Expanding the Jackson line by force?

[Black Mariah]

Re: Expanding the Jackson line by force?

So you'll complain about how many models Fender has, then want Jackson to do the same? Why do you think they have so many models?

At best with most companies you get color selection. Different pickups = different model, and it's the same way with Jackson. You want a H/S/H Soloist? Well, that makes ONE of you. Find a few dozen more that also want one and it MIGHT make a blip on the radar. The extra cost in grabbing the parts from the bin is in the extra cost for the parts. Gold hardware costs the manufacturers more money too, you know? Import graphics DO NOT SELL. There is NO MARKET for them. The swirls manage to do better than flames (blue-orage an hot rod combined), but they are still tough to get out of the warehouse. If you're going to use shitty plastic for the fingerboards, just ebonize the damn rosewood with a dark stain. It's no lamer than plastic composites.

Jackson is a fucking TINY company compared to Fender. Fender can offer so many more options because they have a couple orders of magnitude more customers than Jackson does. Fender can afford to do a different model for each day of the week because they WILL find their buyers for it, and their overheads are so fucking low on guitar part costs they can afford to make less money on eac guitar.

You can ONLY get an Epiphone with a maple board and black inlays because they WERE on the now-discontinued John Conolly model. AFAIK, they didn't move many of those. I could be mistaken though.

[Number Of The Priest]

Re: Expanding the Jackson line by force?

Wow, Newc basically wants a Carvin-type selection process happen for Jackson. Unlikely to happen, but so many possibilities are available! [img]graemlins/drool2.gif[/img]

[RP]

Re: Expanding the Jackson line by force?

I'm just glad the new Charvel line is coming out, some of the options Newc talked about will be available with those.

No sharks on maple, though, thankfully. But there are maple boards, and the option of single hum, H/S/S, 3 singles and H/H, and at least some paint options available.

Much better than just being able to choose the paint on the one USA bolt-on the company has had recently.

[YetAnotherOne]

Re: Expanding the Jackson line by force?

While I'd love to see it, it's not gonna happen and here's why: Consider what happens with even a relatively modest list of options ...

Body Styles: DK1, KE2, KV2, RR1, SL1, SLS, SLATQH, WR1 (8 choices)
Fretboard: Maple, Ebony, or Rosewood (3 choices)
Headstocks: reverse, standard, SLS & SLS reversed (4 choices)
Hardware: black, gold, chrome (3 choices)
Neck: 24 or 22 (2 choices)
Scale: 24.75" or 25.5" (2 choices)
Pickup Config: X/X/H, H/X/H, S/S/S, S/S/H, S/X/H (5 choices)
Bridge: Floyd, v-trem, strung-through, stop tailpiece (4 choices)
Fin layout: standard or reverse (2 choices)
Fin color: MOP or ebony (2 choices)

That's a relatively modest list but look how many different combinations it gives rise to: 8 x 3 x 4 x 3 x 2 x 2 x 5 x 4 x 2 x 2 = 92,160 possible combinations. From a fan's standpoint that's the whole idea, from a producer's standpoint why have so many possible combinations in your standard lineup that you won't even be likely to make one of each for a decade or more (based on the number of USA Jacksons that go out the door). It's pointless because you lose all cost savings you get from offering a standard lineup in the first place. Add to that the fact that simply choosing models, colors, and quantities is beyond the capability of the average large chain buyer and this really buys you nothing. Indeed it might make Jackson *LESS* desirable to larger chains (who move enough volume to keep the prices down for the rest of us).

I think it would be cool if Jackson returned to their roots and did only semi-custom and true custom work but I don't think most here would be pleased with the price increases that would entail.

[RP]

Re: Expanding the Jackson line by force?

Personally, I'd limit the options to fretboard wood and pickup configuration.

Then you're only looking at 120 possible combinations, though I wouldn't necessarily offer every option on every line. Instead of fretboard choice on a Warrior, for example, maybe I offer a reverse headstock, or something like that. And, just like now, maybe some models get a string-through option while others don't, etc. The point is that every option doesn't have to be made available for every line.

If need be, cut down the number of colors offered to balance out the disturbance caused by the other options.

Things like the color of the hardware is less important since that can be changed out by the dealer or the eventual owner if need be. And things like the number of frets or the scale length (or even the reverse sharks) should remain custom shop issues, to me.

[holycross1]

Re: Expanding the Jackson line by force?

More colors:
Copper Anodize
Silver
Purple
yellow
More than just dark colors.
DKMG's without pickup rings.
Take the discontinued chavel import line and put PC heads on them.
Offer a traditional with one humbucker with a pointy.
bring back the set neck arch tops that schector seems to rip off the 750XL. DUH
Make all the warriors short scale again

Your thoughts?

[Newc]

Re: Expanding the Jackson line by force?

But why leave the scale length and reverse fins Custom Shop options? Gibsons sell, so there's a market for that scale length. Fenders sell, so there's a market for that scale length. Serve both markets, sell twice as many.
They've done reverse fins on production models before.

Jackson didn't sell a lot during the 90s when they had their largest diversity because Metal was their market, and Metal was being killed by Grunge. Now that Jackson is experiencing a climb in sales, they should look into bringing back that diversity.

If they're going to CNC, it's instantly cheaper to provide those and other options.

Newc

[RP]

Re: Expanding the Jackson line by force?

If I was going to do a guitar with a different scale length, I think I'd personally just offer a different guitar, rather than making it an option on all of them.

But I don't know that the option or any other option for that matter) would increase sales enough to justify adding the option. Until today, I'd not heard an outcry for different scale lengths, but I admit I haven't been paying attention since that's not been an issue for me.

I guess I was trying to offer what I thought to be realistic options. I've not noticed scale length being an option offered by other guitar manufacturers on their standard model line-up.

If they open it up to everything under the sun, then yeah, add scale length in there, and reverse fins and those god-awful fins on maple and whatever else they can come up with.

As for serving both markets and selling twice as many guitars, Jackson/Charvel is always going to have a specific image. Simply offering a different option would not necessarily pull in those who otherwise would've bought a Strat or a Les Paul. Just like Fender making the Heavy Metal strat in the '80s didn't get me to give up on Jackson/Charvel.

Jackson/Charvel has to know their customer and market to their customer's needs. Battling for market share in areas outside their expertise could lead to increased sales overall, but it could also end up in failure if the new market you're going after doesn't take to the new guitars because they aren't Jackson/Charvel people even if the guitars have all the specs they'd normally want and the old market abandons you because your offering a product line and image that's different than what the company has been about since its inception.

[ February 01, 2004, 11:58 PM: Message edited by: RP ]

[RP]

Re: Expanding the Jackson line by force?

Heck, if we're going all out on the options, then Jackson should offer all their USA guitars in both bolt-on and neck-thru forms. There are a lot of people, even in Jackson's current market, who simply prefer bolt-on guitars, yet Jackson only offers one USA bolt-on model, at present.

[holycross1]

Re: Expanding the Jackson line by force?

ESP has their Eclipse models and SG ripoffs with short scale only
The warrior was originally a short scale.
The Charvel fusion pre dated the Jackson Dinky with 24 fret boards and a 24 3/4 scale.
The elite 750XL and the Jackson archtop were short scale. These are the facts.
I don't hink a scale option is a good idea for the import line either, but a couple of short scale only models with floyd and string thru versions would do wonders.

[img]graemlins/headbang.gif[/img]

[Newc]

Re: Expanding the Jackson line by force?

Neither have I, and to my knowledge, Jackson was the only company to offer different scale lengths on similar models (i.e. Fusion and Dinky). However, since Jackson are locked into a market that is also served by both Fender and Gibson, it makes perfect sense to cater to the players of both brands.
Jackson has to stand apart from the crowd, but standing do far outside the crowd that you're being passed by is not a good thing. Offering the options and features on production models that are offered by 5 different competing companies is a good way to stand out - it gives Jackson the image of "one-stop shopping" - you get both scale lengths, you get all the pickup configs, all the traditional and radical body styles, all the hardware options, and all the fancy inlay options in one company.
Right now, if you want a production model import guitar with a maple board and non-dot inlays, you only have the John Connely Epiphone.
Right now, if you want hum-single production model with graphics, you have to get an LTD Lynch Kamikaze.
Right now, if you want a production model tribal tattoo graphic with a stringthrough/TOM bridge, you get either the Schecter or the BC Rich, but if you want it to be a Strat or Explorer shape, you're screwed, because you can only get a Schecter LP Jr style or a BC Rich KKV.

It is my opinion that a large part of why Jacksons are not selling like they could/should is because of a lack of comparative diversity in their production lines compared to the other makers, though it is also due to the publicity received by the countless "sig of the month" models of the other makers.

Too many common options are left as Custom Shop Only items for Jackson. If the largest market of new guitar buyers is young adults with crap jobs, they probably aren't going to be interested in settling for an import with a hardware color they don't like with plans to change it for the color they want later at added cost, and they may not be dealing with a dealer who is willing to swap the hardware for free.

Newc

[RP]

Re: Expanding the Jackson line by force?

Originally posted by holycross1:
ESP has their Eclipse models and SG ripoffs with short scale only
The warrior was originally a short scale.
The Charvel fusion pre dated the Jackson Dinky with 24 fret boards and a 24 3/4 scale.
The elite 750XL and the Jackson archtop were short scale. These are the facts.
I don't hink a scale option is a good idea for the import line either, but a couple of short scale only models with floyd and string thru versions would do wonders.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">So, like I said, a different guitar, rather than an option on all of them.

[holycross1]

Re: Expanding the Jackson line by force?

[img]graemlins/band.gif[/img] posted February 02, 2004 12:07 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ESP has their Eclipse models and SG ripoffs with short scale only
The warrior was originally a short scale.
The Charvel fusion pre dated the Jackson Dinky with 24 fret boards and a 24 3/4 scale.
The elite 750XL and the Jackson archtop were short scale. These are the facts.
I don't hink a scale option is a good idea for the import line either, but a couple of short scale only models with floyd and string thru versions would do wonders.

[RP]

Re: Expanding the Jackson line by force?

Originally posted by Newc:
If the largest market of new guitar buyers is young adults with crap jobs, they probably aren't going to be interested in settling for an import with a hardware color they don't like with plans to change it for the color they want later at added cost, and they may not be dealing with a dealer who is willing to swap the hardware for free.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I would suspect that Jackson wouldn't necessarily offer the options for free, either. Certainly some of the options on the new Charvel line are more expensive than the base Standard cost, including pick-up layout and colors beyond the original four.

[holycross1]

Re: Expanding the Jackson line by force?

Thank you RP.
I was trying to help drive the point home.