Rickenbacker, betting on the past to ensure their future?

[Grey]

1) The simple fact is that Rickenbacker as a brand has virtually no presence in the music industry unless you look for it.

2) The Beatles are not on national television right now

OK, I'll go along and agree with your premise that Ric has no presence and I'll counter with this: So what? The best chocolates have to be searched for while Reese's and Hershey are at every counter in every store. I prefer Ghirardelli over a Chunky bar, and, similarly, for those guitar players who are serious about their instrument of choice, yes, they will go looking for a top instrument. For those that are not, they will go to Guitar Center and buy an Epiphone. Again, so what? Ric is doing what they want in their sales...as you noted, content with their market and no desire to expand. Why is that a problem? If John Lennon (who has actually been dead longer than he was ever famous) can still sell guitars, and Ric is happy with those numbers, why does anyone perceive something is wrong? Yes, you may be right: Ric has no presence in the music industry. But I will add no presence with amateurs, hackers, kids who try guitar for two weeks before moving on to snowboarding.

2) Then how do you account for The Beatles being the second highest selling musical act of the past decade and just two days ago setting a record for streaming? Yeah, the Liverpool Lads are not be playing this year's Super Bowl, but to think they have disappeared off the face of TV is odd. My God, I see that Paul McCartney guy every two seconds on TV. Just saw him shaking a jingle bell on "Saturday Night Live" a week ago.

What happened to Rickenbacker amplifiers? What happened to Rickenbacker acoustics? What happened to slanted fretboards, weird converter guitars, strange pickups and general innovation? If you're really asking me whats wrong with a corporation that has decided it no longer needs to innovate or improve upon its product, then no amount of carefully worded arguements from me are going to sway you.

As for streaming, i'll elaborate on my previous opinion. I am not making a statement about popularity, I am making a statement about visibility. Hearing a great album is not the same as seeing an artist holding an instrument on stage at an awards show or a concert venue. If Paul McCartney still actually played Rickenbacker basses while performing that would be a great statement. The worst thing about all of this is that there are great modern bands out there using Rickenbacker instruments that they could reach out to and endorse, but they dont, because Rickenbacker has its market (the history you mentioned) and they seem to neither need nor want the recongition of new musicians.

Rickenbacker does not need to change, but does that mean they shouldn't want to? If the rumors are true about a shift in management at RIC next year, then maybe new blood will bring new ideas.

[aceonbass]

When you go to Orange or Ampeg's website and see all the pics of artist endorsers, you're seeing people who got their gear for FREE. If RIC reached out to artists who are popular by giving them guitars, they'd probably play them, but then I'd be paying for their guitars because RIC's gonna pass that cost onto ME. I like being able to get a 4003 for $1500, and don't feel like paying $1550 so someone who's music sucks can have a free guitar. Some artists get more than free gear. They actually get paid to use their free gear. John Hall has said they'd like to try more new ideas, but the demand for the old ones can't be met by the less than 100 employees they have.

[Tommy]

John Hall has said they'd like to try more new ideas, but the demand for the old ones can't be met by the less than 100 employees they have.

It's not just that. Mr. Hall has mentioned here that when a new idea is attempted (even something as ordinary as new fretboard wood) the loud howl of disapproval from Ric owners creates a frustrating sense of "Why even bother?"

[Grey]

When you go to Orange or Ampeg's website and see all the pics of artist endorsers, you're seeing people who got their gear for FREE.

I'm sure they send gear to musicians for endorsement, but many of the artists' featured on Orange's website were using their gear before ever being featured by the company, it's simply a way to promote the band and Orange at the same time and costs either very little.

John Hall has said they'd like to try more new ideas, but the demand for the old ones can't be met by the less than 100 employees they have.

I don't see how introducing new models with alternate features would affect the "classic" line at all, they would remain unchanged. Hence no complaints from people who want to keep buying the same 4 models with a new color every 2 years. Essentially the logic here is, "we can't introduce new models because we need everyone working on producing the models we already have, and we don't want to add more people because we don't feel like expanding. So don't expect anything new from us, ever."

[cassius987]

When you go to Orange or Ampeg's website and see all the pics of artist endorsers, you're seeing people who got their gear for FREE.

I'm sure they send gear to musicians for endorsement, but many of the artists' featured on Orange's website were using their gear before ever being featured by the company, it's simply a way to promote the band and Orange at the same time and costs either very little.

Literally every endorser I've ever met (dozens EDIT: sorry, I meant about a dozen, not multiples of 12) started playing whatever brand it was, always something you can find right away at a GC, because of the free gear. Prior to that, if I knew them, they were playing something different. But now they knew they could get a new guitar every 3 months or so and that was good enough for them.

Not that none of them had any familiarity with the endorsed brand prior to. But I don't recall it ever being their main squeeze.

[jdogric12]

I think it's of great concern that most of the company's bread and butter is tied to 50-year old music, for sure. The market is already starting to reflect boomers selling off their gear (I'm trying not to be too morbid!)... I mean, the economy is doing much better than it was 5 years ago, and used Rick prices have not similarly recovered. Of course, that's reflected in the vintage guitar market overall, but I'll try not to digress. Those with Beatle interest diminish in numbers every year. If the company doesn't start giving out some 4004's and 650's (the newest forward-looking innovations) to new bands, they might be in serious trouble in 10-20 years. Of course I know I'm just an armchair quarterback here... just my $0.02.

[berklee6]

This is a very interesting thread.

Rickenbacker serves a niche market within the vast musical instrument market. It is an outlier in terms of being a family owned and operated USA-based manufacturer. They’ve resisted offers of buyouts from the BIG GUYS as well as resisted offering lower-priced, mass-produced ‘Rickensquiers” from factories overseas. (Note: I cringe that Martin produces its strings for “America’s guitar” in Mexico.) I imagine RIC is constrained by being a small company with limited numbers of employees and distributors while working hard to satisfy existing backorders. I would also venture to guess that most of RIC’s customers are older and conservative; they demand new instruments to mimic those from the early-to-mid 1960s. The BIG GUYS are able to satisfy both “vintage demand” and the younger Guitar Center crowd; one can buy a USA-made Les Paul Studio Whatever for around $699 while an investment banker can order a “custom” LP model that’s molecule-by-molecule similar to those made in 1959 for upwards of $10,000. Perhaps once one is hooked on the $699 model they’ll eventually trade up to those offered at higher price points.

RICs are hard to find in stock at retail locations. RIC doesn’t currently have the ability to produce 1,000s of additional instruments at a wide range of price points to mass retailers. This limits the ability of players to conveniently check one out. A 650, if you can find one in stock, retails for about $1200 or so new, the same price as a USA-made PRS S2 model that is mass-produced and often on sale for much less.

So, what is RIC to do? Sell out to the BIG GUYs? License mass produced Rickensquiers? Triple their size and produce more and varied instruments at great capital costs (and risk)? Do nothing and be satisfied with fulfilling backlog and tinkering with modest variations like the 1993 Plus?

Here’s what I suggest for the near-to-mid term…

Invest in one or two lower cost models for wider distribution. Remember when we all went gaga over the 4003s basses? Essentially they were lower cost versions of 4003 with features removed that most of us didn’t care about it: no binding, no RIC-O-Sound, dot inlays, etc. They sold zillions of them at their lower cost pricepoint. I would love to see RIC offer similar instruments, such as an under $1000 610 and 4000s bass, with limited finishes such as Fireglo-only, that could be made available in reasonable numbers, in stock, at major retailers. Perhaps the 650D (or newer model) could be brought back from the dead and made available even more cheaply. At the lower price points they can even be supplied with a gig bag ala the BIG GUYS. This may be a capital investment worth making.

And for heaven’s sake, please update the corporate web site! When was the last time a 380L or a Jazzbo was offered for sale?

Just some thoughts…

[stringsncords]

The corporate website is beyond brutal - I can't imagine why there has been no attention paid to updating it. It's an absolute embarrassment to be highlighting the 10-years-ago 75th Anniversary, still showing old, discontinued models, and the best of all is in the Gallery section under 2000's models; "We haven't gotten a chance to pull these out of our archive yet. Please check back soon".

However, the success of the company can't be disputed - they rode the wave of the greatest era in popular music, and are still reaping the benefits. Ricks are great-looking guitars, and the fact that there is no economy line of lower-priced models keeps them strong, in my opinion. The seemingly unlimited models of Les Pauls, Strats and Teles - priced several thousands of dollars apart is - to say the least - confusing, and it's hard to tell what you're getting unless you've really made a major study of the nuances of each guitar. Not so with Ricks.

We also have to consider that the music industry is much different now that the 60's thru 80's golden era of guitar-based bands; there are no modern superstar bands who instantly sell out arenas. Hip Hop and Rap have been around for a (too) long time, and the pendulum hasn't swung back to a major act who plays their own instruments yet. Taylor Swift and Adele are the 2 biggest acts of 2015, there are successful country acts, and Madonna, Katy Perry, Ariana Grande, etc are what's being played for the youth market. It's a very confusing time to be a guitar afficionado.

That being said, RIC is still doing fine. The 1993 Plus is a superb addition to the product line, and I'm looking forward to see (hopefully) what's new at NAMM 2016. It's a company that definitely marches to their own drum, with attitude to match. We know what we have here, and if you're on board, you have to accept them as they are.

[Kopfjaeger]

I was not sure what kind of reaction this thread would get here. I posted it on the FB site first and pulled it off 15 minutes later has it started a huge shitstorm. After the news of Lemmy's passing, I took a peek at the RIC site to see who else they had endorsing the brand and I was a little shocked to see they really had no one. It's been a while since I've been to the site and I forgot how dated and behind the times it was. It's pretty disappointing actually.

There is no doubting Rickenbacker's rich history. back int he day tons of killer bands and artists used Rickenbacker instruments. You also can't deny their continued success. They sell out of what they make and they have a wait time of 6-10 months on new orders. I don't want to see themselves cheapen the brand by making instruments overseas. All I was pointing out was that they seem to be OK with riding the wave they created in the 1960's That has served them well but they are running out of famous/popular artists that once exclusively played the heck out of their instruments. How long can they continue to ride that wave? This I do not know. I guess "if it's not broke, don't fix it' but if we've learned anything about RIC, they are painfully resistant to change. How long did it take them to fix the double hump pick guard on the 4003? How long did it take them to minimize the dangerously deep and wide neck pick up route ion the 4003? Members have been questioning those two "easy" fixes for as long as I've been here and they were just fixed this year.
I'd just rather not see the "wave" break and then RIC is standing there without a game plan that maybe they could have been implementing earlier. It's not a bad thing that they still sell instruments off past glory but it certainly would not hurt the company to create a new greatness as well.

Sepp

[Tommy]

Invest in one or two lower cost models for wider distribution.

I would love to see RIC offer similar instruments, such as an under $1000 610

Yes, yes, yes. A lower priced model (not $119 Squier models, but something under a grand) would be a welcome addition to the Rickenbacker line.
No shark fins, no binding, no Ric-O-Sound...I'd buy one of these 610s tomorrow if Ric produced them as you suggest for under $1,000.

[stringsncords]

".......they seem to be OK with riding the wave they created in the 1960's That has served them well but they are running out of famous/popular artists that once exclusively played the heck out of their instruments. How long can they continue to ride that wave? ....."


All you have to do is look at the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame. Most of the great bands are already in (except the ones not in for "political" reasons - another story altogether) and the pickings are getting very slim; it'll be interesting to see the nominees 5 years down the road, now that it seems that hard drives are the current instruments of choice.

[antipodean]

Innovation is a very rare commodity in the guitar universe - the vast majority of instruments sold are based on designs that were hatched in a golden period from the late '40s to the early '60s. Instruments that have looked to break the mould in materials (such as aluminium or carbon fibre), layout (such the Chapman Stick) or sonic capability (such as the Line6 Variax) remain curiosities, and whilst bass amp technology has moved ahead, guitarists almost universally favour amps that owe a huge debt to either Leo Fender or JMI. Pretty much everyone is either mining their own past or someone else's. Singling out RIC in this regard strikes me as being a little unfair.

I do have to agree, however, that RIC needs to pay attention to their use of online media and the way they present their heritage. Its hard to believe that such an exciting legacy can be made to sound soooo dull.

[Grey]

Innovation is a very rare commodity in the guitar universe - the vast majority of instruments sold are based on designs that were hatched in a golden period from the late '40s to the early '60s. Instruments that have looked to break the mould in materials (such as aluminium or carbon fibre), layout (such the Chapman Stick) or sonic capability (such as the Line6 Variax) remain curiosities, and whilst bass amp technology has moved ahead, guitarists almost universally favour amps that owe a huge debt to either Leo Fender or JMI. Pretty much everyone is either mining their own past or someone else's. Singling out RIC in this regard strikes me as being a little unfair.

I do have to agree, however, that RIC needs to pay attention to their use of online media and the way they present their heritage. Its hard to believe that such an exciting legacy can be made to sound soooo dull.

I'm not asking them to break the mould but how about a little diversity? Several excellent points were made about introducing a stripped down 610 at a lower price point, which is something I would actaully be very interested in. How about offering models with wider necks? It's hardly a new idea around here and they've done it before. Imagine a "modernized" 6XX-series guitar with surface (edit: rear mounted) controls and a wide neck, maybe take a page from Mastery and put threaded set-screws in the bridge plate to make it more stable, maybe put a stop-tail on it or a trapeze. I'm not saying they need to invent a whole new guitar. What would it really cost to test the waters with a few models, if Rickenbacker's position in their niche is already so secure?

[antipodean]

Doesn't the 650C tick a lot of the boxes on your wish list?

[Grey]

Doesn't the 650C tick a lot of the boxes on your wish list?

Yes and no. I meant to say rear mounted controls, i'm not a fan of the chrome pickguard. I'd also prefer a bubinga or rosewood fretboard but those are personal preferences, and this was just one example.