Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

jps wrote:I too, bought my first Rickenbacker at 17 (you know which one), are we seeing a pattern, here?

Definitely..........I suffer from male pattern baldness too...........

nukebass wrote:In reality, is there a true economic alternative for an American Fender or Gibson?

Yep, Fender Japan and certain Epiphones. The Japanese product is pretty much built to a US or better standard for a lower price.

The higher level Korean Epis are real bargains - the word of mouth on the 335s (and the Casino/Sheraton) and Thunderbirds is very good. They may not quite match the US guitars but they are much cheaper, representing geat value.

winston wrote:

jps wrote:I too, bought my first Rickenbacker at 17 (you know which one), are we seeing a pattern, here?

Definitely..........I suffer from male pattern baldness too...........

nukebass wrote:It would be nice if RIC made a less expensive model, but we know they don't have time for that.

It's got nothing to do with "time", Ryan. Rick tradition is as an American musical instrument manufacturer. The only way to lower price points any further would be to ship the work and jobs offshore, and that is not going to happen as long as there is a Hall in charge of the company's fortunes.

This will be interesting to watch:

http://www.musicincmag.com/News/2008/08 ... ender.html

Stratocaster, Telecaster, and P-Bass designs may become public domain; this is precisely why we police our trademarks so diligently.

Could the Les Paul be next?

Wow, a little after the fact.
The Strat shape does seem generic by virtue of the thousands of copies over the decades.
At what point did Fender decide to persue this I wonder?

Is my avatar gone because of copyright infringement?

Reading the summaries, it's hard to take a position on either side of that fence.

jingle_jangle wrote:Reading the summaries, it's hard to take a position on either side of that fence.

Well, two things that are inarguable is that 1) they dilly-dallied to file trademarks and partly because of that 2) failed to police the market effectively. I'm not saying they're going to lose but if they do, it will likely be mainly due to these factors.

PRS got lucky in the Gibson case in that they drew an especially stupid federal judge who probably has trouble putting on her stockings. Fender could be so lucky with the TTAB folks although I imagine that the other parties would then escalate their case to the federal courts.

“[Our clients’] position is that these shapes are not solely associated with any one company,” said Ron Bienstock of Bienstock & Michael, which represents the opposing companies.

Ron was featured a few years ago in Bass Player magazine; as I recall, he played MTD basses.

manta wrote:I don't have any RIC copies because they suck.

Tim

Classic! Good one, Tim.

winston wrote:No gallows for you Michael..............a keel hauling maybe . Just save up for the real thing. You will be glad you did. Btw I bought my first Rickenbacker at age 17.

Ditto that; same here-I bought a used JG 4001 about four months before my 18th birthday. I started out as a bassist

Ron is an interesting guy, long time in the industry. He's an attorney that's made a career of representing people in litigation or other legal matters with Gibson and Fender for one thing or another. He's your man if you want to sue or are sued by those guys . . .

For years before his legal efforts, he was involved with International Musician Magazine, selling advertising space.

paologregorio wrote:

winston wrote:No gallows for you Michael..............a keel hauling maybe . Just save up for the real thing. You will be glad you did. Btw I bought my first Rickenbacker at age 17.

Ditto that; same here-I bought a used JG 4001 about four months before my 18th birthday. I started out as a bassist

Coincidence - I bought my 4000 (back in full working order as of today due to the kindness of one Howard Bishop Esquire) in my final year of school at the ripe old age of 17. I was 41 when I bought my second Ric - that's a long time between drinks...

I still have a hard time understanding how lower cost alternatives hurt the USA-name brand. Someone who can only afford a couple hundred $$ for a guitar is only going to spend that much. They're not going to buy a Fender CS, Gibson, or for that matter Ric. They *might* buy a MIM Fender, a Squier, or an Epi. And once they get to like playing the guitar, they *might* decide it's worth saving or spending to get the USA-made version.

I guess what I'm trying to say is the guy/gal buying the clone wasn't going to be buying the USA model in the first place. By tapping into the lower-expense market, the brand would presumably obtain a customer they wouldn't have had otherwise.

Bill

jingle_jangle wrote:

nukebass wrote:It would be nice if RIC made a less expensive model, but we know they don't have time for that.

It's got nothing to do with "time", Ryan. Rick tradition is as an American musical instrument manufacturer. The only way to lower price points any further would be to ship the work and jobs offshore, and that is not going to happen as long as there is a Hall in charge of the company's fortunes.

A couple of years ago, I remember doing a price compare using my 4001S purchased new in 1984. I posted the results on the Ric Corporate forum. When I factored in the slightly lower "S" value and took it up to the 2006 U.S. dollar by factoring in inflation, the 2006 pricing for a 4003 was pretty close to what it was in 1984 for a 4001 - when adjusted for inflation. I haven't looked into a 2008 price compare, but what I did in 2006 showed me that Ric hadn't diverged much from what they charged about 25 years prior. I could have goofed and not subtracted out the case cost, but I seem to remember factoring that in.
In the modern age of higher health insurance costs and higher costs for raw materials, I wouldn't be surprised to see the costs move up a bit higher than simply comparing mid-80's pricing to 2008 after adjusting for inflation.