Would you like to see imported Rick budget models?
Moderators: rickenbrother, ajish4
Cheap Rickenbacker's? No......I like Rickenbacker guitars just as they are. Unique, American made classic designs. Budget guitars are about a company's profit and market share. If the supply v. demand situation remains constant, Rickenbacker, under John Hall, will (hopefully...) be making a quality, classic product for many years to come. And I, for one, still want to be buying a quality, classic product well into my retirement years and not have the market diluted with cheap imitations!
I vote no and don't think we will have to worry about that as long as JH is at the helm, I myself think that budget foreign made guitars would ruin Ric's name as is has Fender's and MANY others who have gone that route. Gibson comes to mind also.
"Born To run" was played with an original Danelectro bass, I think a Longhorn, great sound to my ears. but then again you have to take the necks off to adjust the truss rods.
"Born To run" was played with an original Danelectro bass, I think a Longhorn, great sound to my ears. but then again you have to take the necks off to adjust the truss rods.
I'm a little confused that the actual suggestion of this thread was a budget range called "Electro" but everyone's debating a "cheap Rickenbacker" instead.
Although Rickenbacker would be involved, naturally, I don't believe the debate is actually about "cheap Rickenbackers" i.e.: kids wouldn't be able to go and buy something with 'Rickenbacker' written on it, for cheap. They would be buying a cheap guitar branded as an Electro - not unlike what they were able to do all those years ago, if my readings are correct, so there seems to even be a historical basis for this (???)
Your pride, investments, etc, as "Rickenbackers" would be more than safe.
What it creates is a revenue stream and also creates aspirational purchasers - at a level much higher than you're seeing today. It's business sense.
Although Rickenbacker would be involved, naturally, I don't believe the debate is actually about "cheap Rickenbackers" i.e.: kids wouldn't be able to go and buy something with 'Rickenbacker' written on it, for cheap. They would be buying a cheap guitar branded as an Electro - not unlike what they were able to do all those years ago, if my readings are correct, so there seems to even be a historical basis for this (???)
Your pride, investments, etc, as "Rickenbackers" would be more than safe.
What it creates is a revenue stream and also creates aspirational purchasers - at a level much higher than you're seeing today. It's business sense.
-
spike
"I'm a little confused that the actual suggestion of this thread was a budget range called "Electro" but everyone's debating a "cheap Rickenbacker" instead."
I didn't read the original post that way. I read it as asking about foreign made Rickenbackers, at a lower price point, with perhaps name electro.
What we'd be talking about is say something that looks like a Ric, but with cheaper components, maybe a bolt on neck, and no frills. No binding, limited colors, no neck inlays, etc.
"market diluted with cheap imitations!"
That's just not correct. Like Rob said, Fender and Gibson aren't losing sales, they're gaining customers and generating revenue by providing a good quality guitar at a decent price. And people, like myself appreciate that, since I don't have pockets deep enough to line my guitar rack with
expensive American made instruments.
And in the case of Fender, which I'm most familiar with some of those expensive American made models aren't better enough to demand the premium price.
Fender knows that there are people who think like I do when it comes to guitars and is making sure that they get my dollars too. And because if it, I have a nice collection with a very good variety of
tones at my disposal.
I will say that buying my 360 was a very difficult decision. $900 for a guitar is the most I've ever spent.
I didn't read the original post that way. I read it as asking about foreign made Rickenbackers, at a lower price point, with perhaps name electro.
What we'd be talking about is say something that looks like a Ric, but with cheaper components, maybe a bolt on neck, and no frills. No binding, limited colors, no neck inlays, etc.
"market diluted with cheap imitations!"
That's just not correct. Like Rob said, Fender and Gibson aren't losing sales, they're gaining customers and generating revenue by providing a good quality guitar at a decent price. And people, like myself appreciate that, since I don't have pockets deep enough to line my guitar rack with
expensive American made instruments.
And in the case of Fender, which I'm most familiar with some of those expensive American made models aren't better enough to demand the premium price.
Fender knows that there are people who think like I do when it comes to guitars and is making sure that they get my dollars too. And because if it, I have a nice collection with a very good variety of
tones at my disposal.
I will say that buying my 360 was a very difficult decision. $900 for a guitar is the most I've ever spent.
-
shamustwin
- Senior Member
- Posts: 5287
- Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2003 5:00 am
I think Squire ruined NEW american Fender's name (along with their shoddy mass produced quality), when I see a Squire I think: cheap Fender; why?because that's what it is. In fact Fender had to make Squires because in the 70's and early 80's their reputation was so bad no one would buy them at the American prices, I laugh at the prices I see for 70's Fender nowadays. If I saw Electro and a cheap price I would think: cheap Rickenbacker (and I would also wonder if they were in financial trouble). I will not buy a guitar unless it's made in america, that way I know that someone in Korea is not getting payed 20 cents an hour and working 16 hours a day to put my guitar together, I don't think that combination is very conducive to making a good quality guitar, never mind the human rights issues.
And I'd rather have one good quality Rickenbacker on my wall than a wall full of cheap stuff. There is an old saying : "You get what you pay for", and I have found that to be especially true with guitars and basses.
I think Ric is about the last guitar co. in the USA that sticks to it's priciples.
When I was a kid there were many different guitar manufacturers, Rickenbacker, Fender, Gibson, among many others, when you bought one you knew it was going to be a good guitar. The offshore guitars were junk and the American ones, even the cheap ones were pretty good like Danelectro. Nowadays I only get that feeling from Rickenbacker, or old Fenders, old Gibsons etc. I'm not saying they are all junk just that when I see a Ric there is no doubt in my mind where it is made and how. I KNOW what I'm getting is going to be a good product, and I also know that nobody is going to be playing a $229.00 bass that looks like the bass I payed a grand for.
And I'd rather have one good quality Rickenbacker on my wall than a wall full of cheap stuff. There is an old saying : "You get what you pay for", and I have found that to be especially true with guitars and basses.
I think Ric is about the last guitar co. in the USA that sticks to it's priciples.
When I was a kid there were many different guitar manufacturers, Rickenbacker, Fender, Gibson, among many others, when you bought one you knew it was going to be a good guitar. The offshore guitars were junk and the American ones, even the cheap ones were pretty good like Danelectro. Nowadays I only get that feeling from Rickenbacker, or old Fenders, old Gibsons etc. I'm not saying they are all junk just that when I see a Ric there is no doubt in my mind where it is made and how. I KNOW what I'm getting is going to be a good product, and I also know that nobody is going to be playing a $229.00 bass that looks like the bass I payed a grand for.
-
adam_swapp
- Member
- Posts: 389
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 7:49 pm
- Contact:
-
spike
"Similarly, their forays into the low end of the market (e.g. MIM Fenders) were similar to Cadillac's ill-fated Cimarron in that putting their badge on a down-scale product tarnishes the whole marque."
Perhaps in the eyes of purists and elitist types, but not in the eyes of the average Fender ethusiasts.
"In essence, they cannibalized their own market share."
I look at it as reaching more markets than they could if they only sold expensive hand crafted American made models. I don't see a problem with that business model.
Perhaps in the eyes of purists and elitist types, but not in the eyes of the average Fender ethusiasts.
"In essence, they cannibalized their own market share."
I look at it as reaching more markets than they could if they only sold expensive hand crafted American made models. I don't see a problem with that business model.
What it creates is a revenue stream (like I've said several times now), and also creates aspirational purchasers - at a level much higher than you're seeing today. It's business sense.
My views on this are pretty well known but it's time to say it again:
RIC is a privately owned company whose production can't keep up with dealer demand.
Gibson and Fender are also both privately held. We don't know how having knockoff import versions of their main lines have affected their bottom line. But I can tell you that lower quality import knockoffs have cheapened the reputation of their current USA lines and hiked the prices of most older ones out of reach.
There aren't as many new Rics out there as Gibsons and USA Fenders, but you can always find the standard models new; yet you can resell a nearly new one for almost as much as you paid. But buy a new Gibson or USA Fender and try to resell at anywhere near new cost. You can't, and one big reason is that most of them look no different from their cheap import versions.
And if dealer inventory is any indication of overall sales, it's obvious that the ratio of Epiphones to Gibsons and import Fenders/Squiers to US Fenders is getting larger all the time. Revenue may be up, but sales of their US product as a percentage of overall sales must be down.
Different name or not, if it looks just like a Ric and is cheaper, then it's built with cheaper components. And that would damage Rickenbacker's reputation.
And besides, it's just not gonna happen. Period. When JH decides to hang it up in another 30-40 years, he'll no doubt sell to someone like-minded.
-
adam_swapp
- Member
- Posts: 389
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 7:49 pm
- Contact:
Tom,
I own a MIJ Tele. Fine guitar, it is. As a matter of fact, it's the best one I own. But do you think I aspire to owning a "real" Tele? No. Similarly, the fact that Strats and Tele's are so ubiquitous makes them unremarkable. Fender alone makes about 6012 different models. I see a guy playing a Strat, and I think, "So what?". IMHO, most people simply don't make much of a distinction between a cheap Strat and a top-of-the-line model. FWIW, I can't even tell them apart by looking at them.
I also think your analysis of Fender is flawed. If memory serves, the only part of the Strat and Tele that are protected is the shape of the headstock. As such, it was legal for other companies to make cheap knockoffs using the same body shape. IMHO, Fender's downmarket guitars were an attempt to wrest market share back from these companies. In effect, their failure to take appropriate legal steps 50 years ago has turned their design into a commodity.
Ric is different. If you want a Ric, buy a Ric; there's only one place to get that look. Sure, there are folks who buy a Ric just for the snob appeal. One might question the "I only play Ric's" mentality as a narrow and limiting view. And one might reasonably argue that there are guitars of equal quality available elsewhere for less money. But in many ways, the look is the brand. Give that up, and you don't have much left.
I'm not an elitist. I'm the guy that argued in favor of Danelectro's?
I own a MIJ Tele. Fine guitar, it is. As a matter of fact, it's the best one I own. But do you think I aspire to owning a "real" Tele? No. Similarly, the fact that Strats and Tele's are so ubiquitous makes them unremarkable. Fender alone makes about 6012 different models. I see a guy playing a Strat, and I think, "So what?". IMHO, most people simply don't make much of a distinction between a cheap Strat and a top-of-the-line model. FWIW, I can't even tell them apart by looking at them.
I also think your analysis of Fender is flawed. If memory serves, the only part of the Strat and Tele that are protected is the shape of the headstock. As such, it was legal for other companies to make cheap knockoffs using the same body shape. IMHO, Fender's downmarket guitars were an attempt to wrest market share back from these companies. In effect, their failure to take appropriate legal steps 50 years ago has turned their design into a commodity.
Ric is different. If you want a Ric, buy a Ric; there's only one place to get that look. Sure, there are folks who buy a Ric just for the snob appeal. One might question the "I only play Ric's" mentality as a narrow and limiting view. And one might reasonably argue that there are guitars of equal quality available elsewhere for less money. But in many ways, the look is the brand. Give that up, and you don't have much left.
I'm not an elitist. I'm the guy that argued in favor of Danelectro's?
You want to put that where?
-
spike
"I own a MIJ Tele. Fine guitar, it is. As a matter of fact, it's the best one I own. But do you think I aspire to owning a "real" Tele?"
But what's a "real" telecaster? IMO, an MIJ tele is just as much a "real" telecaster as Fender's $900 American tele. And it is probably, for the most part every bit the player that the american tele is. If all I could afford were a Squier telecaster, I'd definitely be looking to move up when I could better afford it.
"I also think your analysis of Fender is flawed."
Perhaps, but the end result is the same. More guitars available to a wider consumer base.
"But it many ways, the look is the brand."
I agree. The point of my comments is that there IS a market for an import version of a Ric. It's clear that market isn't represented in this forum, but there is a market.
"I'm not an elitist."
I'm not suggesting that at all. But this thread has taken the form of any number of threads over on the Fender forum I'm in. The kind of thread where people will assert that if it isn't American made, it's not good. And frankly that rubs me the wrong way.
But what's a "real" telecaster? IMO, an MIJ tele is just as much a "real" telecaster as Fender's $900 American tele. And it is probably, for the most part every bit the player that the american tele is. If all I could afford were a Squier telecaster, I'd definitely be looking to move up when I could better afford it.
"I also think your analysis of Fender is flawed."
Perhaps, but the end result is the same. More guitars available to a wider consumer base.
"But it many ways, the look is the brand."
I agree. The point of my comments is that there IS a market for an import version of a Ric. It's clear that market isn't represented in this forum, but there is a market.
"I'm not an elitist."
I'm not suggesting that at all. But this thread has taken the form of any number of threads over on the Fender forum I'm in. The kind of thread where people will assert that if it isn't American made, it's not good. And frankly that rubs me the wrong way.
However you look at at, I still think that Rickenbacker guitars and basses are more than affordable, if you really want one that is. There is no 'Pre-CBS' style era for Rickenbacker. It remains a family run business with its roots in the 20s. The company can lay claim to the first electric guitar and with the 30s came some of the first electric guitars on the planet. Rikenbacker is still going strong almost 75 years later..... now that's an achievement! The designs and production processes may have evolved over time to what they are today, but the essence of 'Rickenbacker' is still there. My Rickenbacker guitars conjour up a timeless beauty, and there's very little else that even comes close. Rickenbacker guitars and basses are an evolution. Be proud of it America.