Is a new mass-produced bass ever worth more than £1500

[SteveXFR]

1 hour ago, Boodang said:

I agree... mostly! I think Fender have probably got their pricing spot on. My preferences for design might not be a quality issue but they would certainly be more expensive to incorporate. It's interesting that the scale of economics now mean that Fender, making a bass as cheap as they possibly can, charge more than a custom luthier who can incorporate those design preferences.

 

Don't forget a lot of what we pay for a Fender is import taxes. In the US they're considerably cheaper than in the UK

[Ralf1e]

Which came first the Fender or the boutique?

Leo was a genius and nearly everything that has come since has been built in the wake of his ideas.

He built the cake. Others are now putting their own version of the icing on it.

[iconic]

23 hours ago, Ralf1e said:

Did I use the word complete. It would have needed some welding as all rot boxes built in those days did but it was there.

I don't suppose you think you could have picked up a Tiger 110 or BSA Goldstar or a 650 Roadrocket for about £100 either?

But you could 🤣

In 1992, I bought a well running, short ticket, rough as a badgers backside on the body '78 MK2 RS2000 for £200 in glorious white...dynamically it was still as woeful as when it was new, felt like a tad quicker 1600E only not as comfy. 

 

...although this post brings nothing to the bass party, it maybe helps your case😉

[Dan Dare]

On 30/03/2023 at 18:59, Cato said:

As always the market decides.

 

This. Worth or value is predicated by how much people are willing to pay. How much they are willing to pay is governed primarily by desirability. Quality plays a part in determining that, but so do scarcity, the "right" label, appearance and so on. 

[Misdee]

1 hour ago, Dan Dare said:

 

This. Worth or value is predicated by how much people are willing to pay. How much they are willing to pay is governed primarily by desirability. Quality plays a part in determining that, but so do scarcity, the "right" label, appearance and so on. 

I totally agree. A 1960's P Bass isn't worth £7000-£10 000 if your only criteria is buying a tool to do a job with. Whatever folks are paying for, it isn't something tangible. But conversely, my own personal experience is that you can be paying for something equally intangible ( or completely irrelevant) if you opt for a new boutique custom made bass.

 

Ultimately, one criteria for "worth the money" is how much of what you paid will you be able to get back if you decide to sell it. Another is how much enjoyment and fulfilment will you get from playing that bass, and there can be a conflict between the two. If I  wanted a new Stingray-style bass, for example, I would do better buying a new USA Lakland 44-94 (or 44-76) than a new EBMM Stingray Special if in future I wanted to sell it on.  I would lose less money. However, for my sensibilities at least, only a Musicman bass will do when it comes to Stingrays. I'd always feel dissatisfied with the Lakland, despite the superior build quality ect. So which is the best value?

Edited April 3, 2023 by Misdee

[Greg Edwards69]

16 hours ago, Boodang said:

 To me the whole thing smacks of 'how to make a bass as cheap as possible ''.

Is that kinda the founding ethos of Fender guitars, though? They were designed to be mass produced as quickly and cheaply as possible by unskilled labour. They were workhorse instruments, made for the masses with replaceable parts (indeed, part of the reason behind the bolt on neck).  It's only more recent times that people are convinced vintage fender instruments have some kind of mystical mojo. At the time, they were just mass produced instruments.

[chris_b]

45 minutes ago, Greg Edwards69 said:

It's only more recent times that people are convinced vintage fender instruments have some kind of mystical mojo. At the time, they were just mass produced instruments.

 

Actually Pre-CBS Fenders had a good reputation and were highly sought after almost as soon as CBS bought the company and started to make their cuts and production changes.

 

Of course they weren't all great instruments, but the better Pre-CBS basses have mostly found their way into studio work via the A list session players. Those guys don't use any old basses. They have their pick of the best sounding basses so there must be something in the "myth".

[Ralf1e]

1 hour ago, Greg Edwards69 said:

Is that kinda the founding ethos of Fender guitars, though? They were designed to be mass produced as quickly and cheaply as possible by unskilled labour. They were workhorse instruments, made for the masses with replaceable parts (indeed, part of the reason behind the bolt on neck).  It's only more recent times that people are convinced vintage fender instruments have some kind of mystical mojo. At the time, they were just mass produced instruments.

Agree absolutely! At the time they were just mass produced instruments. At the time they were also the best basses money could buy and the only one fit for purpose to record by all accounts.  All the others were rubbish and sounded like suitcases with a neck glued or tacked on or even worse.

Others grabbed that idea and ran with it but it took years to happen and catch up.

I am not a Fender fan but credit where it is due. The design has won me over just in the last year. Before that I never even owned one.

Don't get me wrong a Westone Thunder or Spectrum LX or 2 (see my avatar) still make a P bass sound like a toy but they came much later (and didn't bribe the right people). Joke.

[fretmeister]

"Worth" is a very loaded word.

If it costs £1500 to allow the workers to have a living wage and good working conditions etc then even if it is too expensive for me, then it must be reasonable.

 

People often look at the price of parts against the RRP of a new product and declare that the full product is too expensive. Often there is no thought given to building rent or purchase / staff wages / insurance / electricity / heating / building taxes / water supply (always very expensive in manufacturing) / environmental compliance / transport / maintenance of the machinery / distribution systems / IT Networks / etc etc.

 

Just because there might only be £300-£400 of parts in a £1500 bass does not mean there is £1100-£1200 profit. The actual profit might only be £200 after all the actual overheads are covered. 

 

Manufacturing is very expensive. Global shipping is very expensive. The cost of the parts is the smallest element of the total monies spent to get the finished item into the hands of the ultimate buyer.

 

If there's one thing I've learnt from seeing actual accounts for manufacturing companies, it's that actual profit levels are always far smaller than people expect them to be, and the total overhead cost per item is always massively larger.

 

For those reasons I'm not convinced the word "worth" is the right one. I can easily say whether I would be happy or not to pay £1500 for something, but that has no influence at all on whether it would be possible to make that thing at a lower price and not go bankrupt.

 

 

[Doctor J]

On 02/04/2023 at 08:57, gjones said:

Saying that, I'm happy to subsidise a company like Fender and it's American factory and workers, if it prevents the company from having to offshore their production to find cheap labour abroad. 

 

Not sure I understand the logic. Fender have multiple OUS factories explicitly so they can utilise cheap foreign labour. If you want to subsidise a company who don't exploit cheap, foreign labour you'd choose one who don't have more factories in cheap labour markets than they do at home, no?

 

Edited April 3, 2023 by Doctor J

[Dad3353]

37 minutes ago, Doctor J said:

 

Not sure I understand the logic. Fender have multiple OUS factories explicitly so they can utilise cheap foreign labour. If you want to subsidise a company who don't exploit cheap, foreign labour you'd choose one who don't have more factories in cheap labour markets than they do at home, no?

 

Define 'cheap, foreign'. If the folk working in the 'foreign' factories are getting a decent wage for their local economy, isn't that a Good Thing..? 

[Doctor J]

Cheap, relative to the expensive labour, as quoted.

[Dad3353]

Sorry, I'm failing to see the 'logic' here. 

[Doctor J]

That's ok.

[fretmeister]

Yeah - it's not "cheap" labour - it might even be very well paid in that location. But it is lower cost to the main comparator.

[Misdee]

To me how much employees are being paid and treated is a complete irrelevance. It's certainly not something I want to pay over the odds to improve. I've had a hard life too. And now I'm expected to find three grand if I want a new Stingray. 

[Burns-bass]

10 hours ago, Misdee said:

To me how much employees are being paid and treated is a complete irrelevance. It's certainly not something I want to pay over the odds to improve. I've had a hard life too. And now I'm expected to find three grand if I want a new Stingray. 

The reason you’ve probably had a hard life is that you’ve not been paid fairly for your labour. You can perpetuate that or break the cycle. 
 

Who would spend £3k on a Stingray? Madness.

[fretmeister]

11 hours ago, Misdee said:

To me how much employees are being paid and treated is a complete irrelevance. It's certainly not something I want to pay over the odds to improve. I've had a hard life too. And now I'm expected to find three grand if I want a new Stingray. 

 

If you've had a hard life then why would you want others to suffer the same way?

 

As always there are 2 types. Those who have suffered and want the next generation to suffer just as much, and those that have suffered and want better things for the next generation.

 

Always pick the second choice, or perhaps admit that your suffering has deeply damaged your humanity and ability to empathise.

[tauzero]

4 hours ago, fretmeister said:

 

If you've had a hard life then why would you want others to suffer the same way?

 

As always there are 2 types. Those who have suffered and want the next generation to suffer just as much, and those that have suffered and want better things for the next generation.

 

Always pick the second choice, or perhaps admit that your suffering has deeply damaged your humanity and ability to empathise.

 

I would go for option B, but I have no way of knowing how much the guitar company workforce is paid, how much profit there is, how much is reinvested, and how much goes to shareholders and directors. Seeing the way that wealth redistribution in the UK and US is operating in anti-Robin Hood mode, I would be chary of further lining the pockets of some bloated capitalist.

[fretmeister]

41 minutes ago, tauzero said:

 

I would go for option B, but I have no way of knowing how much the guitar company workforce is paid, how much profit there is, how much is reinvested, and how much goes to shareholders and directors. Seeing the way that wealth redistribution in the UK and US is operating in anti-Robin Hood mode, I would be chary of further lining the pockets of some bloated capitalist.

 

That's certainly a valid concern.

 

I did enjoy informing an American on facebook that I won't buy from countries that allow exploitation of workers... and then telling him the USA was on high on that list. Sometimes that bear has to be poked.

 

[Ed_S]

7 hours ago, Burns-bass said:

Who would spend £3k on a Stingray? Madness.

 

I did. I'm enjoying it and I don't regret my decision. 🙂 

 

I totally get not understanding why somebody else has bought something you wouldn't, though. At about the same time I bought my bass, a mate from work paid roughly the same on booking a big family holiday. To my way of thinking, all he'll get for his money is photos I can find on google image search, sand in places it should never be, and an overwhelming feeling of relief when he can sleep in his own bed again!

[Dan Dare]

18 hours ago, Misdee said:

To me how much employees are being paid and treated is a complete irrelevance. It's certainly not something I want to pay over the odds to improve. I've had a hard life too. And now I'm expected to find three grand if I want a new Stingray. 

 

There's a "hard life" for us in the West and a "hard life" for those in other parts of the world...

[Boodang]

2 hours ago, Ed_S said:

 

I did. I'm enjoying it and I don't regret my decision. 🙂 

 

I totally get not understanding why somebody else has bought something you wouldn't, though. At about the same time I bought my bass, a mate from work paid roughly the same on booking a big family holiday. To my way of thinking, all he'll get for his money is photos I can find on google image search, sand in places it should never be, and an overwhelming feeling of relief when he can sleep in his own bed again!

I've dived with dolphins in the Bahamas, skydived in Hawaii, hiked to the base camp of Everest and sailed the Seven Seas of Rhye.... oh the time and money I could have saved if only I'd done a Google image search instead!

[Waddo Soqable]

1 hour ago, Boodang said:

I've dived with dolphins in the Bahamas, skydived in Hawaii, hiked to the base camp of Everest and sailed the Seven Seas of Rhye.... oh the time and money I could have saved if only I'd done a Google image search instead!

Out of interest, do dolphins come and poke you with their snouts and the like, or give you a wide berth? 

[Passinwind]

12 hours ago, Burns-bass said:

Who would spend £3k on a Stingray?

Someone who makes 500 a gig?