#1
http://m.imgur.com/qtK96up


Wouldn't let me post a link but if you want to check it out search for " 1987 Gibson W.R.C" on eBay. There's one on there right now for less than 1000$.

What do you guys think? And why isn't it more expensive?
Last edited by NorthstrumGuita at Nov 13, 2016,
#2
Sturgeon's 2nd Law, a.k.a. Sturgeon's Revelation: “Ninety percent of everything is crap.”

Why, yes, I am a lawyer- thanks for asking!


alhaq369
It is very impotent to success a business.
#3
dannyalcatraz

Thanks, I actually just emailed Wayne Guitars and requested paid consultation with Wayne Charvel himself, so I'll be able to officially say that the guitar I'm making has input from Wayne Charvel.

I'm going to bed now but I'll be replying to all my messages on this thread and all my other ones when I wake up.
#4
It is what it is, Kind of ironic that Gibson went and sued Ibanez for copying they're guitars then in turn got they're asses sued by Jackson for marketing those puppies, Freaking hilarious if you ask me, Wayne Charvel is/was really more of a guitar modification/repairman, Basically he cobbled spare MIJ Fender parts together in which Charvel was born, Which in turn he was bought out by his partner Grover Jackson, From there he bounced around a bit in obscurity and now operates Wayne guitars, Not exactly a household name by any means, Jackson/Charvel is now owned by FMIC Fender, Although you can still buy a real Jackson under the name GJ2, There were actually several hundred of those built before the hammer fell, of which 200 were autographed by Wayne and came with a letter of authenticity, Not that he built them or anything, Just certifying that was his signature I suppose, Personally I've never figured out all the hoopla surrounding autographed guitars, Sorry but I'd prefer if you kept your sharpie away from my guitars, Why so cheap? Uh... looks like any used Charvel I've ever seen, Remove the Gibson logo and truss rod cover and that's exactly what it is, So your actually going to pay Wayne to speak with him? Wow! dude must be hurting for cash, Generally builders are happy to speak to people about they're wares at no charge,
#5
Quote by NorthstrumGuita

Wouldn't let me post a link but if you want to check it out search for " 1987 Gibson W.R.C" on eBay. There's one on there right now for less than 1000$.

What do you guys think? And why isn't it more expensive?


The WRC was part of Gibson's attempts to be relevant in the '80's. Remember that they nearly discontinued the LP (their best-selling guitar) in the '80's and that they were sold for only about $4M dollars. It was also a time of change for Charvel (they shortly began building guitars outside the US after Wayne moved from California).

There were only about 200 guitars sold because there was absolutely no interest in the guitar at all. It may also have been the subject of a lawsuit or two involving the use of the Charvel name.

These days it's viewed as an oddity, an aberration, a curiosity and a footnote.
#6
Quote by NorthstrumGuita


Thanks, I actually just emailed Wayne Guitars and requested paid consultation with Wayne Charvel himself, so I'll be able to officially say that the guitar I'm making has input from Wayne Charvel.


One, I don't think "input from Wayne Charvel" is even remotely as impressive to the rest of the guitar community as you seem to feel it is. It wouldn't matter to me at all.

Second, you can get input from almost anyone associated with the guitar industry by catching them at NAMM or the NY or LA Amp Shows and buying them a beer. Most are more than happy to sit down with you if you're buying and they're not overly busy.

And third, you've not proven to be coachable. If you hire Bill Belichick to help you with football strategy and then reject whatever he has to say without thinking about it, you're not coachable. You've opened what, eight or nine threads here boasting about a guitar you intend to build and then you've rejected most suggestions and a lot of the information that people have provided. When you ask for feedback or constructive criticism and then brush it all off while clearly demonstrating that you really don't understand much about the basics or the physics of guitar construction and playability, you're not coachable.

What that means is that if you pay for input, you're wasting your money and their time.

One more thing -- you will NOT be able to officially say that you had input from Wayne Charvel unless he gives you permission to do so. That would be considered an endorsement, and that would require a separate payment, and would require Wayne to consider whether he wants his reputation tied in with your creation (and you). Different thing entirely.

After all, you've had free input from dannyalcatraz, but I understand he's pretty expensive when it comes to having his name mentioned in the same sentence as someone's product. Probably due to that whole tampon debacle.
Last edited by dspellman at Nov 13, 2016,
#7
dspellman

If Wayne Charvel gives me advice and input why wouldn't I be able to say that? Because it's not an endorsement, it's the truth. If I advertise that I consulted with Wayne Charvel to build the axe I don't think I need his permission for that.
#8
nastytroll

Ya, I did some research on Charvel last night and read their wiki page. The guy has worked with a lot of the industries biggest companies and he's still going. Wayne guitars are like purely custom built I think and they're pretty expensive.

He may have consulted with me for free, but I figured I'd offer him some incentive and said I'd pay him a few hundred bucks to consult with him by exchanging a few emails. As far as I'm concerned the guy is a legend man.
#9
dspellman

They only built or sold 200 because of they were sued by Jackson. The reason why they needed to stay relevant is because EVH made the Superstrat popular and Gibson wanted in on that.
#10
dspellman

And btw, Charvel is a legend. He's worked directly with a lot of the industries biggest and most reputable companies.

I think his name carries weight for sure.
#11
Quote by NorthstrumGuita
dspellman

If Wayne Charvel gives me advice and input why wouldn't I be able to say that? Because it's not an endorsement, it's the truth. If I advertise that I consulted with Wayne Charvel to build the axe I don't think I need his permission for that.

But it means 2 things. Jack, and shit.

What would have value would be Wayne Charvel thinking your prototype is good, or a production model. That's what people care about; not that you've had kind of a neat idea.
Quote by Diemon Dave
Don't go ninjerin nobody don't need ninjerin'
#12
Quote by NorthstrumGuita
dspellman

If Wayne Charvel gives me advice and input why wouldn't I be able to say that? Because it's not an endorsement, it's the truth. If I advertise that I consulted with Wayne Charvel to build the axe I don't think I need his permission for that.



Once again, you're uncoachable.
I've been in marketing for years.

The lawsuit that results will tell you everything you need to know.
Last edited by dspellman at Nov 13, 2016,
#13
slapsymcdougal

Well I shouldn't be saying this until after I consult with him, but attaching his name to the guitar will only help add creditability to an new and unheard of guitar company. His name carries weight.
#14
Quote by NorthstrumGuita
dspellman

And btw, Charvel is a legend. He's worked directly with a lot of the industries biggest and most reputable companies.

I think his name carries weight for sure.


Yeah, well, I've met the man.
What you think is immaterial. Again, get your butt to a couple of NAMM shows and see what the industry thinks.
Last edited by dspellman at Nov 13, 2016,
#15
dspellman

Listen, maybe you're right, doesn't mean I'm going to blindly accept everything you say. I'm not saying you're right or wrong, but I like to arrive at my conclusions. Can you blame me? I take everything you say into consideration but I still like to arrive at my own conclusions.

The guitar industry isn't governed by its own unique set of laws. If I pay to consult with Wayne Charvel I can legally say I did, because it's true. Who would sue me? Fender? Go ahead, I could use the free publicity lol..
#16
Quote by NorthstrumGuita
dspellman

Listen, maybe you're right, doesn't mean I'm going to blindly accept everything you say. I'm not saying you're right or wrong, but I like to arrive at my conclusions. Can you blame me? I take everything you say into consideration but I still like to arrive at my own conclusions.

The guitar industry isn't governed by its own unique set of laws. If I pay to consult with Wayne Charvel I can legally say I did, because it's true. Who would sue me? Fender? Go ahead, I could use the free publicity lol..


I've dealt with copyright, trademark and relevant law in marketing. I've also been part of the marketing for several guitar companies including two majors.

You, on the other hand, have no idea what you can legally do.

Do some research on the "misappropriation of the name or likeness of another."

I can tell you from experience that winning one of these lawsuits if it's run all the way to court will cost you several hundreds of thousands of dollars. You don't want to lose one. We had a dentist "borrow" one of my photographs of a particular model and run it as an ad to show what a brilliant smile you would have if you used his services. We kindly asked him to cease and desist and he refused. I won the copyright lawsuit which pretty much took his practice out. Then he was hit by the modeling agency for misappropriation of the likeness of the model. That was a much larger award. I think he now understands every intricacy of the legalities involved.

You don't.

While you're "reaching your own conclusions," find out why the 1987 Gibson W.R.C you've noticed is also called a "lawsuit" guitar. It has to do with the use (or non-use) of Wayne's name in conjunction with the guitar.
Last edited by dspellman at Nov 13, 2016,
#17
Quote by NorthstrumGuita
dspellman

Listen, maybe you're right, doesn't mean I'm going to blindly accept everything you say. I'm not saying you're right or wrong, but I like to arrive at my conclusions. Can you blame me? I take everything you say into consideration but I still like to arrive at my own conclusions.

The guitar industry isn't governed by its own unique set of laws. If I pay to consult with Wayne Charvel I can legally say I did, because it's true. Who would sue me? Fender? Go ahead, I could use the free publicity lol..


No you can't.

Paying for someone services doesn't give you the right to use their name in any capacity - that would require a separate negotiation. The person who would sue you is called Wayne Charvel.
Actually called Mark!

Quote by TNfootballfan62
People with a duck for their avatar always give good advice.

...it's a seagull

Quote by Dave_Mc
i wanna see a clip of a recto buying some groceries.


stuffmycatswatchontv.tumblr.com
#18
steven seagull

If Wayne Charvel approves my design and suggests changes why can't I tell people? Why couldn't I say " Wayne Charvel approved my specs" ?

Unless he specifically states that I'm not allowed to do so in some kind of confidentiality clause than I'm pretty sure I'm allowed to speak truthfully about the development of my guitar.
#19
dspellman

Unless Charvel specifically states otherwise, why can't I tell people about the development of my guitar?

If I don't mention it in advertisements I could casually mention it, or just release our correspondence.

I wouldn't have to keep our emails confidential. I'd just post them right on my website. Let the emails speak for themselves.

I'm going to consult with a lawyer to find a loophole if needed.

I know you know way more about this than me, I'm not doubting you and you're probably right, but I think there's a loophole.
#20
NorthstrumGuita

Look, the single thing that needs to speak for itself is your guitar.
You've put the horse before the cart. At this stage, you should be thinking about the build, not the advert.

The biggest favour you could do yourself right now is to buy some cheap lumber, some no-name pickups and components, and start building guitars. Strat clones, LP-alikes, eye-raping bastard sons of every BC Rich ever to come off a production line.

I mean, you hear far too many cases of "the builder's plans for the loft conversion were great, but he took out supporting beams from the roof, and it fell in on Christmas eve and killed the dog".
Quote by Diemon Dave
Don't go ninjerin nobody don't need ninjerin'
#21
You might be able to get away with pix or mentions of WC in your website's "About Me" or the like, but if you put his name in the advertising, that's a distinct contractual agreement.

(Music copyright & licensing atty in Tx since 1994.)

Post Sunday brunch edit to clarify "might": there could still be a lawsuit if WC doesn't expressly allow you to use his name & likeness. That's expensive and costs you time as well. As the saying goes, don't borrow trouble.
Sturgeon's 2nd Law, a.k.a. Sturgeon's Revelation: “Ninety percent of everything is crap.”

Why, yes, I am a lawyer- thanks for asking!


alhaq369
It is very impotent to success a business.
#22
Quote by NorthstrumGuita
dspellman
If I don't mention it in advertisements I could casually mention it, or just release our correspondence.

He can still sue you. Casual word of mouth is just as valid a form of marketing as it is putting it on a poster on your bedroom wall. You will need a written contract from WC allowing you to disclose such information.
I wouldn't have to keep our emails confidential. I'd just post them right on my website. Let the emails speak for themselves.

You'd need a contract from WC to do that. It still counts as an endorsement. See above.
I'm going to consult with a lawyer to find a loophole if needed.

I know you know way more about this than me, I'm not doubting you and you're probably right, but I think there's a loophole.

And pray tell, what would that loophole be?

Do you seriously think WC is going to give you such a contract if you're intending to use it as a vehicle to exploit a loophole?

A better question still, how do you expect WC to endorse your product when you haven't even made any products yet? Don't you think that's utterly naïve? You don't have any industry experience whatsoever and you don't even consider fundamental guitar principles in your designs as being true. And you're having idle fantasies about WC endorsing that? That's just as adorable as it is arrogant.

You think that we're doing this just to make fun of you but honestly we aren't. It's just that your preconceived ideas on the way things work are totally unrealistic.
Quote by TheSennaj
And well yes, I'll enjoy the carpal tunnel and tendonitis, because trying to get one is clearly smarter than any word you have spoken thus far.
#23
T00DEEPBLUE

You're wrong. I already looked into it. There aren't any laws that require me to keep my correspondence with people hidden.

Listen, you don't know what you're talking about and you're giving me bad advice. Stop it.
#24
Quote by NorthstrumGuita
T00DEEPBLUE

You're wrong. I already looked into it. There aren't any laws that require me to keep my correspondence with people hidden.

Listen, you don't know what you're talking about and you're giving me bad advice. Stop it.

Have you carefully read the clauses of WC's endorsement contracts to be sure of that?

Because you're not going to find that kind of information in the declaration of independence.

And no. We're giving you the best advice you could receive. Some of those people giving you this advice actually have industry experience. You cannot tell people to stop giving bad advice just because you don't like it.
Quote by TheSennaj
And well yes, I'll enjoy the carpal tunnel and tendonitis, because trying to get one is clearly smarter than any word you have spoken thus far.
#25
Actually, I think they're giving you the best advice. Stop worrying about everything else until you get some guitarbuilding experience.

And you can't have looked that hard in regards to publishing email correspondence. Depending on content of said emails, it may fall under 'publication of private facts.'
#26
Deliriumbassist

The term "private facts" refers to information about someone's personal life that has not previously been revealed to the public, that is not of legitimate public concern, and the publication of which would be offensive to a reasonable person.

Doesn't apply in this circumstance.
#28
I think it's pretty stunning how much you're focusing on the marketing aspect of this and getting the opinion of someone who most players probably don't even care about instead of just building the guitar, building a brand based on quality and getting your actual product out there.

No one will buy your guitar because person X gave you some advice. They'll buy it because they like the instrument. You can bring back Les Paul and Leo Fender from the grave and consult with them, if no one has any actual experience with your product and can recommend it, it won't get off the ground.
#29
I think this has gone on long enough now.

This thread has drifted way off-topic and it seems like one side is never going to agree with the other no matter what argument one puts forward.

OP, you are very close to being banned at this point. You have made multiple threads on the same topic and you consistently argue with people who have the courtesy to give you their advice because that advice was not what you wanted to hear. It is becoming a nuisance.

If your behavior does not improve, you will be banned.
Quote by TheSennaj
And well yes, I'll enjoy the carpal tunnel and tendonitis, because trying to get one is clearly smarter than any word you have spoken thus far.