What's in a name...

[onegypsygun]

I 've been playing guitar for 23 years. I have owned over 100 different guitars in my life. Gibsons, Epiphones, Fenders, Squires, ESPs, LTDs, Ibanez, Deans, Silvertones, Martins, B.C. Richs and more than I can remember. In 1992 I bought a Squier bullet strat, it is the only guitar i've never traded off... It is simply the greatest guitar i've ever have. It out plays everything. Everyone that has played this guitar has tryed to buy it off me for hundreds more than I paid for it. (I paid $100 for it brand new). I am so sick of the name game. I'll take a Squire in a heartbeat over a fender. I traded off all my Fenders for Squiers and my gibsons too. My guitars need to be playable, roadworthy and built like a tank. Alot of people play on equipment better than what their heros used and sound half as good...what's the difference? Perhaps only talent. So are you a musician or maybe more of a collector. Now I'm not saying every Squire or no name guitar is a gem. But learn your craft, learn what makes a for a good playing guitar, sit down and truly play them and look them over. Don't just order something off the internet. I've got friends who took the time to pick out a truly playable guitar and for a couple hundred dollars got something thats has brought them over a decade happy jaming. If you have to have that big name on you headstock maybe you need to go back to the woodshed and learn to play. (maybe this has something to do with why guys buy big flashy cars...ya think?) All I can say is when I play people don't look at the headstock, The're to busy being blown away by what I'm doing on the fretboard. ( and latley I've been playing a Squier Affinity Tele. Meat and potatoes son!) So what's in a name...Only the wisdom, talent and ego of the player.( And what they want you to see and what they don't want you to see.) So thank god for affordable guitars that make sense for gigging musicians. Sorry I'm just sick of all the slag Squiers get.

[hicksjd9]

It just goes to show how branding works. With a good brand, proper quality control is essential for them to keep their market power and continue selling at a higher price. The point is, that, say, Fender, has it's entire reputation at stake in the quality of every guitar that they produce. That puts pressure on them to make sure that all of their guitars meet a certain level of quality. If their guitars would start to lack in quality and word got out, they would not be able to sell above their marginal cost (how much money it acutally takes them to produce the product). The company would eventually make zero profit and could leave or enter the market at will (i.e. no more fender). Look at companies like Peavey or Radio Shack, who used to be giants of selection/quality, but have now been relegated to low level brands. Poor quality = less money = no more competitive monopoly = no more giant company and big profits. This can mean that you get a good deal on some awesome gear on their way out, though !

With a name like Squire, there is not as much pressure to make a quality guitar. They, of course, can AND DO make quality guitars, but you might have to pick up and play 12 of them to find one that meets the quality of the average Fender Mexican, and 30 to find one that meets the quality of a Fender American. The Squire brand name does not hold a lot of market power, so if they make a few shit guitars, it's not going to kill their profit margin (because believe it or not they are likely not operating at a profit or very little profit). Most people buy them for their low cost and quality is a secondary concern.

The same thing aplies for tylenol and acetominophen, klenex to tissues, etc. Why buy Tide and not Sam's choice detergent?

This is all to say that you can definietly find a gem no matter what generic brand you use, but people are conditioned to love what they know and what they know is major brands. It's our society and the billion dollar power of a lifetime of marketing.

Man, I hate economics!

[bassist_25]

It just goes to show how branding works. With a good brand, proper quality control is essential for them to keep their market power and continue selling at a higher price. The point is, that, say, Fender, has it's entire reputation at stake in the quality of every guitar that they produce. That puts pressure on them to make sure that all of their guitars meet a certain level of quality. If their guitars would start to lack in quality and word got out, they would not be able to sell above their marginal cost (how much money it acutally takes them to produce the product). The company would eventually make zero profit and could leave or enter the market at will (i.e. no more fender). Look at companies like Peavey or Radio Shack, who used to be giants of selection/quality, but have now been relegated to low level brands. Poor quality = less money = no more competitive monopoly = no more giant company and big profits. This can mean that you get a good deal on some awesome gear on their way out, though !

Unfortunately, Gibson seems to have left their quality suffer as of late, yet they still sell their instruments for lots of cash.

I agree that the name on the headstock, drum head, or amp face shouldn't dictate whether you purchase a piece of gear or not. Also, a lot of the import instruments, like Schecter and LTD, are a great value. However, in my experience, it's a lot easier to get a pro piece of gear to sound good than a cheap piece of gear. I know I made a lot of sound engineers' lives easier when I went from a $350 bass to a $1200 bass.