Jackson Endorsements

[Bengal]

Both Araya and King have flip-flopped back and forth between ESP and BC Rich. Just pick one and go with it.

But sometimes companies take a turn for the worse. If that happens, you can't blame the star for bailing.

[toejam]

I hope he still has it.... that thing owns all!

He still has it, but I remember him saying he sweats like crazy and has had to gut the electronics and rebuild it a couple times over the years. Not sure if it gets any play time any more.

[toejam]

I'm pretty sure he's playing an ESP in the Seasons video.

That was the Raiders ESP guitar in the video.

Now, if I remember correctly, he also had a Raiders Jackson that he played a few shows before the switch to ESP.

With just a Raiders logo? I can't recall ever seeing him with another Jackson, but it's possible.
You can see the Raiders emblem on the bottom left, next to the Black Flag symbol.

[Seef]

Ah, but here's the catch: are you really advertising the brand you play simply by playing it? Are you consciously putting out the effort to promote the brand of gear you use or is it simply a tool to get the job done? Do you finish a gig by broadcasting the slogan of the brand you're using?

I'm not promoting GM's product when I drive my Impala to WalMart, I'm simply going to WalMart. The Impala gets me there. If someone else sees it and decides to buy one, it's not my doing.


By the same token, if I'm playing a gig with a Jackson, I'm promoting my band, not promoting someone else's product.

If the audience perceives my performance as a product advertisement, then either my music is less captivating than the brand I'm using to make that music, or the audience is entirely too impressionable.

As a guitarist I really do look at what kind of guitars the artist is playing. And I bet I'm not the only one. I'm sure it sways some people.

[Bengal]

RD,
That Jackson does own. I love that Jackson.

I'm pretty sure I read he still has it but it's been retired a long time ago.

[Varth Dader]

As a guitarist I really do look at what kind of guitars the artist is playing. And I bet I'm not the only one. I'm sure it sways some people.

I agree. I'm always curious what my peers use to achieve their sound, especially if their chops or tone impress me.

[guitarbumb]

I play Jacksons and always will it doesnt matter if im endorsed or not ill still play jackson as i feel they make the best guitar there is, im not after free gear i want jackson to get the recognition they deserve. If people are only after it for free gear go play a piece of crap ibanez or something, play jackson because you love jackson like i do.

[Newc]

If it's an ad for the guitar brand, and the guitar company is saying "we want you in our official printed advertisements as part of your endorsement deal", then I agree, the artist in question should get something, but I don't see where they should automatically get free guitars, even in that situation.

Maybe a discount similar to what employees would get, but certainly not free.

The brand isn't getting free advertisement in that case - they're putting out money for the photographer and the associated team (for studio shots - live shots would probably be buying the rights to a photo or hiring a photographer with a great reputation to shoot the artist live as a work-for-hire, where they own the rights to the image, and that costs a ton of money because the established photographer is losing out on licensing the image to several customers), as well as the actual printing (magazine space for the ad, etc etc), as well as the discount offered to the artist in question, which is likely to be such that it costs more to make the guitar than they sold it for, but they hope to make up the difference in sales.

Now, if a brand calls for exclusivity, then the artist should have the bargaining power to score a freebie here and there, but certainly not an arsenal at once.


Jackson didn't lose Mustaine over a few guitars a year, Mustaine was being cut back from his 11 freebies a year to about half that and he cried.
This was at the same time he rebuilt the band yet again and they were not out in the open like they had been previously. Dave was doing his rehab thing, Ellefson was booted, and other bands were taking over Megadeth's turf.

Giving 11 free guitars a year to someone who had not been seen live in a year would have been wasting perfectly good guitars.

[RandyRhoads]

Giving 11 free guitars a year to someone who had not been seen live in a year would have been wasting perfectly good guitars.

Not to mention the fact that he could more than afford to have payed for them out of his own pocket and still not notice a difference in is bank account. I totally agree with you... in my honest opinion, I don't care how big an icon Mustaine is/was, there is no excuse for wanting ELEVEN free guitars 'per year'. I bet most of them rarely got played or photographed so it would've made more sense to Jackson as a business to sell these guitars to music stores and at least make some money from them.

[algeriet]

Always wanted to do this. Hope I got it right: Bump!¡

[Axegrinder87]

Always wanted to do this. Hope I got it right: Bump!¡

???

[MetalHeadMat]

???

It seems he bumped the thread. Do you have anything else to add algeriet?

[Force]

Now this thread is seeing action again, i'll add to it.

I play Jacksons and always will it doesnt matter if im endorsed or not ill still play jackson as i feel they make the best guitar there is, im not after free gear i want jackson to get the recognition they deserve. If people are only after it for free gear go play a piece of crap ibanez or something, play jackson because you love jackson like i do.

Exactly............free or heavily discounted gear is always welcome but i'm happy to pay for my Jacksons because I love them.

Very little had to do with who was playing them, I thought they looked great & when I played them they felt better than anything else. I'll note on my albums that I use Jacksons & don't expect anything in return. (insert demand for endorsement here)

Hell, if they were to give me free stuff, i'd be happy with a few JS series, just throw EMG's in them & i'm set.

[decadence5423]

Well I guess if this thread is back from the dead...

I came into Jackson guitars with early Children of Bodom. Alexi's wild child RR. Other bands I listened to also used Jackson guitars. When I decided I was really serious about playing guitar my first was.... a Jackson. Didn't end up being an RR but it was a King V. My second guitar was a Jackson, my third, my fourth, etc. I've owned a Gibson, a Schecter, there was an Ibanez in there, but they really didn't compare for me. When Children of Bodom switched to ESP I was really disappointed. Looking into it all I could find was the timetable Jackson gave Alexi to replace his guitars was a year, and ESP was only three months.

Anyway... my point is I bought into Jacksons because some of my favorite artists at the time were playing them. And I'm sure there are and was tons like me. This a lot of business. I can't understand why Jackson wouldn't have tried a little harder to keep them playing Jacksons. As a business, it would make sense for them to bust their arses a bit to get them a guitar or two, faster. For me it doesn't matter, though. Nothing compares to Jackson for me.

[VitaminG]

Alexi never had a Jackson endorsement. Maybe Jackson should have pursued him with one, but at the time he lost his guitars, he was just some guy in Europe playing Jacksons in his band. Why would that warrant a rush CS order?