Gibson got raided by the Feds again, and in light of that, I'd like to ask a question

[MoreGuitars]

Gibson will never fold. Just won't happen folks. That's foolish talk. I think they're stupid for not having more swag to promote their product line. For those of us with a ton of Gibson guitars and amps - we'd like the world to know we love em. That alone should make em throw out the fool running the place.

I agree. They have made a lot of nice guitars. Even some of the recent ones bagged on by this forum. Don't know if a lot of the hate for Gibson is just class war fare. I don't know why it should bother anybody, there are plenty of guitars to buy if you don't like them. If you think they are over priced pieces of poop, there is plenty of other options out there. I own a lot of Gibson Guitars and a lot of guitars that are not Gibson. I like guitars.

[SnorkelMonkey]

They might go down but Fender would buy them out and start making great guitars over in Japan like they're doing with the Gretsch line

[royal crxsh johnson]

i would much rather buy a gordon smith or a heritage, mainly because i'm a lefty.

 

personally, i think it would be terrible if gibson closed down. i just hope they get hurt enough to wake up and get their {censored} together. they've always been off and on, but there's nothing like picking up a mid-teens gibson mandolin or a late 40's l5ces. but, that being said, the guitar industry would survive, although obviously vintage gibson prices would skyrocket.

[Agitator]

Wasn't there some other hideous Gibson guitar recently? Not the Firebird X, but something with an "X-shaped" headstock? Did I imagine that?

[NetStar]

Ooh, I hope they don't go down: I'm still saving for my Jonas Brothers' Signature Melody Maker!

[booher]

that would suck because the already out of reach 1950s ES175 of my dreams will raise in value exponentially.

[ispunk]

Ooh, I hope they don't go down: I'm still saving for my Jonas Brothers' Signature Melody Maker !

Sad thing is that's not a half bad guitar if you remove their sigs and JB graphic. I like the dual P90s in there better than the regular MM with the singular single coil.

[Dolf]

Sad thing is that's not a half bad guitar if you remove their sigs and JB graphic. I like the dual P90s in there better than the regular MM with the singular single coil.

 

that guitar is cool as {censored}, unfortunately

[V]

They won't go down, but good riddance if they do. They deserve to fail because of their "We're Gibson. Put out whaever and charge $4-10k for it." policy.

[Fender&EHX4ever]

Sad thing is that's not a half bad guitar if you remove their sigs and JB graphic. I like the dual P90s in there better than the regular MM with the singular single coil.

[Kap'n]

 

No, but a change in company leadership and philosophy might be a good thing.

 

 

This. Henry J has been responsible for a lot of ill in that company.

 

Arguably as much as Norlin.

 

They spend way too much time trying to extract the last cent from their rapidly aging fanbase, while trying to "wow" a potential younger fanbase with toys disguised as innovation.

 

If they spent more of their efforts trying to make high-end instruments at a premium, but fair price they would do a lot better.

 

Of the nine instruments I own, one is a Gibson, and I'm kind of ashamed I bought it new. I have no desire to feed the pockets of the current management.

 

OTOH, the instrument I did buy was old stock of a dealer that Henry J. cut off for not meeting quota.

[Phil O'Keefe]

Gibson's response, complete with 30 minute press conference.

 

And the official press release.

 

 

The press conference was actually pretty good. I think Henry handled himself pretty well. And he brings up some good points regarding the Lacey Act, and how provisions of that law make YOU criminally liable for owning a guitar that had a non-compliant piece of wood in it. The dealer who sold it to you, the builder AND the importer would all be criminally liable too, even if the dealer and customer bought it in good faith, expecting that the products were legal and in compliance. IOW, even if you don't know, if there's no criminal intent, you're still guilty.

 

Specifically, check out what he says about that at around 13:20-13:40 and at 18:35-19:55. The video can be found on the page you land on when you click that first link (above).

 

I was talking to Craig Anderton about the Lacey Act this morning, and suggested that soon, people will have to travel with papers for their guitars - and they already do. If you're traveling / touring internationally with a guitar, I'd be at least a little nervous. Maybe some customs inspector sees your guitar, notices the rosewood fingerboard and decides they don't like the look of it. Looks like Brazilian rosewood to them. Doesn't matter that it can be very tricky to tell them apart in some cases, or that yours is actually Indian rosewood (remember, the current raid was over Indian Rosewood and ebony). Or maybe you do have an authentic 1963 Strat, and at the time it was built, the guitar was in compliance, but it contains materials that are currently illegal to import. Or maybe your modern "relic" looks old enough to make the inspector suspect it contains now-banned materials, or maybe even that it is a custom-made, foreign-built illegal "clone" that was made using illegal materials.

 

Yeah, you might want to comply with those Lacey Act revisions folks. Or at least be aware of them and look into how they might affect you directly. It's definitely something I want to try to learn more about. Problem is, it's not spelled out very clearly. Here's a link to the USDA's page with lots of PDF files you can download and read:

 

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/plant_health/lacey_act/index.shtml

 

Remember, if they say Gibson was out of compliance over the last two years and win that in court, all of you out there with one or two year old Gibbys are in deep kimchee too. Who knows? I'm no attorney (and am offering no legal advice), but I suspect they could probably tack on another felony charge for every such non-compliant guitar you bought or sold, even if you had no suspicions regarding the guitar's legality whatsoever.

 

Scary stuff.

 

And all because the legally harvested wood wasn't completely "finished" in India? Henry's right -- if that's what this is about, then it's really not about "conservation" or environmentalism.

 

Look, I know it's Henry's job to put as good a face on it as he can, and I'm not trying to say he's pure as the driven snow here -- I have no way of knowing. But I certainly see his side of it a lot better now than I did yesterday. I'm all for the protection of endangered species, and even tough criminal laws against smuggling illegal woods, but saying the dealers and the customers who had no idea there was an issue are actual criminals? "Oh, well... it was in the news that we raided Gibson, so you should have 'reasonably known' the wood was tainted, and so you broke the law by buying / selling that guitar. Oh BTW, we'll be taking the guitar..."

 

Seriously... we're going to have to go to a mini passport for the guitar, with all the documentation - export license and any locally required certificates of compliance, CITES import permits, customs stamps, builder's stamps, purchase receipts / transfer of ownership docs...

[acdc518]

i doubt they would take the time to seek out everyone who may have boughten a gibson with illegal wood and prosecute them. I think that is just gibson trying to get people to think the law is stupid and be on their side.

[companyman]

 

consequences will never be the same!

[placebo62]

 

i doubt they would take the time to seek out everyone who may have boughten a gibson with illegal wood and prosecute them. I think that is just gibson trying to get people to think the law is stupid and be on their side.

 

 

boughten

[thenoob]

my buddy works for gibson and was in the factory when it got raided. (puts together & does set ups)

he said it was comical watching the feds trying to find what they wanted. also said they didn't take any ebony, only maple necks.

[acdc518]

 

boughten

 

 

boughten |?b

[Phil O'Keefe]

i doubt they would take the time to seek out everyone who may have boughten a gibson with illegal wood and prosecute them. I think that is just gibson trying to get people to think the law is stupid and be on their side.

 

But that's just it -- the way the law is right now, it is kind of stupid, and impossible to comply with.

 

And they don't have to seek you out. If they inspect your stuff at an airport, and your serial number falls within a certain range of "known non-compliant guitars" -- Bam! At the minimum, they seize your guitar, and you never see it again.

 

Here -- check out this article: http://www.fretboardjournal.com/features/magazine/guitar-lover%E2%80%99s-guide-cites-conservation-treaty

[Phil O'Keefe]

my buddy works for gibson and was in the factory when it got raided. (puts together & does set ups) he said it was comical watching the feds trying to find what they wanted. also said they didn't take any ebony, only maple necks.

 

That's weird. Why would they take maple under the Lacey Act? Most of the maple that is used in USA built guitars is grown here in the US.

[crohny]

as much as i hate what gibson is, their guitars are the only guitars ive found that suit me well. if they went under itd be a bummer. their current stuff isnt of the uality of the older stuff i have had the honor of playing but they arent bad instruments by any stretch. i think the company could use a revamp and have all the bull{censored} taken out of it. no more stupid gimmicks. get down to what made the company great and work off that. not try and reinvent the wheel.

[V]

Maybe they managed to buy terrorist maple or something. Or they bleached illegal ebony until it looked like maple.

[Phil O'Keefe]

Maybe they managed to buy terrorist maple or something. Or they bleached illegal ebony until it looked like maple.

 

[FlogRock]

But that's just it -- the way the law is right now, it is kind of stupid, and impossible to comply with. And they don't have to seek you out. If they inspect your stuff at an airport, and your serial number falls within a certain range of "known non-compliant guitars" -- Bam! At the minimum, they seize your guitar, and you never see it again. Here -- check out this article: http://www.fretboardjournal.com/features/magazine/guitar-lover%E2%80%99s-guide-cites-conservation-treaty

Woah I just read that entire article. :eek:

Summary / conclusion / TL;DR:
Don't take / ship any guitar across a border unless you are both a lawyer and a luthier, and are willing to take the time to get all kinds of permits, research the origins of all woods in the guitar, and get certificates of authenticity.

Even if your guitar was made in the 80s using (at the time) legal rosewood, with mother of pearl inlays instead of white abalone, the burden of proof is on you...

Maybe, when touring internationally, you should just rent guitars locally just as most acts already rent their backline... (I know, this sucks.)

This makes me sympathise with Gibson (and other manufacturers) a lot more... And it explains their prices a little better, since they have to do the paperwork and jump through all the hoops (importing only at selected airports, etc).

[THAT4301]

So why have fender not had similar issues?

[Help!I'maRock!]

WRT Gibson Management, no, it would not bother me at all if Gibson went under. I do feel they're being unfairly targeted though and I'm considering calling PRS to get documentation on my Custom 24. Just in case.