Sponsorships

DonovanB

Here's a thought for all of you.

Lets say you are really good and are selling a lot of albums, touring etc. and someone offers you a sponsorship of guitars. But you can only play their guitars.
A condition is that if you are seen, heard or photographed playing another brand you will be in breach of contract and have to pay back a large sum of money they gave you.

Would you do it? give reasons....

I'll give my answer later.

[deleted]

That sounds a bit spiteful (I know some local bands who are sponsored but they still use other types of guitars; it isn't a problem for them) on the part of the hypothetical sponsor...but in the spirit of the question, if it was a brand I liked, sure, why not? Most good guitar brands produce a variety of models that could cover all the bases you'd need?

You're married, aren't you? You're OK with the concept, I'd imagine. ? Hahahahaha.

Ray

And wear their cap at the post-gig interview as well? Maybe depends on the guitar. And what if they dont make all the kinds of guitar that you need for the numbers you play?

Neps

Well, I'd go with Fender.. Humbuckers are over rated in any case..
Wont mind wearing the cap, as long as I can still proudly wear my Zildjian Tshirts!!

[deleted]

Cool No problem....

As long as I can specify where my woods come from, what my paint job is, what tuners I like, what pickups I want and what amp I play through...

Pay the Moola, and put your logo on my headstock ?

Then again we all know John Mayer is "sponsored" by fender? right

I have seen videos of him playing a Gibson, a Guild, and a PRS before?

So it begs the question? do guitar builders demand that? I don't see it

needleshy

i would also do it if they make a guitar to my spec no problem, live i'd use em and get pics taken. i know for a fact that the bands that are sponsored use different guitars in the studio to get the specific sound and feel they want and need,and thats not breaching any contract. so they pay me i'll play their guitars. i dunno if i'd wear a cap though but t shirt id wear, as long as it looks cool.

DonovanB

Ah, don't change my question...
if that was stipulated in your contract, whether realistic or not would you do it?

Stratisfear wrote You're married, aren't you? You're OK with the concept, I'd imagine. ? Hahahahaha.

yip ? but I find the concept of being with one woman indefinitely more acceptable than one guitar.

Sure you could specify your requirements and have some incredible signature guitars to your name, but I am still undecided as to wether I would or not.

Maybe to refine the question a little, If you were demanded to only play one brand, would you be able to do it. Especially if you couldn't get away with not doing it

AlanRatcliffe

I could do it as long as they built one or two to my spec. Depends on the company too - some have a good range to choose from (say Ibanez), so you could get a humbucker guitar, and a single-coil, maybe an archtop too. Don't forget some of the bigger companies own a number of brands Like Fender/Jackson/Guild, etc., making exclusivity no hurdle. If it were Gibson and you also wanted a single-coil Stratlike thing, or Dean and you didn't want a something associated with Dimebag, you're stuffed.

One thing for sure is that no one guitar can do it all (I know, I've tried).

The solution to the problem is to get big enough that they are happy if you are just seen with one of their guitars ? That's when all the manufacturers will shower you with product for free, and if you sign an endorsement (even a non-exclusive one), they will pay you money on top to use your name and likeness in advertising. So start practising. ?

PeteM

I think that if you've cracked it big-time, manufacturers will come looking for you, and you can lay down the terms. I like to leave my options open and might sign exclusivity in the short-term but I would never sign away my rights on a permanent basis.

chris77

Not before I study the fine print thoroughly. If I'm good enough to be approached then I have some bargaining power, and I will be a fool not to use it. They want me - not the other way around (even if I actually do!) So I can play a bit of hardball. They should specify what steps they would be willing to take to help me keep my signature sound, whether it includes building me a custom instrument if they dont have a suitable option in their product line, or allowing me to use an instrument from another manufacturer. How long will the endorsement be for and how will we renegotiate our terms? The list of points we have to agree upon first is almost endless. The same principles should also apply to both parties, and it must all be specified in black and white. No handshakes and promises over a bottle of Chivaz at a stripclub. If all is agreed upon beforehand and I'm in breach then fine, I knew what the terms were so I will face the consequences. But if they can't keep their end then I will want my pound of flesh as well. Cause and effect. These okes will be out to get the best deal possible for themselves, so I will be willing to do the same. Be as greedy as possible and try to get as much out of the contract as I can. Even be downright stubborn and unreasonable to test how far they are willing to accomodate me - I'm sure they will do the same. If we're able to compromise and meet somewhere in the middle, good. We will both benefit from our relationship and the boundaries will be well defined, as well as what our benefits and responsibilities are in the partnersip. If we cant meet somewhere in the middle, screw them. Their competitors might value my talents more. It might mean living in a smaller house if I dont agree to dance to their tunes and all else fails, but at least it will be because I refused to become a corporate puppet. And sometimes dignity is worth more than a sponsorship deal.

Heath

i might sell out if the company has a good enough range to choose from .

Ray

OK, I've thought about it. I'll do it! When will they be in touch?