Hamer. A sad day.

[krysh]

[quote name='RhysP' timestamp='1357047911' post='1916690']
This isn't correct. Only Paul Hamer left, Jol Dantzig & Frank Untermyer both remained with Hamer (Dantzig left for a brief period between 1993-97).
Jol Dantzig was ousted by Fender in 2010. Frank Untermyer became something pretty high up in Kamen but retained links to Hamer until the end.
[/quote]
frank was and probably still is the head of the hamer/ovation/guild factory in new hartford.

[Delberthot]

SWR are also owned by Fender, not Gibson and a cheap Tobias range has been released by Gibson. Obviously nowhere near as good as the originals but they are selling them for buttons compared to the originals

Fender and Gibson are the musical equivelant of General Motors and Ford. They both own a large slice of the market made up of many different manufacturers and if any of them don't do so well then they're shut down. Its never nice when a brand ceases to exist but at the end of the day its business.

[BassPimp66]

I find it strange that they are not able to sustain a small on-demand production line for Hamer. Fender have got all the tools and materials to build whatever guitar they want. They are big enough so that they can centralize all support functions. If the Hamer guitars are built in the Fender factory, it's pretty much about applying a different decal at the end of the process. They could keep the brand running without throwing money down the drain, provided they showed restrain on marketing, artist relations, etc... shame really.

[RhysP]

[quote name='BassPimp66' timestamp='1357055227' post='1916850']
I find it strange that they are not able to sustain a small on-demand production line for Hamer. Fender have got all the tools and materials to build whatever guitar they want. They are big enough so that they can centralize all support functions. If the Hamer guitars are built in the Fender factory, it's pretty much about applying a different decal at the end of the process. They could keep the brand running without throwing money down the drain, provided they showed restrain on marketing, artist relations, etc... shame really.
[/quote]

But doing that would do away with everything that made Hamer such superb instruments - they'd just become another range of fender mass produced questionable quality sh*t.

Edited January 1, 2013 by RhysP

[BottomE]

[quote name='RhysP' timestamp='1357057381' post='1916892']
But doing that would do away with everything that made Hamer such superb instruments - they'd just become another range of fender mass produced questionable quality sh*t.
[/quote]

Exactomento my friend. Even a child can tell the difference in quality between my Fender Jazz Bass and my Hamer Cruise. The fit, finish and quality of the Hamer are leagues above the Fender. Its not even close.

[Wolverinebass]

Interestingly, a mate of mine got a 2nd hand Cruise bass a few years ago. He flogged it making a not entirely substantial loss on it and got a MIM Jazz which I thought was although a bit less in theory was miles behind in terms of feel and how it played and sounded. He then went mad and bought 5 Danelectros all of which are mince. I thought the Cruise bass was brilliant. What a mug.

Look at this. [url="http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/170962227167?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649"]http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/170962227167?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649[/url]

It's just ridiculously nice and I wouldn't say stupidly pricey either. If I had the cash it'd be worth a punt. Yet, no more to come. Thank you for closing them down Fender. Go back to your mass produced, "we haven't changed anything about our design at a fundamental level for more than 50 years" tosh. It's just so wrong.

[BassPimp66]

[quote name='RhysP' timestamp='1357057381' post='1916892']
But doing that would do away with everything that made Hamer such superb instruments - they'd just become another range of fender mass produced questionable quality sh*t.
[/quote]

Not all Fenders are mass-produced. They have some custom options that are pretty good.
I believe they could have kept the Hamer brand under the custom builds.

Edited January 1, 2013 by BassPimp66

[BottomE]

[quote name='Wolverinebass' timestamp='1357059430' post='1916949']
Interestingly, a mate of mine got a 2nd hand Cruise bass a few years ago. He flogged it making a not entirely substantial loss on it and got a MIM Jazz which I thought was although a bit less in theory was miles behind in terms of feel and how it played and sounded. He then went mad and bought 5 Danelectros all of which are mince. I thought the Cruise bass was brilliant. What a mug.

Look at this. [url="http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/170962227167?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2649"]http://www.ebay.co.u...984.m1423.l2649[/url]

It's just ridiculously nice and I wouldn't say stupidly pricey either. If I had the cash it'd be worth a punt. Yet, no more to come. Thank you for closing them down Fender. Go back to your mass produced, "we haven't changed anything about our design at a fundamental level for more than 50 years" tosh. It's just so wrong.
[/quote]

That does look nice. Love to have a play of that one.

[BigRedX]

The Hamer situation is very sad, but has nothing on Gibson's takeover and closure of Opcode back in the late 90s. I haven't seen any evidence of Opcode technology ever appear in other Gibson Products.

[Dingus]

I suppose that the bottom line is that , as Karl Marx famously hypothesized , Capitalism is barbarism , and ultimately the more profitable companies will consume the less profitable ones .

[RhysP]

[quote name='Dingus' timestamp='1357080678' post='1917380']
I suppose that the bottom line is that , as Karl Marx famously hypothesized , Capitalism is barbarism , and ultimately the more profitable companies will consume the less profitable ones .
[/quote]

Going by the way Fender & Gibson operate when buying up these smaller companies I think a more appropriate Marx quote would be "A single party state cannot exist without first eradicating it's opposition"

[Dingus]

[quote name='RhysP' timestamp='1357130676' post='1917789']
Going by the way Fender & Gibson operate when buying up these smaller companies I think a more appropriate Marx quote would be "A single party state cannot exist without first eradicating it's opposition"
[/quote]

Well that would certainly be part of it .

It's a long time since I thought about Hamer basses , but this thread has reminded me just how nice they are / were , and made me nostalgic for their heyday . Such a shame they are now gone .

[uncle psychosis]

[quote name='Wolverinebass' timestamp='1357059430' post='1916949']
Thank you for closing them down Fender. Go back to your mass produced, "we haven't changed anything about our design at a fundamental level for more than 50 years" tosh. It's just so wrong.
[/quote]

A bizarre attitude. Musicians want to buy Fenders. Not only that, but musicians want to buy Fenders that are the same as they were 50 years ago. You can hardly blame Fender for making what people want to buy...

[RhysP]

I used to work in a (now defunct) music shop in Cardiff that was one of the few places in the UK to stock them in the late 70's/early 80s so I got to play loads of them & they were all fantastic instruments.
I've owned a quite a few over the years & got to meet Paul Hamer & Jol Dantzig at the Frankfurt trade fair a couple of times too.

I've always been a big fan or Hamers & it is indeed a real shame that they are no more.

[NancyJohnson]

About twenty years ago, Hamer used to be distributed (along with Godin and, I think, Warwick) from a small industrial unit close to me in Kings Ride Park, Ascot; my drummer knew someone who worked there and I had a couple of hours one afternoon pulling guitars out of boxes and playing them. They were all good. I can probably pinpoint that afternoon as where my love affair with Hamer first started.
P

[Wolverinebass]

[quote name='uncle psychosis' timestamp='1357134057' post='1917862']
A bizarre attitude. Musicians want to buy Fenders. Not only that, but musicians want to buy Fenders that are the same as they were 50 years ago. You can hardly blame Fender for making what people want to buy...
[/quote]

You are quite correct of course. Nothing wrong with Fender making stuff that people want to buy. It could be argued that Fender (like Rickenbacker) can't deviate too much from their tried and tested formula. Nothing wrong with that. What is totally wrong is them closing down a company which makes better instruments than them and also them giving me some sort of crap about "they're too similar" to Fender basses and therefore not allowing them to be sold in the UK. Surely it's Fender that have the bizarre attitude and not me?

[uncle psychosis]

[quote name='Wolverinebass' timestamp='1357219828' post='1919254']
You are quite correct of course. Nothing wrong with Fender making stuff that people want to buy. It could be argued that Fender (like Rickenbacker) can't deviate too much from their tried and tested formula. Nothing wrong with that. What is totally wrong is them closing down a company which makes better instruments than them and also them giving me some sort of crap about "they're too similar" to Fender basses and therefore not allowing them to be sold in the UK. Surely it's Fender that have the bizarre attitude and not me?
[/quote]

Lots of Squiers are now (supposedly) outdoing "proper" Fenders, but Fender are still maintaining the Squier line...If enough people wanted to buy Hamer basses then Fender would quite happily sell them. They've survived decades in a tough business, you don't do that by throwing away money.

I've worked in manufacturing and maintaining small volume products isn't particularly easy or profitable. A lot of the time it just doesn't make financial sense.

Its always sad when instrument brands go under, but I don't think its particularly fair to assign some kind of underhand motive when its far more likely to just be because of simple economics.

Edited January 3, 2013 by uncle psychosis

[Gust0o]

[quote name='uncle psychosis' timestamp='1357229114' post='1919438']
I've worked in manufacturing and maintaining small volume products is particularly easy or profitable. A lot of the time it just doesn't make financial sense.
[/quote]

Maintaining the methods of mass production for small volumes is the killer. Works for craft production, in the small-volume/high-end space, but you have to cut your cloth accordingly - you can't have production sat idle.

I think the market killed Hamer. People were likely just not buying them in the same volumes as in previous periods, and someone made a commercial decision.

[RhysP]

[quote name='uncle psychosis' timestamp='1357229114' post='1919438']
....I don't think its particularly fair to assign some kind of underhand motive when its far more likely to just be because of simple economics.
[/quote]

But Fender have a long history of using underhand bullyboy tactics with smaller companies - look how they threatened Rob Green at Status when his first basses went out under the "Strata" name.
Fender absurdly made him change the name as it was supposedly too close to "Strat" & people would obviously confuse the two & accidentally buy a high end carbon fibre bass guitar thinking it was one of Fenders sh*tty bolt together guitars.

[Dingus]

If Flea and EVH had decided to play Hamer basses and guitars respectively I expect that they would still be in production today , but as it stands I don't think even the bass player out of Def Leppard plays them any more . The profile of the brand had been on the wane for a long time .

[uncle psychosis]

[quote name='RhysP' timestamp='1357229773' post='1919454']
But Fender have a long history of using underhand bullyboy tactics with smaller companies - look how they threatened Rob Green at Status when his first basses went out under the "Strata" name.
Fender absurdly made him change the name as it was supposedly too close to "Strat" & people would obviously confuse the two & accidentally buy a high end carbon fibre bass guitar thinking it was one of Fenders sh*tty bolt together guitars.
[/quote]

yes, but Fender didn't own Rob Green's company. People who buy Status basses weren't giving money to Fender. People who bought Hamer guitars (since 2008) [i]were[/i] giving money to Fender. Companies don't voluntarily close down parts of their organisation that make them money. Its not like its a fly-by-night thing, either---they bought them four years ago. Why buy a company to close them down and then keep them going for four years?

I think the adjective you used to describe Fender's own products suggests that you're perhaps not being entirely objective here...

[uncle psychosis]

[quote name='Gust0o' timestamp='1357229685' post='1919449']
Maintaining the methods of mass production for small volumes is the killer. Works for craft production, in the small-volume/high-end space, but you have to cut your cloth accordingly - you can't have production sat idle.

I think the market killed Hamer. People were likely just not buying them in the same volumes as in previous periods, and someone made a commercial decision.
[/quote]

Precisely. I've heard that Hamer made great guitars---but I don't think I've [i]ever [/i]seen one in the flesh. Not at a gig, not in a shop, not at a mates' house.

[RhysP]

[quote name='uncle psychosis' timestamp='1357231367' post='1919500']
Its not like its a fly-by-night thing, either---they bought them four years ago. Why buy a company to close them down and then keep them going for four years?
[/quote]

You obviously aren't aware of what actually happened - Fender actually started the process of closing Hamer down almost as soon as they bought them. They stopped Hamer producing guitars to supply to shops & turned them into a "special order only" outfit. How the hell is a guitar maker supposed to keep up a profile & sell guitars if the owner stops them supplying shops with their instruments?

Edited January 3, 2013 by RhysP

[RhysP]

[quote name='Gust0o' timestamp='1357229685' post='1919449']
I think the market killed Hamer. People were likely just not buying them in the same volumes as in previous periods, and someone made a commercial decision.
[/quote]

Hamer had been a small volume boutique guitar builder (they were the first of the boutique builders in fact) since it's inception & had prospered very nicely doing just that. They sold everything that they made & had one of the finest reputations of any guitar maker. They would have carried on doing just that to had they not been forced out of business.

[Gust0o]

[quote name='RhysP' timestamp='1357231700' post='1919508']
You obviously aren't aware of what actually happened - Fender actually started the process of closing Hamer down almost as soon as they bought them. They stopped Hamer producing guitars to supply to shops & turned them into a "special order only" outfit. How the hell is a guitar maker supposed to keep up a profile & sell guitars if the owner stops them supplying shops with their instruments?
[/quote]

Perhaps they had prospered nicely, as you say - but their original operation clearly didn't fit with Fender's wider business plan, or their intents if they made the decision so quickly. The above sounds like a rationalisation exercise, from what you've said RhysP - Fender pulling them back to what is, perhaps, a core strength. Others have noted their boutique nature and quality, so why not?

In terms of the mass market, they weren't a brand fit to compete in the way that Fender itself does - perhaps Fender thought the spare production could be better utilised for other purposes, or assets sold on to recoup on costs. And, in any case, would Fender want a Hamer sub-brand challenging their main lines? I'm not so sure, unless there were some real differentiation.

There are a whole host of reasons why Fender might make that decision very early in the deal, and not simply to put a 'competitor' out of business. This type of move is very common in business.

Just musing, maybe shedding a light on some decisions which might otherwise seem bizarre - I'd quite like a look at Fender's strategy, mind, out of professional interest