lawsuit guitars

Re: lawsuit guitars

On May 14, 2:49 pm, rct <Ron.Thomp...@faa.gov> wrote:

> Every Hondo ever made, with cases, extra setta strings, and a 20
> dollar cable, all of them aren't worth 301 dollars.

OTOH, I probably wouldn't be playing guitar if I didn't find a used
Hondo II Les Paul for $50 back in 1982. So, I have a soft spot for
them. But, yeah, I get your point.

- Rich

Re: lawsuit guitars

On May 14, 2:37 pm, jimmy <bigtoeh...@hotmail,com > wrote:

> I especially like this one.
>
> "Hondo Set Neck Ibanez Artist Style Guitar Black lawsuit"
>
>     http :// tinyurl,com /439pfg (have to log in to see completed
> listings I think)

I've been bitching about this "lawsuit" phenomenon for months now. It
seems that the right buzzword will get you big bucks on eBay. The word
"vintage" gets horribly abused too. But I don't blame the sellers. I
blame the buyers for being such idiots.

> It's a Hondo that "Looks like it's from the lawsuit vintage era". She
> went for $301.51.

That's insane. Don't get me wrong, I like Hondos. They're decent
platforms to modify (add the right tuners, pickups, etc. and you have
a nice guitar). But there's no way I'd ever pay more than $100 for
one.

- Rich

Re: lawsuit guitars

Dr. Zontar wrote:
> On May 14, 2:37 pm, jimmy <bigtoeh...@hotmail,com > wrote:
>
>> I especially like this one.
>>
>> "Hondo Set Neck Ibanez Artist Style Guitar Black lawsuit"
>>
>> http :// tinyurl,com /439pfg (have to log in to see completed
>> listings I think)
>
> I've been bitching about this "lawsuit" phenomenon for months now. It
> seems that the right buzzword will get you big bucks on eBay. The word
> "vintage" gets horribly abused too. But I don't blame the sellers. I
> blame the buyers for being such idiots.

Me too. There's one born a minute. "Rare", used more than Vintage or
Lawsuit. Sheesh.

>
>> It's a Hondo that "Looks like it's from the lawsuit vintage era". She
>> went for $301.51.
>
> That's insane. Don't get me wrong, I like Hondos. They're decent
> platforms to modify (add the right tuners, pickups, etc. and you have
> a nice guitar). But there's no way I'd ever pay more than $100 for
> one.

Me either, and that would be $100 Aussie;-)

Mark

Re: lawsuit guitars

jimmy wrote:
> On Wed, 14 May 2008 08:17:30 -0700 (PDT), rct <Ron.Thompson@faa.gov>
<snip>
>> A Mustang looks nothing like a Model T, but it is a Ford. And you and
>> I can not, no matter how much we want to, no matter how good we make
>> them, can not make identical cars and call them Rustangs. We'll get
>> sued, no matter how good or how crappy our cars are. The lawsuit
>> itself has and had absolutely nothing to do with how good something
>> was, but you just can't tell the modern day Guitar Genius that,
>> because everyone gets all their smartz from the eBay.
>>
>> rct
>
> Aren't you guys glad I brought this up ;-?

Yes;-)

Mark

Re: lawsuit guitars

rct wrote:
> Mark Bedingfield wrote:
>
>>> Yes, the term "Lawsuit" is WAY over used, and is most often used to
>>> indicate some level of high quality.
>
>> It can be, in the same way that there are dogs made by Fender USA too.
>
> How can it be used to indicate some level of high quality?

It can't, that's my point. HOWEVER the MIJ production lines in the early
80's had a better hit/miss ratio than Fender USA did at the time. You
were much more likely to get a good Japanese guitar than a US one, until
FMIC took over. Obvious dogs aside of course. I don't consider Hondo to
be anything more than a toy either. I'm talking about Yamaha, Ibanez,
Greko and that ilk.
>
>> Every MIJ replica I have played has been great quality. And its more
>> than a few too. Same deal with Korea.
>
> Great! What does that have to do with lawsuits?

In so much as the term "Lawsuit" (like it or otherwise) is usually
coined to describe a MIJ clone. Another dumb term used is "Lawsuit era".
Which means it isn't a clone, but made during that period. That is
REALLY bogus.

>
>>> Because it is some guy trying to sell his pretty much worthless copy
>>> by calling it a Lawsuit Copy, when there is no such thing.
>
>> I don't look at it like that. I don't care what you call it, the MIJ's I
>> have played have been good guitars. Especially from that late 70's to
>> mid 80's. Can call it frog's wings for all I care. Its just a name.
>
> If it is just a name, why put the word "Lawsuit" in front of the word
> "copy"? Just call it what it is, instead of frogs wings.

For me it indicates (roughly) an era. That's all.
>
>> Close, Fender were retooling the US after the CBS sale. They relied on
>> Japan even for sales in the US for that period.
>
> Very brief period, yes, there were no American Fenders. I remember it.

FMIC Japan sold Standards in Australia probably up until 1993. The
period Fender where not making was only about 3 months I think.
>
>> Even today there are still some models sold outside of Japan by FMIC. Jazzmasters, Jags etc.
>> Even some specific Strat and Tele models.
>
> That is today and has nothing to do with lawsuits or the initial
> reasons for Japanese production.

It stems from that era. That's when it started.
>
>> The main reason the MIJ Fenders were sold only to the Japanese market is also because sales of
>> MIA fenders needed bolstering after tooling was up and running.
>
> Not at all. The main reason was because OTHER COMPANIES WERE MAKING
> MONEY ON FENDER COPIES. Period. End Of Story. The fellas that
> bought the company off CBS did what Leo was too nice to do and CBS was
> too lazy to do, and that was to stop the other companies from making
> money off the backs of Fender. The lag in American production due to
> not owning the equipment was probably farther back than thirdendary,
> not at all a main reason.

OK, I explained that badly. Yes, you are right. But the sales of MIJ
Fenders overseas was also stoped because it was hurting MIA sale. I.e.
sales of MIA's were down and MIJ's were up. It was as much about brand
positioning and protection as it was about stopping Japanese piracy. It
still is, Squier, CIJ and MIM are all VERY well organised.
>
>>> Schultz and Smith then went into the storeroom and got out some 50s
>>> guitars they had laying around that Leo had built and they started re-
>>> tooling the company to make them just like these. See, they had no
>>> machinery or equipment when they bought it from CBS. It's all written
>>> down. Nobody from Japan showed them how to do anything.
>
>> I am sure I have read somewhere that the Japanese were consulted during
>> the retooling, because they were already doing it.
>
> Well yeah, consulting is a pretty vague word, don't you think? And
> where did Schultz come from? Or was it Smith? Onea them guys.

It may have even been Mexico, for that matter.
>
>> Mind you there is a hell of a lot of mythology surrounding MIJ Fenders.
>
> Yes, usually spread by those that covet MIJ Fenders.

In Aussie the MIJ Fenders are not uncommon. Every one I ever played has
been consistently good. The same can't be said for MIM or MIA Fenders.
US Fenders these days are generally much better than they have been, tho
MIM's can still be hit and miss, especially at the standard level. I
won't dispute that there WILL be dogs in the Japanese Fender range, I
just never played one. At worst they were OK, at best unreal.
>
>> Mostly because of the crappy documentation, it spilled over to MIK as well. Ask Fender who
>> made what and they don't know either.
>
> I don't agree. There are a few small periods of time, right after the
> sale, when overseas production was new, that there may have been some
> minor confusions,
> mostly because parts were made in one place and assembled in another.
> They actually CAN tell you whom made what when and where, people just
> don't ask because it might make their guitar worth what a copy is
> actually worth: not much.

I asked. Mailed Fender to enquire about a 1993 (tho I suspect 1990)
Fender Catalina and my 1990 S9 Squier Strat. The answer, sorry no idea.
Records don't go back and foreign equipment is even more sketchy. There
are no records about the early MIK Fenders or Squier's, and certainly no
documentation readily available. That S9 is a wonder to behold, it plays
great and it sounds great, regardless of what pups I have had in it so
far. Its also a ply body. I have yet to play a MIA Strat that is better
than it. I really don't care what its worth, its a player. And strangely
the Pro Tones, S9's and E series MIK Squiers are probably the most
sought after of all MIK Fenders.
>
>> I agree. I'd also go on to add a modern MIA Fender is still pretty much
>> a copy too.
>
> I don't agree. A Fender is precisely whatever Fender says it is, and
> nothing else. I may not agree with what they call a Telecaster, but
> it is still a Telecaster because they say it is.
>
> A Mustang looks nothing like a Model T, but it is a Ford. And you and
> I can not, no matter how much we want to, no matter how good we make
> them, can not make identical cars and call them Rustangs. We'll get
> sued, no matter how good or how crappy our cars are. The lawsuit
> itself has and had absolutely nothing to do with how good something
> was, but you just can't tell the modern day Guitar Genius that,
> because everyone gets all their smartz from the eBay.

I suppose that it's very subjective. Its just a brand name now imo,
that's all. Like the term Lawsuit and Vegemite, it isn't a guarantee of
quality. But a good starting point I guess. I have 3 Strat's one Custom
MIA, CIJ, MIAussie hybrid, one hotrodded MIK Squier and a MIM 50's RI. A
Squier Tele and a Fender Catalina. The best finish is on my MIK Squier.
All fantastic players tho, so I'm happy;-)

Anyway, I'm not going to argue, because I agree with you. I'm just
pointing out where the term "Lawsuit" has gone. Do you have a beef with
MIJ Fenders tho?

Mark

Re: lawsuit guitars

Mark Bedingfield wrote:

> >> It can be, in the same way that there are dogs made by Fender USA too.

> > How can it be used to indicate some level of high quality?

> It can't, that's my point. HOWEVER the MIJ production lines in the early
> 80's had a better hit/miss ratio than Fender USA did at the time. You
> were much more likely to get a good Japanese guitar than a US one, until
> FMIC took over.

Where? When? I was here, right here in Southern New Jersey, I was
working in a music store, I was giving lessons, I was recording and
going up and down the east coast trying to get some records sold, I
was working full time too! Where was this happening?

> Obvious dogs aside of course. I don't consider Hondo to
> be anything more than a toy either. I'm talking about Yamaha, Ibanez, Greko and that ilk.

Greko was just another crappy copy. Do you think we were all like
covetin them Grekos back then? No man, anybody that had onea them was
just foaming to get a real les paul. It was crap. Crap then, crap
now. A copy. Nothing more. Ibanez was not just copies anymore, but
for a large portion of this here USAmerican guitar playing world, they
were and always have been and always will be makers of copies, hence
guitar players like me, and a whole bunch more mind you, that have
never owned one because we remember when they did nothing but copies,
and they just weren't all that great. Yamaha always made great
guitars and had nothing to do with the copyists.

Remember, this was about "Lawsuit" guitars.

> In so much as the term "Lawsuit" (like it or otherwise) is usually
> coined to describe a MIJ clone. Another dumb term used is "Lawsuit era".
> Which means it isn't a clone, but made during that period. That is
> REALLY bogus.

OK.

But then...

> > If it is just a name, why put the word "Lawsuit" in front of the word
> > "copy"?  Just call it what it is, instead of frogs wings.
>
> For me it indicates (roughly) an era. That's all.

Not sure. It's either REALLY bogus, or it indicates (roughly) an era.

> >> Close, Fender were retooling the US after the CBS sale. They relied on
> >> Japan even for sales in the US for that period.

> > Very brief period, yes, there were no American Fenders. I remember it.
>
> FMIC Japan sold Standards in Australia probably up until 1993. The
> period Fender where not making was only about 3 months I think.

It could have been a year. But even during the no production year
they were using up parts inventory and barely getting guitars out. I
don't know what went to Austrailia in them days.

> >> Even today there are still some models sold outside of Japan by FMIC. Jazzmasters, Jags etc.
> >> Even some specific Strat and Tele models.

> > That is today and has nothing to do with lawsuits or the initial
> > reasons for Japanese production.
>
> It stems from that era. That's when it started.

> OK, I explained that badly. Yes, you are right. But the sales of MIJ
> Fenders overseas was also stoped because it was hurting MIA sale. I.e.
> sales of MIA's were down and MIJ's were up. It was as much about brand
> positioning and protection as it was about stopping Japanese piracy. It
> still is, Squier, CIJ and MIM are all VERY well organised.

I'm just not sure where that was happening, or from whom you are
getting those figures and facts. If you have a source that is at
least reasonable, that would be good.

> >> I am sure I have read somewhere that the Japanese were consulted during
> >> the retooling, because they were already doing it.
>
> > Well yeah, consulting is a pretty vague word, don't you think?  And
> > where did Schultz come from?  Or was it Smith?  Onea them guys.
>
> It may have even been Mexico, for that matter.

No, one of them was recruited from Yamaha Music, late 70's early 80's
somewhere in there, CBS trying to get it together towards the end.

> >> Mind you there is a hell of a lot of mythology surrounding MIJ Fenders.

> > Yes, usually spread by those that covet MIJ Fenders.

> In Aussie the MIJ Fenders are not uncommon. Every one I ever played has
> been consistently good.

I can't say that about every MIJ Fender I've ever played.

> The same can't be said for MIM or MIA Fenders.

I agree.


> > I don't agree.  There are a few small periods of time, right after the
> > sale, when overseas production was new, that there may have been some
> > minor confusions,
> > mostly because parts were made in one place and assembled in another.
> > They actually CAN tell you whom made what when and where, people just
> > don't ask because it might make their guitar worth what a copy is
> > actually worth: not much.
>
> I asked. Mailed Fender to enquire about a 1993 (tho I suspect 1990)
> Fender Catalina

Yeah, I don't think there were anymore after...92 or so, so a 93
wouldn't be out of the question.

> and my 1990 S9 Squier Strat. The answer, sorry no idea.

OK.

> Records don't go back and foreign equipment is even more sketchy.

Meaning, we farmed them out to the low bidder and we didn't really
keep track of all that stuff.

> There are no records about the early MIK Fenders or Squier's, and certainly no
> documentation readily available. That S9 is a wonder to behold, it plays
> great and it sounds great, regardless of what pups I have had in it so
> far. Its also a ply body. I have yet to play a MIA Strat that is better
> than it. I really don't care what its worth, its a player. And strangely
> the Pro Tones, S9's and E series MIK Squiers are probably the most
> sought after of all MIK Fenders.

Get with a rep. A long term one preferrably. They'll tell you what
the company can't tell you in an email or a call to the help line or
on a Forum.

> Anyway, I'm not going to argue, because I agree with you. I'm just
> pointing out where the term "Lawsuit" has gone. Do you have a beef with
> MIJ Fenders tho?

No, I don't. My beef is quite simply the use of the word "Lawsuit" to
imply some kind of quality. It doesn't. To imply a very broad and
deep range of guitars from a certain time. It doesn't. To imply that
the reason there is a Fender Japan is because of "The Lawsuit". It
isn't. I lived through this, I remember it, I have it in no less than
6 books that anyone can buy, conversations and letters with the
company and a large variety of reps for this area and others.

I also can't, don't, and won't pretend to speak for Australia, I don't
know what they were doing there then.

rct

Re: lawsuit guitars

rct wrote:

> Greko was just another crappy copy.

That's bullshit.

> Do you think we were all like
> covetin them Grekos back then?

Some were. But you have to remember, these days people are more willing
to look past what it says on the headstock of a guitar.

> No man, anybody that had onea them was
> just foaming to get a real les paul.

Maybe they were - brandname snobbery was in fuller effect then. On the
other hand, on the back of a music magazine from 1982 I have a full-page
interview with Janick Gers (then with Gillan, now Iron Maiden). He's in
the dressing room surrounded by four Stratocasters - two American '70s
models, one early '60s model and the other is a Greco 50's Strat copy.
Not everyone had their heads up their arses back then.

> No, I don't. My beef is quite simply the use of the word "Lawsuit" to
> imply some kind of quality. It doesn't.

Well, the 'lawsuit' Tokai and Grecos I'ved play are better than almost
every '60s, '70s, '80s, '90s and '00s America Fender. In fact, I've
only played one American Stratocaster that I thought was worth the
asking price - back when they were half the price they are now.

Re: lawsuit guitars

White Spirit wrote:


> rct wrote:

> > Greko was just another crappy copy.
>
> That's bullshit.

The three Greko(Grecco, Greco) Les Paul Copies I played in the late
70's, all three black, were all piles of stool that their respective
owners couldn't wait to get rid of. That, though it doesn't agree
with what you think of them, is not bullshit. Your mileage and
experience may vary.

> > Do you think we were all like covetin them Grekos back then?

> Some were.  But you have to remember, these days people are more willing
> to look past what it says on the headstock of a guitar.

Nothing I wrote in here had anything to do with what was written on
the headstocks of the guitars. It was about taking them out and using
them.

> >  No man, anybody that had onea them was just foaming to get a real les paul.

> Maybe they were - brandname snobbery was in fuller effect then.

Or, they wanted a decent guitar that was pretty well proven to hang in
there through some pretty good(or bad) abuse that us HIGH Schooligans
were pretty good at dishing.

> On the other hand, on the back of a music magazine from 1982 I have a full-page
> interview with Janick Gers (then with Gillan, now Iron Maiden).  He's in
> the dressing room surrounded by four Stratocasters - two American '70s
> models, one early '60s model and the other is a Greco 50's Strat copy.
> Not everyone had their heads up their arses back then.

Wow. It was on the back of a magazine. It MUST be true!

> > No, I don't.  My beef is quite simply the use of the word "Lawsuit" to
> > imply some kind of quality.  It doesn't.

> Well, the 'lawsuit' Tokai and Grecos I'ved play are better than almost
> every '60s, '70s, '80s, '90s and '00s America Fender.  In fact, I've
> only played one American Stratocaster that I thought was worth the
> asking price - back when they were half the price they are now.

That's bullshit.

rct

Re: lawsuit guitars

rct wrote:
> White Spirit wrote:
>
>
>> rct wrote:
>
>>> Greko was just another crappy copy.
>> That's bullshit.
>
> The three Greko(Grecco, Greco) Les Paul Copies I played in the late
> 70's, all three black, were all piles of stool that their respective
> owners couldn't wait to get rid of. That, though it doesn't agree
> with what you think of them, is not bullshit. Your mileage and
> experience may vary.
>
>>> Do you think we were all like covetin them Grekos back then?
>
>> Some were. But you have to remember, these days people are more willing
>> to look past what it says on the headstock of a guitar.
>
> Nothing I wrote in here had anything to do with what was written on
> the headstocks of the guitars. It was about taking them out and using
> them.
>
>>> No man, anybody that had onea them was just foaming to get a real les paul.
>
>> Maybe they were - brandname snobbery was in fuller effect then.
>
> Or, they wanted a decent guitar that was pretty well proven to hang in
> there through some pretty good(or bad) abuse that us HIGH Schooligans
> were pretty good at dishing.
>
>> On the other hand, on the back of a music magazine from 1982 I have a full-page
>> interview with Janick Gers (then with Gillan, now Iron Maiden). He's in
>> the dressing room surrounded by four Stratocasters - two American '70s
>> models, one early '60s model and the other is a Greco 50's Strat copy.
>> Not everyone had their heads up their arses back then.
>
> Wow. It was on the back of a magazine. It MUST be true!
>
>>> No, I don't. My beef is quite simply the use of the word "Lawsuit" to
>>> imply some kind of quality. It doesn't.
>
>> Well, the 'lawsuit' Tokai and Grecos I'ved play are better than almost
>> every '60s, '70s, '80s, '90s and '00s America Fender. In fact, I've
>> only played one American Stratocaster that I thought was worth the
>> asking price - back when they were half the price they are now.
>
> That's bullshit.

How can WS's experience of playing Strats be BS? My experience mirrors
WS's. I've played dozens of various Fenders and only ever picked up one
US Strat that really grabbed me. An L-series.

Mark

Re: lawsuit guitars

Mark Bedingfield wrote:

> How can WS's experience of playing Strats be BS? My experience mirrors
> WS's. I've played dozens of various Fenders and only ever picked up one
> US Strat that really grabbed me. An L-series.

White Spirit wrote:

> rct wrote:

> > Greko was just another crappy copy.

> That's bullshit.

That's how.

rct

Re: lawsuit guitars

rct wrote:

> Mark Bedingfield wrote:

>> How can WS's experience of playing Strats be BS? My experience mirrors
>> WS's. I've played dozens of various Fenders and only ever picked up one
>> US Strat that really grabbed me. An L-series.

> White Spirit wrote:

>> rct wrote:

>>> Greko was just another crappy copy.

>> That's bullshit.

> That's how.

To be fair, you completely wrote Greco off in that statement. Had you
said that some were crappy copies then fine, and it would have
illustrated your point.

Re: lawsuit guitars

On May 15, 11:03 am, White Spirit <wspi...@homechoice.co.uk> wrote:
> rct wrote:
> > Mark Bedingfield wrote:
> >> How can WS's experience of playing Strats be BS? My experience mirrors
> >> WS's. I've played dozens of various Fenders and only ever picked up one
> >> US Strat that really grabbed me. An L-series.
> > White Spirit wrote:
> >> rct wrote:
> >>> Greko was just another crappy copy.
> >> That's bullshit.
> > That's how.
>
> To be fair, you completely wrote Greco off in that statement.  Had you
> said that some were crappy copies then fine, and it would have
> illustrated your point.

True enough. On the other hand, to portray Greco copies as some
mystical "lawsuit" thingy that us dumb asses of the 70's completely
overlooked is not accurate either, and you and I both know that the
people selling them want that to be true.

rct

Re: lawsuit guitars

rct wrote:

>> To be fair, you completely wrote Greco off in that statement. Had you
>> said that some were crappy copies then fine, and it would have
>> illustrated your point.

> True enough. On the other hand, to portray Greco copies as some
> mystical "lawsuit" thingy that us dumb asses of the 70's completely
> overlooked is not accurate either, and you and I both know that the
> people selling them want that to be true.

Yep. Fortunately, there are other guitars that deserve that mystical
status that are overloooked, and that many people don't know about. I'm
grabbing them while I can. Maybe they'll be the Tokais and JVs of tomorrow?

Re: lawsuit guitars

White Spirit wrote:
> rct wrote:
>
>>> To be fair, you completely wrote Greco off in that statement. Had you
>>> said that some were crappy copies then fine, and it would have
>>> illustrated your point.
>
>> True enough. On the other hand, to portray Greco copies as some
>> mystical "lawsuit" thingy that us dumb asses of the 70's completely
>> overlooked is not accurate either, and you and I both know that the
>> people selling them want that to be true.
>
> Yep. Fortunately, there are other guitars that deserve that mystical
> status that are overloooked, and that many people don't know about. I'm
> grabbing them while I can. Maybe they'll be the Tokais and JVs of
> tomorrow?


JV's are coming back BTW;-). There is a new line of Squiers called
"Vintage Vibes". They are 50's-60's replicas. My local dealer showed me
some shots of them and they look amazing. 50's and 60's Strat, 50's
Tele, Duosonic, early and late 50's P bass, Early J bass.... Man they
look good. My dealer mate got to play one and said the one he played was
great too.

Mark

Re: lawsuit guitars

Mark Bedingfield wrote:

> How can WS's experience of playing Strats be BS? My experience mirrors
> WS's. I've played dozens of various Fenders and only ever picked up one
> US Strat that really grabbed me. An L-series.

The best I've played have been a c.1984 Japanese Squier and a very early
Japanese Fender 3-bolt model. The 60's models I've played either
haven't aged very well or weren't that great in the first place.

I probably sound like I slag American Fenders off a lot. In truth, I'd
love to have one at some point. It's just a question of finding the
right one. The only one I would have paid for was the wrong colour :)
But when I can get Korean Strats off Ebay for between £63 and £100 that
are better than something I'd pay £1,000 for, I can't really justify it.
I used to look at '70s models before the prices more than tripled.