The Big Three

[fronobulax]

Several posts dealing with Fender's marketing strategy for Guild have mentioned "The Big Three". Now in the days when I needed to harness a dinosaur to a treadmill to power my amp, the Big Three were Fender, Gibson and Guild. That was not a reflection of the market as much as it was a reflection on my exclusive interest in bass, and electrics. I presume back in the 1970's that if you looked at the Big Three in acoustic guitars, you would replace Fender with Martin.

Are there better choices for The Big Three circa 1970 for electrics and acoustics?

How about now? Fender clearly retains a position in electrics. I run into Epiphone more than Gibson but I won't split that hair. Who would be third?

On acoustics I'd guess Martin, Gibson and Taylor. Any better ideas?

I could try and define "Big Three" but doing so would probably end up rehashing a lot of topics that need a rest, IMO. I will suggest that the Big Three in electrics do need to offer basses as well as guitars, but beyond that...

 

[krysh]

...How about now? Fender clearly retains a position in electrics. I run into Epiphone more than Gibson but I won't split that hair. Who would be third?...

I'd say Ibanez, not to forget Yamaha. Gibson only counts if you add Epiphone.

 

[West R Lee]

I've always thought of the "old" big three in acoustics to have been Martin, Gibson and Guild. Now I think of the acoustic big three as Martin, Gibson and Taylor.

West

 

[capnjuan]

'Big'? Most sales? Best reputation? Cool factor?

Gibson and Fender and ... sez eBay is searching Musical instruments / guitars / electric ... today and today only ... the blue light special ... totals offered by brand:

B.C. Rich (455)
Dean (831)
Epiphone (329)
Fender (574)
Gibson (280)
Ibanez (726)
Jay Turser (315)
Schecter (407)

and ...
Guild (23)

 

[MojoTooth]

I've always thought of the "old" big three in acoustics to have been Martin, Gibson and Guild. Now I think of the acoustic big three as Martin, Gibson and Taylor.

West

+1

 

[West R Lee]

Most popular and most prolific. I'd say in the day (70's,80's.90's), that was Martin, Gibson and Fender were the most popular acoustics. Obviously Guild has been blown away by Taylor in terms of popularity and sales over the past 10 years. It hard for Guild to compete with companies that advertise and get their products out there for the public to see by putting them in popular artist's hands.

West

 

[capnjuan]

Most popular and most prolific. I'd say in the day (70's,80's.90's), that was Martin, Gibson and Fender were the most popular acoustics. Obviously Guild has been blown away by Taylor in terms of popularity and sales over the past 10 years. It hard for Guild to compete with companies that advertise and get their products out there for the public to see by putting them in popular artist's hands.

Agree: they don't seem to be able to capitalize on the whole 'unplugged' thing.

 

[dreadnut]

Guild New York

Guild Hoboken

Guild Westerly

 

[West R Lee]

I meant to say Martin, Gibson and Guild in that quote (early years) Cappy.....I'm sure you got the jest though.

West

 

[West R Lee]

Guild New York

Guild Hoboken

Guild Westerly

:lol: :lol: :lol: Love it!

West

 

[capnjuan]

I meant to say Martin, Gibson and Guild in that quote (early years) Cappy.....I'm sure you got the jest though.

I got it Jim I was tempted to jerk the text of your quote around ... ... just for fun ... :wink: but it did make me start thinking about all those dookie '60s Fender 12-string Coronados or whatever they were ... but ... say hello to Fender's entry-level Villager 12-string ... $400 or so ... Fender also has a line of entry-level acoustics ... possibly made in Tajikistan ... priced at / below Guild's GADs. From Guild's perspective, making a buck in the entry-level market means having your parent company undercut your price ... :roll: :

 

[devellis]

I agree with Taylor, Martin, and Gibson as the Big Three now, but really, there isn't a Big Three anymore. Taylor and Martin are really the Big Two. Gibson comes in third in terms of history, but Larrivee and Godin probably make a lot more acoustics than Gibson. And Guild certainly has a longer history than Taylor. So, it's just not as clear as it was back in the Martin-Gibson-Guild days. I think this is good for Guild, in a way. Not being Martin or Taylor doesn't place a guitar in a second tier, the way not being Martin/Gibson/Guild placed a company in a second tier when I was a lad and fern swamps covered the earth. If anything, Taylor and Martin are now second tier to the boutique builders: Collings, Goodall, Santa Cruz, Froggy Bottom, Bourgeois, Huss & Dalton, and perhaps a few others. I get the impression that Guild wants to be perceived in the latter club these days. Their quality and price put them pretty close. Unfortunately, we old timers think of them more as an established factory brand and young folks seem not to think of them much at all because of a lack of visibility.

It seems like almost every thread brings us back to speculation about Guild's future and the importance that active image management and visibility will play in that future. Given their limited output and quality, I think they deserve to be considered a boutique brand, but that may be hard to pull off when people see old ones selling for several hundred bucks or less.

 

[West R Lee]

I agree with Taylor, Martin, and Gibson as the Big Three now, but really, there isn't a Big Three anymore. Taylor and Martin are really the Big Two. Gibson comes in third in terms of history, but Larrivee and Godin probably make a lot more acoustics than Gibson. And Guild certainly has a longer history than Taylor. So, it's just not as clear as it was back in the Martin-Gibson-Guild days. I think this is good for Guild, in a way. Not being Martin or Taylor doesn't place a guitar in a second tier, the way not being Martin/Gibson/Guild placed a company in a second tier when I was a lad and fern swamps covered the earth. If anything, Taylor and Martin are now second tier to the boutique builders: Collings, Goodall, Santa Cruz, Froggy Bottom, Bourgeois, Huss & Dalton, and perhaps a few others. I get the impression that Guild wants to be perceived in the latter club these days. Their quality and price put them pretty close. Unfortunately, we old timers think of them more as an established factory brand and young folks seem not to think of them much at all because of a lack of visibility.

It seems like almost every thread brings us back to speculation about Guild's future and the importance that active image management and visibility will play in that future. Given their limited output and quality, I think they deserve to be considered a boutique brand, but that may be hard to pull off when people see old ones selling for several hundred bucks or less.

Wouldn't have a clue in terms of sales, but I do know if I turn on CMT for instance, about 90% of the players are playing Gibson acoustics. In fact, I did a count here in a thread on the CMT Awards a couple of months ago....it was like 40 Gibsons, 3 Taylors and 1 Martin. :shock:

West

 

[devellis]

Good point, West. I suspect CMT is particularly fertile ground for Gibsons, but it's also representative of a pretty significant segment of American music. Gibson also works hard at product placement, for example, on shows like American Idol. Around here in North Carolina, among live players, you'll see dozens of Martins and Taylors for every Gibson, and the Gibson will probably be an older one. In my various wanderings, I seldom encounter them but I don't think that really represents anything.

 

[adorshki]

I agree with Taylor, Martin, and Gibson as the Big Three now, but really, there isn't a Big Three anymore. Taylor and Martin are really the Big Two. I think this is good for Guild, in a way. Not being Martin or Taylor doesn't place a guitar in a second tier, the way not being Martin/Gibson/Guild placed a company in a second tier when I was a lad and fern swamps covered the earth. If anything, Taylor and Martin are now second tier to the boutique builders: Collings, Goodall, Santa Cruz, Froggy Bottom, Bourgeois, Huss & Dalton, and perhaps a few others. I get the impression that Guild wants to be perceived in the latter club these days. It seems like almost every thread brings us back to speculation about Guild's future and the importance that active image management and visibility will play in that future. Given their limited output and quality, I think they deserve to be considered a boutique brand, but that may be hard to pull off when people see old ones selling for several hundred bucks or less.

Agree with all those observations. I think that prices of used Guilds will go up as would-be owners reduce the number of high-quality used instruments. I also think an upgraded brand identity will tend to reflect favorably in the used prices in much the same way I bought my D40 under the "get it (an American built guitar) while you can" motivation. Or perhaps in this generation, "get it while you can 'cause a new one's not neccessarily that easy to get either".
In any case I think it'll take at least a year for the economy to warm up enough to help sales of new OR used.

 

[West R Lee]

Good point, West. I suspect CMT is particularly fertile ground for Gibsons, but it's also representative of a pretty significant segment of American music. Gibson also works hard at product placement, for example, on shows like American Idol. Around here in North Carolina, among live players, you'll see dozens of Martins and Taylors for every Gibson, and the Gibson will probably be an older one. In my various wanderings, I seldom encounter them but I don't think that really represents anything.

Same here with the bluegrass players, but here, it's Martins. Evrybody and his brother plays Martin guitars, with the exception of the occasional Mossman. Most of the bluegrass players around here are older guys....50's to 70's. Seems when you do find the younger guys playing around here, most of them play Taylors and Takamines.

West

 

[dreadnut]

I gotta confess - I played a used Taylor at GC last week, I can't imagine why anyone would have sold it - it was a high-end custom job - forgot the exact model number but it was equivalent to an 800 or 900 series in appointments and woods - if I'd had 1600 clams she'd have come home with me - it absolutely sang like a bird. :shock: I've played lots of Taylors, but this one was really special. Hey guys, my birthday is coming up... :lol:

 

[Brad Little]

.. Fender also has a line of entry-level acoustics ... possibly made in Tajikistan ... priced at / below Guild's GADs. From Guild's perspective, making a buck in the entry-level market means having your parent company undercut your price

About 4-5 years ago, I had the opportunity to set up a guitar program at the school I was at. With a budget of $2000 I worked with the local Sam Ash to get 10 entry level acoustics. I wound up with 7 Fenders and 3 Yamahas, all in what was called a starter pack, came with strap, picks, gig bag, etc. The Yamahas were set up better out of the box, but were all laminate. The Fenders had stiffer action (not noticeable at lower frets) but solid tops. I don't remember where they were made, possibly Pakistan or Indonesia.If I had the time to set them up they would have been much nicer than the Yamahas.
Brad

 

[capnjuan]

... I don't remember where they were made, possibly Pakistan or Indonesia.If I had the time to set them up they would have been much nicer than the Yamahas.

Never had the pleasure with the low-end Fender acoustics ... for all the guitar heroes at the West Palm Guitar Center, the place is a madhouse. Of course, I could always drive the 90 miles to GC's Miami madhouse ... :roll:

 

[cjd-player]

I was at a local Taylor event two weeks ago and heard Bob Taylor speak. He noted that according to music industry reports, Taylor has sold more acoustic guitars than Martin in each of the past 18 months. So Martin is no longer No.1 in "the big three".

With regard to celebrity endorsements, Taylor does not give guitars to celebs for exposure. Bob noted that 99 percent of the music that is played is played by folks like you (pointing to the audience). He said that you will never see a Taylor ad with a celeb holding a Taylor guitar. He said that (again pointing the audience) you are our main customer. Seeing a Taylor guitar up on a television stage is nice, but that is not a part of our business model.

Regardless of whether you like Taylor guitars, you have to admire their rise from 12 initial years of poverty and daily threats of going out of business to the No.1 sales position in just about 25 years.