Gibson Pricing?

[rlord1974]

Nice. Looks a little too orange to be a lemonburst.

 

[jlb32]

I just picked up this 2005 R0 (G0) from a girl in SC... I can't wait to get this in my hands!

Is this called a Lemonburst?

Congrats, looks killer. That looks like a Iced Tea Burst IMO. You can always call Gibson with the serial number to find out for sure.

 

[TrueTone500]

I had a nice 2010 Bourbon R0, but like the dumb-ass that I am, I sold it! I paid $2900.00 for it, and worth every penny AFAIC. 2010 must have been a damn-fine year for Gibson, because that guitar was hands-down the best built LP I have ever owned. Perfect in every way possible (except for the stock pickups), with a total weight of 9.0 lbs - no weight relief or chambering. I also had a 2008 vintage white LPC '68 reissue that weighed only 8 lbs! True to form, I sold it also...

 

[C1-ocaster]

Binding and cosmetic doo-dads don't greatly effect the true overall tone.
As for parts costs, Gibson sill uses those old school tuners that have crappy ratio making tuning harder and let's the tune go out much more often. But hey, it's "classic". Well classic doesn't always mean better and certainly shouldn't cost more for it.
Most of LP's cosmetics simply pushes the price up cause it looks cool.

For a real world comparison as to how much it costs a customer to buy a "fancier" looking guitar, just look at Carparelli guitars.
They are Canadian and many and many models are hand made. The Canadian dollar will buy you $.96 US. So, dollar for dollar is quite close.
You can get a beautiful looking and sounding LP type guitar for a bit less than $1300 plus a modest shipping cost.
That will give you a real idea of what you can buy for that money that doesn't have the "Gibson' name on it.

They also make a higher end LP type guitar that's made to be as close to a 50's LP as you can get without the Gibson logo.
It will cost you about $2421 US + about $60 in shipping. But that's a very special model rivaling a $4000 Gibson LP.

Those include all the fancy tops, colors, binding, excellent electronics, tuners, etc... for a lot more reasonable price.
So, I don't buy the argument that LP's cost more cause they have all those cosmetics.
Comparing Strats to LP's is quite a reasonable comparison, far from being apples to oranges. That argument only works for LP lovers needing a reason to be extra special.
Fender makes fancy styled Strats and yet they still don't cost as much as LP's. Set neck vs bolt on is hardly that much of a cost consideration. If the Strats tone or playibility were that bad in comparison, then maybe, but they simply don't.
Real American made Strats sound fantastic with awesome tone in various pickup positions. Real American made LP's also sound fantastic.
They are two different flavors of apple, which is why I use to have both. I'd love to have a Gibson humbucker guitar again, but the pricing is out of control.

Whether or not a new LP is "over priced" depends on what you want and are willing to pay and that's it.
Trying to justify how Gibson prices new LP's is pointless, cause Gibson charges what their brand image can get, which adds at least 50% and more to their prices. It ain't all binding and cosmetics or set necks.

 

[jlb32]

Binding and cosmetic doo-dads don't greatly effect the true overall tone.
As for parts costs, Gibson sill uses those old school tuners that have crappy ratio making tuning harder and let's the tune go out much more often. But hey, it's "classic". Well classic doesn't always mean better and certainly shouldn't cost more for it.
Most of LP's cosmetics simply pushes the price up cause it looks cool.

For a real world comparison as to how much it costs a customer to buy a "fancier" looking guitar, just look at Carparelli guitars.
They are Canadian and many and many models are hand made. The Canadian dollar will buy you $.96 US. So, dollar for dollar is quite close.
You can get a beautiful looking and sounding LP type guitar for a bit less than $1300 plus a modest shipping cost.
That will give you a real idea of what you can buy for that money that doesn't have the "Gibson' name on it.

They also make a higher end LP type guitar that's made to be as close to a 50's LP as you can get without the Gibson logo.
It will cost you about $2421 US + about $60 in shipping. But that's a very special model rivaling a $4000 Gibson LP.

Those include all the fancy tops, colors, binding, excellent electronics, tuners, etc... for a lot more reasonable price.
So, I don't buy the argument that LP's cost more cause they have all those cosmetics.
Comparing Strats to LP's is quite a reasonable comparison, far from being apples to oranges. That argument only works for LP lovers needing a reason to be extra special.
Fender makes fancy styled Strats and yet they still don't cost as much as LP's. Set neck vs bolt on is hardly that much of a cost consideration. If the Strats tone or playibility were that bad in comparison, then maybe, but they simply don't.
Real American made Strats sound fantastic with awesome tone in various pickup positions. Real American made LP's also sound fantastic.
They are two different flavors of apple, which is why I use to have both. I'd love to have a Gibson humbucker guitar again, but the pricing is out of control.

Whether or not a new LP is "over priced" depends on what you want and are willing to pay and that's it.
Trying to justify how Gibson prices new LP's is pointless, cause Gibson charges what their brand image can get, which adds at least 50% and more to their prices. It ain't all binding and cosmetics or set necks.

Wonder how many guitars a place like Carparelli makes a year. IMO you can't compare a company like that to a big company that has huge overhead, employee benefits, huge insurance costs etc..., etc..

As far as Fender Strats go IMO there is a lot more involved in making a Les Paul style guitar over a basic Strat or Tele. People buy parts off the internet daily and build their own Strats/Teles for next to nothing. How many do that with a Les Paul?

I will agree that all guitar companies charge what they know they can charge. They are businesses so they would be stupid not to. If Fender could sell and charge as much for a USA Strat or Tele as Gibson does for a USA Les Paul you know they would in a heartbeat.

You have builders like the Carparelli you mentioned that build and price cheaper. They do that because that's the only way they will get business. If they could charge $5000 or more per guitar and sell them they would.

You have builders like Ken Lawrence that charge $7000 or more for a Explorer and has a 3 year or more waiting list. He charges what he charges because he can. If they were a harder sale he would be selling those explorers for $2K-$3K or cheaper instead of the $7K-$8K he does now.

 

[C1-ocaster]

Binding and cosmetic doo-dads don't greatly effect the true overall tone.
As for parts costs, Gibson sill uses those old school tuners that have crappy ratio making tuning harder and let's the tune go out much more often. But hey, it's "classic". Well classic doesn't always mean better and certainly shouldn't cost more for it.
Most of LP's cosmetics simply pushes the price up cause it looks cool.

For a real world comparison as to how much it costs a customer to buy a "fancier" looking guitar, just look at Carparelli guitars.
They are Canadian and many and many models are hand made. The Canadian dollar will buy you $.96 US. So, dollar for dollar is quite close.
You can get a beautiful looking and sounding LP type guitar for a bit less than $1300 plus a modest shipping cost.
That will give you a real idea of what you can buy for that money that doesn't have the "Gibson' name on it.

They also make a higher end LP type guitar that's made to be as close to a 50's LP as you can get without the Gibson logo.
It will cost you about $2421 US + about $60 in shipping. But that's a very special model rivaling a $4000 Gibson LP.

Those include all the fancy tops, colors, binding, excellent electronics, tuners, etc... for a lot more reasonable price.
So, I don't buy the argument that LP's cost more cause they have all those cosmetics.
Comparing Strats to LP's is quite a reasonable comparison, far from being apples to oranges. That argument only works for LP lovers needing a reason to be extra special.
Fender makes fancy styled Strats and yet they still don't cost as much as LP's. Set neck vs bolt on is hardly that much of a cost consideration. If the Strats tone or playibility were that bad in comparison, then maybe, but they simply don't.
Real American made Strats sound fantastic with awesome tone in various pickup positions. Real American made LP's also sound fantastic.
They are two different flavors of apple, which is why I use to have both. I'd love to have a Gibson humbucker guitar again, but the pricing is out of control.

Whether or not a new LP is "over priced" depends on what you want and are willing to pay and that's it.
Trying to justify how Gibson prices new LP's is pointless, cause Gibson charges what their brand image can get, which adds at least 50% and more to their prices. It ain't all binding and cosmetics or set necks.

Wonder how many guitars a place like Carparelli makes a year. IMO you can't compare a company like that to a big company that has huge overhead, employee benefits, huge insurance costs etc..., etc..

As far as Fender Strats go IMO there is a lot more involved in making a Les Paul style guitar over a basic Strat or Tele. People buy parts off the internet daily and build their own Strats/Teles for next to nothing. How many do that with a Les Paul?

I will agree that all guitar companies charge what they know they can charge. They are businesses so they would be stupid not to. If Fender could sell and charge as much for a USA Strat or Tele as Gibson does for a USA Les Paul you know they would in a heartbeat.

You have builders like the Carparelli you mentioned that build and price cheaper. They do that because that's the only way they will get business. If they could charge $5000 or more per guitar and sell them they would.

You have builders like Ken Lawrence that charge $7000 or more for a Explorer and has a 3 year or more waiting list. He charges what he charges because he can. If they were a harder sale he would be selling those explorers for $2K-$3K or cheaper instead of the $7K-$8K he does now.

Absolutely. We are speaking the same thing.

The question though was about Gibson's pricing, in particular is too high, and why.

The pricing is, as we mostly agree, based on what Gibson can get for them, more so than how much effort and tech and time is put into making them.
Yes, their construction and cosmetic niceties do cost more than most Strats.
So an LP will cost more for those obvious reasons.

But I was also responding to the question of showing another company making very similar guitars to Gibson at a lower price point, that wasn't made in low labor cost countries.
Carparelli and Carvin are great examples. They demonstrate that a guitar can be built and sold at half of the cost of an LP Standard.
The reasons for that we can debate as to how much it impacts the actual selling price.
Yet, it's still clear that Gibson charges as much as they do because people will pay for them.

The reality is the real value of something comes down to how much someone will pay for it.
If no one would give $2500 for a Les Paul Standard, then Gibson could want that much all day long, but if no one were willing to pay that much, then it's simply not worth that much.
If people were willing to pay double for an American Strat than what Fender charges, then Fender would be foolish to not bring the price up.
This happened with Gibson. There was a period in the 80's and part way into the 90's when Jackson, Ibanez, and other "hot" brands cost MORE than a Les Paul, and LP's hung on racks with low pricing. That changed in a big way once Les Pauls became "hot" again and those other brands dropped in value big time.

There is practical question for some folks regarding Gibson's pricing. To some it doesn't make sense to pay double what an American made Strat costs. Yes, there is more cosmetic work that goes into making a Les Paul, but is it really TWICE the work and materials as a higher end Strat? Clearly it's not.
But guitars are not really practical purchasing decisions. Guitars are an emotional experience and subject to emotional attachment where pricing and value is more about desire and want than need.
People can try and rationalize it, but it's really about what they value from an emotional point of view, and lots of people LOVE them some Gibson's, and will pay regardless of the practical aspects of the guitars actual material and labor costs.
We're not buying toasters or vacuums after all when talking guitar.

BTW, I've been guitar shopping and have come across a great deal on a new Gibson Les Paul Standard.
The big discount is helping rationalize my emotional desire for wanting a Les Paul.
And, I've been playing a good number of new ones and really digging that sound and tone I have missed ever since I made the very foolish decision to sell my 1982 Gibson Explorer II in cherry burst, mahogany and flame maple top.
I sold it during that late 80's early 90's era when Gibson's weren't worth much.
The idiot, ME, sold that beautiful gorgeous sounding guitar for $350!!!
That's how much I paid for it 1 year used in 1983. Arrrrggh!

I can get a new 2013 desert burst LP Standard for about $2000.
Emotion has taken over and I'm starting to believe that price is excellent!
More Kool Aid please!

 

[Shawn Lutz]

I just picked up this 2005 R0 (G0) from a girl in SC... I can't wait to get this in my hands!

Is this called a Lemonburst?

looks more like honey or light burst to me

 

[RedB4Black]

I just got a new custom for significantly less than $4K. Anyone paying full price is doing it wrong. It does have a few nits about the build quality though, but it sounds awesome. Also, I swapped out the bridge pickup and noticed that the ground wire for the stock pickup and a cap weren't even soldered. Lol

 

[sixstringking713]

I dislike gibson as a guitar manufacturer.

 

[Stealthtastic]

Suhr pros and even full CS builds are quite fairly priced and mop the floor with Gibson. Too bad they don't do a singlecut.

 

[jlb32]

Suhr pros and even full CS builds are quite fairly priced and mop the floor with Gibson. Too bad they don't do a singlecut.

IMO that depends on the individual guitar. I don't think there's a Suhr in the world I would trade my R8 for.

 

[steve_k]

Suhr pros and even full CS builds are quite fairly priced and mop the floor with Gibson. Too bad they don't do a singlecut.

Really?

 

[pstar]

Binding and cosmetic doo-dads don't greatly effect the true overall tone.
As for parts costs, Gibson sill uses those old school tuners that have crappy ratio making tuning harder and let's the tune go out much more often. But hey, it's "classic". Well classic doesn't always mean better and certainly shouldn't cost more for it.
Most of LP's cosmetics simply pushes the price up cause it looks cool.

For a real world comparison as to how much it costs a customer to buy a "fancier" looking guitar, just look at Carparelli guitars.
They are Canadian and many and many models are hand made. The Canadian dollar will buy you $.96 US. So, dollar for dollar is quite close.
You can get a beautiful looking and sounding LP type guitar for a bit less than $1300 plus a modest shipping cost.
That will give you a real idea of what you can buy for that money that doesn't have the "Gibson' name on it.


They also make a higher end LP type guitar that's made to be as close to a 50's LP as you can get without the Gibson logo.
It will cost you about $2421 US + about $60 in shipping. But that's a very special model rivaling a $4000 Gibson LP.

Those include all the fancy tops, colors, binding, excellent electronics, tuners, etc... for a lot more reasonable price.
So, I don't buy the argument that LP's cost more cause they have all those cosmetics.
Comparing Strats to LP's is quite a reasonable comparison, far from being apples to oranges. That argument only works for LP lovers needing a reason to be extra special.
Fender makes fancy styled Strats and yet they still don't cost as much as LP's. Set neck vs bolt on is hardly that much of a cost consideration. If the Strats tone or playibility were that bad in comparison, then maybe, but they simply don't.
Real American made Strats sound fantastic with awesome tone in various pickup positions. Real American made LP's also sound fantastic.
They are two different flavors of apple, which is why I use to have both. I'd love to have a Gibson humbucker guitar again, but the pricing is out of control.

Whether or not a new LP is "over priced" depends on what you want and are willing to pay and that's it.
Trying to justify how Gibson prices new LP's is pointless, cause Gibson charges what their brand image can get, which adds at least 50% and more to their prices. It ain't all binding and cosmetics or set necks.

Carparelli does not build guitars, MADE IN KOREA!,,
Just a re-saler of cheap guitars!

 

[TrueTone500]

Suhr pros and even full CS builds are quite fairly priced and mop the floor with Gibson. Too bad they don't do a singlecut.

This is just...well BS!

 

[TrueTone500]

I just picked up this 2005 R0 (G0) from a girl in SC... I can't wait to get this in my hands!

Is this called a Lemonburst?

looks more like honey or light burst to me

I think Gibson referred to this finish as Teaburst or Lightburst. It's definitely got a nice deep honey look to it, but it's also 8 years old... May have darkened a bit.

 

[rlord1974]

Suhr pros and even full CS builds are quite fairly priced and mop the floor with Gibson. Too bad they don't do a singlecut.

This is just...well BS!

I have to agree and call BS on this. Gibson makes some incredibly high quality guitars.

There have been way too many people jumping on the "Gibson quality is shit" bandwagon recently.

 

[RG955TT]

I will say that my Suhrs are as good if not better than most Fender CS guitars which are now $3000-4000 plus! I do think the pro model Suhrs are a decent deal at about $2200 for a very well made and equipped US guitar.

The issue I think with the Gibsons are they are all over the map in both price and overall quality. A $5000 guitar should not have easy to spot flaws and a fret board that does line up with the neck wood. I have seen this on many of their very expensive guitars. On the other hand I have a 60's tribute w/P90s and a Studio that are made very well especially for what they cost.

My Gibsons are really nice (my ES335 was a little pricey but is still a great guitar) and I like them for what they are but some of the prices do not reflect the quality and attention to detail you should expect. All 5 of my Suhrs for example are flawless from the pros to the customs- no difference.

 

[Stealthtastic]

I said Suhr pro. You can find them for around 2k or less sometimes new. I don't think the Gibson stuff in the same price range compares.

 

[Heritage Softail]

Suhr pros and even full CS builds are quite fairly priced and mop the floor with Gibson. Too bad they don't do a singlecut.

This is just...well BS!

I have to agree and call BS on this. Gibson makes some incredibly high quality guitars.

There have been way too many people jumping on the "Gibson quality is shit" bandwagon recently.

It is the cool thing to say when you don't have anything real to say.

I have played a few lower end guitar center gibbons that have been fried chicken grease finger played... Banged around....

Lots a great players. At the moment I have three LP's, sold more than that. My main thing is to have 9's on them and different pups. Some great old used beaters out there for pretty cheap.

When I want that crunchy goodness, it is the old LP tone and feel I want. The new AAA premium top PLEK plank guitars are great. My pups in and it is money.

I have two Suhrs, and it is a different beast. Love the Suhr take on a Tele too. Variety is good.

I prefer to say one is not better than the other. It is a matter of having a few of each brand you like

It is ridiculous to ask a man to have lonely a few guitars... Balderdash...

 

[Shiny_Surface]

It's all brown and smelly in the end.