# RAN guitars offline. Did they close? Update: Trouble Relocating



## chopeth (Feb 16, 2019)

I lost track of them. No media updates for a few months and I'm writing for two weeks getting no answer. Probably nothing wrong but the telephone isnt working either (just tried though I can't speak any polish) and i'm used to fast replies of less than 24h..

Anybody recently spoke to them or knows anything?


----------



## lurè (Feb 16, 2019)

Website Is up


----------



## Viginez (Feb 16, 2019)

oh, they have a new logo







maybe they update some things


----------



## BusinessMan (Feb 16, 2019)

I hope not because I really want one of their guitars when I have the cash.


----------



## narad (Feb 16, 2019)

Viginez said:


> oh, they have a new logo
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Not great, but still an improvement.


----------



## Jujex (Feb 17, 2019)

As long as they have the crusher headstock it doesn't really matter.


----------



## Viginez (Feb 17, 2019)

narad said:


> Not great, but still an improvement.


i kinda like it, but the right placement on a headstock will be a challenge imo because of its proportions


----------



## p88 (Feb 17, 2019)

Hmm...I've checked Facebook and Instagram, and unless I'm mistaken, I don't think there have been any updates on both since November and October respectively.

I hope everything is OK, they're an amazing company who make incredible guitars.


----------



## chopeth (Feb 18, 2019)

Well, back on the fucking topic

Ran guitars are going through a very bad moment as I finally found out. They wanted to change their work location because the price was getting so high and finally everything is packed and prepared to move but the new place deal is not being agreed so RAN guitars is in a limbo, they don't get more orders and the ones already in process are delayed... permanently apparently... Plus, they didn't even send an email to their customers. I know more people as me whose guitars should be due now and don't know anything about RAN. Nobody answer the mails or pick up the phone.


----------



## p88 (Feb 18, 2019)

chopeth said:


> Well, back on the fucking topic
> 
> Ran guitars are going through a very bad moment as I finally found out. They wanted to change their work location because the price was getting so high and finally everything is packed and prepared to move but the new place deal is not being agreed so RAN guitars is in a limbo, they don't get more orders and the ones already in process are delayed... permanently apparently... Plus, they didn't even send an email to their customers. I know more people as me whose guitars should be due now and don't know anything about RAN. Nobody answer the mails or pick up the phone.



Ah man, that really sucks.

How did you hear about this?


----------



## Descent (Feb 18, 2019)

Maybe the owners took the money and ran???


----------



## chopeth (Feb 19, 2019)

p88 said:


> Ah man, that really sucks.
> 
> How did you hear about this?



Social media


----------



## ChugThisBoy (Feb 19, 2019)

Descent said:


> Maybe the owners took the money and ran???



Great pun but we don't do such things in Poland


----------



## possumkiller (Feb 19, 2019)

ChugThisBoy said:


> Great pun but we don't do such things in Poland



Dude, I was just on holiday with my wife in Wroclaw last week.


----------



## ChugThisBoy (Feb 19, 2019)

possumkiller said:


> Dude, I was just on holiday with my wife in Wroclaw last week.



Oh, nice. Did you like the city? You're from Gdańsk, right?

This will be offtop but who cares.


----------



## possumkiller (Feb 19, 2019)

Nah, I am from Florida but I live in Gdansk. Wroclaw is great! My wife was obsessed with finding the krasnoludki. She is from Gdansk and she always thought it was the prettiest city but she says Wroclaw in the old town looks just as nice and very similar to Gdansk. I am trying to go see as much as I can when we have time off. So far I have been to the tri-city here, Warsaw, Wroclaw, Malbork, and Koscierzyna.


----------



## ChugThisBoy (Feb 19, 2019)

Look at you go  I've never been in Malbork and I always wanted to, tho. Glad you like the city  It has some mojo, indeed


----------



## CapinCripes (Feb 19, 2019)

chopeth said:


> Well, back on the fucking topic
> 
> Ran guitars are going through a very bad moment as I finally found out. They wanted to change their work location because the price was getting so high and finally everything is packed and prepared to move but the new place deal is not being agreed so RAN guitars is in a limbo, they don't get more orders and the ones already in process are delayed... permanently apparently... Plus, they didn't even send an email to their customers. I know more people as me whose guitars should be due now and don't know anything about RAN. Nobody answer the mails or pick up the phone.


Thats pretty awful for customers, i had thought about picking one up a little over a year ago so i sent them a inquiry about a pretty basic thor model, got back a quote for just shy of 5000 euros. if the quote was more reasonable i would be in similar shoes.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Feb 19, 2019)

chopeth said:


> Well, back on the fucking topic
> 
> Ran guitars are going through a very bad moment as I finally found out. They wanted to change their work location because the price was getting so high and finally everything is packed and prepared to move but the new place deal is not being agreed so RAN guitars is in a limbo, they don't get more orders and the ones already in process are delayed... permanently apparently... Plus, they didn't even send an email to their customers. I know more people as me whose guitars should be due now and don't know anything about RAN. Nobody answer the mails or pick up the phone.



How does that even happen? Why permanently? Did they sell thier tools?

I would definitely of ran that differently.


----------



## odibrom (Feb 19, 2019)

chopeth said:


> Social media



Link please...


----------



## chopeth (Feb 19, 2019)

_ "I was told, They have been moving to a larger workshop which required some modification as the lease on the old place was up so was a good time. But is not doing qoutes or taking any new orders for the moment. Everything has been packed up tightly storage so it’s incredibly difficult to sort through everything to find one thing for a photo update. Last I heard was that Darek is speaking to local luthier friend to use their space temporarily. He is working his ass off and wants nothing more than to get back to working peacefully."
_
and then, the same guy answered:

_Darek has been very stressed out about the delay. They are get over run with emails which is adding to that stress and it’s just delaying the process of getting back on track. I understand where you are coming from lack of communication but try not to take it personally._

I didn't even know who's that Darek who seems to be on charge. I've always talked to Dariusz which seems to be mute.


----------



## CapinCripes (Feb 19, 2019)

MaxOfMetal said:


> I would definitely of ran that differently.


I see what you did there.


----------



## PuriPuriPrisoner (Feb 19, 2019)

I guess that's why they haven't responded to the quote form I sent in a little while ago.


----------



## lurè (Feb 19, 2019)

Hope things will settle soon, they make really good guitars.


----------



## BrutalRob (Feb 20, 2019)

@chopeth Darek is Dariusz´ Dad and the founder of Ran Guitars.


----------



## chinnybob (Feb 20, 2019)

I sincerely hope the guys at RAN can get everything sorted, they're a great bunch of people and I've had several guitars from them which have all been absolutely top notch.


----------



## ChugThisBoy (Feb 20, 2019)

I'll try to talk to the guys from Ran myself. I don't live in the same city but I'll give it a shot.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Feb 22, 2019)

Cleaned this up. Let's keep it to the guitars.


----------



## chopeth (Feb 22, 2019)

thanks A LOT!


----------



## Lorcan Ward (Feb 22, 2019)

That's a bad situation to be in. Best thing they can do is at least inform customers, silence makes things a lot worse.


----------



## couverdure (Feb 22, 2019)

I wonder if this was one of the reasons why Steffen from Obscura switched to ESP last year.


----------



## Lorcan Ward (Feb 22, 2019)

He said he had to wait a long time for any build he wanted from RAN when I talked to him but ESP was just a better business move all around. Paired with Rafael's kiesel endorsement that's a lot of reach.


----------



## Flappydoodle (Feb 22, 2019)

MaxOfMetal said:


> Cleaned this up. Let's keep it to the guitars.



Aww, but I wrecked his ignorant ass good and proper!

But on topic, I was *this* close to ordering a RAN about 6 months ago. However, they were pretty slow replying to emails and not very informative - like, I'd ask 3 bullet pointed questions, and he'd reply with one sentence only addressing the first. That put me off.

Fingers crossed for those of you who paid deposits and are waiting for guitars. This is always a risk with these luthiers. Even the reputable ones with good intentions can run into trouble - they're small businesses after all and subject to the same risks (sickness of key people, rising rents, altering regulatory environment etc).


----------



## chopeth (Feb 25, 2019)

up


----------



## BrutalRob (Feb 25, 2019)

@Flappydoodle I am wondering if the just got to a point where they can´t handle the demand anymore. What you were stating just underlines this to me.

I got five invader. But after they fucked up the last one and hardly responded when they were supposed to take care of that matter, i decided this was my last Ran. Though the reason they took half a year to take care ( at that point I already had decided to get things done by a luthier here in Germany who has done stuff before for me and whom i trust) was because the supposedly were changing their location....this was early last year.


----------



## Flappydoodle (Feb 25, 2019)

chopeth said:


> up



Their website is back.

But are we saying that they've disappeared since October, didn't post a single update to their facebook/instagram/etc, and left people hanging - including people who paid deposits? That's really shitty business practice if so.

I think any reasonable person can understand that small businesses have difficulties. If I had a deposit, I'd be fine knowing they need to move and there will be delays. But total radio silence for months is totally unacceptable. It takes literally 2 minutes to post an explanation on social media.


----------



## odibrom (Feb 25, 2019)

They might have been afraid to loose the so much needed money due to all the fuss over luthiers gone rogue. If they posted anything like that, they could have to give lots of money back, money that have already bee invested in woods and hardware, for example, or they didn't thought it would take this much time... just speculating here. Fear has a huge effect over people in these situations. Only they can answer to this, but yes, bad client relations...


----------



## chopeth (Feb 26, 2019)

Flappydoodle said:


> Their website is back.



The website never went down.



odibrom said:


> They might have been afraid to loose the so much needed money due to all the fuss over luthiers gone rogue. If they posted anything like that, they could have to give lots of money back, money that have already bee invested in woods and hardware, for example, or they didn't thought it would take this much time... just speculating here. Fear has a huge effect over people in these situations. Only they can answer to this, but yes, bad client relations...



I'd be tolerant and give them the few months or whatever they need in bad times, but not saying anything official is a fricking unprofessional thing, and not answering the only communication method you have with your clients .... I don't have a word for that.


----------



## lurè (Feb 26, 2019)

Simply It takes less time to make an official statement that answer every email explaining their current situation.


----------



## odibrom (Feb 26, 2019)

Overall it's just a sad situation for the Guitar industry, for RAN truly is/was(?) a strong brand in the custom/semi-custom guitar market. Let's wait and see them grow back into business.


----------



## Flappydoodle (Feb 26, 2019)

lurè said:


> Simply It takes less time to make an official statement that answer every email explaining their current situation.



And when you search for "RAN guitars" on google, this thread now comes up, with them going AWOL. Oops.


----------



## chopeth (Mar 5, 2019)

BUMP for any news


----------



## Emperoff (Mar 5, 2019)

So sad this is happening... Again. I've seen enough small builders go through this and closing (or running away with the money) to not place a custom order never again. Had my own share of it as well.

I hope the best for them, and that the affected customers get their guitars (or money) eventually.


----------



## MSS (Mar 5, 2019)

Wow. I didn’t know this. I have a Ran Crusher 7 that I love. I hope they pull through ok.


----------



## chopeth (Mar 6, 2019)

Dariusz contacted me, dunno if he wrote to anyone else:

_"Hi, Sorry for delay, we have problems after shop changes investition last year. Had to return bank funds and can not continue work. We are locked, no chance to make any move. We are trying to find solutions with our lawyer of this situation. Any work was stopped. We lost our guys due to these problems. Thank you for your patience, we do our best to heal it and get cash/goods for refunds. I will inform you asap. Sorry again."_

I wonder how many projects are affected together with mine. And when he says _"do our best to heal it and get cash/goods for refunds"_ I understand they will "try" to give the money back but not a single guitar more from RAN?


----------



## odibrom (Mar 6, 2019)

Damn, that's sad news. It looks like it will take a while for RAN to get up on their feet...


----------



## Xykhron (Mar 6, 2019)

Copy & paste of an email received by two Ran customers affected (https://www.facebook.com/groups/ranowners/). Other one confirmed the same mail over other forum:

"Hi, Sorry for delay, we have problems after shop changes investition last year. Had to return bank funds and can not continue work. We are locked, no chance to make any move. We are trying to find solutions with our lawyer of this situation. Any work was stopped. We lost our guys due to these problems. Thank you for your patience, we do our best to heal it and get cash/goods for refunds. I will inform you asap. Sorry again."


----------



## MSS (Mar 6, 2019)

and I came this close to ordering...hope they get back on their feet. Great guitars all around.


----------



## chopeth (Mar 7, 2019)

Never to see light


----------



## Wolfhorsky (Mar 7, 2019)

Damn, I wish guys the best. Let’s hope they survive this hard time for them.


----------



## MSS (Mar 7, 2019)

I am so glad to have this one and hope no one loses money on any orders in the Q:


----------



## Ordacleaphobia (Mar 7, 2019)

Yeah this whole thing sounds like such a shame, RAN was breathtakingly solid. Reaaaaally sucks that they're in this situation because it sounds like it wasn't really from any fault on their end. My heart goes out to the RAN crew and anyone on the order list.


----------



## coreypla (Mar 7, 2019)

I'm a huge "RANboy" (see what I did there), and had a full custom in que with a hefty deposit paid. Now nothing. I do hope to see the money back since I am a contingent employee and have to save literal pennies and dimes to get any 'treat' for myself. Egg noodles for dinner and custom guitars for breakfast. Anyone, in any financial state, should get their money back for a transaction gone awry like this. 

I bought one RAN about 6 years ago. My first and only custom guitar. Their work is amazing and I hope this isn't the end forever. This new build-to-be <RIP> was going to be an absolute dream come true for me, and RAN always found a way to make any build a reality. Everything that they did made sense to me as a luthier shop and they were always the most customer-centered.

I hope they can get everything back on track at some point. I imagine its hard to come back from a blow like this, but I would love to see them making those amazing instruments again. For now I hope to see the money back in my account. I'd prefer to have only the positive thoughts about this luthier and team. I have always sung their praises.

First and only RAN. Much respect and love to the whole RAN crew and all the Polish Luthiers that make dreams come true, one pointy headstock at a time.


----------



## lurè (Mar 7, 2019)

Same, I have a RAN and quality is top notch.

If RAN is closing we lost a great builder.


----------



## gorthul (Mar 10, 2019)

I was also wondering whats going on there, sad to hear this.
My RAN 7 is also one of the finest instruments I have ever held in my hands. Some time ago I was thinking about selling it, however I guess I should keep it now, simply because I might never order a new one again.


----------



## crankyrayhanky (Mar 10, 2019)

If you’re waiting on a refund it looks like you are screwed
That ship hit the iceberg


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Mar 10, 2019)

Ordacleaphobia said:


> Yeah this whole thing sounds like such a shame, RAN was breathtakingly solid. Reaaaaally sucks that they're in this situation because it sounds like it wasn't really from any fault on their end. My heart goes out to the RAN crew and anyone on the order list.



That's the really bad thing about this situation. Normally when a builder like this goes under, it's due to shady business practices or major incompetence. This case, they were screwed over at the worst time possible by an outside source. It's a really sad situation.


----------



## MSS (Mar 10, 2019)

I am really bummed about this. My Ran and my Duvell are my two favorite guitars. The fret edge work, while excellent on both, is actually better on the Ran.


----------



## chopeth (Mar 11, 2019)

I spoke to Dariusz again. I don't know if he wrote to everyone again. They are desolate and want to stand up again but I don't know if there is a process of confiscation of property or any other details. He says they have a lot of health problems, including being absolutely down and they want to solve everything as soon as possible. They are going to make a list with the clients affected but it is not clear to me if they are going to refund the deposits (which I don't think they can) or they want to hire new builders and start working in a few months (my assumption)... Anyway, if their workshop is under embargo, their workers have fled and there is no money, I sincerely don't know what I would do myself. It's a screwed up situation.

I answered I want the best for RAN and don't want them to disappear so I told them no problem for me, I still want the guitar and I can wait longer.


----------



## USMarine75 (Mar 11, 2019)

chopeth said:


> He says they have a lot of health problems



Man, these small luthiers really need Obamacare.


----------



## isispelican (Mar 11, 2019)

Hope they manage to get out of this


----------



## oracles (Mar 11, 2019)

My RAN's are among the best instruments I've owned or played, and Dariusz has been nothing but a stand up guy in my experience. Really sad to hear how things are playing out for them at the moment. They do truly make world class instruments.


----------



## Flappydoodle (Mar 12, 2019)

Some of you guys are gullible AS FUCK

Why on earth are you holding out for guitars? Any of you in the EU need to be lawyering up and sending letters ASAP. If RAN are going to be selling assets, issuing refunds, or handing out partially completed guitars, you want to be in the priority. It's virtually guaranteed that there won't be enough cash in the business to pay back everybody.

Just from those two conversations - the shop is gone, their luthiers have gone, and the owner is apparently sick. That means RAN is gone.

If they don't have money to give back deposits, they quite likely don't have money to hire (and train) new people. This dangling of future hope is exactly how you will end up losing your money and never seeing a guitar.

My advice is, try to secure your money back now. If they do actually get up and running again, and you're really desperate for a RAN, you can put another deposit then. 

Only a fool would leave money in a dysfunctional business with no premises, no employees and this shoddy communication with customers.


----------



## chopeth (Mar 13, 2019)

Flappydoodle said:


> Some of you guys are gullible AS FUCK
> 
> Why on earth are you holding out for guitars? Any of you in the EU need to be lawyering up and sending letters ASAP. If RAN are going to be selling assets, issuing refunds, or handing out partially completed guitars, you want to be in the priority. It's virtually guaranteed that there won't be enough cash in the business to pay back everybody.
> 
> ...



What would you suggest? going from your country "in Europe" to Poland and kick some ass?


----------



## diagrammatiks (Mar 13, 2019)

Flappydoodle said:


> Some of you guys are gullible AS FUCK
> 
> Why on earth are you holding out for guitars? Any of you in the EU need to be lawyering up and sending letters ASAP. If RAN are going to be selling assets, issuing refunds, or handing out partially completed guitars, you want to be in the priority. It's virtually guaranteed that there won't be enough cash in the business to pay back everybody.
> 
> ...



Why does this keep happening. Says forum where this happens all the time.


----------



## GXPO (Mar 13, 2019)

USMarine75 said:


> Man, these small luthiers really need Obamacare.



They have public healthcare in Poland, no excuses!

I hope they manage to turn this around, the guitars were never really my style but they were clearly well built and loved.


----------



## GXPO (Mar 13, 2019)

Flappydoodle said:


> Some of you guys are gullible AS FUCK



Likelihood of taking internet dudes advice -95%


----------



## USMarine75 (Mar 13, 2019)

GXPO said:


> They have public healthcare in Poland, no excuses!
> 
> I hope they manage to turn this around, the guitars were never really my style but they were clearly well built and loved.



Psssht... I ain't buying no commie guitars then! 

(j/k love my two Mayones... Mayonii? Whatever...)


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Mar 13, 2019)

Flappydoodle said:


> Some of you guys are gullible AS FUCK
> 
> Why on earth are you holding out for guitars? Any of you in the EU need to be lawyering up and sending letters ASAP. If RAN are going to be selling assets, issuing refunds, or handing out partially completed guitars, you want to be in the priority. It's virtually guaranteed that there won't be enough cash in the business to pay back everybody.
> 
> ...



Obviously RAN is the only builder in the world. It's not like there are literally hundreds of builders who make guitars with similar specs and pricing. We all know that absolutely no one is building pointy super-strats. 

This is good-ish advice, but no one is really going to take it. We've seen this how many times?

That said (hence the "ish") unless you have thousands into a build, it might just be better to let it go. I'm not sure how this works in RAN's neck of the woods, or where everyone is from, but pursuing this legally is likely going to be more costly than a small deposit. Even if a judgement is given in the buyer's favor, how are they going to collect? So, after hundreds of dollars in legal fees you'll be left with a judgment not worth the paper it's written on. At least that's how it works over here. Does the EU have a body that handles this sort of thing?

This is why I'm a huge proponent of going to local luthiers, at least those in the same country/state/province.


----------



## ChugThisBoy (Mar 13, 2019)

USMarine75 said:


> Psssht... I ain't buying no commie guitars then!
> 
> (j/k love my two Mayones... Mayonii? Whatever...)



I know it's a joke from your side but please, don't.. just don't do it again.


----------



## narad (Mar 13, 2019)

Flappydoodle said:


> Some of you guys are gullible AS FUCK
> 
> Why on earth are you holding out for guitars? Any of you in the EU need to be lawyering up and sending letters ASAP. If RAN are going to be selling assets, issuing refunds, or handing out partially completed guitars, you want to be in the priority. It's virtually guaranteed that there won't be enough cash in the business to pay back everybody.



Yea, let me notify my legal staff who I, of course, have on retainer, to get back my $600 deposit from luthier in an overseas country*. It's not about being gullible -- these are simply difficult situations. We all know there is some inherent risk in ordering from far away places, but usually the price is a bit better, or the wait times are shorter, but when something goes wrong there's really no good or responsible solution to these things. 

It unfortunately winds up being one of these unfortunate in-between situations where it's not really enough money to warrant getting back through legal action, and more money than anyone really wants to chalk up as a loss. I mean, even when I had previous situations with much larger amounts ($2-3k) in with another shady ex-soviet circle luthier, and consulted lawyers about it, I really couldn't make any headway. It's probably only because he was seeking immigration into the US that I had any effective leverage.

*I don't actually have a RAN deposit.


----------



## 777timesgod (Mar 13, 2019)

Health issues - check. Builders leaving - check. Location problems - check. Insufficient capital for refunds/operation - check. I think that the members of this forum in particular know the symptoms quite well.
I appreciate the loyalty of some for a company that improved a lot over the years, they used to be the go to guys for custom copies (of known brands/shapes) of lower quality, for European customers eager to avoid currency, customs and shipping fees or had designs that the foreign custom shops would not work on. While they still do those, they raised their game and I heard better things as the years went by.
Definetely, if they do not come back -which seems very likely at this predicament- large sums of money will be lost. Please, let us not see the same arguments between the camp of "sit on your ass and take the hit because I make 10k a month, own 100 customs/amps and do not consider it a big deal" and the camp "I barely could afford the deposit on that custom guitar, time to lock and load and book plane tickets". They always lead nowhere and are tedious, if you had a deposit and can get it back though your credit card/bank, make a decision if you want to try it or assist a company that may or may not go down. Just my 2 cents.


----------



## jephjacques (Mar 13, 2019)

Aw man, I bought one of their in-stock guitars last year and it's among the best guitars I've ever owned. This is a real bummer.


----------



## ArtDecade (Mar 13, 2019)

Descent said:


> Maybe the owners took the money and ran???



They def took the money and RAN.


----------



## sezna (Mar 13, 2019)

ArtDecade said:


> They def took the money and RAN.


How long did it take for you to come up with that one?


----------



## ArtDecade (Mar 13, 2019)

sezna said:


> How long did it take for you to come up with that one?



Mere hours.


----------



## Flappydoodle (Mar 13, 2019)

chopeth said:


> What would you suggest? going from your country "in Europe" to Poland and kick some ass?



If you are in Europe, then a simple letter from a lawyer is likely to make you a priority when it comes to getting anything back from the remnants of the company. I say "in Europe" because threats from overseas are too difficult to enforce. Within Europe, there are lots of customer protection laws for situations like this.

When it comes to dissolving a company (in the UK at least, I assume Poland is similar), there is some hierarchy about who gets what first. Bank loans will tend to get repaid because their contracts are so tight. But once everything is liquidised, there may be a pool of money left for customers and suppliers to whom the company owes money. My point is simply that you might want to try and get yourself to the top of that list, if you care about getting the money back.



GXPO said:


> Likelihood of taking internet dudes advice -95%



That's fine.



narad said:


> Yea, let me notify my legal staff who I, of course, have on retainer, to get back my $600 deposit from luthier in an overseas country*. It's not about being gullible -- these are simply difficult situations. We all know there is some inherent risk in ordering from far away places, but usually the price is a bit better, or the wait times are shorter, but when something goes wrong there's really no good or responsible solution to these things.
> 
> It unfortunately winds up being one of these unfortunate in-between situations where it's not really enough money to warrant getting back through legal action, and more money than anyone really wants to chalk up as a loss. I mean, even when I had previous situations with much larger amounts ($2-3k) in with another shady ex-soviet circle luthier, and consulted lawyers about it, I really couldn't make any headway. It's probably only because he was seeking immigration into the US that I had any effective leverage.
> 
> *I don't actually have a RAN deposit.



The "gullibility" relates to optimistic comments about waiting for them to get back on their feet etc. Based on them having legal troubles, no premises, no workers, and the owner being sick - the chance of them getting back on their feet is slim.

I realise you're being facetious, but you don't need "legal staff" to send a simple letter. And I assume there are people who have sunk more than $600 deposits in. 

I think I was clear in my original post - I don't think that anybody will be able to successfully take legal action, win, and get money back. But when RAN are "making a list" of customers and deciding who gets what, the noisy people will be served first and the optimistic people hanging on will get ignored.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Mar 13, 2019)

Flappydoodle said:


> If you are in Europe, then a simple letter from a lawyer is likely to make you a priority when it comes to getting anything back from the remnants of the company. I say "in Europe" because threats from overseas are too difficult to enforce. Within Europe, there are lots of customer protection laws for situations like this.
> 
> When it comes to dissolving a company (in the UK at least, I assume Poland is similar), there is some hierarchy about who gets what first. Bank loans will tend to get repaid because their contracts are so tight. But once everything is liquidised, there may be a pool of money left for customers and suppliers to whom the company owes money. My point is simply that you might want to try and get yourself to the top of that list, if you care about getting the money back.
> 
> ...



I think it's gullible to think they're putting together some list of whose naughty and nice and will reward some and not others based on things like strongly worded letters from lawyers that mean absolutely nothing.


----------



## Xaios (Mar 13, 2019)

Shame to see a luthier that had credibility* established over a relatively long period of time (at least in the world of custom builders) go under, especially if they were indeed screwed over by a third party.

*Credibility for their customers. The blatant design infringement they used to pull is another matter entirely. Given that the company was pretty much built on a foundation of IP theft, there is a certain karmic justice to them being screwed out of said business by third party fuckery themselves.

Regardless of whether the business deserved its end, the builders clearly took pride in their craft as evidenced by generally widespread praise for the quality of the instruments they produced, and they deserve better. At least, those that weren't knowingly complicit in profiting off the designs of others do.


----------



## 777timesgod (Mar 14, 2019)

MaxOfMetal said:


> I think it's gullible to think they're putting together some list of whose naughty and nice and will reward some and not others based on things like strongly worded letters from lawyers that mean absolutely nothing.



The mass e-mail send under the pretence that it was individually composed and addressed for each customer (from what I understand) is a red flag. Trying to please some customers with half-finished gear and return of deposit may sound logical but I also do not see it being plausible. If you have assets and money, you will use them to get back on your feet and will not be concerned with customer A and customer B. 
After all, what is the difference to brand damage from pissing off 1000 people and having some assets to get by or pissing off 900 people and being dead broke.



Xaios said:


> *Credibility for their customers. The blatant design infringement they used to pull is another matter entirely. Given that the company was pretty much built on a foundation of IP theft, there is a certain karmic justice to them being screwed out of said business by third party fuckery themselves.



I remember being attacked in the past (not in this forum of course) when I simply mentioned Ran guitars. I did not promote them or anything but fans of several brands were pissed off when they first appeared years ago. 
My view was always this, if the big companies cared about their fans, they should have established European custom shop branches. It is not that hard to pull it off (for some time at least, the big companies would last longer), given the sheer number of garage luthiers selling axes for 3-5ks nowadays. I am not implying sending luthiers over but franchising and giving the right to established locals with guidance from the HQ.
As I said, the damage from shipping from the USA, plus the custom office fee, plus the currency change and bank fees are a deterring factor for many to order a custom guitar/bass.


----------



## Velokki (Mar 14, 2019)

777timesgod said:


> The mass e-mail send under the pretence that it was individually composed and addressed for each customer (from what I understand) is a red flag. Trying to please some customers with half-finished gear and return of deposit may sound logical but I also do not see it being plausible. If you have assets and money, you will use them to get back on your feet and will not be concerned with customer A and customer B.
> After all, what is the difference to brand damage from pissing off 1000 people and having some assets to get by or pissing off 900 people and being dead broke.
> 
> 
> ...



That's actually a great point. Why haven't bigger brands built local custom shops for European customers?


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Mar 14, 2019)

777timesgod said:


> My view was always this, if the big companies cared about their fans, they should have established European custom shop branches. It is not that hard to pull it off (for some time at least, the big companies would last longer), given the sheer number of garage luthiers selling axes for 3-5ks nowadays. I am not implying sending luthiers over but franchising and giving the right to established locals with guidance from the HQ.
> As I said, the damage from shipping from the USA, plus the custom office fee, plus the currency change and bank fees are a deterring factor for many to order a custom guitar/bass.



I don't get how wanting a particular guitar entitles folks to getting that guitar at the price they choose.

It's cool to want certain things, and it's a bummer that we can't afford them sometimes, but that doesn't mean we can be less-than-ethical to attain them. 

I'm not saying RAN is the "luthier devil", they were a very small operation that likely had zero impact on the brands they copied. 



Velokki said:


> That's actually a great point. Why haven't bigger brands built local custom shops for European customers?



It costs millions of dollars to set up modern guitar custom shops.

The amount of guitars they'd have to sell over decades to recoup that cost is prohibitive.

If it was feasible, and more importantly a good business decision, we would have seen it happen already.


----------



## diagrammatiks (Mar 14, 2019)

MaxOfMetal said:


> I don't get how wanting a particular guitar entitles folks to getting that guitar at the price they choose.
> 
> It's cool to want certain things, and it's a bummer that we can't afford them sometimes, but that doesn't mean we can be less-than-ethical to attain them.
> 
> ...




Why don’t corporations with accountants and business directors do this one shit thing that benefits me. 

Why. Why. Why. Why.


----------



## narad (Mar 14, 2019)

777timesgod said:


> if the big companies cared about their fans, they should have established European custom shop branches.



They care about profits first, naturally.


----------



## LeviathanKiller (Mar 14, 2019)

Does anyone have a good thread link to the RAN builds that were copies that maybe show/indicate what they were copies of? Just curious. I haven't followed their entire history very well.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Mar 14, 2019)

LeviathanKiller said:


> Does anyone have a good thread link to the RAN builds that were copies that maybe show/indicate what they were copies of? Just curious. I haven't followed their entire history very well.



There weren't ever very many on this forum.

They were mostly Jackson, Dean, and ESP copies, some BCR too. Headstocks, similar logos, and all.


----------



## ArtDecade (Mar 14, 2019)

Anyone know of a custom shop where I can get a RAN copy made? I love custom copies of custom copies.


----------



## Xaios (Mar 14, 2019)

ArtDecade said:


> Anyone know of a custom shop where I can get a RAN copy made? I love custom copies of custom copies.


Too bad Ed Roman isn't still alive, this is probably his biggest fantasy.


----------



## mlp187 (Mar 14, 2019)

ArtDecade said:


> Anyone know of a custom shop where I can get a RAN copy made? I love custom copies of custom copies.


I have two new superstrat coming out: the Flusher and the Wipemachine.


----------



## canuck brian (Mar 14, 2019)

777timesgod said:


> My view was always this, if the big companies cared about their fans, they should have established European custom shop branches. It is not that hard to pull it off (for some time at least, the big companies would last longer), given the sheer number of garage luthiers selling axes for 3-5ks nowadays. I am not implying sending luthiers over but franchising and giving the right to established locals with guidance from the HQ.
> As I said, the damage from shipping from the USA, plus the custom office fee, plus the currency change and bank fees are a deterring factor for many to order a custom guitar/bass.



You want luthiers to go from being self employed to part time employees on the side on top of their normal lutheiry. Do you have any idea the logistical nightmare of that would be? Now you're dealing with new tax laws, where the payments go, insurance, shipping, custom costs (who's paying) and the list will go on for quite some time. That doesn't even take into account if the luthier working on the guitar just outright fails or has huge issues like RAN is seeing right now. Now the parent company takes a reputation hit and they're probably going to respond with lawyers. 

If you genuinely think this is doable, write out what's needed to make it happen legally and on the books before the first plank gets planed. After that, figure out which luthiers reliably and consistently make awesome product at 3-5k that will take a downgrade in pay as well as now having a boss. The list for that will be most likely empty.


----------



## sezna (Mar 14, 2019)

If the big companies cared about their fans? No, they care about money. People are not entitled to products or offerings from companies. We don't complain that Mayones didn't open up a separate shop in America, but that doesn't mean they just don't care about their customer base. 

Rolex's lack of production in China, and the booming Chinese Rolex clone market, has nothing to do with Rolex's lack of care for the Chinese economy...they sell tons there. Perhaps bad analogy but you get my point.


----------



## LeviathanKiller (Mar 14, 2019)

canuck brian said:


> You want luthiers to go from being self employed to part time employees on the side on top of their normal lutheiry. Do you have any idea the logistical nightmare of that would be? Now you're dealing with new tax laws, where the payments go, insurance, shipping, custom costs (who's paying) and the list will go on for quite some time. That doesn't even take into account if the luthier working on the guitar just outright fails or has huge issues like RAN is seeing right now. Now the parent company takes a reputation hit and they're probably going to respond with lawyers.
> 
> If you genuinely think this is doable, write out what's needed to make it happen legally and on the books before the first plank gets planed. After that, figure out which luthiers reliably and consistently make awesome product at 3-5k that will take a downgrade in pay as well as now having a boss. The list for that will be most likely empty.



Not to mentioned you'd likely have different quality levels too


----------



## Flappydoodle (Mar 14, 2019)

MaxOfMetal said:


> I think it's gullible to think they're putting together some list of whose naughty and nice and will reward some and not others based on things like strongly worded letters from lawyers that mean absolutely nothing.



Well, Dariuz's own email says they are drawing up a list of customers.

As for business insolvency, I'm quite familiar with how it works in the UK. I assume Poland is similar. At a certain stage of the process, they absolutely do get to decide who gets what out of the left-over money. A letter is zero effort and helps get your foot in the door. They usually prioritise customers/suppliers who made contact vs. those who do nothing. That's fact. 



Xaios said:


> Shame to see a luthier that had credibility* established over a relatively long period of time (at least in the world of custom builders) go under, especially if they were indeed screwed over by a third party.
> 
> *Credibility for their customers. The blatant design infringement they used to pull is another matter entirely. Given that the company was pretty much built on a foundation of IP theft, there is a certain karmic justice to them being screwed out of said business by third party fuckery themselves.
> 
> Regardless of whether the business deserved its end, the builders clearly took pride in their craft as evidenced by generally widespread praise for the quality of the instruments they produced, and they deserve better. At least, those that weren't knowingly complicit in profiting off the designs of others do.



I liked the look of their guitars, and almost did an order. But yep - the cloning of other guitars was a bit dodgy. And also, their communication was shit. I'd ask a list of 3 questions, and I'd get one sentence answering only one of them.

And for anybody still holding onto hope, the fact that they disappeared for MONTHS and then send one single email, full of typos, lacking a proper explanation, should be a HUGE red flag.


----------



## narad (Mar 14, 2019)

Flappydoodle said:


> A letter is zero effort and helps get your foot in the door. They usually prioritise customers/suppliers who made contact vs. those who do nothing. That's fact.



Sounds like a highly subjective non-fact to me? Some weirdo publishing statistics on who gets what back with and without writing an extra email of contact?


----------



## crankyrayhanky (Mar 14, 2019)

narad said:


> Sounds like a highly subjective non-fact to me? Some weirdo publishing statistics on who gets what back with and without writing an extra email of contact?


so....you are advocating be uber patient and don't bog them down with silly requests for product or refund?


----------



## narad (Mar 14, 2019)

crankyrayhanky said:


> so....you are advocating be uber patient and don't bog them down with silly requests for product or refund?



I'm saying that praying to the great God of handmade guitar refunds is likely equally effective at prioritizing your spot as is writing an email.


----------



## crankyrayhanky (Mar 15, 2019)

narad said:


> I'm saying that praying to the great God of handmade guitar refunds is likely equally effective at prioritizing your spot as is writing an email.


so you're saying there's a chance lol


----------



## 777timesgod (Mar 15, 2019)

MaxOfMetal said:


> I don't get how wanting a particular guitar entitles folks to getting that guitar at the price they choose.
> It's cool to want certain things, and it's a bummer that we can't afford them sometimes, but that doesn't mean we can be less-than-ethical to attain them.
> It costs millions of dollars to set up modern guitar custom shops.
> The amount of guitars they'd have to sell over decades to recoup that cost is prohibitive.
> If it was feasible, and more importantly a good business decision, we would have seen it happen already.



I did not mean that grabbing a forgery or a copy of a trademark design is ethical. I meant that the extra costs, on top of the USA guitar price, for European customers are a big weight.
I completely disagree that it takes millions to set up a modern custom shop, did all of the recent luthiers who came out the last decade and were a success begin with a venture capitalist backing them? Yes, money will be needed and that is the investment that the big guitar companies should consider.



narad said:


> They care about profits first, naturally.



Profits are lost from people who do not buy your product and buy a copy instead. Not to mention the market share lost and the opening of one's perspective to new brands.



canuck brian said:


> You want luthiers to go from being self employed to part time employees on the side on top of their normal lutheiry. Do you have any idea the logistical nightmare of that would be? Now you're dealing with new tax laws, where the payments go, insurance, shipping, custom costs (who's paying) and the list will go on for quite some time. That doesn't even take into account if the luthier working on the guitar just outright fails or has huge issues like RAN is seeing right now. Now the parent company takes a reputation hit and they're probably going to respond with lawyers.
> 
> If you genuinely think this is doable, write out what's needed to make it happen legally and on the books before the first plank gets planed. After that, figure out which luthiers reliably and consistently make awesome product at 3-5k that will take a downgrade in pay as well as now having a boss. The list for that will be most likely empty.



I never mentioned part time, you make assumptions. Regarding the luthier failing, are the big brands infallible? Look at some of the crap coming out of their CS, flaws and inconsistencies are present sometimes.

Multinational companies of different industries branch out and franchise, only guitar companies are so autistic and backwards in their dealings. Yes, it will be hard but a worthwhile investment. It does not need to begin as a massive operation. Personally, I work for a company which opened factories in other continents. Was it a bitch to get started, yes. Were several problems that rose unforeseen, yes. Did we plow through and reach profit, again yes. Difficulty does not dictate if a business decision should be made, short and long term feasibility do.

Regarding the money needed, I would like to remind you all of the millions dumped by Gibson and Fender on investments (in other areas than guitar making) which led to their bankruptcy. Clearly, an effort could have been made for a European custom shop. We saw Dean and B.C Rich produce some Czech guitars which are highly sought after years later by collectors and are considered some of their best in quality. 

You seem pissed off just because I mentioned this, calm down. No one said that you have to give out of your own pocket or that you need to close your shop. It was just a comment on something that thousands of guitarists wish was true. Maybe I am wrong and every single effort will lead mathematically to failure.

Billions are spent each day, in the corporate world, for various projects. Not all come through but at the same time not all fail. There is potential in a European custom shop, the sheer amount of people giving literally thousands to garage luthiers of unknown brands who began building months ago (many from this forum) is proof that there is a chance. I am not implying that it will be smooth sailing or that it will 100% work.


----------



## narad (Mar 15, 2019)

777timesgod said:


> Profits are lost from people who do not buy your product and buy a copy instead. Not to mention the market share lost and the opening of one's perspective to new brands.



You can try to make this case for this but it is literally the sole purpose of the guitar company to make money, so I think it's silly to think that you've discovered some untapped market that they're not aware of. If they're not opening up a European facility, it's probably because it financially does not make any sense for them to do so.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Mar 15, 2019)

777timesgod said:


> I did not mean that grabbing a forgery or a copy of a trademark design is ethical. I meant that the extra costs, on top of the USA guitar price, for European customers are a big weight.
> I completely disagree that it takes millions to set up a modern custom shop, did all of the recent luthiers who came out the last decade and were a success begin with a venture capitalist backing them? Yes, money will be needed and that is the investment that the big guitar companies should consider.
> 
> 
> ...



Starting a full service, modern, guitar manufacturing facility from scratch can easily cost over a million dollars in the first year. 

Even if you lease the space and the more expensive tools, and hire local staff. It adds up. 

You can't compare this to a one-man operation that works out of thier garage with tools they've acquired over decades. 

Sure, they can go the OEM route and contract with an existing builder, but who? If they go with a high end, established shop it's not going to do much to lower the price, and if they go small they might wind up in a situation like RAN of one of then many small builders who fold. 

It's also wrong to assume that every sale of a small luthier build is a missed sale for the larger brands. How much overlap is there between someone who is buying a Daemoness, Ruokangas, Eggle, Huber, Skervesen, or Waghorn vs. a Jackson, ESP, Dean or BCR (the brands most copied by RAN)?


----------



## diagrammatiks (Mar 15, 2019)

Also, companies don’t really give a fuck how much vat or import duties you are paying as long as the playing field is level. If there is significant domestic competition or a good reason for doing so they’ll do it.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Mar 15, 2019)

Let's also not forget that RAN was significantly undercutting the builders they were copying. Fully customized Jacksons and ESPs were $4k+ at the time they were making copies, but most RAN builds looked to come in under half that.


----------



## BrutalRob (Mar 15, 2019)

Yepp, that´s right. I remember paying about 1400 Euro for my first Ran. That was around 05/06. Every next build got more expensive, my last one at about 2400.

About pics of their copies: Try to search google for something like Ran custom rhoads, that way i found pics of two.
Or ran guitars florian decher. this guy has made a fan page which is checking many times before ordering my first. there were also a couple of copies shown.

up until some years ago, Rans gallery was way bigger since the also showed their copies. I remember when all of them got taken down. At that time, I wanted them to build a single cut shape but I got told they would not build other shapes besides their own anymore. Ended up ordering another Invader


----------



## diagrammatiks (Mar 15, 2019)

BrutalRob said:


> Yepp, that´s right. I remember paying about 1400 Euro for my first Ran. That was around 05/06. Every next build got more expensive, my last one at about 2400.
> 
> About pics of their copies: Try to search google for something like Ran custom rhoads, that way i found pics of two.
> Or ran guitars florian decher. this guy has made a fan page which is checking many times before ordering my first. there were also a couple of copies shown.
> ...



Not going to get into an argument about how ip should work. But this is how most companies get started anyway. Building lower cost copies of stuff that isn’t readily available. Then they transition into doing other stuff.


----------



## canuck brian (Mar 15, 2019)

777timesgod said:


> I never mentioned part time, you make assumptions. Regarding the luthier failing, are the big brands infallible? Look at some of the crap coming out of their CS, flaws and inconsistencies are present sometimes.
> 
> Multinational companies of different industries branch out and franchise, only guitar companies are so autistic and backwards in their dealings. Yes, it will be hard but a worthwhile investment. It does not need to begin as a massive operation. Personally, I work for a company which opened factories in other continents. Was it a bitch to get started, yes. Were several problems that rose unforeseen, yes. Did we plow through and reach profit, again yes. Difficulty does not dictate if a business decision should be made, short and long term feasibility do.
> 
> ...



- Nope - not pissed. I was pointing out the fallacies in your proposals and was kind of amazed that you think it could work. I'm an Global IT Director for a large company so planning and implementing multinational projects is something I do normally and I'm not a stranger to international business with nearly 20 years of experience. I'm also a luthier (15 years) with many luthier friends across the world as well as guitar part manufacturers. You'd probably get the same reply from 99% of the luthiers I know. 

- Lets not use the word "autistic" as a negative here. You're hitting a little close to home.

- If you want these guys who can bang out guitars reliably at 3-5K, why are they going to work with a larger brand and take direction for their own work when they probably started building their own stuff to do the exact opposite. If they're not going to be part time, they're going to be full time, which makes their own operation take a a break doesn't it? Then you're into the taxation, health benefits etc etc etc, payroll, If opening a European custom shop was a viable option for these giant companies with MBA's on their staff and accountants and finance people finding places to save and make money, they would have done it. You'd need to find a location with enough amazing luthiers willing to do what you're asking, or fly them in. Or train up already in the works luthiers. It's really not plausible. Example - you open a shop in the UK because reasons. Now you're dealing with possible language barriers as not every luthier speaks English. The last time i talked to Ilya Fokin about pickups he was using a Russian - English translator program. Another example of a major issue - Brexit. If that happens, non-UK luthiers would have a problem working for the UK custom shop.

- _"garage luthiers of unknown brands who began building months ago"_ are not the people Ibanez/Jackson/Anyone wants representing their top tier mastercraft product. If me, as a wee little non-threatening lutheir, won't take on an apprentice, Ibanez is most definitely not willing to put their rep on the line.

- Employed well known-luthier decides to shoot his mouth off online or cause a giant fiasco to the point nobody wants their guitar made by that particular luthier. IE - Vik / BRJ.

- Fender isn't going bankrupt. They're kicking all the ass. They made a brilliant acquisition of Jackson guitars to complement their range of already market dominating guitars. They have two custom shops (Jackson and Fender) with a long wait list and literally legendary luthiers on staff who've been there for many years. They do not have the required staff (Mastercraft-level luthiers) to have the equivalent in a European city. I honestly don't feel like I could make the cut at either of those shops and the guys who I know could wouldn't do it.

- I'm aware that profits are lost when someone buys a copy of your guitar, but they still only have a copy. I bought a Jackson recently and got asked why. "I don't build Jackson Guitars."

- The custom shops of companies are known for the custom shops themselves, the brand is usually second. We all know what a LACS is and it's almost a surety that something coming out of the Jackson custom shop is going to be amazing (and 99% of the time have the right amount of frets). That's a lot of reputation to build up to have someone invest that much money in an unproven project.

(not mad or GRR - i just write walls of text. It's a thing.)


----------



## Flappydoodle (Mar 15, 2019)

narad said:


> Sounds like a highly subjective non-fact to me? Some weirdo publishing statistics on who gets what back with and without writing an extra email of contact?



Well, as I said, I do have knowledge of the process.

There are some people who are legally entitled to get their money back first. That is usually banks. If there is money left over, there is no law stating that that has to be shared equally. The company (or the accountant handling it) will distribute it back towards suppliers and customers to whom the business owed money. Often, by creating a bit of fuss, you increase your chances of getting money back. As I said, they will usually prioritise people who have started legal action, simply to make it go away. Quite often that will be suppliers (i.e. for breach of contract, agreed to pay for received goods by date X, and didn't), but sometimes it can be customers.

If you are simply being pedantic about the word "fact" after I also said "they *usually* prioritise", you're wasting everybody's time.



narad said:


> I'm saying that praying to the great God of handmade guitar refunds is likely equally effective at prioritizing your spot as is writing an email.



And you are wrong. Writing letters works. I've seen it time and time again.


----------



## narad (Mar 15, 2019)

Flappydoodle said:


> If you are simply being pedantic about the word "fact" after I also said "they *usually* prioritise", you're wasting everybody's time.



"Fact" in the sense that it... _is true,_ or has been shown to be true across a large swath of similar scenarios. I don't know if you see that as pedantic but if someone's going to say that something "works", usually I don't rely on some anecdotal observations in situations that have little relevance to one at hand. It's just he-said she-said (between us) so it's dumb to think anyone really knows what card to play to wind up with a decent outcome here -- or if it is even possible to do so.

Like obviously I get that being a nuisance could be advantageous here -- I've got a wealth of experience in being a nuisance -- and that this could put some pressure on the business to return to you what they can. There's no argument there. However, it's 2019. Getting a sternly worded email, absent of any real legal backing, hits me with about as much effect as a Nigerian prince calling for assistance. 

I'll have to send an email to RAN after this whole thing is through to ask them for their prioritized list of who-gets-what. I don't expect them to be like, "Well, I got 3 emails from this guy, so he was for sure the first customer to get his money back. On the other hand, Jonathan only wrote one email, and he ended it with a smiley -- no money for Jonathan."


----------



## Vyn (Mar 15, 2019)

narad said:


> Like obviously I get that being a nuisance could be advantageous here -- I've got a wealth of experience in being a nuisance -- and that this could put some pressure on the business to return to you what they can. There's no argument there. *However, it's 2019. Getting a sternly worded email, absent of any real legal backing, hits me with about as much effect as a Nigerian prince calling for assistance.*



Pretty much this to be honest. It's highly unlikely that a customer is going to go through with said legal action because the majority have done the cost-benifit calcs and worked out it'll be MORE expensive to get a legal team involved or they just aren't going to have the capitol behind them in the first place. There's probably a very small percentage of people who actually have the time, money and CARE to go through with any legal proceedings. I would imagine that businesses are quite aware of this. 

In any regard if you ARE going to send an email requesting monies to be refunded, I suspect you MIGHT have more of a chance with a politely worded "Can I please have a refund" than going full lawyer. You're entitled to do so, however in the eyes of quite a few people it does just make you come off as an entitled arsehole (not saying that you are, that's just how some people take that) and you will probably end up at the bottom of the refund list.


----------



## Flappydoodle (Mar 18, 2019)

narad said:


> "Fact" in the sense that it... _is true,_ or has been shown to be true across a large swath of similar scenarios. I don't know if you see that as pedantic but if someone's going to say that something "works", usually I don't rely on some anecdotal observations in situations that have little relevance to one at hand. It's just he-said she-said (between us) so it's dumb to think anyone really knows what card to play to wind up with a decent outcome here -- or if it is even possible to do so.
> 
> Like obviously I get that being a nuisance could be advantageous here -- I've got a wealth of experience in being a nuisance -- and that this could put some pressure on the business to return to you what they can. There's no argument there. However, it's 2019. Getting a sternly worded email, absent of any real legal backing, hits me with about as much effect as a Nigerian prince calling for assistance.
> 
> I'll have to send an email to RAN after this whole thing is through to ask them for their prioritized list of who-gets-what. I don't expect them to be like, "Well, I got 3 emails from this guy, so he was for sure the first customer to get his money back. On the other hand, Jonathan only wrote one email, and he ended it with a smiley -- no money for Jonathan."



So you *were* being pedantic, got it! I asked a friend of mine which is an insolvency practitioner, and he says "yes, absolutely make contact either by yourself or through a lawyer".

I recall your run in with Red Dragon Guitars. That was obviously a laughable situation where they would have zero grounds to threaten you after you posted an opinion online. But in the case of RAN, you have paid a business to do something, and they are not doing it. They are breaching the contract. There *are* grounds to take action, and both parties know it, and so it isn't just an empty email. And I'm sure you know that the EU has much stronger consumer protections than America.



Vyn said:


> Pretty much this to be honest. It's highly unlikely that a customer is going to go through with said legal action because the majority have done the cost-benifit calcs and worked out it'll be MORE expensive to get a legal team involved or they just aren't going to have the capitol behind them in the first place. There's probably a very small percentage of people who actually have the time, money and CARE to go through with any legal proceedings. I would imagine that businesses are quite aware of this.
> 
> In any regard if you ARE going to send an email requesting monies to be refunded, I suspect you MIGHT have more of a chance with a politely worded "Can I please have a refund" than going full lawyer. You're entitled to do so, however in the eyes of quite a few people it does just make you come off as an entitled arsehole (not saying that you are, that's just how some people take that) and you will probably end up at the bottom of the refund list.



You don't have to go through "legal action". There are simple laws in the EU for customer protection. If you agreed to pay €XXXX for a guitar, and the company didn't give you a guitar, you have a simple pathway to asking for money back. It's not a lawsuit where you're going to pay for hours of lawyer time and have to fight in court etc.

I agree that a polite letter can also work. You've at least started a process of asking for a refund. It might be a case that you can't draw blood from a stone, but I think RAN hasn't declared bankruptcy yet (as far as I've seen posted here), so it would depend on the contract you signed as to whether refunds are allowed or not. Perhaps a deposit will be non-refundable, but someone who made payments to a guitar definitely has a claim for either the guitar or the cash back.

Looking back through the BRJ thread, it's funny how it separated into optimists who said "I'll wait, and hopefully they recover and make my guitar" or the naysayers who immediately declare that nothing can be done. If you treat this like any other business which is having trouble, probably going bankrupt, then it's quite simple.


----------



## Vyn (Mar 18, 2019)

Flappydoodle said:


> You don't have to go through "legal action". There are simple laws in the EU for customer protection. If you agreed to pay €XXXX for a guitar, and the company didn't give you a guitar, you have a simple pathway to asking for money back. It's not a lawsuit where you're going to pay for hours of lawyer time and have to fight in court etc.



I derped hard and forgot this was under EU law not US law. You're right on that one. If this was a situation in the US though, you're pretty much high and dry.


----------



## LeviathanKiller (Mar 18, 2019)

Looking through some screenshots on my phone last night I happened to realize that I nearly joined the 2018 run that they were doing on Facebook. So thankful I decided to pass.

Anyone that was a part of that, Troi is trying to help out I know. Which is super nice of him.


----------



## narad (Mar 18, 2019)

Flappydoodle said:


> I recall your run in with Red Dragon Guitars. That was obviously a laughable situation where they would have zero grounds to threaten you after you posted an opinion online. But in the case of RAN, you have paid a business to do something, and they are not doing it. They are breaching the contract. There *are* grounds to take action, and both parties know it, and so it isn't just an empty email. And I'm sure you know that the EU has much stronger consumer protections than America.



I know there are grounds to do so -- I don't think anyone ever argued otherwise -- it just doesn't seem to change the outcome in these cases (cases: in the guitar world). It's great your friend's an insolvency guy, but I'm going to go out on a limb and assume the dynamics of these situations are drastically different case-to-case. As you bring up BRJ -- yes, people are quick to take up one position or the other, but were screwed equally regardless.


----------



## chopeth (Mar 19, 2019)

LeviathanKiller said:


> Looking through some screenshots on my phone last night I happened to realize that I nearly joined the 2018 run that they were doing on Facebook. So thankful I decided to pass.
> 
> Anyone that was a part of that, Troi is trying to help out I know. Which is super nice of him.



Who's that Troy?


----------



## Sogradde (Mar 19, 2019)

MaxOfMetal said:


> I think it's gullible to think they're putting together some list of whose naughty and nice and will reward some and not others based on things like strongly worded letters from lawyers that mean absolutely nothing.


In Germany there is a ranking who gets money first, depending on how you're involved in the entire thing. Technically, someone who has only paid for the build but they didn't start yet is on a different level than someone who had his build started already, as there are physical assets that can be handed out (I guess the correct term here is "obligee" ?). The EU being a bureaucratic nightmare, I wouldn't be surprised if they had tons of laws for that. So yeah, it makes sense to make a claim.

Any builder who's in the game as long as RAN should be insured for cases like this. Any self-employed person even.


----------



## 777timesgod (Mar 19, 2019)

narad said:


> You can try to make this case for this but it is literally the sole purpose of the guitar company to make money, so I think it's silly to think that you've discovered some untapped market that they're not aware of. If they're not opening up a European facility, it's probably because it financially does not make any sense for them to do so.



I do not think that it is silly at all. Times change and so does potential for business, maybe the time now is not positive for something like this but I genuinely believe that if they can drop millions in other ventures, they can at least consider this matter.
In other domains of business millions are spent each year breaking into new continents. The big guitar companies did this with their factory models, perhaps they can with their CS shops. Who knows unless they try, starting small at first with limited runs and moving up to allowing people to place orders for their own specs.



MaxOfMetal said:


> Starting a full service, modern, guitar manufacturing facility from scratch can easily cost over a million dollars in the first year.
> 
> It's also wrong to assume that every sale of a small luthier build is a missed sale for the larger brands. How much overlap is there between someone who is buying a Daemoness, Ruokangas, Eggle, Huber, Skervesen, or Waghorn vs. a Jackson, ESP, Dean or BCR (the brands most copied by RAN)?



For the first point, money as proven by how some American firms throw it around for investments that end dead in the water is not the only factor.
Regarding the overlap, it is not just the money lost, as I mentioned it is the matter of opening people to new things. How many people purchased CS models from smaller luthiers 20 years ago and how many do it today. Each corporation needs to check these matters for long term damage. The clientele for the models you mention is 100 times bigger today than 20 years ago when the general guitar population would see a CS by not one of the big brands and scratch their heads.

To conclude, it is obvious that we will not agree on this since we have different perspectives entirely. 



Flappydoodle said:


> You don't have to go through "legal action". There are simple laws in the EU for customer protection. If you agreed to pay €XXXX for a guitar, and the company didn't give you a guitar, you have a simple pathway to asking for money back. It's not a lawsuit where you're going to pay for hours of lawyer time and have to fight in court etc.
> 
> I agree that a polite letter can also work. You've at least started a process of asking for a refund. It might be a case that you can't draw blood from a stone, but I think RAN hasn't declared bankruptcy yet (as far as I've seen posted here), so it would depend on the contract you signed as to whether refunds are allowed or not. Perhaps a deposit will be non-refundable, but someone who made payments to a guitar definitely has a claim for either the guitar or the cash back.
> 
> Looking back through the BRJ thread, it's funny how it separated into optimists who said "I'll wait, and hopefully they recover and make my guitar" or the naysayers who immediately declare that nothing can be done. If you treat this like any other business which is having trouble, probably going bankrupt, then it's quite simple.



As I have said earlier, the people who have builds scheduled deserve a better explanation than "We do not know what will happen but we are trying". The minute you give that picture to the customer, they are morally and potentially legally clear to request refunds and chargebacks.
The Ran well may not be completely dry so early in the crisis, so my personal view to the members here is to go ahead quickly. If you care for the company more than you do for your own bank account then wait, it is simple.
Yes, in the EU, we have laws that protect the consumer but those laws will not make funds magically appear for refunds from the company's account. I do know that sometimes government departments for consumers foot the bill or part of it for insurance funds which go down in Europe but I am not sure about the consumer goods.


----------



## diagrammatiks (Mar 19, 2019)

777timesgod said:


> I do not think that it is silly at all. Times change and so does potential for business, maybe the time now is not positive for something like this but I genuinely believe that if they can drop millions in other ventures, they can at least consider this matter.
> In other domains of business millions are spent each year breaking into new continents. The big guitar companies did this with their factory models, perhaps they can with their CS shops. Who knows unless they try, starting small at first with limited runs and moving up to allowing people to place orders for their own specs.
> 
> 
> ...



Yeah no one has ever tried this. U r teh first one to think of this


----------



## narad (Mar 19, 2019)

777timesgod said:


> I do not think that it is silly at all. Times change and so does potential for business, maybe the time now is not positive for something like this but I genuinely believe that if they can drop millions in other ventures, they can at least consider this matter.
> 
> In other domains of business millions are spent each year breaking into new continents. The big guitar companies did this with their factory models, perhaps they can with their CS shops. Who knows unless they try, starting small at first with limited runs and moving up to allowing people to place orders for their own specs.



The trend is moving factories to countries with cheaper labor, and offering increasingly more value for the money. Everyone is seeing good margins from this. Even EU ops like Strandberg, who had crazy high prices, are having tough times being profitable in the EU, and have since shifted his whole operations to low-cost asian labor in the aforementioned manner.

What you are proposing is in the entirely opposite direction. I'm willing to bet that people don't want Ibanez Euro Line made from euro labor and costing Aristides - Huber level prices. Really not sure what would make you believe there is a huge untapped market for this.


----------



## Andromalia (Mar 19, 2019)

> Yes, in the EU, we have laws that protect the consumer but those laws will not make funds magically appear for refunds from the company's account.


Actually, yes, most of them do. If a transaction is cancelled, it just pushes the seller account into the nefgative, you still get your money. A rule I have when ordering expensive things is to never, never, allow delivery times to go over 6 months from payment. Deposits are fine as they are refundable if the product isn't delivered without a time limit, but final payments, 6 months maximum, otherwise I can't chargeback them.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Mar 19, 2019)

777timesgod said:


> For the first point, money as proven by how some American firms throw it around for investments that end dead in the water is not the only factor.



Investment brings risk. 

Sometimes that risk pays off, and sometimes it doesn't. There are entire branches of businesses that crunch the numbers on the risk:reward. 



> Regarding the overlap, it is not just the money lost, as I mentioned it is the matter of opening people to new things. How many people purchased CS models from smaller luthiers 20 years ago and how many do it today. Each corporation needs to check these matters for long term damage. The clientele for the models you mention is 100 times bigger today than 20 years ago when the general guitar population would see a CS by not one of the big brands and scratch their heads.



It used to be that if you wanted anything nicer or more different than rather barebones Strats and LPs you had to go custom. 

Most of what we'd consider mainstream guitars today were the small custom shops two or three decades ago. 

While the numbers have changed, getting custom instruments has always been popular. 



> To conclude, it is obvious that we will not agree on this since we have different perspectives entirely.



We can still have a polite discussion. 



Sogradde said:


> In Germany there is a ranking who gets money first, depending on how you're involved in the entire thing. Technically, someone who has only paid for the build but they didn't start yet is on a different level than someone who had his build started already, as there are physical assets that can be handed out (I guess the correct term here is "obligee" ?). The EU being a bureaucratic nightmare, I wouldn't be surprised if they had tons of laws for that. So yeah, it makes sense to make a claim.
> 
> Any builder who's in the game as long as RAN should be insured for cases like this. Any self-employed person even.



That's the point we're trying to make. 

Use established channels of consumer protection vs. a toothless letter from a lawyer. 

I would not be surprised if RAN doesn't have insurance. Seems to be rarity amongst builders. Unfortunately.


----------



## LeviathanKiller (Mar 19, 2019)

chopeth said:


> Who's that Troy?



The guy who manages a ton of Facebook runs. If you're a part of one of the runs, you'll know who he is.


----------



## narad (Mar 19, 2019)

LeviathanKiller said:


> The guy who manages a ton of Facebook runs. If you're a part of one of the runs, you'll know who he is.



Oh yes, manager Troi, I believe I have heard of him.


----------



## chopeth (Mar 20, 2019)

runs? what's that as a noun?


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Mar 20, 2019)

chopeth said:


> runs? what's that as a noun?



As in "production run" or "batch". 

A set of instruments in a particular production time frame. 

For instance a limited edition "run" of guitars with specific specs or price.


----------



## chopeth (Mar 20, 2019)

MaxOfMetal said:


> As in "production run" or "batch".
> 
> A set of instruments in a particular production time frame.
> 
> For instance a limited edition "run" of guitars with specific specs or price.



ohh, sure, thanks. But in my case I ordered by e-mail with Dariusz.


----------



## 777timesgod (Mar 21, 2019)

diagrammatiks said:


> Yeah no one has ever tried this. U r teh first one to think of this



*You are the*
Never claimed to be or that EU lines never existed, I mention 2 examples in one of my posts. Just an unpopular opinion, apparently one that makes you angry/sarcastic.


----------



## chopeth (Mar 21, 2019)

Guuuuys, there is a few people here very worried about their money invested in these guitars and our heart jump everytime we see a new update in the thread.

Can you please stop measuring your penises or go somewhere else to keep fighting about who's right here?


----------



## narad (Mar 21, 2019)

Dude, your heart shouldn't be jumping every time this thread's bumped -- this isn't going to get resolved for a long time.


----------



## LeviathanKiller (Mar 21, 2019)

narad said:


> Dude, your heart shouldn't be jumping every time this thread's bumped -- this isn't going to get resolved for a long time.



Yeah, this is a normal forum thread, not some sort of issue resolution ticket system. THAT SAID, it would be cool if we had such a thing. A heavily moderated version of this thread where only legitimate updates to this situation got posted and people didn't have to sift through any discussion whatsoever. Then we could quote the post containing any news and talk about it here in this thread however we like.

I really want to believe these guys are going to pull through. My fingers are crossed.


----------



## diagrammatiks (Mar 21, 2019)

LeviathanKiller said:


> Yeah, this is a normal forum thread, not some sort of issue resolution ticket system. THAT SAID, it would be cool if we had such a thing. A heavily moderated version of this thread where only legitimate updates to this situation got posted and people didn't have to sift through any discussion whatsoever. Then we could quote the post containing any news and talk about it here in this thread however we like.
> 
> I really want to believe these guys are going to pull through. My fingers are crossed.



Between the likes of black water vik and abasi getting their shit together you better start using your toes.


----------



## chopeth (Mar 26, 2019)

Anybody else in this situation, send me a private message.


----------



## Kleks (Apr 6, 2019)

Hey fellas,

I'm an owner of Ran's Invader and Polish citizen myself. Based on everything been said - Ran Guitars is gone for good. Not a single chance for a come back. Story with struggling to find new premises is just a nonsense - it wouldn't take more than couple of days to find a new proper place to move small guitar manufacture. And staff wouldn't leave if there was at least a tiny chance to keep that job. 
Sad to say - this is it, no more Ran Guitars. Too bad Darius kept taking deposits for new orders that never meant to be completed.

RIP Ran.


----------



## BlacKat Guitars (Apr 6, 2019)

So you just decided to register on this forum now, use RAN logo as your avatar and write this as your first post. Nothing suspicious here at all.


----------



## Kleks (Apr 6, 2019)

BlacKat Guitars said:


> So you just decided to register on this forum now, use RAN logo as your avatar and write this as your first post. Nothing suspicious here at all.



Yep, exactly  Been wondering myself what the hell is going on with them, googled it yesterday and found this thread.


----------



## soldierkahn (Apr 7, 2019)

chopeth said:


> Guuuuys, there is a few people here very worried about their money invested in these guitars and our heart jump everytime we see a new update in the thread.
> 
> Can you please stop measuring your penises or go somewhere else to keep fighting about who's right here?



Did you forget where you are? This is still sevenstring right?


----------



## Isurez (Apr 9, 2019)

I have a very important message to communicate. Be aware that I'm just an intermediary, please do not ask me questions in a PM because I will not answer them.

There was a conversation today between Jarek (owner of Skervesen Guitars) and Darek (owner of Ran Guitars). The whole initiative is the result of the fact that some of Ran Guitars’ clients have asked Skervesen Guitars for help. The owners of both brands have known each other for a long time, which is why there was an agreement. It consists in the possibility of transferring a deposit from one brand to another since the mentioned in the title of this topic builder is no longer able to create more instruments which are known for their perfect workmanship. Of course both sides realize that this is not a solution to the problem but one of the options that can be used by those willing. In order to make such a transfer, please contact Darek who will then contact Skervesen Guitars. Please consider the possible price difference that may result from the fact that both brands differ in this respect. Skervesen Guitars allows a range of price negotiations. We remind you once again - this is only an option for those interested because such inquiries began to appear on the part of Ran Guitars customers. Skervesen Guitars was informed that Darek is in contact with his clients via email. 

For more details, please contact us through official e-mails:
Ran Guitars email: [email protected]
Skervesen Guitars email: [email protected]


----------



## Kleks (Apr 9, 2019)

That's pretty good news.

Appologies for my doubt in Ran - really thought it's all done and gone, my bad.


----------



## Albake21 (Apr 9, 2019)

Interesting... Although aren't Skervesens way more expensive than RAN?


----------



## Demiurge (Apr 9, 2019)

If the funds are liquid enough to be transferred from one business to another, why not just provide a refund?


----------



## ikarus (Apr 9, 2019)

Albake21 said:


> Interesting... Although aren't Skervesens way more expensive than RAN?



"Please consider the possible price difference that may result from the fact that both brands differ in this respect."


----------



## Ordacleaphobia (Apr 9, 2019)

Demiurge said:


> If the funds are liquid enough to be transferred from one business to another, why not just provide a refund?



The only thing I can come up with is that they may be writing off part of it between the two of them.
IE I put a $500 deposit on a RAN and RAN sends $250 to Skervesen who agreed to just eat the other $250. Only thing I can think of that makes sense.


----------



## Isurez (Apr 9, 2019)

We are guessing how all the people who have left a deposit feel so we are able to offer better prices for them. 



Demiurge said:


> If the funds are liquid enough to be transferred from one business to another, why not just provide a refund?


Unfortunately it is not as easy as it may seem. We have a way to do it. I do not want to delve into details, the only thing I can say is that we want to help these people. We know the details of part of Ran Guitars orders and we are sure that our offer will not meet the requirements of some of these people. For example "V" shape guitar made by Skervesen Guitars. We assume that some people are not interested in our guitars at all. So I would like to emphasize once again that this is only an option that people can use. This is not a solution to the problem on the part of Ran Guitars, only the proposal with which his clients came out.


----------



## Kleks (Apr 9, 2019)

So you're not able to build a V-shape guitar?


----------



## Isurez (Apr 9, 2019)

We do not have such a model in plans. We have not even received one inquiry for this type of guitar in the last 3 years. Also we do not plan to use Ran Guitars projects, so please do not think about ghost-building. There is not the slightest possibility for such a thing.


----------



## LeviathanKiller (Apr 9, 2019)

This offer is what I was hinting at earlier in this thread. Nice to see them come to SS.org and offer it to even more of you guys.


----------



## BlacKat Guitars (Apr 9, 2019)

I assume that they build their own models, not RAN copies and probably discontinued their V long time ago like everyone else. 

We are also working with some RAN customers who ordered in run organized by Troi - in this case we just offer spec that is closest to original order. 

This situation is very unfortunate and we keep our fingers crossed that RAN will manage to deal with their problems and will get back to business.


----------



## MSS (Apr 9, 2019)

I have a Ran 7 and a Skervesen Raptor 7. They are both outstanding guitars. I would jump on this opportunity. I do think the money should be refunded but maybe it was already invested in wood etc.


----------



## Xaios (Apr 9, 2019)

Ordacleaphobia said:


> The only thing I can come up with is that they may be writing off part of it between the two of them.
> IE I put a $500 deposit on a RAN and RAN sends $250 to Skervesen who agreed to just eat the other $250. Only thing I can think of that makes sense.


This sounds pretty sensible to me. RAN can save some measure of face with their customers and Skervesen gets a wave of new builds that don't have to come in piecemeal, and also generates a boatload of goodwill, all without having to do any extra marketing of their own. That sounds well worth taking a $250 (or whatever such a split would dictate) hit per instrument.

Granted, I'm no luthier. Perhaps someone that is can chime in. @canuck brian , penny for your thoughts?


----------



## Wolfhorsky (Apr 9, 2019)

As an owner of few Skervs and a friend of guys from Skerv team and also as a Pole, I want to share my thoughts on this. Both Skerv team and Tomek from Blackat guitars are cool people that only want to help Ran customers. They want also make things better in order to keep the positive image of Polish guitar manufactures. They all have their companys, but they respect and like each other - that is worth mentioning imho. So, guys from Blackat and Skerv - thumbs up.


----------



## Ordacleaphobia (Apr 9, 2019)

Xaios said:


> This sounds pretty sensible to me. RAN can save some measure of face with their customers and Skervesen gets a wave of new builds that don't have to come in piecemeal, and also generates a boatload of goodwill, all without having to do any extra marketing of their own. That sounds well worth taking a $250 (or whatever such a split would dictate) hit per instrument.
> 
> Granted, I'm no luthier. Perhaps someone that is can chime in. @canuck brian , penny for your thoughts?



Something else that occurred to me later is that some of the capital may be in the form of raw material- timber, pickups, tuners, etc. that could be used for the build still. 
If my $500 deposit is gone in terms of liquid cash, but RAN can send Skervesen the pickups, bridge, tuners, and wood that RAN bought for my build, that's effectively an equivalent transfer of value in this situation. 

Just thinking out loud. This is pretty much the first time I've seen something like this happen with a company that had their ducks in a row, and also didn't almost immediately point toward things going terribly wrong- so it's fun to be able to just be curious rather than upset for once


----------



## soldierkahn (Apr 10, 2019)

Maybe some won't agree, but I want to at least post that while I don't dig these brands, the simple fact they are banding together like a family is not only super shocking to see happen, it's amazingly refreshing that there are still business folks who care. They didn't even start out saying they're trying to help RAN out specifically, they're focused on the customers. I'm gobsmacked in such a positive way. I just wanted say that


----------



## narad (Apr 10, 2019)

I am also working with some of the RAN customers who ordered in run organized by Troi. I will be providing vials of essential oils, closest in smell to the woods of the original RAN order, or also I can draw the guitar on a custom moleskine. This may not be suitable for all orders, but those interested please contact me via email.


----------



## Sogradde (Apr 10, 2019)

This is probably the best they could have done in the situation. Kudos to RAN and Skervesen for working together like that.


----------



## BlacKat Guitars (Apr 10, 2019)

narad said:


> I am also working with some of the RAN customers who ordered in run organized by Troi. I will be providing vials of essential oils, closest in smell to the woods of the original RAN order, or also I can draw the guitar on a custom moleskine. This may not be suitable for all orders, but those interested please contact me via email.



I wasn't going to write anything here but it's annoying to see suggestions that no actions are being taken to remedy this situation. RAN going down would be terrible news for custom guitars community and other builders from Poland. They are not invictus or brj, they've been around for long and are known to deliver awesome quality builds. We don't really know what happened and I can't see the point in speculation and gossip. I hope they manage to work out their problems but all customers trying to cancel and get deposits back at the same time is a nightmare scenario for all parties involved. In this case customers have option to get guitar from another custom shop instead of fighting to get their deposit back, RAN has a chance to work out their issues without long queue of angry customers and those other shops get some extra orders so in this bitter situation it's a win-win (as much as it can be).

But essential oil jokes can help too, just as essential oils do.


----------



## BrutalRob (Apr 10, 2019)

As good as it is that Ran is trying to find some solution for their customers, I would probably be totally pissed.
Been a Ran customer for about 12 years and got 5 Ran Invader during that time. So basically, during those years i had a guitar being build all the time. Always a V. 
So right now, I am extremely lucky I have no other guitar in the pipeline, which would have been , tadaaa, another V. 
So my only option right now would have been to take anything else Skervesen has to offer. Which would be no option for me since I can not stand most of those superstrats which seem trendy nowadays. Or to live with the fact my desposit would be gone. 

But since everyone seems to be all over the Crusher models nowadays, I think getting stuff from skervesen seems like a good alternative.


----------



## Isurez (Apr 10, 2019)

It is worth mentioning that one of the main goals of whole action is to get rid of fears about ordering guitars from Polish manufactures. We never treated Tomek from Blackat Guitars or Darek from Ran Guitars as our competition. We could always count on the help of both of them. We have built a network of local interests between which there is a certain unwritten mutual assistance agreement. These are manufacturers of guitar cases, hardware parts, timber/wood warehouses, etc. This initiative is the result of various situations related to this whole guitar-building related business. Of course, customers are in the first place in all of this. @Wolfhorsky and @BlacKat Guitars were faster than me to pay attention to it. Thanks Wojtek, thanks Tomek.




Ordacleaphobia said:


> Something else that occurred to me later is that some of the capital may be in the form of raw material- timber, pickups, tuners, etc. that could be used for the build still.
> If my $500 deposit is gone in terms of liquid cash, but RAN can send Skervesen the pickups, bridge, tuners, and wood that RAN bought for my build, that's effectively an equivalent transfer of value in this situation.


I was not going into details, but this is one of the solutions we use. Also there is no split so if you paid for example 900 EUR deposit then this entire deposit goes to your Skervesen Guitars build.


----------



## BlacKat Guitars (Apr 10, 2019)

Yup, we are all big family except Roter.


----------



## possumkiller (Apr 10, 2019)

BlacKat Guitars said:


> Yup, we are all big family except Roter.


How about Mayones?


----------



## narad (Apr 10, 2019)

possumkiller said:


> How about Mayones?



Papa.


----------



## possumkiller (Apr 10, 2019)

Also, I wonder why people think it is fine and dandy for US, UK, and Japanese builders to make copies but somehow it is not ok for Eastern Europe or China to make copies. RAN made copies of guitars that people here had no chance of being able to afford the original. People in Poland saving up money for ages to order a custom RAN worked the same as a kid saving up for ages in the US to buy an RR1 or KV2. You have to be pretty rich over here to afford any hand made guitars. Idk it just bothers me that people love to trash RAN for making copies yet have no problem with the copies made by Ibanez, ESP, or *gasp* Daemoness... 
It's not like they were making straight up forgeries trying to pass off as originals.


----------



## BlacKat Guitars (Apr 10, 2019)

narad said:


> Papa.



More like godfathers. I'm in touch with Mateusz from Mayones and he is an awesome dude. So still family.



possumkiller said:


> Also, I wonder why people think it is fine and dandy for US, UK, and Japanese builders to make copies.



Polish companies made copies mainly for domestic market because of demand and neccesity. There is still a big salary gap between Poland and western Europe or USA, in 90s and early 2000s it was way worse than now. We now have national teachers strike because they are fighting for higher wages, some of them earn 600 € gross (before taxes). Compare this to price of typical instrument made in Japan or USA. When I grew up guitars were just impossibly expensive even if we talk about Korean builds (which were way worse in quality than current Indo builds) and also most of the stuff was impossible to get. When I finally managed to save up enough money to buy RG2020x that was my dream guitar at that time, it turned out that distributor had 2 pieces available - one with damaged finish, another with damaged trem. And it was still very expensive for me, it took me a year to collect money to get it. It was also difficult to import something used and domestic market needed good quality guitars.

Builders at that time made mainly stuff for Polish musicians on a budget. And they were copies or at least inspired by something. People wanted guitars that looked like Jackson, ESP, Ibanez, Gibson etc. and they bought these because 1 they couldn't afford original, 2 they couldn't buy original because it was not available in shops. And believe me, everyone wanted originals and even if quality of those custom instruments was incredible (especially for their price), they were always regarded as copies. At some point situation changed - wages went up and inventories in shops improved. Somewhere in later 2000s some of those Polish companies grew up and worked on their own lineup - Mayones introduced Regius and Setius, Ran came up with Crusher. Copies slowly faded away and they're history now.

Edit: attached my 3 Ibanez copies made by Malwood and BC Rich Warlock copy made by Witkowski


----------



## narad (Apr 10, 2019)

possumkiller said:


> Also, I wonder why people think it is fine and dandy for US, UK, and Japanese builders to make copies but somehow it is not ok for Eastern Europe or China to make copies. RAN made copies of guitars that people here had no chance of being able to afford the original. People in Poland saving up money for ages to order a custom RAN worked the same as a kid saving up for ages in the US to buy an RR1 or KV2. You have to be pretty rich over here to afford any hand made guitars. Idk it just bothers me that people love to trash RAN for making copies yet have no problem with the copies made by Ibanez, ESP, or *gasp* Daemoness...
> It's not like they were making straight up forgeries trying to pass off as originals.



I'm not sure. It's obviously going to be a case-by-case basis. Usually the area that irks people the hardest is when a company copies another *small/independent* luthier's work. 

Like I know RAN copied Ken Lawrence's headstock, which I think is a pretty shitty thing to do. Not only is it an incredibly unique design -- you're not just going to make a small variation and wind up with a KL headstock --, and not only is it very synonymous with Ken, but Ken's guitars are very expensive / super high quality. So in that respect it seems like it's trying to pass itself off as something more than what it is / becomes more in like with Grote or aliexpress forgeries of small builder's things.

But they can make strats or Vs all day long for all I care.


----------



## possumkiller (Apr 10, 2019)

narad said:


> I'm not sure. It's obviously going to be a case-by-case basis. Usually the area that irks people the hardest is when a company copies another *small/independent* luthier's work.
> 
> Like I know RAN copied Ken Lawrence's headstock, which I think is a pretty shitty thing to do. Not only is it an incredibly unique design -- you're not just going to make a small variation and wind up with a KL headstock --, and not only is it very synonymous with Ken, but Ken's guitars are very expensive / super high quality. So in that respect it seems like it's trying to pass itself off as something more than what it is / becomes more in like with Grote or aliexpress forgeries of small builder's things.
> 
> But they can make strats or Vs all day long for all I care.


Is it just me or is a KL EXP just a copy of a Gibson made by a small American builder? You take no issue with KL copying an Explorer but you take issue with RAN copying a KL? This is exactly what I am talking about. Ken Lawrence and Dylan Humphreys can make copies of Gibsons and Jacksons all day long and nobody cares because they are "boutique" but if RAN makes copies of Gibsons and Jacksons they are somehow a lower form of life.


----------



## possumkiller (Apr 10, 2019)

BlacKat Guitars said:


> More like godfathers. I'm in touch with Mateusz from Mayones and he is an awesome dude. So still family.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yes this is how my wife told it to me as well. I am American but she is from Gdansk. We moved to Gdansk last year and now I can see for myself how even now it is a huge pain in the ass to find any sort of good musical gear here. There is still a huge gap in wages. My wife works for Amazon here in Gdansk and I get paid in dollars going to online school from my US military benefits plus I earn 1500zl a month on the side and somehow I still cannot afford a Polish guitar . I am keeping an eye on allegro for an old school 90s Mayones KZ Soloist style guitar they used to make just because I really want to have a guitar made in Poland from that era.


----------



## Wolfhorsky (Apr 10, 2019)

Almost every guitar is a „copy” of Fender or Gibson.


----------



## BlacKat Guitars (Apr 10, 2019)

possumkiller said:


> I am keeping an eye on allegro for an old school 90s Mayones KZ Soloist style guitar they used to make just because I really want to have a guitar made in Poland from that era.



Here's mine. Unfortunately I sold it long time ago .


----------



## narad (Apr 10, 2019)

possumkiller said:


> Is it just me or is a KL EXP just a copy of a Gibson made by a small American builder? You take no issue with KL copying an Explorer but you take issue with RAN copying a KL? This is exactly what I am talking about. Ken Lawrence and Dylan Humphreys can make copies of Gibsons and Jacksons all day long and nobody cares because they are "boutique" but if RAN makes copies of Gibsons and Jacksons they are somehow a lower form of life.



That's exactly it. Ken copies an explorer shape, from the 1950s, and does a way better job of it. He makes a couple small design improvements, puts his own spin on things. RAN then copies Ken, who is still alive, building, and steals the unique design element of a KL that makes it distinguishable from a Gibson or any other guitar. And frankly makes a much worse guitar. No offense to Ran, but Ken Lawrence they are not.

Ken's not trying to pass his guitar off as a Gibson. That's beneath him. People don't buy KLs because they can't afford a Gibson explorer -- they want better. In contrast, RAN's building a KL copy for guys who simply can't afford a KL. Do you see the difference?

I mean, this is why patents expire. You have your idea. You're allowed a good chunk of time to cash in on it. And then it goes out in to the world.

Again, if RAN wants to copy guitar designs from 30-70 years ago, be my guest. But ripping off existing builders is bad form.


----------



## Wolfhorsky (Apr 10, 2019)

narad said:


> That's exactly it. Ken copies an explorer shape, from the 1950s, and does a way better job of it. He makes a couple small design improvements, puts his own spin on things. RAN then copies Ken, who is still alive, building, and steals the unique design element of a KL that makes it distinguishable from a Gibson or any other guitar. And frankly makes a much worse guitar. No offense to Ran, but Ken Lawrence they are not.
> 
> Ken's not trying to pass his guitar off as a Gibson. That's beneath him. People don't buy KLs because they can't afford a Gibson explorer -- they want better. In contrast, RAN's building a KL copy for guys who simply can't afford a KL. Do you see the difference?
> 
> ...


Let’s agree to disagree. 
Ran didn’t copy KL in any of their guitars. Give me any hint or a touch of proof.
You should know the background history of Polish guitars. Please, read carefully the post by Tomek from Blackat. Knowing that, You should take that into consideration before making that serious accusations and judgements.


----------



## possumkiller (Apr 10, 2019)

narad said:


> That's exactly it. Ken copies an explorer shape, from the 1950s, and does a way better job of it. He makes a couple small design improvements, puts his own spin on things. RAN then copies Ken, who is still alive, building, and steals the unique design element of a KL that makes it distinguishable from a Gibson or any other guitar. And frankly makes a much worse guitar. No offense to Ran, but Ken Lawrence they are not.
> 
> Ken's not trying to pass his guitar off as a Gibson. That's beneath him. People don't buy KLs because they can't afford a Gibson explorer -- they want better. In contrast, RAN's building a KL copy for guys who simply can't afford a KL. Do you see the difference?
> 
> ...


Sooooo... according to your logic, making a copy is fine as long as you make it better than the original? Isn't that a bit subjective? Or do you mean as long as it is more expensive? Even an ESP copy of an EXP will set you back quite a bit more than a Gibson these days. With the QC reputation of Gibson, I am sure RAN could easily be accepted as "better" than an original. So is Dylan in bad form because he makes copies of Grover's designs? Mr. Jackson is still quite alive and well as far as I remember. Are the builders that copy Fenders and Gibsons not stealing the unique design elements that made Fenders and Gibsons distinguishable?

All I'm saying is a copy is a copy regardless of how expensive it is or where it is made. Why people feel the need to shit on some builders because they build affordable copies of guitars for people in their home market (the literal exact same way Ibanez and ESP started out btw) is beyond me. It just comes off as some kind of cork-sniffing snobbery to me. EDIT: Or I should say more comes off as religious people cherry picking which parts of the bible they want to follow and to whom it applies.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Apr 10, 2019)

Wolfhorsky said:


> Ran didn’t copy KL in any of their guitars. Give me any hint or a touch of proof.













There are more, these were just the first two that showed up within the first dozen or so images when you Google "RAN Guitars".


----------



## possumkiller (Apr 10, 2019)

Also, who was it that was making copies of Fenders and Gibsons way back in the 70s when Fender and Gibson solidbodies were still only in their 20s? People like Paul Reed Smith, Wayne Charvel, Dean Zelinsky?


----------



## narad (Apr 10, 2019)

Wolfhorsky said:


> Let’s agree to disagree.
> Ran didn’t copy KL in any of their guitars. Give me any hint or a touch of proof.
> You should know the background history of Polish guitars. Please, read carefully the post by Tomek from Blackat. Knowing that, You should take that into consideration before making that serious accusations and judgements.



This is RAN, no?










Not sure how history would be a factor here -- stop copying other independent luthiers' design statements.


----------



## StevenC (Apr 10, 2019)

possumkiller said:


> Also, who was it that was making copies of Fenders and Gibsons way back in the 70s when Fender and Gibson solidbodies were still only in their 20s? People like Paul Reed Smith, Wayne Charvel, Dean Zelinsky?


You're still missing narad's point.

It's one thing to get a KL, because a KL is way better than a Gibson and you pay more to get a way better guitar. Getting Ran to build a KL isn't cool because you're just looking for a cheaper KL. I've played a Ran and I've played some KLs. The KLs were way better.

The point of Charvel and PRS was an attempt to make the Strat and the LP better and more relevant to modern players than guitars of the 50s. The difference is between a knock off and an improvement.


----------



## narad (Apr 10, 2019)

possumkiller said:


> All I'm saying is a copy is a copy regardless of how expensive it is or where it is made. Why people feel the need to shit on some builders because they build affordable copies of guitars for people in their home market (the literal exact same way Ibanez and ESP started out btw) is beyond me. It just comes off as some kind of cork-sniffing snobbery to me. EDIT: Or I should say more comes off as religious people cherry picking which parts of the bible they want to follow and to whom it applies.



You're entitled to your opinion, but I'm not obliged to see it in black-or-white copy-is-a-copy. Ken's making ~12 guitars a year and you're going to rip off his design? Lame. Being in Poland doesn't excuse it IMO. 

Regarding these Ibanez / ESP bits, ripping off the huge companies, couldn't care less.


----------



## narad (Apr 10, 2019)

And they definitely deserve some criticism for putting Ken's headstock on this abomination:





When copyng KL isn't enough, and you just need more brands...


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Apr 10, 2019)

narad said:


> And they definitely deserve some criticism for putting Ken's headstock on this abomination:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



How meta.


----------



## narad (Apr 10, 2019)

MaxOfMetal said:


> How meta.



There I go again, not understanding the satire.


----------



## possumkiller (Apr 10, 2019)

StevenC said:


> You're still missing narad's point.
> 
> It's one thing to get a KL, because a KL is way better than a Gibson and you pay more to get a way better guitar. Getting Ran to build a KL isn't cool because you're just looking for a cheaper KL. I've played a Ran and I've played some KLs. The KLs were way better.
> 
> The point of Charvel and PRS was an attempt to make the Strat and the LP better and more relevant to modern players than guitars of the 50s. The difference is between a knock off and an improvement.


ESP? Ibanez? Tokai? Those were all cheaper ways to get a Gibson, Fender, or Jackson design.



narad said:


> You're entitled to your opinion, but I'm not obliged to see it in black-or-white copy-is-a-copy. Ken's making ~12 guitars a year and you're going to rip off his design? Lame. Being in Poland doesn't excuse it IMO.
> 
> Regarding these Ibanez / ESP bits, ripping off the huge companies, couldn't care less.



Gibson maybe. Not really. They weren't as huge then as they are now. Fender was a small builder all the way up until CBS took over. How many guitars does RAN make per year?

If being in Poland doesn't excuse it, then being in the UK, US, or Japan shouldn't excuse it either.


----------



## Isurez (Apr 10, 2019)

I do not understand where this discussion is going. Ran Guitars will not build a guitar anymore. Neither Skervesen Guitars nor Blackat Guitars offer such guitars as those presented in your posts. Besides, Ran Guitars stopped building copies when Crusher was introduced from what I know. Perhaps this contributed to his financial problems because people wanted to order such guitars. So I have one question: is it the Darek's fault that he was building them or people who wanted to order copies?


----------



## Wolfhorsky (Apr 10, 2019)

narad said:


> This is RAN, no?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This is actually very bad example. Their V is their own design. The other post with a copy is another issue: some customers want them to make a one off copy of other guitar.


----------



## narad (Apr 10, 2019)

possumkiller said:


> Gibson maybe. Not really. They weren't as huge then as they are now. Fender was a small builder all the way up until CBS took over. How many guitars does RAN make per year?
> 
> If being in Poland doesn't excuse it, then being in the UK, US, or Japan shouldn't excuse it either.



In fact, you use Dylan as an example. But I recall when a customer wanted a Vik-style headstock on his weird tele-style Daemoness, Dylan contacted Vik to make sure it was okay. Did RAN contact KL to copy his headstock?

I mean, Dylan doesn't get flack, because he doesn't do shit like this.



Wolfhorsky said:


> This is actually very bad example. Their V is their own design. The other post with a copy is another issue: some customers want them to make a one off copy of other guitar.



It's the headstock. They copied the headstock from a small builder in California.


----------



## StevenC (Apr 10, 2019)

Wolfhorsky said:


> This is actually very bad example. Their V is their own design. The other post with a copy is another issue: some customers want them to make a one off copy of other guitar.


A one off, four times


----------



## possumkiller (Apr 10, 2019)

narad said:


> I mean, Dylan doesn't get flack, because he doesn't do shit like this.
> 
> 
> 
> It's the headstock. They copied the headstock from a small builder in California.


Like what? Build copies of guitars? Did he get permission from Jackson or ESP to copy their headstocks? So it is fine to copy a headstock from any guitar unless it is a small builder? Where is the line for that? How many guitars do you have to build before your headstock design is ok to be copied?

So does this make the Crusher headstock off limits to other builders?


----------



## Sogradde (Apr 10, 2019)

Did they offer the headstock as a regular option or were those specifically requested by the person ordering the guitar?


----------



## possumkiller (Apr 10, 2019)

Sogradde said:


> Did they offer the headstock as a regular option or were those specifically requested by the person ordering the guitar?


It was never on their order form. Copies had to be specifically requested.


----------



## Isurez (Apr 10, 2019)

Sogradde said:


> Did they offer the headstock as a regular option or were those specifically requested by the person ordering the guitar?


By the person. Darek openly refused to build a copy a few years ago but people were still asking about them so he started to ask for some huge sums for such guitars to get rid of such ideas. I'm not a defender of Darek. I just know it because we talked about it a long time ago.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Apr 10, 2019)

All the whataboutism in the world isn't going to make it cool that RAN stole KL's headstock. Period. Done. That's it.

Let's move along.


----------



## narad (Apr 10, 2019)

possumkiller said:


> Like what? Build copies of guitars? Did he get permission from Jackson or ESP to copy their headstocks? So it is fine to copy a headstock from any guitar unless it is a small builder? Where is the line for that? How many guitars do you have to build before your headstock design is ok to be copied?
> 
> So does this make the Crusher headstock off limits to other builders?



Yea, I'm not trying to like pass legislation here. Just saying, RAN got a lot of shit for copying stuff because most people will see the difference between copying a Jackson and copying some small builder's super unique headstock. And RAN got a lot of shit for producing tons of copies and not any of their own designs. Not because they're Polish.

For the most part, I had a lot of respect for RAN in the recent years, the Crusher was just a carve top superstrat, but clear attempts were made for it to be "it's own" design. I can look at just the body and declare, yup, that's a RAN. But the way they got started was shitty, and has NO BEARING on Daemoness at all. You're not going to confuse an Atlantean with anything (which was there at the start), and in terms of artistry, you're not going to confuse any of his shapes with any other builder.

And yea, I would say the Crusher headstock should have been off-limits as RAN was trying to establish their own designs. Moot point now. But not really sure anyone would copy it when they could just copy a Caparison.



MaxOfMetal said:


> All the whataboutism in the world isn't going to make it cool that RAN stole KL's headstock. Period. Done. That's it.
> 
> Let's move along.



Yea, probably better said than the big post.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Apr 10, 2019)

narad said:


> You're not going to confuse an Atlantean with anything



Let's keep it that way.


----------



## narad (Apr 10, 2019)

MaxOfMetal said:


> Let's keep it that way.



I think I'm the only one that ordered one :'(


----------



## diagrammatiks (Apr 10, 2019)

The Atlantean is clearly a copy of a half downloaded photo of an ebmm majesty


----------



## possumkiller (Apr 10, 2019)

MaxOfMetal said:


> All the whataboutism in the world isn't going to make it cool that RAN stole KL's headstock. Period. Done. That's it.
> 
> Let's move along.


I guess that is how to end an argument you can't win? 
The FACT is that just about every builder apart from the original 50s builders got their start building copies. I'm not saying RAN should or shouldn't have made copies. I am just saying some people have a very weird and arbitrary way of defining what is and isn't acceptable when making copies.


narad said:


> But the way they got started was shitty, and has NO BEARING on Daemoness at all. You're not going to confuse an Atlantean with anything (which was there at the start), and in terms of artistry, you're not going to confuse any of his shapes with any other builder.







There is an Explorer and BRJ Vixen copy as well but the pics were too big to fit.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Apr 10, 2019)

possumkiller said:


> I guess that is how to end an argument you can't win?
> The FACT is that just about every builder apart from the original 50s builders got their start building copies. I'm not saying RAN should or shouldn't have made copies. I am just saying some people have a very weird and arbitrary way of defining what is and isn't acceptable when making copies.
> 
> View attachment 68434
> ...



Weird how RAN guitars copies came up in a RAN Guitars thread. 

Or do we have to prefix everything with a list of everybody else who might or might not have committed a "no no"? 

I don't think anything has been overly arbitrary, it's just not going in your favor so it's easier to ignore the detailed examples and explanations and still hammer home the same false equivalency. 

No one care who copies Gibson or Fender or Jackson in contemporary times. What people do care about is when small builders are treated the same way. 

But, it's not like this is some official shit. We're just nobodies bullshitting about guitars. Relax. 

Again: move on. No one's minds are changing here. RAN is done. It's all moot.


----------



## narad (Apr 10, 2019)

possumkiller said:


> I guess that is how to end an argument you can't win?



You can just start a thread specific to that purpose, and I'll just follow you there. Maybe these posts can be moved?

But yea, Daemoness didn't get it's start making mindless copies. Original headstock from day 1. Moved into his own full body designs after his first 3-4 guitars. He does do the usual bodies that everyone copies, but even those are heavily Daemonized. And he doesn't copy things from contemporary builders in the business without asking. You want to say copies are copies, but there are just glaringly obvious differences between how RAN operated and how Dylan operates. It's not that people are judging the brands -- who behave identically -- unfairly. They approach company ethics in vastly different ways. That's the last I'll say about it here.


----------



## Kleks (Apr 10, 2019)

Isurez said:


> I do not understand where this discussion is going.



Very fair point, this thread turned into a spam discussion, but these are all long term members with 10k posts, so that's fine. 

NOT.



Isurez said:


> Ran Guitars will not build a guitar anymore.



That's what I said couple of days ago, but apparently it was heavily suspicious cause I had a Ran avatar and I'm new to forum.

Just my 5 cents - I absolutely love my Ran guitar and finding out they're gone and dead as a company really brought me down. 

I'm a Pole so it took me quite a while to save money for my Invader, but finally I received it last year and it's the most perfectly built and finished guitar I have ever had, truly cherish this one. 
Reading "they copy this, they copy that" is heavily off topic. Sorry guys, but no one cares what you think of Ran, and this thread is not about that at all.


----------



## 7 Strings of Hate (Apr 10, 2019)

I just read a few pages of possum killer making the rest of you look like fools lol


----------



## narad (Apr 10, 2019)

Kleks said:


> Very fair point, this thread turned into a spam discussion, but these are all long term members with 10k posts, so that's fine.
> 
> NOT.



Wayne's World's just making it to Poland now?


----------



## Kleks (Apr 10, 2019)

narad said:


> Wayne's World's just making it to Poland now?



How funny, I bet you're king of every party you attend...


----------



## BrutalRob (Apr 10, 2019)

@7 Strings of Hate totally with you on this one


----------



## Jebe- (Apr 10, 2019)

Great to see people, luthiers and/or companies helping each other out!

And it may be just me, but I can't wrap my head around if narad is trying to be funny or just trying to pick a fight.


----------



## narad (Apr 10, 2019)

Jebe- said:


> Great to see people, luthiers and/or companies helping each other out!
> 
> And it may be just me, but I can't wrap my head around if narad is trying to be funny or just trying to pick a fight.



I will point out some facts:

1) I did not bring up the discussion about copying.

2) In that discussion, I am simply pointing out that RAN has a history throughout their career of copying design ideas that are synonymous with other small builders, and that this is something other small builders often refuse to do, or at least ask permission for. 

3) I don't like then being moderated to not have this conversation by someone who just joined the forum last week and is not OP, in a similarly snooty manner. I didn't start the fire, I'm just joining it.

But anyway, I'm out. Always wind up posting a lot, maybe too much, when about to pull the trigger on new gear and all my browser tabs are SSO.


----------



## Wolfhorsky (Apr 10, 2019)

StevenC said:


> A one off, four times


Four times? I feel corrected. But easy with that hatred. 99% companies started by making copies.


----------



## Fred the Shred (Apr 10, 2019)

Oh sweet, the "why many people dislike small builders being copied and don't equate that to big brand copies" discussion again.

Anyhoo, great move from the other Polish builders. I'd shower them with praise if this NAMM a single one of them had got me some Soplica.


----------



## StevenC (Apr 10, 2019)

Wolfhorsky said:


> Four times? I feel corrected. But easy with that hatred. 99% companies started by making copies.


Yeah, you're probably right. But there's a difference between making one or two knock offs at the start and a mature business built around it.


----------



## ArtDecade (Apr 10, 2019)

StevenC said:


> Yeah, you're probably right. But there's a difference between making one or two knock offs at the start and a mature business built around it.



JHS


----------



## diagrammatiks (Apr 10, 2019)

ArtDecade said:


> JHS



If it’s for worship then it’s ok.


----------



## StevenC (Apr 10, 2019)

ArtDecade said:


> JHS


Much like with amps, there's only so many circuits.


----------



## ArtDecade (Apr 10, 2019)

StevenC said:


> Much like with amps, there's only so many circuits.



*Copying a circuit and claiming it as your own is different than cloning.* JHS straight took credit for a Devi Ever design and was called out for it by Devi. Then, the whole DIY community took it upon themselves to find that every circuit JHS claimed as their own "_after extensive R&R_" was absolute BS. No one cares if you copy/clone. Just give credit where credit is due. JHS and Co. are toss-pots.


----------



## Kleks (Apr 10, 2019)

ArtDecade said:


> *Copying a circuit and claiming it as your own is different than cloning.* JHS straight took credit for a Devi Ever design and was called out for it by Devi. Then, the whole DIY community took it upon themselves to find that every circuit JHS claimed as their own "_after extensive R&R_" was absolute BS. No one cares if you copy/clone. Just give credit where credit is due. JHS and Co. are toss-pots.



And what that has to do with Ran closing down?


----------



## ArtDecade (Apr 10, 2019)

Kleks said:


> And what that has to do with Ran closing down?



Read the thread and see where people started discussing cloning. You have 7 posts - I am not here to do summaries for you.


----------



## StevenC (Apr 10, 2019)

ArtDecade said:


> *Copying a circuit and claiming it as your own is different than cloning.* JHS straight took credit for a Devi Ever design and was called out for it by Devi. Then, the whole DIY community took it upon themselves to find that every circuit JHS claimed as their own "_after extensive R&R_" was absolute BS. No one cares if you copy/clone. Just give credit where credit is due. JHS and Co. are toss-pots.


Didn't know about that. My experience of JHS has been fairly recent and all the cloning has been upfront and honest. Thanks for the info.


----------



## 7 Strings of Hate (Apr 10, 2019)

ArtDecade said:


> Read the thread and see where people started discussing cloning. You have 7 posts - I am not here to do summaries for you.


Telling him to read the thread is fine but this high school drama clique bullshit of judging people on post counts is probably a little bit of a short sighted way to go about things. Actually never mind I have twice as many posts as you so that means I’m way better than you lol. I subscribe to the system now


----------



## ArtDecade (Apr 10, 2019)

7 Strings of Hate said:


> Telling him to read the thread is fine



The Edge Lord giveth. 



7 Strings of Hate said:


> but this high school drama clique bullshit of judging people on post counts is probably a little bit of a short sighted way to go about things. Actually never mind I have twice as many posts as you so that means I’m way better than you lol. I subscribe to the system now



The Edge Lord taketh away.


----------



## Jonathan20022 (Apr 10, 2019)

This is a little more than petty guys, at this point having a side discussion somewhere else about it would be a much more productive debate. 

I've talked about copies and such with Narad before, and I've never put thought into the morality of it until our discussion. And in our context it was about brands copying the general blackmachine silhouette, which is similar in some regards because Blackmachines were completely unavailable so some companies, including Skervesen copied the design 1:1. Others put their own spin on the design which I find more acceptable.

In general direct copies in places that have next to no chance of securing the product being copied is generally harmless in my eyes. There's several accounts of people saving up for a RAN in this thread for a long period of time, if one of those folks wants a Blackmachine I highly doubt many would save 3 - 4x the amount to buy a Blackmachine. Nor be lucky enough to secure a build whenever a batch does get finished at random like they have been. Someone who was never going to buy a Blackmachine securing a copy of it does no harm to the original luthier because them being a customer of the original is already very unlikely.

This is also an entirely subjective matter, so there's no objective line to draw. Narad doesn't support certain luthiers because of certain hobbies, and while I don't see eye to eye with that he has every right to. @possumkiller How would you feel about RAN copying a Regius headstock or body, and providing it at their price point vs the Mayones price point. Not only would it be producing a "cheaper" Regius, but one from a neighboring partner, I don't think the comparisons have to end at Daemoness/Gibson, etc. I'd argue you also have a personal line in the sand you can say would be too much of a copy for you to feel comfortable with.

I'd have zero gripes with someone copying Darren's (decibel) designs, it's still wrong but as subjective as the point is I'd have less problems with it because Darren is a scumbag who abused his clientele.


----------



## possumkiller (Apr 10, 2019)

Jonathan20022 said:


> @possumkiller How would you feel about RAN copying a Regius headstock or body, and providing it at their price point vs the Mayones price point. Not only would it be producing a "cheaper" Regius, but one from a neighboring partner, I don't think the comparisons have to end at Daemoness/Gibson, etc. I'd argue you also have a personal line in the sand you can say would be too much of a copy for you to feel comfortable with.


Considering 90% of the population in Poland can't afford Mayones since they blew up internationally and raised prices, I wouldn't be surprised and wouldn't blame them. The only thing is Mayones only does their own designs now which are further away from traditional designs. People here pretty much still want traditional stuff like Fender, Gibson, PRS, and Jackson type shapes. Only now it's easier to get your hands on a decent budget import version of these so I don't think they can even compete pricewise anymore.


----------



## Ordacleaphobia (Apr 10, 2019)

possumkiller said:


> *Considering 90% of the population in Poland can't afford Mayones since they blew up internationally and raised prices, I wouldn't be surprised and wouldn't blame them. *The only thing is Mayones only does their own designs now which are further away from traditional designs. People here pretty much still want traditional stuff like Fender, Gibson, PRS, and Jackson type shapes. Only now it's easier to get your hands on a decent budget import version of these so I don't think they can even compete pricewise anymore.



I thought this debate was over but since it's still going I may as well throw my hat in.
The bolded part is way more important than most on this site give credit to. People just like certain aesthetics. People also have a finite amount of capital. Even someone like myself who is a major guitar nut and recognizes / desires quality craftsmanship cannot afford to buy something like a Mayones. It doesn't matter if I want to or not, I mathematically cannot do it without some *major *reallocation of priorities. So where is the harm in me buying a guitar that looks, feels, and quacks like a Mayones, but isn't?

People say it's poor form to rip from smaller luthiers because they put blood, sweat, and tears into their brand and reputation, they make design improvements, their level of quality is higher, etc. But this feels like a null argument to me (in this context- individually these statements are true). Lets run with the Mayones example. If I want a Mayones, I want a Mayones for 1 of 3 reasons:

I know Mayones builds excellent, bulletproof guitars and I want an instrument that will not let me down.
I love the look of the Setius / Regius / Duvell / etc.
I'm shallow and want one because they're "cool" right now.
Looking at this list, which of these reasons REQUIRE a genuine Mayones guitar? Only #1. Coincidentally, I would argue that that's the biggest selling point for their entire brand.
Quality.
You can't impersonate quality.

I've said this on this forum dozens of times by now- I am a mega Blackmachine fan. I have never seen a design that speaks to me the way the Blackmachine shape does.
Realistically, will I in the foreseeable future be able to purchase one? No, absolutely not; but I _want_ to. Because while I can have my copy, I know the quality of the original will remain a factor of what I want. The nuances and attention to detail are missed by the impersonators- the lip on the headstock is off, the body is too thick, the headstock is too short, the gap the strings stretch over is too shallow, etc- let alone quality that affects playability. Siggery, Mercer, and the like had a draw to people like me, because they (mostly, lets not get carried away) got the design right, and the quality was 'good enough'. Now, if I had the means? I would have my B2, no question.

You let the quality of your brand set you apart. If looks are enough I'll go copy. If I need the whole package, I'd get the genuine article. The guy that buys the RAN Regius wants a Regius, but needs a guitar that's still great. The guy that buys a Regius wants the full package, top tier everything.

Unless it's a straight up forgery, I don't have any defense of those at all.


----------



## lurè (Apr 10, 2019)

You can rip off all the headstocks and designs you want but if you can't provide quality with your instruments, well, your business won't last very long.


----------



## coreypla (Apr 10, 2019)

Dear Isurez,

Would I be able to talk to you about this at all? I had tried messaging you.



Isurez said:


> I was not going into details, but this is one of the solutions we use. Also there is no split so if you paid for example 900 EUR deposit then this entire deposit goes to your Skervesen Guitars build.


----------



## Fred the Shred (Apr 10, 2019)

My one gripe with this whole copy ethics discussion is that it's taking place here, on a topic where companies are helping the customers of another company that is going through tremendous financial stress get actual guitars built. 

The morals of the copy thing are incredibly varied, and while I have my own share of past gripes with RAN copies, they are totally irrelevant given the topic at hand. This sort of thing is fuel for some really interesting debate, but this is like debating the merits or faults of BRJs when shit hit the fan and people were completely in the dark regarding what the fate of their money would be.


----------



## SDMFVan (Apr 11, 2019)

I remember them making a slew of these back in the day too...


----------



## diagrammatiks (Apr 11, 2019)

I don’t care about copying at all. 

Just thought I’d throw that out there.


----------



## Lorcan Ward (Apr 11, 2019)

All I know is the Ibby copy someone got her years ago is what got me interested in custom guitars in the first place.


----------



## prlgmnr (Apr 11, 2019)

diagrammatiks said:


> I don’t care about copying at all.
> 
> Just thought I’d throw that out there.


I don't think you're the first person in here to not care about copying.


----------



## Albake21 (Apr 11, 2019)

Lorcan Ward said:


> All I know is the Ibby copy someone got her years ago is what got me interested in custom guitars in the first place.


Whoa..... be right back, gonna go start some plans to build a custom RGA.


----------



## LeviathanKiller (Apr 11, 2019)

Albake21 said:


> Whoa..... be right back, gonna go start some plans to build a custom RGA.


Same


----------



## Viginez (Apr 11, 2019)

those aren't straight copies 1:1. 
most of them are copies with custom specs, which you can't get from the original brand.
like people want their guitar with a floyd, more frets, different fretboard etc, specced to their liking.
i don't think the major brands were hurt in any form if someone builds a few "copies".
to me it's a grey area for sure, but not as bad as copying it straight, with the logo etc.


----------



## jephjacques (Apr 11, 2019)

That RGA fuckin owns


----------



## narad (Apr 11, 2019)

Lorcan Ward said:


> All I know is the Ibby copy someone got her years ago is what got me interested in custom guitars in the first place.



Weirdly enough that has the deeper cutaway contours I've only seen on the Broderick LACS. Wonder if they modeled it after that.


----------



## Jonathan20022 (Apr 11, 2019)

That photo took me back to finding this this


----------



## Spicypickles (Apr 11, 2019)

Not much to say on the subject, but I will miss the bolt on porn they produce, best neck joints in the biz


----------



## Merrekof (Apr 12, 2019)

First Ran I saw was an Ibby RBM copy, but Ibby don't make them any more so good copying is a good thing for the fans of the model, I guess. Ibanez isn't gonna lose a cent because of it.
After the whole "who copied who" discussion, I'm still wondering what happened to Ran. I find it hard to believe that relocation is a reason to quit an entire business. Did the guy behind Ran get a job offer he couldn't refuse? Did he get sick? Retirement? Financial problems? Never played a Ran but I hear or read nothing but good things about them.


----------



## Isurez (Apr 12, 2019)

What difference does it make? I mean honestly, will it change anything? This is Darek's private affair. A lot of different things had accumulated and he had no influence on most of them. Wondering and gossiping will not help at all.

The only thing I can say is that whole situation hurts me especially when you take into account fact that I was very close to ordering a guitar from him because the quality of his work was unbelievable. Legend.


----------



## Merrekof (Apr 12, 2019)

It does not make any difference at all, you are right. It was just out of curiosity.


----------



## c7spheres (Apr 12, 2019)

Albake21 said:


> Whoa..... be right back, gonna go start some plans to build a custom RGA.





Albake21 said:


> Whoa..... be right back, gonna go start some plans to build a custom RGA.


Let us know if you find someone willing to actually do it. I'm looking for someone to make a duplicate of my main axe. I was talking with Ran guitars about doing a copy of my custom and they would no longer do an Ibby headstock so I was going to ask them to do something close which I could later modify into the shape. I was saving up for it when all this went down, so bitter sweet that I luckily didn't lose any money. Let us know if you find someone willing to actuallyy do it. I went to my original builder, Ron Blake, but he since retired from full builds. I was definately the first person I know of to have an Rga like these built. At least 5-6 years before any LACS or Rga models were released. I'm not not bragging, just saying, It was the only one on the internet or that I ever heard of for years, then they started popping up once Ibby released them. If anything Ibby copied me  The closest thing at the time was an ESP. It's an Ed Roman (I know, let's not start on an Ed Roman rant please) built by Alan Dreher and Ron Blake. Ron did many customs for all the big names, they even did ghost builds for the LACS and never got credit because they are ghost builds. The man is a master and it was really sad to hear he doesn't do full builds any more. I think he's in his mid 70's now. Here's some pron. It's a black Limba Body, 3pc hard maple neck, full double edge system and hardware from an rg2027xvv made in 1999 a year before they were released, with EMG's , ebony fretboard and custom inlay. The neck profile is even nicer than the rg2027xvv was. 20 years later, It is still solid, though it has some battle scars, every one of which I kicked myself in the ass for, but this is a player guitar. I refuse to put it in a glass box and stare at it, that would be guitar abuse, but I do need a backup for it, so anyone who knows of a godd luthier that will do this, please tell! Also has a french polished ebony vaneer headstock, it's a 3/4" maple flame top with a thick ebony vanneer on the headstock to.
View attachment 68474


----------



## c7spheres (Apr 12, 2019)

prlgmnr said:


> I don't think you're the first person in here to not care about copying.


I say copy. None of these companies will make a guitar like this. They are all custom. If they refuse for over 20 years now to make these guitars then it's not copying, it's filling a need in the market. I think it's stupid that companies can even copyright their headstock shapes. As long as it is not sold as something it's not, then it shouldn't be protected, imo. Especially Ibanez, they didn't care when they ripped off Gibson and they won't make any options available either. I've been saying it for over 20 years, and they never come out with something that checks all the boxes, at any cost. stop making so many damn guitars with weird stuff (like a 7 string bass where the bottom 2 strings are fretless) and start giving me real quality options I can use. I should be able to just order the parts I want at least and build the guitar I want, dare I say like Keisel, No let's not even start on that subject now! I swear, i'm not trying to start trouble. Tone wood! just kidding.


----------



## Albake21 (Apr 12, 2019)

c7spheres said:


> View attachment 68476
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I meant making one myself.


----------



## Lorcan Ward (Apr 12, 2019)

narad said:


> Weirdly enough that has the deeper cutaway contours I've only seen on the Broderick LACS. Wonder if they modeled it after that.












Its similar anyway and the regular RGA doesn't have them.


----------



## jephjacques (Apr 12, 2019)

They're actually more similar to the contours on their carved-top Crusher models. A nice bit of Ran/Ibanez synthesis!


----------



## Albake21 (Apr 12, 2019)

Broderick's RGA is still one of my all time favorites. I wish more companies made white stained tops, but I know it's a difficult process.


----------



## Velokki (Apr 12, 2019)

That RGA is one super classy guitar. I think the best thing about small builders is that you could ask someone to imitate an existing design, but make it your own in the ways you want. I don't think Ibanez lost any customers due to RAN. If anything, smaller luthiers' unique takes on their designs should serve as an R&D/market research platform and a promotional tool for the bigger brand. If someone made amazing variations of existing Ibanez designs in a smaller shop, and people would be interested in them, it would be easy for Ibanez to just take the formula and apply it on production guitars the next year.

Anyway, now I want a black RGA with white binding...


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Apr 12, 2019)

Velokki said:


> That RGA is one super classy guitar. I think the best thing about small builders is that you could ask someone to imitate an existing design, but make it your own in the ways you want. I don't think Ibanez lost any customers due to RAN. If anything, smaller luthiers' unique takes on their designs should serve as an R&D/market research platform and a promotional tool for the bigger brand. If someone made amazing variations of existing Ibanez designs in a smaller shop, and people would be interested in them, it would be easy for Ibanez to just take the formula and apply it on production guitars the next year.
> 
> Anyway, now I want a black RGA with white binding...



That's kind of how it already works, and it's not really industry specific to guitars. 

Small shops innovate, as they're much more agile (typically) and due to market factors they need to innovate to stay above water. 

When they hit on a great idea the larger manufacturers come in and use their supply chain muscle to make said innovation cheaper and faster to implement, which makes it more available to more buyers. 

So the little guy is better at new ideas and the big guy is better at making them happen.


----------



## Velokki (Apr 12, 2019)

MaxOfMetal said:


> That's kind of how it already works, and it's not really industry specific to guitars.
> 
> Small shops innovate, as they're much more agile (typically) and due to market factors they need to innovate to stay above water.
> 
> ...



Yeah. This is going off topic, but look at companies like Thermo Fischer. That company is basically only a sum of its acquisitions! There's like 200 companies they own, and really have no R&D of their own these days. They are very proficient in scouting new companies and regularly buy new startups and younger companies' innovations to their product portfolio. It's really effective and probably the wisest way to operate such a company.

Guitars work differently, but it only makes sense that exactly what you described is happening 

Talking about innovation, I wonder if some bigger company comes up with a mass-produced, cheaper version of a resin-guitar like Aristides, and in more traditional shapes (than Aristides). That could be something. Imagine a Jackson Soloist or an ESP Horizon that resonates like hell and sustains forever!


----------



## BlacKat Guitars (Apr 12, 2019)

We had a fairly big company (US Music Corp) acquire Parker guitars, this didn't work too well. Gibson owning Steinberger is another garbage fire.


----------



## StevenC (Apr 12, 2019)

BlacKat Guitars said:


> We had a fairly big company (US Music Corp) acquire Parker guitars, this didn't work too well. Gibson owning Steinberger is another garbage fire.


Were either of those companies ever profitable? Parkers were incredibly expensive to build and no one would pay that price, and Steinberger was 3 decades before headless guitars caught on in any meaningful way.

It's not mismanagement if there's no market for this stuff.


----------



## jephjacques (Apr 12, 2019)

And Gibson is run by idiots, which doesn't help.


----------



## diagrammatiks (Apr 12, 2019)

StevenC said:


> Were either of those companies ever profitable? Parkers were incredibly expensive to build and no one would pay that price, and Steinberger was 3 decades before headless guitars caught on in any meaningful way.
> 
> It's not mismanagement if there's no market for this stuff.



I mean if you acquire a company that has no market that’s mismanagement.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Apr 12, 2019)

StevenC said:


> Were either of those companies ever profitable? Parkers were incredibly expensive to build and no one would pay that price, and Steinberger was 3 decades before headless guitars caught on in any meaningful way.
> 
> It's not mismanagement if there's no market for this stuff.



The rest of their brands aren't in such a pretty state. Randall and Washburn don't have a lot going on at all.


----------



## soldierkahn (Apr 12, 2019)

Isurez said:


> It is worth mentioning that one of the main goals of whole action is to get rid of fears about ordering guitars from Polish manufactures. We never treated Tomek from Blackat Guitars or Darek from Ran Guitars as our competition. We could always count on the help of both of them. We have built a network of local interests between which there is a certain unwritten mutual assistance agreement. These are manufacturers of guitar cases, hardware parts, timber/wood warehouses, etc. This initiative is the result of various situations related to this whole guitar-building related business. Of course, customers are in the first place in all of this. @Wolfhorsky and @BlacKat Guitars were faster than me to pay attention to it. Thanks Wojtek, thanks Tomek.
> 
> 
> 
> I was not going into details, but this is one of the solutions we use. Also there is no split so if you paid for example 900 EUR deposit then this entire deposit goes to your Skervesen Guitars build.




I think you guys and gals are all doing a fantastic job in removing that fear, or at least reducing it significantly. Knowing that putting in a RAN order or a Skerv order, that it will come to fruition in some manner, is definitely a sigh of relief for a lot!


----------



## soldierkahn (Apr 12, 2019)

Lorcan Ward said:


> All I know is the Ibby copy someone got her years ago is what got me interested in custom guitars in the first place.



this was the exact reason i even started researching into Ran, and then Daemoness. I wanted to find someone who could make pretty much what you posted, with ebony and trem lol. Ive always dreamed of "certain specs" and Ran was delivering all of those when they were making the aboves.... too bad i missed the train years and years ago. I want to give Daemoness a LOT of credit, because when I was talking with him and his reps, he was willing to nail EVERYTHING i asked for, minus the reverse Ibanez headstock. He was even willing to go as far as to have a Skype session with me so we could design one that was super close, but i ended up letting him know that waiting 5 years for the build, i could only endure that if i could get everything i was asking for. But .... ill never stop searching.

not only was he super supportive, he said he was actually excited with my build and dug my specs. i was in awe


----------



## soldierkahn (Apr 12, 2019)

c7spheres said:


> View attachment 68476
> 
> 
> 
> ...



following lol


----------



## c7spheres (Apr 12, 2019)

Albake21 said:


> I meant making one myself.


Wow, Wish I had those skills and tools. Do you build for others? I may be interested in the future of having a body clone built of my main guitar I posted above.


----------



## Albake21 (Apr 13, 2019)

c7spheres said:


> Wow, Wish I had those skills and tools. Do you build for others? I may be interested in the future of having a body clone built of my main guitar I posted above.


Maybe when I get a bit better at the craft I'll start building stuff for others. As of right now, I'm still new and I'm just trying to better my craft.


----------



## c7spheres (Apr 13, 2019)

Albake21 said:


> Maybe when I get a bit better at the craft I'll start building stuff for others. As of right now, I'm still new and I'm just trying to better my craft.


Thanks!


----------



## soldierkahn (Apr 14, 2019)

Albake21 said:


> Maybe when I get a bit better at the craft I'll start building stuff for others. As of right now, I'm still new and I'm just trying to better my craft.



definitely cant hate on that. im still working out the bugs in making just a simple replacement body for my XL. Was gong to have someone else do it for a while, but with as rare as they are, i dont feel comfortable shipping them to someone and praying i get them back lol. about the only change im making spec wise is the bodywood, and im not routing for a trem.


----------



## Ziricote (Apr 15, 2019)

Wow I read this thread and very happy I never jump on custom run last year. Its funny how some guys tell other guys its ok give ran the break because they have hard time with luthiers and rent. I'm advise people to not give a shit about their reasons. The only thing you should give shit about is your money. Does your teacher care why you didnt do homework? If you are always late or dont go in to work, do your bosses care your reason? If I was customer here then I dont care reason, i only care my personal money. Skervesen try to make offers is just them try to capitalize on situations here. Nobody wants to be forced to buy Skervesen. Thats like buying something you dont want only because its on sale. That is how you waste money. For sure there is more than you know here going on. The Ran company took money and that is all that matters. Why it happen really doesnt matter. They not your friends, they took money. Go with large companies now. These small company luthiers arent worth hassles. It happens so often. For Poland I go with Mayones, or I go with the ESP, Schecter or maybe the Jackson shop! There are small luthiers who produce good stuff, but pick wisely and never accept excuses. Its always the smaller luthiers who have excuses. I advise luthiers to stop w the excuses. People want guitars or money back. If you cant produce either then you are a crook. There is only this way to look at it. Its business


----------



## Wolfhorsky (Apr 15, 2019)

Ziricote said:


> Skervesen try to make offers is just them try to capitalize on situations here. Nobody wants to be forced to buy Skervesen. Thats like buying something you dont want only because its on sale. That is how you waste money. For sure there is more than you know here going on...


Easy, cowboy ;-)
You have freedom of speech, but Your opinions are just Your opinions - not facts.
Or should I say: You know shit and keep talkin’


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Apr 15, 2019)

Wolfhorsky said:


> Easy, cowboy ;-)
> You have freedom of speech, but Your opinions are just Your opinions - not facts.
> Or should I say: You know shit and keep talkin’



I know there's a feeling of national pride for you guys, but if you, and anyone in here, continues to attack anyone who even so much as mentions another Polish builder you're all getting banned. Got it? Good.


----------



## LeviathanKiller (Apr 15, 2019)

Ziricote said:


> Wow I read this thread and very happy I never jump on custom run last year. Its funny how some guys tell other guys its ok give ran the break because they have hard time with luthiers and rent. I'm advise people to not give a shit about their reasons. The only thing you should give shit about is your money. Does your teacher care why you didnt do homework? If you are always late or dont go in to work, do your bosses care your reason? If I was customer here then I dont care reason, i only care my personal money. Skervesen try to make offers is just them try to capitalize on situations here. Nobody wants to be forced to buy Skervesen. Thats like buying something you dont want only because its on sale. That is how you waste money. For sure there is more than you know here going on. The Ran company took money and that is all that matters. Why it happen really doesnt matter. They not your friends, they took money. Go with large companies now. These small company luthiers arent worth hassles. It happens so often. For Poland I go with Mayones, or I go with the ESP, Schecter or maybe the Jackson shop! There are small luthiers who produce good stuff, but pick wisely and never accept excuses. Its always the smaller luthiers who have excuses. I advise luthiers to stop w the excuses. People want guitars or money back. If you cant produce either then you are a crook. There is only this way to look at it. Its business



When you deal with small luthiers you are dealing with people quite personally. Those people are subject to circumstances of life like sickness, and so on that tie them up where large companies just simply use another person or backup person. This is a huge con for dealing with small shops/luthiers BUT having such a personal relationship with them is also why many people choose them. You often talk directly to the person who's going to be hand-making your instrument and they are personally invested in seeing that you are happy with what they made you. For some people that's all worth it, for some people it's not. _That_ is the advice I would give anyone considering this choice. Big shops did not simply exist spontaneously, they grew from small shops with customer interest. Some make it, some don't.

Also, no one is being _forced _to transfer their deposit to Skervesen or any other builder. It's just an easy-out option for those interested in such a thing.


----------



## cip 123 (Apr 15, 2019)

Ziricote said:


> Skervesen try to make offers is just them try to capitalize on situations here. Nobody wants to be forced to buy Skervesen. Thats like buying something you dont want only because its on sale. That is how you waste money.



No one is being forced to buy a Skerv. Plus they have a good reputation so even if you went that option you can always flip it.


----------



## canuck brian (Apr 15, 2019)

Velokki said:


> Talking about innovation, I wonder if some bigger company comes up with a mass-produced, cheaper version of a resin-guitar like Aristides, and in more traditional shapes (than Aristides). That could be something. Imagine a Jackson Soloist or an ESP Horizon that resonates like hell and sustains forever!



They would get sued instantly Aristides, and rightfully so. Patents exist for a reason.  They're expensive because of what goes into building them and the research it took to get there. 

Also no other company would put their balls on your guitar and post it online. It really is amazing how far they go for you.

Zirocote - relax dude.


----------



## Velokki (Apr 15, 2019)

canuck brian said:


> They would get sued instantly Aristides, and rightfully so. Patents exist for a reason.  They're expensive because of what goes into building them and the research it took to get there.
> 
> Also no other company would put their balls on your guitar and post it online. It really is amazing how far they go for you.
> 
> Zirocote - relax dude.



Yeah, get what you mean, but I didn't mean _copying_ Aristides. I meant producing another kind of resin-guitar, or maybe whatever-the-heck-new-material guitar! 
Something radically different. Kinda like what Fishman did to pickups with their Fluences.

There's been very little innovation regarding guitar materials, that could be something big within the next decade.


----------



## cip 123 (Apr 15, 2019)

Velokki said:


> Yeah, get what you mean, but I didn't mean _copying_ Aristides. I meant producing another kind of resin-guitar, or maybe whatever-the-heck-new-material guitar!
> Something radically different. Kinda like what Fishman did to pickups with their Fluences.
> 
> There's been very little innovation regarding guitar materials, that could be something big within the next decade.


Status, Parker, Flaxwood, EGC, Ampeg, Steinberger, Rainsong, Composite acoustics.

It's been tried and is still happening however you run in to various problem such as - Guitarists don't like change. The materials/time to make certain non-wood instruments often leaves them being very expensive and either not justifiable to make or not justifiable for any player. Some materials make things heavy such as acrylic/resin. It's more expensive than cheap wood, like the cites rosewood debacle, we just got cheaper wood from some companies and other companies admitted that ebony isn't actually that expensive and put it on their models. Some companies that make "woods" that are sustainable are small (Rocklite, Richlite) and may not be known to large builders. You have a company like Parker in which every guitar is so complicated to make it makes a very unsustainable business. 

It's been tried, people are still trying. But no ones going to buy a Les Paul with a Resin fretboard.


----------



## narad (Apr 15, 2019)

canuck brian said:


> They would get sued instantly Aristides, and rightfully so. Patents exist for a reason.  They're expensive because of what goes into building them and the research it took to get there.



What patent is that?


----------



## cip 123 (Apr 15, 2019)

narad said:


> What patent is that?



"Using the same patented one-piece Arium construction process"
Probably the one Arsitides claim to have on their website. 

https://aristidesinstruments.com/guitar/070s/


----------



## narad (Apr 15, 2019)

cip 123 said:


> "Using the same patented one-piece Arium construction process"
> Probably the one Arsitides claim to have on their website.
> 
> https://aristidesinstruments.com/guitar/070s/



The one that doesn't seem to be online anywhere? I'm interested to see exactly what the patent covers.


----------



## cip 123 (Apr 15, 2019)

I hate to take this thread too wildly off topic so this will be my last post on anything outside RAN.



narad said:


> The one that doesn't seem to be online anywhere? I'm interested to see exactly what the patent covers.


You're the authorised dealer, why don't you ask them 

But here's some info anyway - "In 1996 Enserink Innovation BV continued as Catalyst Instruments BV, which later sold the build technology to Aristides Instruments BV, who are injecting quality guitars to this day."

https://www.enserinkdesign.com/project/electric-guitars

The Arium material it seems was developed a while back in the 90's, used by Enserink Designs it then switch hands and has ended up with Aristides. There are patents held by Enserink designs and I'm sure there are patents held by Aristides. Whether those patents include the chemical makeup of Arium is unclear however if you google the material you'll be hard pressed to find anything other than Aristides. Though that may not even be it's real name given Enserink calls it a "sound compound"

Lastly given the equipment needed to create a guitar like an Aristides you'd be crazy to even try. It may not be against a patent to make a guitar from Arium, but I would only really trust Aristides to do it.


----------



## narad (Apr 15, 2019)

cip 123 said:


> I hate to take this thread too wildly off topic so this will be my last post on anything outside RAN.
> 
> 
> You're the authorised dealer, why don't you ask them
> ...



Ahhh, that's why it was never coming up when I tried to patent search it. Maybe dig into this a little later. But I just think (maybe because I probably will order an Aristides fairly soon and hang out on the associated FB groups) people are making much too big a deal about Arium as a unique/optimal build material. There's lots of composite materials that are spongy and resonant, and have been tried before (as you pointed out previously).

There's just a big start-up cost to getting it all going, so until the market is clamoring for it, I don't think big companies are going to switch over. But I don't think this is on the basis of IP, is my point (/opinion, since I'm not staring at the patent - but then again, no one else is either! )


----------



## LeviathanKiller (Apr 15, 2019)

narad said:


> Ahhh, that's why it was never coming up when I tried to patent search it. Maybe dig into this a little later. But I just think (maybe because I probably will order an Aristides fairly soon and hang out on the associated FB groups) people are making much too big a deal about Arium as a unique/optimal build material. There's lots of composite materials that are spongy and resonant, and have been tried before (as you pointed out previously).
> 
> There's just a big start-up cost to getting it all going, so until the market is clamoring for it, I don't think big companies are going to switch over. But I don't think this is on the basis of IP, is my point (/opinion, since I'm not staring at the patent - but then again, no one else is either! )



I'm just waiting for the day they have Arium "flavors". Try our bassy flavor or looking for something with more attack? try the "trebly" flavor.


----------



## StevenC (Apr 16, 2019)

cip 123 said:


> I hate to take this thread too wildly off topic so this will be my last post on anything outside RAN.
> 
> 
> You're the authorised dealer, why don't you ask them
> ...


All of the patents I can find relating to this are expired anyway.


----------



## diagrammatiks (Apr 16, 2019)

StevenC said:


> All of the patents I can find relating to this are expired anyway.



Starting up with arium is super expensive as well. Almost impossible for someone to just make a guitar out of it just starting out.


----------



## 777timesgod (Apr 16, 2019)

Just to get back on topic, regarding the offer that Skervesen made, I have a questions or rather a request for clarification. 

Lets say you put 400 as a deposit for your Ran custom build and the situation with the luthiers/new place of work happened. Skervesen offers a build spot for that sum but you do not have the total for a Skervesen or do not like their type of build or you may feel that if you go through, the new guitar will remind you of the Ran that never came.
The questions is, can one of the Ran transfers sell his build spot to a third party? That is, getting 250-300 from someone else for the 400 spot and letting them move onwards? 

I assume that yes, so here is another one. Can someone buy the transfer and reduce the amount they need to pay for a current build that they have? Meaning, that you owe Skervesen 1500 more and you buy the 400 build spot for 250-300 and now you owe Skervesen 1100. Logically, they will not want this, as I assume (like a previous poster) that they got build material from Ran - bodies, humbuckers, components and this would make the whole situation harder to manage.


----------



## Wolfhorsky (Apr 16, 2019)

StevenC said:


> All of the patents I can find relating to this are expired anyway.


So if You made a ripoff - it is legal, but unfair or what?
Are You sure, that all „Ran ripoffs” were the infringements of the patents?
Don’t feel attacked. I just want to make this fair.


----------



## narad (Apr 16, 2019)

Wolfhorsky said:


> So if You made a ripoff - it is legal, but unfair or what?
> Are You sure, that all „Ran ripoffs” were the infringements of the patents?
> Don’t feel attacked. I just want to make this fair.



Steven wouldn't rip-off the Aristides shape and branding. That's more Ran-level shenanigans. We're just talking about composite materials in an exo-skeleton type stuff that seems expired.


----------



## Wolfhorsky (Apr 16, 2019)

narad said:


> Steven wouldn't rip-off the Aristides shape and branding. That's more Ran-level shenanigans. We're just talking about composite materials in an exo-skeleton type stuff that seems expired.


It looks like a double standard.


----------



## narad (Apr 16, 2019)

Wolfhorsky said:


> It looks like a double standard.



It's not. If anything you were closer to a double standard in comparing our opinion of Ran to that of other boutique builders that will sometimes copy a headstock or body shape of a known and often trademarked/protected design.


----------



## StevenC (Apr 16, 2019)

Wolfhorsky said:


> So if You made a ripoff - it is legal, but unfair or what?
> Are You sure, that all „Ran ripoffs” were the infringements of the patents?
> Don’t feel attacked. I just want to make this fair.


I never mentioned anything about Ran infringing on patents, nor did I say that ripping off Aristides body shape was OK. 

I said Ran ripping off Ken's headstock wasn't cool in my book, and I said that Aristides no longer has patent protection on their production methods.



Kleks said:


> I strongly doubt you ever kept a Ran guitar in your hands, otherwise you wouldn't be talking all of that nonsense. You're just a common guitar seller, nothing above that, and Ran is beyond your reach.
> 
> I have found a nice guitar for you tho, I believe that one would suit you perfectly. Oh, and it doesn't seem to be a copy of anything, hope you appreciate that.
> 
> ...



As I said earlier, I've played both a Ran and a KL. Anybody else who has played both is probably as qualified as I am to say which is better. Hands down the answer is KL. Rans are nice, KLs are top notch. Narad has some cool guitars and I'd say most of his are closer to KL than Ran.


----------



## Wolfhorsky (Apr 16, 2019)

StevenC said:


> I never mentioned anything about Ran infringing on patents, nor did I say that ripping off Aristides body shape was OK.
> 
> I said Ran ripping off Ken's headstock wasn't cool in my book, and I said that Aristides no longer has patent protection on their production methods.
> 
> ...


Fair enough. You made Your point.


----------



## Wolfhorsky (Apr 16, 2019)

narad said:


> It's not. If anything you were closer to a double standard in comparing our opinion of Ran to that of other boutique builders that will sometimes copy a headstock or body shape of a known and often trademarked/protected design.


Body shape or headstock is way less than R&D of Aristides construction. 
As far as Ran goes - i don’t care if they made straight ripoffs of some shapes. 
They had their own designs and they did dinally focus on that. Making copies can be seen as unethical, but i am 100% sure that everyone who wanted a copy won’t ever get the original. Even if they were rejected by Ran or some other company/luthier.


----------



## narad (Apr 16, 2019)

Wolfhorsky said:


> Body shape or headstock is way less than R&D of Aristides construction.
> As far as Ran goes - i don’t care if they made straight ripoffs of some shapes.
> They had their own designs and they did dinally focus on that. Making copies can be seen as unethical, but i am 100% sure that everyone who wanted a copy won’t ever get the original. Even if they were rejected by Ran or some other company/luthier.



We're not implying that one should rip-off Aristides' IP. If Aristides had a patent on some type of construction, and that patent is expired, then it's fair game. That is as fair as it gets, according to how these IP systems work around the world. The patent is there to protect the use of IP for what is considered a fair duration, to make up and capitalize on money spent on initial R&D.

The copies of small builders are often dealing with things that aren't patented or trademarked, so this is entirely, objectively different in this case. It's rarely really within a small builder's ability to seek out legal action, often across national borders, over what amounts to a tiny loss in sales, so it's rarely in the builder's best interests to try and defend it that way. You want to copy a KL headstock, I think you're probably legally okay to do so. But Ken doesn't like it when people copy his headstock design, and for that reason alone I'm going to look down on a company that chooses to do so, and to make posts that reflect that. There's not a right answer -- it's shady ethical stuff. But I have just as much a right to that opinion and that justification as anyone to theirs.

If you want a KL guitar and choose not to work hard and save the money for it, and want to hire Ran to make a copy, against what Ken would want, then that's on you. I think it's shitty, but whatever. Like I'm not going to pay $15k+ for a blackmachine. They're not worth it to me. So I could get some knockoff that looks like one but otherwise has next to nothing in common with it, but I'd rather not have anything blackmachine-style at all than have a phoney one. To me it's kind of a weird sense of entitlement to say, "Yea, I can't afford that but I deserve that." Plenty of totally usable guitars out there in all shapes and sizes and price points.


----------



## Wolfhorsky (Apr 16, 2019)

narad said:


> We're not implying that one should rip-off Aristides' IP. If Aristides had a patent on some type of construction, and that patent is expired, then it's fair game. That is as fair as it gets, according to how these IP systems work around the world. The patent is there to protect the use of IP for what is considered a fair duration, to make up and capitalize on money spent on initial R&D.
> 
> The copies of small builders are often dealing with things that aren't patented or trademarked, so this is entirely, objectively different in this case. It's rarely really within a small builder's ability to seek out legal action, often across national borders, over what amounts to a tiny loss in sales, so it's rarely in the builder's best interests to try and defend it that way. You want to copy a KL headstock, I think you're probably legally okay to do so. But Ken doesn't like it when people copy his headstock design, and for that reason alone I'm going to look down on a company that chooses to do so, and to make posts that reflect that. There's not a right answer -- it's shady ethical stuff. But I have just as much a right to that opinion and that justification as anyone to theirs.
> 
> If you want a KL guitar and choose not to work hard and save the money for it, and want to hire Ran to make a copy, against what Ken would want, then that's on you. I think it's shitty, but whatever. Like I'm not going to pay $15k+ for a blackmachine. They're not worth it to me. So I could get some knockoff that looks like one but otherwise has next to nothing in common with it, but I'd rather not have anything blackmachine-style at all than have a phoney one. To me it's kind of a weird sense of entitlement to say, "Yea, I can't afford that but I deserve that." Plenty of totally usable guitars out there in all shapes and sizes and price points.


I am 90% with Your statements. 
Hypothetically, what if a builder/company doesn’t offer the desired option and someone wants the design/looks but with unavailable features? For example: i would buy or order boden, but with different fan and neck carve. It is impossible to get Strandy that way. Within Your idea, I shouldn’t get my copy/homage with the features that I want only because the company makes well designed guitars (that can’t meet my needs) and by making the copy i will make them lose money (i woundn’t buy original anyway).


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Apr 16, 2019)

Wolfhorsky said:


> I am 90% with Your statements.
> Hypothetically, what if a builder/company doesn’t offer the desired option and someone wants the design/looks but with unavailable features? For example: i would buy or order boden, but with different fan and neck carve. It is impossible to get Strandy that way. Within Your idea, I shouldn’t get my copy/homage with the features that I want only because the company makes well designed guitars (that can’t meet my needs) and by making the copy i will make them lose money (i woundn’t buy original anyway).



No one is _entitled_ to a given guitar design.

You're welcome to order whatever you want, and a builder is free to build whatever they want*, but it doesn't make it ethical to rip off someone's design. 

Ethics, legality, and reality don't always intersect in our favor.

*If legal.


----------



## diagrammatiks (Apr 16, 2019)

Wolfhorsky said:


> I am 90% with Your statements.
> Hypothetically, what if a builder/company doesn’t offer the desired option and someone wants the design/looks but with unavailable features? For example: i would buy or order boden, but with different fan and neck carve. It is impossible to get Strandy that way. Within Your idea, I shouldn’t get my copy/homage with the features that I want only because the company makes well designed guitars (that can’t meet my needs) and by making the copy i will make them lose money (i woundn’t buy original anyway).



Ya but plenty of builders will you make a headless with any carve and fan you want. Why would you have to have it in a boden shape.


----------



## Ordacleaphobia (Apr 16, 2019)

narad said:


> To me it's kind of a weird sense of entitlement to say, "Yea, I can't afford that but I deserve that." Plenty of totally usable guitars out there in all shapes and sizes and price points.



I think it's less "I deserve that" and more "there's no good reason for this not to be an option." 
"Good" of course being a subjective word, what constitutes a 'good' reason to me may not constitute a 'good' reason to you. Case in point, the KL headstock example. Shaping the wood into that specific style is a no-go for you since Ken dislikes it when people do that, and that's a good enough reason for you to not be on board with that idea.
For someone else, that may not be a good enough reason. It's just wood being cut into shape, and the point of a custom guitar is for it to be custom to what you want, and why should this specific shape be off the table because someone who cut their wood that specific way first wants to be the only one to do so? It's just a personal ethics thing to you on whether or not that counts.



> Like I'm not going to pay $15k+ for a blackmachine. They're not worth it to me. So I could get some knockoff that looks like one but otherwise has next to nothing in common with it, but I'd rather not have anything blackmachine-style at all than have a phoney one.



Another reason for the conflicting opinions is perspective. 
I think your perspective is that you're looking at these guitars as a craft piece, a _product _rather than a _tool_- something that has it's own identity. Not unusual for high-end guitars.
I agree that a Blackmachine is not worth $15k and that a knockoff would likely have more in common with a standard series Ibanez than the real deal, but it sounds like in this case you're more referring to what I call 'gucci syndrome;' where you want the _brand _rather than the item itself. I don't really care that much about if the guitar I'm playing is a real Blackmachine. It'd be nice, but really the only part I give a fuck about is the design, since that's what drew me to the product in the first place. Assuming the guitar itself is playable enough for it's price point, obviously.

So while you wouldn't want one of these guitars because to you it would be a phoney, an impostor, something slimy and deceptive, like a stain that won't wash away; to me it's just a tool built this specific way. Like paint on a house. I don't care who mixed the paint- I just want that wall to be grey. 

Not saying you're 'wrong' by any means, I totally get your perspective. Just trying to explain others'.


----------



## narad (Apr 16, 2019)

Ordacleaphobia said:


> I think it's less "I deserve that" and more "there's no good reason for this not to be an option."
> "Good" of course being a subjective word, what constitutes a 'good' reason to me may not constitute a 'good' reason to you. Case in point, the KL headstock example. Shaping the wood into that specific style is a no-go for you since Ken dislikes it when people do that, and that's a good enough reason for you to not be on board with that idea.
> For someone else, that may not be a good enough reason. It's just wood being cut into shape, and the point of a custom guitar is for it to be custom to what you want, and why should this specific shape be off the table because someone who cut their wood that specific way first wants to be the only one to do so? It's just a personal ethics thing to you on whether or not that counts.
> 
> ...



I don't like the analogy though because there's nothing creative about the process that creates grey paint. Whether we're talking Gucci or KL, someone needed to use their brain and their sense of aesthetic to make that design, so it is a reflection of themselves and their art. In the case of something like a Jackson shape, it's easy to imagine how if you asked a thousand people to design a shape, many of them will simply happen to be a Jackson headstock. It's not very creative. But none of them are going to be a KL headstock -- it's too arbitrary. 

As far as "there's no good reason for this to not be an option", the reason is that Ken used his brain to create the design, Ran was not involved in that process, and yet Ran benefits financially from it.

So in another analogy, "I don't care who built the car- I just want it to look like a Ferrari F40". That's not logic I get behind. If you want to drive a Ferrari F40, go out and earn a shit-ton of money.


----------



## Ordacleaphobia (Apr 16, 2019)

narad said:


> I don't like the analogy though because there's nothing creative about the process that creates grey paint. Whether we're talking Gucci or KL, someone needed to use their brain and their sense of aesthetic to make that design, so it is a reflection of themselves and their art. In the case of something like a Jackson shape, it's easy to imagine how if you asked a thousand people to design a shape, many of them will simply happen to be a Jackson headstock. It's not very creative. But none of them are going to be a KL headstock -- it's too arbitrary.
> 
> As far as "there's no good reason for this to not be an option", the reason is that Ken used his brain to create the design, Ran was not involved in that process, and yet Ran benefits financially from it.
> 
> So in another analogy, "I don't care who built the car- I just want it to look like a Ferrari F40". That's not logic I get behind. If you want to drive a Ferrari F40, go out and earn a shit-ton of money.



I suppose that's fair- but if I can present yet another analogy, what are your thoughts on art prints? 
I can go on Amazon and get myself a Van Gogh print for $4. Vincent clearly had to use his sense of aesthetic to create that painting since it's literally a work of art, but I don't think that the print would cheapen or lessen the original. I don't think it's wrong for them to exist; why rob the people of something that they enjoy? Why artificially create a void in the market? If I want to look at that painting, why should I need to have millions of dollars at my disposal to throw around? Why should the positive effect it has be limited to the elite when it can easily be enjoyed by the many?

The Ferrari example is different since the design of the car is part form, part function. You can't just _build _a car that _looks _like an F40. Every piece of that vehicle is meticulously designed to account for and fit into that shape. Guitars aren't really like this- except for maybe Parkers 
I still totally see your point, and I don't even really disagree with it, I just think that this is one of those issues that just comes down to a personal judgement, and either end isn't egregious enough for me to pass any form of judgement on.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Apr 16, 2019)

Ordacleaphobia said:


> I suppose that's fair- but if I can present yet another analogy, what are your thoughts on art prints?
> I can go on Amazon and get myself a Van Gogh print for $4. Vincent clearly had to use his sense of aesthetic to create that painting since it's literally a work of art, but I don't think that the print would cheapen or lessen the original. I don't think it's wrong for them to exist; why rob the people of something that they enjoy? Why artificially create a void in the market? If I want to look at that painting, why should I need to have millions of dollars at my disposal to throw around? Why should the positive effect it has be limited to the elite when it can easily be enjoyed by the many?
> 
> The Ferrari example is different since the design of the car is part form, part function. You can't just _build _a car that _looks _like an F40. Every piece of that vehicle is meticulously designed to account for and fit into that shape. Guitars aren't really like this- except for maybe Parkers
> I still totally see your point, and I don't even really disagree with it, I just think that this is one of those issues that just comes down to a personal judgement, and either end isn't egregious enough for me to pass any form of judgement on.



The problem with the Van Gogh analogy is two-fold:

1) He died in 1890.
2) His work is in the public domain. 

A more apt analogy would be to use a contemporary painter who is still making a living off of their art.


----------



## Ordacleaphobia (Apr 16, 2019)

MaxOfMetal said:


> The problem with the Van Gogh analogy is two-fold:
> 
> 1) He died in 1890.
> 2) His work is in the public domain.
> ...



Splitting hairs here, but fine. Take Lena Sotskova instead.
What if I want a print of _Leading Violin _or _Force of Nature_? There are whole businesses who will give you a canvas print of whatever image you send to them and the only obvious legal statement is a disclaimer saying that if you get them sued you're on the hook.

Is Lena really getting screwed when I say "Wow, that is a gorgeous piece. I wish I could hang this in my studio, but I can't spend my entire annual salary on a painting," and someone says "Tell you what- I can make you a lower-quality, less detailed image that would look more or less the same from a distance for $200."
You could argue yes on principle and have a point, sure. But realistically in practice, no- I don't think she is. She is no worse off for this exchange, and would not have been better off if it had not taken place.

I don't think I've ever seen someone get upset about these prints though- because not everyone can afford to cover their house in $40,000 originals and art is still a major piece of culture.


----------



## narad (Apr 16, 2019)

Ordacleaphobia said:


> Splitting hairs here, but fine. Take Lena Sotskova instead.
> What if I want a print of _Leading Violin _or _Force of Nature_? There are whole businesses who will give you a canvas print of whatever image you send to them and the only obvious legal statement is a disclaimer saying that if you get them sued you're on the hook.
> 
> Is Lena really getting screwed when I say "Wow, that is a gorgeous piece. I wish I could hang this in my studio, but I can't spend my entire annual salary on a painting," and someone says "Tell you what- I can make you a lower-quality, less detailed image that would look more or less the same from a distance for $200."
> ...



Further refining the analogy (sorry, but important), I think the more apt comparison is between a living artist *that makes prints* of their original art. Ran making a KL headstock and KL making his headstock are both still in the same medium, take roughly the same amount to do, and likely differ to some extent in quality. The same as you can say to the print you get from a general purpose print shop and a dedicated artist-endorsed print. The latter is more expensive, usually by an order of 3-4x (so about Ran vs KL, as well).

And in this scenario, I definitely would buy the print from the artist. I eventually grew out of Audrey Kawasaki's stuff but for a long time I wanted a print of hers, but $600-800 was hard to justify. But those that do buy those prints support the artist, and help him/her continue to keep creating. If everyone bought prints from the cheap print shop, it would deprive the creative person of their income that helps them to create, and the world becomes a slightly worse place. In short, if someone creates something "worthwhile", worth copying, then I feel we should go out of our way to compensate that person for their contribution to the world.

In 100 years when Ken is dead (or has transcended into a being of pure energy no longer burdened by financial worries), if someone copies a KL headstock, I'll think... fine, they liked the design, and what else were they going to do? But in 2019, I think the right thing to do in that position is to go order a KL.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Apr 17, 2019)

Ordacleaphobia said:


> Splitting hairs here, but fine. Take Lena Sotskova instead.
> What if I want a print of _Leading Violin _or _Force of Nature_? There are whole businesses who will give you a canvas print of whatever image you send to them and the only obvious legal statement is a disclaimer saying that if you get them sued you're on the hook.
> 
> Is Lena really getting screwed when I say "Wow, that is a gorgeous piece. I wish I could hang this in my studio, but I can't spend my entire annual salary on a painting," and someone says "Tell you what- I can make you a lower-quality, less detailed image that would look more or less the same from a distance for $200."
> ...



Choose your battle. 

Are we discussing the legality? Ethics? Economics? 

Getting a knock off is both legally and morally wrong, even if it doesn't have a significant financial impact. 

You're not entitled to the artwork just because you want it. 

Luckily, there are plenty of artists out there, and chances of finding a very similar, yet non-morally dubious/ambiguous piece within your means is very high.


----------



## c7spheres (Apr 17, 2019)

As said above by MaxofMetal:" Getting a knock off is both legally and morally wrong, even if it doesn't have a significant financial impact. "

I think this is an important point. There is definately a difference between a knock off, inspired or borrowed features, and what design vs what art is. Using a similar idea or elements of anothers idea is one thing. Plagerizing, copying, or ripping off and presenting a guitar as a brand it is not is a knock-off which is illegal. Copying a headstock or building design is patentable, but not illegal to copy. Only illegal to copy and sell as original. It is legal to sell as non original but similar to or superior to the original item with the patent or license holders permission, if applicalble, but only if applicable, then you sould still do it unethically and only if the person who's rights were violated decided to or had the ability to sue, could anything be done about it. Keep in mind that although guitars are art in our's and the luthiers eyes, that are manufactured objects in the law's eyes. To be art, it would have to be sold as or by consensus considered art n the eyes of the law, which is still just manufactured property, but treated differently becuase of things like artistic license vs patent design etc. In the same vain, nobody seems to care except the artists, expecially when it comes to music. There's a difference beteen trying to patent/copyright a I-IV-V progression and an original blues song. That's why theres a million I-IV-V songs and everyone's not suing eachother. They are almost identical, but not really. Juse like these 2 guitars are almost identical, but not really. They both have necks, bridges headstocks etc. Also, once a company gets so big it becomes synonymous with the name, even if it's patented, the courts will make it not longer applicable. Thing like Hoover because synonymous with vacuuming, YoYo's, Asprin etc. All became Genericided? It's a real thing. Google it or Youtube it. See there's an example. Google and YouTube should be Genericided, imo. So no artist or guitar builder or musician has got that big yet, but things like Blues, Classical, Jazz and Rock kinda have. Sorry to ramble. Over and out.


----------



## Ordacleaphobia (Apr 17, 2019)

narad said:


> Further refining the analogy (sorry, but important), I think the more apt comparison is between a living artist *that makes prints* of their original art. Ran making a KL headstock and KL making his headstock are both still in the same medium, take roughly the same amount to do, and likely differ to some extent in quality. The same as you can say to the print you get from a general purpose print shop and a dedicated artist-endorsed print. The latter is more expensive, usually by an order of 3-4x (so about Ran vs KL, as well).
> 
> And in this scenario, I definitely would buy the print from the artist. I eventually grew out of Audrey Kawasaki's stuff but for a long time I wanted a print of hers, but $600-800 was hard to justify. But those that do buy those prints support the artist, and help him/her continue to keep creating. If everyone bought prints from the cheap print shop, it would deprive the creative person of their income that helps them to create, and the world becomes a slightly worse place. In short, if someone creates something "worthwhile", worth copying, then I feel we should go out of our way to compensate that person for their contribution to the world.



Overall, I tend to agree with this- but within reason. I don't believe that Lena produces prints of her work- so you're looking at 5 figures or bust for something official. 
What is someone that's a fan of her artwork to do? This is my point- these people fill a hole in the market. To bring it back to guitars, if Doug took the Ormsby route and launched a $1000-$2000 import Blackmachine line, I would absolutely be on board to give people that bought copies instead a hard time. 

But he didn't (understandable), Perry did (also understandable), and while I can't say it's in good taste...I also can't fault him for it; and I don't fault the buyers for buying them (shoot, I have a hype on the way lol). That's really all I'm getting at. 
I'm not endorsing replicas/copies/tributes/whatever- and I'm not saying that there's nothing wrong with them; just that I get it and that I find the whole situation to be...understandable, and not _*usually *_worth getting upset over.


----------



## lurè (Apr 17, 2019)

Warmoth sells guitar parts identical to Fender.
Daemoness has made a "copy" of a jackson dinky upon customer's request.
Ormsby has an entire line of guitar with a blackmachine headstock rip off.
Ran has made copies of guitar upon customers' request.
If this is all illegal and ethically wrong then let's go back to lutes. Problem solved.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Apr 17, 2019)

lurè said:


> Warmoth sells guitar parts identical to Fender.



That's because they paid a license to Fender. 

Fender licenses out their designs to several parts makers, and it's not just Fender brand parts but anything FMIC.


----------



## nedheftyfunk (Apr 17, 2019)

MaxOfMetal said:


> Getting a knock off is both legally and morally wrong, even if it doesn't have a significant financial impact.



I don't mean to be pedantic, Max, but what you mean by legally wrong? Under whose laws? When RAN was making copies, it was legal for them to make and sell them in Poland under Polish law, even though it would have been illegal for you to import one into the US.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Apr 17, 2019)

nedheftyfunk said:


> I don't mean to be pedantic, Max, but what you mean by legally wrong? Under whose laws? When RAN was making copies, it was legal for them to make and sell them in Poland under Polish law, even though it would have been illegal for you to import one into the US.



I was speaking in generalities, and not exclusively to RAN or guitars as the conversation had drifted, but I'd assume that RAN wasn't selling guitars exclusively in Poland.


----------



## StevenC (Apr 17, 2019)

nedheftyfunk said:


> I don't mean to be pedantic, Max, but what you mean by legally wrong? Under whose laws? When RAN was making copies, it was legal for them to make and sell them in Poland under Polish law, even though it would have been illegal for you to import one into the US.


He's talking about stealing artwork.


----------



## narad (Apr 17, 2019)

MaxOfMetal said:


> I was speaking in generalities, and not exclusively to RAN or guitars as the conversation had drifted, but I'd assume that RAN wasn't selling guitars exclusively in Poland.



I know one of those KL-explorers wound up stateside -- dude posted it on harmony central back in the day.


----------



## nedheftyfunk (Apr 17, 2019)

narad said:


> I know one of those KL-explorers wound up stateside -- dude posted it on harmony central back in the day.



Oh, undoubtedly quite a few of those initial RANs ended up in both the US and elsewhere in the world where it would have been illegal to import them for sale. I remember many of them popping up on forums back in the day.



MaxOfMetal said:


> I was speaking in generalities, and not exclusively to RAN or guitars as the conversation had drifted, but I'd assume that RAN wasn't selling guitars exclusively in Poland.



Even though RAN sold guitars to people in countries where it would have been illegal to purchase them, the illegality is on the purchaser's end and not the producer's unless the producer is regulated in the purchaser's country. I doubt RAN had assets outside of Poland and so wouldn't have been subject to anyone else's law (bar dubious extraterritorial jurisdiction).

It's different if the company has assets in a country where it is illegal, as then some aspects of the business is subject to local laws. But even then, in most countries those laws only stop entities producing and selling locally copyrighted / trademarked goods directly for that market, not from doing so elsewhere. That's why if you bring a case of Budweiser from the US to Germany, Anheuser-Busch InBev doesn't get sued for trademark infringement despite Budweiser being another company's trademark in most of the EU. Individuals importing Edwards guitars with Gibson headstocks into the US, but ESP not getting punished despite selling other products would be the same thing. 

Anyway, thanks for the clarification Max, and, apologies for the off-topic to those worried about their deposits. I hope it works out for y'all.


----------



## soldierkahn (Apr 17, 2019)

Ordacleaphobia said:


> Splitting hairs here, but fine. Take Lena Sotskova instead.
> What if I want a print of _Leading Violin _or _Force of Nature_? There are whole businesses who will give you a canvas print of whatever image you send to them and the only obvious legal statement is a disclaimer saying that if you get them sued you're on the hook.
> 
> Is Lena really getting screwed when I say "Wow, that is a gorgeous piece. I wish I could hang this in my studio, but I can't spend my entire annual salary on a painting," and someone says "Tell you what- I can make you a lower-quality, less detailed image that would look more or less the same from a distance for $200."
> ...



nice


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Apr 17, 2019)

nedheftyfunk said:


> Oh, undoubtedly quite a few of those initial RANs ended up in both the US and elsewhere in the world where it would have been illegal to import them for sale. I remember many of them popping up on forums back in the day.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I was actually speaking to the buyer end as well (see: entitlement), read the last few posts I've made. 

We're actually in complete agreement.


----------



## canuck brian (Apr 18, 2019)

Ordacleaphobia said:


> Overall, I tend to agree with this- but within reason. I don't believe that Lena produces prints of her work- so you're looking at 5 figures or bust for something official.
> What is someone that's a fan of her artwork to do? This is my point- these people fill a hole in the market. To bring it back to guitars, if Doug took the Ormsby route and launched a $1000-$2000 import Blackmachine line, I would absolutely be on board to give people that bought copies instead a hard time.



When you hone and perfect your craft only to have some jerkoff say "well, your work is expensive so I should be able to rip it off because i can't afford the real thing". Watching the mental gymnastics of people justifying this is hilarious. It's like saying "I want a Tesla, but I only have Volkswagen money, but since i like Tesla, I should have all the features copied from a Tesla." It actually sounds that stupid. If you want to rip off a luthier because you like their guitars but hate the price, do what I did and learn to build your own - that way you can do whatever the hell you want, including carving your own Enduraneck. If the first thought in your skull is "but that will take forever" or something like that, maybe you'll understand the work and time put in behind building guitars isn't something you should disregard like you are.

A fan of her artwork can look into legal prints, just like every other person who isn't looking to rip another artist off. If she doesn't make prints, that's her decision, not yours.


----------



## Ordacleaphobia (Apr 18, 2019)

canuck brian said:


> When you hone and perfect your craft only to have some jerkoff say "well, your work is expensive so I should be able to rip it off because i can't afford the real thing". It's like saying "*I want a Tesla, but I only have Volkswagen money, but since i like Tesla, I should have all the features copied from a Tesla.*" It actually sounds that stupid. As a luthier, you're the kind of person I geniunely dislike.
> 
> A fan of her artwork can look into legal prints, just like every other damn person who isn't looking to rip another artist off. If she doesn't make prints, MAYBE THERE IS A REASON FOR HER TO DECIDE THAT.



It absolutely isn't. The shape of a headstock does not affect the sound or playability of a guitar. It is purely an aesthetic option. We already went over the car analogy.
But even just to run with and humor this one more time- the guy that wants a Tesla but doesn't have Tesla-money _*is not going to buy a Tesla anyway*_. But you bet your ass if Volkswagen was all "Hey, what if we figured out a way to build a sporty electric car for $30k?" and then _did it_, _*hell yes *_people would buy it. That's product progression, it's why we have smartphones, computers and _Teslas_ today. This is a horrible example. 

Sure- if Lena simply doesn't want prints of her work to exist, I'm nobody to say otherwise. But it's naive to expect them not to. If there's demand, someone will supply.

If there's a market for it, someone's going to fill it. There's the desire for profit. I get that. I probably wouldn't do it, but I see how people would.
Once the people have what they want, it's a lot easier to just...buy it. At this point it's on the buyer, and for the most part, I can't fault them either- because "the product already exists, I'm staring right at it; _someone's_ going to get it, why shouldn't it be me?" ** 

I understand this is close to home for you, but that's just the free market at work. Feel free to dislike that as much as you want. 


** "Well that's unethical!" That's an argument, sure- but severity differs on a case by case basis and people have different moral thresholds, so again- it's not surprising to me.


----------



## Ordacleaphobia (Apr 18, 2019)

canuck brian said:


> If you want to rip off a luthier because you like their guitars but hate the price, do what I did and learn to build your own - that way you can do whatever the hell you want, including carving your own Enduraneck. If the first thought in your skull is "but that will take forever" or something like that, maybe you'll understand the work and time put in behind building guitars isn't something you should disregard like you are.



So why would it be okay for me to build my own guitar the way I want, but not for me to have my buddy from down the street who already knows how to build guitars build one for me?
If he's willing to do the work for the amount of money I'm willing to give him, how is that any different from me just doing it myself?


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Apr 18, 2019)

Ordacleaphobia said:


> So why would it be okay for me to build my own guitar the way I want, but not for to have my buddy from down the street who already knows how to build guitars build one for me?
> If he's willing to do the work for the amount of money I'm willing to give him, how is that any different from me just doing it myself?



Because profit.

That's what makes it kind of shitty. If a home builder wants to make themselves a KL Explorer, power to them. If a company decides to profit off of another builder because they can undercut them, that's when it gets ethically dicey. 

This reminds me a lot of the Skervesen "Terrormachine". 

Way way back the guys from Skervesen made an exact (at least 99% of the way) Blackmachine copy for a "friend" on the auspice that it was a "one off" (their words) for a close friend. Pretty much everyone was in agreement that it being a "special" situation and not a regular model made it somewhat okay. 

Flash forward a month or so later and they were offering them to anyone. That was shitty.


----------



## Ordacleaphobia (Apr 18, 2019)

MaxOfMetal said:


> Because profit.
> 
> That's what makes it kind of shitty. If a home builder wants to make themselves a KL Explorer, power to them. If a company decides to profit off of another builder because they can undercut them, that's when it gets ethically dicey.
> 
> ...



I remember the Terrormachine- I thought they only built 2 of those including the original, and then shortly after created the Raptor line because they didn't want to keep building them? 

And I'm not saying it isn't ethically dicey. I'm just saying it makes sense why it happens- because profit. It just seems really obvious to me that there are going to be some people out there who happen to be guitar builders that don't think it's really that big of a deal. Whether it is or not varies from person to person, and in this particular instance, I think RAN did it pretty well. They branded all of their own 'copy' builds, made clear that it merely a replica and not a forgery, didn't copy from JUST ONE builder, and delivered instruments that were of high enough quality to build a name for themselves. Once they had the brand awareness, they distanced themselves from that aspect of their business and focused on creating their own identity. If you're going to do replicas, I think that's the best way to go about it imo. 

But like I've said before, I totally see your point, and I don't necessarily disagree with it.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Apr 18, 2019)

Ordacleaphobia said:


> I remember the Terrormachine- I thought they only built 2 of those including the original, and then shortly after created the Raptor line because they didn't want to keep building them?
> 
> And I'm not saying it isn't ethically dicey. I'm just saying it makes sense why it happens- because profit. It just seems really obvious to me that there are going to be some people out there who happen to be guitar builders that don't think it's really that big of a deal. Whether it is or not varies from person to person, and in this particular instance, I think RAN did it pretty well. They branded all of their own 'copy' builds, made clear that it merely a replica and not a forgery, didn't copy from JUST ONE builder, and delivered instruments that were of high enough quality to build a name for themselves. Once they had the brand awareness, they distanced themselves from that aspect of their business and focused on creating their own identity. If you're going to do replicas, I think that's the best way to go about it imo.
> 
> But like I've said before, I totally see your point, and I don't necessarily disagree with it.



I don't think anyone is unsure why it happens.


----------



## narad (Apr 18, 2019)

I also think it's weird to say like, "the guy that wants a Tesla but doesn't have Tesla-money _*is not going to buy a Tesla anyway*", _like, he was born a guy without Tesla-money and he is somehow imprisoned in this state, with no way to acquire more money or save for the thing he wants. You're basically treating the guy as a product of circumstance, and not an actor in his own life. Where's the sense of responsibility?

We are (almost) all born "a guy without Tesla-money", and through our choices, we often find ways of affording the things we want most. For some people, they become the guy with Tesla-money, and they buy the Tesla. I believe anyone who buys a Ran rip-off KL could buy a KL -- we're not talking orders of magnitude in price margins here -- they are just not willing to put in the extra effort and make the extra sacrifices to do so.

There's ethical concerns of course, but completely aside from that, I feel it also reflects pretty negatively on the other values of the person who chooses to get the knockoff.


----------



## canuck brian (Apr 18, 2019)

It's very close to home and something I have experience with. I've sent cease and desists and oddly the law was on my side. That's something else you should probably investigate as you seem clearly uneducated about it.

The free market is typically governed by legalities and not feelings. 

Ahh it's an aesthetic option. So I should be able to slap Ibanez's headstock and vinyl decal on mine as it's just a sticker. You know people get sued over "aesthetics" right? My guitar building biz is a hobby, not my day job. I could care less if someone bought another guitar from me, but if someone copies and sells one of my guitars, my day job is going to let me hire lawyers to go after them to the fullest extent of the law available. Welcome to the free market where people do things like get pissed and hire lawyers when someone rips off their IP.

I'm aware that someone who doesn't have Telsa money isn't going to buy one. It's almost like I can quote myself to someone who didn't read....



> your work is expensive so I should be able to rip it off because i can't afford the real thing





> I want a Tesla, but I only have Volkswagen money, but since i like Tesla, I should have all the features copied from a Tesla."



Just as a heads up, if you build a car that isn't a Tesla and slap Tesla badging all over it to create a replica so you can make profit, that isn't progress, thats IP theft. It's also legally actionable. Improving on a product is something that everyone should do, but copying is not progress. You want the top tier product offered at the lower price because you can't afford the real one where all the design hours are.

Lets use a guitar example. Ibanez. Licensed the Floyd, improved on it, all good. They tried their own system, ate the legal issues, and are now back to the licensed floyd.

I have never understood the bizarre level of entitlement of some guitar players. It's worse than every corporate office I've worked in and that's truly saying something.

Product progression would be something like what Ola did. He created a brand new product, invested pretty much his entire life into it, and here you are justifying ripping the guy off in the name of "progression." Maybe you should do something like putting the work in progressing guitar instead of looking for shortcuts to undercutting people.


----------



## Ordacleaphobia (Apr 18, 2019)

narad said:


> I also think it's weird to say like, "the guy that wants a Tesla but doesn't have Tesla-money _*is not going to buy a Tesla anyway*", _like, he was born a guy without Tesla-money and he is somehow imprisoned in this state, with no way to acquire more money or save for the thing he wants. You're basically treating the guy as a product of circumstance, and not an actor in his own life. Where's the sense of responsibility?
> 
> We are (almost) all born "a guy without Tesla-money", and through our choices, we often find ways of affording the things we want most. For some people, they become the guy with Tesla-money, and they buy the Tesla. I believe anyone who buys a Ran rip-off KL could buy a KL -- we're not talking orders of magnitude in price margins here -- they are just not willing to put in the extra effort and make the extra sacrifices to do so.



Also not valid. Time for another example.
I'm buying a guitar- _*right now*_. There are going to be guitars that like. The guitar I buy will likely be one of these, if I can make that happen.
Say I really, really want a PRS Dragon. But I don't have PRS Dragon money laying around. _For this purchase_, there is no way I am getting a PRS Dragon. There is no possible way that Paul is going to manage to sell me a Dragon unless he takes a dive and sells it to me for the amount I can afford- which would be a really, really stupid decision. So he won't do that. And I don't get a Dragon. Of course, I could greatly advance my career later on down the line to the point where I can afford to buy a Dragon; and when that point comes, I'd probably do just that. But that has no bearing on this purchase decision right now. 
Unless you're of the opinion that if I want a Dragon, I shouldn't buy a guitar until I can afford the Dragon? 

The point is that there are purchases made along the way, and if an alternative is available at one of those intermediates, it isn't shocking to me that folks would opt for the alternative. Your current situation is different from your potential situation. Doesn't mean they don't still desire the original and it doesn't mean that they won't buy it one day, it's just not on the table right now.

Weren't the RAN replica builds like $2k? 3k? How much is a Ken Laurence? 6k? That's _double_. In the _thousands_. Definitely a large enough delta to be considered an entirely different market. For my personal financial situation, I can see myself owning a $3,000 guitar. It would take exactly what you're describing here- a lot of discipline, saving, and some sacrifices...and once I own it, it would be the single most valuable possession I own outside of my house and car. I would likely feel guilty about owning such a valuable indulgence item. A $6,000 is not even on the table. Even if I took the extra time to scrounge up the money- that is not a responsible move on my part. I cannot afford a $6,000 indulgence. That is 100% an entirely different market and demographic.


----------



## narad (Apr 18, 2019)

I sold my car and bought a KL and a Diezel, then took the bus for three years. Priorities.


----------



## canuck brian (Apr 18, 2019)

Ordacleaphobia said:


> Unless you're of the opinion that if I want a Dragon, I shouldn't buy a guitar until I can afford the Dragon?



If you can't afford the dragon, you can't afford it. Welcome to the free market and how it works. Just because you feel entitled, and thats exactly what it is, doesn't mean you get to skirt laws in place that were created to stop bs like this.

When i was in high school, i did something SUPER screwed up. I saw Korn play on their first tour, immediately decided I wanted a 7 string Universe and actually saved up the money to get one - took 2 years to save up the nearly $3000 while working a job at Dominos and Shoppers Drug Mart after school (17-18) Ibanez then realized the market was picking up and brought out a more affordable one based on the Universe. The market expanded and piles of companies jumped on the seven string craze....but oddly none of the big guys directly copied Ibanez. They created their own distinct product because Hoshino USA would have shoved lawyers directly up someones ass otherwise.

That's the free market at work. I suggest you actually research how it works. Play whatever mental gymnastics you need to to justify ripping someone off.


----------



## Cynicanal (Apr 18, 2019)

TIL that I was wrong for buying a cheap $200 guitar for my first guitar when I started learning back in college, and that instead I should have just not started learning/playing guitar at all because I wasn't willing to buy the most expensive thing on the market for my first instrument.


----------



## narad (Apr 18, 2019)

Cynicanal said:


> TIL that I was wrong for buying a cheap $200 guitar for my first guitar when I started learning back in college, and that instead I should have just not started learning/playing guitar at all because I wasn't willing to buy the most expensive thing on the market for my first instrument.



No one's saying that. That's exactly why $200 guitars exist.


----------



## Cynicanal (Apr 18, 2019)

Prior to his edit, canuck_brian said exactly that no one should buy a cheaper guitar if they'd like a more expensive one. It's not like I wouldn't have wanted a nicer guitar; had someone said "hey, I'll trade you my USA Jackson Soloist for your Ibanez Gio", I'd have gladly taken them up on it, but it would have been stupid to not start playing until I was ready to buy a USA Soloist.


----------



## Ordacleaphobia (Apr 18, 2019)

canuck brian said:


> It's very close to home and something I have experience with. I've sent cease and desists and oddly the law was on my side. That's something else you should probably investigate as you seem clearly uneducated about it.



Dude I don't think you're getting what I'm saying.
I never implied that the law was on that side, I don't know where you even _*got *_that from. And obviously creating anything in violation of the law should be shut down.



> Ahh it's an aesthetic option. So I should be able to slap Ibanez's headstock and vinyl decal on mine as it's just a sticker. You know people get sued over "aesthetics" right?
> 
> I'm aware that someone who doesn't have Telsa money isn't going to buy one. It's almost like I can quote myself to someone who didn't read....
> >your work is expensive so I should be able to rip it off because i can't afford the real thing
> ...



You're talking about a forgery rather than a replica. We're talking about _*completely*_ different things.
Why would the volkswagen Tesla have a Tesla badge on it? That'd be all kinds of ridiculous. You said *"I should have all the features copied from a Tesla." *[And then accused me of not reading your post]
Features include things like horsepower, build quality, console items, etc. To be able to deliver all of these items at a lower price point would be unquestionably progress.
The tricky part is in avoiding IP theft, because obviously they can't just copy the Tesla engineering. That'd be a 9 figure lawsuit [which would be a good thing].

As for the bolded bit- yeah, I do. Obviously. So do you. And so does everyone else in the planet.
Have you ever purchased an item and said "No, actually, I'd love to pay more for this. Please take more money from me than you were asking for."

You guys throw the word 'entitlement' around like candy and I'm starting to wonder if you even know what it means.
Nobody is 'entitled' to anything other than their rights. I just don't think that people should be shamed for their purchase decisions all of the time. They took an option that was available to them. I don't think this is something that you can make sweeping statements on morality.


----------



## Ordacleaphobia (Apr 18, 2019)

canuck brian said:


> If you can't afford the dragon, you can't afford it. Welcome to the free market and how it works. Just because you feel entitled, and thats exactly what it is, doesn't mean you get to skirt laws in place that were created to stop bs like this.
> 
> When i was in high school, i did something SUPER screwed up. I saw Korn play on their first tour, immediately decided I wanted a 7 string Universe and actually saved up the money to get one - took 2 years to save up the nearly $3000 while working a job at Dominos and Shoppers Drug Mart after school (17-18) Ibanez then realized the market was picking up and brought out a more affordable one based on the Universe. The market expanded and piles of companies jumped on the seven string craze....but oddly none of the big guys directly copied Ibanez. They created their own distinct product because Hoshino USA would have shoved lawyers directly up someones ass otherwise.
> 
> That's the free market at work. I suggest you actually research how it works. Play whatever mental gymnastics you need to to justify ripping someone off.



What makes you think I am opposed to any of this?


----------



## Cynicanal (Apr 18, 2019)

> The tricky part is in avoiding IP theft, because obviously they can't just copy the Tesla engineering. That'd be a 9 figure lawsuit [which would be a good thing].


That's not true at all, though. They couldn't copy the things that Tesla had active patents on, but copying non-patented engineering is _totally_ legal, and is important for technological progress.


----------



## canuck brian (Apr 18, 2019)

Ordacleaphobia said:


> What makes you think I am opposed to any of this?



At this point, I really don't care what you think.


----------



## canuck brian (Apr 18, 2019)

Cynicanal said:


> TIL that I was wrong for buying a cheap $200 guitar for my first guitar when I started learning back in college, and that instead I should have just not started learning/playing guitar at all because I wasn't willing to buy the most expensive thing on the market for my first instrument.



Where in the name of sweet Jesus did you read that?

I bought a used Charvel while saving up for the insanely expensive Ibanez.

Oh - i got this from a dictionary online.
_adjective_

believing oneself to be inherently deserving of privileges or special treatment.
"kids who feel so entitled and think the world will revolve around them"
Thats you.


----------



## Ordacleaphobia (Apr 18, 2019)

canuck brian said:


> At this point, I really don't care what you think.



I'm sorry you feel that way.
Seriously, I like you Brian.


----------



## Cynicanal (Apr 18, 2019)

canuck brian said:


> Where in the name of sweet Jesus did you read that?
> 
> I bought a used Charvel while saving up for the insanely expensive Ibanez.
> 
> ...


I'm entitled because I bought a $200 guitar? What? What are you even smoking?

(Also, I saw your post pre-edit where you said "yes, you shouldn't buy any guitar until you can afford a PRS Dragon because that's how capitalism works". Don't pretend it didn't happen, we can all see "Last edited: 20 minutes ago".)


----------



## canuck brian (Apr 18, 2019)

Cynicanal said:


> I'm entitled because I bought a $200 guitar? What? What are you even smoking?
> 
> (Also, I saw your post pre-edit where you said "yes, you shouldn't buy any guitar until you can afford a PRS Dragon because that's how capitalism works". Don't pretend it didn't happen, we can all see "Last edited: 20 minutes ago".)



I'm most definitely not going to pretend it didn't happen because i'm not stupid. I also wrote that "if you can't afford a PRS dragon, you shouldn't buy it, that's how capilism works." I was initially confused by the mindbendingly stupid rationale of saving for an expensive guitar removing the ability to buy cheap ones. 

The entitlement thing wasn't for you.


----------



## canuck brian (Apr 18, 2019)

Ordacleaphobia said:


> I'm sorry you feel that way.
> Seriously, I like you Brian.



It's seriously something that we're going to very loudly disagree on man. I'm sorry. This really is one of those things where i'm going to be incredibly stubborn and mean so imma bow out before i piss more people off.  This is one of those topics that puts me into the wall of text mode.

There's another situation that really hits home for me on this - I've got ALL the files to make Decibel Javelin 6's and 7's. I know they work because we already made 9 bodies. I literally need to clamp a body blank to the table, put the tools in and hit go - voila - Decibel Javelins. There is no way in hell i'm even considering doing that though because i believe right down to my core that it's wrong. It's Darren's property, not mine, and I feel I have no right to use it or even build upon it. I seriously considered building one for myself at one point, but i think that would be bad form considering the whole situation.


----------



## Lemonbaby (Apr 18, 2019)

Wow - is this discussion still going on? Just dropped by to see if there's "real news" (TM) on the original topic...


----------



## Ordacleaphobia (Apr 18, 2019)

Wanting a product to exist =/= Feeling like said product _should_ exist because you want it. 
I don't think most people feel entitled to their dream guitar.
I think most people just really want it and if it's suddenly available, would probably be enthused about being able to purchase it.



canuck brian said:


> It's seriously something that we're going to very loudly disagree on man. I'm sorry.
> 
> I've got ALL the files to make Javelin 6's and 7's. I literally need to clamp a body blank to the table, put the tools in and hit go - voila - Decibel Javelins. There is no way in hell i'm even considering doing that though because i believe right down to my core that it's wrong. It's Darren's property, not mine, and I have no right to use it or even build upon it.



All I'm trying to say is that I don't think we disagree as aggressively as you think. I think you're assuming that I'm okay with things that I'm not and all I'm trying to do is make sure that you know exactly what it is that I'm saying. 

Assuming Darren doesn't have any of his designs protected, yes, you _could_ do that, and it'd be poor form, I think. But not technically illegal, and since Darren isn't making guitars anymore and people like that design, I wouldn't be surprised if someone else in your situation would take the opportunity. There's unquestionably people out there that wouldn't have too hard of a time talking themselves into doing that, and while I wouldn't be a fan, I would kind of 'get' why they're doing it. 
And in this case, I think this is the part where we majorly disagree on, I wouldn't really fault the buyers too much. Again, I wouldn't be happy about seeing it happen, but I don't know if I would be offended, either. I'd probably think to myself that it's kind of in poor taste and just move on. But...it's not my world. I'm just some dude that likes guitars. 

If he does have his designs protected, that'd just be straight up illegal and I don't think anybody would support illegal replicas even if they weren't forgeries.
Which- again; are _*never *_okay.


----------



## Slippery_Pete (Apr 18, 2019)

I mean, like, honestly you know, KL copied the body of an Explorer. Like for sure.


----------



## Demiurge (Apr 18, 2019)

^I think it works like satire- it's considered okay when you punch up. Rip a design for a more expensive guitar, you're feted for "refining" the design. Rip a design for a cheaper guitar, you're a dirty rotten scoundrel.


----------



## Albake21 (Apr 18, 2019)

Lemonbaby said:


> Wow - is this discussion still going on? Just dropped by to see if there's "real news" (TM) on the original topic...


Seriously, I don't want to go through these pages just to see if there is any new update since the Skervesen update. This thread pretty much has nothing to do with the actual topic anymore.


----------



## StevenC (Apr 18, 2019)

Demiurge said:


> ^I think it works like satire- it's considered okay when you punch up. Rip a design for a more expensive guitar, you're feted for "refining" the design. Rip a design for a cheaper guitar, you're a dirty rotten scoundrel.


But that is kinda the idea... 

Take thing and make it better: you've added value. 

Take thing and make it cheaper: you've made a profit.

KL>Gibson value added

Ran<KL in every way


----------



## Demiurge (Apr 18, 2019)

^I can see that, but does adding value cancel-out the supposed ethical concern of using another's design?


----------



## sezna (Apr 18, 2019)

Demiurge said:


> ^I can see that, but does adding value cancel-out the supposed ethical concern of using another's design?


Patent law generally thinks so, otherwise fields would never progress


----------



## diagrammatiks (Apr 18, 2019)

You don’t lose money because someone whose was never going to pay you for something buys a copy of something you sell. That’s not how that works.

Sorry couldn’t read this thread anymore and let this stupidity continue.


----------



## Demiurge (Apr 18, 2019)

Perhaps I'll regret dragging my cocktail hour devil's advocacy out further, but I'll ask regarding guitars: is using more 'spensive woods & parts a design improvement?


----------



## sezna (Apr 18, 2019)

diagrammatiks said:


> You don’t lose money because someone whose was never going to pay you for something buys a copy of something you sell. That’s not how that works.
> 
> Sorry couldn’t read this thread anymore and let this stupidity continue.


we sure are lucky you put an end to it



Demiurge said:


> Perhaps I'll regret dragging my cocktail hour devil's advocacy out further, but I'll ask regarding guitars: is using more 'spensive woods & parts a design improvement?



<opinion> perhaps not, but, is better quality? </opinion>


----------



## diagrammatiks (Apr 18, 2019)

sezna said:


> we sure are lucky you put an end to it
> 
> 
> 
> <opinion> perhaps not, but, is better quality? </opinion>



I don’t care about copying. Ya’ll argue that until you’re blue in the face. 

Let’s have a concept of revenue that matches this century.


----------



## narad (Apr 18, 2019)

diagrammatiks said:


> You don’t lose money because someone whose was never going to pay you for something buys a copy of something you sell. That’s not how that works.
> 
> Sorry couldn’t read this thread anymore and let this stupidity continue.



That's why I just download all my movies and music. It's ethically fine because I was never going to pay them, but I want it, and the option is available to me, so voila.


----------



## diagrammatiks (Apr 18, 2019)

narad said:


> That's why I just download all my movies and music. It's ethically fine because I was never going to pay them, but I want it, and the option is available to me, so voila.



Of course your knee jerk reaction completely misses the point. 

You conflate a number of different issues, ethical, moral, economic because copying is an issue you feel very intensely about instead of something you actually understand. 

If you think copying or downloading music is morally wrong. That’s fine. 

But if you think that every downloaded song is loss revenue that’s insane.


----------



## narad (Apr 18, 2019)

diagrammatiks said:


> Of course your knee jerk reaction completely misses the point.
> 
> You conflate a number of different issues, ethical, moral, economic because copying is an issue you feel very intensely about instead of something you actually understand.
> 
> ...



I agree, and I don't disagree with that statement. But, for the sake of discussion in this thread, I think it's a bit off base. Whether someone is not ever going to buy something, provided it's value doesn't exceed their net worth, is something that's hard to clarify. If you concede that then the flood doors open to each person's individual self serving value judgements - "Yea! I was never going to buy any music, $10 an album is too much, but now that I have it I listen to it 100x a day!"


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Apr 18, 2019)

@MaxOfMetal plz


----------



## diagrammatiks (Apr 18, 2019)

narad said:


> I agree, and I don't disagree with that statement. But, for the sake of discussion in this thread, I think it's a bit off base. Whether someone is not ever going to buy something, provided it's value doesn't exceed their net worth, is something that's hard to clarify. If you concede that then the flood doors open to each person's individual self serving value judgements - "Yea! I was never going to buy any music, $10 an album is too much, but now that I have it I listen to it 100x a day!"



Right, that’s saying you shouldn’t steal. That’s fine. My position on that in relationship to software and digital goods is a bit more complicated but I’ll agree that you generally shouldn’t steal. 

But in the case of downloading stuff, the perspective on the other side is exactly the same. Whether I never buy that album and listen to it never or steal it and listen to it 100 times the actual money the company would have received is still zero. 

That’s not to say that the internet and downloading hasn’t decreased music industry revenue across the board. It definitely has. But the reason for that is a lot more complicated then that they are losing a sale every time someone pirates an album.


----------



## narad (Apr 18, 2019)

KnightBrolaire said:


> @MaxOfMetal plz



Why would you clamor for a lock on a self-sustaining topic of discussion? Just because it split off from the main topic? You'd rather not have any posts about either topic than see a thread bumped that you're not participating in? I'm always confused by this behavior.

If anything just split into 2 threads.


----------



## Slippery_Pete (Apr 18, 2019)

StevenC said:


> But that is kinda the idea...
> 
> Take thing and make it better: you've added value.
> 
> ...



I would replace the word “value” with two words, “forum cred”. I’m sure they are awesome guitars but let’s be honest. It’s mostly about Hetfield endorsing him.


----------



## sezna (Apr 18, 2019)

narad said:


> Why would you clamor for a lock on a self-sustaining topic of discussion? Just because it split off from the main topic? You'd rather not have any posts about either topic than see a thread bumped that you're not participating in? I'm always confused by this behavior.
> 
> If anything just split into 2 threads.


I think it is more about the discourse occasionally turning aggressive, but yeah if we can keep it civil I'm down


----------



## narad (Apr 19, 2019)

Slippery_Pete said:


> I would replace the word “value” with two words, “forum cred”. I’m sure they are awesome guitars but let’s be honest. It’s mostly about Hetfield endorsing him.



Well, I've bought 2, and I've spent 1000x more time chasing Eric Johnson than Hetfield's (and not really been into anything Metallica's done in 20 years). Obviously Hetfield got the word out on this, but Ken's been building basses for 30 years, explorers in small batches, finishes about 20 every 2.5 years. And the resulting instruments are at the absolute highest tier in terms of craftsmanship IMO, and experience in owning many other things that people consistently rate above Gibson or Ran.

This is off track, but you'd be doing a disservice by saying people are buying them because of Hetfield, and not because Ken's an incredibly dedicated and experienced independent builder.


----------



## c7spheres (Apr 19, 2019)

canuck brian said:


> It's very close to home and something I have experience with. I've sent cease and desists and oddly the law was on my side. That's something else you should probably investigate as you seem clearly uneducated about it.
> 
> The free market is typically governed by legalities and not feelings.
> 
> ...



The problem with everything in the world practically, is the law and the income inequality crap. The answer of work harder is only a temporary fix for a few. If everyone in the world was really smart and rich then there would still be the same amount of poor and destitute people, because it's how people are. We are all mentally ill in our own customized perverted way.

Your example of sending a cease and desist order. That's great if you can actually get it enforced but the likelihood is almost nothing unless you have the money to enforce it, legally. The probability is that the legal enforcement would cost more than the loss unless you are a very large manufacturer, so once again the little guy is screwed and big guy gets away with it. Rights and protections are a commodity which are given to the highest bidder. The legal system is a whore that has no morals or ethics and is not repairable. That is my severly dystopic view. I don't have the money to send Ibanez or Ran or Daemoness a cease and desist to stop copying my Carved top soloist design, and if I did I wouldn't becuase I don't care, but I can prove I was the first by a long shot. At at least 5 years ahead of all of them. I mean how come nobody will take you serious if your just little old me but when my big money enters the equation all of a sudden I'm legit. I can subcontract anyone I want to build anything I want whether it's legal or not. Not that I would. It depends, honestly. I am a moral and ethical person, more than most, for sure, but the reality is that moral and ethics never really existed on a large scale, only in individuals. The fact is that everyone will do anything they want for their own interest. Ibanez elevated itself by theft from Gibson, Tesla lies about caring for the environment while later switching to combustion engine cars and rockets that tear literally 500 miles holes in the Ozone and nobody gives a shit and it's only a blip on the news then goes away. This is how all things are. All great abundance comes from great scarcity, usually. I'm leaving now before I really get cynical, but understand I'm not slamming or disagreeing with anyone here. I actually agree with everything everyone has said. Everyone is right imo.


----------



## chopeth (Apr 19, 2019)

I wish I'd never opened this thread in spite of the info/second chance we thankfully got thanks to Skervesen. Please, mods.


----------



## c7spheres (Apr 19, 2019)

chopeth said:


> I wish I'd never opened this thread in spite of the info/second chance we thankfully got thanks to Skervesen. Please, mods.


I wish the best for Ran and hope they can get back to making kick ass guitars. I would love to commision a build someday. Probably the best customs for the money. Even though I never played one, I like everything I've seen from them. I've only heard good things about theier guitars and customer experiences and had a good experience when I had questions before I narrowly missed putting down a deposit. I wish there was someone in the U.S. that was doing exactly what they do. Especialy if they made paddle headstocks and Wizard neck profiles so it could be finished off by local luthier with whatever headstock you want.


----------



## SDMFVan (Apr 19, 2019)

c7spheres said:


> Probably the best customs for the money. Even though I never played one,



Congratulations on summing up the entirety of SSO in 13 words.


----------



## spudmunkey (Apr 19, 2019)

SDMFVan said:


> Congratulations on summing up the entirety of SSO in 13 words.



A close 2nd on the list would be "The best guitar I've ever played. Just thinning out the herd. Reverb link:"


----------



## Slippery_Pete (Apr 19, 2019)

The best is when someone posts a new gear day YouTube video and gushes over how amazing it is. Then the next day it’s on Reverb.


----------



## Spicypickles (Apr 19, 2019)

Great argument. 

Shrimp cocktail is absolutely delicious from everything I’ve seen, even though I haven’t tasted it.


----------



## dr_game0ver (Apr 19, 2019)

Spicypickles said:


> Great argument.
> 
> Shrimp cocktail is absolutely delicious from everything I’ve seen, even though I haven’t tasted it.


Unfortunately this is the internet so i'm gonna have to disagree with you. Even tho i haven't tried it either...


----------



## spudmunkey (Apr 19, 2019)

Spicypickles said:


> Great argument.
> 
> Shrimp cocktail is absolutely delicious from everything I’ve seen, even though I haven’t tasted it.



I love shrimp cocktail, but hate shrimp. It's great on a grilled cheese with cheddar.


----------



## Spicypickles (Apr 19, 2019)

I was just using that as an example. Take it from Bubba, shrimp is amazing in its many forms.


----------



## Soya (Apr 19, 2019)

Its my favorite move in jiu jitsu.


----------



## c7spheres (Apr 19, 2019)

SDMFVan said:


> Congratulations on summing up the entirety of SSO in 13 words.


Haha, Very funny!  I knew someone would point that out! Here's my revised/corrected statement: I wish the best for Ran and hope they can get back to making kick ass guitars. I would love to commission a build someday. Probably the best customs for the money if all the hype around them is true. Even though I never played one, I like everything I've seen from them. I've only heard good things about thier guitars and customer experiences and had a good experience when I had questions before I narrowly missed putting down a deposit. I wish there was someone in the U.S. that was doing exactly what they do. Especialy if they made paddle headstocks and Wizard neck profiles so it could be finished off by local luthier with whatever headstock you want. 

Smartass : )


----------



## Kleks (Apr 19, 2019)

Fookin nonsense all of it. 

How about a bit respect for OP you morons???


----------



## narad (Apr 19, 2019)

Kleks said:


> Fookin nonsense all of it.
> 
> How about a bit respect for OP you morons???



+1, Yea guys, where do you think you are? Some sort of fun place where you can joke around with each other? Jeez!


----------



## Emperoff (Apr 21, 2019)

Can a mod please clean this mess so people actually affected by this issue don't have to swim through pages of people fighting each other for something off-topic?


----------



## LeviathanKiller (Apr 21, 2019)

Emperoff said:


> Can a mod please clean this mess so people actually affected by this issue don't have to swim through pages of people fighting each other for something off-topic?


Why don't we just have a thread for RAN troubles updates? I think the majority of the banter here is interesting.


----------



## Kleks (Apr 21, 2019)

LeviathanKiller said:


> Why don't we just have a thread for RAN troubles updates? I think the majority of the banter here is interesting.


This is thread for RAN troubles updates.

Why don't you just open another one for your irrelevant crap-talk?


----------



## narad (Apr 21, 2019)

Kleks said:


> This is thread for RAN troubles updates.
> 
> Why don't you just open another one for your irrelevant crap-talk?



But then people won't understand the context for our new irrelevant crap-talk without first coming back here to read the first half of said crap-talk. It just makes sense to keep it all in one place, no?

But for real, what's to update? Ran = kaput.

And go check out the Vik guitars thread where his business went to shit, or the BRJ thread where his business went to shit. It was a series of small tangent conversations that were topically relevant to Vik or BRJ, or similarly now, Ran, as are all threads. It's a forum - it's not official customer support. Instead of getting bent out of shape that the thread gets bumped (for discussing the ethics of Ran's previous business practices), simply realize that that's NEVER the nature of these threads.

You can actually do your own moderating by simply blocking the people you don't want to see. Since your sole purpose in your whole week of being a member here seems to be this thread, all you have to do is block the irrelevant crap-talkers, and all your problems will go away.


----------



## prlgmnr (Apr 21, 2019)

Why do Americans call prawns shrimp? What do you call shrimp?


----------



## Seabeast2000 (Apr 21, 2019)

prlgmnr said:


> Why do Americans call prawns shrimp? What do you call shrimp?




Prawnz0rz.


----------

