Gossip:
A knowledgeable insider has told me that Remington is $6,000,000 (USD) in arrears on their electricity bill. They had to hire in some generators to make electricity to run their machines after the power was turned off by the public utility recently.

Same birdie told me that Dan Cooper of Montana has been recently billed $60,000 retroactively for all the short mags he has built so far, and now must pay royalties for each rifle he builds in the future, to Browning, who is presumably then paying it to ... Rick Jamison?

Et cetera! Expletive deleted.

It is with a heavy heart that I must announce that HA!/DOA cannot go public with stock issues. We will have to stay private in the economic environment of the forseeable future.

We gotta keep alive companies like Sturm Ruger, Dakota, Kimber, and Cooper, disparate as that collection is. Now is not the time for HA!/DOA to try to corner the market. CZ has already taken a pretty big slice of the pie.

Apparently Remington's grabbing up the Russian shotguns and Yugoslavian rifles is indeed a sign of "spartan times" at Big Green. Easy money by surcharging for their name on the cheapies?

so short mags have killed the american gun industry???

lots of irony, greed and unintended conequences here...

boom stick,
I think such chicanery has got to have something to do with it. Times are tough. Sorry I had to let you go. Even the free advertizing and marketing skills you have brought to bear on AR.com are too much for a zero income business such as HA!/DOA. Time is money!

RIP and others,
The writing is on the wall for Remington… just as it was for Winchester. Remington can almost no longer make a rifle that will bring them any profit, this is why they no longer make the ADL this is why they make a plastic rifle with a pressed barrel and this is why they are now trying to import rifles. For years… both of these companies have been in peril but it wasn’t till recently did both of them become more and more desperate… Both companies have been playing the tactics of bringing out new cartridges, knowing that the 5 percent(ers) will buy them, then dumping the support of making the cartridges and the rifles themselves once the 5%(ers) stopped buying.
Very pathetic… every year its been the same story… the price of rifles have gone up past inflation, and the quality has gone down. These companies (Rem, win, Marlin) do not invest in there future. Every seen the inside of Winchester or rem or marlin? Marlin has 150 machines dating back to the 50s making one gun. There are NO “MODERN CNCs’†in any of the 3 companies I have mentioned. They never wanted to keep up with technology and now… the quality and more importantly the cost of manufacturing has killed them. Remember how dumb both Winchester and Remington thought you were? That you couldn’t find a Rem 30-06 or M70 in 25-06 because the demand for the wsm, and RUMs was so great… they were focusing their attention on getting them out the door first. Yeah they were... nothing else had an immediate profit for them. These two jokers never intended to support there newly found cartridges and they wont, but that’s the least of there problems. Ever seen the inside of Bushmaster? Its amazing how much the company can kick out with so few machines. Despite the old man dying, Ruger still has somewhat of a head on its shoulders.

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:
boom stick,
I think such chicanery has got to have something to do with it. Times are tough. Sorry I had to let you go. Even the free advertizing and marketing skills you have brought to bear on AR.com are too much for a zero income business such as HA!/DOA. Time is money!

you can fire me and rehire me but you renamed my cart...

i think i deserve some recognition in the name...lakota boom stick or whatever...

we (till i got fired ) have an elite (french for high cost and low production) line of proprietary (french for wildcat) cartridges that can inspire the short sighted companies to produce what the unwashed masses realy want. we are good for the industry as a guiding light. we can in years to come come up with a lot of inventive carts that will set a new standard. or if they dont change and go belly up...we will become the next dakota-kimber or whatever.

till then the idea/r+d stage is fun!

p.s.

rip...what do you think of my 50-110 long nose???

So all the WSM rifles have Cooper in trouble.

Great marketing trick that Winchester did. Sink all the copetition and themselves in one fell swoop.

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:
p.s.

rip...what do you think of my 50-110 long nose???

O.K. boom stick, the cartridge name is back to:

.450 Lakota Boomstick

No BS. .450 LB, the short-nosed, short-necked one.

... If only you will do your own R&D on the 50-110 Long Nose, and let me skip this one. I have too many irons in the fire as it is.

HA!/DOA: The Thundersticks of the Cognoscenti.

quote:

Originally posted by NEJack:
So all the WSM rifles have Cooper in trouble.

Great marketing trick that Winchester did. Sink all the copetition and themselves in one fell swoop.

Jack,
I think Mr. Cooper could get out of paying Browning retroactively, but the lawyer fees would cost more than the $60,000 they want from him.

I suppose he might want to continue building them too, if anybody is buying them after this fallout.

I hope they don't run the Cooper rifle maker out of business.

When a "manufacture" becomes an "importer" you know it is a bad sign. Very Bad.

quote:

Originally posted by RIP:

quote:

Originally posted by boom stick:
p.s.

rip...what do you think of my 50-110 long nose???

O.K. boom stick, the cartridge name is back to:

.450 Lakota Boomstick

No BS. .450 LB, the short-nosed, short-necked one.

... If only you will do your own R&D on the 50-110 Long Nose, and let me skip this one. I have too many irons in the fire as it is.

HA!/DOA: The Thundersticks of the Cognoscenti.

thanks for the reinstation...

will do on the 50-110 long nose...but what do you think of it? an extra .2" in the case...that is a lot

sorry for the hijack...

quote:

Originally posted by smallfry:
RIP and others,
The writing is on the wall for Remington ... Despite the old man dying, Ruger still has somewhat of a head on its shoulders.

I agree, Ruger seems to be "most likely to succeed" as far as revenues. They have a very diversified offering of long guns and handguns, and a lot of investment casting business for other industries that is little heard of by us gunnuts. They have been more successfully innovative in the firearms design area, seems to me. More good than bad, in the balance. My first hunting rifle was a .30-06 M77, which will have to be pried from my cold dead fingers some day, as it is one of those Sub-MOA factory rifles.

Ruger is the only big american gun company not to change hands.I have never had a problem with a Ruger firearm.I have had nothing but problems with Winchester and Remington.I think the less # of gun buyers and the wsms are going to kill the gun companies.We didnt need 29 different 7mm rifles thyey did nothing the old ones didnt do better.Rick Jamison w=should have been given something but not be the breaker of the dam of the american firearms industry.I just bought three winchester model 94 trails end in 25-35.I didnt get to see them just bought them over the phone .They have the worse wood fittings I have ever seen.I think only one of three stocks might be useable.I have never had a bad stocked Ruger.I think Bill Ruger was the Sam Colt and John Browning of the 20th century.I buy every Ruger that I am interested in and have sold very few of them.I have never had a problem with any of my rifles except one that I got on the internet that I had to part back together because many parts were broken.I do wish that Ruger would make more parts for its old Ruger 77 mark I.They are out of most of the major parts and this is my favorite rifle.Ruger is the best firearms company from its start to present that still going strong.

A contrary opinion here on the demise of the US firearms industry as a whole.

First Winchester is not really dead, its owned by who has owned it for 50 years or so, OLIN some corporate shuffling around here but they have owned Winchesster for a long time. They made a smart business move years ago, dump the non profitable gun making interest, by leasing. Great.... leased by FN who invest squat, operated as a old labor intensive industry, and made sure Winchester never saw a military contract. All old bad news. Now lets talk about OLIN, they are doing just fine, chemical manufaturer who retains the WInchester ammo name, and making as much ammo as they possibly can for delivery to the war. there balance sheets look just fine.

Now enter Remington, they retained ownership of their ammo brand. Which definately helps the balance sheet. I have some doubts about the gunmaking business but as long as they hold on to the ammo brand I suspect survival.

I am actually curious what the next few months will bring in the trails of Winchester. Hope is once US Repeating Arms leased rights to the name expires, it is possible it will get reborn from the ashes, smaller, more modern. less labor intensive. I am hoping anyway..time will tell. One thing for sure is I would certainly not hire the existing members of the current marketing department.

I will miss the CRF model 70's if they are gone forever, good parts there which there isn't any equivalent at the price point.

Personally, I hope Remington does go under. History's timeline is littered with gunmakers who got it wrong.

No company that has made as many stupid and costly mistakes as Remington should be allowed to stay in business. The electric utility should put a J-lock on Remington's factory doors.

I feel the same way about USRAC. The Model 70 design will never die, and that is all I care about. We'll get a better Model 70 once USRAC gets the hell out of the way.

If I want factory fodder, I'll buy a Kimber and shoot Federal ammo. You won't find me crying in my beer over Remington or USRAC.

quote:

We'll get a better Model 70 once USRAC gets the hell out of the way.

I certainly hope so, the current situation definately introduces possibilites on that score.

Makes me wonder, if they can't afford the light bill, how did they afford the generators and diesel fuel....

John

quote:

Originally posted by Big Bore Boar Hunter:
Makes me wonder, if they can't afford the light bill, how did they afford the generators and diesel fuel....

John

Maybe rental units with cash upfront. It does sound fishy though. Most companies wouldn't dream of stiffing the light company until the bitter end.

Its Just a nasty Rumor guys Remington is owned
by Oprah and Tupperware. They couldnt possibly go under.

Actually it could be the truth I hope not!
I prefer other makes of rifles but Remington is still in my top 4 picks as a manufacturer.

I find it difficult to believe that any company, other than Winchester or the Herstal Group susidiaries, could be retroactively billed for making WSM's. I am not a lawyer, but this sounds like it could be beaten in court easily.

Remington will now take the J lock off your rifle for $20.I think the remington model 710 is about the biggest piece of crap they have made.Have you seen their new muzzleloader its looks nice and cheap and very ugly.I do want a Sendero in 264 before they go under.I hope they dont but between Walmart getting them to make cheap guns and the frickin wsms its killing american gun makers.

.

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
The economic indicators for the US economy do not look good when compared to the rest of the first world.

And yet, the U.S. economy has the highest growth rate of any first world country.

Global Economic Indicators


George

.

Most of the time, it is because of poor management which is only interested in boosting PE ratios (make the shareholders happy and you'll get a bigger bonus and more stock options), reluctance to introduce new methods and equipment due to the high capital investments required (the decision-makers do not expect to be with the company when the investments pay off), heavy pension, medical, and labor costs, and the other extravagant demands and featherbedding of some labor unions.

By moving production off-shore, they 'win' all around (tax breaks provided by the host country, more lax safety requirements, much lower labor costs, often non-existent pension and medical costs, etc.).

In many cases, the unions will demand their pound of flesh right up until the factory doors close (airline employees being a very notable exception).

Still, there is very little 'economic malaise' here as opposed to the stagnancy in France or Germany.

Of course, this discussion is more appropriate for the either Miscellaneous Topics or (God forbid!) the Political Forum.

George

Amerikan's buy stuff and lots of it comes from China etc. US trade deficit is phenomenal, in some sectors manufacturers relies on the domestic market.

Cheers
/JOHAN

quote:

Do you guys honestly believe that it's the introduction of a cartridge or the actions of one person

No Alf I don't for a minute think that. The issues are a lot deeper than that, a big item is not being lean, when your markek is a shrinking one, coupled with its a durable goods that need replacemnt at best every ten years.

In Winchester ( U.S. Repeating Arms really ) when was the last truely new rifle they made? Other than the CRF model 70, its been really years since they have introduced anything new, not just tweaks and fiddles. There was a time that Winchester introduced a new rifle almost every five years, the model 88 and 100 come to mind as some of the last really new designs. I wonder if they even had a R&D budget for development of new designs left, funny thing is Browning had new designs but Winchester didn't. Look at new introductions since the 1980's slim pickings there. And the real terminal problem was the fact that every gunshop I walked into didn't have Winchesters or at best one or two. Every time I walk into sporting goods stores, there seems to be 5 Remington or Ruger rifles to every Winchester. Consumers don't buy what they can't see, plain and simple.

No Alf the management at USRA have been firmly operating in the 1950's for years, and the whole house of cards has finally come down, its been a long time coming, although it is curious that "the" year the rights to the Winchester name come up for renewal it all falls apart. My other guess is this didn't happen overnight, I beat the balance sheets for the last three years look miserable ( maybe 5 years ), nobody closes a business with one year business turndown, this has been going on for a while.

I don't think either USRAC or Remington are as dumb as some seem to think. That they have lasted as long as they have manufacturing in a country that goes out of its way to drive manufacturing out of the country is a testament to their business acumen. Take a look around, there is hardly a healthy manufacturing company left in the USA.

quote:

Originally posted by schromf:
Every time I walk into sporting goods stores, there seems to be 5 Remington or Ruger rifles to every Winchester.

I was told by more than one gunshop owner that Ruger allows/allowed gun shops to take guns on a consignment basis. This permits shops to have a large inventory of Rugers with little investment.

George

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
Do you guys honestly believe that it's the introduction of a cartridge or the actions of one person ( the Jamison suit as some would contend) that brings companies into trouble ?

No, Remington and Winchester have had long spiraling deaths which have been directly related to the lack of investment to technology. It is not from law suits or new cartridges it’s the fact that they no longer could make a profit off of a firearm.

Of course USRAC runs the old manufacturing machines into the ground.

What incentive is there to upgrade manufacturing capacity for a 10 year product run? They took the M70 and Win. name for 10 years to milk it as long as they could.

Now they start playing hardball to negotiate for the next 10 year lease. Such is the life when you lease. Without long term ownership there can be no pride in manufacturing and that is a losing recipe where quality is concerned.

Well said George. This post has been on my mind all day. Thank you.

I suspect Winchester fell into the trap of letting the giant retailers dictate the cost of the product because of the high volumn potential. Meeting these demands caused the quallity issues we have beat to death here on AR.

Maybe if we all supported our local gun shop, where service and support went with the sale, a business plan that supported adequate magins may have saved Winchester, not to mention your local gun shop.