Chinese flatiron

[jbrwky]

I saw a Chinese made mando with the Flatiron logo in the Gibson booth at Merlefest yesterday. So the rumors were true. I think I understand why they did it but as an owner of two really great American made Flatirons I felt a little sad when I saw it. Ah, progress.

[bradeinhorn]

interesting- anyone get a chance to play one? i am sure we'll hear about it on monday...

[MikeEdgerton]

Did it look like a re-branded Epiphone or was it a different instrument all together?

[mythicfish]

Not to worry ... I doubt if yours will relinquish their "citizenship"
BTW ... since this brand hasn't been available for years I don't understand why anyone would/ should care where they're made.

Curt

[bradeinhorn]

i agree with curt. anyone who cares to know, will know the difference. i am just curious if they'll be another pacrim junker or a competitor for the km1000 or eastmans.

[jbrwky]

Curt, do you own one?

[Greenmando]

I have been hoping to buy a Flatiron F4 for years now, I wish I had not passed on the prototype now.

[mando_dan]

jbrwky, I'm right there with you- I own two Flatirons, a pre-Gibson and a Gibson Nashville, and I'm a bit distressed that another icon (yes, Flatirons are icons in the mandolin world) is now a cheap knock-off. I'm sure the Collings contingent (or fill in the blank with another current American-made mandolin company) would feel equally betrayed if their company's production were moved over seas. A Korean Collings is not the same as a Texas Collings. And an American Flatiron is not the same a Chinese Flatiron. Yes, I care. In fact I'll go on record saying that what Gibson is doing with the Flatiron name is dishonorable.

Flame away, but please, do not call me a jingoist or xenophobic as those names do not apply.

[allenhopkins]

BTW ... since this brand hasn't been available for years I don't understand why anyone would/ should care where they're made.

The point I tried to make in this lengthy thread on Chinese Flatirons, when Greg Boyd announced that he'd heard a rumor that Gibson was going to make them in China -- was that it's too bad when an established American brand, associated with excellence, is co-opted for a "budget line" of imported instruments. Examples such as Epiphone, Washburn, Regal (well, maybe not totally "associated with excellence") abound.

Maybe Gibson is going to give the "Flatiron" label to high-quality imported instruments, similar to Eastman or Kentucky. Experience with their Epiphones isn't all that encouraging, although the recent introduction of a "Masterbilt" line of quality Epiphone guitars is hopeful.

It's a bit sad when it just becomes a marketing ploy, not an effort to carry on the quality of the original line. I've heard that Fender Co. has taken the Guild line overseas, and of course the label "Fender" has long since been attached to a variety of inexpensive imported instruments, as well as quality imports and domestically-made models.

I also recall from the former thread, that our friends who work for Gibson stated they weren't informed that "export" of the Flatiron label was under consideration. Wonder if their opinions or input were solicited at any point in the decision process?

[MikeEdgerton]

As far as marketing goes I totally understand why Gibson would use the Flatiron name on an imported line of instruments. There is still value to the brand and this is obviously an attempt to profit from that value, and as they say, that's business.

With that said I also understand the distress this might cause those loyal Flatiron owners, but in reality the brand changed when Gibson bought Flatiron, this is just a continuation of that change. If anything it will probably add value to your American made instruments.

There's a part of me that hopes this is simply Gibson trying to grab market share in the Eastman et al portion of the mandolin market and that they will be selling a high end, high quality import brand as opposed to simply re-branding the Epiphone instruments as Flatiron's.

[jk245]

Today, search of the Gibson website has no indication of the said Flatiron either on product pages or press release.
Until product is available for testing and evaluated it is not fair to make a value judgment on this product.

If you have questions call Big Joe and he will tell you whatever the Gibson company wants you to know. As recent as last month on this he said



Posted: Mar. 28 2007, 16:27 QUOTE
"Rumors are always flying about Gibson products and its subsidiary products. That is nothing new. Some of them actually become true, but most do not. Could there be an imported Flatiron at some time in the future? Who knows. It has been discussed and several options have been included, including European imports. What will occur in the future? We will just have to wait to find out. I will only state what I know to be fact concerning these issues. There is always lots of speculation and that seems to make the cafe readers joyful. Just always take what someone who "knows" with a grain of salt. Until it is announced publicly it is just another idea someone may have passed around that will not likely ever see the light of day. "

Big Joe Quote

[MikeEdgerton]

I don't think anyone is making a value judgment, you're talking raw emotions here, and the fact that it was on display in a Gibson booth at a major festival pretty much says that it exists no matter what anyone has said in the past. Big Joe put forth that message based on either what he knew or what he was allowed to say, it really doesn't matter either way. It sounds as if Greg Boyd knew something that the rest of the industry didn't.

[John Flynn]

BTW ... since this brand hasn't been available for years I don't understand why anyone would/ should care where they're made.

I have no bias about where mandolins are made. I'd be proud to own a good mandolin from anywhere. I do think people are justifiably reacting to couple of ironies. 1) The perception, possibly true, that Gibson and its supporters have led the editorial opposition to Asian-made mandolins, but now Gibson is launching a brand of Asian-made mandolins, and 2) That Gibson hinted strongly that the new Flatirons would all be made here and now they are obviously not. It is much like the US car companies who led the outcry against Japanese cars at the same time they were cutting deals with Toyota, Suzuki, Mazda and a host of Asian parts suppliers. It's not so much the action itself, it's the hypocrisy.

For that reason, I would never choose to buy a new Gibson, Flatiron or Epiphone, even if I thought they were the best mandolin for the money, which I don't think they are. Just MHO.

[MikeEdgerton]

The perception, possibly true, that Gibson and its supporters have led the editorial opposition to Asian-made mandolins, but are now launching a brand of Asian-made mandolins

That couldn't possibly be true, they've marketed two brands of Asian instruments for years. The Epiphone's were outsourced to the far east in the early 70's.

Gibson is in business to make money. If they are bringing on a new line of import instruments they are simply following the market. They have a major share of the high-end market but I doubt they even scratch the middle of the market or for that matter the low end of the market. The same dealers that sell high end instruments generally sell mid and low end instruments. It's found money if they can get brand acceptance without diluting their high end models.

[John Flynn]

That couldn't possibly be true, they've marketed two brands of Asian instruments for years. The Epiphone's were outsourced to the far east in the early 70's.

I didn't imply they only became hypocritical just recently. You should do some searches to threads that go back a few years, if they still exist. See if it "can't possibly be true."

The "just in the business to make money...just following the market" arguments are true and they are fine as far as they go. But if your target market doesn't like what you are doing, your market won't follow you and you won't make money.

[MikeEdgerton]

Actually, I've been a member under another name for a few years. I've read them.

Gibson's target market does support their high end market and you need to take into account he fact that Gibson doesn't just sell mandolins. This move won't lose any market share for Gibson. If nothing else it gets them the entry to mid customers that will move up to more expensive instruments later on. If they bought from a Gibson dealer the first time there's a good chance they will go to the same place when they move up.

Just because a few people here don't like what they are doing doesn't mean that translates across the entire spectrum. The members here are an elite group of mandolin enthusiasts. I won't deny that. It would be silly to assume that the majority of any portion of the mandolin buying public is here on any level. The market is much larger than we are.

[Chip Booth]

I believe that I have said it before, but I will say it again. #I don't like that Gibson is doing this. #I proudly own a pre-Gibson Flatiron and would like the brand name to retain it's status. #

When I was in school we all ate at a late night diner called "The Kettle". It was the place to hang out after hours. #Some years later a chain moved into town called The Kettle and forced the mom and pop diner to change it's name to Akle's. #When that happened the next generation of school kids all went to "The Kettle" because that was where they always heard they should go. #Akle's is no longer in business.

Chip

[jk245]

From a marketing standpoint Gibson can still demand a high esteem for their top of the line "Gibson" labeled merchandise.
Gibson is entitled to make a value judgment and use a purchased name for their lower end product line.
I do not think they have a choice since other makers of good reputation are making good quality products in the Orient. A well known name gives them a startup advantage.

Recently the prestige British Rover said it will become a Chinese Made Rover. Business is business.
If you still have an old original Rover it is still a great car.
If you still have an old original Flatiron it is still a great mando.

[mandroid]

The Gibson products , like Epiphone , and presumably Flatiron, have different distributorship arraingements, than OMI , as I learned in local shop chat, the minimums for each are hefty , and separate.

[MikeEdgerton]

That doesn't mean that these won't dovetail in behind the OMI instruments, and it doesn't mean that all OMI guys don't carry Epiphones.

When you sell anything that has a high to low end you try to hit the price points where people buy, that holds true if you're a manufacturer, distributor, or retailer. I'm assuming Gibson saw a hole in it's price points and is looking to fill it.

It isn't the first time they've created inexpensive second lines to sell to non-Gibson dealers either.

[fatt-dad]

bummer. . . . As a geologist, I should know this, but are there even "flatirons" in China? It's Madison-Avenue-type exploitation and inconsistent with the "traditional values" I'm familiar with. By the way, I have no problems with world economics, ala "outsourcing" or overseas manufacturing. I just see this for what it is - getting the most money out of a name that they own.

f-d

f-d

[Fretbear]

It has become clear in the last six months that the demand for higher quality mandolins at consumer reachable prices has been recognized. Visiting this website alone, both by the potential consumers and marketers, could have seen to that, just another reason to like Scott Tichenor. I have always been dismayed that a decent guitar could long be had for around a $1000 or less but that a comparable mandolin was not (Eastman notwithstanding). I solved my problem by building, but am aware that (that) is not an option for many. Even if the motive is only for common profit, which it surely is, I am still glad that mandolins like the new Kentucky KM-1000 are starting to become available to players.

[sunburst]

This one even bugs me a little.
I don't care what Gibson does in business dealings. I don't care where a mandolin is made if it is well made. I don't care if Gibson thinks they can profit from an import line. All that's none of my business.

What bothers me is this:
When Flatiron worked out the bugs in their mandolin building process, they were about the best mandolins on the market at the time, other than a handful of small builders. Gibson hadn't had any apparent interest in making quality mandolins for years. The mandolin market wasn't very strong, and Les Pauls and such were Gibson's bread and butter in those days.
Some Japanese companies were getting pretty good at making mandolins, but it was Flatiron that finally brought a quality USA made mandolin back to the market.
Rather than try to compete, Gibson bought the competition, eventually discontinued the brand, and now is reviving it only to send production where they can get cheap labor.

Flatiron, the brand that revived quality American mandolin production, is being attached to a new product for name recognition by a corporation. That's what sort of bugs me. Gibson is well within their rights. There's nothing ethically wrong with any of it. It just seems to me, and apparently to some others, that the Flatiron name deserves more than that.

[cooper4205]

There's nothing ethically wrong with any of it. It just seems to me, and apparently to some others, that the Flatiron name deserves more than that.

well put, John

[pickinNgrinnin]

[quote]BTW ... since this brand hasn't been available for years I don't understand why anyone would/ should care where they're made.

Apparently some folks do:

[quote]This one even bugs me a little.
I don't care what Gibson does in business dealings. I don't care where a mandolin is made if it is well made. I don't care if Gibson thinks they can profit from an import line. All that's none of my business.

What bothers me is this:
When Flatiron worked out the bugs in their mandolin building process, they were about the best mandolins on the market at the time, other than a handful of small builders. Gibson hadn't had any apparent interest in making quality mandolins for years. The mandolin market wasn't very strong, and Les Pauls and such were Gibson's bread and butter in those days.
Some Japanese companies were getting pretty good at making mandolins, but it was Flatiron that finally brought a quality USA made mandolin back to the market.
Rather than try to compete, Gibson bought the competition, eventually discontinued the brand, and now is reviving it only to send production where they can get cheap labor.

Flatiron, the brand that revived quality American mandolin production, is being attached to a new product for name recognition by a corporation. That's what sort of bugs me. Gibson is well within their rights. There's nothing ethically wrong with any of it. It just seems to me, and apparently to some others, that the Flatiron name deserves more than that.


I suspect more folks will be weighing in who care where the Flatirons are now being made. I agree with John's view as stated above.