https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...-remington-files-for-bankruptcy-idUSKBN1H204F
Wonder what this does to the NEW stuff Remington had at SHOT SHOW...??
Wonder what this does to the NEW stuff Remington had at SHOT SHOW...??
- Thread starter jcsparky
- Start date
Love how they try to connect these recent shootings to Remington’s financial woes when the truth is Remington has been headed down that road for a very long time.
This was a log time coming
much ado about nothing
no need to get all riled up...Remington isnt going anywhere
no need to get all riled up...Remington isnt going anywhere
Let's see... IBM, General Motors, Remington... I'm sure that there are others. Who else is going to try the, "We're ______________. The people will buy what we make for them to buy." business model? It hasn't worked yet (that I'm aware of). Leupold, are you paying attention? The Mark 5 series is certainly a step in the right direction, but now you're playing catch-up in the market, which should have never been the case.
That attitude (we're the 500 pound gorilla) does nothing but breed competition and ensure that the market "pie" will get cut up into progressively smaller pieces. Don't get me wrong, it's great for the consumer, but it sure sucks for the people that comprise the company (not to mention the shareholders).
As much as it pains me to say this, I'm glad to see this happen to Remington... I love to see "people" get what they have coming (whether that's good or bad; I love to see good things happen to people who've earned them, and I love to see bad things happen to people who've... earned them). If a company drags its collective ass and allows its competition to innovate and either deliver superior quality/features at a given price point or similar quality/features at a lower price point (or, horror of horrors, superior quality/features at a lower price point), then they've earned whatever happens to them. I don't want to hear any crying about foreign competition, either, and I'll tell you why: the Ruger American Rifle. It is in no objective way that I can discern inferior to modern R700s, and is in some ways superior. It is American made, and it is priced such that it gives the purchaser a lot of value ("value" in this case being defined as, what you get in exchange for what you give). There isn't a single reason why Remington, oh, say, 10+ years ago, couldn't have come up with something similar... but they were too busy resting on their laurels and not paying attention to the market changing around them. It's just so damned frustrating...
That attitude (we're the 500 pound gorilla) does nothing but breed competition and ensure that the market "pie" will get cut up into progressively smaller pieces. Don't get me wrong, it's great for the consumer, but it sure sucks for the people that comprise the company (not to mention the shareholders).
As much as it pains me to say this, I'm glad to see this happen to Remington... I love to see "people" get what they have coming (whether that's good or bad; I love to see good things happen to people who've earned them, and I love to see bad things happen to people who've... earned them). If a company drags its collective ass and allows its competition to innovate and either deliver superior quality/features at a given price point or similar quality/features at a lower price point (or, horror of horrors, superior quality/features at a lower price point), then they've earned whatever happens to them. I don't want to hear any crying about foreign competition, either, and I'll tell you why: the Ruger American Rifle. It is in no objective way that I can discern inferior to modern R700s, and is in some ways superior. It is American made, and it is priced such that it gives the purchaser a lot of value ("value" in this case being defined as, what you get in exchange for what you give). There isn't a single reason why Remington, oh, say, 10+ years ago, couldn't have come up with something similar... but they were too busy resting on their laurels and not paying attention to the market changing around them. It's just so damned frustrating...
you do realize remington probably sells more hunting rifles than any other company.....right?
this has more to do with shitty management than it does to do with shitty sales.....there are plenty of other companies that sell 1/100 of what Remington does, and still have successful and profitable companies.
Yes, and I also realize that "big green's" lack of innovation has led to the design/availability and rise in popularity of things like the Ruger American, the Howa 1500/Weatherby Vanguard, Tikka T3, etc...
I'm just going off of what I see on the racks at my local Cabela's and other mainstream sporting goods stores... to the guy who walks in off the street and wants to buy a hunting rifle, there's really no reason (beyond name recognition) to go with an R700. He can either get similar quality/features at a lower price with something like a Savage, or superior quality at a similar price with something like a Tikka... or he can kinda split the difference and pay less for something with some innovative features like the Ruger American or a Mossberg. I take your point about poor management, and I believe that that's what led to the bankruptcy filing; management not taking the profits and investing in the company/product... thus allowing for the rise of their competition.
their lack of innovation is really a moot point.
as they have sold over 5 million Remington 700s over the last 50 years..........thats 100,000 a year....dealer price on a Remington 700 is around $500.......so annually Remington is raking in $50,000,000 just on Remington 700s.
it doesn't make a difference that their designs are "behind the curve".....they are selling regardless.
if you are selling $50million on just one product line.. and are still in bankruptcy...thats a result of shitty management......especially when you couple in how popular the 870s are and how well they sell.
Remington could have been at the forefront of quality and innovation.......and theyd still be in the same boat they are now.
It's not about how many rifles they've sold in the last 50 years, it's about how many they've sold in the last 5 years, or 10 years. It's about a $500 dealer price on a rifle that offers the consumer no more quality/performance/features than one that has a retail price of less than $400.
It's about not investing in machinery/tooling that allows for less expensive production of one of their core products. It's about taking that big, fat revenue stream that you mentioned and NOT using it to drive the company forward.
If you are not improving, you are dying.
Look what happened to Colt revolvers, and what is now happening to S&W revolvers. Lots of the old school revolver assembly guys are retired or dead, not many have that skill or knowledge left to Have the quality they used to offer, not to mention not many will work at that job for what little pay is offered....
Look what happened to Colt revolvers, and what is now happening to S&W revolvers. Lots of the old school revolver assembly guys are retired or dead, not many have that skill or knowledge left to Have the quality they used to offer, not to mention not many will work at that job for what little pay is offered....
.......how is that not a management issue.........
I'll refer you to the first sentences of my first post on this subject:
It seems to me that from the very beginning of my participation in this discussion I acknowledged that it was a management issue. The attitude that I described certainly isn't one attributable to operations, or marketing, or any other functional organization (and if it IS, then it's up to management to change it). Similarly, it's certainly not operations or marketing or R&D that chose not to innovate, and to continue to offer the same old product at the same old (adjusted) price point, despite what the competition is doing.
But we have also become enamored of cheap disposable products.
Enthusiasts will buy a finely finished Python but they are fewer in number than someone that just wants a stamped block of steel or plastic that will launch bullets in the general direction of the target.
Plastic guns are the new cheap pocket revolvers from the turn of the 19th century.
You are not wrong, and we as enthusiasts appreciate quality work. But the Walmart mentality has ruined a lot of people on understanding what quality is.
The Walmart mentality is so short sighted stupid.
We save nothing when we have to buy three of something to equal one item of quality manufacture.
The environmentalists should be shitting a brick over how Walmart has filled our landfills with cheap disposable crap but that would be biting the other prong of their agenda - globalism.
In the mean time I am happy to snap up Colt/Smith and Wesson revolvers, old bolt actions, and steel/aluminum semi autos that have single stack magazines or that are out of favor because they dont hold a bakers dozen.
At this point I couldn't care less if they take the deep 6. There are so many better options on the market that the other manufacturers that have done well for themselves will quickly move into the hole that Remington leaves. We can't support companies into perpetuity just because they're historic. If they suck, they suck. Bye.
All I know is that if I can't get .270 130 grain Core Lokts my long-range shooting career is going to take a dump for a while... It will take a while to learn to use mils instead of just "holding over the shoulder".
Maybe MOA will be easier to learn because it's inches, not metric.
Maybe MOA will be easier to learn because it's inches, not metric.
Totally agree. I sight in my 7 mag at 400 yards with core lokts and just make sure I see hair in the scope.
Sad but hey, reality bites. Gibson guitars is in the same boat. Basically: “We’re Gibson. We can build what we want, not what the customer wants, charge what we want, not what will sell, have shit dealer relations and we’ll survive because we’re Gibson.”
Living down south this is a language I understand?.270 Rem 7400 130 Cor-Lokts
Shit man, no worries, Savage can take the lead on this one.. But hey, look on the bright side, they are innovative...
...and appropriately priced, given the quality/feature set (for the most part).
Agreed......
Remington is not going anywhere. Bankruptcy is not for going out of business- it is for restructuring debt. Stock holders wil be taking a hair cut. Freedom group may sell off some less productive subsidiaries. Look what GM did. They discontinued Saturn, Oldsmobile, Pontiac, and Hummer- but the company remains. As I said in another thread, many of the subunits of the freedom group will probably be more profitable (at least more efficiently managed) as independent entities.
Maybe the taxpayer will have the pleasure of bailing Remington out as well! Hopefully I get a free gun from the deal.
Yes there are alot rifles and accessories based on the "700 action".
I just want to try one of they PCR Rifles.
Not sure their management made the right decisions in the Cerberus group. I'll buy Remington for what it is, not the GAP and not the bottom of the barrel. Bushmaster, AAC? aaah not so much.
I just want to try one of they PCR Rifles.
Not sure their management made the right decisions in the Cerberus group. I'll buy Remington for what it is, not the GAP and not the bottom of the barrel. Bushmaster, AAC? aaah not so much.
This has nothing to do with Remington's QC nor the American public's buying tastes. It's all about Remington being used as a cash cow by investors.
Just my opion I would say it is a multitude of factors. Gun manufacturers enjoyed the high output of sales during the hysteria of the gun grabs days of Obama years. Over spent on expansion for demand output at the time. Then hysteria days dried up. Law suits, bad management, and competition increased with better quality actions and barrels.
Read up on this. It was the management firm.
Rather have an ESP anyway?
Seems to be the way this county is going , financially and morally bankrupt
This doesn't take into account that it is not all pure profit. That is shortsighted in the first place and shows you know little of business. To say that it doesn't make a difference that designs are behind the curve is also shortsighted. In business, if you are not innovating you are dying. Grow or die. It is true in life as well as the market place. Research some before posting ignorant crowd speak. Leadership matters. Have you never been in the military with shitty leadership vs quality?
True. Most people don't understand law and that there are multiple types of bankruptcy.
This is what happens when you attach a DBM to an 870. But on a serious note, Remington had this coming for a long time. Letting the competition bury you year after year with innovative and attractive new designs. Quality control going out the window, guns arriving at distributors with rust on them. Relying on your name is the worst thing a company can do. How do you let Savage and Ruger come out with very feature rich and affordable precision rifles and not come up with something? You have the most revered action ever made and you cant come up with anything? The potential Remington had to exploit the precision market was right in their face and they chose to come out with a magpul stock, aftermarket bolt handle, and some cerekote. I hope this is a wake up call to Remington and they come back with some interesting new products.........but I won't be holding my breath.
What I feel is sad is that Remington is only a little extra QC, especially in their barrels, away from still being competitive. Sure they need to be smarter about caliber and twists as well. But I don't feel this is a huge hurdle. The 700 footprint is still the base of most customs, that is changing of course but I doesn't have too.
That said, if I ever need another factory rifle it'll likely be a super light weight hunting barreled action like a tikka superlite that will likely be dropped into a manners. Or maybe a ruger American if I want to be very cost conscious or like the caliber options better.
That said, if I ever need another factory rifle it'll likely be a super light weight hunting barreled action like a tikka superlite that will likely be dropped into a manners. Or maybe a ruger American if I want to be very cost conscious or like the caliber options better.
It is true another American icon bites the dust. Many factors go into what has happen to Remington but innovation is definitely one cause. In the last 5 years have built 4 custom high end rifles 3 of them bolt action. Not one of them has a Remington action, used Defiance and Surgeon. Smaller company's are the cutting edge on quality and performance.
