SE Silver Sky - not interested

Johnny Alien

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
2,710
do you know how much a nice cello or violin costs? I guarantee you parents will buy these for their kids. Some may wait til the kid proves they will stick with it.

I do know how much those cost actually. Most kids that are starting out rent those types of instruments. My wife's uncle has a violin shop and I know that is a prime source of business. When my kid showed interest in playing I bought him a Squier figuring we could upgrade if he was still interested. It was a crazy nice guitar for the price. He doesn't play anymore. I'm not saying that there are NO kids that will get this I am just saying this whole "great entry point for starters" is not really accurate. This is a mid level instrument not an entry level.

I don't know about todays kids. Today's kids won't be caught dead with a $500 cell phone. We just went through Xmas and 2 birthdays with 3 grand kids. My gosh has times and perceived value changed. ;)

Kids today would rather have an expensive phone than a car. Things are different these days. But those are also usually "rent to own" through the phone provider.
 

xmd5a

Member
Messages
2,855
do you know how much a nice cello or violin costs? I guarantee you parents will buy these for their kids. Some may wait til the kid proves they will stick with it.

Who buys a nice cello or violin for their kid? You can get them a cheap violin for $100 on Amazon, as well as numerous brass instruments. It's a good time to be a musically curious kid or budget musician.

Indeed I bought a $100 violin for my kid. A cork sniffer violinist would say I just ruined violin for my child forever, but the price delta is like a factor of ten, so that's just the way it has to be.

$850 is grown up prices for a guitar, for sure. There are just way too many good guitars around $300 to even consider $850 as an entry price point. The PRS SE line is aimed at people who can't/won't spend $2,000+ on a guitar. I'd bet the guitar market is pyramid shaped, where the cheaper the guitar is, the more units are sold, and so this is PRS moving to a lower but larger rung of the pyramid.
 

RRfireblade

Member
Messages
4,746
Kids today would rather have an expensive phone than a car. Things are different these days. But those are also usually "rent to own" through the phone provider.

You don't have kids or grandkids huh? :)

Lol, rent to own through the grandparents.

And be glad you don't have to have the talk we just had with the 15 year old about what she thinks a cheap first car is.
 

lostpick

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
1,383
do you know how much a nice cello or violin costs? I guarantee you parents will buy these for their kids. Some may wait til the kid proves they will stick with it.
Most of them rent. My sis was first chair cello in hs and none of the kids owned those instruments.
 

Johnny Alien

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
2,710
You don't have kids or grandkids huh? :)

Lol, rent to own through the grandparents.

And be glad you don't have to have the talk we just had with the 15 year old about what she thinks a cheap first car is.

My kid is 20 actually. No grandchildren yet. But I get what you are laying down. I feel the pain.
 

The-Kid

Pedal Art: Providence Dealer
Messages
4,393
IMO while the initial release seems good it probably seems better than it actually is.



A better release IMO would have been right before the holidays to put it head to head with the rest of the competition at the time of the year when consumers purchase the most out of the year. I mean yes its out of stock but does it mean it sold extremely well or that they just didnt or couldnt make enough ready to meet release?



One could see that them being sold out as a success but at the same time one could see it as they may have not made enough stock or didnt ramp up production enough to meet a holiday release and barely met this one.




While these are probably great and many will love them at the same time many folks complained about Fender for the recent price increase and had them possibly considering alternatives. In a sense a Silver Sky SE is an alternative but for the same price folks complained with Fender is it really an alternative most will consider aside from the other S-type options out there especially with the folks who complained about price increases?




Both use inhouse parts and inhouse electronics and hardware, neither use aftermarket parts, so in a sense it would have made more sense to price these a bit lower maybe 700$-750$ than the main competitor (Fender MIM 850$) for what it is. I say they have an advantage at a slightly lower price but pricing them the same price as an MIM Fender takes away a bigger competitive advantage the SE could have IMO.





While many that like S-Types in general will give the new SEs a consideration I dont see a huge flock of dudes who complained about price increases Fender made with the MIMs to be to crazy about a substitute for a MIM Fender that cost the same and uses inhouse components much like the Fender MIMs do. For obvious reasons as explained it just wouldnt make sense for many of these folks.




Other S types that do cost lower, as much or about as much as an MIM Fender for 850$ offer aftermarket components like Duncans, EMGs, Gotoh, Wilkinson/Gotoh bridge, Grovers tuners etc etc making them in a sense more competitive when considering a S-Type alternative



They price themselves at the same price or about the same as an MIM Fender or lower because they are substitutes for Fender strats and need to be competitive by either costing lower and offering the same quality or costing the same but offering higher quality hardware, pups, craftsmanship etc etc.
 

Hugh_s

Member
Messages
3,862
of all the things, you have an issue with… poplar?

loads of awesome strats have been made from poplar, it’s just they’re generally painted solid colors.
 

Hugh_s

Member
Messages
3,862
IMO while the initial release seems good it probably seems better than it actually is.



A better release IMO would have been right before the holidays to put it head to head with the rest of the competition at the time of the year when consumers purchase the most out of the year. I mean yes its out of stock but does it mean it sold extremely well or that they just didnt or couldnt make enough ready to meet release?



One could see that them being sold out as a success but at the same time one could see it as they may have not made enough stock or didnt ramp up production enough to meet a holiday release and barely met this one.




While these are probably great and many will love them at the same time many folks complained about Fender for the recent price increase and had them possibly considering alternatives. In a sense a Silver Sky SE is an alternative but for the same price folks complained with Fender is it really an alternative most will consider aside from the other S-type options out there especially with the folks who complained about price increases?




Both use inhouse parts and inhouse electronics and hardware, neither use aftermarket parts, so in a sense it would have made more sense to price these a bit lower maybe 700$-750$ than the main competitor (Fender MIM 850$) for what it is. I say they have an advantage at a slightly lower price but pricing them the same price as an MIM Fender takes away a bigger competitive advantage the SE could have IMO.





While many that like S-Types in general will give the new SEs a consideration I dont see a huge flock of dudes who complained about price increases Fender made with the MIMs to be to crazy about a substitute for a MIM Fender that cost the same and uses inhouse components much like the Fender MIMs do. For obvious reasons as explained it just wouldnt make sense for many of these folks.




Other S types that do cost lower, as much or about as much as an MIM Fender for 850$ offer aftermarket components like Duncans, EMGs, Gotoh, Wilkinson/Gotoh bridge, Grovers tuners etc etc making them in a sense more competitive when considering a S-Type alternative



They price themselves at the same price or about the same as an MIM Fender or lower because they are substitutes for Fender strats and need to be competitive by either costing lower and offering the same quality or costing the same but offering higher quality hardware, pups, craftsmanship etc etc.
I think the price fits PRS as they generally trade on their brand cachet compared to their competition. While kinda intangible, it’s still a thing they leverage heavily.

In the end people who want a Fender aren’t going to really look at the SESS, at least I don‘t think they are. They’re not looking at Suhr, or many of the other reimagined strats.
 

Pantalooj

Member
Messages
3,556
As an owner of higher end Fender and Gibson guitars I have never had an urge to acquire a PRS. The Silver Sky is very appealing to me, but not at its current price point. I will most likely purchase the SE.....and if I enjoy I am very likely to upgrade to the standard Silver Sky which I would never consider without the ability to get some playing time with their budget option. I have never had any interest in an Epiphone or Squire product.

Whilst I didn't buy one ... I was VERY impressed and surprised when I tried a Core SS. I was just tyre-kicking ... thought I wouldn't like it because my usual specs would not include a 7.25" radius or small frets (and for clarity, I like PRS and own a Core model ... so that wasn't a factor in my prejudice). My experience was amazingly good and amazingly balanced Strat tone, and excellent playability from the get-go. Would recommend a tyre-kick if the opportunity arises for you ;)
 

The-Kid

Pedal Art: Providence Dealer
Messages
4,393
I think the price fits PRS as they generally trade on their brand cachet compared to their competition. While kinda intangible, it’s still a thing they leverage heavily.

In the end people who want a Fender aren’t going to really look at the SESS, at least I don‘t think they are. They’re not looking at Suhr, or many of the other reimagined strats.
Im a Fender guy and have mainly vintage spec Fenders but recently have been playing Charvels a bit more.



Even though I play the Charvels a lot more now I still consider myself a "Fender guy" and Im always looking at substitutes and alternatives to Fender Strats because I'm a Fender guy.



If you play a S-type of whichever brand I mean you may not identify as a "Fender guy" but.....your kind of a Fender guy as much as you dont want to admit it or not IMo pretty much.







While it may be a great guitar as an alternative/substitute to a MIM Fender at $850, both costing the same, both using inhouse hardware, electronics and pups and both being relatively the same quality the grass doesn't seem to be greener or less green on either side IMO.
 

Pantalooj

Member
Messages
3,556
Who buys a nice cello or violin for their kid? You can get them a cheap violin for $100 on Amazon, as well as numerous brass instruments. It's a good time to be a musically curious kid or budget musician.

Indeed I bought a $100 violin for my kid. A cork sniffer violinist would say I just ruined violin for my child forever, but the price delta is like a factor of ten, so that's just the way it has to be.

$850 is grown up prices for a guitar, for sure. There are just way too many good guitars around $300 to even consider $850 as an entry price point. The PRS SE line is aimed at people who can't/won't spend $2,000+ on a guitar. I'd bet the guitar market is pyramid shaped, where the cheaper the guitar is, the more units are sold, and so this is PRS moving to a lower but larger rung of the pyramid.

It's all relative, but I would agree ... SS SE is mid-priced (AUD$1,6000) rather than entry level for something that plays reasonably well for a beginner (e.g. Ibanez AZES ... AUD$550)
 

JosephZ

Member
Messages
3,982
curious, how would you characterize the tone of Poplar compared to, say, Alder, Ash, Basswood, etc?
Sorry didn’t see this because for some reason I didn’t get an alert :dunno

I’ll try to keep this as concise and to the point as possible… and all this is just my opinion.

First off all these differences are very subtle…

With Ash I have little experience so I won’t comment on that.

Alder in dynamic, and balanced.

Poplar is very close to alder, a bit less dynamic(NOT A BAD THING) and more focused with a bit more sustain.

Mahogany is warmer than alder and poplar not as dynamic as alder but more dynamic than poplar.

Basswood is warm and full similar dynamics as poplar but with even more sustain.


Two points:

First: Poplar is cheap for a verity of reasons, most having more to do with its undesirable appearance and therefore it’s low desirability for other uses (furniture, cabinets etc) for example than for it’s poor qualities tonally.

Second: basswood was the butt of all jokes for a long time and thought of as as cheap option and not a real “tone” wood for the longest time. (I’ve been on guitar forums since 96 ish so I know lol)
but at some point a few artists namely Jeff Back and believe Joe Satriani and a few others came out and said that they prefer basswood guitars and low and behold basswood is now considered a viable tone wood. Personally I think it great on a Strat as it tends balance out a bit of the Strat’s natural “wimpyness”. But that’s just my opinion.

However I truly believe that all poplar needs for a famous guitarist with great chops who is very popular among other guitar players, to say that they prefer poplar to other woods tonally,…and it will be considered a serious “tone wood” too.
 
Last edited:

Pantalooj

Member
Messages
3,556
Sorry didn’t see this because for some reason I didn’t get an alert :dunno

I’ll try to keep this as concise and to the point as possible… and all this is just my opinion.

First off all these differences are very subtle…

With Ash I have little experience so I won’t comment on that.

Alder in dynamic, and balanced.

Poplar is very close to alder, a bit less dynamic(NOT A BAD THING) and more focused with a bit more sustain.

Mahogany is warmer than alder and poplar not as dynamic as alder but more dynamic than poplar.

Basswood is warm and full similar dynamics as poplar but with even more sustain.


Two points:

First: Poplar is cheap for a verity of reasons, most having more to do with its undesirable appearance and therefore it’s low desirability for other uses (furniture, cabinets etc) for example than for it’s poor qualities tonally.

Second: basswood was the butt of all jokes for a long time and thought of as as cheap option and not a real “tone” wood for the longest time. (I’ve been on guitar forums since 96 ish so I know lol)
but at some point a few artists namely Jeff Back and believe Joe Satriani and a few others came out and said that they prefer basswood guitars and low and behold basswood is now considered a viable tone wood. Personally I think it great on a Strat as it tends balance out a bit of the Strat’s natural “wimpyness”. But that’s just my opinion.

However I truly believe that all poplar needs for a famous guitarist with great chops who is very popular among other guitar players, to say that they prefer poplar to other woods tonally,…and it will be considered a serious “tone wood” too.

More famous than Steve Morse ...
 
Last edited:

Verne Andru

Member
Messages
1,012
Would you do more market research first if you were to be paid?
That's a silly question. I spent over a decade manning a NAMM booth right beside PRS and got a pretty good insight into the "market" in the process. Without the benefit of seeing the "books," which I would have access to as a consultant, it's all hypothetical anyway.

Fender has been both up and down market for decades by offering cheaper Mexican made Fenders, and as the market leader, Fender is the company to emulate. PRS first copied Gibson Les Pauls very directly with the Mark Tremonti model, and there was a lawsuit around that, but it was their Fender Strat copy that seems to be making the biggest waves. PRS is just taking pages from Fender's playbook. There are visual cues that set the Core and SE lines apart, and the same used to be true for MIA and MIM Fenders, but newest Player series makes the MIA and MIM look nearly identical, as far as I know.
Based on this I posit you don't understand what a "brand" is or how branding works, but that puts you in the majority so not to worry.

Fender has been very consistent with their brand strategy - there are Fenders and there are Squiers so there is a very clear distinction between the upper and lower ends with movement up and down in each offering.

PRS has been consistent branding everything PRS - electrics, amps and acoustics. For the longest time SE was understood to stand for "Santana Edition" (whether true or not) so was acceptable to the market as it was seen as a sort of "signature" brand like the "Gibson Les Paul." SE recently changed to "Student Edition" with the introduction of a slew of lower end products using that sub-brand and thereby introducing confusion into the market. Unlike Fender there's no brand clarity from a market perspective so I disagree with your assertion that they are following Fender's playbook. Perhaps they think they are but if that's the case they need a new marketing department.

FMIC is not only one of the largest makers of electric guitars, they also control the majority of the distribution of MI product. Up to this point PRS has been a sidereal PITA but this puts them head-to-head and there will be consequences, it's just a matter of time.

When the Pigtronix guys were gassing to take over Supro I counselled against it for some of the same reasons (they wanted to reposition Supro as an upscale boutique offering when its brand strength was entry-level/affordable). They went ahead anyway. It took about 5 years but they eventually hit the wall and acknowledged everything I had foretold had come true. While I don't profess to have a crystal ball, I don't think this move by PRS was very well thought out and I would have counselled against it, and probably been fired for doing so, but that's all in a days work.

You have to understand your market position (if you have one) and play to your strengths. Marketing knock-offs, regardless how good they are, isn't what I would identify as PRS's strength and will only serve to dilute their current market position and cause a slew of unforeseen competitive pressures by the bigger players that will be detrimental to them over the long term.

That's my take. Let's pick this up in 5 or so years and see where the chips have landed.
 
Last edited:

xmd5a

Member
Messages
2,855
That's a silly question. I spent over a decade manning a NAMM booth right beside PRS and got a pretty good insight into the "market" in the process. Without the benefit of seeing the "books," which I would have access to as a consultant, it's all hypothetical anyway.

Based on this I posit you don't understand what a "brand" is or how branding works, but that puts you in the majority so not to worry.

Being too much of an "insider" might be a problem if you end up not perceiving things as the average customer would. I've only been exposed to brands my whole life, and having enough to afford expensive guitars but being the sort of person who voluntarily opts for the cheaper ones, I give a lot of thought to what it means for a guitar to be up scale and down market.

Fender has been very consistent with their brand strategy - there are Fenders and there are Squiers so there is a very clear distinction between the upper and lower ends with movement up and down in each offering.

PRS has been consistent branding everything PRS - electrics, amps and acoustics. For the longest time SE was understood to stand for "Santana Edition" (whether true or not) so was acceptable to the market as it was seen as a sort of "signature" brand like the "Gibson Les Paul." SE recently changed to "Student Edition" with the introduction of a slew of lower end products using that sub-brand and thereby introducing confusion into the market. Unlike Fender there's no brand clarity from a market perspective so I disagree with your assertion that they are following Fender's playbook. Perhaps they think they are but if that's the case they need a new marketing department.

FMIC is not only one of the largest makers of electric guitars, they also control the majority of the distribution of MI product. Up to this point PRS has been a sidereal PITA but this puts them head-to-head and there will be consequences, it's just a matter of time.

I think everyone knows that MIM Fenders are "entry level" and MIA Fenders are the good stuff. The reason is obvious enough, you want into a guitar store and you ask, "why are the ones up higher twice as expensive as the ones that I can reach?" and someone will be sure to tell you. And then not long after you realize all the rock stars are using the MIA product. So that fact, MIA versus import, applies to all brands, and people will wonder where any guitar is made, be it PRS or whatever. I think you have a myopic fixation on the headstock and are not seeing the whole picture from a regular player's perspective. I'm certain that Gibson could start putting "Gibson" on import headstocks and it wouldn't hurt their brand image, so long as they provide some visual cue, people will still make the distinction between "the real deal" and the imports, just as they do now with Fender and PRS, which have a mix of import and domestic made models.

As far as where Squier comes in, IME you only buy Squier if 1) you're buying a cheap guitar for someone else, or 2) if you're broke and that's genuinely all you can afford, so I dont think the brand is important. I think Squier contrasts with First Act rather than Fender.


When the Pigtronix guys were gassing to take over Supro I counselled against it for some of the same reasons (they wanted to reposition Supro as an upscale boutique offering when its brand strength was entry-level/affordable). They went ahead anyway. It took about 5 years but they eventually hit the wall and acknowledged everything I had foretold had come true. While I don't profess to have a crystal ball, I don't think this move by PRS was very well thought out and I would have counselled against it, and probably been fired for doing so, but that's all in a days work.

You have to understand your market position (if you have one) and play to your strengths. Marketing knock-offs, regardless how good they are, isn't what I would identify as PRS's strength and will only serve to dilute their current market position and cause a slew of unforeseen competitive pressures by the bigger players that will be detrimental to them over the long term.

That's my take. Let's pick this up in 5 or so years and see where the chips have landed.

I'd guess that only older players would even know of the brand Supro, older players generally have more money to spend, and Supro is affiliated with vintage, and vintage = expensive, so the idea of taking it upscale doesn't seem dumb to me, but then again I'm not an older player and I don't have an interest their products so I don't have a strong opinion on the matter.
 

Verne Andru

Member
Messages
1,012
Being too much of an "insider" might be a problem if you end up not perceiving things as the average customer would. I've only been exposed to brands my whole life, and having enough to afford expensive guitars but being the sort of person who voluntarily opts for the cheaper ones, I give a lot of thought to what it means for a guitar to be up scale and down market.
Thanks for a thoughtful response. Over the course of my career I've marketed everything from soup to nuts so tagging me an "insider" is very far off the mark, but since we don't know each other your misunderstanding is understandable.

I think everyone knows that MIM Fenders are "entry level" and MIA Fenders are the good stuff. The reason is obvious enough, you want into a guitar store and you ask, "why are the ones up higher twice as expensive as the ones that I can reach?" and someone will be sure to tell you. And then not long after you realize all the rock stars are using the MIA product. So that fact, MIA versus import, applies to all brands, and people will wonder where any guitar is made, be it PRS or whatever. I think you have a myopic fixation on the headstock and are not seeing the whole picture from a regular player's perspective. I'm certain that Gibson could start putting "Gibson" on import headstocks and it wouldn't hurt their brand image, so long as they provide some visual cue, people will still make the distinction between "the real deal" and the imports, just as they do now with Fender and PRS, which have a mix of import and domestic made models.

As far as where Squier comes in, IME you only buy Squier if 1) you're buying a cheap guitar for someone else, or 2) if you're broke and that's genuinely all you can afford, so I dont think the brand is important. I think Squier contrasts with First Act rather than Fender.
I'm going to turn your words against you - what you just posted is an "insiders" POV. You know the gear and hang out on forums like this so you would be classified as a "heat seeker" or "early adopter," meaning you would be close to first in line for anything new and know all about it before you ever handled one. Marketing to the masses who know nothing and to the elite who are highly informed are completely different marketing challenges.

I'd guess that only older players would even know of the brand Supro, older players generally have more money to spend, and Supro is affiliated with vintage, and vintage = expensive, so the idea of taking it upscale doesn't seem dumb to me, but then again I'm not an older player and I don't have an interest their products so I don't have a strong opinion on the matter.
You're right and wrong. While much of the vintage stuff has appreciated over time, old Supro stuff was, and probably still is, selling for chump change. It was lo-end department store fare that many considered junk and priced accordingly. There were many times I saw the "new" Supros trying to be sold for $1600 while I could pick up a vintage one in good nick for under $500 and completely rebuild it for $200 in parts (and have a piece of vintage gear at the end of it) so the disconnect was, and still is, vast. At the end of the day they made a bad business decision in the face of advice to the contrary and paid by losing their company.
 

xmd5a

Member
Messages
2,855
Thanks for a thoughtful response. Over the course of my career I've marketed everything from soup to nuts so tagging me an "insider" is very far off the mark, but since we don't know each other your misunderstanding is understandable.

You said "I spent over a decade manning a NAMM booth right beside PRS and got a pretty good insight into the "market" in the process. " afaik you have to be something of an insider to even get into NAMM.

I'm going to turn your words against you - what you just posted is an "insiders" POV. You know the gear and hang out on forums like this so you would be classified as a "heat seeker" or "early adopter," meaning you would be close to first in line for anything new and know all about it before you ever handled one. Marketing to the masses who know nothing and to the elite who are highly informed are completely different marketing challenges.

So this is a simple definition problem, I take insider to mean someone who works or is involved on the supply side of the trade. I don't think a super consumer, which I think I would qualify as, is an insider. I've just been heavily marketed towards.

The idea that MIMs are lesser Fenders is something I learned almost immediately as a teenager, because I started with a Strat copy, and wanted a real "Fender", so I had to understand the price structure, and since Strats are the most popular electric guitar to have ever existed, it's likely the route I took is very common, if not the most common.

You're right and wrong. While much of the vintage stuff has appreciated over time, old Supro stuff was, and probably still is, selling for chump change. It was lo-end department store fare that many considered junk and priced accordingly.

I don't think you're correct here. It's been a "thing" that these budget brands that used to be entry level in the 60's are going for a lot of money now, because of the idea that anything old must be good, and because many people who were broke in the 60's are well off now, and they can afford to feed their nostalgia. When I look up vintage Supro I see lots of high prices https://reverb.com/marketplace?query=vintage supro even these old Silvertones are over $1k https://reverb.com/marketplace?query=vintage silvertone&product_type=electric-guitars Or if you google "cheapest tube amps" you will see a bunch of brand new amps made to look like they're from the 50's and 60's, because that's a selling point in and of itself.

Also regarding Supro, I don't think it makes sense for any vintage brand to sell cheap stuff now. You have hundreds of no name Chinese brands like "Ivy" or "Glarry" or "Indio", brand names that basically don't matter. Even though Supro was once cheap,now they could claim their decades in the business has given them the skills to make the finest guitars (regardless of whether its true or not).
 

Verne Andru

Member
Messages
1,012
You said "I spent over a decade manning a NAMM booth right beside PRS and got a pretty good insight into the "market" in the process. " afaik you have to be something of an insider to even get into NAMM.

So this is a simple definition problem, I take insider to mean someone who works or is involved on the supply side of the trade. I don't think a super consumer, which I think I would qualify as, is an insider. I've just been heavily marketed towards.
I agree we seem to have different definitions happening here. I'm a marketing executive and Pigtronix was a client, I was not an employee. They were one of many clients I've had over the years in many different industries and I am in no-way an insider to any or all those markets, as your statement would infer. Marketing is Price, Product, Promotion and Distribution. To do my job it was important for me to get to know the industry my clients live in, which is one of the reasons I'd go to NAMM. Other reasons include sunshine in January and a whole ton of great music and parties. I know maybe a handful of people in the MI business and don't consider myself an insider by any stretch, nor would anyone in the biz. It was my job to understand my client's business, regardless of their vertical market, and attending a trade show once a year was part of that process. You may consider me an insider, but I certainly don't, nor do real "insiders." The fact that our booth was right beside PRS gave me a bit of an peek behind their curtain, which is why I brought it up.

The idea that MIMs are lesser Fenders is something I learned almost immediately as a teenager, because I started with a Strat copy, and wanted a real "Fender", so I had to understand the price structure, and since Strats are the most popular electric guitar to have ever existed, it's likely the route I took is very common, if not the most common.
There's a joke that goes - what's the difference between a Fender Stratocaster made by a Mexican in California and a Fender Stratocaster made by a Mexican in Mexico?

Thank you for affirming a point I made earlier - as an up and coming player you wanted a REAL Fender, not a copy. That situation will not change because Fender has a 60 year head-start and are firmly entrenched as the only legitimate source for a real Stratocasters. This is exactly the problem the SS will have in the long term once the initial surge abates. Paul seems to think he's good enough to eat Fender's Stratocaster lunch and all I'm saying is that this will not end well.

I don't think you're correct here. It's been a "thing" that these budget brands that used to be entry level in the 60's are going for a lot of money now, because of the idea that anything old must be good, and because many people who were broke in the 60's are well off now, and they can afford to feed their nostalgia. When I look up vintage Supro I see lots of high prices https://reverb.com/marketplace?query=vintage supro even these old Silvertones are over $1k https://reverb.com/marketplace?query=vintage silvertone&product_type=electric-guitars Or if you google "cheapest tube amps" you will see a bunch of brand new amps made to look like they're from the 50's and 60's, because that's a selling point in and of itself.
Prices are quite silly these days so your links have no meaning. I stand by what I said - at the time Supro was trying to sell their amps for $1600 they were competing with vintage Supros selling for under $500. It was stupid, to say the least.

Also regarding Supro, I don't think it makes sense for any vintage brand to sell cheap stuff now. You have hundreds of no name Chinese brands like "Ivy" or "Glarry" or "Indio", brand names that basically don't matter. Even though Supro was once cheap,now they could claim their decades in the business has given them the skills to make the finest guitars (regardless of whether its true or not).
What about Danelectro? They've done very well with their reissues that were, until the recent covid pricing hikes, very affordable.

And while you point out the Glarrys of the world, why in heaven's name would a company like PRS want to muck around in the bottom-end of the market with yet anther Stratocaster knock-off when it is saturated with other product offerings much cheaper than they'll ever be able to offer them for? I understand Paul's job is to keep expanding his market (CEO stands for Chief Growth Officer) but the direction he's taking is a race to the bottom that he will not win no matter how nice the SS is.
 




Trending Topics

Top Bottom