Gibson statement on the price fixing investigation
- Thread starter dudu
- Start date
Help Support Tokai Forum:
SkyNet3D
Well-known member
Yeah, because Gibson is known for it's fair prices and faultless quality control. Who would dream of thinking they care more about overpricing their products than providing customers with quality instruments for musicians instead of collectors.... :roll:
That media release is poorly written.
In the end I suspect that Gibson's pricing accurately reflects the cost of producing guitars in a first world country, although that cost would include a whole bunch of other stuff that is maybe not connected to their main products IMO. :-?
In the end I suspect that Gibson's pricing accurately reflects the cost of producing guitars in a first world country, although that cost would include a whole bunch of other stuff that is maybe not connected to their main products IMO. :-?
SkyNet3D
Well-known member
JVsearch said:
So their pricing accurately reflects the mismanagement of their company, and not the actual cost of producing guitars in a first world country.
A
Anonymous
Guest
SkyNet3D said:
So a bit like banks & their charges? Except on a tiny scale, in a way that needn't affect the world at all.
:roll:
Mike
SkyNet3D said:
To be honest, paying bonuses and other big salaries is part of the the cost of building something in a first world country. The mismanagement you're referring to would be the creation of several "abominations" in recent times? And perhaps the large amount of marketing and endorsing that they do (or were doing)?
Like many companies they seem to think they have to create new products to continue - if you don't have something new to sell all the time you're kind of a failure these days? You know, innovate not just follow. I just think the guitar business is different - most of the buyers are very conservative and just want a LP, SG, ES etc and maybe it would have been better to just keep doing that, and do it well.
stratman323 said:
This is a great point - Gibson are a drop in the ocean, so really it doesn't matter what the management do to the company, the effect is negligible. But as Mike points out, when you have stewardship over large chunks of the world's wealth you have an additional duty, beyond market forces, to act properly with those resources.
Of course I'll never sell that to anyone. And I hate to add, that many of those scum have gone back to business as usual, some have even got bigger due to acquisitions made in the recession at bargain prices possibly using bailout money in some cases. We have been robbed, there's no doubt about that. Sadly, I believe that if we hadn't bailed them all out the situation would have been dire.
A
Anonymous
Guest
JVsearch said:
Sadly, I don't think we were robbed. We, via our elected representatives, apparently gave our money away to the banks without obtaining any guarantees regarding our rights as shareholders to dictate policy, control bonuses, encourage lending to keep small businesses afloat, or indeed anything else.
The money wasn't taken - we gave it to them. Only people much more intelligent than me understand why - I'm too stupid to be able to see it as anything other than absurd - the financial equivalent of lemmings leaping off a cliff.
:evil:
