A bit of heavy relicing.

[Kiwi]

In August 2019 Gibson basically trashed a load of Firebird X's on the grounds they were unsellable.

[ezbass]

A disgusting publicity stunt IMO. They claimed that the guitars had some sort of fault, but I call shenanigans on that. Those guitars could’ve gone to worthy causes or schools no matter what was wrong with them (other than a poorly conceived idea for a guitar). However, Gibson have proved themselves to be the current POTUS of the guitar industry, so we shouldn’t be surprised.

[Kiwi]

They have been coy on the details of why they were unsellable.  

[ezbass]

1 hour ago, Kiwi said:

They have been coy on the details of why they were unsellable.  

Or sarcastic 

[EdwardMarlowe]

I can remember being impressed by instrument smashing antics in my younger days, but the older I get, the more it just seems like a dreadful waste of a guitar some kid who is desperate to learn but can't afford one would probably be veyr grateful to receive.

THe great irony of electric guitar players is that the more they want to be seen as rock and roll wild men, the more inherently conservative they are in relation to their guitars. I mean, I'm talknig about people who in 2020 still think it's clever to claim "rap is not music". The same people who fell all over themselves back in the day to be the first (or the tenth, or the thousandth.... ) to say "enjoy your *toy*" any time anyone bought a Variax (not a real guitar, y'know, because it didn't use "real" pickups, or even have fake ones so it would "look normal"), sneered viciously at these when they were announced. Gibson fans don't want Gibson doing anything it wasn't already doing by 1959. Born a generation or two earlier, they'd still be sneering that solid-boies weren't "real" guitars. In part, Gibson's lifestyle marketing asa 'heritage' brand hasalso helped to ensure that this is the market it primarily panders to. Result? THey try anything new, their market won't buy it, andmost of the rest of us couldn't afford it anyhow. That's the pwoer of branding, I guess - and the double-edged sword. I'd say that's why they were "unsaleable". I'm sure they could have shifted the lot at £100 apiece, but it appears they would rather not risk their brand being cheapened that way. This publicity stunt is clearly designed to hide their "mistake" in terms of what their market will buy - ande perhaps a coded message to that market that they recognise their "mistake" in trying anything new.