Alan Ratcliffe wrote:
Just to introduce some balance to the whole Tokai lovefest (or should that be Love Rock fest?) we've been having lately...
Bear in mind, Alan, that some of the love-fest is simply to make people aware that the choice exists. This is a new thing for South Africans, many of whom don't know anything about Tokai, and may be tempted to think they're some cheap knock-off for people who can't afford an Epiphone.
Alan Ratcliffe wrote:
A Gibson model guitar retains far more of the value of its original purchase price than any copy ever could. Regardless of the quality difference (real or perceived), the real thing holds its price better and will likely always be worth more
True in general, Alan. My Les Paul Deluxe has very poor specs next to the Tokai LS150 I'm going to be buying. Multi-piece body, maple neck, 3 piece top, crappy pickups (which I've swapped out) and yet they go for a whack of money nowdays.
At the same time, an early 80's Tokai Les Paul just sold for over $4,000 on yahoo auctions Japan. As more people become aware of the guitars, their value will stay truer. But in general you're correct. The flip-side is, if you really want a 50's type Les Paul, Tokais are affordable in the first place. Where as the privilege of the Gibson logo will add at least a half the cost of the Tokai, and frequently will double the price. And for me that's it. I want the guitar. Not the name. If I could blow the money on a Gibson, I'd still be tempted to go Tokai though. They've exploited their name rather ruthlessly. I did an inflation calculation that said that a '59 LP sold for the equivalent of a little over $1900 in today's money. And this is a line that got canned because... they were too expensive. But look what the Gibson reissues go for now.
Alan Ratcliffe wrote:
As it stands, the copies are arguably better instruments when compared to the equivalent Gibson model, and certainly offer more "bang for the buck", but they remain Asian copies of someone else's design. Is that morally right and do we want to support it?
Yes they are copies of the design of Ted Mcartey and the guys in Kalamazoo in the fifties. Now how much are those guys getting from the Gibson reissues? Probably not so much, eh? And I don't think that a Gibson, as a corporate entity, feels aggrieved that all it's hard work of existing in some tax records is being exploited by an Asian company. Furthermore, given that Gibson canned the line, and gave people deliberately poorer quality lookalikes until Tokai's quality frightened them, I feel quite happy to support Tokai, which listened to the public from the start.
Brand loyalty includes providing excellent products at good value. Japanese companies never seem to forget that.
And Fender doesn't seem to have any problem with it, do they? They just hired Tokai to make vintage-style guitars for them. Gibson instead continued to make lower than 50's spec factory Gibsons, made even lower spec Epiphones, and then started remaking their guitars to original spec at a huge premium (a blatant admission that their factory guitars were lower quality than the originals).
Alan Ratcliffe wrote:
Just because the original manufacturer doesn't make 'em like they used to, does that mean someone else does? They may get closer (arguably), but I don't think anyone can make anything like a real late '50s model guitar anymore (to quote Henry Crun - "You can't get the wood, you know.").
Probably true. Although, given all the crazed analysis, I'm sure the odd '59 replica is as good as any original, with a lucky combination of wood, or some other quirk. Even the original guitars must have had the odd dud. Gibson custom shop, Tokai, and Navigator probably all have more consistent production than Gibson in the 50's. But yes, the 50's Gibsons do seem to have factor X in spades.
But the main fact still stands: many of us don't like Gibson as a company, we like a certain range of guitars that the company made many years ago. We didn't ask for changes and updates, sound chambers or Les Paul Supremes. We wanted the same guitars that shook our world in the hands of Clapton and Page, Richards, Green, etc.
By sheer law of numbers, that's impossible for most people. A guitar that was once very expensive is now luxury yacht expensive. Copies are the only possible option. Japanese companies realised this fact and provided them. When Gibson sulkily realised they could no longer make people buy anything they felt like slapping the words Les Paul on, they sluggishly moved into the same replica business that Tokai, Burny, Ibanez, and Greco had been in for years. They protected the European and American market with the threat of legal action (they've recently been slapped down hard in Sweden though), and were able to charge more for their replicas than anyone else. They charge for their lower spec range, what other manufacturers charge for their 50's replicas.
Alan Ratcliffe wrote:
Now, I think everyone knows where I stand on Gibson and their products. I also like the Tokai brand and other Japanese manufacturers, and they deserve kudos for seeing a gap and taking it (just like they did in the '80s Norlin years). But I does this change anything stated above? I think these are things that need considering.
They are. And I have considered them a lot in the time I've been researching Tokai. But a couple of main points stand out for me:
1. Gibson now calls for loyalty from the very customers they ignored for years.
2. They charge more for their replicas than even the original guitars cost. And far more than they can be profitably made for.
3. If it was ok to buy a Tokai for a vintage Les Paul in 1980, how does it become not ok when Gibson decides to built their own?
4. Gibson doesn't sell in South Africa because of its own outrageous demands for profit.
And bear in mind, nothing I'm saying is designed to imply that premium Tokais are
better than Gibson VOS reissues. Just comparable. Some say they're better, some say they're not, but they bat in the same league.
Fritz Brand wrote:
Well said indeed, food for thought.
I really hope Gibson do get their ducks in a row at some stage, would love to own a real Gibson when the quality gets better.
I don't think it's correct of the Tokai guys to call the axes Les Pauls. Yes it doesn't say Les Paul on the headstock, but everyone refers to them as Les Pauls. Call it a Les Paul copy or better yet a Love Rock. I've never been a fan of copies.
I get where you're coming from, but the very reason Gibson just lost copyright on the Les Paul in Sweden, is because they were caught out using Les Paul as a common noun. In other words, Gibson representatives, in their own literature, used the term to describe a type of guitar, rather than a specific line produced by them and Epiphone. Everyone does that. And so does Gibson. It would be pointlessly confusing to do anything else. There's the Yamaha Lord Player, the Navigator 400 something, the Edwards LP98, the Greco Super Real. For people who don't know these brands well, it makes sense to refer to the type of guitar - a type that everyone knows.
But to finish with the original point: while I personally have some beef with Gibson as a corporation, when I'm talking about Tokai, it's mostly because I've done a lot of research about the guitars and want to share my excitement about them and how wonderful it is to have them available to us in SA. To let people know that they
are great guitars, and not some kind of inferior knock-off. People are more than welcome to boycott them in loyalty to Gibson. But lots of us just want to be able to own that dream "50's" Les Paul.
