Without the electric guitar franchise financial base to underwrite the Guild operations, where would the Guild brand we know and love be today? Think of all the venerable brands that are no more. Is Kodak relevant to anyone these days? If the Guild brand had died with the Westerly plant, would our Westerly and before guitars be more or less valuable? Would we have a vibrant message board for Guild?
Playing a Guild says something about you, but what, I am not sure. Most people have a vague, good connotation about Guild and have a sense they have been around for a long time. Perhaps the perception we are subconsciously going for is that “I don’t have the resources to throw money at Martin but I know how to find a great guitar at a bargain.” Or, “I don’t go with the crowd, I am different.” Or,” I like vintage and have a sense of history.” Or, "I know my guitars."
I am probably wrong on some details and omitted others. I am acoustic oriented. I raise more questions than I answer. My point is how different our perceptions seem to be on the Guild brand from the more complicated realities. I hope you found this interesting and it was worth the long read.
* No affiliation with Fender or the music business. No axes to grind. Just thinking out loud.
Of course, a brand telegraphs information to the consumer. For example, “McDonalds” tells me what will be on the menu, the price roughly, and presumably a minimum level of safely and cleanliness. On the other hand, a local business with a name to which I have no association, like “Mary’s Kitchen,” tells me only that it is probably a diner. It is roughly the same dynamic for a factory production guitar company and a local luthier.
I have liked Guild since my youth. I got my first Guild because I had little money and it was the best I could afford. My friends had them. I remember those days very fondly. So, I associate Guild with my youth and with value.
You can look up the history of almost any long-running brand, and you will see there is a lack of continuity. Quality, reputation and sales may go up and down. The Company is bought and sold. Designs, trends, and products come and go. The company divests, diversifies, and/or reinvents itself. Otherwise, it stagnates, falls behind, and/or is bought out.
Even in closely-held family companies like Martin and Taylor, there is no true continuity. The owners, managers and craftsmen come and go. Material availability, technology, research and fashion drive the demise of old features and products and the introduction of new ones. Why does one buy a brand like Martin or Taylor? I heard a young guy in a music store say he wanted a Big Baby because “everyone knows Taylors are the best.” Because your favorite artist plays that brand? Because Martin was indisputably the best when I was young?
Then there is the proprietary information. Bracing patterns, trade secrets and the like enable the trademark Martin, Gibson and Guild sound.
Which brings me back to Guild. The very early Guild years were really special, but most of us cannot afford those now. Alfred Dronge founded Guild in 1952, focused on archtop jazz guitars. He oversaw the production of excellent instruments and the move to Hoboken in 1956. Guild continued to expand, and in 1966, was sold to electronics giant Avnet Corporation and production began to move to Westerly, Rhode Island, completed in 1969. Guild had an evolving focus on folk, rock and blues acoustic and electric guitars, and 12 strings. Presumably, Dronge stayed on as a manager, but died in 1972.
The instruments from Hoboken are generally more sought after than those from Westerly. The 60's more than the 70's. Why? Did the quality decline that much in the move to Westerly? Was the Avnet management all that inferior? You never hear about an “Avnet” Guild. Are pre-1972 guitars more desirable because Mr. Dronge was still a manager until then and his skill resulted in production of a superior product? Carlo Greco was the General Foreman of the Guild Guitar Company from 1959 until 1977. Are pre-1977 Guilds more desirable because of Mr. Greco’s involvement until then?
Is it that craftsmanship and worker dedication was declining in general throughout the county through the 50’s, 60’s and 70’s, so that, the older the instrument in general, the better it was staring out?
The decline of the acoustic market in the late '70s caused economic pressure. The acoustics seemed to get heavier. This is the era in which I latched onto Guild “value.” The 70’s Guild still seem to be pretty highly regarded.
The 80’s ushered in the synthesizers, disco, etc., and the economy tanked. Martin, Guild and other acoustic manufacturers suffered.
In 1986, Guild was purchased by a partnership called the Guild Music Corporation, but it declared bankruptcy two years later. I think George Gruhn was a minority shareholder. In 1986, well-known luthier Kim Walker started making prototypes for new models for the Guild Guitar Company, in 1987 he was head of R&D and the custom shop, and in 1988 was supervising production as the assistant plant manager.
Interestingly, we call these the Gruhn/Walker years, not the bankrupt Guild Music Corporation years. These Guilds are some of the most highly regarded.
In 1989, the Fass Corporaiton, which would later become US Music, purchased Guild.
From the mid '80s to the early 90’s, Guild imported Madeira acoustic guitars based on existing Guild designs but manufactured in Asia, and did the same with electrics. In the early 2000’s, Guild electric guitars manufactured in Korea were reissued under the DeArmond brand. Also in the early 2000s, Guild acoustic guitars imported the GAD-series from China. Did this dilute the Guild brand? Objectively, why are American made acoustics so desirable? Why are imports seen as a negative? Why is it different from, say, the auto industry?
The Fender Musical Instruments Corporation purchased Guild in 1995. In late 2001, Guild production was moved to Corona, California. In 2004, Fender acquired the assets of Tacoma Guitars and moved acoustic production to Washington State. In 2008, Fender acquired Kaman Music Corporation and moved acoustic production to Connecticut. Which of these factories is the most desirable? Time will tell. Does the factory really matter? There was a continuity of bracing and other trade secrets, and management during these moves. Sure, some craftsmen were left behind, but workers change jobs and retire regardless of where the factory is located.
To me, it is not the change in factories, per se, but the dumping of product on the market that severely wounds the brand. Granted, I have been the beneficiary. How many people got burned by believing in the Corona and Tacoma factories, paid street price, and then watched the crazy discounting and wished they had delayed the purchase. How many people bought GADs on the strength of the brand without realizing they are Chinese? Does it really matter as long as Guild’s trade secrets went into making the GADs and gave them something of the Guild sound?
Interestingly, many have said that the pre-Fender Guilds are more desirable. Others say that the post-Fender but per-Corona are more desirable because of Fender quality control.
Considering all the changes over the decades, it is pretty silly to make a blanket statement that Westerlies are the best.
Why is Fender perceived to be the big bad corporation with no soul? Like all big corporations, it sometimes seems out of touch. But, is it really all that different from the various owners that produced the Westerlies?
In 1951, Leo Fender introduced the Broadcaster, the prototype solid-body guitar that would eventually become the legendary Telecaster. In 1965, he sold his company to corporate giant CBS. In 1981, CBS recruited a new management team to re-invent Fender. In 1985, a group of employees and investors purchased the company from CBS, as Fender Musical Instruments Corporation, but the sale included only the name, the patents, and the parts that were left over in stock. Initially, Fender imported their guitars from offshore manufacturers who had proven their ability to produce affordable, viable instruments. But the quest for even more control over quality soon led to the construction of Fender's flagship domestic factory in Corona, California. Fender grew dramatically in sales and stature, manufacturing and distributing virtually everything for guitarists, including amplifiers and mixing boards, and is a world leader in the manufacturing and distribution of electric guitars and amplifiers.
Fender may be a large multinational corporation, but its roots are recent and fairly modest. Without the electric guitar franchise financial base to underwrite the Guild operations, where would the Guild brand we know and love be today? Think of all the venerable brands that are no more. Is Kodak relevant to anyone these days? If the Guild brand had died with the Westerly plant, would our Westerly and before guitars be more or less valuable? Would we have a vibrant message board for Guild?
Playing a Guild says something about you, but what, I am not sure. Most people have a vague, good connotation about Guild and have a sense they have been around for a long time. Perhaps the perception we are subconsciously going for is that “I don’t have the resources to throw money at Martin but I know how to find a great guitar at a bargain.” Or, “I don’t go with the crowd, I am different.” Or,” I like vintage and have a sense of history.” Or, "I know my guitars."
I am probably wrong on some details and omitted others. I am acoustic oriented. I raise more questions than I answer. My point is how different our perceptions seem to be on the Guild brand from the more complicated realities. I hope you found this interesting and it was worth the long read.
* No affiliation with Fender or the music business. No axes to grind. Just thinking out loud.
