Gibson Announces New CEO and Other Executives

to add to Cliff's suggestions...

1. Get rid of models nobody wants, streamline down to what they do best.
2. Get rid of those stupid colors nobody wants.
3. The models they do have are too confusing, way too many Les Pauls, one is 10k, another one is 2k... WHY? Same wood,same machine, same people making it. Who can afford a 10k Les Paul besides Slash or Cliff lol. uggh.
 
Personally, if I heard that Gibson laid off a ton of their American workforce in favor of robots, I'd gain some clarity about their values and would never buy one of their guitars ever again.
 
All the demonization of CEO's and senior leadership is just BS and pointless. Railing against the so called 1%er's. It will be guitar buyers (consumers) that rebuild Gibson (if it can be rebuilt). Senior management is stuck with a significant problem. First they have to figure out what the consumer really wants, then they have to figure out how to deliver it. All of this against a backdrop of a horrible reputation in the guitar universe. Cliff is spot on right about fixing some long-standing QC issues, but that is only half the problem. Once those issues are addressed, they will have to convince the buyer that those issues have been fixed. They have a well deserved reputation for poor quality at a ridiculous price.

Personally, I'd like to see Gibson marry new manufacturing technology with old-school craftsmanship. Yes, management has a responsibility to deliver a fair return to the stockholders. There will not be any stockholders if they fail to do that. But that does not mean producing K-Mart guitars at Nordstrom's prices. Then the consumer will voice their opinion by not buying anything Gibson. Henry did a very thorough job of running that great company into the ground. Gibson's employees and management team better get on the same page and work to salvage what is left of the once great brand or we may witness the death of an iconic company. It took a long time to get the company into the condition it is in. It will take some time to reverse course and rebuild. If Gibson wants a place in the guitar universe, they are going to have to earn it.

I still have a 1971 Les Paul Custom, and it is a killer guitar. It's pretty beat up from years of touring (it was my #1). It was my #1 for a reason. Personally, I'm rooting for them to rebuild the brand.
 
Last edited:
I hope it's not just another case where the same people that caused the problem are going to fix this problem.
 
Robots aren’t bad per se. Suhr uses a lot of robots and I had no problems with any of their products. Lack of vision and customer focus are a problem, however. There’s nothing in their entire lineup I’d want at the prices they are asking. There are a couple of ways to deal with that: 1. Build better product, 2. Lower the price. I’d prefer #1, most people would go for #2.
 
Well this thread has been going for a few days now and looking at all the responces, nobody is expecting anything good (including myself)

Another team coming in to change the company and make it work!! Yippi !!

And yet how many times during the coarse of the year do you read about a CEO, taking at times a healthy company and slamming it into the ground. Allot!
 
Gibson is very unique , in the sense that I have loved them AND hated them.
When I was buying one , I hated them , due to inconsistent neck thickness specs , but once I found what I was looking for, I love it.

The fact that HUMANS are used to make the guitar , is what sets them apart.

Mass production , greed , and delusional marketing ideas ( during Henry’s control ) , have ruined the company - ( IMO )

I’d say , keep making them by hand , by Americans. Limit the Les Paul model to 4 versions , with a single limited edition version each year. Make fewer guitars PERIOD , and make QC the number one priority.
Less is more.
 
Gibson is very unique , in the sense that I have loved them AND hated them.
When I was buying one , I hated them , due to inconsistent neck thickness specs , but once I found what I was looking for, I love it.

The fact that HUMANS are used to make the guitar , is what sets them apart.

Mass production , greed , and delusional marketing ideas ( during Henry’s control ) , have ruined the company - ( IMO )

I’d say , keep making them by hand , by Americans. Limit the Les Paul model to 4 versions , with a single limited edition version each year. Make fewer guitars PERIOD , and make QC the number one priority.
Less is more.

For me, I'd rather have same quality across the board. I want to know that if I want to buy a specific model guitar, that the quality will be the same across the board, because I'm buying a guitar for those specific qualities (whether it's the look, the scale length, neck shape, etc). When you have a large company like Gibson that ships internationally, I can't imagine it would behoove them to have everything made by hand, because you either have to hire a large swath of workers which increases production costs, or you have to sacrifice quality by increasing output.

Of course, I could be completely wrong and maybe Gibson has a strategy to make this work, but the layoffs they've had this past year don't really inspire confidence that they do ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 
What brands of DSP effect processors, TV, car, clothes, or mobile phone are you currently using? :rolleyes:

If I hear about a lot of American workers getting laid off, it's my right to not buy a company's products anymore. You're correct to point out that ethical consumption is tricky (or impossible) in our current system, but I can't be coerced into buying a product from a company if I'm upset about the way they treat their labor force.
 
I don't think Gibson should move production offshore. They already have offshore production and it's called Epiphone. Part of Gibson's brand is that they are a premium product. The customer knows that when they buy Gibson, they're getting a premium product that includes stuff you don't get in the offshore product. Nitro, better QC, better electronics, US manufacture. Regardless of whether or not these things make for a better sounding and playing instrument, people perceive these qualities as being desirable. Just improve QC because no one should need a fret job out of box on a $5000 guitar. And get prices down since they've gotten out of control. Consolidate the lines.

Around the $1000 range, give us bang for buck. Sorry, the Fadeds just feel cheap and ugly. Put one next to a comparable Reverend and the Rev feels like a much more premium instrument. That's what I meant when I suggested they take a page from Reverend.
 
Gibson 'can' make good guitars onshore, they just need to properly define their mission.
Is it:
A) to make high quality American hand made guitars? Or is it
B) to make inexpensive guitars that compete with other companies within that price range.

If Option A is the desire - hire Tom Murphy to run the production team. Or have Tom Anderson come in as a consultant to review their design/build/QC process, and suggest the proper changes so that each guitar has the consistency of an Anderson.

If Option B is the desire - then automate and offshore.

Gibson has been trying to do both A and B and it is not working. They just produce high priced garbage.
 
Gibson is very unique , in the sense that I have loved them AND hated them.
When I was buying one , I hated them , due to inconsistent neck thickness specs , but once I found what I was looking for, I love it.

The fact that HUMANS are used to make the guitar , is what sets them apart.

Mass production , greed , and delusional marketing ideas ( during Henry’s control ) , have ruined the company - ( IMO )

I’d say , keep making them by hand , by Americans. Limit the Les Paul model to 4 versions , with a single limited edition version each year. Make fewer guitars PERIOD , and make QC the number one priority.
Less is more.

That was the basis of my post. Not some rant against the 1%, but that we now have a class of managers, who hop between companies like professional football stars, have no loyalty to the company or the brand, don't know the product nor do they care. Their only mission is to make the company profitable again for the shareholders by any means, and once that means has been achieved after a couple of years they cash in on their bonuses and stock options and migrate to the next company. And if it doesn't work out they'll take a fat severance pay and leave others to pay the piper.

It's not that good CEO's don't deserve to get well paid, it's that they've become the human equivalent of locusts. So a new CEO from outside the company is not filling me with any confidence. A new CEO from within Gibson would already have a Herculean task, one from outside Gibson has a gargantuan task. And since chances are he's the human equivalent of locusts I'm not placing any bets on Gibson surviving as a quality made in the USA company.
 
Gibson is very unique , in the sense that I have loved them AND hated them.
When I was buying one , I hated them , due to inconsistent neck thickness specs , but once I found what I was looking for, I love it.
Same here, I have four in all
1980 Les Paul Standard (proud to say I am the original owner) this is "the wife" even friends who don't like Les Paul's love this one.
2007 Les Paul Custom Just a exception feeling and sounding guitar.
1982 V "The V' great sounding guitar, but when I got it, was younger and dumber, neck needed to be re-leveled. But after that investment great sounding and feeling guitar.
And last I picked up last month 2011 ES 335 going for a great price but it had two issues, first was the nut (not bad but not right) I was told the past owner did this. and the bridge saddles: the spacing was not correct and needed to replace the saddles.
So even with this minimal investment still came out ahead, really nice guitar.

My point, yes I love my Gibson's. But don't see myself getting any new ones in the future and have no interest. I have no confidence in the company management team, past or present. Maybe I'll be proven wrong! And I would like that. But something tells me I wont.
 
The new incentives by the current administration should be enough to keep them in the USA for the near future. .02
 
I've worn Levis almost my entire life. The new ones just don't fit right. I actually emailed them to complain and they gave me a canned response about QC, dedication to our customers, blah, blah.

If I were CEO of Gibson:
1. Fix that damn headstock design where the slightest hit causes it to break.
2: Get rid of those sh*t tuners.
3. Plek every guitar.
4. QC, QC, QC!!!
5. Sell off all assets not directly related to MI industry.
6. Expand into amplification products, pedals, etc.
7. Invest heavily into automation. US labor is expensive, robots work cheap.

I would also probably consider opening a plant in Asia or Mexico and making a line of guitars there. US labor is too expensive to compete in the low and mid price tiers.
You hit all of those out of the ballpark Cliff, you should be the new CEO.
 
I've worn Levis almost my entire life. The new ones just don't fit right.
So it's not just me! The last pair I bought are the least comfortable of any jeans I've owned.

Every year or two, I head down to the local thrift store and spend half an hour trying on jeans.I walk out with a couple of pairs at somewhere between $7 and $15 each, and I'm good to go.
 
Back
Top Bottom