Posted on 12/07/2014 8:24:06 AM PST by Kaslin
Given that our Commander in Chief is a surprisingly decent firearm salesman, it’s a little odd that one of America’s most prolific gun manufacturers might soon be facing an agonizing financial death. But, that’s exactly where Colt is headed if things don’t change drastically. It takes a very specialized form of failure for a gun company to miss out on the Obama-inspired run on guns, the “assault weapon” craze of the 2000’s, and the proliferation of Concealed Carry in the 1990’s, but that’s exactly what happened. And, worse, this isn’t Colt’s first foray into fiscal failure.
In fact, this tendency of Colt to stumble onto hard times has a name in the industry: It’s called the “Colt curse”. It’s been around since Samuel Colt first bankrupted his hopeful arms company in the 1830’s. God may have made man, and Samuel Colt may be credited with making men equal; but, it has always been an uphill battle. It turns out that Colt was pretty good at making guns – but he was a failure at marketing and selling his contribution to the world of weaponry.
Lucky for Colt (and the generations that would later benefit from his contribution to the industry), the war with Mexico broke out in the 1840’s, and Samuel Colt saw his opportunity. The aspiring gunsmith quickly found an audience with the US Government for his innovative firearm designs. Realizing the full potential of crony-capitalism, the entrepreneur almost went broke entertaining politicians, generals, and frontiersmen. He was, undoubtedly, the Solyndra lobbyist of his day. With the helpful contract from America’s military, Colt quickly etched his name in America as the creator of the “gun that won the West”.
The company, however, was never quite capable of shaking their addiction to government contracts. In fact, it quickly became a centerpiece of their business model.
In the 1970’s firearm manufacturing in the US was adopting the model of America’s automotive giants. Unionization was prolific, and innovation was an afterthought. Yeah… It didn’t work out for Detroit; and it almost ended in disaster for the firearm industry as well. While most American companies scrambled for ways to avoid the Union-led decline into mediocrity, Colt happily hummed along with the help of military contracts, and large government shipping orders.
The iconic manufacturer’s business was booming… Right up until the moment that Unions decided to do what they do best: Go on strike. By 1988, the company had lost a number of high-dollar contracts, and the end of their beginning was clearly at hand.
In the decade to follow, their competitors warmly embraced America’s newfound fascination with the civilian market, concealed carry, and home defense. Colt, on the other hand, decided to take a more pragmatic approach. And, by “pragmatic”, I mean “liberal” approach:
A wealthy industrialist, from the heart of a non-gun-owning Manhattan family, decided he could steer the company to better times. With a man who knew nothing about guns at the helm, Colt embarked on their reimagined path to prosperity by introducing (and supporting) the idea of smart guns and federal gun permits. Yeah… As strange as it might seem, telling your most ardent customers that they should ask a fickle and hostile Federal government for permission to handle your product, isn’t a great business practice.
The new CEO (yeah… the last one was fired pretty quickly) still decided to put civilian ownership on the back-burner as he focused on appealing to the same Pentagon cronies that nearly drove the company into the trash-bin of history. There are only a handful of industries that relish the advent of war… And they all have something in common: They work (in effect) for the Pentagon. With their sudden boom in government contracts, as the Iraq war picked up, it looked like good times might finally be on the horizon.
Good times, in fact, seemed like it couldn’t be avoided. Well, at least in theory. But if Colt had proven anything in its 178 years of existence, it’s that turning a profit is kinda tough sometimes. The company’s decision to whittle their civilian division down to a few obligatory 1911s wasn’t really doing them any favors, given that their competitors were rushing to fill the demand of a gun-hungry republic. While Joe Biden, Barack Obama, and Harry Reid rambled on about gun control, Colt casually dismissed the idea of focusing on the civilian market. Heck, it was only within the last few years that Colt finally got around to deciding that a pocket pistol (the .380 Mustang) might be a good idea.
Colt’s civilian offerings are proving to be “too little, too late” for a market that is currently saturated with high-quality alternatives. And so, with a very specialized degree of failure, Colt has managed to paint itself into near bankruptcy. Their corporate bonds are rated as junk, and they’re continuing to pile on millions of dollars worth of debt.
The company might still survive. After all, they represent a history, a quality, and a heritage that is rare in today’s world. Their guns are quality products (even if you do pay a premium for those ponies on the slide) and their reputation is strong. But the company embraced too many values of the left to survive long in a world that has proven to be hostile to their industry.
In the end, there are really only three things that are responsible for killing Colt: cronyism, support for gun control, and labor Unions… You would think a gun manufacturer would know better than to sleep with government. But, I guess nobody shared that lesson with Colt’s management.
My dad owned a Detective Special and carried it when we were posted in Japan in the 1950s.
i used to shoot service rifle but my eyes aren't what they used to be... i don't have to walk point, point defense is all i need and i feel comfortable and confident with the M1A so i'll stick with what i have
maybe Santa will leave you a SCAR under the tree... 8^)
I look forward to Colt going under and having its rights purchased for pennies on the dollar.
Then a new owner can do the historic brand justice.
Been on a range at the SHOT show where everything up to a .338 Lapua was suppressed. Behind the line no ear protection was necessary.
I'd like that and a 4" Python.
Heck, it was only within the last few years that Colt finally got around to deciding that a pocket pistol (the .380 Mustang) might be a good idea. Uh, wrong. The Government .380 has been in production for years, and the Mustang, Mustang Pocketlite, and Mustang Plus 2 appeared before the first Gulf War. That's been 23 years now.
I’ll take an FN SCAR.
I just love M1’s and Garands. Great rifles and accurate.
I had a bunch of weapons and many that others prefer before the boating accident.
We have 7 DYI AR’s that each cost $2k - $3k when we were through.
Great rifles but, I just love my M1A’s.
I love them more than my scoped rifles and more than our ACOG jewelry.
Rilly? By any buyer? Or are there a few that might stick in your craw, like Norinco?
Having used a .45ACP on a daily basis for business and pleasure for over 45 years, I likely have forgotten more than you will ever know about the pistol. Expose your self to a .45 ACP_at 100 yards and you are dead. At 200 yards you are going to really hurt if not die right now and will probably stop using bad language. I can demonstrate that business on demand but that is me and I am just a beginner with the 1911.
There is literally nothing that Marxism cannot destroy, and Colt is the perfect example.
Colt zigged Left while everybody else was zagging right, and that is the end of the story.
Too bad, too, since they made (and still make) a nice product.
billyboy15 wrote:
Used to fire a Colt 45 while in the USAF (Early 1960’s Air Police). These were WW11 vintage. Accurate range of these puppies was about 10 feet. If your target was further away your best bet was to throw the pistol at him.
Lion Den Dan replied:
You, sir, probably can’t hit a bull in the butt with any weapon. From the above statement, I question if you have ever used a 1911.
marktwain remarks:
Many of the old Army .45s were just worn out. The ones the Air Force had were ones that originally were in the Army Air Corps. A lot were simply difficult to shoot. A real problem were grip safeties that had to be held just right to get the pistol to fire. If you didn’t, you could pull the trigger so hard the gun would shake, and it would not fire.
On the other hand, I was issued a 1911A1 from the armory to fire a pistol match in the reserves in the middle 80’s. It was probably made near the end of the war (WWII) and had never been to Korea or Vietnam. It looked and handled new, and I fired the highest aggregate score in the match with it, against competition that had tuned civilian models. I wish I could have figured out a way to keep it, and it was strictly issue.
Agree. Love my King Cobra, but the wife said “mine” :-)
Buy the .22lr copy. Cheaper, well enough made, reliable, and you can’t tell the difference unless you look at the open of the barrel.
Hey man! How you been?
Thinking .308 or larger.
If guys are gonna “”Ooh and Aahh!” my rifle and shoot it, might as well make a lasting impression
Besides, seems I can get all the 308 I want these days but, try finding .22 anything, anywhere.
The fact that it is altered to not be ear damaging, isn’t that a good reason to make the rule be to ask people to put suppressors on their guns when target practicing? Think about it. If I was living out in rural PA, and you wanted to practice shooting in your yard? Wouldn’t you want to lessen whatever was audible to me say, a ways down the road, for courtesy’s sake. I would!
Always got a chuckle out of revolvers with silencers.
Russians made one ...
Must have worked real good with the barrel/cylinder gap.
This is going to be my ccl gun.
I supposed that could be a secondary concern, I'd do it so I could shoot without ears. After that range time, the lure of multiple suppressors has been compelling with the paperwork requirements and tax payments being the showstoppers.
make the rule be to ask people to put suppressors on their guns when target practicing
Can't see them as a requirement until paperwork and tax removed to make them more accessible. OTOH, in the country where it is legal to shoot, I wouldn't restrict shooting for noise.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.