So, I was looking for an upgrade to my VM Jaguar vibrato tailpiece and I found this comparison between the stock indoneasian/chinese, the AVRI and the Japanese made taiplieces. And the guy brought up something I have been thinking since I started playing guitar.

I won't opine about UK nationalism.

It seems to me that most of the guitar community takes for granted that being "Amarican made" is inherently an indication that it's better quality than stuff made outside of the US (With the exeption that proves the rule being Japanese guitars and Brittish amps). Outside of that, generally speaking everything is lumped together into the "Imports" cathegory.

That was kind of weird when I started thinking about it. For one, I'm working in my thesis, which is about offshoring of manufacturing and services (from a supplier perspective, rather than the common buyer perspective). And in the literature (most of it American and Scandinavian) one factor that companies are encouraged to consider is the "Made in effect" (Wiesmann et al., 2016) or the target market's ethnocentrism (Hamin et al., 2014): The degree to which people from those countries will preffer local made stuff simply because it's made in their own country.

For another, I'm Peruvian, and in my country "import" it's always a positive when talking about non-edibles, a selling point. As an example, here's an FB Marketplace screenshot where many entrys show "Importado" as something important enough to list on the tile.

These are all obviously very cheap strat copies, but in Squiers, Fenders, Epiphones, Ibanez, Charvels, you'll see people list them as \"Imported\", \"Bought abroad\" or \"bought in the US\" despite being asian made models.

Now, there are peruvian made guitars, but they are usually pretty low quality, but Peru is not a manufacturing powerhouse, and their market (Peru) is pretty small. Asian or european countries are a different situation, yet they are still grouped as "Imports".

In reality, I doubt that South Korea, China, Indonesia, Taiwan, or any other country with a sizeable industrial sector would struggle to produce guitars with the quality standards americans consider as MIA. Didn't Asian made guitars already surpass american quality in the 70? Don't people consider those "vintage" guitars superior? I think it's just that nowadays the big US brands know than americans won't pay the same for the same product, as long as it says "Made in X" instead of "Made in America". And therefore, reduce their bidding targets/budget for foreign suppliers. Also, that gap allows them to do some QC and setup, that reinforces the idea that MIA is inherently better. As a country with lower wages, it's more economic to to get an asian guitar and pay a luthier to set it up or fix any minor details, than to pay extra for a guitar with "better quality".

This is even more ridiculous when people talk about Mexican made guitars being inferior to American ones, when they are not only made in the same continent, but are also within the same interlinked economy and tradeblock (NAFTA then, and now USMCA), i.e. having access to the same suppliers and know-how. It's just marketing focused on the US consumer profile.

Anyway, after that rant, I'd like to ask what people outside of the US think of this.

• Do people in Japan or Britain see American made gear as being superior, or do they consider that local gear is better?
• What do Indonesian guitarrists think of guitars made there? Same with China or South Korea and their respective markets.
• What do people in Europe think of this? (Sorry I don't know about European gear)

P.D. Didn't know which flair to use lmao