Is Fender trying to put Jackson out of business?

[Inazone]

Since the majority of guitars are truly what I consider "globally sourced" regardless of where they're assembled, I don't see prices going anywhere but up. Spiking oil prices and piracy will increase transportation costs, natural disasters can turn national economies upside-down overnight, and stock markets rise and fall every time a terrorist farts. The day will probably come when ebony and mahogany are completely hands-off, and when current painting techniques are banned due to health or environmental concerns. Some of those might sound a little extreme, but something will always drive prices higher.

As I see it, this is a great time to be buying guitars, even if prices do seem high. There's no excuse not to find the best prices and customer service, there are truly options for every guitarist on every budget, and the workmanship on Chinese, Indian and Indonesian instruments has at the very least become much more consistent. However, every manufacturer simply cannot cater to every prospective customer at every price point. It's just not realistic. There are only so many options that can be dropped before actual corner-cutting kicks in, and labor costs can only get so low before production has to move to a country with lower wages and less-experienced workers.

Personally, I've only paid over $1000 for a new guitar once in my life, and it was a USA Jackson. The shame of it was that I didn't bond with the guitar, but I worked out a trade with someone here on the JCF, and we both got what we wanted. Since then, I've done most of my buying on eBay or at local shops' clearance sales, and then modding to suit my tastes. I keep thinking "this will be the year that I order a custom Jackson," but then I buy a used one and mod it to have the very same look, feel and tone I would otherwise pay five times as much for from the custom shop. It's the one way to guarantee that I'll get exactly what I want.

[Torment Leaves Scars]

I like Sharkfins too, and wasn't saying that ONLY kids like them. But if they want to bring a new generation of fans into the fold, they definitely help attract the kids. I'm not really against dot inlays, I have a PS-2 with them, and a DK-2S with sharkfins and binding, and of course the Sustainer. I'm just saying that the flashier look will help bring back some entry-level kids from LTDs and Ibanezes and the will hopefully aspire to an upscale model just as you are.

Well, at the risk of starting a debate, the Ibanez I just got rid of for my Jackson had "shark fin" inlays, and it was a dirt-cheap guitar. One of the inlays was loose, and actually coming out of the neck. The Ibanez I had was an old EX180 model.

Not sure what's goin' on with new Ibanez products, but I think Ibanez is normally pretty synonymous with "shark fin" inlays on their guitars...

I think the "shark fins" definitely put that finishing touch on the Warriors. Sure, they could get away with dot inlays, but the fins just look so much more aggressive. They just look right on a "Metal" guitar.

I certainly look forward to getting that USA Select Series model in the future!

[Newc]

Actually Ibenhads have "shark teeth" inlays, with the extra little notch.

Rickenbacker had triangle inlays back in the 60s that look a whole lot like Jackson's sharkfins. Just sayin...

Speaking of Ibenhad and the Road to Jackson - I too had an Ibenhad I really liked; An EX350. H-S-H, double-locking trem, binding, 24 frets, great guitar. When I needed customer service, the company was nowhere to be found. I traded that guitar dead even for a KX10D Kelly and it's been Jacksons for the last 12 years for me.


And anyone who judges a guitar company only on their least-expensive offerings has a serious mental deficiency. There is absolutely no excuse to say "wow, this $400 Jackson sucks ass, I bet that $2400 USA-made Jackson sucks too". It's not like Hondo, who've never had a high-end or high-quality line. Jackson started off as a high-end USA Custom Shop ONLY and then moved to affordable lesser-quality imports, not the other way around, so even if some brainless n00b walks into GC and shits on a JS30RR, there's no way he's gonna shit on an RR1.


And while Epiphone may be only making Gibson copies now, many years ago they were a viable brand name who made quality instruments in the USA equal to Gibson. Unfortunately, they sold out to their competitor and have been relegated to the dung heap as punishment. Jackson couldn't do that to Charvel, since there would be no Jackson without Charvel.

[lerxstcat]

Well, at the risk of starting a debate, the Ibanez I just got rid of for my Jackson had "shark fin" inlays, and it was a dirt-cheap guitar. One of the inlays was loose, and actually coming out of the neck. The Ibanez I had was an old EX180 model.

Not sure what's goin' on with new Ibanez products, but I think Ibanez is normally pretty synonymous with "shark fin" inlays on their guitars...

I think the "shark fins" definitely put that finishing touch on the Warriors. Sure, they could get away with dot inlays, but the fins just look so much more aggressive. They just look right on a "Metal" guitar.

I certainly look forward to getting that USA Select Series model in the future!

Those are shark TOOTH inlays - not exactly the same. An EX Series is older than most RGs so an inlay coming loose 20-25 years later is not unheard of - though I do get your point. I wasn't saying Ibanez didn't have them, I was saying the JS Series needed them TOO to compete with the Sharktooth Ibanezes and the sawtooth LTDs because the dot-inlayed JS30s were a little plain in comparison, from the perspective of bling-loving metal kids especially. So they came up with the JS32s and jacked the price $50, then added models with licensed Floyds and jacked those another $50. Which are probably selling better than the JS30s were despite being $100 cheaper. They don't LOOK as much like an entry-level now, which matters to kids. And adults, apparently!

[Torment Leaves Scars]

Those are shark TOOTH inlays - not exactly the same. An EX Series is older than most RGs so an inlay coming loose 20-25 years later is not unheard of - though I do get your point. I wasn't saying Ibanez didn't have them, I was saying the JS Series needed them TOO to compete with the Sharktooth Ibanezes and the sawtooth LTDs because the dot-inlayed JS30s were a little plain in comparison, from the perspective of bling-loving metal kids especially. So they came up with the JS32s and jacked the price $50, then added models with licensed Floyds and jacked those another $50. Which are probably selling better than the JS30s were despite being $100 cheaper. They don't LOOK as much like an entry-level now, which matters to kids. And adults, apparently!

I'm almost certain that guitar had "shark FIN" inlays. If it's still at the shop where I traded it, I can find out this evening, as I'm swinging up that direction. Not sayin' you're wrong, but in all honesty, I can't remember.

FWIW, I did scour the net, and didn't find a single hit for an EX180, as if it never existed, BUT, what I DID find are cheaper Ibanez models WITH "shark fin" inlays.

[markD]

i had a silver EX series ibanez at one point. it DID have shark fin inlays. they weren't notched liked like the shark tooth inlays that were available on the RG, S or 540P guitars from the same time period ('89-'90).

[toejam]

Actually Ibenhads have "shark teeth" inlays, with the extra little notch.

Rickenbacker had triangle inlays back in the 60s that look a whole lot like Jackson's sharkfins. Just sayin...

Jackson used to call their inlays sharktooth. At least that's what was in an ad I remember from years ago.

[Sephiroth]

I actually think Jackson is being smart by updating the JS Series to include sharkfins and licensed Floyds. They have lost much ground in the last 10 years to ESP and Ibanez, which they need to try and regain. Kids like the flashy stuff like sharkfins and that immediately makes the JS more attractive to them. As Torment Leaves Scars said, that 16-year-old will get his folks to spring for a $400 Jackson that IS a Jackson - not an LTD or a Squier - and it's going to make him a loyal Jackson fan.

This is probably the best thing Fender has done for the Jackson brand since buying the company. There are a lot more people out thre who can swing a $400 purchase than can buy a $2500 USA Select or even a higher-priced MIJ import. Why not exploit thaqt market and try to bring young people back into the Jackson-for-life category? The 80s are gone' guys; they aren't coming back. But Jackson can become a bigger part of the market again with the right approach. The real thing was tainted by being passed around like a turnout whore at a biker blast over the years. At least Jackson is now owned by a company that specializes in building guitars once again. We all worried FMIC planned to put Jackson out of business when it bought the company; a;most a dcade has gone by since then and if that was their goal they are taking their sweet time about killing it off.

Sharkfins are a basic and an identifying siguature of a Jackson that Jackson has went to war with other guitar makers to defend, so yeah it's a good thing.

[VitaminG]

Jackson went to war?

I used to have a cheap Onyx brand Super Strat with sharkfins. Neck binding too. Hallmarks of a quality guitar. Made in Korea

[toejam]

Jackson went to war?

Yes. And that's why Fender bought them... to put them out of business! They haven't been able to succeed in the 9 years since they acquired them, though. Mega FAIL!

[lerxstcat]

I'm almost certain that guitar had "shark FIN" inlays. If it's still at the shop where I traded it, I can find out this evening, as I'm swinging up that direction. Not sayin' you're wrong, but in all honesty, I can't remember.

FWIW, I did scour the net, and didn't find a single hit for an EX180, as if it never existed, BUT, what I DID find are cheaper Ibanez models WITH "shark fin" inlays.

You know, you're right; Ibanez did use sharkfins way back then. But in the past 20-odd years they have used the sharkTOOTH inlays that have that little notch cut in them. I don't think you will find any current models that have the sharkfins exactly like Jackson has. That is a trademark of Jackson guitars. You will see all sorts of similar variations, such as the arrowheads on my Yamaha RGX1220S, and the triangular inlays on Rickenbackers, but they are all a little different from the fins.

[lerxstcat]

Jackson went to war?

Yes, and he won too! Ever hear of the Battle of New Orleans?

[Torment Leaves Scars]

Those are shark TOOTH inlays - not exactly the same. An EX Series is older than most RGs so an inlay coming loose 20-25 years later is not unheard of - though I do get your point. I wasn't saying Ibanez didn't have them, I was saying the JS Series needed them TOO to compete with the Sharktooth Ibanezes and the sawtooth LTDs because the dot-inlayed JS30s were a little plain in comparison, from the perspective of bling-loving metal kids especially. So they came up with the JS32s and jacked the price $50, then added models with licensed Floyds and jacked those another $50. Which are probably selling better than the JS30s were despite being $100 cheaper. They don't LOOK as much like an entry-level now, which matters to kids. And adults, apparently!

I know what the "sharkTOOTH" inlays are, but these were not them. These were definitely the "sharkFINs" on my old Ibanez.

No, I can't say an inlay coming loose after 20-25 years is a sign of poor quality, but everything about that guitar (except for the feel...) just sucked; everything from the lack of sustain, inability to stay in tune, obnoxious string buzz and dead frets, cheap tremolo, cheap hardware, cheap electronics, etc. The only things that didn't suck about it were the way it looked and the way it played.

These new JS32 guitars certainly don't look like cheap instruments, which I really like, but, sure, I wish they had some binding, but does binding effect the way it plays? Probably not.

I gotta say, I'm a bit disappointed that I hadn't seen the next model up from the JS, which I believe was the WRXT model. I love some of the colors available on the WRXT, and I believe the body is Alder instead of Cedro, like that of the JS.

While on the subject of the WRXT, what's the difference between the JS32 and WRXT, aside from the appearance of the pickups?

Whatever the case, I can't complain, I dig the way it sounds and it plays, so it's a win for me! If Fender have involved themselves in Jackson's manufacturing processes of lower end models, I have to say, I'm pretty happy with what they've done. I played a MIM Strat today, and IMO, my Warrior plays better, and is just nicer, overall.

[lerxstcat]

You know, you're right; Ibanez did use sharkfins way back then. But in the past 20-odd years they have used the sharkTOOTH inlays that have that little notch cut in them. I don't think you will find any current models that have the sharkfins exactly like Jackson has. That is a trademark of Jackson guitars. You will see all sorts of similar variations, such as the arrowheads on my Yamaha RGX1220S, and the triangular inlays on Rickenbackers, but they are all a little different from the fins.

You must have missed this earlier post....

[eaeolian]

And why is the RR24 a $1300 guitar? It's a nice guitar but personally I don't see it as a $1300 guitar for an import.

The inflation of the high-end imports and even the prices of the USA models is the issue here; not what I can get on the cheapest models they make.

Priced an ESP lately? A Caparison? Both basically the same thing as the Japan-made Jacksons, and similarly priced. While I applaud the idea of keeping guitar quality high - the SLAT-7 I just bought is as good as early '90s Pro - Jackson had to make a choice, and they stuck with Japan and building better guitars. There are $1200-$1400 Korean guitars now, but they're seldom as good as the Japanese ones.