Jackson Prices vs. Peoples attitude

[xenophobe]

A point to remember when any Co or its products increase or decrease is price is the clientèle, and the reputation that follows. I don't think anyone thinks of a BMW or Mercedes, and visualizes a long hair in mechanic blues driving it home after a long days work, greasy hands included. You think of a Wealthy person. Same goes with Guitars. Anyone here have a vision of a guy playing on the street for change holding a PRS with bird inlays? When When you Take the availability of Charvel Jackson Guitars out of the hands of "regular Musicians" and make them the tool of studios, trust fund babies and weekend warriors that do most of there shredding as lawyers, your in effect hurting the memory reputation of the company's. No longer with Megadeath, and Anthrax come to mind. Not unlike the Strat head division, the guitars will be thought of as those where then, and these are now. Nothing positive IMO

I guess you don't remember the days when Charvels were USA only and most people only dreamed of owning them...

Or when Charvel production moved to Japan and USA Jackson neck-thrus were the guitars you drooled over, but paid full retail for a Charvel import because there was no way in hell you could afford a USA Jackson.

[Carbophos]

weekend warriors are certainly a part of a prize increase. Many people of my age (35-40) who were fans 20-25 years ago are now dudes with well-established career and soild income. And I bet they want full-on nostalgia trip with crazy graphics, exotic woods and stuff...

I'd say the entire philosophy of the music instruments markets has changed through the years. The "bedroom" (I mean the buyers who never even played in ANY kind of band and probably never will) segment of the market was increasing year by year untill it happened that the bedroom players gained, say a "control share" of the market.

[shreddermon]

Anyone here have a vision of a guy playing on the street for change holding a PRS with bird inlays?

That's an original SD Charvel with a replacement neck. And, oh, he has a PRS with brids, too...

http://www.donwoodphoto.com/watermark.php?file=3162

[Mesaboog]

I can't comment on all of Jackson imports, but my el-cheapo MIJ Jackson JDR-94 Concept is one awesome instrument. I have a hard time with the "you get what you pay for" philosophy. Great instruments are available at very reasonable prices. I just read in the LTD PC-1 run thread, one guy said his brand new expensive PC-1 sounded "dead". And we all know about the prices of Gibson Les Pauls and the consistency QC issues. Mojo is a personal thing and it doesn't necessarily depend on how much money you are willing to shell out.

The free market determines prices. As long as folks are willing to shell out big bucks for USA Selects and Customs, the prices will keep going up. Simple economics. Jackson has to stay in business and the goal is to keep growing profits. If their pricing strategy works, they will stay in business...if not, they will change their strategy, lower prices and/or go out of business. But most important of all, they need to make sure they are churning out a quality product and valuing their customers.

[satch0922]

Obviously we can agree that low end guitars have their limitations compared to more expensive models (ie. electronics, hardware and finish quality). That doesn't mean you can't "hot rod" a lower end guitar and have a great player with decent overall quality.

Now...back to the original topic. I do think that Jackson (Fender) did not do themselves any favors by selling beginner instruments. A MIJ and USA is all they needed to be competitive in my opinion. I have two MIJ Jacksons and they are great guitars (after some upgrading). And no....they are not the same build quality of my LP...BUT...they cost me a 3rd of what the LP did.

Let's face it, who cares what people's attitudes about Jacksons are. If all of a sudden they become all the rage again then we will be bitching because they are over priced!

[Rsmacker]

It's not about price, it's about the loss of the Brand Jackson used to be.

The original mystique Jackson guitars had for me is long gone, unfortunately. When I was a youth (mid-80's), and saw the upcoming bands I loved toting Jacksons I wanted one sooooooo badly it hurt. They weren't available off the peg in the UK then, custom orders only. The Charvel model series were available, and had a good rep, but every time I looked in Kerrang, I'd see the name Jackson on Anthrax/Metallica/Slayer/etc's guitars. I had to have one.

So I worked hard. I pledged to fuck/steal/cheat/kill anyone who stood between one of those guitars and me. And I did. I saved and saved, then went to the USA and bought a used Jackson strat with a snakeskin finish. I swear I sat and just looked at that headstock for hours, tracing the logo. A Jackson - MY Jackson. Coming home and talking to other guitarists, I would say I had a Jackson
"Oh, a Charvel" they would say
"NOOOOO, A JACKSON" I would reply, the magic box would open and they would worship. Forget my playing, I was hailed a God, I had the Holy Grail in my hands. I was known as "that bloke with the Jackson. No, a real one"

Then things changed a little. The guitarists of choice were all toting Ibanez guitars, but Jacksons were still a serious guitar. If you saw one sitting on a stand before a band came on, you knew the guitarist was going to be a serious player. You would stay around just to watch him play, you knew he wouldn't be banging out some shitty cover version.

For a while the entry guitar had been Charvette, the players who would stick it out would aspire to a Charvel (by then with the toothpaste logo), and still Jackson was the ultimate. It meant you were going somewhere, or had arrived.

Some time afterwards, Grunge became the thing, and soon enough, Jackson were knocking out cheaper guitars. Now, I don't know where this fits into the timeline of corporate ownership, but there was obviously a drive to get one into every kid's bedroom.

That was the point the magic went. It matters not what price a Jackson is now, they will never have the same appeal, to me, or to any youngster starting out. They have become too attainable, the genie is out of the bottle, and it ain't going back in!

They were once something to aspire to, a Premier League Brand, they had an aura about them, they were an elite. The day they cheapened that Brand by knocking out guitars for a couple of hundred quid, they lost something they will never replace.

I know that some of these cheaper guitars will be eminently playable, and worth every penny, but we are talking about human frailties, namely lust. You used to lust after a Jackson, in the same way men have lusted after gold for centuries. If you wanted it, you had to do something extra-ordinary, someone owning it was someone to respect (and envy). It's pathetic, I know, but it's human nature, to aspire to something special, to have the most special, shiniest trinkets. Banging out cheap far-Eastern models made a few quid through mass sales, but tarnished the name, irrepairably. Like Argos gold sovereign rings. (For non-UK readers, cheap shit jewellery!)

Jaguar cars did the same thing when they released a diesel estate (Lord preserve us). A perfectly good car, but it's NOT a Jaguar. They sold plenty of them, but lo and behold, Jaguar has seen it's place in the prestige motor market slip and has decided to drop the X-type and concentrate on the higher end.
For years I wanted a Jag, so I worked hard and saved........sound familiar? I remember my first Jag with the same warmth I remember my first Jackson, it was reward for the hard work and sacrifice I put in. After a few years, I wanted another one, the latest model, they were still exclusive, we had a love affair, me and Jaguar, "so I pulled the trigger" ( to borrow a much-loved phrase on here). Then they whored out their name (thanks to the bean counters at Ford) and rolled out the X-type diesel estate. I cannot fault my XJ-Sport in any way, but I won't be upgrading to another Jag, it's like finding out your Mrs has been blowing the milkman.......

I'm yearning for an Aston Martin now, even though I know they are plagued with problems, aren't as reliable as the Jag, and twice the price. They do, however, still hold that Premier League Brand status. I know that when I say I own an Aston, no-one will be thinking "Ah, a cheap one", they will immediately know I am a man of substance and taste. (And possibly a show-off arsehole, but I can live with that). And I'm going to fuck/cheat/steal/kill anyone who stands between me and one.......

Yes, yes, incredibly shallow, and pure snobbery, I am a complete tosser. But you all know you'd love to have an Aston sitting outside, just to tell people that's YOUR motor.

It's what Branding by marketing depts have toiled to achieve for years. Any Brand, be it Gucci, Rolex, Ray-Ban, whatever, does the same thing. There are plenty of perfectly good alternatives for a fraction of the cash, but they know part of the appeal is the exclusivity of their Brand. So long as they keep their prices high, remain something "special", we will aspire to own them, and WILL get our hands on them, by hook or by crook. Logical thoughts about quality don't enter into it, once you have an established Brand, it is gold-dust. Everything goes into preserving the exclusivity and desirability of that Brand, it must be seared into the heart of every mere mortal, to WANT one.
Or, of course, you can just deliver the brand on a plate to EVERYONE at a knock-down price. It is pressing the self-destruct button, but the shareholders WILL see an immediate return. Then it is time to cut and run, because then you have flooded the market with something that isn't special anymore.

Jackson has already sold out it's Brand, taken the cash, pissed it up the wall, and changed hands.

Simply raising prices now can never re-vitalise the Brand, but then nor will getting hot new endorsees. The damage has been done and there is no time machine to right the wrongs. They need to get over it, look forward, and concentrate on making EVERY guitar a winner, make sure no-one ever says "Yeah, I bought one and it had this and that wrong with it". They need owners/staff who are passionate about guitars, not passionate about units shifted and sales graphs.

If that means the prices rise, to ensure they are ALL 100% guitars, so be it. Soon enough, people will be looking for Jackson 2007 models, knowing they are not going to buy a dog. But let a few dogs through, and they will just be another also-ran.

Whether the current owners/shareholders will be able to wait for the results is another story. To get anywhere near the respected name it once was, won't happen overnight.


Sorry to blather on, but it's been something I've thought about for a while, I've just had the opportunity to get it out of my system!!!


PS. Interestingly, whereas I once would have spat on a Charvel, I had to have the Daddy, the Jackson, I recently bought a 1987 Model 6. What a fantastic guitar! It's only taken me 20 years to consider the "cheaper" guitar and find out it is just as good as their big brothers - now that's how powerful Brand Jackson once was!!!!

[Nazgul]

That was a nice post Rsmacker!

[ABSOLUT CHARVEL]

That was a nice post Rsmacker!

+1

i think i laughed, i cried, and cheered. well done

[Vlover]

I think most 'good' guitarist pick the brand that works best for them. If they get famous like Dimebag, Vai or Page the get endorsment and everyone copies them. Of course that changes. I noticed that most Artist leave jackson because of something OTHER than how the guitars play, and we as not famous big name guitarist should NOT follow their equipment lead.

To me, name brand dosnt mean anything if the guitar doesnt feel right between my hands, so I go with what feels right to me. I found the V's from jackson and they work for me. I could use ESP V's, but every V player now a days is and I dont want to be every other player. If you sound good, then people will be interested, if you look good sounding good, then most people will follow sadly.

As far as the company is concerned, they should focus on all areas of the market, price means nother to talent but it does to buisness. Keep them cheap I say, cause real talent will shine through price, and if the 7 Jacksons i owned cost more than 500$ I would not have had the money to buy them and settled on something I could afford.

if i suck, then its not because my guitar is cheap, just my talent

[Mesaboog]

It's what Branding by marketing depts have toiled to achieve for years. Any Brand, be it Gucci, Rolex, Ray-Ban, whatever, does the same thing. There are plenty of perfectly good alternatives for a fraction of the cash, but they know part of the appeal is the exclusivity of their Brand. So long as they keep their prices high, remain something "special", we will aspire to own them, and WILL get our hands on them, by hook or by crook. Logical thoughts about quality don't enter into it, once you have an established Brand, it is gold-dust. Everything goes into preserving the exclusivity and desirability of that Brand, it must be seared into the heart of every mere mortal, to WANT one.

Great post Rsmacker....you're a marketing guy I bet.

I agree with everything you said in your post, but I think the "mystique" you talk about with the luxury brands has to deliver on the promise. Yes, there is something "special" about all of those luxury brands you mentioned. People will shell out the big bucks, but there has to be a perceived, THEN REALIZED value. You might be able to sell a piece of plywood to a few people for $3000. But that is not going to make you a successful business over the long haul. You might get some suckers to buy because of a slick marketing campaign promoting some kind of rare plywood. But at the end of the day, the product has to deliver. You can't put a Mercedes badge on a Cadillac and charge $80,000.

Every brand has a niche. And you eloquently explained how J/C found their niche in the early days as an entrepreneural boutique product line. But businesses MUST change over the times to stay competitive and survive. Look at the USA auto industry. They refused to change over time, or didn't change enough, and now the Japanese are kicking their asses. When you buy a Japanese car, you know you are getting a reliable QUALITY product. And people are willing to even pay more money for a reliable quality product. US auto brands are not perceived synonomous with quality and reliability and that is where the rubber met the road (pardon the pun). You can't promise quality and reliability and still pump out an inferior product.

As for J/C, they know their business, and I am sure they are doing what they think is best to be as successful as possible. They have analyzed the market and have determined exactly where they want the brand to fit relative to the competition. And they are marketing and pricing based upon that strategic vision. They don't want to be a "boutique only" company at the top end of the market. They want to provide a range of products to appeal to the largest possible demographic. But they also want to compete at the top end of the market as well. It is a dilemma/risk to be all things to a wider demographic. You risk being a homogeous comodity vs. being that something special. The brand promise gets diluted and you force the customer to sift through all your "brand within the brand" promises. It's must be a challenging business model to be a company that sells Chevys and Ferrari's at the same time.

But to be successful in business, WHATEVER YOUR BRAND OR MARKETING PROMISE, YOU BETTER DELIVER WITH THE PRODUCT, or you can expect the customer to look at other alternatives. There's a lot of choices out there.

[Rsmacker]

Thanks chaps, glad I didn't bore too many to death!
Nope, I'm not a marketing guy, though I'm open to offers of a super-well-paid job in a nice office and a secretary if anyone wants to...........No, thought not!

Indeed the product HAS to deliver, you can't pull the wool over people's eyes for long. And Jackson DID deliver when I was getting wood over them. When you picked one of those sleek aggressive beauties up, you knew it was a killer, you could hear how good it would sound in your head, Nigel Tuffnel-style. You could see the finish was perfect on the stock colours, and then you'd catch a glimpse of a graphic, or an eerie-des, whatever, and you could feel the desire burn in your heart. I would conceal Jackson brochures inside porno mags, so people wouldn't think I was weird, lusting over guitars!! If I had one of those guitars, I'd just polish it every day, they were to be admired!
And then Feb 1987, I watched Dave Mustaine at Hammersmith Odeon, wrecked, scrape his King V across his mic stand, say goodnight, then just drop it on the floor. I swear, I felt that blow in my nuts!!!

But of course they weren't just to be looked at as some sort of modern art, they played wonderfully, they sat right, even the spikey ones. Everything seemed to be thought out on them, there was no problem with upper fret access (not on any one I got my mitts on, at least), they lived up to the hype.

And I'm sure they still deliver. In a way. Horses for courses, I'm sure their £500 models aren't to be sniffed at. That's a lot of bread, even if it is way short of the kind of dosh for a USA CS, so it better not be a dog.
The thing is, IMHO, it's that vast middle ground between entry level cack, packaged with an amp, strap, pick and chord book, for £99, and the big bucks stuff. Quality in those models can vary considerably from guitar to guitar, it doesn't warrant personal in depth QC inspection, but isn't cheap enough to be churned out of some Far-Eastern sweat-shop willy nilly.

The "cheap" Jacksons I have played (or rather "mid-priced" because they weren't really "cheap") were distinctly lack-lustre and disappointing.
To my mind, someone would choose one because they were looking for, let's say, a black sharkfin, simple as that. It could be a BC Rich, ESP, Hamer whatever (let's just pretend they all do a sharkfin type), the buyer will simply go for the one which is slightly cheaper, or the one which comes with the most free stuff from the dealer. They were OK, I suppose, but there was no way you would be able to say you had a Premier League guitar in your hands. Certainly nothing to boast about, to let your mates try out and WANT one too! Just another guitar.....

To my mind, that's the problem. They have become "just another guitar".

Of course, despite my yearning for the good old days, I do realise there is a dilemma for any business growing as Jackson did. I know if they hadn't sold out to the big boys, they would have become a thing of the past years ago. There comes a point where a business will stagnate and run out of investment cash. Then, of course, the original ethos behind the company will be lost. Generally guitar companies are started by musicians rather than businessmen, but after a sell-out they have to answer to shareholders who want profit. Look at how many company founders bale out at the first opportunity yet start another guitar company soon afterwards - Bernie Rico, Patrick Eggle, Trevor Wilkinson etc etc. They obviously weren't in it for the cash alone!

But, there is a glimmer of hope for a renaissance. Think of my previous post and my current lust for an Aston Martin. Well, if they hadn't been bought by Ford a few years ago, they wouldn't be around now. The thing is that Ford have left them to it. No diesel estate cars from them, no family cars. Ford have left them to potter around and do what they do, but with the clout behind them to not have any financial crisis. Perhaps Jackson's current owners will give them space to ensure every guitar that leaves the factory is a peach, and let one of their other manufacturers churn out entry level stuff.