Reissues...Should they stop production?

[Kinetic]

Casual laws of supply and demand. Right now these guitars are going for ridiculously low prices in a lot of circumstances.

What's your thoughts on this?

Low prices??? What low prices? I haven't seen anything low. Please point me out to low. R9's are still ripped off at 5-6k

 

[The_Sentry]

Low prices??? What low prices? I haven't seen anything low. Please point me out to low. R9's are still ripped off at 5-6k

Fleabay is filled with 'em. These are just the first models I saw priced between 3-4 grand...

2005' GIBSON LES PAUL R9 59 1959 VOS TIGER TOP MINT ! on eBay!

2010 GIBSON LES PAUL CUSTOM CLASSIC WHITE VOS - NEW! - eBay (item 230544849055 end time Nov-06-10 15:34:58 PDT)

2003 Gibson Goldtop Les Paul Brazilian Board 57 R7 - eBay (item 270658932394 end time Nov-06-10 20:38:56 PDT)

2005 GIBSON 1959 HISTORIC LES PAUL DARKBURST - eBay (item 120641379737 end time Nov-07-10 11:06:07 PST)

1999 Gibson Les Paul 59 1959 RI 40th Anniversary Flame - eBay (item 180578208179 end time Nov-22-10 10:39:02 PST)

1989 PREHISTORIC GIBSON LES PAUL FLAMETOP REISSUE - eBay (item 120641583770 end time Nov-07-10 18:57:24 PST)

Gibson Custom Les Paul Reissue 59 VOS - eBay (item 230545813506 end time Nov-08-10 17:54:55 PST)

2010 GIBSON CUSTOM SHOP LES PAUL SN#(8 0-) VOS R8 MINT - eBay (item 300463834699 end time Dec-03-10 09:49:04 PST)

 

[rockstar232007]

Yes, instead of making "Reissues", they should just make ALL Gibson Les Pauls the way they do in the CS (quality/details). Maybe not exactly the way they used to, but at least to the same specs (flatter top-carves, thicker binding, etc).

The only reason Gibson is split into two divisions (Gibson USA and the Custom Shop) is so they can justify building very expensive guitars, while still being able to produce moderately-priced guitars that are more within the budget of the average consumer.

In other words; Gibson USA is the "Epiphone" of US made Gibsons. Don't believe me? Compare any USA Gibson to an Epi (as I have), and 99% of the details and/or build quality are almost exactly the same...even down to the sheilding paint in the cavities. I'm not talking about MIC vs. USA or "good" vs. "bad" quality, I'm talking about comparible build specs between two very different (except in design) types of construction.

So, IMHO, they should just get rid of the RI line and start producing them all with the same quality/detail as the CS, and get the CS back to what it used to do best - building actual custom orders.

 

[Es Paul]

The Historic Reissues are a big deal to Gibson. They NEED this line. It's their flagship.

It's like taking away the S class from Mercedes or the 7 series from BMW. They don't make all of their money from these cars but they sure make the C or E class or the 3 or 5 series look like a great deal.

Gibson uses these models to show what they can do with their Custom Shop.

And these are the guitars that made Gibson who they are.

 

[rockstar232007]

The Historic Reissues are a big deal to Gibson. They NEED this line. It's their flagship.

It's like taking away the S class from Mercedes or the 7 series from BMW. They don't make all of their money from these cars but they sure make the C or E class or the 3 or 5 series look like a great deal.

Gibson uses these models to show what they can do with their Custom Shop.

And these are the guitars that made Gibson who they are.

No! THESE are the guitars that made Gibson who they are:

 

[Es Paul]

No! THESE are the guitars that made Gibson who they are:

You have to get over the fact that nothing is made the way it used to be made.

They're not owned by the same people and Henry definitely aint no Ted McCarty.

And to meet the demand, it's got to stay this way. They make really great guitars for the amount they're pushing out of the custom shop.

 

[rockstar232007]

You have to get over the fact that nothing is made the way it used to be made.

They're not owned by the same people and Henry definitely aint no Ted McCarty.

And to meet the demand, it's got to stay this way. They make really great guitars for the amount they're pushing out of the custom shop.

That wasn't the point.

What I meant was that if it weren't for the original LP...even if their true potential wasn't discovered until after they were discontinued, Gibson wouldn't have the reputation they have today, and the LP wouldn't be the highest selling guitar of all-time.

I know they won't make them they way they used to, but there's absolutely no reason that they can't at least build them to the same spec, and keep the costs relitively low? Henry himself even told me that, and I'm paraphrasing, "it's actually a lot cheaper to build them them that way (flatter tops, period-correct binding, etc), but, and this is a direct quote, "This is strictly a design choice". So, why would they change/tweak the design elements of guitars that were revered not just their exceptional playability, but also their overall beauty?

One thing that he said that kind of got under my skin though was "The Custom division is dedicated to authentic reproductions on many of their models. If that is what you seek, this is where you should go." Well, if I had the spare 3-5K lying around, maybe I would...nah, for that I could actually have an exact replica made for me, and of a much higher quality.

 

[Es Paul]

Ok. I see your point and it's valid.

But as a company, the first thing is to make money. Second, is creating a quality product without compromising cost.

Everyone knows they can do it. But then it would become stagnant. It would be hard to sell as many as they do now, every year. They're getting "closer" and that what pushes people to buy them every time they've updated them

They put all of their marketing into these. Maybe one day. But it will probably cost 10 grand for an R9

 

[rykus]

i haven't seen too many CS pauls for less than new prices! if you want a specific look or weight or year ect ect be prepared to pay, because theres ten other people looking for the same thing! i never really liked tabaco bursts or plain tops yet all the time people post em up and get a bunch of others that really like it/ or own or plan on owning. and the replicas are great for players and some are collectible but allot of poeple with$ still want a nice historic or the limited, signed, aged,flown to space, buried with elvis.,or whatever else they'll say next to sell the new model....and they will sell.

 

[dwagar]

Is the 6 thousand dollar Gibson Custom Shop R9 better than something that was handmade for less by a luthier like Roman Rist?

"better"?

If you're looking for a period correct guitar, I suspect someone like Roman could do a better job, and could use period correct woods, hide glue, etc. I don't think it would be a lot cheaper, and it wouldn't say "Gibson" on the headstock.

When I say 'someone like Roman', I referring to, at a guess, the dozen or so guys that have that level of experience, not the other 500 or so that say they can build you a cheaper replica.

Where they aren't better IMO, is resale. There is a huge market of guys looking for a Gibson, there aren't many looking for a Rist (no offense to Roman).

If your concern is the percentage return when you sell used, I'd say you're better to stick with Gibson.

Resale values may have tanked a bit, as have all in a recession, but I don't think they've dropped all that much. A used R9 before the crash was about $4K-4.5, I think they are still in that range. There will always be some higher, some lower. Lower prices may mean issues, scratches, rash, a top no one likes, etc.

As you say, supply and demand, but there's also the overall market, and seller motivation. If you really need the cash, you drop your price until it moves. I wouldn't want to be trying that with an unknown name on the headstock.

IMO, one of the best options is simply buy a used R9. Let someone else take the depreciation hit. Same as buying a used car, whatever.

If you want more 'correct', buy a used R9 and ship it to Historic Makeovers, Dave Johnson, Gord Miller, etc. You're probably still coming out to around the price of a new one, maybe a bit less.

'Best' IMO is what Mapleflame, and some others on here, do. I have absolutely no idea of what he invests in his guitars, but take an issues early Goldy and do a save or conversion on it. Then you DO have the real deal. Without period correct hardware (which you wouldn't have on an R9 or replica anyway) I suspect you can come in under $10K, in some cases I suspect well under $10K. However, while that would be the 'best' guitar, again you have a smaller market for resale, if that's your main concern.

 

[rumbling_groover]

It is a question of limited production.

When the custom shop only produced 500 R9s each year they had some inherent value. Just look at the '90s guitars they had select woods etc...

Now they just have more accurate specifications. The limited production aspect has moved into signature models.

 

[uburoibob]

Gibson's reputation was established WAY before the LP or Ted McCarty came along. Lloyd Loar was their original superstar in the 20s. And, aside from D'Angelico and Stromberg, they were the preeminent maker of archtop guitars - the L5 and Super 400.

It's the other way around - it's Gibson's reputation that is RESPONSIBLE for the LP coming along. The original bursts - they aren't ALL great guitars. There are very few of them that are great guitars. How many have you played? Overall, the Historics are being made better than the original bursts were. But it isn't how well made they are that establishes their value... there's a LOT of romanticization of the Gibson factory of the 40s, 50s and early 60s going on in these threads...

Bob

 

[Es Paul]

Gibson's reputation was established WAY before the LP or Ted McCarty came along. Lloyd Loar was their original superstar in the 20s. And, aside from D'Angelico and Stromberg, they were the preeminent maker of archtop guitars - the L5 and Super 400.

It's the other way around - it's Gibson's reputation that is RESPONSIBLE for the LP coming along. The original bursts - they aren't ALL great guitars. There are very few of them that are great guitars. How many have you played? Overall, the Historics are being made better than the original bursts were. But it isn't how well made they are that establishes their value... there's a LOT of romanticization of the Gibson factory of the 40s, 50s and early 60s going on in these threads...

Bob

+ 1 million.

 

[dwagar]

Gibson's reputation was established WAY before the LP or Ted McCarty came along. Lloyd Loar was their original superstar in the 20s. And, aside from D'Angelico and Stromberg, they were the preeminent maker of archtop guitars - the L5 and Super 400.

It's the other way around - it's Gibson's reputation that is RESPONSIBLE for the LP coming along. The original bursts - they aren't ALL great guitars. There are very few of them that are great guitars. How many have you played? Overall, the Historics are being made better than the original bursts were. But it isn't how well made they are that establishes their value... there's a LOT of romanticization of the Gibson factory of the 40s, 50s and early 60s going on in these threads...

Bob

GREAT post.

 

[pippy]

Considering the production figures the new reissues have been reaching I can't see how anyone could remotely consider buying one as an investment.

The good ones are (probably) amongst the finest Les Pauls the company has ever made. They should be bought for their inherent qualities.

Buying one as an investment? Nah.

They should keep making them as well as they can.

P.

 

[rockstar232007]

Considering the production figures the new reissues have been reaching I can't see how anyone could remotely consider buying one as an investment.

The good ones are (probably) amongst the finest Les Pauls the company has ever made. They should be bought for their inherent qualities.

Buying one as an investment? Nah.

They should keep making them as well as they can.

P.

I agree, but one thing that many people don't realize though, is there is no point in buying any current Gibson guitars for investment purposes.

Reasons why:

1.) There are have been, and continue to be too many of them produced in order for them to ever be considered "rare" (which is one of the main reasons vintage LPs are so desirable).

2.) They are made with totally different (cheaper) components than those of their vintage counterparts.

So, no matter how you look at it, even the best carbon-copy Reissue will never live up to a vintage Paul. Sad to say, but it's true.

Gibson's reputation was established WAY before the LP or Ted McCarty came along. Lloyd Loar was their original superstar in the 20s. And, aside from D'Angelico and Stromberg, they were the preeminent maker of archtop guitars - the L5 and Super 400.

It's the other way around - it's Gibson's reputation that is RESPONSIBLE for the LP coming along. The original bursts - they aren't ALL great guitars. There are very few of them that are great guitars. How many have you played? Overall, the Historics are being made better than the original bursts were. But it isn't how well made they are that establishes their value... there's a LOT of romanticization of the Gibson factory of the 40s, 50s and early 60s going on in these threads...

Bob

I agree Bob, but my main point in posting that pic wasn't to imply that the LP itself is what made Gibson what it is today. I was talking about what actually went into building the guitars back then compared to today that makes them inherently different...not necessarily "better", but "different".

 

[Mikey L]

to me, Historics are the only ones I'd consider buying, so I say cancel all the rest of the lines, and start keeping it real selling Historic spec guitars, just like in the 50s.

my 2p

Totally with you on this. I'd love to see a "standard" "custom" dynamic again.

 

[b3john]

The posts on this thread raise an interesting point - but the opposite of the main question. What if Gibson shut down everything APART FROM the Custom Shop? The R8 and R9s become the only Les Paul Standard model available?

Congratulations, you've single handedly killed off the Black Beauty Customs, the '57 Goldtops, all the P-90 model LPs, the double-neck EDS-1275, the SGs (!!!), the Jr's, the entire line of semi-hollow body guitars and the archtops, and also all the acoustics out of Boseman.

Really? That's your business plan?!? Just because you're bitter about the X?

Yeah, sorry but you don't get my vote for CEO...

 

[NoStatic]

Keep it up. Maybe one day you guys will actually talk Gibson into the ground.

 

[Jakeislove]

Gibson should definitely continue making reissue/historic guitars: historics are being done consistently well, used market is competitive with their other offerings, no swiss cheese weight relief, no PCB crap, new ones are typically babied to death by their owners until they get GAS and have to take the hit.