Eventual Jackson buyout?

[PowerTube]

Okay, the ownership of Charvel/Jackson went from Grover Jackson to Aiwa (??) to now Fender. Deep down, some of us are cringing at the thought that Fender might do to Jackson what Gibson did to Kramer. That is, buy the name, but put out a low-quality imported product which they hope will sell by inertia. It's only fair to give Fender a chance and not to jump the gun, but time will tell.

Now, let's compare Jackson to Harley Davidson. In the late 70's, the Harley name was pretty much mud. The once proud marquee had come to mean cheap imported bikes with the Harley name. Sales were in the dumpster and the future didn't look very bright. Then along comes Willie G. Davidson and some other employees who bought his grandfather's company back from AMC. Suddenly, the pride and quality were restored. They made some outstanding marketing and business decisions and business was booming beyond all expectations.

Are you seeing the parallels here? Again, I believe in giving FMIC a chance, but I have to wonder if they really understand what the Jackson name means.

So, if there's a buyout, I can currently contribute exactly $1.87 American, plus whatever I can find under my couch. Obviously, I don't mean myself, but I can totally see someone doing this and making Jackson the most prized guitar on the market. Maintain the quality, up the image, and improve the marketing. What do you think?

[Newc]

Re: Eventual Jackson buyout?

Akai - *slap slap* wake up *slap slap* [img]images/icons/tongue.gif[/img]

But yeah it would be nice to see Jackson a self-contained company without a larger corporate banner flying overhead - it would certainly ease the fears and suspicion of the current situation.
However, Grover could have done something to avoid selling to IMC/AMIC, but didn't (or didn't want to?).

If Jackson comes up for sale again within the next 10 years, it'll be a fire sale for a dead body.
Hopefully Jackson was able to retain all their copyrights and trademarks in the buyout - goodness knows Fender loves trademarks, but I know that they know how valuable Jackson's trademarks are.

Newc

[Accept2]

Re: Eventual Jackson buyout?

Harley and Jackson were in 2 different industries, and under 2 different sets of circumstances. Jackson is in a very small market with lots of competitors and low gross margin. Over all, the Jackson trademark is just a tiny speck in American business. Its so small you need the Hubble to see it. Harley on the other hand is in a medium sized market but with high gross margin, and a trademark that is a household name. In addition, what competition it does have, doesnt really compete head on with Harley. There was no magic in Harley's come back. AMF simply tried to meet demand without regard to quality, and customer service. Once AMF was gone (they werent actually gone, as members remained on the board and held vast amounts of shares), Harley spend $80M on production capacity increases. There was no magical spell that anyone cast, and if AMF had done the same, and changed their attitude, Harley would have come around under their ownership as well. If Grover were to retake control of Jackson, he would have the same problems that Fender would have, he isnt a wizard like Gandalf........Owning a guitar company isnt a great investment. Its a ****ty industry, and you dont make alot of money. Thats why I see the future of Jackson being the same as Guild's...........

[Black Mariah]

Re: Eventual Jackson buyout?

Jackson hasn't been on it's own in a long time. The copyrights and trademarks have belonged to each successive owner.

I'm taking a definite "wait and see" attitude. I haven't liked what I've seen so far though. Last I heard there was supposed to be a couple of models at NAMM (Jazz'R bass, the Pat Lachman signature, the Model 1 and 2) that I didn't see anywhere. That doesn't sound too good to me.

[2Loud2Old]

Re: Eventual Jackson buyout?

I don't think its fair to compare Harley to Jackson.

With Harley, you're paying for an image.

With Jackson, you're paying for a guitar!

[img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img] [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img] [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img]

Greetz to all my Hog riding Bro's out there.. I just had to yank a chain or two. [img]graemlins/poke.gif[/img]

[PowerTube]

Re: Eventual Jackson buyout?

Originally posted by 2Loud2Old:
I don't think its fair to compare Harley to Jackson.

With Harley, you're paying for an image.

With Jackson, you're paying for a guitar!

[img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img] [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img] [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img]

Greetz to all my Hog riding Bro's out there.. I just had to yank a chain or two. [img]graemlins/poke.gif[/img]

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">HOWEVER..... I see your point, but how many dads buy their kid a Squier Strat or Epiphone Les Paul Junior Starter Pack because "well, um, Fender's the best, aint it?" or "Gibson's the best, ain't it?" Let's face it: image is EVERYTHING. Jimi Hendrix sold more Fenders than all of Fender's advertising campaigns combined. Jimmy Page did the same for Gibson. EVH did the same for Kramer.

If the Jackson name were to once again mean "the best of the best" to the public, like they and Kramer did in the Eighties, that would do wonders for the company's image.

[Cleveland Metal]

Re: Eventual Jackson buyout?

At least my Jackson doesn't leak oil all over my driveway... [img]graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[lerxstcat]

Re: Eventual Jackson buyout?

Jacksons have top quality, but they ARE about image - the image of Randy Rhoads,
a death as tragic and senseless as that of Hendrix. The Jackson franchise and legacy was built on the back of Randy' rock martyrdom. The quality would've been the same, but Randy put them on the map and is the Godfather of Jackson Guitars. He did for Jackson what Hendrix did for the Fender Stratocaster,
and what EVH did for Charvel by plugging
them when he first hit the big time.
Otherwise we'd all probably think those pointy-headed things just looked silly!
(ducks and runs for life!) [img]graemlins/brow.gif[/img]

[SARJ]

Re: Eventual Jackson buyout?

If Jackson gets to be a poor quality instrument we always have Doc Dryer and GMW Guitar Works. I have yet to hear one complaint about either.

We didn't have the internet when AMIC bought Jackson. What was the buzz then? Fender could very well be the savior of Jackson guitars. Jackson guitars could end up being the cream of the crop again.

I wasn't impressed by what was shown at NAMM, but Fender is just getting started. Buy a DK2 or a DXMG in a year from now and see. They will be under Fenders production full swing. Try an SL1 or KV2 or RR1 and see. We may be surprized.

Guild isn't a bad company. How many of us here actualy own a Guild guitar anyway? I havn't ever seen one to play it. The last I heard they improved the Guild line dramtically. It's all a matter of opinion.

A buddy of mine bought an SL1 back in November. I took my gear to his place up in Albuquerque NM to jam with him while I stayed at his house. The locking nut being just a hair off to one side always bugged me, but doesn't make any noticeable difference. His USA made Jackson SL1 had the same problem and the Floyd wouldn't keep in tune. Poor quality? Not really, but these are things you don't see until you've had it a few days. My DK2 smoked his Sl1 by the way.

Like it was said before, just wait and see. Fender will own Jackson for a long long time.

[Jim Shine]

Re: Eventual Jackson buyout?

Back when Fender bought Guild, most players believed that Fender would ruin that brand of guitars. Fender wanted to improve quality, so in a bold move they moved the Guild factory out of Rhode Island to Corona California, and now the Guild guitars are better than ever. Yes, people can bring up Sunn amps as being a failure, but Fender sold those things for years until finally pulling the plug.

I wouldn't worry about Fender doing anything to lower the quality of Jackson guitars. The only thing that may potentially happen is they may try to commercialize Jackson guitars with heavy advertising and promotions. I don't know if it will happen real soon as last year they teamed up (not bought out as many believe) Gretsch guitars to build and promote Gretsch guitars for the Gretsch family. I think that they will work on that line first as that brand has been in very rough shape for several years now.

[ January 29, 2003, 11:17 AM: Message edited by: Jim Shine ]

[Jim Shine]

Re: Eventual Jackson buyout?

I have owned many old Guild's. Yes, the pre 80's Guilds were very well built, but as they entered the 90's, things changed. I can't tell you how many bad Guild acoustics I have had pass through my hands that left the factory in bad shape. Fender moved them out to California, 1-Because cost to upgrade the old factory was too expensive, and 2-To be able to run the Guild production without having the factory so far away from the parent company.

[Soloist1]

Re: Eventual Jackson buyout?

Oh come on! You know they moved Guild out there so they could work on figuring out how they would mount pick guards to the Guild models. That one pink crackle Jackson that had a pick guard was really a Jackson/Fender prototype that was snuck out of the shop and put on eBay. lol

[Accept2]

Re: Eventual Jackson buyout?

The move of the Guild factory didnt have anything to do with quality. Guild simply couldnt produce the desired amount of guitars that Fender wanted. Guild was averaging 60 guitars a day. If you ever owned a Guild from RI, you would know that they were very high quality, but very inefficient at making them. They used old equipment, and thats why Guilds from RI are not around much. By making Guilds at the Corona factory alongside Fender, they now are made with CNC, and are coming off the line at a hell of a rate. Now Guilds are just about everywhere. Fender has excellent supply chains, and they have a very efficient factory. This makes it good for anyone who wants a Guild because they are readily available.......However, there are still people who think of the new Guilds as just production line Fenders with Guild nameplates slapped on them, because that's basically what has happened. Its not bad, its not good, its just business plain and simple.......