Randall Smith Gone From Mesa Boogie/Gibson?

[EOengineer]

If YouTubers were insignificant from a marketing and promotion perspective I doubt the internet would be having this conversation.

You’d also have to be fairly oblivious to not pick up on the cavalcade of YouTubers all releasing videos of every new product to the minute of one another as soon as the manufacturer drops the press embargo.

It’s not coincidental.

 

[Tanax]

They are releasing reissues of old circuits. We will have to see when Mesa releases any actually new products.

If you look at Marshall, they have stagnated to churning out 20W reissues of their old products. I'd rather not see Mesa end up like that.

But that's exactly what people have been asking about? As long as it's not the only thing they do going forward, but we haven't seen any evidence of that. It hasn't been that long since Gibson took over (and designing products takes time).

We'll see like you said if this is all they will do going forward, but I would already love a few more reissues. Mark III and Mark IV would be great.

 

[Desertdweller]

We'll see like you said if this is all they will do going forward, but I would already love a few more reissues. Mark III and Mark IV would be great.

Those amps were for sale for nearly 20 years each and there are over 20000 of each out there. I love my Mark III, but it’s not an amp I’d expect them to ever reissue, same with the IV. I’d like them to get back to forward thinking with amps and keep coming up with new ideas.

 

[GuitarBilly74]

Sorry, but why do you think brands use these people in the first place? it’s not a reward or a kind gesture, it’s advertising. They’re only getting the gigs because it leads to sales.

Exactly. That's why they have to be strict on what these spokespeople can and cannot say. It doesn't matter if there were already rumors out there, as someone associated with company, you just can't do this type of stuff and getting fired is the expected outcome.
You can't run a business without information security. Enforcing it is not "bad PR". Talk to any serious business out there and they will tell you the same thing. Most companies have zero tolerance policies for this kind of stuff.

Fluff got off easy, especially considering how litigious Gibson usually is. I wouldn't be surprised if he ends up getting a cease and desist letter from their lawyers at some point...

 

[MirrorProfiles]

Exactly. That's why they have to be strict on what these spokespeople can and cannot say. It doesn't matter if there were already rumors out there, as someone associated with company, you just can't do this type of stuff and getting fired is the expected outcome.
You can't run a business without information security. Enforcing it is not "bad PR". Talk to any serious business out there and they will tell you the same thing. Most companies have zero tolerance policies for this kind of stuff.

Fluff got off easy, especially considering how litigious Gibson usually is. I wouldn't be surprised if he ends up getting a cease and desist letter from their lawyers at some point...

No one is disagreeing with this though, not a single person has said “Fluff did the right thing”. There’s no debate on that.

I don’t know why it keeps getting brought up as if it’s some kind of justification for Gibson making a meal out of how it’s been handled.

 

[GuitarBilly74]

Those amps were for sale for nearly 20 years each and there are over 20000 of each out there. I love my Mark III, but it’s not an amp I’d expect them to ever reissue, same with the IV. I’d like them to get back to forward thinking with amps and keep coming up with new ideas.

Yeah I think they're doing the IIC+ and the RevF rectifier because they were very small runs and sell for crazy prices in the used market. The Mark III and IV are great but there were a lot of them and you can find them at reasonable prices often. I too hope they continue with new products rather than a bunch of reissues.

 

[Whizzinby]

Gibson making a meal out of how it’s been handled.

?

Fluff says Randall was fired. Gibson end relationship with Fluff. Fluff says Gibson ended relationship with him.

The entire thing is Fluff speaking publicly about Gibson/Mesa, not the other way around.

 

[GuitarBilly74]

No one is disagreeing with this though, not a single person has said “Fluff did the right thing”. There’s no debate on that.

I don’t know why it keeps getting brought up as if it’s some kind of justification for Gibson making a meal out of how it’s been handled.

It's not a "justification". It's just what happens when there are inside leaks. There's been CEOs fired over stuff like this. Sued, even.

The prospect of some loss in sales is small versus the potential costs of having an even slightly permissive policy regarding information security. Ask any company HR or lawyers if you don't believe me. Companies don't play around with this kind of stuff.

 

[Boudoir Guitar]

It's not a "justification". It's just what happens when there are inside leaks. There's been CEOs fired over stuff like this. Sued, even.

The prospect of some loss in sales is small versus the potential costs of having an even slightly permissive policy regarding information security. Ask any company HR or lawyers if you don't believe me. Companies don't play around with this kind of stuff.

Fluff was a YouTuber; occasional touring/recording artist playing Mesa amps. To the extent he had an NDA, it was about products given to him for review or whatever, not the inner machinations employment at Gibson. I would imagine his contract had some generic boiler plate statement about "not making the brand look bad" or something.

I don't think any actual Gibson employee with access to confidential information is going to say "Oh, that Fluff guy heard a rumor and shared it and he still gets...some access to gear. I guess that means I, as an actual employee of the company, get's to share confidential information!"

 

[LeftyLoungeLizard]

What's a "Fluff"?

 

[MirrorProfiles]

?

Fluff says Randall was fired. Gibson end relationship with Fluff. Fluff says Gibson ended relationship with him.

The entire thing is Fluff speaking publicly about Gibson/Mesa, not the other way around.

Gibson puts a vague message out implying Randall has retired. This spreads among employees, dealers, affiliates of Mesa and eventually reaches forums and social media. Not just that he’s sailing off into the sunset, but that it’s a bit messier than that.

Gibson could have handled all of this more decisively and cleared things out.

Once stuff is online and people are talking about it, is when Fluff posted his facebook comment. Which he shouldn’t have done.

Gibson are well within their right to do what they want to Fluff, but it doesn’t really benefit them to give it the whole “we’ll never work with you again!!!!”. They obviously don’t want anyone working with them to be giving information out publicly like that, and they can’t give the impression to others that they’ll allow it. So it’s understandable why they’d terminate the relationship and make an example of him. And choosing to do that also has repercussions, which probably doesn’t help Gibsons image of being an out of touch corporate entity that is more about pleasing shareholders and suits than the average musician.

It wasn’t Fluff’s place to say anything at all, and doing so was a mistake if he wanted to keep working with Mesa. Everyone knew what was going on anyway, even if it took Randall confirming it to convince certain people. Word would have got out, it always does.

 

[GuitarBilly74]

Fluff was a YouTuber; occasional touring/recording artist playing Mesa amps. To the extent he had an NDA, it was about products given to him for review or whatever, not the inner machinations employment at Gibson. I would imagine his contract had some generic boiler plate statement about "not making the brand look bad" or something.

I don't think any actual Gibson employee with access to confidential information is going to say "Oh, that Fluff guy heard a rumor and shared it and he still gets...some access to gear. I guess that means I, as an actual employee of the company, get's to share confidential information!"

I seriously doubt his contract didn't say "any and all information by the disclosing party without express, written consent of the company".
Hell, even the NDA you get online from Legalzoom or whatever says that, let alone from a corporation like Gibson. And personnel information is always considered sensitive.

It's not about what employees "would think". These are blanket policies. I've seen vendors be terminated for saying something before the official announcement. That's a direct loss of a point of sale but it happens because information security is a huge asset and liability. No one plays around with it.

 

[Boudoir Guitar]

I seriously doubt his contract didn't say "any and all information by the disclosing party without express, written consent of the company".
Hell, even the NDA you get online from Legalzoom or whatever says that, let alone from a corporation like Gibson. And personnel information is always considered sensitive.

It's not about what employees "would think". These are blanket policies. I've seen vendors be terminated for saying something before the official announcement. That's a direct loss of a point of sale but it happens because information security is a huge asset and liability. No one plays around with it.

I doubt very seriously the “disclosing party” was Gibson. “Hey Fluff - we here at Gibson just wanted to let you know, despite what you may read in the press, Randall Smith was actually fired.”

 

[GuitarBilly74]

Gibson puts a vague message out implying Randall has retired. This spreads among employees, dealers, affiliates of Mesa and eventually reaches forums and social media. Not just that he’s sailing off into the sunset, but that it’s a bit messier than that.

Gibson could have handled all of this more decisively and cleared things out.

You don't know that they could. There are many reasons why a company won't detail someone's termination. Sometimes it's the employee's own request if he doesn't want the negative connotation of being fired to become public, sometimes it's at the company request. sometimes it's part of the initial contract that terms of termination should not be disclosed etc..... this is why personnel information is always considered sensitive information and the most common statement is simply "so and so is no longer with the company."

Holy moly, it's HR orientation day at TGF. Are you really this uninformed about hiring/firing practices?

 

[GuitarBilly74]

I doubt very seriously the “disclosing party” was Gibson.

Correct. it was not. It was Fluff who disclosed it without clearing it first. If you think that's ok in any shape or form, I don't know what to say to you.

 

[Boudoir Guitar]

I seriously doubt his contract didn't say "any and all information by the disclosing party without express, written consent of the company".
Hell, even the NDA you get online from Legalzoom or whatever says that, let alone from a corporation like Gibson. And personnel information is always considered sensitive.

It's not about what employees "would think". These are blanket policies. I've seen vendors be terminated for saying something before the official announcement. That's a direct loss of a point of sale but it happens because information security is a huge asset and liability. No one plays around with it.

To be clear, I have no problem with Gibson terminating their relationship with him.

My problem is with all of your analogies - they are all related to an employee and/or contractor mishandling the kind of routine information they receive as part of that relationship, which is not what happened here. Fluff didn't spill the beans on some early access amp he got from Gibson/Mesa as part of his relationship with them. He got some info seemingly from a 3rd party that put Gibson in a not awesome light and made the wrong decision about what to do with it. That's completely different than all of your analogies.

As to your last post -- but Gibson didn't say "we have chosen to part ways." They said he retired, which also has connotations that Randall might not have been too pumped about. I doubt both parties agreed to that statement.

 

[LeftyLoungeLizard]

You don't know that they could. There are many reasons why a company won't detail someone's termination. Sometimes it's the employee's own request if he doesn't want the negative connotation of being fired to become public, sometimes it's at the company request or a mutual agreement etc..... this is why personnel information is always considered sensitive information and the most common statement is simply "so and so is no longer with the company."

And undoubtedly it is done to avoid lawsuits by the fired party.

 

[[Nathan]]

GuitarBilly should apply for a job at Gibson. It’s been a fascinating insight to how people can constantly miss the larger context that’s played out here.

 

[Jarick]

1. Randall sold the company. He lost all ability to complain about the handling of the company, including his own involvement, the second he cashed the check
2. Fluff had no business airing company info in public.
3. I wish the new DR was about 20% cheaper

/end

4. Gibson, who've faced PR nightmare after PR nightmare, looks bad yet again for mishandling Randall's exit and cutting ties with a visible sponsor over that mishandling

 

[GuitarBilly74]

GuitarBilly should apply for a job at Gibson. It’s been a fascinating insight to how people can constantly miss the larger context that’s played out here.

And you shouldn't apply for a job anywhere if you're this ignorant about work policies.

At least you got a little video out of it lol
"Don't forget to like and subscribe!! Click the bell for more bullshit content every day".