My Mandolin Story.

[cntrlmn]

2 years ago I purchased a Gibson Goldrush mandolin from an individual who was not aware of any problems with the mandolin. I paid approximately 5k for the mandolin and really liked it . My son wanted a new guitar so i decided to trade the mandolin in on the new guitar and after trade in i owed $500 for the guitar so i had the store hold it until around christmas so i would not have to hide it from him. About 6 weeks went by and the store contacted me saying they could no honor my trade in because the mandolin was defective. They sold the mandolin and the person buying the mando noticed a dip in the top and sent it back to them during the trial period. They sent the mandolin to a very well known dealer in Nashville who examined the mandolin and determined that the top was to thin and that it was a factory defect and that the factory had added a patch of some sort to help prevent the top from caving in. They also contacted gibson and they also agreed that the top was to thin and that it should have never left the factory but they could not honor the warranty because I was not the original purchaser. My issue is that I was honorable enough to allow the guitar dealer to return the mandolin to me after we had made a legal trade because I know it is the right thing to do it was not their fault the mandolin was defective. I'm out 5k and 4k for the guitar for my son. Gibson even though they admit that the mandolin should have not left the factory will not do the right thing and repair it for me. I'm very disappointed with gibson on this matter I know the warranty is black and white but when it comes to a obvious lack of concern of quality by someone who built this mandolin i must question buying any more gibson products. I would like to know if anyone else has had an issue like this or has comments.

[Scotti Adams]

If what you say is fact then that bites bigtime

[P.D. Kirby]

I'm with Scotti, this is unacceptable. I would contact Gibson or the original owner of the Mandolin and see if he will return it. I know Gibson is running a little short on wood these days but that is, if true, a real issue with not only Gibsons quality but also their honesty. Someone at Gibson knew about this defect and let it go anyway otherwise it wouldn't have an attempted repair. Make sure to keep us updated as this plays out and contact Big Joe (member here) he is a former Gibson Mandolin Luthier and could probably point you to the right person at Gibson to take your complaint to. You have my sympathy, no matter who's fault it is this just should not happen!!!

[Scotti Adams]

Get ahold of David Harvey ..hes a good man. If there is something that can be done Im sure Lil Dave will get it done.

[Big Joe]

Gibson warranties are a legal contract that they must uphold... Good or bad. They only apply to the original owner with proof of purchase. In other words, you purchased a used mandolin for a substantial amount LESS than the original price. Gibson has NO obligation to you. You did not purchase it with a warranty from them. You are not the original owner and you did not purchase it from an authorized dealer. That violates two parts of the warranty. It does not matter what the condition is, Gibson has no obligation to repair it. Actually, if they do it can cause them a lot of legal issues.

The reason you bought a used instrument was to save money. When you do that, you sacrifice buying from a dealer who may help and purchase an instrument you know has no warranty. It is not the fault of Gibson your instrument has problems. You may (or may not) have recourse from the person you purchased it from, but you have no claim against Gibson. The good news is that you can have a new top put on and still not have as much invested as if you bought it new.

Gibson's warranty is no secret. It is published on their website as well as packed with each instrument when it leaves the shop. The Gibson warranty is no different from any other manufacturers warranty when it comes to the way they are handled. The warranty is ONLY to the original owner.

While it is easy to blame Gibson, no one knows what has happened to that instrument since it left the factory. They don't just put stuff under the top to make it stronger. That could well have been done by anyone at anytime. However, it does not matter when it was done or who did it, Gibson is still not obligated in any way shape or manner. It does not qualify for factory warranty coverage period. Now if you were the original purchaser, purchased it from an authorized dealer, and provide proof of purchase then they may. Be liable.

[terzinator]

If the original owner buys it back from you (to get the warranty work done), is he/she still the original owner?

I took a gander at the warranty language, and it talks all about original purchaser, and the warranty can't be transferred to subsequent owners, but it doesn't specifically say that the original owner cannot return to being the original owner if he gets the instrument back. (You'd think they'd have something in there about once a sale is made, the warranty is null and void for anyone, but it doesn't appear to say that, or I missed it.)

Not trying to find a loophole to get a free neck reset or something, but if this is truly a defect that was detected at the factory, with some kind of half-baked, deceptive "patch" (and not an accidental "not enough glue on the braces" thing), and sold as new (and not a "second" or "blem"), then it seems like there should be some heck to pay by the manufacturer. (Like I'd think the manufacturer could avoid legal issues by saying, "Heeeeyyy, this should have been a factory second! How'd it get in the "good" pile! Sorry about that! We'll take care of it so as we don't sully our reputation!")

But that's just me, talkin' out my pie hole... YMMV, etc., etc...

[multidon]

Dealing with Gibson is going to go nowhere. There is no way to prove that the patch was added at the factory and if it was added by someone later the warranty would then be void for the original purchaser too. They can always claim "Patch? What patch?".

[terzinator]

Yeah, it would be interesting to hear how the "very well known Nashville Dealer" (I assume I know who you mean) determined that the patch was added at the factory. (And then who at Gibson agreed with the assessment!)

Hopefully you have a good paper trail; if for nothing else than a good story at holiday time.

[coletrickle]

This whole story seems a little weird to me. I don't understand the fact that you made a trade, they accepted the trade and then resold the mandolin, which had a dip in the top that no one noticed until they sent it to the new buyer after the trade? How did this go to the new buyer with a sinking top? Did it happen in shipping or something?

Also, how can they not honor your trade after they had already resold the instrument? Seems to me the shop should bear the liability here. Once the instrument changed hands from you to them, then changed hands again to another party, you are removed. They approved your trade and then resold the instrument.

Maybe I am missing something (i.e. the trade was not finalized due to the $500) in which case I don't understand why they would resell an instrument that has not fully cleared the trade process.

[Ed Goist]

Yet another reason to buy from an independent luthier.
Honest individuals are much more likely to stand behind their product (and less likely to hide behind small print) than corporations...Even good corporations.
That's just a fact.

[Scotti Adams]

I recently sold a mando that had an issue..one that I could have lived with. When the new buyer was in the middle of his approval period we discussed the issue. The luthier agreed to repair the problem for the buyer after he bought it. Thats what Im talking about.

[rgray]

I kinda agree with coletrickle that the store should be liable. The store wisely knows a trial period makes good business sense in terms of customer relations, but apparently didn't apply the same general concept during the 6 weeks they "owned" your mando. It doesn't seem you were in a position to voluntarily do the honorable thing but were held over a barrel by the store who had your 5K plus the trade guitar.

I understand and agree with the business and legal aspects raised by Big Joe. Letter of the law and such. But terzinator makes a good point that the warranty says nothing about being void if the the mando changes owners and then comes back to the original owner. IF the Nashville dealer and Gibson contact were correct that this was a factory defect, I would look into having the original owner return it for warranty work.

[cutbait2]

i think its an unfortunate situation but you are really not "out" anything but time if you get your mando back. i'd have the "too thin top" story verified by someone else. there's a "well known guitar dealer" in nashville whose well known counter man told me my 32 L-00 has a top crack. it actually has a 3 piece top and you can see the seam. no cracks.

[Jeff Budz]

Big Joe,

Just because Gibson isn't legally obligated to help out in any way doesn't mean that they are not allowed to help out. Seems to me that sometimes it's really good to go "above and beyond" to make a customer happy and get good press. I can't really say I've heard any "good" stories about their customer service here on the Cafe'.

Ed,

+1 on getting a Mandolin from an independent luthier. You get to develop a relationship with one person who looks at their instruments as "their babies" and cares about their owners. After a very positive experience bringing a used mandolin to it's maker, I feel a great desire to have him make a new one for me.

Oh yeah, and the store should probably eat this too... When I worked at a music store we never went after someone when we found a problem with a trade-in later on.

Crummy situation. So does the mandolin play OK? Is it going to explode or something like that? I always loved the look of those Golden Ages, hope you can salvage the situation.

[John McCoy]

This whole thing with the store doesn't pass the smell test, at least to me. It raises several questions, just some of which are:

If this whole trade-for-guitar transaction was made with a music store, why did they need to send it to "a very well known dealer in Nashville?" If they're in the stringed instrument business (which they presumably are if they're dealing in 4-figure guitars), wouldn't they have their own expert available (if not in-house, then at least on call)?

And why send it to a "dealer" anyway? That term implies someone who exchanges your cash for their instruments--an honorable and honest endeavor certainly, but implies no expertise in the construction of instruments. Why would a dealer send it to a dealer? Shouldn't they have sent it not to a dealer but to a "well known"--and respected--luthier?

And shouldn't a well-know whatever who's issuing such a dire diagnosis (and, presumably, prognosis) of your mando let his name be used? How else did he/she/they become "well known?"

Then there are issues with the fact that the store sold the mando before the trade transaction was completed. If they gave an approval period to the buyer, then were they implying to him that the instrument was in pristine condition without checking it out first?

Keeping it short by omitting other concerns.

== John ==

[F-2 Dave]

The store surely had every opportunity to examine the mandolin before the deal was made for the trade. IMO the store decided to try to take advantage of you and avoid eating the cost. When you manufacture on the level that Gibson does, the occasional klinker will inevitably surface. It shouldn't, but it does. Since you're not the original owner, Gibson is out of the picture. After the deal was made on the trade, you should be in the clear, especially after they sold it to someone else. The problem should be between the store and whoever they sold it to. You've got my sympathy, this really stinks.

[mandolirius]

Big Joe,

Just because Gibson isn't legally obligated to help out in any way doesn't mean that they are not allowed to help out.

Actuallly, it does. Once they establish a precedent, they could find themselves in court fighting other warranty claims. They have no choice but to stick to the terms of the warranty. I'm not defending Gibson or even the legal process, but that's the reality.

[cntrlmn]

I would like to clarify a few things i may have confused you all on. I traded the mandolin in on a guitar for my son. It was a legal trade to Artisan Guitars in Franklin TN. Because I had them hold the guitar they contacted me approx 6 weeks after the deal and let me know of the defective mandolin. I at first told them that I would contact a lawyer about the trade and no doubt I would have won the argument, but I decided that it was not the right thing to do and I've bought 2 guitars from Artisan and they have always done me right and I would not feel right about doing anyone like that so I decided to just let them send me the mandolin back and I purchased the guitar outright. When Artisan sold the Mandolin the person who purchased the mandolin sent it back to them on their 10 day approval period because they noticed a sunken place in the top. After Artisan got it back they carried it to Gruhn guitars to see if there was indeed a defect and they said it should have never left the Gibson factory. The guys as Artisan contacted Gibson and talked with them and they agreed that the Mandolin carved to thin on the CNC machine(i think this is what he called it) and that the technician patched it some way to help prevent a cave in. He also stated that if I were the original buyer they would replace the mandolin no questions asked. I've already determined that there is nothing i can do, I would just like for everyone to be very careful when paying a lot of money for used items. I think in this hopefully a rare case and that since this is obviously a factory defect regardless of who originally bought the instrument Gibson would feel prideful enough to repair the instrument and make sure these kinds of defects do not leave the factory.

[Big Joe]

First, I can assure you the Goldrush was not sold with a Patch under the top to a dealer. Seconds were never sold. This may have been done after it was already in the marketplace, but it really would make no difference when, where, or who the patch was done. It is now a used, second hand instrument which the manufacturer has no obligation or moral need to repair. It may not make anyone happy, but that is the same with any company. The warranty is ONLY valid for the items the warranty states.

The same kind of warranty applies to many things. If you buy a new Rolex you will find the same thing, except that if you add any non Rolex parts you have voided your warranty. If a non certified Rolex watchmaker works on iy the warranty is dead. The same goes with nearly all fine watches, which are a lot more money than a mandolin. Look at the warranty that comes with your pistol. Same thing. The purpose of a warranty is to provide the original purchaser with some added value and protection for purchasing it new from an authorized dealer. That gives the dealer an advantage and reason to sell new. The factory knows what it is supposed to be since it is at an authorized dealer.

Once it is resold, the factory has no, zero, nada obligation to that instrument, dealer, new owner, or even old owner. They are out of the picture completely. It becomes the sole property of the new owner and his responsibility alone. That is the way it is and should be. If you want a warranty, buy it new from an authorized dealer.

About 3 times a year a post like this comes up. Everyone wants to jump on the company that built the instrument years before. Several will commen that the factory should stand behind it. They already have. To the original owner. There is no obligation to anyone else. Period. There is even the possibility that repairing an instrument not in warranty could affect every warranty ever made. By fixing one out of warranty it could be argued all should be. Fixed out of warranty.

One last word on this. The maker would never tell anyone it was built too thin or defective. No one but the owner of the company can make that statement. I will say again the patch was added later by someone. It could. Have even been added later by the repair division, but that would not make any difference to the second owner. No warranty.

One last question. Could the store or new buyer have had the work done? Did the owner not inspect it when he bought it? A lot af unanswered questions that have nothing to do with the factory.

[DerTiefster]

I posted a couple of P.M.s to you away back at about post #3, offering some suggestions which parallel some of the above info. Did they make it through or did the notices get collected by your email spambox? I'd think there remain some addressable aspects, but Big Joe's posts are absolutely correct with the conditions he discusses.

[cntrlmn]

My last replys did not make the post.

[multidon]

Everything Big Joe says regarding musical instrument warranties is absolutely true but there is one notable exception in the industry. If you buy a used Weber you can send it to Sound to Earth to be re-certified. For 200 dollars they inspect it, put on new strings, adjust the truss rod, tweak the action, and send you a new Limited Lifetime Warranty. Of course if they find any pre-existing defects those are excluded from the warranty. Just wanted to point this out because when one buys any other brand of used instrument one is on their own. Weber is the only company I know of that has a program like this. Maybe they have just a tad more pride in their workmanship?

[Bob Borzelleri]

It is entirely possible that the patch was not applied by Gibson. However, it is beyond my reasoning to comprehend how the top could end up being shaved too thin after it left the Gibson factory. Notwithstanding several creative conspiracy theory possibilities, the scenario that has the top being shaved too thin by Gibson and then being sold is the most plausible.

If Gibson let a mandolin out that Gruhn believes shouldn't have left the factory, then all the talk about term of the warranty and setting undesirable precedents or buying used to save money and the like rather miss the actual point. If what is being attributed to Gruhn is accurate, then Gibson screwed up by letting mandolin out of the factory. The only precedent that would be set by Gibson fixing this mandolin would be taking responsibility for a factory defect. All manner of companies fix out of warranty products all the time; even for 2nd owners. They do so because the facts of the matter support a fair and equitable resolution.

[Ivan Kelsall]

From the OP - "They also contacted Gibson, and they also agreed that the top was to thin and that it should have never left the factory......". If that is true,then Gibson admitted that the Mandolin was defective when it left the factory.
If you buy a car & that particular model turns out to have a defective 'whatever',many times the cars will be recalled to have the defective component removed & either repaired or replaced. That covers ALL owners (at least in the UK) whether you bought it new or 'used'.The warranty covers the car & the original components - not the original owner.
Gibson's (apparent) admission of a sub-standard instrument being sold to a dealer,should in no way void the warranty in this particular case (IMHO). The big get-out for Gibson (& other makers), is the 'original owner' bit. Sub-standard is just that,poor & defective workmanship regardless of owner. Gibson should be honour bound to put the problem right,but the get-out clause says it all (again IMHO). Bob Borzelleri above has it dead on !.
Ivan

[strings777]

It is entirely possible that the patch was not applied by Gibson. However, it is beyond my reasoning to comprehend how the top could end up being shaved too thin after it left the Gibson factory. Notwithstanding several creative conspiracy theory possibilities, the scenario that has the top being shaved too thin by Gibson and then being sold is the most plausible.

If Gibson let a mandolin out that Gruhn believes shouldn't have left the factory, then all the talk about term of the warranty and setting undesirable precedents or buying used to save money and the like rather miss the actual point. If what is being attributed to Gruhn is accurate, then Gibson screwed up by letting mandolin out of the factory. The only precedent that would be set by Gibson fixing this mandolin would be taking responsibility for a factory defect. All manner of companies fix out of warranty products all the time; even for 2nd owners. They do so because the facts of the matter support a fair and equitable resolution.

Great post Bob...agree with you 100%!

[William Smith]

Well.if its all true then to me Gibson made a huge mistake,and I'm sure the guy thats out all them thousands will pry never buy a Gibson again! but he did buy it in the first place!?
Just remember ya can do thousands of great jobs but that one bad job gets around the block a little faster!

[stetson]

I find it hard to believe that it left Gibson in that condition. Why would a worker risk his/her job trying to get away with it.
I'd find it much easier to believe the original owner had an accident and had it repaired then hid the defect to sell it.
I've owned Gibsons going back to 1956. I'd believe their quality before I'd believe an individual owner.

Still, once it was sold and resold again, our poster should be off the hook. The store doing the trade should now be liable for any defects.

[P.D. Kirby]

Big Joe, I'm as big a Gibson fan that their is (Banjos, Mandolins and Guitars) but I don't think I would ever say that something like this would never happen. Gibson is a cross section of people just like any other company and people make mistakes, sometimes people do things to cover up those mistakes less they get canned for screwing up an expensive product. I would like to think that there is more to the story than we know and since none of us have had a chance to inspect the damage we can only assume what has happened here. One thing is for sure you know the folks at Gruhn so it would be easy enough for you to call and ask them if they did in fact inspect this Mandolin and say it was a factory defect. This would do nothing to help the OP but it would go a long way to support your statement and possibly Gibsons reputation. I for one would love to know what Gruhn has to say. I would call them myself but they don't know who I am and would probably just tell me to mind my own business. I still get the feeling there is something more to this story???

[cntrlmn]

I would like to reply to Big Joe's comment concerning having no moral commitment to fixing the mandolin. I the fact that you made this comment Big Joe is one reason I would not have you do any work on my Mandolin. I would expect that most real craftsmen would stand behind whatever they build if the defect was one they created.The very reason I posted on this forum was to get some comments and gain insight into how people think along the lines of pride and moral issues. I think you are correct in stating the company has no legal reason to fix the mandolin but if the mandolin left the factory with a ultra thin top with a patch installed they should feel obligated to fix the mandolin. I have a Weber mandolin that I sent to Boseman to have a small crack in the top where the top was glued together and I had expected to pay what Weber quoted for the repair but when they received the mandolin they found that the top was not glued or something properly when it was built. They did not charge me for the repair and I'm at least the fourth owner of this mandolin. I received an email from weber stating that Bruce Weber felt that the crack would not have shown up if the mandolin would have been assembled correctly at the factory. Legally Gibson is not obligated to fix the mandolin and neither was Weber. I'm not an expert on rolex, guns and mandolins but i do know what it means to stand for something.

[guitarpath]

How do we know for sure that this mandolin left the factory with an ultra-thin top and a supporting patch? You are making an assumption here which may or may not be accurate.

Honestly, I have sympathy for you and your dilemma. However, I don't understand why one would expect free warranty service for a used instrument. I don't think this is a moral issue. Gibson has a business to run.

I have seen similar arguments in guitar forums (not necessarily regarding Gibson). People want to buy used instruments to save money yet when something goes wrong or they discover a flaw, they want the company to fix it for free under warranty. Its having your cake and eating it too.

[Phantoj]

It's a shocking story... if true, Gibson sold a reworked 2nd-quality instrument for full price, and the original poster got burned.

The Gruhn angle is interesting to me. How does this whole alleged incident affect Gruhn's opinion of Gibson? Seems like showing a respected guitar expert that you're selling 2nds and refusing to fix when the rework goes bad will cost Gibson more than doing the right thing for the OP.

On the other hand: there are two sides to every story (plus I'd like to hear Gruhn's side). It's even possible (no offense intended to the OP) that an internet forum hatchet job could be totally fabricated... although I'm inclined to believe there's some truth to this one.

[Mike Snyder]

It has not been established, certainly not here, that the mandolin left the factory defective. We're blowing alot of air without any knowledge, nothing new and fair game and largely what goes on at the cafe. Big Joe did nothing to diserve any disrespect. Why he would continue to provide us with his insight into all things mandolinish, along with the voice of reason we have come to love and depend on recent years I can only wonder. I suspect that he has enough buisness to prevent his loss of sleep over this noise.
I have, through a Gibson dealer, had warranty dealings with Gibson involving what I believed to be failure of the neck joint. They didn't say that, the dealer didn't, Gruhn's certainly didn't. I assumed that from what I saw. It came back with a perfect set-up, all scratches buffed out, wonderful. A year later the same problem. Overnight ultra-high action and a gap at the back neck button. The particular brand name on the headstock was, at that time, no longer being built by Gibson, so they sent me the equivalent instrument WITH the G brand on it. Gibson-bashing doesn't go far with me. I like the sound, I cherish the little imperfections in the build that remind me that people aren't perfect and the wooden things they build aren't perfect. Human hands put wood in the CNC, and take it out. Humans take the wood to it's final dimensions.
Weber and Collings make wonderful instruments. They're in a situation where they can do lots of innovative things which will never be a possibility at Gibson because of the corporation. Alot of crappy things have happened at Gibson because of corporate mentality. Since Derrington, and particularly since Harvey, the mandolins are speaking for themselves.
It'd be cool if the cafe crowd were to know the real poop on the too-thin Goldrush. I'd like to. The hearsay and opinions and bashing, not so much.

[Canoedad]

Wouldn't a luthier (as we have here) be able to tell if the patch was applied before the mandolin was assembled vs. a patch applied post assembly? This layman would think that a pre-assembly patch should be of a level of neatness not readily achievable post assembly.

[DerTiefster]

Reality check: Joe said Gibson was not corporately obligated to anyone but the original poster, and that the process we think of as courts of justice commonly turns isolated acts of generosity into full-blown, broad-spectrum, and quite expensive obligations. There are many instances of a claim made by Party A to Party B, acted upon by Party B (for any reason), followed by expanded claims by party A. When Party B contests the expansion of claim, the courts interpret the initial accommodation as a prima facie admission of responsibility. "Why would anyone ever simply be generous?" is the point of view the court takes for the sole purpose of easing the decision process. It doesn't mean the decision is correct, but that the process of arriving at a decision is expedited. If Gibson expanded its warranty coverage in any instance, the courts might very well decide that they were acting out of an admission that their warranty language meant something expanded, and that everyone and his/her cat should expect the same treatment. In this fashion, the courts create an environment in which an isolated benevolence can become a permanent obligation.

Joe did -not- say that he would not stand behind his own work as a matter of honor. Legal fictions being what they are (fictions), there are ways around expansion of obligation for an independent luthier. They depend upon the words used in the transaction, not only upon the actual events of the transaction.

There is not enough in the way of evidence in this thread to justify Gibson-bashing. In fact, it seems to me that the O.P. said that Gibson would repair the instrument for the original purchaser, which is exactly what their warranty says. I believe he said that -Gruhn's- staff reported to him that Gibson would do this, not that -Gibson- staff said to him that Gibson would do this. I might be misremembering some detail, but I don't want to go back through the messages and verify this.

Anyone know an approximate cost for a "top-tier" luthier to "top" such a mandolin?

[Scotti Adams]

Hmmm Im wondering about that recently listed Distressed MM that says the top has been stabilizied by Gibson for many more yrs of playing...what does that mean?

[Jeff Budz]

With all due respect, Big Joe's comments hit me in a negative way. They may be true, and reasonable, but sometimes it's not what you say, but how you say it.

[Ed Goist]

Sell that Gibson as is (but with full disclosure, of course) for whatever you can get for it and buy a Kimble.
Problem solved.

[stratman62]

If I buy something, anything, used and there is a problem with it, it is my problem.

[Jeff Budz]

If I buy something, anything, used and there is a problem with it, it is my problem.

Not if you are Artison Guitars, apparently.

BOOM!

[stetson]

If I buy something, anything, used and there is a problem with it, it is my problem.

That's true. How many of us would expect free service on a used car?

[Pete Summers]

That's true. How many of us would expect free service on a used car?
Yupper, I agree. And I also think the OP's later comments implying that Big Joe is not trust worthy because he gave an honest and knowledgeable explanation of Gibson warranty policies is way out of line.

You may not like those policies, but that certainly is no reason to disparage his professional integrity. Bah Humbug!
:(

[mrmando]

Yeah, what really mystifies me is the OP's loyalty to the dealer that is trying to weasel its way out of a trade. The OP is not legally/morally obligated to take the mandolin back, but he's doing it anyway out of some misplaced affection for Artisan Guitars. Well, just because the OP is willing to do something beyond his obligations is no reason for him to expect Gibson to do the same.

[Fretbear]

Big Joe did nothing to deserve any disrespect. Why he would continue to provide us with his insight into all things mandolinish, along with the voice of reason we have come to love and depend on recent years I can only wonder. I suspect that he has enough business to prevent his loss of sleep over this noise.
I generally like Joe's posts and he is a valuable, knowledgeable and well respected member of our forum. Anyone who has spent any time on the Cafe will also remember that he also used to serve as a self-appointed Gibson cop around here for some time before he left that company and would regularly offer stern warnings and admonitions to people who dared to consider using Flowerpot inlays, bell shaped truss rod covers and other Gibsonia.

[Big Joe]

My words are not based upon what I may or may not do. They are simply the facts as stated by the warranty. Whether we like what it says or not has nothing to do with the law. Gibson has a printed warranty that applies to their instruments, and I should state that this warranty applies ONLY to instruments sold by authorized dealers within the United States. Instruments purchased outside the US have no warranty on them by the Gibson company. If a warranty applies, it is through the distributor who handles that area. They do offer some warranty, though how those are handled I do not know and is not from the Gibson company itself.

Gibson has only a legal and moral obligation to the warranty they provide. They are not required to provide any warranty. They do so to help both the dealer and the original consumer. However, any warranty is void the minute the original seller trades or sells that instrument. It even is gone if you give the instrument away. It is only available to the original purchaser if he meets the conditions of the warranty. No company has a moral responsibility beyond that.

Weber does offer a warranty to a used mandolin if you meet the requirements for that warranty. You send it to them, pay a warranty policy price, and they will then stand behind the instrument. That is very good for them and the consumer, but most companies do not or cannot provide such a policy for numerous reasons. I think Bruce does a very good thing that way.

Now, as to how this applies to me. I only stated the truth as is written in the warranty contract. It is not how we do our business. We stand behind our work and if there is an issue we will take care of it. Period. If you have us do some work and then YOU screw it up on some manner, that is a different story. We have a very, very minimal number of returns, but if we do, they are addressed and the problem taken care of. We do everything we can to take care of our customers and my moral obligation is to do the very best I can on anything and then stand behind it with whatever I have. End of story. However, I do not have a printed warranty that is sent with every instrument. I have the power to do what I want in regard to issues. Not everyone has that power and they must stay withing the borders of the contract they give.

Yoy may not like what I say when it comes to warranties by companies, but that has nothing to do with what I think or feel or wish, it is only reporting the truth. If that upsets you, don't waste your energy getting mad at me, work to change the problem, and I am not the problem. I haven't even been part of the company for 41/2 years.

One last thing. Artisan is not a Gibson dealer, or bluegrass dealer, and neither is Gruhn. They cannot speak for the company andy more than I can. The only one who can speak for the company is the guy who owns it and I can guarantee you he did not say anything about this mandolin. Unless he says they are at fault, they are not. Nothing anyone else might say has any influence or power or authority.

Ok, one more last thing. It is possible a mandolin was built with a thin top. It is possible it was sent to an authorized dealer. It is possible it was sold to the original owner. It is not likely that no one noticed until Artisan got hold of it. They do not have a luthier on staff and are not heavily experienced in mandolins. If they noticed it, then why did not someone before? Actually, Artisan did not notice it according to the OP but their buyer did.

So, the guy trades a mandolin he paid good money for used and the store who gets it sells it without completing the deal. How does that happen? Then the new buyer brings it back because the top is sinking. No one... the factory, the first buyer, the second buyer, the store who takes it in trade... they all miss this one fact. Tops sink for a lot of reasons. Being thin is only one of them. However, all these people have this mandolin for some time and it never gets discovered. So, the store gives it back with this story of what someone said to someone and another shop not related to this instrument in any way makes a claim that somebody said something.

That is a LOT of second or third hand information and little based on fact. If it left the factory with a thin top, then it would be normally noticed much before this. The original owner or the original dealer could have had it replaced or repaired themselves. The second buyer gets it knowing it has not warranty, he sells it, finally gets it back and now he is mad at Gibson for this whole ordeal. I can state again Gibson did not put a patch under the top before shipping it to an authorized dealer.

I don't know any of the participants involved. However, an equally plausible story is that this instrument did not go to a dealer but was given or sold to someone as an artist instrument or seemed to find its way out the backdoor without authority. It is kept by the original person who got it without warranty. He ultimately sells it and it ends up in the marketplace where it was never intended to be.

I do know of one mandolin, not a goldrush, that was presented to an employee who was to keep it. He did... for a few years. The top was thin on this one and he did a carbon fiber overlay on the inside to help strengthen the top. This mandolin was sold and is now in the market. That instrument has not warranty, and had none when it was provided to the original owner. Unfortunately, this one should have stayed with him/her and never been put into the market. It now is. It still has no warranty. It never will have. Someone may get it someday and discover the work inside and we may see another thread like this.

What appears to be a problem with or at the factory is not. The mandolin I spoke did not get its extra support from any authorized means, but by the person who got it. They put the support in. That may well have been the case with this instrument as well. No instrument intended for retail sale or for the consumers were "patched" inside by the factory. I would not say Gibson is perfect, and neither are the rest of us. The only perfect one is the person we celebrate during this season. For the rest of us, we all do our best and we usually get it right. For those times we don't we do our best to take care of it. The factory is no different. No factory is perfect.

I have no dog in this fight in a personal way. I have not seen the instrument. I could tell in a hurry if the top was patched and if the top were too thin. Still, it is not a warranty issue. It can certainly be repaired and done in a manner that it will never show. However, it is not a warranty issue and therefore we should not expect them to do what they are not able to.

I hope the person who owns this mandolin gets resolution, but the issues are really between him and the person he purchased it from. However, unless the seller gave a warranty with the sale, he is not obligated in any way. He may have an issue with the store he traded it to or the new owner. Is it possible they did the patch work? Who knows. We certainly don't. None the less, no matter what instrument or car or watch or gun or washing machine we purchase, we need to know what the warranty is and what it means and how it applies. Mandolins are highly emotional issues and we don't think of the contract when we purchase them. We assume everything is fine because it sounds good, or it plays good, or it looks good. Just as with a used car, it is not a bad idea to have a professional luthier look it over before purchasing. There are a lot of things you may never see or know that can be huge problems for you. If you go ahead and buy it anyway, then it is on you. By having a luthier look it over you can at least know what you are facing.

[John Ritchhart]

I have had warranty dealings with Gibson and they stood behind their warranty. They actually built me a new mandolin to replace the one with issues. AND I have had direct dealings with Big Joe. He repaired and set up my crappy sounding D-28 and made it ring like a bell again for a reasonable price. He's a fine luthier and a good man. So if you haven't met him and dealt with him personally I wouldn't make broad sweeping judgements like I've seen in this forum. My two cents.

[Mike Bunting]

Yeah, what really mystifies me is the OP's loyalty to the dealer that is trying to weasel its way out of a trade. The OP is not legally/morally obligated to take the mandolin back, but he's doing it anyway out of some misplaced affection for Artisan Guitars. Well, just because the OP is willing to do something beyond his obligations is no reason for him to expect Gibson to do the same.
This is the only response that makes any sense to me, all the others miss the point. The dealer in effect bought the mandolin "as is", it's now his problem.
To add to Ed Goist's post, or get a Stanley. :)

[Bryan KS]

The one thing from the OP's story that really doesn't make any sense to me is who would really believe Gibson would admit over the phone without having the mandolin in their hands that it was a factory issue and it never should have been sold. I cannot believe they would admit any type of wrong doing withough first inspecting it. Plus I think Joe brings up a great point and it seems much more plausible that it was damaged and repaired at some point before the OP got it and this information was not passed on to increase the value. Maybe its just me but I wouldn't be dropping 5k for a used mando without working out a trial period and taking it to a respected mandolin luthier to have them inspect it first. Glad you got the mandolin back and hopefully you can get some enjoyment out it.

[George R. Lane]

Heresay is not allowed in a courtroom, nor should it be allowed here.

[Mike Bunting]

Heresay is not allowed in a courtroom, nor should it be allowed here.
And neither is hearsay.

[terzinator]

Big Joe brings up a lot of great points, in that there's a lot we don't know. (And there are things we don't know we don't know.) Regardless of whether it was a factory patch, the dealer that took the mandolin in trade from the OP must have had a contract, too? No? Stating something to the effect of "We THE DEALER now own this instrument, etc..." Maybe the contract had some language in there "UNLESS this or that is discovered" etc... But we don't know that.

... I'd think the serial number would determine whether this instrument was intended for sale, or for the "prototype pile"...


However, any warranty is void the minute the original seller trades or sells that instrument. It even is gone if you give the instrument away. It is only available to the original purchaser if he meets the conditions of the warranty. No company has a moral responsibility beyond that.

Regardless of this particular drama, does the warranty become null and void at that moment? Or is it that it is null and void for subsequent owners? I'm not seeing anything about that, specifically, in the warranty language on the manufacturer's site. And if the warranty is gone "if you give the instrument away," what happens if you give it away or sell it for a trial period (however long that is), and it comes back to you? What if an instrument is lost or stolen? Lots of fine points that the warranty doesn't expressly address...

[George R. Lane]

And neither is hearsay.

Mike, Thanks for correction.

[Mike Bunting]

Mike, Thanks for correction.
I meant to put a :) behind it.

[mandolirius]

Taking a step back from the specifics of the situation and looking at it from the larger perspective, the OP wound up purchasing a guitar because the store would not take his mandolin in trade. He's not really out anything, he just bought a guitar. He did say that he really liked the mandolin. From a moral standpoint there are just too many unknowns for me to form any opinion.

[barney 59]

The one thing from the OP's story that really doesn't make any sense to me is who would really believe Gibson would admit over the phone without having the mandolin in their hands that it was a factory issue and it never should have been sold. I cannot believe they would admit any type of wrong doing withough first inspecting it. Plus I think Joe brings up a great point and it seems much more plausible that it was damaged and repaired at some point before the OP got it and this information was not passed on to increase the value. Maybe its just me but I wouldn't be dropping 5k for a used mando without working out a trial period and taking it to a respected mandolin luthier to have them inspect it first. Glad you got the mandolin back and hopefully you can get some enjoyment out it.

Ever use big calibrated machines? I have and sometimes they fall out of calibration as the CNC machine at Gibson apparently did. The problem with a machine like that is if you are doing multiples of something and the results aren't checked then you did a great deal of work and used a great deal of material and it's all wrong. Is it possible that a batch of instruments were started and then a solution was arrived at,"a patch" that would have been used on several or many instruments? If the patch plan did'nt work then maybe this isn't an isolated incident,the person that answered the phone at Gibson knew what you were talking about because he had seen it before. The one recurring thing that always comes up about Gibson is the statement "Anything is possible from Gibson."

[John McCoy]

...It [the warranty] even is gone if you give the instrument away....

Just for clarity: there is an exception for an instrument purchased as a gift, isn't there?

[allenhopkins]

That's true. How many of us would expect free service on a used car?

Some new car warranties are transferable to second buyers. I think the question here is not only what would be the "ethical" thing for Gibson, Artisan Guitars, or the OP to do -- but what would be Gibson's best tactic from a business standpoint. On the one hand, unilaterally and informally "extending" their warranty policy could expose them to dozens, hundreds, of used-Gibson purchasers bringing in instruments and claiming "factory defects," with the possibility of either major expenses for repairs, or defending against legal actions from those whose repair claims they denied.

On the other hand, I'd think a person unfamiliar with Gibson, reading this thread, would come away less likely to buy one of their products than before he/she looked at it. The idea that a possibly badly-built mandolin with the Gibson name on it, would not be considered for repair of the factory defect -- regardless of who now owns it -- doesn't sit well with most people. And invoking "the letter of the law" to escape responsibility for poor initial workmanship, or poor business performance, is never a wise marketing strategy; ask United Airlines about the United Breaks Guitars YouTube vid, and what the effect was on them.

I find factory warranties largely irrelevant: defects are quite rare, and warranties are so hedged around with conditions and exclusions that the burden of proof is heavily tilted toward the claimant. NY State has a "lemon law" to protect purchasers of used vehicles, but no one's applied that to musical instruments. Anyway, it doesn't cover private sales. Perhaps the OP should take Gibson to Judge Judy or a similar venue, though I doubt Gibson would agree to go. Henry Juskiewicz, meet Judy Sheindlin -- I'd TEVO that, if I had TEVO...

[John McCoy]

NY State has a "lemon law" to protect purchasers of used vehicles, but no one's applied that to musical instruments. Anyway, it doesn't cover private sales.

Some states do have an "implied merchantability" law covering private sales, but my understanding is that that would apply to this situation only if the seller knew of and deliberately withheld negative information about the instrument.


Perhaps the OP should take Gibson to Judge Judy or a similar venue, though I doubt Gibson would agree to go. Henry Juskiewicz, meet Judy Sheindlin -- I'd TEVO that, if I had TEVO...

:)) :)) :)) :)) :))

[Mike Bunting]

Perhaps the OP should take Gibson to Judge Judy or a similar venue, though I doubt Gibson would agree to go. Henry Juskiewicz, meet Judy Sheindlin -- I'd TEVO that, if I had TEVO...
Perfect! I can see it now! "Don't get smart with me Mr. Juskiewicz, they didn't hire me because I'm good looking, they hired me because I'm smart! You may be able to fast talk a few guitar players, but you can't try that on me!" :))

[G. Fisher]

Where is the patch located?
Do you have a picture of the top showing where it is sinking?
Does the mandolin look different than when you traded it?
Are you sure it's your mandolin and the person that bought it from Artisan didn't pull a switch?

IMO after 6 weeks it's Artisan's issue to deal with. How did it get approved for trade if the sinking top is that great of an issue?

[Mike Bunting]

[QUOTE=G. Fisher;10003060 IMO after 6 weeks it's Artisan's issue to deal with. How did it get approved for trade if the sinking top is that great of an issue?[/QUOTE]
Agreed, and I'm wondering why the OP was unaware of the sinking top.

[Big Joe]

The warranty Gibson uses is so similar to the other larger manufacturers as to be the same. One asked about a gift. If the instrument were purchased in the name of the person receiving the gift, and the original receipt was given the the receiver of the gift, then the warranty would probably apply...IF it was purchased new from an authorized dealer. For example, if you inherit an instrument, the warranty is no longer valid. The one inheriting the instrument is not the original purchaser. We have run into this with other very well respected manufacturers as well.

I don't know the OP that I know of. I do know the store mentioned and Gruhn's, and Gibson. I have had a working relationship with each. It is very possible the OP has not been presented with all the facts exactly as they may have transpired. Here we have a group that wish to bash the manufacturer, who has absolutely nothing to do with this transaction. I will guarantee you no one in the factory ever said it was sold defective. Not if they expected to keep their job.

Anyway, I hope the OP finds resolution to this issue. I would be happy to inspect it for him and see hoe serious the issue is and there is no cost for that.

[jim simpson]

3 pages and no photographs, I'm dissapointed. I find it hard to believe a patch came from the factory. It should be possible to identify where the repair came from if the seller is honest. How about a dental mirror shot?

[Bob Scrutchfield]

Yeah, what really mystifies me is the OP's loyalty to the dealer that is trying to weasel its way out of a trade. The OP is not legally/morally obligated to take the mandolin back, but he's doing it anyway out of some misplaced affection for Artisan Guitars. Well, just because the OP is willing to do something beyond his obligations is no reason for him to expect Gibson to do the same.



This is the only response that makes any sense to me, all the others miss the point. The dealer in effect bought the mandolin "as is", it's now his problem.
To add to Ed Goist's post, or get a Stanley. :)


A lot of variables, and obviously some missing details, in the OP's post. One thing that glaringly stands out to me is that the OP had absolutely no obligation legaly or moraly to take the mandolin back, especially after it was sold by Artisan Guitars to another party. It doesn't make sense to me that the OP accepted this mandolin back into his posession after 6 weeks just for a sense of "doing the right thing." I mean, we are talking about 5k here aren't we?
I would think, Artisan Guitars, unless they provided a warranty or a 6 week trial period, had no legal responsibility to accept it back from the buyer after 6 weeks.

Lets say for instance, I purchased a new car at a Dealer and had traded my used car in on it. The Dealer promptly sells my used car to another buyer, and that buyer drives it for 6 weeks. Then he returns it to the Dealer because the transmission went out.
If the car Dealer called me 6 weeks later with a story that the transmission in my old car went out and that he wanted me to come and get it, I would tell him that I was very sorry about that and then I'd tell him what he could do with my old car.

I do feel for the OP's situation and really hope he can somehow make the mandolin right without having to spend a lot of extra money.

[Dale Ludewig]

I think we have two threads going on here, at the same time.
One is simply that there are no actual facts presented and verified.
Secondly, everything else is conjecture and opinion about what might have been, what should be, who did what, etc. An interesting insight into how each person thinks.

[mrmando]

I think we have two threads going on here, at the same time.
One is simply that there are no actual facts presented and verified.
Well, I don't quite agree. I'm pretty comfortable with taking Big Joe at his word regarding the Gibson warranty and how it works, as well as what he says about Gibson's QC standards. I have no reason not to regard those statements as factual.

The facts start getting fuzzy with Artisan's tale of what happened after they sold the mandolin. Artisan heard about a patched-up top from its customer who heard it from Dealer X in gNashville who heard it from Gibson ... yeah, sure. I think Big Joe raises enough serious questions to give anyone good reason to doubt the whole story. Somebody isn't telling it straight. It wouldn't matter how many guitars I had bought from Artisan, if they tried to pull this on me they would lose a customer.

[cntrlmn]

this is a copy of the email artisan sent me i will attempt to attach the pictures they also sent me.8007280073
Hello Mike,

We wanted to bring to your attention a serious concern regarding your Gibson Goldrush mandolin that you recently brought to us for trade consideration. We recently sold the instrument, shipped it to the potential buyer, who upon close inspection, felt there was an issue with the top. So much so, that he took the mandolin to his personal luthier. At that point, he informed us that after his luthier inspected the mandolin & found the top was bowed in beneath the fingerboard extension. Exercising his rights within our 3 day approval period, he returned it to us for a full refund.

It was Friday when it returned, before we could get an opportunity to inspect it. Comparing it with another Gibson mandolin, we confirmed - indeed the top is radically "dipped" in the center between the bridge & neck (I have attached two pictures of the area in question to this email). Rather than a radius in the top, there is a valley where the sinking has taken place. Physical inspection inside with a mirror revealed a "support" patch had been installed, (square in shape), beneath the top area in question. This appears to be a highly professional job, which would likely to have taken place when the top was being carved, which seems to indicate that this was done at the factory by Gibson.

This morning I took the mandolin to Gruhn guitars here in Nashville, to have the instrument personally inspected by George himself. George notice the same anomaly, then took it to his mandolin repair staff to further inspect. After a lengthy inspection while I waited, the mandolin repair technician, along with George gave their opinions on the problem. Their view is that this instrument's top is so thin, that it is in severe danger of failing, and should not have any tension on the strings beyond a very slight amount, enough to keep the strings slightly taut. The top being so thin is why the top support was added, by Gibson, to reinforce a very sloppy top carve. The area is so thin, that you can actually shine a light through the top and see through it. It is their opinion that this instrument, at best is a factory second, and at worst, should never have been released from the factory.

Unfortunately, this means that we will have to negate the trade value for the instrument, in regards to the Bourgeois 00. At this point, Gruhn puts the instrument as a total loss, that will have to have the top fully replaced (an incredibly expensive venture), or have the Mandolin exchanged for a new instrument under warranty to the original owner.

We apologize for bringing this to your attention only now, however based on original inspection we failed to notice the condition. As soon as we were made aware of the situation, we did remove the instrument from our website as is it not saleable.

As of today's date, we have not received final payment for the balance due on the Bourgeois. If we do receive your check in the mail today, we can destroy it, or simply return the check un-deposited to you. If you would like to apply the $500 as a deposit for the the Bourgeois, we would be pleased to do so, with either the total balance being due immediately, or sufficient additional payment (up to 25%) to place the Bourgeois purchase on our 90 day layaway plan.

We can understand that you may have additional questions. Please feel free to contact us, at your earliest convenience either by email or phone. We look forward to hearing from you.

Many Thanks,

--
Adam Fluhrer
Artisan Guitars
230 Franklin Road
Suite 11-GG
Franklin, Tennessee 37064

Hours: 10 to 5 - Mon thru Sat

Local & International: 615-595-2544
Toll Free: 866-265-5993

www.artisanguitars.com

[MikeEdgerton]

From the original post: "They also contacted gibson and they also agreed that the top was to thin and that it should have never left the factory but they could not honor the warranty because I was not the original purchaser."

Did I miss that in this e-mail you received? Have you taken it to Gibson?

[cntrlmn]

After I got the email from artisan I responded to the email threating them with a lawsuit, after a couple of days I called artisan and decide to just forget the lawsuit and the trade.At that time artisan told me they had taken the mandolin to gibson for inspection and that is when gibson reported the defective carving of the top. I will look to see if i have a email with that verbage in it from artisan.

[MikeEdgerton]

The answer is that you have not taken it to Gibson so you really don't know what they said, right? Might that be the logical place to go here? We've now taken them over the coals and you're going by what someone else that you were in an adversarial position with has said. Before I'd burn any more bridges I might be tempted to just see what they say about it. You aren't too far from the factory. Beyond that I'm not seeing a whole lot of value in this thread it is pushing the limits of the posting guidelines a bit.

[Ed Goist]

What a nightmare...
Cntrlmn, I'm so sorry you've had to go through all this, but thank you for the cautionary tale.

[Mike Snyder]

Thanks, Ed, for debashing that.

[Scott Tichenor]

At the point where an anonymous individual publicly posts (alleged) private communication between the parties involved (and which we cannot verify the accuracy of) then we've moved beyond the guidelines that govern this forum. Unfortunate situation, but at this point the purpose of this thread seems to be none other than to inflict damage in the form of public opinion upon others.

- Grievances, personal and corporate: The Cafe discussion forum is intended to be a nurturing community. While it is fair game discussing vendor corporate policies, malevolent harassment of individual employees, including posting names, email address, or any other personal contact information will not be tolerated. For example, a concern about a manufacturer's warranty policy or a reseller's return policy is permissible. Using the forum to malign or leverage personal advantage in a conflict is strictly forbidden. Though intent or motivation are not always provable, the moderators reserve full right in deeming whether or not comments made are consistent with policy, and may take action to edit, delete, or when necessary, revoke posting privileges.