Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

jakeox wrote:Maybe this isn't appropriate to this discussion, but I have found that my blood pressure remains lower when I recognize that there are some questions that aren't worth trying to answer. What I mean is, RIC has no interest in introducing a budget range bass. I think they've been pretty clear about that. Given that, this discussion, to me, is on par with questions like:

When I sent an offer to that guy selling that bass on eBay, shouldn't he have taken it since his asking price is too high?
Should the [girl/guy] I asked out that rejected me have instead gone out with me?
Should it have rained on my way to work today, isn't it really unfair that I got wet?

You may have an answer you feel strongly about, but it doesn't change the outcome, and you'll be much happier if you don't get too invested in the question. Sure, it's fun to speculate about why things turned out how they did, or what might have been different, but getting worked up about it only accomplishes one thing: you get worked up. I, for one, find that getting worked up is not a lot of fun.

Take a deep breath. Enjoy the things that are instead of focusing to the point of obsession on what could be better. I guarantee you'll be a happier person that way.

Hear hear.

aceonbass wrote:Where where?

No, not here, here, hear hear!

What?




No, really, I echo the sentiments.

jakeox wrote:Maybe this isn't appropriate to this discussion, but I have found that my blood pressure remains lower when I recognize that there are some questions that aren't worth trying to answer.

The question is, "Do you think.....", so a thread which seeks opinions is somehow not worth trying to answer?
I disagree, (but that's just my opinion). On the other hand I do agree with the sentiment "Maybe this isn't appropriate to this discussion...". So for that I'll give you a 'Hear, hear!'.

I can see this thread self destructing very soon...

SamBailler wrote:

jakeox wrote:Maybe this isn't appropriate to this discussion, but I have found that my blood pressure remains lower when I recognize that there are some questions that aren't worth trying to answer.

The question is, "Do you think.....", so a thread which seeks opinions is somehow not worth trying to answer?
I disagree, (but that's just my opinion). On the other hand I do agree with the sentiment "Maybe this isn't appropriate to this discussion...". So for that I'll give you a 'Hear, hear!'.

No. My point is not that we should not discuss it, but that there's no point to getting overly emotionally invested in it. I personally have no strong feelings either way on this one, because I can see good arguments on both sides. The question I think is not worth fighting over is "should RIC introduce a budget line". Nobody's arguing over whether YOU think they should, or I think they should, or anything else.

For example, I would personally love it if RIC reintroduced the 4002, or something like it. Heck, from what I hear, they should have most or all of the parts laying around to knock out a batch or two. I don't get upset that they're not going to do it though.

If you're just trying to start arguments, then that's a different discussion.

This is a discussion forum. Why not talk about things we can not change. That's pretty much life anyway.

Rick-o-nomics 101:

My (minimum) wage in Arizona in 1974: $2.10/hr.
1974 4001 (w/case) list price: $450
Number of '1974' hours worked to buy new 4001: 214.3
Translated to 40 hr. weeks: 5.4

Minimum wage in Arizona in 2010: $7.25/hr.
2010 4003 (w/case) list price: $2,159
Number of '2010' hours worked to buy new 4003: 297.8
Translated to 40 hr. weeks: 7.4

36 years of progress:
Min. wage increase: 245%
Ric bass price increase: 380%
Time worked to afford purchase increase: 37%

Yet another reason I'm glad not to be an 18-year-old kid today...and I didn't vote in the 'poll' for the same reason I wouldn't vote in a poll that asked whether one is in favor of or opposed to gum-drop trees and cotton-candy clouds: no matter how sweet it sounds, it ain't gonna happen...

(Just a friendly aside...is it remotely possible for us to avoid bashing places like Bangladesh and Indonesia? I have very close friends there, and I hate hearing 'first worlders' refer to these countries as though they're some kind of badly drawn cartoons filled with oafish rag-pickers incapable of operating power tools. Thanking you all in advance and wishing each and every one a lovely day...)

Dane,

I agree with your non-bashing sentiment. I have no friends yet in either of the areas you mentioned but a quick Google through the universe shows that there is craftsmanship and a lack thereof in virtually every corner of the globe (except the Denver Metroplitan area where you and I reside).

Wow, I was serious for a whole two lines. That may be a record.

harley wrote:Wow, I was serious for a whole two lines. That may be a record.

Join the club!

Joey states:

I can see this thread self destructing very soon...

I hope not. With that said, I hope I'm not destructing the thread by posting this. I have a very roundabout reason for my viewpoint so please bear with me.

I voted yes on this topic but I find that I would much rather Rickenbacker make more fretless and bring back a 5 string. It makes no sense for me to buy new when I don't want a 4 string, I've never played a 4004 and other than the look of a 4004 it doesn't appeal to me to go out of my way to try to play one. If there's one nearby, cool. But I have a life to live and driving across country to play an instrument just isn't on my list of things to do. This may be due to my complete disdain of driving more than 2 hours in a vehicle though.

Regardless, I understand the reality of the situation that Rickenbacker is in. It makes no sense for the company to build a budget bass. And one of the reasons you will get so many different answers to this question is that everyone has a different idea of what a budget bass is. Some think Squier is a budget bass and some think they are bottom of the barrel bass and don't even consider a bass like SX as budget. Some think Squier is mid-range and SX is budget. Some think they both are budget.

With the target definition of budget varying as much as it does, it's very difficult to communicate what people are really wanting/thinking.

Do I think Rickenbacker should make a $199 bass? OMG no. Even if they used a different brand name like Fender and Gibson do, it wouldn't hurt the name of Rickenbacker but it would be a seriously awful bass at that price unless they sold umpteen million and had 10 years to get the quality to the point of Squier and Epiphone basses.

So the question becomes more of where is the line of where a good and decent quality bass becomes acceptable to the market and the company. $400? $600? $900?

And then we have to follow up on what you put on that bass--which helps dictate where the price point will be.

I sometimes have to seriously wonder if Rickenbacker doesn't start another budget line simply because if they made changes and even had a different name on it, they fear they would compete with themselves because let's face it. As beautiful as the 4000 series bridge is, it's a totally Flugelheimed design and anything they put on a new line is going to be better as far as servicing and maintenance goes.

Rickenbacker is in both an enviable and unenviable position. The backlog they have is fanatical and sales are great year over year. The biggest problem is how do you evolve your product line when you can't keep your products in stock due to unreal demand. Whittling down features such as 5 string and limiting others such as FL and LH and jacking up prices hasn't stopped demand so why change?

But if you don't change, then you alienate the fans you did have who did want those features. Like I said when I started, I would love to buy new but when I can't find the features I want that are new, why do I want to buy new? A push pull tone pot? Puh-leeze. When the features I want aren't even available anymore a split neck design and prettier colors with different electronics doesn't really appeal to me.

So let's look at what I want, truly. I think my 4003S/5 is one awesome instrument. I think it's almost a perfect instrument but I also realize that it's not everyone's cup of tea. I'm seriously glad that the market was different enough back in the day where Rickenbacker did want to try new things because otherwise, I'd never have seen this instrument let alone played and owned it. I won't lie. I want a 5 string to come back. I want a fretless 5 string to come back. I want a JG unlined FL 5 string with no dots on the fretboard at all.

I know this will never happen but I can dream, right?

So, with the Rickenbacker market stuck the way it is, the only way I'd ever see some of the features I want on a plank of wood from Santa Ana is for Rickenbacker to make a different bass that's more accessible than the money making 4003.

About the only way I can dream is to have Rickenbacker make a different brand that's "budget friendly" that will not really compete with the 4003 sales... or shop elsewhere.

I'm kind of up a creek, aren't I?

Maybe I should play drums, instead?



On the Rolls Royce/Bentley analogy, Bentley was at one time the "other brand" of RR and went back to being its own mark. I guess Coventry decided to flesh out the Bentley name once again and now it's back to respectable when before it was just "RR with a different hood ornament".

Furthermore, on the Cadillac Cimarron analogy, it's fails because a lot of people didn't even like American cars when the Cimarron was introduced. Moreover, the average Cadillac owner was 55+ years of age and GM was wanting to lower the entry cost and its age range of ownership as it was seen as "the old folks car". Remember the Allante? That was the first shot across the bow for Cadillac to lower the average age of its owners. I'd say that 25 years later, it seems to have worked but not by much.

And I have to echo what was said about supporting your local economy. A lot of us are not from the US and I respect those opinions that aren't from the US. Ultimately, Rickenbacker is a US company and it has to protect its interests. Those interests include by default supporting its own economy. Since Rickenbacker is a US company and I am a US citizen, it stands to reason that I want any instrument they make to come from the US... even if it's a budget model and costs $100 or so more because of this fact.

</scatter-braind-ramblings level=5>

Tarrbot wrote:Ultimately, Rickenbacker is a US company and it has to protect its interests. Those interests include by default supporting its own economy.

If we take the "buy local" argument to its logical conclusion, only So Cal residents should buy Ricks... It doesn't really work, does it?

antipodean wrote:

Tarrbot wrote:Ultimately, Rickenbacker is a US company and it has to protect its interests. Those interests include by default supporting its own economy.

If we take the "buy local" argument to its logical conclusion, only So Cal residents should buy Ricks... It doesn't really work, does it?

If we're talking logic, unless you're living in the land of honey and mana then you have to buy outside of your local economy for some items or else pillage neighboring countrysides for that which you need and desire.

However, I didn't say "buy local" I said support your own economy and I can also argue how broad the definition of the term "local" is.

Maybe Ricks have gone up compared to the minimum wage, but student basses have not. In 1978 I bought a Fender Musicmaster bass new for $150. Today you can get Squire Bronco for $150 or a Squire P or a J for $199. Not bad for a first bass these days.