McCartney's Epiphone Texan

wayang · Post by **wayang** » Thu Jun 02, 2005 7:19 am

That item might sit on the shelf for a while...I don't think Donald Trump or the Sultan of Brunei even play the guitar...

I guess Macca could buy 'em up secretly to avoid the embarassment...

fabgear · Post by **fabgear** » Thu Jun 02, 2005 7:46 am

I wish I could get that money for my replicas Paul!~

route66guitars · Post by **route66guitars** » Thu Jun 02, 2005 8:51 am

The guitar in question is one of the very limited run of exact replicas of McCartney's Texan. They were signed by Paul, and came with the free-standing Gibson display case, as seen in your larger Gibson Dealer's stores.

There are two other editions of his signature Texan. I believe the standard US model retails at $8,000.00 and the import one is around $3,000.00.

Part of the reason that the prices are what they are is that the bulk of the proceeds go to Adopt-a-Minefield. This is why McCartney agreed to do the Epiphone signature models (and why he hasn't done one with anyone else.) His original intent was to have a replica of his Texan made for himself so he could retire the 'real' one.

Scastles · Post by **Scastles** » Thu Jun 02, 2005 9:23 am

Interesting and for a worthy cause but a lot to lay down...except for a select few, or in this case, one.

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Thu Jun 02, 2005 9:25 am

...and as usual the marketing mentality bit off a huge hunk. A thing of beauty is one thing; exclusivity is an excuse for all sorts of scams.

Ego and its gratification know no bounds.

At least the money (or one would assume a large portion of it--Sir Paul doesn't need any more, I'm sure) goes to a worthy cause.

So I wonder, Scott, what portion of the 40K is tax deductible?

route66guitars · Post by **route66guitars** » Thu Jun 02, 2005 9:50 am

If this were considered a charitable donation no portion of the purchase price is tax deductable in the U.S. as the buyer is receiving goods of equal value (based on it's MSRP) in exchange for the donation. As it is Gibson/McCartney making the donation it is not something the end buyer even participates in.

Only 40 of these instruments were built. This is hardly a mass produced attempt to rip off the guitar buying public.

Ego gratification? Do you have any idea how many times Rickenbacker has asked to put McCartney's name on a bass? Paul has stated several times that he was convinced to do these replicas to raise money for his wfe's charity. I do not know what Gibson's take is, but McCartney's portion goes to Adopt-A-Minefield.

wayang · Post by **wayang** » Thu Jun 02, 2005 10:22 am

That is a great cause...one of the best going at this time. However...

What's dumbass about this is a) if you accept the fact that this guitar is absolutely not worth $40K, then you are NOT receiving goods of equal value and b) if you really want to help out with the minefield problem or anything else along those lines, why not give the money straight to the organizations doing the field work? This way of going about it is goofball self-aggrandizement on the part of buyer and seller alike, "IMO".

The Gamelan I play with has done five benefit concerts for Tsunami relief since January. We have raised over $10K, all of which went directly to relief NGO's doing the work. We wouldn't dream of taking a damn dime, even though we are all regular folks scrambling to pay our own bills.

The absurd reverence for the upper class evidenced here makes no sense to me...unless, of course, one is a member of said class...in which case I would have to say: "Oh, I get it..."

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Thu Jun 02, 2005 10:37 am

Dane's first paragraph goes right to my point of ego-gratification, both Paul's and the 40 purchasers'.

If somebody was to plunk down $40K for one of these, they are not buying only a (theoretically) workng musical instrument, they are buying bragging and display rights. The display case is a perfect accessory, and Gibson has sized up their limited market perfectly.

The last paragraph of Dane's leaves out another group of apologists for the wealthy--those who earn a living catering to wealthy folks and who through osmosis or predilection, share their outlook.

route66guitars · Post by **route66guitars** » Thu Jun 02, 2005 10:50 am

It all reeks of petty jealousy to me.

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Thu Jun 02, 2005 12:32 pm

I can't speak for anyone else who has posted, but I have little to be jealous of. Been there, done that, Scott. The whole thing is not an earthshaking or life-changing topic for me.

Sir Paul can do whatever he likes with his money and his fame. What I do or say will have no impact upon him, nor would I wish it to.

The customers who pony up for this sort of excess are entitled to exactly what they get.

I love lots of things. I love many types of guitars, mostly for their beauty. I really love and appreciate Rickenbackers because of the tradition and philosophy of the company, and the excellence of their products, including the excellent value for quality of goods received.

The whole collectors' market is skewed to reinforce the egos of those who collect with items of exaggerated intrinsic value. The bigger the exaggeration and the bigger the price tag, the more pathetic is the puppy nibbling at the biscuit.

atomic_punk · Post by **atomic_punk** » Thu Jun 02, 2005 12:48 pm

If you want to pick on someone who does things for no reason other than the glorification of his massive ego, look at someone like Gene Simmons, who will put his name, signature, likeness and endorsement and lips on anyone or anything who is willing to scratch him a check.
I'm with Scott on this one, he is doing it for a cause that he (and his wife) care about and donating his portion of the proceeds to charity.

Where is the ego glorifcation on McCartney's part, exactly? He doesn't profit, his charity (if they sell out) makes about half a million, and the people who buy them have something they will always cherish.
Where is the harm, exactly? Value, no. Are they getting what they pay for? No. But they are getting a guitar, signed by Paul, and helping a charity. It's better than charging $2000 for a "Gold Circle" ticket, or better than fleecing your fans at every turn.

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Thu Jun 02, 2005 1:15 pm

And I am with you both on the subject of Paul's participation.

I am not referring to Paul's ego! He has earned the right to do whatever he wants (so has Mr. Simmons; doesn't mean I have to withhold my opinion on either of them when the time comes for comment!)

I am referring to the ego-gratification of the people who purchase this type of thing, as I thought I made clear in the last paragraph of my last post.

wayang · Post by **wayang** » Thu Jun 02, 2005 1:32 pm

Right on, Paul...charitable acts ought to be their own reward. Why do you need a "cookie" to go with it?

And you're right about the "apologists for the rich" category...I designed the wet bar and other built-in cabinetry that went into "The Sleeper House" (featured in the Woody Allen movie)...the whole house 'completion' project (it had sat unfinished since the sixties until a local financier purchased it) cost ten million, and I got my little $15/hour share of that...no complaints here. Even so, that job did nothing to alter my personal politics or world view.

If I depended on that kind of work all the time, I might find myself "going Republican"...thank Dog I don't.