Question of the Week For BP

[oddjob]

but consumers are plenty smart and would recognize that it's not a MM bass.

?????????????????????????
What teenagers have you been around?


When I started I didn't know ANYTHING about basses... quality wasn't a concern, looks and affordibility were. Most of the kids I work with now are in the same boat. Will they grow out of it? I hope so (and some are starting to) but until then the 100-400 market is wide open.

 

[mynan]

?????????????????????????
What teenagers have you been around?


When I started I didn't know ANYTHING about basses... quality wasn't a concern, looks and affordibility were. Most of the kids I work with now are in the same boat. Will they grow out of it? I hope so (and some are starting to) but until then the 100-400 market is wide open.

I guess I was a "kid" until I was about 25...

 

[JeffreyB]

I find all of this very interesting, and it's great to see the arguments both "for" and "against" a budget line of MM-type instruments....this started me thinking about the Asian made instruments that come through our store...It is absolutely AMAZING to see the qualitym as well as the beautiful pieces of figured maple for under 500 bucks. I've been wishing that there were some MM guitars and basses in that price range...I think it would definitely fill a void, and also help to increase product awareness and ultimately help the sales of the California built models.
just my .02....

 

[Big Poppa]

at 500 it is veneer and not really a real top

 

[JeffreyB]

but hey...I'd buy a 500 axis with a nice looking quilt veneer....as long as it has the same neck shape and some good sounding pickups!!!!

 

[boristhespider7]

Well, even when I was a teenager I knew the difference between an American Jazz Bass and a Mexican one, an Epiphone Les Paul and a Gibson, etc. I did my research. And I didn't have the internet back then. I think teens are pretty savy today. They can check out the web, look at Musician's Friend, and do a lot of research. Unless they totally spontaneously decide to grab an instrument and rock out, then I suspect consumers, including teens, would understand that an off-brand MM copy's quality cannot be attributed to MM. If MM has a hand in it, however, a bad experience will more likely be impugned to MM itself. By the way, if you are right that the teens don't know the difference, then how many of them and their friends do you think believe they are playing on a real MM bass when playing an imitation? If that's the case, it could be the worst possible scenario.

I also agree with "Why try so hard to get into an already overcrowded highly competitive market?" If these low-end imitations have proved to be so financially difficult, why keep pushing it? Sure, the argument is always: if there's a viable market, we should be in it! Well, I don't necessarily think that's true in all circumstances. Maybe then, MM should start selling those beginner guitars and basses in the music aisle of Target or Walmart with the "Starcaster" that Fender sells. Heck, there's a market, let's be in it. Maybe Modulus and Paul Reed Smith will be in Target soon too. In the end, I bet MM could make a lot more money designing a line of sweet high-end bass or guitar amps that all of the faithful would buy.

I also agree with the other posters above. I never thought of Fender the same way after the Squier series no matter how high end the model. I'd play one in the store and a tone knob would come off. To me that was Fender, no matter what the headstock said. Gibson I cut a bit more slack because I always thought many Epiphones were of decent quality, but still. Even though I own no boutique basses, I have respect for where many of them stand: we are going to be of a certain tier and quality and if you can afford it, great, if not, save up.

I also don't have a lot of sympathy for the "I can't afford it" argument. The truth is: you can't afford it right now and you want it now! I couldn't afford any of my initial equipment. As a teen, I first rented a bass and I worked, put money in the bank in a disciplined fashion, and bought the instrument I wanted (an entry-level Ibanez) when I could afford it. And you know what, it was very satisfying to know that I had accomplished that. I did the same thing every time I wanted a nicer instrument through high school and college. Today, I actually don't think it's that hard to save up $1400, even as a teen or college student. You just have to be willing to make trade-offs and determine "how bad you want it."

So indeed, there are arguments both ways on this issue as this forum demonstrates. People get emotional about their basses, cars and other luxuries that they believe carry a certain cache. They don't want that cache to be cheapened. You won't see Coach come out with the "Coach Jr." line of lower-end leather products and purses and sell them in Target. It cheapens the brand. To some companies, that's acceptable as long as it's profitable. Thus, to some, this is a purely economic dicussion: "is there a market and can we make money in it?" I definitely think there needs to be entry level instruments for beginners, dabblers, and those exploring if they really enjoy playing -- I was one many years ago. But, I think the market has already taken care of that niche. Why must a company widely considered to make the best basses in the world spend its time, energy, and resources focusing on this area especially where quality and profits have always seemed to be problematic? There is no requirement to be in the entry-level field.

 

[Smallmouth_Bass]

I was under the impression that the entry level market was somewhat lucrative and the lower margins were made up in volume.

 

[Kristopher]

Well, even when I was a teenager I knew the difference between an American Jazz Bass and a Mexican one, an Epiphone Les Paul and a Gibson, etc. I did my research. And I didn't have the internet back then. I think teens are pretty savy today.

Man, when I was a kid and didn't have a job, all I would do was take my worn out copy of Musician's Friend to school and stare at it all day. Didn't take too long before I knew the difference between all the popular models and their prices. Kids love to daydream about all that stuff when they just start out, which is why I can now see one of the points behind this discussion.

The other point being, someone is gonna sell kids a MM copy somehow, it might as well put some $ in the pockets of EB and get the EB stamp of approval.

 

[Old_Guy]

...I suspect consumers, including teens, would understand that an off-brand MM copy's quality cannot be attributed to MM. If MM has a hand in it, however, a bad experience will more likely be impugned to MM itself.
...I also agree with the other posters above. I never thought of Fender the same .... You won't see Coach come out with the "Coach Jr." line of lower-end leather products and purses and sell them in Target. It cheapens the brand. ...There is no requirement to be in the entry-level field.

Brother Boris,
We all love you man.
Let's just say the best intelligence needs to be applied to determine the facts, which will answer the question "Is there logical business case for an entry level, MM branded instrument?" That need, if justified, is both offensive (increased bottom line for EBMM) and defensive (defending the brand from unlicensed cheap knock offs - and we've all seen the "Givsons" etc.)

If this isn't conventional widom, there needs to be a marketing survey to determine what influences the entry level segment to buy. Heck, I don't know. GM imported Asian cars for years, rebadging them as Chevys; now the Hyndai and Kia folks market under their own name. I have a Rollei camera that prides itself on being "designed" in Germany, it's made in Thailand along with most Nikons. You're definitely very right; consumers have an expectation that the parent of the brand is responsible, regardless of the country of origin - that's why consumers buy the brand. We can run a survey in the forum, but I think we all know the answer already. "I want an EBMM. I can't afford one. I'm going to GC with a price point of $500...."

I think we all know that the Coach Leather products used to be stitched by hand in NYC workshops; they're mostly made in Asia and the money's being made on the non-leather goods (fabric); most of these products are submlimated logo goods. With these well established brands, there's a lot of leveraging of brand equity. I'm pretty sure Harley Davidson sells more T-shirts than motorcycles. I'd personally rather not see the EBMM brand diluted, and I'd rather see more cross marketing (sunglasses, apparel, whatever) than flimsy instruments, but I realistically believe that someone's going to push the legal limits on brand infringement if there's money in it. It's a lot easier to make a knock off SR4 than a knock off Harley Sportster. And I sure as heck don't want to see EBMM get swallowed by giant competitors that have a product on every price point.

Why didn't the 914 work out for Porche? I remember them as being cheap; you could get a Karman Ghia (I had one) for less money, and it had the reliability of the Beetle. Remember the Cadillac Cimmaron? Didn't fool anybody, sure wasnt' a Cadillac. So back to the question - and I again I believe that EB needs to tap into this market for both offensive and defensive reasons - how do you leverage the brand without diluting it?

For my friend Boris - I don't know what BP's R&D budget is, but that's cash that is spent right off the top and has to get amortized into the selling price of every instrument. (Dudley has to eat too). More instruments = more R&D available = better electronics, manufacturing, QC, etc. There's usually a trickle down (Cadillac Northstar engine now shows up in Chevy products) which is good for all of us.

 

[jaylegroove]

All these inputs are really, really interesting.

While I still think there will be some budget customers who will be unable to understand that a $200 Asian-crafted instrument can't be as good as its MIA $2,000 counterpart, I have no doubt EBMM should, in a way or another, be here on the low budget market. Simply because, historically, the Ernie Ball Company was a major actor (and probably THE major actor) in democratizing of music playing. Think of the strings and wide range of accessories.

Now, as I said, I still fear that too bad a quality on low-budget licenced copies may reflect on EBMM a negative way, thus my early "suggestion" of getting inspiration from the SUB series.

Also, the low-budget customer ain't necessarily the teenage beginner. He can also be anyone who, for many possible reasons, can't afford a $1,000 instrument. Or can't afford it anymore (still for any reason one may imagine). This customer may have trained ears. Probably he used to be an EBMM player and had to sell his beloved Stingray to pay for the new car (or so) while he just lost his job. There are many challengers in the low budget market, and the guy could be tempted to get a Yammy or so if the quality of the next EBMM licenced copy is not higher than what OLP used to offer.

Just my 2 cents, all IMHO, of course.

 

[jaylegroove]

Good point, Mark !

This one was stamped "Porsche" but actually was a Volkswagen. While Porsche fans would scream "blasphemy", sports car fans on a budget turned their heads towards other brands, and as far as I remember the 914 did not meet much success (at least in Europe).

 

[Old_Guy]

Jean, it didn't do well in the US either - matter of fact, anytime Porche tries to get away from the their iconoclastic air cooled rear-engined 911 formula, they get spanked, with the noteable exception of their Cayenne SUV. Of course the truth is VW, Audi and Porche are all owned by the same parent company, but they carefully (with the excpetion of the 914) maintain the brand.
I find it odd that there's most examples of sucessful up marketing than down marketing these days - The DeWalt power tool line; actually Black & Decker but carefully segmented; Lexus, Infiniti and Acura, etc. Of course we have BFR here. It's very challenging to go down market. SigArms (Sig Sauer) tried putting out a polymer pistol to compete with Glock in the weapons contract market and got spanked hard. Their recovery strategy involved dumping the "SigArms" brand completely - all products are now branded Sig Sauer. The "Chrysler TC by Maserati" was a huge disaster. What's fasinating me right now is this month's Consumer Reports that has a Chevy Malibu sucessfully compared to a Caddy CTS, BWM 328i, Mercedes-Benz C300 and a SAAB 9-3. I never thought I'd live to be that old. But again, the 'perceived value' is going to be that one of these other cars has got to be better because they cost more. So if anything, BP should raise prices. Sorry folks!

The imaginary line of "EB StarvingArtist" instruments would be manufactured in some Asian Tiger factory. Materials costs would be marginally lower, labor would be somewhat lower - but not at Malaysian sweat shop levels. (Good PR point will be how BP isn't exploiting unregulated cheap Asian labor). Greater emphasis on robotics, synthetic materials standardization (Project Bongo's goal) and QC. Ideal price point to compete with ______ (Jaguar? MIM P/J?). Branding emphasis is Mick Jagger, "you get what you need."

 

[Aussie Mark]

the truth is VW, Audi and Porche are all owned by the same parent company, but they carefully (with the excpetion of the 914) maintain the brand.

They also own Skoda too these days, and apparently the Skodas are quite surprising, almost SUB-like in how they've sneaked under the radar.

 

[strummer]

A lot of business talk, from minds a lot sharper than mine

I will just say that the OLP is a good idea, because giving people the option to get with the program is important. I mean, if you play cheapo Squires or what-nots, you aren't suddenly going to buy a MusicMan when you have the sufficient funds. Of course not. More likely you are pissed off at the brand for not making the product available to you.

I hope EB find a good partner to make new licensed copies!

 

[silverburst]

Maybe a different model for an entry-level instrument? An appearnce or feature that would make it different than the current MM line-up, but still be loosely associated with the brand.

Toyota introduced the Lexus brand successfully (think BFRs), then came out with the entry-level youth-oriented Scion line and has done pretty well with it.

 

[Big Poppa]

Boris

I love your arguments as they incite some really good responses....Old Guy what do you do for a living? You have a handle on this stuff.

To Boris......Why assume that it will be a bad experience? Dont you think that what I would approve would be better than the crap that is in the marketplace? Overcrowded/ Its overcrowded because people want it at that price point.You almost sound like Yogi Berra...."Nobody goes there, it's too crowded" If you didnt think the same of Fender maybe its because what a Fender became separate from the whole cover all price points philosophy? Finally the classic extention of an argument to make a point is pointless...."WEll, if you are going to do that why not set them on fire at hate rallies?" WE arent talking about Target o Walmart but if I could I would because it frustrates the hell out of me that they sell unplayable guitars that slaughtder the curious and eliminate future players.....I cannot tell you how many people come upto me and say, "I bought my son/daughter a guitar and he /she has no musical talent" I ask where they got the guitar and its bed bath and beyond, costco target.....


Old guy the hardest marketing is up marketing...the easiest is leveraging a premium IF you retain the appearance of vibe....Seiko cannot make a rolex. Lexus is a paradigm shifting excercise. so is the Scion. Rex hits the nail on the head. Toyota is one of the three greatest companies in the history of business. So any sucessful evaluation of this issue must include a heavily weighted factor of "who 9is the one doing it?" Toyota does a better job than Chrysler and I would pay attention to them based on their integrity and track record and I would really have to struggle to take Chrysler seriously. Im a car buff. Have way too many. I have always said that when the Americans make a real competitive sports car I would buy it. The Z06 Corvette is a super car and I still cant pull the trigger.


Very good poijnt as far as exploiting foriegn labor. It is a very important criteria for me. The limited importing we do is from factories that we have inspected and assured the social benefit the company provides its employees. I am basically a consevative but I do not believe that it is proper to prosper at the expense of others. WE pay more for everything because of this.

 

[boristhespider7]

I'm here to serve.

 

[Big Poppa]

youre the man B

 

[WillPlay4Food]

My son received a Harley pajama set from a bike riding friend last year. I was truly bummed that Harley had no problem putting their logo and selling product in their dealerships that was made in China. Kinda kills the whole "Born & Bred in the US of A" vibe to me. (Not to go nationalistic but I know many people are quite proud their bike was assembled in the US (can't say manufactured because I don't know the pedigree of the bike parts).)

 

[Old_Guy]

Maybe a different model for an entry-level instrument? An appearnce or feature that would make it different than the current MM line-up, but still be loosely associated with the brand.

Toyota introduced the Lexus brand successfully (think BFRs), then came out with the entry-level youth-oriented Scion line and has done pretty well with it.

My thinking as well. Not a strict copy (like OLP) but identifyably EBMM. Headstock that echoed, but didn't duplicate; etc. Call those BWM folks back for a reattack.

BP: I'm here to serve, along with Brother Boris. I love cars too, and as badly as I wanted the new Saturn Sky, I had to go with a Miata on my latest "back from Iraq" present. But on the topic of social responsibility, I appreciate and concur - I don't feel guilty owning your instruments. I do feel guilty having seen Korean sweater factories and indentured Philippino workers in the middle east about a whole host of other things though. That's another program!