quote:

Originally posted by 400 Nitro Express:


California Rigby is not registered in the UK. Think about that. The value of the name and books and records ALONE was 99% of what the US company paid for Rigby - they didn't even buy the machines. They bought a world renowned BRITISH gunmaking NAME - but they didn't bother to tranfer the UK registration for the name to protect it in the UK. How dumb can you get?

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:
I think that at one point the California company was in Chapter 11 reorginization. In reality, they just may not have enough capitol for a protracted court fight with the British company.

I have a completly different take on this than Steve. I don't know Geoff Miller but I bet he probably put his whole life savings into this venture. I have only seen one Rigby up close and personal. It seemed like a nice gun to me. The pictures posted earlier in this thread seem to show a very nice gun indeed and one that I would be very proud to own, built by one of my own countrymen. If this upstart British company is the final nail that pushes the American company over the edge, I just don't see that as a good thing.

quote:

Originally posted by goshoot:

my basic fairness make me feel that if Geoff Miller bought the name and is working to bring back the brand others should not be allowed to rip off his property. His guns I have seen in Reno seemed pretty nice to me. The English company seems to only have vaporware at this time.

quote:

Originally posted by goshoot:
They may or may not have the money to sue now but I bet their attorney is drafting a letter to send to preserve their rights for as long as legally allowed.

quote:

Originally posted by 470Evans:
I'm interested to see how all this ends up.

I never was impressed with the California Rigbys and felt they were overpiced for what they are. They remind me of the "new" Webley built shotguns from Italy.

http://www.basspro.com/webapp/...id=5053&mode=viewGun

They don't look right, don't feel right and unfortunately the criticism that they are trading solely on the name is correct.

I'd like to see proper guns made with the Rigby name once again and wish the new group well.

quote:

Originally posted by goshoot:
I still think this may be the start of a legal maneuver which will have them trying to settle with Miller to buy the name.

quote:

Originally posted by peterdk:
Since i can not be a part of this side of the discussion i thought i might just post some "vaporware"



Thats a beautiful gun. I would love to own it. However, if you were sued in the US and lost since I live in the US I am concerned that it might be taken from me by court order and destroyed like any counterfit item.





best regards

Peter A. Nerving
(gunmaker)
John Rigby & Co.
(gunmakers) Ltd.
London

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:
I think that at one point the California company was in Chapter 11 reorginization. In reality, they just may not have enough capitol for a protracted court fight with the British company.

I have a completly different take on this than Steve. I don't know Geoff Miller but I bet he probably put his whole life savings into this venture. I have only seen one Rigby up close and personal. It seemed like a nice gun to me. The pictures posted earlier in this thread seem to show a very nice gun indeed and one that I would be very proud to own, built by one of my own countrymen. If this upstart British company is the final nail that pushes the American company over the edge, I just don't see that as a good thing.

Dave,

I think you've got me wrong on this. I'm not particularly anti Rigby Cal at all and I bear no malice towards the owner.

My point is they forgot or couldn't be bothered to keep up the UK registration. If a third party then chooses to take that UK name and start producing fine quality bespoke rifles, then good luck to 'em.

Lets face it, they bought a fine UK company and reputation and then failed to keep the name registered in the UK.......which don't exactly make 'em the sharpest tool in the box huh?

As I see it, as much as the Cal company might not like it and as much as they might squeal and squirm, they have no right to complain and I can't see 'em winning.

quote:

Originally posted by husky:
I have just registred the name 'Barak Obama (Gunmakers) Ltd' in Mexifornia.

The company will start to make copies of Baikal double rifles

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:
I think that at one point the California company was in Chapter 11 reorginization. In reality, they just may not have enough capitol for a protracted court fight with the British company.

I have a completly different take on this than Steve. I don't know Geoff Miller but I bet he probably put his whole life savings into this venture. I have only seen one Rigby up close and personal. It seemed like a nice gun to me. The pictures posted earlier in this thread seem to show a very nice gun indeed and one that I would be very proud to own, built by one of my own countrymen. If this upstart British company is the final nail that pushes the American company over the edge, I just don't see that as a good thing.

Dave,

I think you've got me wrong on this. I'm not particularly anti Rigby Cal at all and I bear no malice towards the owner.

My point is they forgot or couldn't be bothered to keep up the UK registration. If a third party then chooses to take that UK name and start producing fine quality bespoke rifles, then good luck to 'em.

Lets face it, they bought a fine UK company and reputation and then failed to keep the name registered in the UK.......which don't exactly make 'em the sharpest tool in the box huh?

As I see it, as much as the Cal company might not like it and as much as they might squeal and squirm, they have no right to complain and I can't see 'em winning.

Steve:

I don't have a clue as to what the law is here but if the UK Rigby can make guns that can't be imported into the USA, it may be a pyrrhic victory indeed.

As far as vaporware, one shotgun does not make a double rifle and don't forget, they have now committed to making doubles at cost for anyone who might own a Rigby made in the USA. Just suppose they have to build 40 doubles at cost. That's quite a committment. If I was Geoff Miller, I would encourage everyone who owned a US Rigby to take the UK Rigby up on that deal. For a US Rigby owner it almost buy one get one free with the UK Rigby company supplying the free one

quote:

Originally posted by Mintyman:
Shame you hit the button Goshoot before the pictures were posted.
Was your vision of the screen obscured by Mr Millers arse, given the position of your tounge.

The man you are so veremently defending has had 12 YEARS to produce a decent gun and has failed to do so. For 12 years he has treated the American double rifle market as a bunch of saps, passing off second rate guns at inflated prices.
The wholesale price of one of those Merkal boxlocks is $ 4000.00 he wants over $ 40,000 a 1000 percent markup, and still he goes bankrupt and borrows money from everybody which he has no way of paying back.

A shame if this doyen of the American gun producers goes to the wall... Don't make me laugh. He is an insult to the very real craftsmen that you can find on the gunsmithing forum here. They are the real American gunmakers, Miller is a joke.
I have been doing some ringing around today and I am told the reason that this has happened is that when Miller "bought Rigby" he agreed to have the guns made in the UK. He renaged on the deal and never got Rigby Ltd as a result.
If that is true then good riddence.

If Rigby Inc are so sure of their position, then why have they tried on 11.06.09 (06.11.09 US) to Trade mark "John Rigby & Co.(Gunmakers)
(Information IPO website)

They are full of shit, and a disgrace to the US gun trade.

quote:

Originally posted by Mintyman:
Shame you hit the button Goshoot before the pictures were posted.
Was your vision of the screen obscured by Mr Millers arse, given the position of your tounge.

quote:

Originally posted by goshoot:
]I don't care about Miller, I don't even know him. I do care about basic fairness however. Why didn't these wonderful other gunsmiths buy the name and risk their money to bring back Rigby at the time Miller stepped in? If Miller fails then someone else can buy the name from the bankruptcy trustee.

quote:

Originally posted by 500N:

quote:

Originally posted by Mintyman:
Shame you hit the button Goshoot before the pictures were posted.
Was your vision of the screen obscured by Mr Millers arse, given the position of your tounge.

LMAO Have you been to their website? They don't have any photos of their "guns" posted. Why would they not post photos on their own web site if these guns existed. They seem to pull gun photos out of their ass only for this forum.


That is gold

quote:

Originally posted by goshoot:

quote:

Originally posted by 500N:

quote:

Originally posted by Mintyman:
Shame you hit the button Goshoot before the pictures were posted.
Was your vision of the screen obscured by Mr Millers arse, given the position of your tounge.

LMAO Have you been to their website? They don't have any photos of their "guns" posted. Why would they not post photos on their own web site if these guns existed. They seem to pull gun photos out of their ass only for this forum.


That is gold

quote:

Originally posted by goshoot:

quote:

Originally posted by 500N:

quote:

Originally posted by Mintyman:
Shame you hit the button Goshoot before the pictures were posted.
Was your vision of the screen obscured by Mr Millers arse, given the position of your tounge.

LMAO Have you been to their website? They don't have any photos of their "guns" posted. Why would they not post photos on their own web site if these guns existed. They seem to pull gun photos out of their ass only for this forum.


That is gold

quote:

Originally posted by Mintyman:

quote:

Originally posted by goshoot:

quote:

Originally posted by 500N:

quote:

Originally posted by Mintyman:
Shame you hit the button Goshoot before the pictures were posted.
Was your vision of the screen obscured by Mr Millers arse, given the position of your tounge.

LMAO Have you been to their website? They don't have any photos of their "guns" posted. Why would they not post photos on their own web site if these guns existed. They seem to pull gun photos out of their ass only for this forum.


That is gold

Goshoot you really are a prick.

Do you know what time it is in Europe at the moment. How in the hell do you expect anybody to update their webserver at this time of night.

Is the view of the clock concealed by that mighty arse as well?

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:
...If this upstart British company is the final nail that pushes the American company over the edge, I just don't see that as a good thing.

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush, from NitroExpress:
I agree with Judson. Winchester cut their own throat. They have been turning out a pretty poor product for any number of years. Let's let them fade into history.

Dave

quote:

Originally posted by Mintyman:

quote:

Originally posted by Mintyman:

quote:

Originally posted by goshoot:

quote:

Originally posted by 500N:

quote:

Originally posted by Mintyman:
Shame you hit the button Goshoot before the pictures were posted.
Was your vision of the screen obscured by Mr Millers arse, given the position of your tounge.

Mintyman you are a fool. The time to post their gun photos is when the web site is developed. They posted all the other photos and graphics when the site was developed, why not their gun photos? Thats the main thing they would want to post. Only one reason-These guns don't exist.


LMAO Have you been to their website? They don't have any photos of their "guns" posted. Why would they not post photos on their own web site if these guns existed. They seem to pull gun photos out of their ass only for this forum.


That is gold

Goshoot you really are a prick.

Do you know what time it is in Europe at the moment. How in the hell do you expect anybody to update their webserver at this time of night.

Is the view of the clock concealed by that mighty arse as well?

Now that incidentally old son is Diamond

quote:

Originally posted by a.tinkerer:
Dave Bush-


What I see here is a few guys from the old country looking to spruce up the quality output of an absolutely famous old name in the gunmaking world.
Building nice guns in the old British style and attributing them to the old British name and doing it in the UK shouldn't take anything away from the guy in California, don't you think?

Do you really think that their choice to offer nice London-built guns and rifles, in the style and at the level of quality that they choose, at the prices that they have listed will blow the Paso Robles house down?

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:
...If this upstart British company is the final nail that pushes the American company over the edge, I just don't see that as a good thing.

The only thing standing across the tracks here is Quality and Value.
Guys in the UK make their product, offer it for sale.
Guys in the US make their product, offer it for sale.
I haven't seen Ltd building a coffin for Inc

Your attitude about issues of quality and value, as seen on gunmakers seems to be pretty flexible.
Why would you be so comfortable to see a huge famous American maker fade into history, but here you seem to have a pretty significant bitch to pitch over this relatively small (overall) effort.

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush, from NitroExpress:
I agree with Judson. Winchester cut their own throat. They have been turning out a pretty poor product for any number of years. Let's let them fade into history.

Dave

source



I just don't get it.



Cheers
Tinker

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:
I think that at one point the California company was in Chapter 11 reorginization. In reality, they just may not have enough capitol for a protracted court fight with the British company.

I have a completly different take on this than Steve. I don't know Geoff Miller but I bet he probably put his whole life savings into this venture. I have only seen one Rigby up close and personal. It seemed like a nice gun to me. The pictures posted earlier in this thread seem to show a very nice gun indeed and one that I would be very proud to own, built by one of my own countrymen. If this upstart British company is the final nail that pushes the American company over the edge, I just don't see that as a good thing.

Dave,

I think you've got me wrong on this. I'm not particularly anti Rigby Cal at all and I bear no malice towards the owner.

My point is they forgot or couldn't be bothered to keep up the UK registration. If a third party then chooses to take that UK name and start producing fine quality bespoke rifles, then good luck to 'em.

Lets face it, they bought a fine UK company and reputation and then failed to keep the name registered in the UK.......which don't exactly make 'em the sharpest tool in the box huh?

As I see it, as much as the Cal company might not like it and as much as they might squeal and squirm, they have no right to complain and I can't see 'em winning.

quote:

Originally posted by Mintyman:
I don't either that was why I questioned the rationality

quote:

Originally posted by Mintyman:

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:

quote:

Originally posted by shakari:

quote:

Originally posted by Dave Bush:
I think that at one point the California company was in Chapter 11 reorginization. In reality, they just may not have enough capitol for a protracted court fight with the British company.

I have a completly different take on this than Steve. I don't know Geoff Miller but I bet he probably put his whole life savings into this venture. I have only seen one Rigby up close and personal. It seemed like a nice gun to me. The pictures posted earlier in this thread seem to show a very nice gun indeed and one that I would be very proud to own, built by one of my own countrymen. If this upstart British company is the final nail that pushes the American company over the edge, I just don't see that as a good thing.

Dave,

I think you've got me wrong on this. I'm not particularly anti Rigby Cal at all and I bear no malice towards the owner.

My point is they forgot or couldn't be bothered to keep up the UK registration. If a third party then chooses to take that UK name and start producing fine quality bespoke rifles, then good luck to 'em.

Lets face it, they bought a fine UK company and reputation and then failed to keep the name registered in the UK.......which don't exactly make 'em the sharpest tool in the box huh?

As I see it, as much as the Cal company might not like it and as much as they might squeal and squirm, they have no right to complain and I can't see 'em winning.

Steve:

I don't have a clue as to what the law is here but if the UK Rigby can make guns that can't be imported into the USA, it may be a pyrrhic victory indeed.

As far as vaporware, one shotgun does not make a double rifle and don't forget, they have now committed to making doubles at cost for anyone who might own a Rigby made in the USA. Just suppose they have to build 40 doubles at cost. That's quite a committment. If I was Geoff Miller, I would encourage everyone who owned a US Rigby to take the UK Rigby up on that deal. For a US Rigby owner it almost buy one get one free with the UK Rigby company supplying the free one

Well you would take that attitude wouldent you Dave...take a decent offer given generously and turn it into an oppertunity to lie and cheat to your own advantage. I am not suprised that you suport Miller in this from what you have just written you are carved out of the same mold. Hell apply to him for a job in public relations you should rub along together just fine.

quote:

Originally posted by Mintyman:
I have been doing some ringing around today and I am told the reason that this has happened is that when Miller "bought Rigby" he agreed to have the guns made in the UK.

quote:

He renaged on the deal and never got Rigby Ltd as a result.
If that is true then good riddence.

quote:

Originally posted by 400 Nitro Express:

quote:

Originally posted by Mintyman:
I have been doing some ringing around today and I am told the reason that this has happened is that when Miller "bought Rigby" he agreed to have the guns made in the UK.

Yes, I remember the first announcement fairly well. It was essentially announced as a US/UK partnership. Basic metalwork to be done in the US, stocking and finishing in the UK, or vice versa, I can't remember which now. Either way, they were to be proved in London. Never happened.

quote:

He renaged on the deal and never got Rigby Ltd as a result.
If that is true then good riddence.

That's what it looks like. J. Roberts & Son, (Gunmakers) Ltd. was incorporated in 1967. When J. Roberts & Son bought Rigby in the early 1980s, he apparently changed the name to John Rigby & Co. (Gunmakers) Ltd. When Rigby was sold in 1997, the records show a name change back to J. Roberts & Son (Gunmakers) Ltd. recorded 29/9/97. Four days later, another John Rigby & Co. (Gunmakers) Ltd. was registered under a different charter. No foreign ownership. Apparently, this was to be the new operating entity of the London end of the new arrangement, which never happened for whatever reason. It's registration was allowed to lapse in 2002.

According to the records, foreign ownership of the name has never been registered in the UK. Looks like somebody in CA has really stomped on their johnson.

400 NE

That is exactly what my research indicates.

And that is the entity that was purchased by the Current company opperating out of London.

Hence they are in fact, running the very same English company that Paul Roberts designated to take over Rigby in England.

If anybody here is the userper it is Miller. He broke the deal and hence lost Rigby (London), that company is now owned by other gunmakers.

He lied to Paul Roberts, he has lied to a string of investers since. He has nothing to complain of, this is all a situation created by his own duplicity.

As I said much earlier today Miller NEVER owned John Rigby & Co. (Gunmakers) Ltd.


Dave Bush.

I do understand the phrase exactly.

However although you may be able to write it, I am sure if you tried to say it to me it would come out simply as a nasty little nasel whine, rather that the powerful insult it was intended to be in its mother toungue.

Insted of discussing this issue, you simply want to suggest that people are encouraged with the conivence of Rigby Inc, to steal from the English company.
Where I come from we might understand the phrase "Piss off you Wanker" but we also understand the phrase "Incitment to commit criminal conspiricy"
You are contemptable.
----------------------------------------
"Serious rifles have two barrels, everything else just burns gunpowder."

quote:

Originally posted by 400 Nitro Express:

That's what it looks like. J. Roberts & Son, (Gunmakers) Ltd. was incorporated in 1967. When J. Roberts & Son bought Rigby in the early 1980s, he apparently changed the name to John Rigby & Co. (Gunmakers) Ltd. When Rigby was sold in 1997, the records show a name change back to J. Roberts & Son (Gunmakers) Ltd. recorded 29/9/97. Four days later, another John Rigby & Co. (Gunmakers) Ltd. was registered under a different charter. No foreign ownership. Apparently, this was to be the new operating entity of the London end of the new arrangement, which never happened for whatever reason. It's registration was allowed to lapse in 2002.

quote:

Four days later, another John Rigby & Co. (Gunmakers) Ltd. was registered under a different charter.

quote:

According to the records, foreign ownership of the name has never been registered in the UK. Looks like somebody in CA has really stomped on their johnson.