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

[diagrammatiks]

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]

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]

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]

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

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]

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.

- 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]

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.

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]

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]

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]

"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.

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

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.

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]

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.



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.



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.

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

 

[narad]

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]

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]

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.

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]

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.