@squirel .. ouch.. well its my personal opinion... well don't get so upset browhats wrong with u?
well i said no offend to gibson fans
Offense you mean and its SQUIRREL with 2 R's
I cannot believe the hogwash...
- Thread starter Whitestrat
- Start date
Offense you mean and its SQUIRREL with 2 R's
dun get so anal over their singlish dood. not everybody here is as proficient in english as u are
anyway, i just think gibson, like many other companies now, have their own fans and haters. this thread just gathers more haters than fans cos of its controversial nature. gibson also really is in a slowdown now thanks to their almost non existent QC. this (gibson's new hendrix guitar) may be their way of getting back into its game but as always, there will be people who dun see eye to eye with them
dun get so anal over their singlish dood. not everybody here is as proficient in english as u are
My point exactly, don't get so uptight about everything. Like for example THIS WHOLE TOPIC. It's irritating when I correct people's english right. It's the same when people complain about such trivial matters. Just let it be. P.S yes i'm very biased towards Gibsons.
haha we all know dood!! ur previous post on that starting big...pretty obvious. well as i said, u either love it or hate it. personally, the older gibsons made before some year which i forgot has got a really nice sound to it. thick and warm sound that kinda gives musical orgasms.
but each company has its own unique sound. its just sad that one company as famous as this wants to copy its direct competitor.
but each company has its own unique sound. its just sad that one company as famous as this wants to copy its direct competitor.
MadWerewolfBoy
New member
A Jimi Hendrix tribute guitar based on a Fender Stratocaster made by Gibson..
That sentence sums up what the product is all about.. *boomz*
That sentence sums up what the product is all about.. *boomz*
Whitestrat
New member
That is downright rude, arrogant and uncalled for. Eclipze has contributed to this forum in many more ways that you can count. And you come in here waving your English at him? That kind of a neanderthal are you?
The man is NOT a native speaker! Throw your non-existant Bahasa at him if you dare.:twisted:
Yes it is, actually. There are 2 versions. There will be a Gibson set-neck version (which I do think might be interesting, if not for the strat-shape)where the headstock is an adulterated version of the current open-book style.:???:
Gibson... innovations... Wow... Putting a Floyd Rose into a Les Paul is innovative? Adding PCBs to guitars is innovative? Having a built-in synth module is innovative? They are at least 20+ years too late!
Oh... I forgot... You're too young to know this.
Whitestrat
New member
You contradict yourself. If you're biased towards Gibsons, then it means you feel something for the brand. If so, then anyone who steps on the brand, would upset you. It's not such a trivial matter to you after all, is it?
I am a Gibson owner. I am also a Strat fan. I'm also sort of a Hendrix Fan. This has to do with how Gibson has been taking below-the-belt shots at Fender for the longest time. The last I remember was their deliberate claiming in a blog that Eric Clapton played Gibsons (which was true, but it was so long ago, it's a moot point) Then there was the blatant bashing of Fender's VG strat using the Robot as a comparison.
I can appreciate fair competition. But just because you do appear to have a better product doesn't mean you go and rub your neighbour's nose into it. That's not very gentlemanly behaviour.
THAT is one of the other reasons why I posted about this JH guitar. The irony is just too much. They blast Fender in the past about having weak sustain, and that bolt-ons are an inferior design, yet now they release this. It shows a severe lack of integrity. It's not the brand that's at fault. The brand is a thing. It doesn't decide for itself. The customers and management decide. Yet here is a management decision that is obviously poor judgement from the brand perspective.
Here's a free lesson from me in Branding 101: It's like Body Shop claiming to be animal testing free, then they get bought over by a giant who DOES animal testing. The public outcry over that was enormous, and Body Shop almost had to close down due to a severe drop in sales. And how Classic Coke went out-of-stock nationwide when Americans were so scared they'd lose it when Coke wanted to release an "improved" version.
So, when it affects human emotions, it's no longer a trivial matter. It's THE SAME CASE when you're talking about religious fanatics now. It's NOT a trivial matter to them that you get to eat in peace. Understand?
RicFreak
New member
OUCHHH!!!!
Mr White, give the guy a break man
We were young once too.Squirrel :We all do agree Eclipze deserves the due respect.
Please do some homework before lashing out at fellow softies.
Whitestrat
New member
give the guy a break man
*sigh*... you mean we were this stupid too? :mrgreen:
RicFreak
New member
snuffleupagus
New member
Fender and Gibson are both corporate entities who have legitimate business reasons to set their own flip-flopping policies as according to the evolving market.
This is nothing new, and it is common amongst all sorts of rival companies in all sectors of industry, to market their products whichever way they want.
If it means stepping on each other's toes, or making claims of controversial proportions, it's all part of business.
In the USA and many parts of the world, competitor brand bashing is a common culture adopted by Ad agencies and branding officers.
The grey area in your potential "business ethics" debate with me would as that, a grey area in all sense of its meaning.
Product misinformation, fraudulent claims (Which must be proved via facts and not based on limited research or hearsay- e.g Jimi is already dead, so we don't know if he did or did not know his step sister) and public deception etc, is a totally different story which shares no relevant tangent to the point I'm going to make which is that......
...We, as consumers are influenced by many factors when it comes to product perception ( Google Consumerism) and therefore demographically, we are bound to have differing opinions and tastes and perceptions.
In summary, What pisses you off about a brand or product , may not have the same effect on another consumer. You choose what you want to buy as you see fit, and no one is going to force you.
Personally to me, I know that Gibson is not a stratocaster maker,and that Hendrix had never wielded a Gibson Strat before, but I would buy it just to see Gibson's take on a stratocaster.
This is nothing new, and it is common amongst all sorts of rival companies in all sectors of industry, to market their products whichever way they want.
If it means stepping on each other's toes, or making claims of controversial proportions, it's all part of business.
In the USA and many parts of the world, competitor brand bashing is a common culture adopted by Ad agencies and branding officers.
The grey area in your potential "business ethics" debate with me would as that, a grey area in all sense of its meaning.
Product misinformation, fraudulent claims (Which must be proved via facts and not based on limited research or hearsay- e.g Jimi is already dead, so we don't know if he did or did not know his step sister) and public deception etc, is a totally different story which shares no relevant tangent to the point I'm going to make which is that......
...We, as consumers are influenced by many factors when it comes to product perception ( Google Consumerism) and therefore demographically, we are bound to have differing opinions and tastes and perceptions.
In summary, What pisses you off about a brand or product , may not have the same effect on another consumer. You choose what you want to buy as you see fit, and no one is going to force you.
Personally to me, I know that Gibson is not a stratocaster maker,and that Hendrix had never wielded a Gibson Strat before, but I would buy it just to see Gibson's take on a stratocaster.
Whitestrat
New member
I agree with you on the consumerism bit as well as the flip flopping bit. I also would like to take a look at that set-neck Gibson USA SSS rear routed strat-like product (not the starter pack).
I guess the key problem I have to this is the usual "sacrilege" bit about Gibson producing a stratocaster-type guitar that bears Jimi Hendrix's name. and how they used to bash the bolt-on model while making a starter pack with a bolt-on config. At least the Gibby version does offer something fresh in this take.
Of course, if it was a Janie Hendrix signature model, I couldn't care less. Hahahaha...
mockingbird
New member
Really, if this guitar is cheap, and it's available here, I might just get one.
j_m_s
New member
anyway.. looks like the link on the site has been pulled.
and squirrel, you do bear similar resemblance (in typing as well as your defense of Gibson) to a fellow member here who seems to have recently disappeared.
hmmmm.
@ Jordan, they were actually priced pretty cheap. From what I saw on the site i believe it was $299 usd for the "little wing" package model, and then it moves upwards for the other models..
and squirrel, you do bear similar resemblance (in typing as well as your defense of Gibson) to a fellow member here who seems to have recently disappeared.
hmmmm.
@ Jordan, they were actually priced pretty cheap. From what I saw on the site i believe it was $299 usd for the "little wing" package model, and then it moves upwards for the other models..
squirrel's getting irritating already
Similar threads
- Locked
