AR Sponsor
[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Is Colt foolish? (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 3/7/2005 6:35:35 PM EDT
|
Here we are in the middle of a buying frenzy, AR15 makers are making money like never before, and Colt won’t expand their civilian sales. If anything, they are pretty much shutting down all support for civilian rifles and going strictly LEO and Mil. Both of which makes Colt less money compared to the public sector. I'm honest enough to admit that if there is an $899 bushmaster next to a $1200 colt, a huge amount of people would choose Colt, but Colt is too dumb to take advantage of their name, brand, and heritage. Colt already had to massively restructure in the recent past to prevent from going bankrupt. So clearly LEO and Mil don’t pay the bills. What the hell is Colt going to do when the time comes for their Mil contract to not get renewed because a new rifle is adopted? Colt was smart enough to expand their military market by buying the defense wing of Canada’s Diemaco, but clearly, this choosing to completely deny and not capitalize on the inflated demand for anything AR15 is one of the worst blunders in the company’s history There is no reason for Colt not to be selling more than Bushy, Oly, RRA, DPMS, and Armalite combined. The name Colt, along with the pseudo prestige that comes with the DOD’s preferred contractor, gives them an advantage in branding you just can’t buy |
|
There might be more to the decision. I worked at a company that was in a position that parallels the Colt one. We decided to invest heavily in new equipment and new employees. To put the investment in perspective, we borrowed about $32,000 per employee and had about 500 employees. Everything looked good until the market took a small dive then the company ended-up bankrupt and out of business. If the company hadn't expanded, we could have probably weathered the storm like we had before. Instead, the huge interest payments hurt us, and the called loan killed us. I also worked with four other companies that went out of business due to cashflow problems. They had the customers, but they just ran-out of short-term capital. Buying more equipment and hiring new employees is a risk. Having willing customers doesn't guarantee success.z |
| Yup, I've come to the conclusion that Colt is just plain stupid and deserving of whatever ills befall them. I tried asking about there sales policy at the SHOTShow but the guy wouldn't talk to me. He just kept repeating the same line..."We're not marketing those guns to civilians right now." Near as I can tell, Colt THINKS that if they maintain this policy that they will retain favored DOD-vendor status if/when Democrats regain control of Congress and the Presidency. |
|
Foolish ? No. They have more than enough govt contracts to keep em alive. If you have thousands of already paid for or good to go orders with some agencies around the world, you supply them. Smart business move IMO. But still , they are pretty turdly for their politics at home. |
|
I don't know how good the numbers were, but I've read that the bulk of Colt's business is LEO and Military. If they're meeting their objectives now, there has to be an incentive for them to change. Are they able to increase production to meet the demand? How much would it cost to do it? Is the return on investment sufficient to make it worthwhile? Colt still plans to sell it's MT rifles to civilians. What Colt does not intend to do is sell civilians AR15s. |
WTF? Did you even read the thread you're responding to? Expansion, markets, all that blah blah has nothing to do with Colt being run by a bunch of snotty-ass "civilian" haters. I don't know where all that came from, but I am sure it does *not* apply here, seeing as how Colt has THE contract to supply the ENTIRE U.S. MILITARY ESTABLISHMENT with these rifles!  The US military is not going away and Colt ain't bankrupt...they're condescending holier-than-thou assholes for one reason - that huge never-ending military contract allows them to be. |
and they would have an even bigger piece if Colt started to worry about cvilian sales of AR's. I dont know why people are bitchin. If it were not for Colts govt contracts and lack of civilian sales tact. There wouldnt be so many knock off companies to make AR's. |
|
I think Colt's current civilian sales program is guided by PC politics. As an example, civilians can buy ARs with no bayo, adjustable stock, or lug. LEXXXX models are still in civilian hands in but Colt is restricting them to Police officers only (at least trying to). I really don't think Colt is restricting them to support the LE community, otherwise all the M4's would have 14.5" barrels making it very difficult for civilians to own. While the .mil customers should certainly have and need priority, the LE market has tons of choices and is not in jeopardy of not acquiring rifles. I would like to see Colt "attack" the civvie market. I believe with a name brand recognition marketing campaign, they could put a real dent in the civvie market. And all with substantial profits. These profits could be used to "fight the good fight", against the PC anti-gun crowd. I feel this long-term strategy is better for the gun industry and as a result better for Colt and its future. What if the SCAR/XM8 projects are implemented in full scale over the next 20 years? And what if these contracts are won by companies other than Colt. If Colt had strategy for the civvie market, this could prove to be another profit center to help compensate for lost revenue with .mil customers. Colt's current capacity may not be able to expand and aggressively target the civvie community without hurting its military orders. (I am not sure, but with as much sub-contracting that is done I think they probably could handle both markets, if not now, probably in time) I don't pretend to know all the numbers the Colt CEO knows; just my $.02 |
LEO and Mil are not enough. If no one remembers, Colt was not far from being a dead company. They shrank down, moved to smaller facilities, etc...So clearly, LEO and Mil don’t pay the bills. Can Colt increase production? Colt doesn’t need to increase production, just provide what the public what they want and in more outlets. No one wants their Shitty MT line. They want AR15 rifles and M4’s Cost? Colt sells their M16 rifles at rock bottom prices to the government. The thinking is, sell lots of rifles for cheap and make a barely-breaking-even profit, but make up for it with quantity and mark up on parts. Colt M16 Bolts don’t cost what they do because they are so much better, but because they need to make up for the money they aren’t making on complete rifles. One AR15 sale makes colt 30% - 50% more money than a single rifle unit sold to the DOD. Once again, you don’t need to expand to capitalize on the market, just focus your efforts on supplying the demand and not getting sidetracked with other markets. Look at bushmaster. They basically sell only 3 rifles now. 80% of their efforts at focused on 20", 16" and M4 style rifles. They put very little resources into anything else. Colt can do the same. And as for the War, their DOD and LEO units don’t have anything to do with their civilian units. They recently restructured to keep their divisions from interfering with each other. That is like saying, Boeing can’t make any more 747’s because there is a war and they need to make F16’s. One has nothing to do with another |
|
And if I may add one thing... Make no mistake; Colt could single-handedly dominate more than 50% of the Civilian sales market if they wanted to. If Colt made a M4 Clone and could get it to dealers with an OTD cost of $1000, it would be the best selling firearm in the country besides 1911 models, and Glocks If I can see it, surely they can too |
Wrong. I have several relatives that make rifles for the military that don't work for Colt that would disagree with you. Try doing a little research before posting.
There is no guarantee of future contracts from the military. Again, do some research.
You haven't been following the company very closely have you? They don't have the equipment, facilities, and employees that they once had. Again, do some research.
Wrong again. Their contract is not "never-ending."z |
|
As long as we are all speculating, I'd lke to jump in. I think the QC/Mil Spec overhead involved in Military/LEO sales makes it hard to compete in civillian sales. Colt can either lower their specs or focus on selling to folks that want their package. For most of the civillian market, parts are parts. If the finish is good, It's just like a Colt, but cheaper. Colt can't compete in this arena. Maybe they should lower their specs for civillian sales and try to compete. Apparently they choose to continue with basically Mil Spec rifles. Could be the death of the company. That's not to say that lots of other parts don't work fine for most aplications. It's just that the mil spec and QC requirements add a lot of cost that many won't pay for. Seems like Colt is competing where their customers are willing to pay for the specs they desire. Forged buffer tubes, shot peened bolts, mag particle testing, proof testing of bolts and barrels, certified metals and heat treating, etc. don't seem to make much difference to the average civillian purchaser. Bushmaster has none of these features and they own the civillian market. They dont parkerize under the front sight either, He He. If you have never seen a military acceptance test, you can't imagine what it adds to the cost of a rifle. Since most Colt parts for the civillian market will pass the mil spec, it makes for a pricey rifle. I don't think any other brand would be much cheaper than a Colt if the same specs were followed. The real question is whether it's necessary do all this to sell to the civillian market. The answer seems to be a resounding NO. Colt's are gonna cost a few hunderd more than most anything else. It's good that you have a choice if ya don't like the package. Seems like a cheap wine if ya want them to sell at the same price as the prutty rifles. |
If they started selling a semi-auto only model identical in specs...parts size wise to its military conterpart like using a 14.7 /permanent A2 flash hider,small FCG pin lowers with their spec telestock they would dominate civilian sales and I would be in line for one...but sadly thats never going to happen.They could make a civy model that realy lives up to "if its not a colt its a copy" slogan..they could but they wont....how sad...making a standard model like that and being proud of selling it to us comon folk would go a long way in not only giving us what we want but fixing their anti gun anti civilian sales image.
|
No shit. It was a LEO. I told him he was nuts. He might of paid ~2k. I tried to talk him out of it, but he is thick. Buy the way... I used a Vulcan beacuse, to me, the lower makes no difference. All the performance is in the upper. I don't give a shit about finish on my shooter. |
|
You guys need to remember that Colt never supported or sold M16's to the civil population, pre 1986. They never intended civilians to have M16's. The only ones to make it into civil hands were LEO/Mil intended or samples that never got branded as pre-samples. I could be wrong but I am old enough to remember that and heard it from many C3 dealers before. Maremont was the same. You couldn't just go to the factory and buy a NIB mint M60 with all the trimmings in 1985. I would imagine that Colt is bowing to pressure from some .gov group and the anti crowd and is fearful of litigation that could happen down the road. There is no protection against frivalous lawsuits as of right now. A lost case could close the doors forever. There still is that BS contract that clinton and that housing group shoved down our throats. I don't know if that ever went away or not. It may not just be that they are stupid. May be other factors involved. Then again, maybe they don't give a crap..... That would be stupid. |
|
People keep saying that one excuse Colt has for not investing into the public sector is fear of litigation, and that is BS. Why it is every other gun maker manages to function in the same hostile political and social environment and manage to make a profit. No one can sit there and tell me that Colt cant yank the LEO markings off a 6920 and put it in your local gun store for everyone to own. Honestly, just look at Bushmaster. Don’t tell me Colt cant be pushing the LEO and Civvy side in the same way. You think anyone out there would be paying $900 bucks for an RRA Entry Tactical if Colt sold a civvy M4. Colt as a company is always hovering on the brink of folding. It's a shame to have such an important American Company in that condition because of bad decisions. Even the 1911, Colts most important weapon, is pretty much muscled out by Kimber and Springfield, No one I know even considers a new Colt 1911. This is Brand mismanagement at its finest People can say that hate Colt all they want, but if given the choice between the last AR they purchased and a Colt equivalent for $150-$200 more, I’m sure an overwhelming majority would eat the extra expense just to own a Colt. So what does Colt do? Basically say they don’t want your Civilian money, they’d rather risk bankruptcy by being dependent on the Mil and LEO |
Good points, bravo. I wonder if Colt ise foolish enough to wait until their cash cow is already feeding in another pasture before turning up the civilian sale efforts? That would be too late, IMO. I do believe that the XM8, in some form, is going to happen. (and I know funding cuts have it in jeopardy right now, but that is just because of appropriating war-time funds, not a reflection of the XM8, or its future.). So I suppose Colt is spending their money and resources on fighting that decision. (ie bribing pentagon officials w/ hookers, kickbacks- you know...that sort of thing) rather than R&D, and building a better mousetrap. I mean how the F can Colt NOT win the SCAR competition? Hell, they have the engineers, the insight, the contacts at the Pentagon, the political pull...........and still lost. That company looked to be headed in the right direction when they hired the ret. General (Keyes I believe) to run things , but the more time goes by, the more I wonder. I guess I am also a bit selfish, too. I want to have their best AR /mil type weapons, but also want to see American Company made guns in American hands. |
I don't disagree with most of what you said. I don't see why they'd make the MT line and the LEO/Mil line and not share common parts between the two. But, you have to admit, that's a pretty bad analogy. 
|
|
I dont know..... slap me silly and call me Sally but if I have to trust something with my life I want it to be well tested and proven reliable Quality cost money, several posters already said that and they seem to be ok with a lesser quality...... not me Sure Colt's politics suck but that's not going to make a difference in the outcome of my decision Under fire and my (__________ insert company name here) locks up, I'm not going to be saying damn this rifle but the company politics are neato and, oh yea......... Payless shoes is having a sale this week, go get some, there all the same right 
|
I have no idea what input Bill Keyes has on Colt's policies, but after moving to a county where the local sheriff absolutely refuses to give CCW permits to citizens (even citizens who had permits from other counties), I can state with personal certainty that not all ex-military men believe in the 2nd Amendment. Whether it is the doing of Keyes, Zilkha, the State of Connecticut, the cast of Friends, or any combination of the above, Colt's policies are irritating as hell to me on a number of levels. Once the other makers/subcontractors get all the bugs ironed out, Colt will then be to ARs as they now are to 1911s; that'll leave them with the SAA. |
|
I dont know..... slap me silly and call me Sally but if I have to trust something with my life I want it to be well tested and proven reliable Quality cost money, several posters already said that and they seem to be ok with a lesser quality...... not me Sure Colt's politics suck but that's not going to make a difference in the outcome of my decision Under fire and my (__________ insert company name here) locks up, I'm not going to be saying damn this rifle but the company politics are neato and, oh yea......... Payless shoes is having a sale this week, go get some, there all the same right A big +1 If you told me that I was going to be made to drive a car for the next 10years and I could have a U-go and the salesman would be nice while I was buying it or a Honda and the salesman would dog curse me as I was leaving Ill take the honda every day. |
|
I would love to own a Colt to be honest just due to the history of the AR and the fact that they do make a good product. I will never buy one however do to their current political stance. Too bad, I think Colt could easily take a majority of the civi market and make a lot of cash. |
|
Colt would have to be replaced with another AR manufacturer anybody like Bushmaster, RRA, hell even FN could take thier place to truly come back to the great civilain market. But I think that the US gov't likes making contracts with makers like colt for the same reasons they had springfield rifles in service for the longest amount of time, in the end it's all about politics not truly a free arms market until you get into the civ market. Where makers MUST compete for sales. |
|
IF Colt stopped with all the PC crap, and offered us the rifles we want, and IF they kept up the same QA and used the same parts, I think plenty of us would be willing to pay $1200 for a rifle. I would. Would they sell as many of them as Bushy or RRA? Maybe not. But they'd still sell quite a few to people willing to pay more to get more. They have made the decision to not sell a product that many of us would want, if only they weren't dicks about it all. Perhaps the best thing we can do to change this is to keep pressure on Colt and to continue supporting legislation that limits the liability firearms makers face for criminal misuse of their products. That being said, I still go out of my way to find Colt parts for some components, because some civvy model AR's just aren't the same quality as what I was once issued. |
|
From what I can see, none of you work at Colt. So how can you say what the reason is? I've worked at enough companies to know that the guy in the booth at an industry convention knows as much about the real reason behind corporate policy as the guy cleaning the bathrooms. It might be that Colt has made no official decision to address any particular market. It may be that there is X amount of production capacity and Y amount of demand. Perhaps some junior doofus sat in on half a conference call to distributors and misunderstood something, so he told his sixth cousin's gay lover that Colt's policy is to not sell to civilians. Who knows. The truth could be as simple as controlling demand with price. G23c |
| Colt had way more than just the US military contract. Now they bought Diemaco they certainly dont need civilian sales. When you look to see how many contracts they have, they may not even need the US military contract to survive. They have quite abit going on outside the US. |
No one cares that you think Colt makes a better rifle. Take that to another thread because that isnt the point of this one. Colt has within it's means to be the #1 seller of AR15 and M4 clones in the public sector. Likewise, the public sector wants to own colts before RRA, OLY, DPMS, and Armalite (Bushmaster would be able to fight Colt off in a competative market, Oly could corner the bargin shopper sector)... Colt needs money. SCAR is going to eat at the M4 market. The XM8 is lurking, not dead, because funding is going toward the War in Iraq. One stroke of a pen and XM8 can replace the M16. What happens to Colt then? If people love Colt so much they would want the company to survive and be more concerned with Colt's Future than impressing their friends and bragging about being the only kid on the block with a 6920
Man, people keep saying that, but it isn’t true. All the fat contracts Colt has and they nearly Folded. Gone. Out of business. Mil contracts and LEO contracts are not enough, if so Colt wouldn’t have been so close to the brink. Also, the M16 isn’t getting greater penetration in new markets. In fact, no one wants it for their armies. So Colt has the M4, and it's the de facto standard in carbines right. Okay so now SCAR and XM8 is competing directly against the M4 in the USA. If we push SCAR, everyone other nation will follow. USA leads the way, that's just the way it is. Canada is a tiny market in mil contracts compared to the USA and colt wont make anywhere near the same amount of money. You live long enough and you get sick of seeing American companies work themselves out of the competitive markets for the dumbest reasons |
..................heheheheeeee.................. 
|
Good point, _DR for the last 168 years, no less! |
|
I brought up the point that this is not the only time in history that Colt has turned their backs on the civilian market. It was impossible to purchase a NIB roll marked M16 from a Colt distributor pre 1986 by Joe Blow off the street. By their own admission, they never intended or wanted the civil sector to possess M16 rifles. This is a mirror of that attitude about full the fledged Colt AR-15's today (with all the evil features). There is no difference from the attitude of 1985 and 2005 today. Prove me wrong about it. It would seem they are not interested in our opinions about the subject. God help them because they will lose big time. I have a 1979 SP1 CAR15 myself. I am thinking about getting rid of it and get something else because I don't care about the pony myself. If the company isn't concerned about me and my dollars, why should I be concerned about their continued existence. With that attitude, I hope they crash and burn. Won't be the first time a company has committed suicide by a failed strategic business plan. |
BTW, I am working on some patents on some new tactical gear as well as holsters and sling systems. I am studying failed business practices and histories of what not to do. I wouldn't do what Colt is doing if I wanted to continue as a successful business leader. So I guess I could speak on the subject as I have had some success selling my products thus far. |
| Colt makes a good rifle . They just suck at civilian sales/ marketing. Foolish policy, it seems they would want to sell as many guns as possible. Other gun companys gave got their licks with pissing off civilian markets too. If I remember correctly Colt has gone under and reorganized a few times already. And the aR wasn't even their creation. Armalite sure got screwed over every which way. |
Is your real name Bill Gates, maybe Donald Trump? because you seem to have it all figured out here. Maybe you should give Colt a call and let them in on their mistakes, I'm sure they have not thought of all this. Dont mistake my diatribe for defending Colt, I am as bothered by their politics as the next person but I wont let thay sway my decision on Quality, I've got several different brands of AR's but still prefer the Colt quality Colt is in no way being foolish, they are in business, they have a fat cat government contract and dont need us. we dont pay the bills, think about it we dont even show up on the Colt Market radar When the time comes to do somethng different they will survive....... or not...... I dont care, there are millions of good quality rifles out there, I will survive also Bushmaster, RRA, Armalite and the rest cant even keep up with the civilian market, how are they going to compete for a government contract. Foolish? Not at all Politically stupid towards civilian sales? Yes Did I just make an ass of myself because I cant even remember what all this is for |
ArmaLite made the decision to sell the rights/patents to the AR15 to Colt so they could move on to other ideas. It was their choice. How is that getting screwed? More like a bad business decision on ArmaLite's part, which by the way is not the same ArmaLite we know today. |
|
I don't know where all that came from, but I am sure it does *not* apply here, seeing as how Colt has THE contract to supply the ENTIRE U.S. MILITARY ESTABLISHMENT with these rifles! The US military is not going away and Colt ain't bankrupt...they're condescending holier-than-thou assholes for one reason - that huge never-ending military contract allows them to be. FN |
| TRhe comments about SCAR and XM8,you all know the MARINES are field testing the lietner&wise sytem on their M4s right,and if thats adopted we might see the M16/M4 around for quite some time if that gas piston works out as its been touted to.Just think a retrofit gas piston that can be used on existing weapons wich means the rifles are still 100% compatible with parts already in the pipe line..in the end it will be about cost and a system that extends the usefullness and makes more reliable the current system and makes it equal to the new contraptions will win out.I wonder what colt will do then if the L&W system becomes a specified upgrade for the M4. |
[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Is Colt foolish? (Page 1 of 2)
AR Sponsor