THE ACCURATERELOADING.COM LEVER ACTION RIFLE FORUM

Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Marlin Closing???
 Login/Join
 
one of us
posted
Heard a Rumour that "Remington" is going to close down the Marlin Plant..

Any truth to it???


DOUBLE RIFLE SHOOTERS SOCIETY
 
Posts: 16134 | Location: Texas | Registered: 06 April 2002Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of Big Bore Fan
posted Hide Post
 
Posts: 824 | Location: Munich, Bavaria, thats near Germany | Registered: 23 November 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of C1PNR
posted Hide Post
It seems I saw somewhere that they were going ro relocate production to a more "business friendly" location, like NC maybe. I hope so.


Regards,

WE
 
Posts: 312 | Location: SW Idaho | Registered: 02 January 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Buy your Marlin lever guns quickly. Those new ones will be more "cost effective" to build. Read, "we are working feverishly to find ways to make them cheaper to increase ROI...".
Reference the bargains on the 798 and 799s.

Rich
 
Posts: 23062 | Location: SW Idaho | Registered: 19 December 2005Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Idaho Sharpshooter:
Buy your Marlin lever guns quickly. Those new ones will be more "cost effective" to build. Read, "we are working feverishly to find ways to make them cheaper to increase ROI...".
Reference the bargains on the 798 and 799s.

Rich

Remington imported the 798 and the 799s and you know that..
The main issue is high taxes in Conn. and high union wages.. There may be other reasons also..





 
Posts: 592 | Registered: 28 February 2005Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Pretty amazing, they paid $42MM 2 years ago and are shutting it down now. I'd think that it would take a helluva lot of rifle sales to make up the costs of moving, new facilities, even if leased, and re-tooling, re-training, etc. Sounds grim. I wonder if a union contract could be coming up for renewal?


xxxxxxxxxx
When considering US based operations of guides/outfitters, check and see if they are NRA members. If not, why support someone who doesn't support us? Consider spending your money elsewhere.

NEVER, EVER book a hunt with BLAIR WORLDWIDE HUNTING or JEFF BLAIR.

I have come to understand that in hunting, the goal is not the goal but the process.
 
Posts: 17099 | Location: Texas USA | Registered: 07 May 2001Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Low Wall,

my comment is directed solely at the same marketing group that did such a fantastic job if "improving" the Zastava/Charles Daly line of 98 Mausers in two action sizes. Especially the rust blue metal finishes, the awesome high grade Walnut used for stocks, and the unheard of value pricing.*

Rich

*Facetious. Crap fit and finish, indifferent inletting quality, and high prices. Oh yes, the plywood hard wood stocks. Then wholesale the remaining inventory because nobody wants to pay intake stage oats prices for exhaust stage oats.
 
Posts: 23062 | Location: SW Idaho | Registered: 19 December 2005Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
ISS,
I have two Zastava/Interarms mini actions but have never seen the the Daly or Remington versions.
Sounds like you are saying that Remington (Freedom Group) degraded the Zastava when they wrestled Zastava away from Daly then dumped them when they didn't sale well.
Is someone else importing the Zastava these days since Remington thru them over?

Maybe you are right about the Freedom Group screwing up the Marlin also. We'll just have to wait and see.





 
Posts: 592 | Registered: 28 February 2005Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Lets see, the "great state of Connecticut" has lost Colt, Remmington, Winchester, and now Marlin! They just don't get it. On the news Dodd said " i don't know what there problem is" Whats there PROBLEM! They are being TAXED to death! In Connecticut there isnt a problem taxes cant fix, just ask the liberals that run this state.

This used to be a blue collar state, Waterbury "the brass city" is nothing but miles of empty factories, so is New Britan, Stanley tool is the lone hold out and we almost lost them recently, the same with Pratt & Whitney.

I hate to see this s%$t happen and the politicians act like they don't know why its happening!
 
Posts: 406 | Registered: 17 January 2009Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
$42 million is & was chump change for Remington since it got them a lever action line that is very popular & I'm sure they intended all along to keep those & dump the rest of the company.
 
Posts: 152 | Location: Vanc.USA | Registered: 15 November 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by shorthair:
$42 million is & was chump change for Remington since it got them a lever action line that is very popular & I'm sure they intended all along to keep those & dump the rest of the company.

"Dump the rest of the company?"
What part would that be?
Their XL7 & XS7 entry level bolt action line where their production can't keep up with demand?
 
Posts: 592 | Registered: 28 February 2005Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of richj
posted Hide Post
but that overlaps the Remington line of products. The levers don't

quote:

"Dump the rest of the company?"
What part would that be?
Their XL7 & XS7 entry level bolt action line where their production can't keep up with demand?
 
Posts: 6519 | Location: NY, NY | Registered: 28 November 2005Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Low Wall:
quote:
Originally posted by shorthair:
$42 million is & was chump change for Remington since it got them a lever action line that is very popular & I'm sure they intended all along to keep those & dump the rest of the company.

"Dump the rest of the company?"
What part would that be?
Their XL7 & XS7 entry level bolt action line where their production can't keep up with demand?


You don't think that Remington's production wouldn't be more efficient & economical?
I have no doubts that Remington fully intended to move the Marlin before they even began the purchase, you don't get to be Remington's size without knowing which states are happy to have you & which aren't.
 
Posts: 152 | Location: Vanc.USA | Registered: 15 November 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Hello shorthair,
I must have misunderstood your first post as I agree 100% with your last post..
I took the last statement in your first post to say that the "Freedom Group" which owns Remington, Marlin, H&R, and Dakota (maybe more) were going to just keep the Marlin Lever Action line and drop any other product that Marlin is currently making which would include the XL7 & XS7.. MY mistake eh?
A more important thing to ponder in my mind is how the firearms, ammunition and component manufactures are going to do after the buying and hoarding frenzy ends and their customers are up to their eyeballs in product..
I know my friends and I stocked up components after the clinton scare died down and are set for life for recreational shooting and hunting..
I have only bought 3000 primers since 2000 and only because these primers were suppose to be "THEE" primer to use in .357mag. loads..
I could ramble on about the dark economic future I see ahead for all but that would be further off topic than I have already gone.. Smiler
 
Posts: 592 | Registered: 28 February 2005Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of buckeyeshooter
posted Hide Post
Don't forget the strong sales Marlin has traditionally had in the .22 market. The old Marlin/Glenfield 50 auto loader, the bolt action 22's and 22 mags and the 39 levergun. Wonder what will happen with them? I do not forsee a bright tunture for the product line and its a shame.
 
Posts: 5723 | Location: Ohio | Registered: 02 April 2003Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Low Wall no harm done I know it isn't always clear what I really try to say. Big Grin
I started so called stockpiling about 40 years ago & am still shooting on some of the original 4831 & can't remember ever buying fewer than 10,000 primers at a time, but that's just the way I like to do things I just can't stand to look at the loading shelves & see a hole that i think should have something in it. Roll Eyes
 
Posts: 152 | Location: Vanc.USA | Registered: 15 November 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
I just do not see how a corporation can pay 42 Million for a company, close it down,loose most all of your experienced workers, move it to a new place, and expect to kee the quality of the original product, much less make any kind of profit, in less than a hundred years. Confused


DOUBLE RIFLE SHOOTERS SOCIETY
 
Posts: 16134 | Location: Texas | Registered: 06 April 2002Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Marlin Being Relocated; Military Brass Not Being Demilled and Taken Off Market
After 140 years, the Marlin plant located in North Haven, Connecticut will be closed by the middle of next year. According to Remington Arms sources, the facility is being decommissioned and the manufacturing relocated to Remington's Ilion, New York facilities, the Marlin lines are not moving offshore.

For the North Haven community, it's an economic hit, impacting not just the 265 Marlin plant workers, but the cottage industries that have sprung up over time to service the Marlin workforce. When Marlin was acquired by Remington in 2008, there were 345 employees in North Haven and another 225 workers at the Marlin facility in Gardner, Massachusetts. Today, only 265 remain, and they've been notified they're not going to be working beyond mid-2011.

For the industry, the news is yet another sign that business as usual is coming to an end. As corporations acquire smaller brands, corporate efficiencies, and economies of scale trump history and community standing. After all, if the brands didn't fit inside a corporate portfolio and meet criteria that include efficiencies, the buy wouldn't make much sense to begin with.

When larger companies acquire smaller ones, consolidation is inevitable.

The process is no different nor more surprising from Remington concerning its family of companies than Smith & Wesson integrating the Thompson/Center operations into its Springfield, Massachusetts headquarters. Stock analysts I've spoken with have made it abundantly clear they'd like S&W stock better if T/C's facilities went away altogether. Fortunately, the analysts don't run companies, they observe them.

If smaller companies were operating efficiently and/or profitably, they would most likely not be candidates for takeover. It is their inherent inefficiencies which make them candidates for acquisition, despite any historical standing. Ultimately, companies exist to make money for owners, whether they be private or public. If a new owner thinks they can change profit-and-loss statements with consolidation, consolidation is inevitable.

For the company founded by John M. Marlin in 1870, it's a change in the kind of ownership lineage that has remained tied to New Haven and Connecticut communities. After acquiring Marlin from its original owner, the Kenna family owned and operated the company for nearly eighty-five years. Remington is the first corporate owner.

At this writing, it seems Marlin, Harrington and Richardson, New England Firearms and L.C. Smith- all Marlin brands -are destined for absorption into Remington's existing manufacturing facilities in Ilion, New York. Such a move would maximize use of that facilities and consolidate manufacturing operations. Consolidation is another efficiency necessary to compete with imported products.

Although it's purely speculation on my part, a consolidation move makes perfect sense if you're demonstrating lean operating abilities as part of some sort of market capitalization move. Bankers and investors are quite fond of consolidated operations, especially if the company happens to represent numerous iconic brands.
 
Posts: 13466 | Location: faribault mn | Registered: 16 November 2004Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
If the fedguv did not allow them to take the relocation costs off of their taxes, they would not move. The union thing is a smokescreen.
Look at Savage and you can see the real story.

Rich
 
Posts: 23062 | Location: SW Idaho | Registered: 19 December 2005Reply With Quote
One of Us
Picture of Alberta Canuck
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by butchloc:
Marlin Being Relocated;

When larger companies acquire smaller ones, consolidation is inevitable.

Agreed. Not necessarily good business, but usually what happens.

The process is no different nor more surprising from Remington concerning its family of companies than Smith & Wesson integrating the Thompson/Center operations into its Springfield, Massachusetts headquarters. Stock analysts I've spoken with have made it abundantly clear they'd like S&W stock better if T/C's facilities went away altogether. Fortunately, the analysts don't run companies, they observe them.

To some extent that is true, but not wholly so. Stock analysts' views influence buy, hold, or sell ratings. Those in turn influence stock prices. And stock prices sometimes heavily affect internal corporate strategies. (To some degree, that may depend on how closely senior management compensation and bonuses are tied to stock performance.)

If smaller companies were operating efficiently and/or profitably, they would most likely not be candidates for takeover. It is their inherent inefficiencies which make them candidates for acquisition, despite any historical standing. Ultimately, companies exist to make money for owners, whether they be private or public. If a new owner thinks they can change profit-and-loss statements with consolidation, consolidation is inevitable.

Having worked on corporate acquisition teams, I'd say that is sometimes true, but often not. Other reasons for takeovers, particularly unfriendly takeovers, include the fact that the small company IS efficient and profitable, or that it has a large cash reserve which the larger, purchasing, corporation wants or needs. Companies which do not have "poison pills" in existance to ward off unfriendly takeovers are prime targets for such action.


For the company founded by John M. Marlin in 1870, it's a change in the kind of ownership lineage that has remained tied to New Haven and Connecticut communities. After acquiring Marlin from its original owner, the Kenna family owned and operated the company for nearly eighty-five years. Remington is the first corporate owner.

And, does that indicate a belief by Remington that it can do a better job of positioning Marlin in the market than Marlin itself did? I sure hope it works better than Remington's brief, torrid, affairs with the Russian gunmakers.

Or is it an indicator that a new generation of Kennas was more interested in grabbing the money and running than tying themselves down to an old-line company which relied on dedicated close attention by the most senior levels of management? Perhaps the purchase was even partially prompted by a desire to eliminate a competitor?


At this writing, it seems Marlin, Harrington and Richardson, New England Firearms and L.C. Smith- all Marlin brands -are destined for absorption into Remington's existing manufacturing facilities in Ilion, New York. Such a move would maximize use of that facilities and consolidate manufacturing operations. Consolidation is another efficiency necessary to compete with imported products.

Although it's purely speculation on my part, a consolidation move makes perfect sense if you're demonstrating lean operating abilities as part of some sort of market capitalization move. Bankers and investors are quite fond of consolidated operations, especially if the company happens to represent numerous iconic brands.


Well, I hope it works out well for Marlin as a division of Remington. Only time will tell.


My country gal's just a moonshiner's daughter, but I love her still.

 
Posts: 9685 | Location: Cave Creek 85331, USA | Registered: 17 August 2001Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
Current rumor from over on the marlinowners forum is Illion N.Y.
 
Posts: 152 | Location: Vanc.USA | Registered: 15 November 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
I've heard some good points here, but it useless to speculate on the economics of the move without a lot more information than we have. A lot of factors go into a decision of this magnitude.
 
Posts: 3174 | Location: Warren, PA | Registered: 08 August 2002Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
When Winchester was going belly-up rumor was that the last firearms made were subpar. I happened to buy an M70 and dumped it after I could never get it to shoot straight.

Anyone believe that was the case and if so, think the same will happen at Marlin? It's only human nature, I guess.
 
Posts: 2717 | Location: NH | Registered: 03 February 2009Reply With Quote
One of Us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Norton:
When Winchester was going belly-up rumor was that the last firearms made were subpar. I happened to buy an M70 and dumped it after I could never get it to shoot straight.

Anyone believe that was the case and if so, think the same will happen at Marlin? It's only human nature, I guess.


I was interested in picking up a new Marlin and will not noe because I fear what you stated may be reality. Workers can only deal with so much uncertainty before the product line suffers.
 
Posts: 969 | Registered: 13 October 2009Reply With Quote
  Powered by Social Strata  
 


Copyright December 1997-2023 Accuratereloading.com


Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia