It's our first anniversary. I bought my Rickenbacker 660TP (jetglo) a year ago from a reputable dealer here in Brisbane, Australia. I bought it having not seen a Ric 'in the flesh' for over 25 years, although it was something I'd wanted since I was a teenager. I was shopping for an amp when I saw it, and once I'd played it I was hooked. The TONE!. My God, that glorious sound!
Oh the troubles a hasty romance can bring..
After a week or so I noticed that the Rickenbacker nameplate did not match the gold scratchplate, and was made of what looked like a piece of paper covered in plastic. It had the same thickness as a playing card. It struck me as strange that a beautiful instrument, made of the best materials, would 'skimp' on the nameplate..
To cut a long, sad story short - It was a fake, cut out of a Ric catalogue, laminated and screwed on. The guitar shop owner said he would fix it, and would order a new one.. for the last year I have been following up on that promise every week - I'll spare you the details.
A month ago he finally told me that Rickenbacker wouldn't supply one without the old one in return (which I knew) and that he couldn't help me. It also transpired that he had sold the business. I still love my Ric, but after a year of hassling the passion had gone from that first encounter.
Why am I telling you all this? Well, after a year of watching, a 660/12TP nameplate has surfaced on EBay. I'm bidding more than I can afford, but it will bring an 'old flame' back to life. So if you see the EBay page where 'guderian2000' has the high bid, please, do me a favour, don't bid on this one.
Thanks, Lee Kear
The tale of a Tom Petty..
Moderators: rickenbrother, ajish4
-
corey
This is very unfortunate. In a better world, you would be able to send your "nameplate" to RIC and have them send you the real deal for your 660 Tom Petty. I think there should be allowances for this sort of thing. As it stands now, you are forced into perpetuating the sale of Rickenbacker nameplates (something RIC is rightly against) because you legitimately need one.
Well I don't think he legitimately needs one. The guitar he bought was not a Tom Petty model, it was a normal 600/12 like mine that someone had put a fake nameplate on. Putting a real Tom Petty nameplate on this guitar isnt going to make it a real Tom Petty model either as the serial number will be wrong and so the fraud continues. Why not just accept the 660/12 as the great guitar it is. It's construction and sound is identical to the TP model. Your rights are against the dealer to return the guitar so you can buy a real TP model somewhere else or get the price difference back off him. The 660/12 is an awesome guitar just as it is. Personally i would rather have (and have) a non-signature model. I think the signatures are great for collectors but look a bit poncy to be seen out playing one live, afterall I'm not Tom Petty.
Thanks Corey, and Kevin is right, Phillip. It's the truss rod cover with 'Rickenbacker' on it that I need (not the pickguard with TP's name on it).
My Rickenbacker is a genuine 660/12 'Tom Petty'. It is #188 of of 1000, with serial number e47854, made in '91. It came with the vintage case and the certificate of Authenticity signed by John Hall. I didn't buy it for the 'name', although it cost me a large premium price because of TP's name.
I would have just as soon bought a standard 660/12, but they're mighty scarce here in Oz. I've never even seen one. All I want is to have what I paid for - a genuine 660TP, complete in all regards.
Regards, LK
My Rickenbacker is a genuine 660/12 'Tom Petty'. It is #188 of of 1000, with serial number e47854, made in '91. It came with the vintage case and the certificate of Authenticity signed by John Hall. I didn't buy it for the 'name', although it cost me a large premium price because of TP's name.
I would have just as soon bought a standard 660/12, but they're mighty scarce here in Oz. I've never even seen one. All I want is to have what I paid for - a genuine 660TP, complete in all regards.
Regards, LK
-
wileyibex
Lee paid good money and bought what he honestly assumed was a Ric 660/TP. At a later date, he came to find that the truss rod cover was just laminated paper. He's seeking to buy an authentic Ric 660 truss rod cover on ebay, and he's now being told he dosn't have a legitimate need for such a thing.
Well, sure he legitimately needs one; without it, there's a silly paper thing where the truss rod cover ought to be. That will undoubtably tear up over time, so he needs a truss rod cover, else he'll have a RIC 660 with a big hole in the patent head...common sense would seem to dictate that he buy that "matching" truss rod cover on ebay to make the guitar's condition "sound."
And yes, it is the responsibility of the dealer who sold him the guitar to make it right, but if (a) the dealer is no longer extant, and/or (b) RIC do not wish to abrogate their policy of "no truss rod covers sold without the return of at least part of the old truss rod cover," then our friend is "out" through no fault of his own. He could sue the (former) dealer, spend a great deal of time and money, and may still never see satisfaction. So given the same situation, I'd do the same; I'd also be in contact with RIC to ensure that all parties are advised that TP LE number ____ is no more; and I'd certainly not attempt to sell it later as a TP LE.
About the LE/signature models: At the time the 660/TP was being made, there was no choice of a non-signature 660, as the production of the two models never overlapped. The option of TP or not TP ("...That is the question...") is of relatively recent vintage, only since, what, 1998-1999? For many of us, the issue of 660/TP or 660-non-TP would be made from the standpoint of availability. If I were in the market, I'd grab the first one that came along, signature or no. And "poncy?" Wasn't he that guy on "Happy Days?" Well, many, MANY people have been known to play guitars with Les Paul's name on them even though they're not him...
Well, sure he legitimately needs one; without it, there's a silly paper thing where the truss rod cover ought to be. That will undoubtably tear up over time, so he needs a truss rod cover, else he'll have a RIC 660 with a big hole in the patent head...common sense would seem to dictate that he buy that "matching" truss rod cover on ebay to make the guitar's condition "sound."
And yes, it is the responsibility of the dealer who sold him the guitar to make it right, but if (a) the dealer is no longer extant, and/or (b) RIC do not wish to abrogate their policy of "no truss rod covers sold without the return of at least part of the old truss rod cover," then our friend is "out" through no fault of his own. He could sue the (former) dealer, spend a great deal of time and money, and may still never see satisfaction. So given the same situation, I'd do the same; I'd also be in contact with RIC to ensure that all parties are advised that TP LE number ____ is no more; and I'd certainly not attempt to sell it later as a TP LE.
About the LE/signature models: At the time the 660/TP was being made, there was no choice of a non-signature 660, as the production of the two models never overlapped. The option of TP or not TP ("...That is the question...") is of relatively recent vintage, only since, what, 1998-1999? For many of us, the issue of 660/TP or 660-non-TP would be made from the standpoint of availability. If I were in the market, I'd grab the first one that came along, signature or no. And "poncy?" Wasn't he that guy on "Happy Days?" Well, many, MANY people have been known to play guitars with Les Paul's name on them even though they're not him...
My apologies, I miss-read that the guitar never was a TP model to start with. I agree that ric should replace the truss rod cover.
The Les Paul relates to the model of the guitar. I think there is very little association between Les Paul the player and Les Paul the guitar.
For instance I know guys that have SRV strats that take off the SRV pickguard. Anyway it was my personal choice that neither the 325v63 and 660/12 I bought did not have signatures on the pickguards.
The Les Paul relates to the model of the guitar. I think there is very little association between Les Paul the player and Les Paul the guitar.
For instance I know guys that have SRV strats that take off the SRV pickguard. Anyway it was my personal choice that neither the 325v63 and 660/12 I bought did not have signatures on the pickguards.
Lee, would you actually pay $45 for a plastic logo plate? I never would! I would make my own, and I would make it better than original. Since I own a 650D, a plate could be cut out of thin walnut, or walnut laminated to a maple base that allowed the maple to show the lettering when the walnut veneer was carved through. Ebony would work for those needing a black logo plate. You could also use black or white plastic, and personalize it to suit your taste. How about having it end in a cresting wave like the 4000 series bass headstocks? The possibilities are only limited by your imagination, and you would have a customized guitar.
And why charge $45 for a simple plastic logo plate? If RIC can get it, more power to them (but not from me)! My long dead relative, Cole Younger, would have been ashamed to charge hardworking folk $45 (with exchange, mind you!) for a $2 logo plate. He preferred to hold up railroad robber barons like a decent outlaw.
And why charge $45 for a simple plastic logo plate? If RIC can get it, more power to them (but not from me)! My long dead relative, Cole Younger, would have been ashamed to charge hardworking folk $45 (with exchange, mind you!) for a $2 logo plate. He preferred to hold up railroad robber barons like a decent outlaw.
I wonder why soemone would sell the nameplate off a TP.
I mean is it worth knockin a hundred bucks off te price?
How hard woudl it be for a capable person to make one of these? Is it pretty much he same as my dakota nameplate, just gold and black? Doesnt appear to be ...
Not that I want o make one, I just wonder if it is real - and how could you tell. The guitar it allegedly came off of seems to be ok (form teh restricted pictures)
JP
I mean is it worth knockin a hundred bucks off te price?
How hard woudl it be for a capable person to make one of these? Is it pretty much he same as my dakota nameplate, just gold and black? Doesnt appear to be ...
Not that I want o make one, I just wonder if it is real - and how could you tell. The guitar it allegedly came off of seems to be ok (form teh restricted pictures)
JP
The nameplate saga continues. Let us count the ways in which a nameplate and an instrument are separated. Lately it would seem that a limited edition Rickenbacker owner and nameplate are all too soon parted.
The current nameplate policy would seem to be a necessary step so that RIC can make it more difficult for copies to be passed off as the genuine article. At $45, while perhaps steep in the absolute sense, in the relative sense is about 2% of the suggested retail price. While not all of us would want to pay this amount, I consider that most Rickenbacker owners who have just paid the better part of two grand would consider the nameplate to be essential. It is, for most, a strong identifier of the instrument, a must have.
Aristeas is doing what most Rickenbacker enthusiasts will do, namely, obtaining through legitimate means a Rickenbacker that is complete in all respects. The best of luck to him.
Problems like these beg the question, "So what is the fix for this problem?" I would be interested in hearing what others recommend when a nameplate is damaged or is missing. To simply sell a new one, without the original, is to risk an increase in fake instruments in which we all pay the price. To introduce too stringent a policy denies honest owners the opportunity to have a completely turned out instrument. At present, the only middle ground may rest with decisions made by RIC based upon the unique circumstances of any given case.
The current nameplate policy would seem to be a necessary step so that RIC can make it more difficult for copies to be passed off as the genuine article. At $45, while perhaps steep in the absolute sense, in the relative sense is about 2% of the suggested retail price. While not all of us would want to pay this amount, I consider that most Rickenbacker owners who have just paid the better part of two grand would consider the nameplate to be essential. It is, for most, a strong identifier of the instrument, a must have.
Aristeas is doing what most Rickenbacker enthusiasts will do, namely, obtaining through legitimate means a Rickenbacker that is complete in all respects. The best of luck to him.
Problems like these beg the question, "So what is the fix for this problem?" I would be interested in hearing what others recommend when a nameplate is damaged or is missing. To simply sell a new one, without the original, is to risk an increase in fake instruments in which we all pay the price. To introduce too stringent a policy denies honest owners the opportunity to have a completely turned out instrument. At present, the only middle ground may rest with decisions made by RIC based upon the unique circumstances of any given case.
Life, as with music, often requires one to let go of the melody and listen to the rhythm
Please join the Official RickResource Forum Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/groups/379271585440277
Please join the Official RickResource Forum Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/groups/379271585440277
Imitation is the most SINCERE form of flattery. Fake Rolex watches are made and sold by shysters, Timex watches are not. In fact, a fake Timex watch would be worth MORE than a real Timex watch because of the novelty. Just as a fake Squier guitar that actually had decent quality would be worth more than a real Squier. But it doesn't happen, because there is no profit in it. Charging $45 for a logo plate only ENCOURAGES the shysters to go out and make some fake logo plates. My friend is a tool and die maker. They are looking for work as the economy stagnates. At $45 each, how long do you think before all the Rickenbacker nameplates you could ever ask for are on the market??? And many of them attached to fake Rickenbackers at that! And so many fake products of all types being sold that stopping more than a tiny fraction is simply impossible. And people will LOVE them, because they will have less to spend but still want to maintain prestige. It is a PROVEN fact that people will WILLINGLY buy a known fake if the fake is of high quality and will fool other people. They are looking for prestige at a discount. They do not really care if it came from the real manufacturer or not. A man who lives in Paris tells me that many Parisian women willingly buy things like fake Versace handbags as long as they look exactly like the real thing and are available at a steep discount off the real name brand item. As the quality of foreign goods improves, and people appreciate them more, the problem will only get worse. Because to the people buying them, it's not a problem, IT SOLVES A PROBLEM.
The way to fight it (do the intelligent thing and don't ever try to completely stop it) is to make your product of OBVIOUSLY higher quality and of high value to begin with. It is a simple thing to put a magnetic chip in the logo plate and record the information on that chip with the serial number of the instrument AT THE FACTORY. When a person buys a Rickenbacker, the chip can be scanned for a number and that number combined with the serial number can be compared to the numbers on file at the factory. If they match, it's real; if they don't, it's a fake. And you can do this for a lot less than $45 per guitar.
Look at the things being copied widely. All of them are things like Versace handbags that offer a lot of style or status (mainly through advertising) but are really oversold as far as real value is concerned. My brother-in-law is a jeweler. He has refused to sell Rolex watches in his store because they offer low value relative to a brand like Krieger he sells. The Rolex is more widely copied as it is highly advertised (thus higher priced) and is easier to copy and still offer a comfortable profit margin to the shysters. They are going to pass on copying the Krieger because to make an acceptable fake would leave them with far less profit margin. Like Krieger, Rickenbacker is less widely sold and offers less markup to the counterfeiters than the products of the competition. If somebody built a fake Rickenbacker to the same standards of Rickenbacker, it could not sell at much of a discount and would attract few buyers.
You cannot stop a shyster from selling a fool a piece of junk, and you shoudn't even waste time trying to protect a fool from himself. A fool and his money are soon parted, and it will always be true as long as there are fools and money. I got the real thing. Why should I worry what a fool ends up with?
The way to fight it (do the intelligent thing and don't ever try to completely stop it) is to make your product of OBVIOUSLY higher quality and of high value to begin with. It is a simple thing to put a magnetic chip in the logo plate and record the information on that chip with the serial number of the instrument AT THE FACTORY. When a person buys a Rickenbacker, the chip can be scanned for a number and that number combined with the serial number can be compared to the numbers on file at the factory. If they match, it's real; if they don't, it's a fake. And you can do this for a lot less than $45 per guitar.
Look at the things being copied widely. All of them are things like Versace handbags that offer a lot of style or status (mainly through advertising) but are really oversold as far as real value is concerned. My brother-in-law is a jeweler. He has refused to sell Rolex watches in his store because they offer low value relative to a brand like Krieger he sells. The Rolex is more widely copied as it is highly advertised (thus higher priced) and is easier to copy and still offer a comfortable profit margin to the shysters. They are going to pass on copying the Krieger because to make an acceptable fake would leave them with far less profit margin. Like Krieger, Rickenbacker is less widely sold and offers less markup to the counterfeiters than the products of the competition. If somebody built a fake Rickenbacker to the same standards of Rickenbacker, it could not sell at much of a discount and would attract few buyers.
You cannot stop a shyster from selling a fool a piece of junk, and you shoudn't even waste time trying to protect a fool from himself. A fool and his money are soon parted, and it will always be true as long as there are fools and money. I got the real thing. Why should I worry what a fool ends up with?
Which now brings us to an answer that I forgot to post in my last rant. Let a guy like Lee with a real Rickenbacker minus its logo plate bring it to an authorized dealer and sell him one logo plate at a reasonable price and register the sale to the serial number of the guitar. He cannot go to another dealer and try the same thing twice.
Then forget about any cheap copies of Rickenbackers floating around because the owners of those guitars were never real Rickenbacker customers anyway. Just rickenslackers that should be noted as such.
Then forget about any cheap copies of Rickenbackers floating around because the owners of those guitars were never real Rickenbacker customers anyway. Just rickenslackers that should be noted as such.
The concept of trademark dilution requires us to take action anytime we become aware of a trademark violation and also to take positive action to protect the mark from easy misappropriation. To do otherwise is rather like leaving the front door open because we have insurance. Under this doctrine, both Fender's and Gibson's trademarks are probably in the public domain since they were not adequately enforced for so many years.
Unfortunately, the dealer concept doesn't work for at least two reasons. First, some of the dealers have in the past been part of the problem, adding plates to goods not authorized to wear them. Second, I can think of several customers I know (one in particular) who would think nothing of taking their legitimate guitar in strictly for the purpose of obtaining a plate. If the plate could be permanently affixed somehow, this might work.
The electronic solution is simply not yet feasible. Many of our instruments already have embedded chips in them, for example, but outside the factory there are very few existing scanners. There's no widely accepted standard for these things yet and they're too expensive. There has been a move afoot for some years now to make this happen (Snagg) but I think it's iffy as to whether they can get the critical mass to make things happen and get readers at stores or police departments.
For the moment our program is working very well within the confines of what's possible and much progress has been made to take the plates off of copy instruments. Any blame for inconvenience should be laid squarely at the feet of those who condone intellectual theft and place these plates on copies. Furthermore, current case law really does not give us too many other options to protect our property.
Unfortunately, the dealer concept doesn't work for at least two reasons. First, some of the dealers have in the past been part of the problem, adding plates to goods not authorized to wear them. Second, I can think of several customers I know (one in particular) who would think nothing of taking their legitimate guitar in strictly for the purpose of obtaining a plate. If the plate could be permanently affixed somehow, this might work.
The electronic solution is simply not yet feasible. Many of our instruments already have embedded chips in them, for example, but outside the factory there are very few existing scanners. There's no widely accepted standard for these things yet and they're too expensive. There has been a move afoot for some years now to make this happen (Snagg) but I think it's iffy as to whether they can get the critical mass to make things happen and get readers at stores or police departments.
For the moment our program is working very well within the confines of what's possible and much progress has been made to take the plates off of copy instruments. Any blame for inconvenience should be laid squarely at the feet of those who condone intellectual theft and place these plates on copies. Furthermore, current case law really does not give us too many other options to protect our property.
While it's cold comfort for me, I agree with John Hall in part. Faking up a Rick requires a nameplate, the 'R' tailpiece, a jack-plate and a copy guitar. At retail price for these four items there's much less profit for the opportunist 'individual faker' than there is for a dealer (or dealer employee) who has access to all four at wholesale prices and plenty of walk-in opportunities (suckers).
I've been very careful in my dealings with the dealer who sold me mine never to imply any wrongdoing on their part - time enough to think about that AFTER I've got the nameplate.
The four parts needed mean that it's generally a lot of hassle to 'fake' a Ric, much less than putting a Fender decal on the headstock of any old Strat copy (here for example), which is much easier to pass off given the bewidering array of Strat models.
The market for fake Ric's is also comparatively small (You can tell I've had a long time to think about this). Ric 'afficianados' are very hard to fool, and it's the newbie who gets conned, (which unfortunately includes me). And there aren't that many of them compared to the number of wanna-be Fender/Gibson owners.
This of course does nothing to lower my blood pressure or the ridiculous amount I'll have to bid to get one on EBay.
I've been very careful in my dealings with the dealer who sold me mine never to imply any wrongdoing on their part - time enough to think about that AFTER I've got the nameplate.
The four parts needed mean that it's generally a lot of hassle to 'fake' a Ric, much less than putting a Fender decal on the headstock of any old Strat copy (here for example), which is much easier to pass off given the bewidering array of Strat models.
The market for fake Ric's is also comparatively small (You can tell I've had a long time to think about this). Ric 'afficianados' are very hard to fool, and it's the newbie who gets conned, (which unfortunately includes me). And there aren't that many of them compared to the number of wanna-be Fender/Gibson owners.
This of course does nothing to lower my blood pressure or the ridiculous amount I'll have to bid to get one on EBay.
-
profjeff
OK...I know that we are talking about a trademark here, but consider the following. In 1985 I bought a 1952 Fender Telecaster Reissue from a big box guitar shop in Los Angeles. These were the good ol days before all of this info. about guitars was available online. I called Fender the next day to find out if I could get a manual for the guitar (the shop had lost it). The guy on the phone said, "Sure, and, by the way, did you get the six saddle bridge, the ash tray bridge cover, and the updated electronics package that should have come with the guitar?" Two days later, I received a parcel post package from Fender with all of the missing pieces--FREE OF CHARGE, no questions asked other than the serial number of the guitar. To this day, I have told everyone I know about Fender's great service and how they are concerned for their customers.
Is Rickenbacker ready for the 21st Century in terms of customer service? My sense is "no." Forget about replacement nameplates (even in the rare circustance like the one illustrated here) or things like giving consumers a choice of neck sizes on the 330-360/12.
If I were running this company, I would have FEDEXed a new nameplate to Lee in Australia immediately along with a polishing cloth, a fresh set of strings, and a current catalog with an order form for more stuff. Talk about missing an opportunity to be a hero. Lee would have told everyone in Australia about his fabulous experience with the little company from Santa Ana.
Photos and sound clips of my Ricks (and my 52 Tele reissue:-) at:
http://home.attbi.com/~drjeffreyb
Is Rickenbacker ready for the 21st Century in terms of customer service? My sense is "no." Forget about replacement nameplates (even in the rare circustance like the one illustrated here) or things like giving consumers a choice of neck sizes on the 330-360/12.
If I were running this company, I would have FEDEXed a new nameplate to Lee in Australia immediately along with a polishing cloth, a fresh set of strings, and a current catalog with an order form for more stuff. Talk about missing an opportunity to be a hero. Lee would have told everyone in Australia about his fabulous experience with the little company from Santa Ana.
Photos and sound clips of my Ricks (and my 52 Tele reissue:-) at:
http://home.attbi.com/~drjeffreyb