[K Gilbert (Kevin1960)]

So according to the inflation calculator, my brothers 1970 LP Custom with a "factory flaw" that cost him $800.00 should cost $4582.47. It lists for $5,245.00 and sells for $3,899.00. I know it is a lot of money for most of us but it seems in line with inflation. Painful as it seems, inflation is driving everything up. What is inflation? Not just the cost of skilled laborers. You gotta make sure the workplace is heated/cooled, has working bathrooms paid vacations for workers, benefits (Medical). The mere fact that they are listening to us says that they are concerned about the product and want educated feedback. Time to get back to looking for ways to improving the product and stop whining about the price. No one is going to put a gun to your head and force you to buy a Gibson. At least till the Government trys to take it over.

[D Schulteis (Deej)]

Malikon, I definitely agree on most every point.

The most I've ever spent on a new guitar, on any guitar for that matter, is $1800 for a Studio Premium Plus Desert Burst. Saw it in the store, played it, had to have it, and just happened to have just that much to spend.

3 months later, it took a drop off the stand, and cracked (not broke) the headstock. $350 and a very good repair job later, it is still my favorite, most used, most comfortable to play, guitar. I love it. Since the crack took away any "collector's value", I went ahead and added a Fishman Piezo bridge to it, drilling and routing as necessary to make it done professionally. It's now doublely my favorite to play. It cost me an extra $350 in the parts and a day's worth of very careful routing, drilling and soldering. And just a couple months ago, hehe, probably 3 months after I finished the piezo job, the strap lock didn't catch properly, and the neck took a drop into a monitor grill. Good thing the monitor was there, because it bounced right up and didn't disturb the previous repair. However, it took out a small corner of the headstock.

Nope, not spending too much money on something that similar stuff will always happen to. If I was willing to go that high in price again, I'd probably grab a standard or traditional. But I'm not. Stage fright, I guess, of spending that much money on something and 3 months later...

So, my next purchases were a BFG (but I didn't get the base $850 model, spent the $1350). Love it and play it almost as much as the Studio PP. I then grabbed an '87 SG with factory Kahler for $750. It's a little beat up, not worried about beating it up more. Great guitar. The LP Studio Baritone I bought a few years ago for like $850 new (on clearance) gets use here and there, depending upon the setlist. But it took a dropped pedal when it was in the stand, and has a nice chip in it to the wood close to where the strap pin is. $850 - no biggie - will get it touched up later.

Nope, not spending a lot. Crap happens, and when it happens to a $1000 guitar: "eh, crap happens"... but when it happens to an expensive guitar, it is gut-wrenching.

My '89 Custom rarely leaves the house or gigs, as I don't want another stand incident on that, and my '73 SG gets out even less. I don't want anyone to think I don't take great care of my guitars though... they are babied, and both my Custom and my 73 SG is in excellent condition - much better than their average years. Just crap does happen.

So, looking for the next guitar... I'm thinking the $1200 range... something that won't be heart wrenching if it gets dinged, scratched or otherwise used, but has quality that I am used to from the Gibsons I do own. But I just don't find anything I want for that price new. I've said it before, and I'll say it again, Gibson has probably already been paid from my next purchase, as I'll probably buy used.

[M Ryan (Malikon)]

Thanks for sharing that Deej, I can relate. Especially to the nicks and dings that life hands your guitar.

My most expensive guitar ever was well over the $1,000. mark (not a Gibson) and it was stolen in less then a year. It still turns my stomach to think about it, so I can't imagine how horrified I'd feel if my hypothetical R0 took a dive on stage or someone ran into the back of the headstock.

Luckily I've never had a snapped or cracked headstock, and I dread it.

Last gig I did on Saturday I was walking my Epiphone in it's hard shell case back to the car when out of nowhere a large bug like a beetle (I honestly never saw it) flew directly into my left eye. Not the lid, the eye itself. It happened so fast, and in hindsight it's comical, but at the time it felt like my eye had suddenly exploded and I dropped/threw the guitar to the ground and grabbed my eye.

A few minutes later I picked up the case, finished packing up and went home. The whole time dreading what I was going to find inside the case. Visions of a snapped/cracked headstock or a cracked neck kept floating through my head.

I got home got stuff put away and sat down to assess the damage. Not only was it not damaged, it was still in tune. I was shocked!

Maybe they're a bit tougher then I thought they were, and I can kind of laugh about it now. But Saturday night driving home my stomach was in knots. So I can't even imagine how sick I would've been feeling if it had been the R0 I keep considering.

(I know, silly story, but in the spirit of sharing... )

[D Schulteis (Deej)]

I'm always saying... "that's what the hard case is for". Good thing we have 'em, as they do take the abuse instead of the instrument.

[m dailey (milod)]

I think in ways it's more difficult than just figuring an inflation calculation because our culture and economy has changed so much. Spending patterns have taken significant changes. So have revenue patterns.

E.g., I think even "the wealthy" don't spend what they used to on clothing, and the average folks almost certainly spend less of a percentage on clothes. OTOH, we're spending bundles on various "communications devices" ranging from cable or sat-TV, cell phones, computers and Internet.

I also think automobiles cost far, far more - not because "cars" cost more, but because of the increasing regulation of vehicles on emissions and "safety" standards, additional hidden taxes, etc., etc. - not to mention such stuff as radios and air conditioners becoming standard. (I remember when even a car heater wasn't necessarily "standard.")

Also we've gone as a "western culture" from men working and "wives" being "homemakers" to two-income families that seem to bring only the same perceived standard of living today as 50 years ago. That's a factor seldom mentioned.

So in a sense, I'd say Gibson is probably running street price about the same or perhaps less than costs across the years - although I'll wager also that there are up and down curves on that.

Figure when the ES175 came out for $175, a good auto mechanic probably made $50 a week if he was lucky and his take-home was less. So roughly a month's pay. A $20 per hour mechanic today can't buy a new 175 for a month's pay, especially after taxes.

OTOH, the auto mechanic in 1950 was supporting himself and family on one paycheck; today it's almost all two paycheck families living at approximately the same perceived standard of living. So figure a lower #2 paycheck at $10 per hour and yeah, it's probably about right.

Bottom line is I think it's almost impossible to make comparisons.

Now add price tags on the Epi. Drag back some years and use your inflation calculations in reverse and it would have been even more of a bargain then - but again, I don't think that "inflation" accounts for changes in perceptions of costs today compared to yesterday.

m

[j waldo (BadBluesPlayer)]

I tend to think that the price points on Gibson guitars are about right.

The models like standards, studios, dots - the more basic models - seem to be priced right. I don't think Gibson has any problem selling all of those that they can produce.

The prices for the real high end guitars don't have to be based on value, they have to be jacked way up because the buyers are conspicuous consumers. Those buyers basicaslly want to pay more so they'll feel like they have something special. If they don't jack the prices, then they're "leaving money on the table", so to speak.

[m dailey (milod)]

Laugh at this one if you will...

I thought the MM was overpriced in 1965 - but although I couldn't afford one, the 335 was appropriately priced given the competition. Although there's something in the LP I never cared for, it also always seemed silly to compare it to a solidbody, even one with a set neck, let alone one with a bolt-on neck.

With Epi as part of the equation, "Gibson" has an incredibly broad set of price points for different sorts of guitars. The question might better be, "How is Gibson doing in today's marketplace to keep its factory in business."

Looks from here it's doing okay.

m

[K Urkosky (KenG)]

j waldo (BadBluesPlayer), on 04 September 2010 - 05:02 AM, said:

I tend to think that the price points on Gibson guitars are about right.

The models like standards, studios, dots - the more basic models - seem to be priced right. I don't think Gibson has any problem selling all of those that they can produce.

The prices for the real high end guitars don't have to be based on value, they have to be jacked way up because the buyers are conspicuous consumers. Those buyers basicaslly want to pay more so they'll feel like they have something special. If they don't jack the prices, then they're "leaving money on the table", so to speak.

I'd hazard a guess you've never played a Re-Issue. While I love my Traditional, the R0 is significantly more guitar. My R0 weighs just over 8.6lbs with solid mahogany while my Trad weighs ion at 10lbs with weight relief holes drilled in it. The top on my Ro is many steps above the Trad too, Re-Issue has nickle hardware, USA's Chrome, Quality of workmanship is also visibly better.

[M Lewis (Matt in a Hat)]

In this economy? Yes and no. I believe some Gibsons, particularly the more fancy/historic spec'd Gibbies are luxury items and therefore deserve a price premium. However, on genereal principle, yes they are WAY overpriced. I suppose it comes with the history, but I would love to see Gibson step back and drop its prices to compete with Fender. As a poster mentioned earlier, it's weird to hear of people working hard for a few months to earn their first Fender, but not being able to afford a Gibson through the same efforts.

If I were able to, I'd price the regular Les Pauls around the same tier as the pricing way back in the day. I sincerely wish, as a young player, I could have spent those funds I had made on a solid Gibson Les Paul or SG. Instead, I had no choice but to go with a B-Stock Epiphone Dot Studio...Not the same mileage in guitar. Please Gibson, I implore you, get off of your high horse and stop making me choose between a Fender or a shitty, half-assed Epiphone. I don't want to have to do a bunch of maitenance to my guitar after I buy it, I shouldn't have to. Either raise the quality of the Epis to that of Gibson and keep the price the same, or lower the prices of Gibson guitars.

Gretsch's Electromatic line is essentially on par with its Pro Line, the only difference being a different design. The guitars hold up well, look as nice as their "big" brothers, and maximize the use of their electronics setup. Gretsch's electromatic line is varied as well, and plans to expand are always being considered. I just want to know that Gibson cares as much about players who aren't already f*cking rich.

[K Gilbert (Kevin1960)]

This question goes in two directions.

First, there is the old List versus what you actually pay for the guitar. That is always going to be a litmus test for a anything in the market. There are always going to be shelf sitters in any line of business. The only difference is that in the Music business,most store owners can not see past clearing out old stock at a loss to make room and free up capital for merchandise that they can move. It is not like clothing in the strictest sense that it has seasons and loses value over time, The other side of that is that guitars on a wall can get shop worn in a heartbeat by even the most careful shopper.

Second is the competition for the market dollar. Yes Gibson has many labels that they sell under but perceived value within the price points are garnering harsher and better competition. PRS and Taylor are not standing still. The PRS "SE" models compete very well with high end Epi's and still carry the PRS label. Also Fender never gave up the idea of offering it's flagship logo on models made in Japan, Mexico, and even China.

Bottom line is that like all companies in this economy and going forward, Gibson will have to continue to be innovative in manufacturing to remain a viable maker of mid and high end guitars. I own a range of models in their wheel house and am their target demographic. To keep people like me buying they are going to have to offer quality value packed products.

[m dailey (milod)]

Just a quick note here...

If what Epi #1 said is true about some upgrades in pots, etc. - and right now my experience is that it is - the Dot I got a cupla months ago is as nice a guitar as anything, albeit without much bling.

I won't get into an issue I had on my purchase deal with a dealer, but let's put it this way: That particular guitar ain't goin' back even if they offered two others. Period. A thin neck "real" 335... that'd be a real nasty decision, which may say something about how I feel about my new Dot. Yes, I told that directly to Epi1. And if it weren't that way, I would have said so. I had a momentary anger attack that dropped away when I went back to pickin'.

FYI, I feel the same way in "SG" terms about my old early '70s Guild SG "clone" with a neck I love and plenty of bling with a hand-carved acorn and oak leaf top that was available to me back then and Gibsons were not.

Secondly, I think it's a bit off kilter to suggest set-neck guitars can be made at the same sort of price points as a board body and a bolt-on neck.

If, as HenryJ said, Gibson is doing well and there are some obvious "updates" around for the current marketplace, I'd say if it ain't broke (as a market model), don't fix it. Hey, I can't believe the leadership that made the 1980s turnaround isn't capable of remaining a viable force even in a bad economy.

Gibsons likely always will be more expensive than Fender as long as they're made in US. A lot of Epis are cost-comparable with Fender and I recall that they outsell Fender.

What the heck, I don't know what I'd say whether I'd take an high-end Epi Paul or a Tele if offered either-or. I'll take my Dot over any Fender. Period. Well... I dunno about a Jazz bass if that either-or were offered for an Epi Lucille. <grin> But that's comparing apples and oranges and I like the idea of both. (I used to play a Precision a lot, btw.)

m

[r ferrell (raven999)]

Sticking to the original question, no side-bars, or mis-directional tricks? Yes, they are. And the proof of it all is this: there is a 3+ year old Les Paul Custom, that 2 years ago, was hanging (and still is) on the wall. As a loyal customer of this shop, I was going to get it for $2,000 out the door. That one, and the Wine Red LPC, have not moved, they're still there, the same exact guitars, right down to the over-lapped binding binding on the back of one, and the nick on the edge of the other( from unpacking). Last month the price on both was raised past the $3,000 mark.

I love the hell out of this shop, and the guys that own/run it. I've bought 6 guitars in the last 3 years, 5 from there. But I WILL NOT buy a guitar that was worth $2,000 one day, and then got jacked up because the corporate mindset says that the more you charge for something, then the more it's worth. That is a complete and total lie. I was even told that the reason for the raise, was to keep the price of these two, in line with new model prices. Before some idiot mentions "inflation", 30% in one month, even a year, is rape.

[K Urkosky (KenG)]

The easy solution is if you think they are too expensive don't buy them or buy used! Pretty simple.
To be honest,in my 35+ years of playing guitar Gibson's prices haven't over-inflated, they've always been up there. For instance in the mid 70's an LP was $900 and a Strat about $600, and that $900 price in money then is easily worth the $2500 in money today. In fact it's not even triple over 30+ years but cars, houses, Golf Clubs, Booze, food etc all have more than tripled. Minimum wage has more than tripled and the avergae salary has since then as well. People will spend 25-30K on a car that will do nothing but devalue from the day you drive it off the lot but balk at paying more than 600-1000 for a guitar. I also notice people will refuse to pay more than $400-600 for a guitar but have no problems going over the 1K mark for an amp to balst away at home or as a hobby with their buddies.

[m dailey (milod)]

Raven...

In a sense you hit the best sorta argument against the smaller dealer. Two years on the wall? Loyal local customers seeing them getting increasingly shopworn yet the price going up with the newer models? Sheesh.

That creates the opposite effect of "it costs more to maintain the concept of value." It's instead more like a new car that didn't sell in '08 that has a a much higher than sticker price 'cuz the newer models cost more. That ain't gonna sell either place.

Even the little "western wear" joint in the town where I live runs unbelievable numbers per square foot because the owner doesn't let that sorta thing happen. He buys wisely and if he made a mistake, he makes such deals on quality stuff that it's out the door.

One might ask, by the way, why a hat is worth $800 and boots in the same price range...

m

[r ferrell (raven999)]

K Urkosky (KenG), on 19 October 2010 - 03:11 PM, said:

The easy solution is if you think they are too expensive don't buy them or buy used! Pretty simple.
To be honest,in my 35+ years of playing guitar Gibson's prices haven't over-inflated, they've always been up there. For instance in the mid 70's an LP was $900 and a Strat about $600, and that $900 price in money then is easily worth the $2500 in money today. In fact it's not even triple over 30+ years but cars, houses, Golf Clubs, Booze, food etc all have more than tripled. Minimum wage has more than tripled and the avergae salary has since then as well. People will spend 25-30K on a car that will do nothing but devalue from the day you drive it off the lot but balk at paying more than 600-1000 for a guitar. I also notice people will refuse to pay more than $400-600 for a guitar but have no problems going over the 1K mark for an amp to balst away at home or as a hobby with their buddies.

Dude, PAY ATTENTION! A 30% MARKUP ON A 3 YEAR OLD INSTRUMENT, IN A 24 HOUR PERIOD IS NOT INFLATION! Now, did you GET it this time, sweetheart?

BTW, my '79 Gibson Les Paul Standard cost me $500, and no, I absolutely will not buy anything new from Gibson due to DDI Syndrome. which btw, actually affects 80% of America, at the current estimate.

Oh, and next time, before you talk about minimum wage, check your story first. in 1973 the Min. Wage, was $2.00/hr, it didn't "triple" that until 2007, but, with adjustments for inflation, relative to said rate hikes, the buying power has steadily decreased until 2007, and has only kept pace with inflation. I DID do some research, here is the simplest to understand result of several searches:

http://oregonstate.e...84/minwage.html

So,as anyone can see, these figures tell an entirely different story than what has been bandied about as an excuse for gross profiteering.

And yet AGAIN! the original question, is; are Gibsons prices too high in this economy? How much of a Rocket Scientist do you need to be to see that? Since the economy affects the ENTIRE country, then the entire country's circumstances make the answer a very simple, very plain, "YES!" some peoples children...

[r ferrell (raven999)]

m dailey (milod), on 19 October 2010 - 03:32 PM, said:

Raven...

In a sense you hit the best sorta argument against the smaller dealer. Two years on the wall? Loyal local customers seeing them getting increasingly shopworn yet the price going up with the newer models? Sheesh.

That creates the opposite effect of "it costs more to maintain the concept of value." It's instead more like a new car that didn't sell in '08 that has a a much higher than sticker price 'cuz the newer models cost more. That ain't gonna sell either place.

Even the little "western wear" joint in the town where I live runs unbelievable numbers per square foot because the owner doesn't let that sorta thing happen. He buys wisely and if he made a mistake, he makes such deals on quality stuff that it's out the door.

One might ask, by the way, why a hat is worth $800 and boots in the same price range...

m

Well, in all fairness to these guys, A) in a town of less than 75,000 people, we have maybe, 1500 working musicians in the surrounding area, including "famous" people who buy property up here, and maybe only 1-200 of us WOULD but a Gibson. They're just not popular, or relevent except to the older crowd. , he doesn't let "just anybody" handle guitars off the top rack, so that limits it to me, and about 12 others. I told you, it is a small mountain town, famous for absolutely nothing! LOL!

Oh, as far as the hats and boots being so expensive, because the real cowboys aren't stupid enough to spend money trying to look like something they're not. It's easy to spot the "real" cowboys, and bikers, their stuff never looks new for more than a few weeks, or months, at most. They're too busy actually wearing, using, or riding it to do more than keep it clean and servicable. If it can't preform a real, solid function, and isn't needed, we won't buy it just to have it, thats called being a poseur.

[K Urkosky (KenG)]

r ferrell (raven999), on 19 October 2010 - 04:47 PM, said:

Dude, PAY ATTENTION! A 30% MARKUP ON A 3 YEAR OLD INSTRUMENT, IN A 24 HOUR PERIOD IS NOT INFLATION! Now, did you GET it this time, sweetheart?

BTW, my '79 Gibson Les Paul Standard cost me $500, and no, I absolutely will not buy anything new from Gibson due to DDI Syndrome. which btw, actually affects 80% of America, at the current estimate.

Oh, and next time, before you talk about minimum wage, check your story first. in 1973 the Min. Wage, was $2.00/hr, it didn't "triple" that until 2007, but, with adjustments for inflation, relative to said rate hikes, the buying power has steadily decreased until 2007, and has only kept pace with inflation. I DID do some research, here is the simplest to understand result of several searches:

http://oregonstate.e...84/minwage.html

So,as anyone can see, these figures tell an entirely different story than what has been bandied about as an excuse for gross profiteering.

BTW Your profile doesn't say your age but I'd hazard your maybe 30 max. SO I'm wondering if you even know what things were like back in the 70's?

And yet AGAIN! the original question, is; are Gibsons prices too high in this economy? How much of a Rocket Scientist do you need to be to see that? Since the economy affects the ENTIRE country, then the entire country's circumstances make the answer a very simple, very plain, "YES!" some peoples children...

I'm in Canada and probably minimum wage and avergae wages may be different but the prices we pay up here are more than US prices!
That being said....The Mom & Pop Shop jacked the price on old stock not Gibson Sweetheart (in store stock prices aren't controlled by Gibson or any other vendor, once the store owner bought it it's up to them to price to sell)! New that 2005 Custom was more than $2K to begin with so I've no idea why you saw it at that price 2 years ago unless it was used then too or the shop tried a bargain sale price to sell off old stock!

Did you buy your '79 LP in 1979 or used many years later because that is also a lot cheaper than any Gibson LP new I ever saw back then.
If you did your research as well you'd also know that the greatest amount of inflation has been in the last 10-15 years for the most part which is why it took so long for minimum wage to catch up. It wasn't a linear progression (understand the word?). Average wages have increase a lot more than that for most people, especially if they have an education and aren't limited strictly to retail or unskilled.
WHy don't you take the Gibson factory tour and see where some of the overhead is coming from?
Secondly if you're going to stay on your horse, why not go after CF Martin, Taylor, PRS and any other company that charges thousands for their product as well?

[r akers (wrick)]

Ever scene (priced to low, email for a price)manufacturer wont let them print it.Now if the store purchases these items,shouldnt they be able to do with and what they please.Speaking of the seventys,you could take a girl out,pick a bottle of Boones farm (for her)and swing into a store get 3 pack of condoms for $1.75 and have at it.Today you can do almost the same thing adding 35 percent more for the meal and Boones farm and $.50 more for the condoms,add 1.50 if you take the blue pill.Now I think the use of the devises or tools have increased well beyond the rubbermans dreams making him wealthy and at the same time improving the product and new gadgits.Thirty years and only .50 cent increase,wonder the stock prices.I think the price the guitars are high and so are some of the mentioned brands.I would think sales of all of them would be lower when most are just trying to stay afloat and many high paying jobs are gone,like buying a 52 inch flat screen tv knowing your cables being shut off.I think the manufactures play a part in someway on the prices they print.

[r ferrell (raven999)]

K Urkosky (KenG), on 19 October 2010 - 08:40 PM, said:

I'm in Canada and probably minimum wage and avergae wages may be different but the prices we pay up here are more than US prices!
That being said....The Mom & Pop Shop jacked the price on old stock not Gibson Sweetheart (in store stock prices aren't controlled by Gibson or any other vendor, once the store owner bought it it's up to them to price to sell)! New that 2005 Custom was more than $2K to begin with so I've no idea why you saw it at that price 2 years ago unless it was used then too or the shop tried a bargain sale price to sell off old stock!

Did you buy your '79 LP in 1979 or used many years later because that is also a lot cheaper than any Gibson LP new I ever saw back then.
If you did your research as well you'd also know that the greatest amount of inflation has been in the last 10-15 years for the most part which is why it took so long for minimum wage to catch up. It wasn't a linear progression (understand the word?). Average wages have increase a lot more than that for most people, especially if they have an education and aren't limited strictly to retail or unskilled.
WHy don't you take the Gibson factory tour and see where some of the overhead is coming from?
Secondly if you're going to stay on your horse, why not go after CF Martin, Taylor, PRS and any other company that charges thousands for their product as well?

OK, that actually did explain quite a bit, you being Canadian. I've only been there once, nice place, needs more bars. (joke, that). Different system, too. From what I hear, it seems that everything up there is a lot more expensive than here, not gonna dispute that.

Well, on to business, since I've got some extra time today. Yonder Custom hung on the wall with a $2500 price tag, until about 2-3 weeks ago. And like I said, the price was raised, to reflect the NEW pricing index; after all, it wouldn't do to have a brand new one sitting next to it, with a 30% higher price tag, then it might raise uncomfortable questions. As for the $2000, that was specific to ME. As I said, I've spent a LOT of cash in this joint, and I may still go after that '175, she's a purty lil' *****. Factory tour? been there twice, in '96, and a year or two after that, but not recently. Strange enough, at the time, I was working for a small luthier, out of DFW, named Steve Lamb. But he didn't do solid bodies, so to get what I wanted I went to Gibson. I was also playing a Carvin, a few BC Rich, a couple old Deans...

Any way, I got off track. In Missoula, across from Hellgate HS, is ESP, a music store. I spent more time there than I did in school. I never have asked, but maybe I could, why Checkers and Dave let that Standard go for $500, maybe because I was just a kid, or, maybe to get it, and ME, out of the store so much. I would guess the latter, since usually, an hour or so after I got there, Ken Colbo, our (often angry)Vice Principal would "escort" me back to whichever class I happened to be missing from.

Now, on to the money mess. This chart explains that in the U.S., mind you; in the late 1960's, the dollar then as compared to 2010 dollars, had a value (buying power) of between $8-10, while the Min. Wage was below $2/hr.
This stayed relatively consistent through the '70's DESPITE an increase in wages, that being due to inflation. In approx. 1980, even though the wage was increasing at a steady rate, the buying power of the dollar began to decrease at an equal, then greater rate. This was during the Reagan years, when the US was riding a wave of popularity across the planet, (primarily driven by a political effect). So, during these "hey-days" (I think that's the proper phrase?) U.S. products were assumed to be more valuable, and, as the chart shows, wages were flat lined long enough for this inflationary effect to further reduce the domestic buying power another 25%. At two points in the '90's, the minimum wage was increased, and the buying power of the dollar, increased equally, but at each point, when the wage was not increased, the buying power of the dollar, continued to decrease in a NON- linear fashion; ( yes, as you may have gathered, I am very well conversant with the English language,and mathmatic terms, not bad for kid who never finished 11Th grade, huh?) during the last period, from 1997-2007, the buying power of the dollar, using the 2010 values, fell to the point that the dollar only had a 25% preceived value, over it's current value. As this chart illustrates,for the last 5 years the buying power of the dollar has only just kept pace with actual wage values, while prices on all goods have increased. Using a CPI calculator, a $750 dollar item, in 1965,(my birth year) should be $5046.62 in 2009. Using the same calculator, using 1973 data, (because it was an even number) $2.00/hr minimum wage should be $9.55/hr, also in 2009.
Currently Minimum Wage is $7.25. Please to remember, this is only a broad comparison, and does not reflect every product item, nor does it reflect the costs of some services, such as insurance, medical, media, transportation,utility, or any number of others which were either not available during the earlier times, or were not an indispensable/ mandatory service (such as health insurance).

Now, on to the last, don't worry, we're almost done, and I think you're gonna like this part... Comparing other guitar companies to Gibson? Why? A Gibson is a Gibson, nothing else is. But, since you asked...CF Martin, I'm not an acoustic aficionado, but, I did check one out. Once. Quite possibly the most uncomfortable guitar I've ever held, it made me think that whoever designed the blasted thing REALLY hated guitar players. But a reasonably nice sound. Still preferred my PR5-E. Taylor's, are every bit some of the sweetest sounding, easiest playing, and nicest looking acoustics I've messed with, short of some truly custom made, like D'Angelico, but I still haven't seen one that I felt was truly worth more than 2/3Rd's of the listing price ( BTW, I NEVER go by MSRP, I always go by out the door price.) PRS. Hm, what can I say...well, nothing good, other than they make nice wall ornaments. The only apples to apples comparison is the Single Cut, to a Studio, if one were to be exacting in features and appointments. In that case, the Single Cut would often win, due to a figured top, if it had one (some do, I think). Otherwise, they simply don't have the same features. They're well made, thousands of musicians use them, they're currently the guitar I see most often on stages across the country, and having the scalloped cut-away, is a great equalizer. But it's still not a Gibson, and not good enough for me to spend that kind of money for, not even a used one. If I were given one, it would IMMEDIATELY be traded for a Gibson, that very day.

But all of this, the whole debate, and our arguments, both, yours, and mine, are all stuff and nonsense. Even the original question is a mistake. It doesn't specify which model. Some models are perfectly priced, I can even think of a few that are UNDER valued. We've been debating the issue, as if ALL Gibson's were of the same price range, and value. Also, if this very same question were applied across the board to every other product being made, I believe that the answer would also be yes, in at least 75% of the cases. Perhaps the question should have been; are the most PRIZED guitars in the Gibson line too high priced for this economy? And a follow up would be; can Gibson produce a version of those lines that will be affordable enough to the buying public, so as to keep them a viable, relevant option to the up and coming, and future generations of musicians?

As I see it, realistically, there are only TWO people that can answer either of those. Henry, being one of them. The reason for that is simple. We don't have a dog in that fight, it's THEIR company, and THEIR profit margin, that's at stake. They're the ones paying the bills, not us. They know how much those bills cost, we don't. It ain't a public company, it's THEIR company,and none of us are directly responsible, all we do is flap our gums.If this company continues to succeed, then we all share a bit in the glory. But if it fails, in the end, all the onus lands on their shoulders.

This is to Henry himself: after further reflection, I'll modify what I said yesterday. I personally will not be buying any NEW Gibson's until such a time as I feel the prices are in line, based ONLY, on MY finances. Everyone else, with all due respect, do as you wish, but I am flat out tired of, and done with, this topic.

[m dailey (milod)]

RE: Epi...

Actually I don't recall anyone referring to the entire Epi line as "beginner guitars," although there's no question that many lower-end models certainly are, and are referred to as such.

I didn't think much of Epi as such back in the 1960s, either for acoustic or electric. OTOH, a Harmony, either classical or the "Sovereign" flat tops, were pretty well accepted. In retrospect, I'm not sure why. I never touched an Epi in that era.

Nowadays... I have a Dot and a low-end A-E. The Dot is an excellent instrument, at least in its current new state. The low end A-E is fine if you consider it a "parlor guitar" rather than something to play Bluegrass with.

Woods... We're in an entirely different marketplace. The Epi Dot neck is exceptional in terms of the externals of playability, etc., etc. The internal wood qualities? I dunno. If it lasts for another 20-30 years that's likely all I'll be using it anyway.

I do wonder about the neck on that very inexpensive A-E. I think I may have to diddle a bit with the truss rod and/or nut. Is the wood sufficiently cured and of quality to last 20-50 years? I dunno. I'm assuming a lot of 'em are made and not of the finest woods... and one might have an almost perfect batch of wood or .... something much less.

Still - Epi is a broad brand on its own with offerings from beginner stuff to instruments I doubt will embarrass anyone.

RE: price tags... Wood is my "thing" on a lotta the price and quality issues today.

It seems to me a lot easier and cheaper to find a single aged board and chunk of maple with a degree of quality and proper aging to bolt together into a "guitar." Once one involves imported woods, it's a different game. There's no question in my mind that the increase in difficulties is geometric. "We" howl about deforestation and yet howl for high quality wood guitars.

The U.S had 150 million folks when I was a kid. It's double that today. Ditto around the world. The effect of that fact has much to do with a lotta stuff that's involved in guitar manufacture, probably most especially the wood marketplace from forest to aging to a finished guitar.

Just consider variations on mahogany, the types of cuts, etc., for guitar sides, backs and necks. Then figure proper aging of the wood. Then one must work around various imperfections one can see. An error and the wood is virtually worthless.

Purely from economics, maple, alder, ash and poplar (Strat) are functionally domestic and relatively inexpensive woods. Mahogany ain't either one.

One might go on and on about the greater difficulty of manufacturing a Gibson-type electric of any sort compared to a bolt-on neck solidbody of any sort. If one ages woods only a year or two, that still is contrary to most current manufacturing practices of buying parts only as needed and certainly adds to production planning difficulties.

m