Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

I would love to see Mr. Hall chime in on this one, but will not hold my breath.

My answer would be that RIC, to a certain extent, has no competition. Theoretically, it is every manufacturer that sells an instrument at the same price point (say $950 to $1,200 for a 4003). However, 4003s are, to a certain extent, unique, which goes a long way in explaining why RIC fights so hard to maintain their patents/trademarks. Also, sales of instruments like Ricks are not necessariy a "zero sum game." Rick is clearly not going for the first time buyer and I would venture to say that most Rick owners also own other instruments. With that in mind, I think the Rick buyer does not choose one or the other, he decides he wants a Rick and buys one for it's own sake. Thus the theoretical "no competition."

It seems from the outside as though RIC has come close to achieving a difficult state for any business, that is, equilibrium. With no advertising whatsoever, orders will come in based on reputation alone and the business can remain profitable based on existing production. I would think that orders fluctuate, but more based on outside economic factors, rather than some artificially created demand.

Rhinobass said

"I would venture to say that most Rick owners also own other instruments."

It is also of interest to note the number of Rickenbacker owners that own multiple Rickenbackers. This may also be the case for all other instruments, however, in researching Rickenbackers I was surprised that many folks had two or three quite routinely and others had, well let's say dozens and leave it at that.

gee I only have 6 ... I must be slacking ...

I think that John (Rhinobass) is absolutely correct about the Rick buyer. Within weeks of learning to play the bass back in junior high, I knew the charms of the Rickenbacker bass. I had my mother drive me to the local GC to buy a set of strings and I immediately gravitated over to a Jetglo 4003. I sat down with it and was in complete awe. Like John stated, I decided I wanted and waited 2 years to gather the money. I could have gone a cheap route but I stuck to it. It was only later that I realized that Macca played one, so I knew it was the bass for me. 2 years later I have a '97 4003 MG (now modified w/ v63 guard, toaster, 'shoe, and .0047 mfd) and a '98 4001v63 (w/.0047). I stepped up to the big time once because Rickenbacker only offers that one “step”. I did my research on the neck-through design, hardware, all the quality put into these guitars. I never considered a Fender, MusicMan, etc., nothing that was in the price range at the time. I still feel that Rickenbackers are separate from the rest of the guitar market. While most people see them as "Beatle" guitars, I think that John Hall and his father did much to keep the company both separate from this yet thoroughly in touch with their buyers...

This is not a stab at their instruments, but Gibson (vicariously through Epiphone) and Fender tend to grasp onto certain segments of the guitar market through names and buy-outs. I live in Chicago, and I don't know a single old blues player who is gonna buy a Muddy Waters Tele because his name is on it. I also don't anticipate any Southern Rock bands sporting a "Lynyrd Skynyrd" Epi Les Paul any time soon. What Fender and Gibson are aware of is sales and marketing. Neither company cares nearly as much as J. Hall does about quality and accuracy. A new $950 Precision or Jazz bass is now a pipe dream. A Fender bass only begins to approach Rick build quality with their American Vintage Series and their Custom Shop stuff. A new Vintage series P or J is at least $1200 and change, and it is only that cheap because Fender realizes that they are selling to a niche market. To make up for this, they sell the ‘60s Jazz Bass (there’s your fake John Paul Jones for ya!), Sting bass, Geddy Lee bass, Stink 182 bass, Marcus Miller bass, and guitars that appeal to popular taste.

I have a '62 reissue Precision (for “Duck” Dunn purposes) and it is a far superior piece of work compared to any American Standard/Series Precision, but still not as "detailed" as my 4003 It also pained me to stray from my Rickenbacker passions, but a working musicians gotta do what a... A new Gibson bass of any sort is at least $1500 or more, and they even consider the Thunderbird a vintage reissue. Take a good look at that thing and try to find anything on that bass that could constitute vintage. It is obvious that selling a bass is an afterthought to Gibson. They’re too busy trying to build the perfect “fooled-you” Les Paul reissue. Again, I’m not taking pot shots, I just this is just a way for these companies to build a customer base and make more sales. Think about it this way - A kid gets his Epi Les Paul, Mexican _____caster or Mexican P bass because one of his heroes plays a similar model. Eventually, the build quality of this instrument is surpassed by the kids ability. Since he likes some aspects of this LP or Strat or whatever, he looks for and learns about the better “series” offered by, perhaps his hero even has a signature model. Then he moves onto the American made ones, then the reissues, then the Custom Shop... Rickenbacker gives the buyer the best in every instrument. Doing business this way builds loyalty and also forces the buyers to become extremely aware of build quality, hardware, wood selection, etc. If Rickenbacker gets the first time buyer, then they got ‘em good. They will always cherish not only the instrument, but also the experience of being a Rickenbacker player. I think it is a genius tradition that I’m glad to feel a part of.

Please fill in what I missed and let me know if I’m wrong.

I paid more for my 4004Cii than for my AV '62 Jazz Bass. Given that the JB is a recreation of an instrument from the early '60s, the detail and build quality are superb, and the three color Sunburst finish is first rate on my bass. My first bass was a '72 Jazz Bass and I wanted to get back to that (must be a middle age thing, huh?). I checked out the AM. Series Jazz but it paled in comparison to the AV series instruments.

I am quite satisfied that RIC wants to produce only quality products, there is no need to chase after beginners; let them aspire to a Rickenbacker. Must be working as RIC has no need to advertise!

A bass manufacturer can add upscale AND downscale instruments to its standard grade. Warwick and Spector are two of the most visible midsize bass companies to do so. They were founded and grew to respectable size long after Fender and Rickenbacker were established brands. They made technical improvements and, in the case of Warwick, used many different species of exotic tonewoods in their basses. I'm still looking for a korina and wenge Rickenbacker. Alembic decided to stay strictly high end, and both Warwick and Spector have blown past Alembic and show no signs of slowing down. With their marketing savvy, Spector and Warwick will be far ahead of RIC in sales to young players, and they have plenty of higher end basses of to sell them later, even higher end than Rickenbacker. Why should a person give up the look and feel they like in order to move upscale? As far as basic playability goes, a Warwick RockBass or Spector Performer will give ANY Rickenbacker, Fender, Gibson, or Ernie Ball serious competition. Why should a beginner think they have to switch to another brand to gain better performance, when they are already almost there at a dirt cheap price, and they can move upscale without losing that familiar feeling? Mike Tobias has seen the light and is copying the business strategy of Warwick and Spector. MTD may surpass Tobias in sales unless Gibson introduces foreign built basses into the Tobias lineup. RIC could also start a custom shop in order to compete against high end Alembic, MTD, Spector, Warwick, Status, Fodera, et al. Some Rick bass owners might actually want to try a wenge necked 4003. Even Peavey is beating the old established mass manufacturers at this game with their Cirrus basses. Youngsters of today see a totally different playing field than what I saw at their age. I wish I had the choices that they have! A youngster can aspire to a Cirrus just as well as they can to a Rickenbacker. Staying behind on orders just because you have chosen to stay small scale is not necessarily the world's greatest marketing plan. It might be if you were in a similar position to Rolls Royce where you charged so much that only a small group of customers could afford your product anyway. If RIC wants to stay small, maybe they should open a custom shop and adopt a Rolls Royce's philosophy. Ford bought Jaguar and Volvo to capture upscale niche markets, without having to move any Ford products into those categories.

Philip, you're assuming facts not in evidence. I have no figures either, just observations, but I believe Alembic is very much alive, well, and far ahead of Warwick and Spector in the high end market. Alembic does its own thing, like RIC, and doesn't need cheap copies of itself, either to stay afloat or to attract new customers. BTW, Mike Tobias was making cheap MTD knockoffs long before Warwick entered that field.

You're confusing gross unit sales with success. IMO Spector, MTD and Warwick began making knockoffs because they were in big trouble. They didn't do it to draw new customers to their more expensive products, they did it to survive because the market wouldn't support their high end product. And note that they continue to make ever-cheaper versions. They are still in trouble, and they have severely damaged their high end business rather than helped it.

In the area of US-made guitars, RIC is not small at all. It just astonishes me that you or anyone else thinks they need to do anything to survive other than fill the continuing high demand for their products.

I have to agree with Dave's point. Seeing all of the OLP Spectors and the ilk, makes me wonder why I would ever spend the 2K for one of their high end basses. Not that I am going to run out and buy an OLP, but it makes me appreciate RIC all the more for their continued commitment to quality and high standards. If you owned a 2K Alembic, would you like it if they made a $300 version of the bass you own?

It's obvious to me that one Texan doesn't know the relative sales/production levels, financial background, and history of some of these companies, while another Texan does.

For the record, we are a production instrument company and by lunch time on a given day make as many units as most of all these boutique makers produce in a week, combined.

At the same time, we also don't charge "boutique" prices either but offer consistently high quality in a production environment. Maybe Mercedes or BMW would be a better comparison to us. There's certainly plenty of both "Rolls Royce" and "KIA" type makers out there, and that's a market they're welcome to.

Now both McGuinn and John Hall have called Rickenbackers the "Mercedes" of the electric guitar market. This obviously implies a commitment to high quality while still putting out a good amount of product. Bentley cannot do both, so like Alembic, commits to quality and not volume. I see none of these companies having any problems "staying afloat". It's just a way of doing business through reputation. Granted, marketing the product is much more necessary in the automotive world.

RIC = BMW
Fender = Ford

I have owned a Mercedes, and I have owned (and still do) a Ford. The Ford blows the Mercedes out of the water in SO many ways when you consider what you get for your money. My Ford recently had its first spark plug changeout at 130K miles, and they were all still firing just fine, thank you. The only failures had been a light bulb and a battery (after 6 years of Texas heat), and a rear axle seal that was discovered to be weeping a bit at brake maintenace time at 130K. It still has the original fan belt, with not a single crack in it anywhere and still within normal wear tolerances. My Mercedes went through one about every year. I had the 300D Mercedes, the one that the local dealer said was their most reliable ever. It NEVER came close to the low failure rate of the Ford. Leaked a lot of oil on the driveway too (their Achilles heel), and burned a quart every 400 miles, which was NORMAL according to my factory workshop manual. I poured 6 quarts in the Ford when I changed oil, and drained 6 quarts out when I changed oil 5K miles later, having added not a drop. Not a single drop of oil has hit the driveway in over 130K miles of driving. Other F-150 owners tell me theirs does the same as mine. My sister traded her first BMW off at only 92K miles because it was beginning to have expensive problems. Her husband has a Ford F-150 also, and it is giving similar excellent service like mine, in harsh North Dakota. Why would I want to compare my bass to Mercedes or BMW??? I consider my ReBop to be more like a Ford F-150. THAT IS MUCH HIGHER PRAISE THAN I CAN GIVE BY LOWERING IT TO YUPPIE CAR STATUS. I like to pay less and get more. Screw the status. As a person who works in an engineering environment, I know that it is engineers who produce excellent products like the F-150 for reasonable prices who are the true engineering geniuses. Any engineer that can't design a high performance car at a Ferrari price should be fired on the spot. Ford was even able to make the F-150 handle better than some sedans I have driven, while keeping the utility and reliability of a truck intact. It drives quieter than the last Mercedes A class I rented in France (that costs $10K more). Of course, since I live near the Yuppie Scum Capital of the Universe (Dallas), that happens to boast the world's largest Mercedes-Benz dealership (3 stories high and all indoor), I doubt that I will get many concurrences. One Dallas automotive engineer told me that the tolerances for the F-150 transmission parts her company produced were as tight or tighter than they had ever produced for anybody else. Shove that little thought up your BMW's tailpipe. When your Mercedes or BMW can do all that at the price I paid for my F-150, THEN you can start to tell me what a great car you have. And I MIGHT buy your opinion on basses. Oh, and by the way, my F-150 had the same "class A" crash safety rating as an S-class Mercedes sedan when I bought it in 97. For 1/3 the price, no less. I work on expensive medical gear, so I am no bozo when it comes to experience with precision products (except for the day I bought the 300D). That's why when I buy an automobile to take me and my baggage anyplace, anytime, in any weather, in safety and comfort, at afFORDable cost, I choose Ford over Mercedes, in a heartbeat. Any top mechanic will tell you that nobody produces better replacement wear parts these days than Ford or Chevy. I didn't buy the ReBop for status, I bought it to be as "Ford tested tough" as any bass I could get, and sound good and feel right the whole time. Even allowing for the lower production figures, fewer used USA Spectors are for sale than used Rickenbackers. I doubt Spector is having any trouble "staying afloat". Their customer service is too good to suggest major business problems. They get some perfect 10's for customer support on Harmony Central, so compare that to RIC's rating.

And from my own experience, Ford goes, Mercedes blows. Wish I had all the money I blew on Mercedes parts. Another biomedical engineer had similar experiences with his Mercedes, so mine is no fluke. A kinesiotherapist at work had to give up her 190 over repair issues. A Jaguar owner (the new one built since takeover by Ford) told my dad what a better car it was than that POS Mercedes they got rid of. THANK GOODNESS YOU GUYS DON'T PICK CARS FOR ME!

And thank goodness you don't pick basses for me.

Eh, I just have an unhealthy bias towards Ricks. Tried many a bass over the years, and Ricks just "do it" for me.

The car thing is just a little ribbing. I'd take an F-150 (I can definitely attest to their durability; seven years' experience with a bunch of them at my old job) over a Mercedes anyday. And I like my Honda a hell of a lot more than that quirky Volvo I used to own.

I hope this doesn't turn into a "car thread."