Wow, folks here just want to throw dirt on a grave without waiting to see if anyone is in it. To address some of the comments above; I have found that Remington IS interested in what customers have to say and I have a bunch of emails and phone calls to prove it. Toyota has a factory in the U.S.. Personally I prefer to buy AMERICAN whenever possible. Its nearly impossible for an American company to compete with foreign countries where labor is a tiny fraction of the cost that it is here.

.

Alf: Do you mean all those “quality†Sakos that blew up or were recalled? Do you mean those “quality†big-caliber CZ’s that have split their stocks? Or do you mean those high quality, hand built guns built in the good old daze when gun and ammo manufacturers would tell you that 3†groups were within tolerance?

Remington’s alignment with Baikal is good because it’s a smart marketing move, apparently one you would not make. You and other Rem haters will whiz and moan about their quality and Remington will laugh all the way to the bank. I’ll use the example Rush uses about talk radio. Success is not about spouting a philosophy on the radio, it’s about knowing the radio business and doing the things to be successful in it. Rem and Win are doing their best to be successful in the gun business by responding to market forces, not by trying to satisfy people who wouldn’t buy their products if they were perfect. (If you’re from Rio Linda, I’ll explain this more later.)

In this forum and others, one hears whizzin’ and moanin’ if a gun won’t shoot minute of angle yet it’s quite common to read about out-of-the-box groups of an inch or less. So where’s the bad quality control? “Bad quality control†has become the buzz word when someone simply wants to be negative about a product. If you don’t like the American products, just say so but trying to hid behind the “quality control†mantra is getting’ pretty lame.

.

I'm sure that Rem/Win are quite aware of what their customers think about their products and their quality control because they are well set up to communicate with them. Per Remington's CEO:

Millner: "We find our consumers are hungry for information at a level that staggers us. The more content we provide--whether it be more detailed ballistics information, more new product information, 3D animation of our products--the more consumers want. But what's exciting is we're able to give it to people when they want to get it. It has been a tremendous tool for launching new products and for announcing promotions. It has been extremely successful."

It sounds like Remington is listening. There is a big market out there that will tell you what it wants if you let it. I again refer to Ithaca and Kimber as those who did not listen. I assume they made "quality" products.

If you have some hard data that shows a decline in sales, I'll listen but until then you and I are just guys with an opinion. I learned a long time ago that what was apparent to me was freqently refuted by people with more information than I had. I also state again, it's about being successful in the gun business, not building the perfect gun (See: Kimber/Ithaca.)

After 35 years of messing with rifles, shotguns and pistols; I have owned, shot, built, rebuilt, bought, sold (sometimes in disgust) and passed over enough Remington, Winchester, Ruger, Browning, Colt, Sig, Beretta and Sako firearms to have adopted specific habits:

1. Don't buy a brand new rifle from the big three unless it is being sold at a used gun price.
2. Bring a long steel ruler when looking at a Winchester. Whoever is in charge of drilling the scope base holes in the receivers is likely blind in one eye.
3. Unless you were already planning to have the safety/sear/trigger redone and retimed; be sure and check that area before you buy. Most factory fresh assemblies can be found in the dictionary under the words loud, backlash, loose, catching or sloppy.
4. On newer Remington 700's, plan on having a new bolt handle put on if you have your ass (sniping, DG) or just a chunk of money (hunt far from home) on the line. I'm not that strong, but I'm in the not so select club of those that have pulled a handle off of a newer stainless Remington.
5. The good news is that it is usually pretty easy to square up a receiver and bolt face,recut the receiver threads, and lap in the lugs on a Remington or Winchester. The bad news is that it is necessary so often.
5. On a Ruger, make sure the scope ring cuts in the receiver line up. Last year it wasn't until after I had a new Lilja barrel put on a Ruger that I noticed the front ring was pointing off to the right by almost ten degrees.
6. Berretta seems to be trying to drive Sako's reputation for quality, earned over the last fifty plus years, into the ground. That is okay, there are still plenty of the older models available second hand.

It is not the mantra that is lame, it is the poor Quality Control that is lame.

lawndart

When you pay peanuts you will normally get monkeys to work for you!

Now that everybody has crapped on Big Green, I am going to take the contrary position.

I don't buy many new rifles, but I bought a NIB 700 Milspec 5-R a while back. trigger sucks, and mine came with a j-lock ( only downsides ).

This rifle shoots, It's the most accurate factory rifle I ever owned, bar none. I have custom benchrest guns that won't outshoot it.

I don't know if these are semi custom, or what, haven't quite figured that out, but this rifle is proof that Remington is still capable of making a top notch rifle. I haven't gotten around to changing out the trigger yet, but I have every reason to believe that .3-.35" aggregrate groups is a high probability.

Just saw a new one a week or so ago, other than they aren't using the j-lock ( improvement ) it was essentially the same rifle.

quote:

Originally posted by Collins:
Well folks, the fact's do not look good...

Not-so-good...

Numbers in Parentheses are negative...

Hmm,

this is a case of accounting accurals vs YTD (year to date) bookkeeping.

The net number (4) infers a -4,000,000 income...

and yes, it does MEAN that...

and the 13,700,000 INCOME TAX bill before that means (assuming 25% taxes.. par for corporate tax) means a 54,800,000 pre-tax profit that they could not HIDE FROM THE TAXMAN


now, their balance sheet is rather interesting to walk down..

last year they paid a liquidating dividend (wont' explain it.. if you know what that means, great) that reduce ONLY ownership via common stock.. good way to take a private company to closely held --- or, more practically, buy out some large stockholders and retire that stock.

let's look at some QUALITY numbers
cash on hand is level
receivables up (did they extend too much credit OR moving more product on the same terms)

inventories up..

okay, that's not a great sign.. unless they are doing consignment with distributors, there no reall good reason for MORE than a quarters worth of sales to be on hand in inventory (weeks of inventory 13+)

other current assets..

down.. good.. would be interesting to know that decomposition, but you can assume it's "misc" and weird (seriously)

total current assests up...
this is generally okay, but a large part is the inventory

netfixed assests
PPE
down a little.. which means they are reinvesting, but at this point are not reinvesting ahead of the depreciation schedules.. interesting.. wonder if there is a reserve for new plants?

other non current assets
while not GAD, think of this as the junkbox

liablilities
payables up, but not up as much as inventory.. probably well managed in that area

short term debt
at average over 3 years.. neutral

other current liabilities. (this is NOT the same as long term liabilities).
at 3 year average.. neutral, but i dont' like this catagory when reading a balance sheet without damn good notations

long term debt.. WOW what a jump from 2 years ago, but down from last year.. wonder what they bought/built last year for 130 mega-smakers?

Oh, wait....

Remington is going to become a closely held, or even closer held company..

watch and see

jeffe

Lawndart: Quite often, posts like yours contain 3 common threads:

-All things used to be better
-The same people seem to have all the problems
-You rarely seem satisfied

You have pretty much run down everything U.S. made. I have nothing else but your post to judge you by so I have to ask, is there anything that satifies you?

I made my living looting disatressed companies & Remington's Balance sheet looks like someone beat me to it..You simply can not run a $400mm seasonal company with $10mm of soft owners equity. I assume the $85mm of Other Noncurrent Assets is really goodwill. Last year iI had a rifle in the custom shop for repair and the whole company was on an unplaid layoff for the entire month of december.

I would bet my favorite rifle against a tBankrupcy before the law change next month. wILL DOUBLE UP THAT THE CURRENT MANAGEMENT WILL TRY TO SCREW THE DEBT HOLDERS IN BANKRUPCY..

Us beancounters really run everything

I don’t never really talk like this but I got poo poed for vulgar poo pooing so read betwixed the lines! Rod Henrickson

Hey Rogue1 I just read your post. It was good, you obviously took the time to do a bit of research before voicing an opinion. A lot of people never take the time to do that. They simply spout off what they believe rather than what they know. But ........ some things here look just a little bit out of place. But first. I could be wrong but I think the original Kimber rifle company was owned by the Warren family of Australia. If memory serves it did go teats up. I don’t know how the Kimber name became assigned to the pistol line, I’m blank on that, sorry. I haven’t seen a new Ithaca gun on the rack in close to 15 years. Nor have I seen adds for them. It is possible that they are still in business making other items but out of curiosity I searched the web and found nadda on Ithaca Gun corp. By the way Winchester or US Repeating arms or whoever is owned by FN in Herstal Belgium.
Anywho ....... I guess I should have stated that the controlling interests of Remington arms have in fact changed several times over the years. Remington is owned by share holders. Not one person. If some one would like to run Remington they simply have to buy %51 of the shares to have controlling interest. Now you found an interesting quote from Mr Millner who happens to be the head poo poo at Remington right now and he stated that the CEOs ........ or persons running the show should have and do have a vested interest in the company .... purely as a token of faith I assume, he was trying to say. My thanks to Tom Ga Hunter for Remington’s balance sheets. I was a small businessman for over 20 years and I CAN read a bloody balance sheet. A chimp and two trainees can do it. If Mr Millner has so much faith in the profit making ability of Remington arm’s! Why did he crawl in bed with a factor (factor is some one that lends money at a very high rate and does not ask many questions) in 2003 to the tune of $100 million bucks and use it to buy back shares from the shareholders. If he was getting a high return from his money why wouldn’t he keep it in the company? From $112,000,000.00 to $12,000,000.00 in share holders loans In one year? Why were the share holders so frightened that they had to get their money out of the company? I see that in 2004 the assets (what they own including receivables they may never collect on) of the company were at $351,000,000.00 and the liabilities (what they owe was at $341,000,000.00. To be honest I don’t see any profit in that balance sheet. In a nut shell Remington Arms does not seem to be worth poo poo and I personally wouldn’t invest poo into it. Color me stupid but it don’t look like a very a very pretty picture to me. It looks like the share holders have dumped the company on a factor. Possibly a shake down company that thinks they can reorganize it and get it going again. Did you ever wonder? Could the company that gave them the loan be FN International?
Rod Henrickson :I have never been wrong I’ve merely found 10,000 ways that don’t pooing work!

Jeff, Tom and speeerchucker have made some good observations. Things look even worse for Remington than I had imagined. Sales flat, expenses up, inventories and receivables increasing faster than sales. It would be interesting to see the term-sheet on the new debt that enabled the equity payout.

Remington is not yet a basket case, but it does look like it's being run to generate cash for the owners in the short term. Remington is NOT in a position to bring to market expensive new models; it looks to be more of the same "cheaper is better" products from Big Green. If the RUMs and SAUMs were supposed to generate lots of new revenue, it doesn't show-up on the income statement.

What? Has this now become a bean counter's forum? AAAUUUGGGGHHHH!!!!!!

You did not examine the warp and woof of my fabric closely enough. You also added colors to the tapestry that weren't there.

1. You rarely seem satisfied - You are dead nuts correct on that one. That is why I have been sending receiver/bolt groups to Jim Kobe (who is my role model to be a curmudgeon), and having him square and true them. The last model 70 receiver I sent to him was pretty straight, and actually came with a decent safety/sear/trigger group. The receiver before was .006" out of square at the front. I will be interested to see what the story is on a Argentine Modelo 1909 receiver/bolt that is on its way as I compose this reply. By and large though, I have been quite satisfied with L61R, AIII and AV Sako actions. They tend to be square and straight. I have one 6PPC varmint model Sako (of all things) that has off center receiver threads. My basic lack of satisfaction with man made artifacts has provided me with years of entertainment as I do what I can to improve them, and contract for others to do what I can't.

2. All things used to be better. Not true at all. Bonded bullets and lathe or Swiss screw turned monometal bullets a la Swift, North Fork and GS Custom did not exist when I started messing with guns. Barrels such as Krieger, Rock Springs (Mike Rock) and Lilja are better than anything available when I was in my twenties. Intelligently applied CAD/CAM and CNC technologies allow the production of complex parts that would be prohibitively expensive otherwise. Look at all the limited edition runs of such rifles as the 1886 and 1895 that have come out in the last fifteen years. Bloody marvelous.
There are some very useful coating techniques and formulations that have come out in recent years. I have been cooking KG - Gunkote onto AR-15 and pistol parts in my kitchen stove for the last six weeks. How cool is that?
My favorite cartridges all seem to thrive on powders such as RL-15 (Bofors, Sweden), Varget (ADI, Australia) and TAC (Belgium). These powders all benefit from newer techniques that make them very temperature stable. Burning rates of these powders, in particular, vary less lot-to-lot than the powders I hand-loaded with twenty five years ago.

3. The same people seem to have all the problems. Illogical conclusion. The obvious problems are evenly distributed. Anyone would likely notice that a bolt handle has come off in their hand. Some people notice more problems because they shoot a lot more and/or shoot in less forgiving environments. That causes more wear and stress on a firearm; that in turn causes more failures. Go to a work week long shooting course where each student fires several hundred to a few thousand rounds in five days. Many, if not most participants will have weapon failures. What is a problem to one person won't be to most other people. For me, a receiver face that is canted by .006" is unnacceptable. Most hunters and casual shooters would be unaware of that issue with their receiver. Someone who only shoots two boxes of store bought ammunition a year would not likely notice an off center, or overly long/generous chamber. A handloader and/or competition shooter would be unhappy with the short brass life and dispersion at longer ranges.

What satisfies me?

1. The newest sniper rifle that I worked and contracted on for my eldest boy. 1970 vintage Remington 700 .243 converted to .308. Receiver and bolt face squared and trued. Holland long bolt handle put on with high temp silver solder. Sako extractor. Kept the factory recoil lug (perfectly adequate for .308). Rock Springs 1:11.25 5R stainless barrel, 20". High Tech Gunsmithing suppressor, 5/8" x 24tpi. Factory trigger worked over by "The Triggerman" in Wyoming to 3.25#. Spare trigger set up identically. HS Precision stock from an LTR Remington rifle, bedded in Devcon Titanium with a Marine-Tex skim coat. Bottom metal will be either stainless steel from Matt Williams or the HS Precision detachable magazine set-up, depending on what my boy makes up his mind on. Polane olive drab paint on the stock, KG-Gunkote on the metal. Badger Ordnance Picatinny style rail, Leupold Mark IV scope. All parts and supplies except the extractor made in the US.

2. Robinson Scout rifle and carbine. I call them "the boring rifles". Never a malfunction, and very good accuracy. Made in the US.

3. My Browning O/U 525 model shotguns in 20 & 28 gauge. Awesome! Made in Japan.

4. My Bennelli 12 gauge M-2 shotgun. A veritable duck and goose killing machine. Made in Italy (to the best of my knowledge). Loaded with home rolled shells containing Bismuth. No broken teeth from steel shot.

5. All but two of my Sako rifles. The aformentioned 6PPC and a new model 75 in 300 Win Mag. The only problem with it is the floppy factory synthetic stock. A McMillan will make it right. All the rest have required only bedding and sealing of the stocks. I put some of them in McMillans for rough weather, but retain the wood stocks as well. Made in Finland.

6. My M-1, and AR-15 high power competition rifles. M-1 made by H&R during WW-II, the AR-15 assembled by myself out of parts. Made in the US.

7. My Sig Blaser R93 LRS II precision rifle. It has too many nooks and crannies, and is too delicate to be a military style sniper rifle, but for plinking at 500 meters it is a joy. Made in Germany

8. My Anschutz competition (Position and Biathalon) rifles. Made in Germany.

9. My Remington SP-10, 10 gauge wood stocked shotgun for late season geese. It has never missed a beat (I do clean it). Made in the US. Only change was a new triple magnum butt pad after one of the dogs ate the original pad.

10. My Ruger 28 gauge O/U; 28" barrels and a straight stock. They finally got the balance right. It won't stand up to the rigors of shooting lots of clay birds, but it wasn't designed to. On quail it does just fine. Made in the US.

11. All my Sig pistols. Just replace the springs every 5,000 rounds, and replace the tritium sights every ten years. Made in Germany.

12. My CZ 416 Rigby in the hogback stock. For $540.00 new I have been more than happy to polish the action and rebed/crossbolt the stock. It fits and swings like a shotgun; it has tumbled many a bison. Made in the Czech Republic.

13. My .308 Remington varmint rifle (matte blue). I traded for it from a local friend who's shoulder and neck were getting sore from arthritis so he couldn't shoot a .308 prone. It shoots .6 - .7 MOA as is, and the fired cases come out straight and not overly fat. Made in the US.

14. A mid 1980's vintage Model 70 push feed (obviously) in 375 H&H that I bought for my dad. What a great rifle. Hardly any recoil. Made in the US.

15. A CZ 452 in 22 WMR. Aftermarket trigger. It has splattered untold numbers of ground squirrels. Made in the Czech Republic.

lawndart

quote:

What? Has this now become a bean counter's forum? AAAUUUGGGGHHHH!!!!!!

Welcome to our little world.

lawndart

Lawndart: I'm an analytical personality but I wonder if you sleep at night.

I'll make a couple more observations and bow out of this contest 'cause I'm running out of urine.

-To the point of this thread, Rem ain' declarin' bankruptcy.
-In the future, those who whiz and moan about Rem/Win/American guns/quality control will continue to do so.
-When someone can produce some hard data that shows poor quality control or declining sales because of it, I'll listen.

Y'all have at it. I am outta here!!!!!!!!!

Hmmmm, so why is remington's web page down???¿ Perhaps the beggining of the end?

quote:

Originally posted by grizz:
Hmmmm, so why is remington's web page down???¿ Perhaps the beggining of the end?

I just noticed that too.

Could be as simple as a hosting server problem, or the beginning of the end for America's Oldest Gunmaker.

Tom in Ga

Obviously you've looked at financials before. I would agree with your assesment 100%.

quote:

Originally posted by grizz:
Hmmmm, so why is remington's web page down???¿ Perhaps the beggining of the end?

grizz,

Simple explanation...I understand that they braze the access doors onto their server machines and some idiot lifted the door and the damn thing fell off and shorted everything out!

****ADVERTIISEMENT****

If any of you successful bean counter guys ever need to rent a bodyguard/ballistician/MD/pilot/photographer with plenty of experience in emergency medicine and a good working knowledge of tropical medicine; I will be available shortly after October, 2007 when my clinic note is retired and I sell it to one of the large Boise "not-for-profit" hospitals. I will try to arrange my military deployments to not conflict with the African hunting season.

I don't drink, so you don't have to lock up the scotch. I already have one girlfriend who is plenty of trouble by herself, so your daughters and wives are likewise safe.

After taking care of drunks in ER's for years I will cheerfully wipe the puke off your face or pull your head out of the millet beer bowl. No mention will be made the next day. Included in the daily rate.

There is never a surchage for gregarious conversation around the fire ring. Will happily and vociferously agree with the client's opinions pro and con any rifle type, political leaning or religious views. Will sagely nod head in agreement as well. Miss your contrary hunting partner who went to his reward two years ago? I will happily and heatedly argue positions opposite yours.

Repairing buffalo gorings, treating falciparum malaria and bribing bureaucrats is also included in the basic package.

Running road blocks, shooting poachers and crossing borders at low altitude available for reasonable add on fees.

This is a golden opportunity to have one of those arrogant pointy-end-of-the-spear-prima-donna types actually work for a change.

Will not ride an Airbus.

References available.

lawndart

Now, back to your regularly scheduled thread....

[QUOTE]Originally posted by rogue1:
A quick review of this thread reveals such facts as:

-“A fellow there said….â€
-“I think that….â€
-“Maybe Remington and Winchester….â€
-“Remington could well be…â€
-“I once worked with….â€

Hard facts these. A ‘net search found nothing about Remington filing for bankruptcy...

--------------------------------

Speaking of hard facts, I see none in your rant. An interview of the CEO hardly counts as "hard facts". More spin and less objective commentary is hard to find anywhere than in any CEO's dissertation on the health of his/her company.
------------------------

As for your reference to my comment that "I once worked with...", obviously you missed the point of that post. It was neither a negative statement in any way about Remington, nor an inference that anything dire was/is about to happen to Remington

It was simply meant to suggest that financials alone are not the only way to judge a company's current situation, and certainly not its future.

Without knowledge of the corporate strategies, the foci of the Board's collective thoughts, and an understanding of the company's position and history in its market field, one can only guess what's happening in any large business venture.


The company to which I was referring had very large cash reserves on hand and a good annual profit picture over many consecutive years, so doubtless looked like a healthy enterprise and a good place for small (and large) new investors to put their beans.

Instead, the large cash reserves occasioned by the corporate policy of not investing in any new "plays" unless they had an almost guaranteed net of 28% ROI, predictably attracted another, larger, oil company which used a combo of some leveraging, a considerably less than 50% (but controlling none-the-less) outright stock purchase, some stock swapping, and various other means to get control of the Board. Then they plundered the cash reserves, sold some of the assets at bargain prices to the take-over company, and left the previous independent smaller stock holders holding little else than "the bag".

Had the original stockholders and their Directors set policies which encouraged using that cash for re-investment in the corporate business activities, dividends, and other appropriate purposes, there would have been no inappropriately large pool of cash to attract the "raider" company.
-------------------------

If I was thinking of investing any sizeable amount of change in any medium sized company such as Remington, I'd want to look at lots of things...including, just out of spite and caution, the executive compensation plan(s), the executive retirement plans, and the executive ages & work histories, as well as the Board minutes for the last couple of years and all the normal "due diligence" items.

quote:

Simple explanation...I understand that they braze the access doors onto their server machines and some idiot lifted the door and the damn thing fell off and shorted everything out!

I found several articles pertaining to problems with Remington's pension plan.

http://www.news-record.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/2...310/1001/NEWSREC0201

With this problem, the steam issue and Remmington's web page being down, things aren't looking too good.

ZM

Sorry Lawndart I advertised for a rocket Scientist!!!!!! Rod Henrickson

Does this joint have a live chat room? I kinda hate waiting 12 hours to catch hell some days? Rod Henrickson

quote:

"51 % of Rem stock owned by a man working behind a gun Counter", thats a better rumor

He probably meant that 51% of the stock he owns ($1.95 worth) is Remington stock......

It is dangerous to draw too large of a conclusion from financial statements,but it looks like management has protected themselves agains unsecured creditors, ie the plaintiff's bar. The thin capitalization and securing debt with receivables are steps I might take myself if I were under attack by the legal pirhanas.

quote:

Originally posted by Alberta Canuck:
Just out of curiosity, what is the SG&A Expense item that is runnng them about $70 million per year?

Sales, General and administrative

ie overhead...

And I'll bet a big chunk of that $70mm is legal fees.

quote:

Originally posted by Mikelravy:
And I'll bet a big chunk of that $70mm is legal fees.

I would assume that any large corporation, especially one producing products that are naturally vulnerable to class action/liability suits, would be spending a huge amount of money in their legal department. I would also suspect that those high paid liability lawyers have allot of input into making a company look as though its pockets aren’t quite as “deep†as they truly are.

Oh, by the way...Remington’s web site has been back up and running for a couple of days now. As everyone knows, web sites (even ones of very wealthy/healthy companies) go off line every now and then for upgrades or maintenance.

I think Remingtons “obituary†is perhaps a bit premature.

I hope you are right about Remington's obituary. If I know anything at all it is that being a manufacturer in the US is about as tough a job as you can find.

Having owned a few Remingtons (and others) here's my 2 cents:

1 - If Remington had a blow up problem like Beretta/Sako and handled it the same way then the bankruptcy rumors would probably not be rumors.

2 - You get what you pay for and you shouldn't expect more. Don't compare a 700ADL or 710 with a Sako 75 unless you paid a Sako price for one of them.

3 - The LE 700's go through an extra quality check. So did the older Senderos. I don't know which of the newer models go through the same check. There are fewer complaints on these models. Guess what - you get what you pay for.

4 - Everyone bitches about the bean counters (so do I) but one of their jobs is to keep companies in business. When Winchester revised their models in 1964 to reduce production costs it was because they couldn't remain in business without making a change. Well, they're still around. Ithaca always made quality shotguns and never changed at all. Guess what? The committment to always produce quality products is an admirable attribute that many US companies have taken to their graves.

5 - If you are reading this then you are probably, like me, a firearms enthusiast who owns many firearms and appreciates quality. If Remington, Winchester, Savage, Ruger, etc. had to rely on us to keep them in business they would be gone tomorrow. For every one of us who buys a rifle there are 10 others who go to Walmart and buy one for deer hunting, plinking, or whatever. None of them have ever seen this website. Those people represent Remington's customer base, not us, so I'm not surprised when I'm unhappy with their product line changes.

SJMCI
I couldn't agree more. I am one of those "Bean Counters" everybody seems to hold in contempt. After a week in my shoes they would be singing a different tune. I have the greatest admiration for anybody that can keep a manufacturing plant running in the USA. It isn't easy.

Beans counters are great, I'm married to one, she's a wonderful woman who knows more about staff management than any one in the human resource office.

Better still she has bought more rifles than I have and she doesn't shoot.

Don't understand anyone having a problem accessing Remington's web site. I was just there- 19:45, September 28, 2005.

Other than that, local gun dealers are complaining about Remington's QC.

quote:

Originally posted by sjmci:
5 - If you are reading this then you are probably, like me, a firearms enthusiast who owns many firearms and appreciates quality. If Remington, Winchester, Savage, Ruger, etc. had to rely on us to keep them in business they would be gone tomorrow. For every one of us who buys a rifle there are 10 others who go to Walmart and buy one for deer hunting, plinking, or whatever. None of them have ever seen this website. Those people represent Remington's customer base, not us, so I'm not surprised when I'm unhappy with their product line changes.

Right on the mark. I can't count the number of times that folks on this and other forums have said something like " RemRugerChester" needs to improve their quality and I'd buy one". As you say, those of us who participate on this forum do not constitute the customer base that keeps RemRugerChester in business. And all of us need for them all to stay in business...

quote:

5 - If you are reading this then you are probably, like me, a firearms enthusiast who owns many firearms and appreciates quality. If Remington, Winchester, Savage, Ruger, etc. had to rely on us to keep them in business they would be gone tomorrow. For every one of us who buys a rifle there are 10 others who go to Walmart and buy one for deer hunting, plinking, or whatever. None of them have ever seen this website. Those people represent Remington's customer base, not us, so I'm not surprised when I'm unhappy with their product line changes.

Great point! I am a "low cost" buyer compared to most on this site. I can not afford to customize a rifle to the extent that many would find acceptable, just not in the budget. But having said that, my expectations are much higher than the average guy who buys a gun at Walmart.

Most deer hunters could care less about the things I am anal about.

So what's being said is that it's OK to sell guns that don't feed well, don't extract well, don't shoot well, have poor finishes, poor bluing, out of tolarance headspacing, poor triggers, Jlocks that fail, safeties that don't work as long as they're cheap?????????