As we go to print with this June issue of MMR, a hot-button topic on our site (and in my in-box) and elsewhere is the recent parting of the ways that has gone down between Guitar Center and Behringer (MUSIC Group). As is to be expected, both parties have their own version of how events transpired, though this specific business partnership dissolution is playing out in somewhat more publically vitriolic fashion than is typical (see report on page 8 and visit mmrmagazine.com to read comments and to participate in the conversation).
There’s no question that there’s a voyeuristic guilty pleasure element to seeing a breakup happen in real-time (there’s a reason why tabloids and blogs do so well when celebrity relationships go south) and these are two significant players in the world of MI. But mudslinging aside, what’s really going on?
Unquestionably, GC has been a primary channel for Behringer throughout the course of the two-decade relationship between the supplier and the retailer, so at first glance it’d seem that MUSIC Group “loses” more in the wake of this development. That said, there remain plenty of online and brick-and-mortar sellers who still carry Behringer product and will likely continue to do so. So, my guess? It’s not great news for MUSIC Group, but they’ll survive. Last year, Mesa Boogie and GC parted ways and at last check both are still with us (hold your “But how long will Guitar Center be with us?” commentary for a moment).
Aside from the dollars and cents element of it all, how about public perception of both organizations in the wake of all this?
In Behringer’s official commentary on the situation, CEO Uli Behringer describes how his company was “forced to evaluate [Guitar Center’s] credit worthiness” and that, due to what MUSIC Group determined to be GC’s “high risk,” they decided to discontinue business with the retailer. Of course, GC’s credit has been the subject of much debate in recent years and “Oh my God, they are on the verge of bankruptcy!” chatter has littered the blogosphere. Behringer’s remarks, whether you believe their take on how the relationship with GC devolved to be true or not, poke at an open wound.
For their part, not only does GC put forth a radically different take on the situation – that they made the decision to sever ties with Behringer and not the other way around – but they have some choice words for the company and its leader. Uli is “playing loose with the truth,” according to GC’s Christopher Ian Bennett, who goes on to reference Behringer’s “reputation in the industry.” Low blow? Well, a Google search for “Behringer reputation” yields the following top-two results: “Why is Behringer so hated?” and “Behringer really that bad?” On top of that, without taking sides one way or another, Behringer has been involved in legal disputes over alleged trademark and intellectual property rights infringement with Mackie, Roland, and Peavey in recent years. And most in the industry know this.
Both sides are hitting one another where it hurts, so to speak.
So, again: what does it all mean, ultimately? Who “wins” – GC? Behringer? The consumer? Other MI retailers?
Having watched suppliers and retailers split with one another only to regroup down the line, over and over and over throughout the years, my larger take is that it’s a wash. That said, it never hurts to refrain from setting bridges ablaze, however enjoyable it may be to watch them burn.
