[Leherenn]

On the face of it, it seems like a market ripe for disruption. Is it that hard to make a decent guitar, or is branding so import to customers that a new brand with a decent product at a cheaper price has basically no chance?

[Gravityloss]

There are a lot of brands and manufacturers. One brand might use multiple manufacturers. Or one manufacturer might make for multiple brands and might even sell some directly with their own brand. Some forms are trademarked (Charvel uses the Fender headstock shape in some of their models). Pickups make a big portion of the sound, again connect different ones together. Some makers insist on putting really crappy pickups in their otherwise excellent guitars. Some might have ok woodwork but all the hardware is bad.

The traditional evolution for a guitar maker is like this: A guitar technician tours with famous guitarists and starts customizing instruments for them. They start their own brand for making new guitars. They have a small team in a small shop and they hand make good but expensive guitars. Then they move manufacturing to Japan. Still pretty good stuff, moderate price, available for the people who really want to get it. Third phase is to move manufacturing somewhere else and sell barely adequate quality guitars with just your brand. Make flashy paint jobs, sell to the masses as "first guitar" etc. Original owners might be out at this point.

Some decades later introduce some old models revived at high quality again.

[Leherenn]

But then how come some of them have so much power over retailers?

[alistairSH]

On the bicycle side, the disruption is happening. It's just leaving local retailers out of the mix. Instead, we have 100% online brands appearing (Canyon, etc).

Locally, the bike shops that are doing well all have a side-business - several have brewpubs or cafes, other have training facilities.