Actually, per multiple manufacturers, there is far more profit in the US civilian market than in US military small arms contracting. Military contracts for small arms often don’t have much profit. The M4A1 made by FN for the US Army costs $642. A civilian version sold by Palmetto State Armory with FN made parts of Army contract quality is more expensive. (Source: http://www.guns.com/2013/02/26/fn-lands-army-m4-contract-underbids-colt-remington/ )
It would be nice to strive for a better arrangement. But we need rifles that aren’t garbage NOW, not in five or ten years.
The only reason FDR was even vaguely able to do what he did was because that guy **broke the laws,** especially in wartime. Plain old mismanagement or incompetence is not illegal. Nor should it be. There is no legal grounds to do something to, say, the Freedom Group management. So, again, corporate boot camp is not a legal option.
You are indeed drawing conclusions based on too little observation. Companies whose management consists exclusively or almost exclusively of persons who came up through the ranks at the company and not from a ‘corporate officer clique’ make the same mistakes and run their companies into the ground. Harley-Davidson is a classic example in progress. Their management is mostly people who came up from the ranks of HD or direct old time friends of Willie G - and their strategy that saved the company in the 80s (”appeal to heritage and nostalgia to cover the fact that our product is overpriced, ancient and not actually competitive in an objective comparison”) isn’t working any more. The company is on paper still making money but they know they’re in trouble and have been making some really pathetic attempts to catch up. The market has been unamused. Sound familiar?
What you describe in Japan is the result of their society, not their business training. This would never happen in the US because our culture is different. Remember, there are ‘suicide forests’ in Japan because their culture requires figurative or sometimes literal suicide upon certain failures.
Your “right men” theory is interesting, but it’s too much like “with the right men in charge, socialism can work.” The “right men” are never available in the required quantities and they’re usually busy doing something else, not wanting to be appointed to try to resurrect some failure for little pay. Hence why the preferred solution is for someone to *buy* the wreckage of a company instead of “work as an appointee of a court.”
“The M4A1 made by FN for the US Army costs $642. A civilian version sold by Palmetto State Armory with FN made parts of Army contract quality is more expensive.”
That doesn’t mean that the manufacturer is getting that premium. Much more likely that it goes to middle men and retailers.
“It would be nice to strive for a better arrangement. But we need rifles that aren’t garbage NOW, not in five or ten years.”
Those things are not mutually exclusive. Buy the best we can get now, while gearing up to produce better weapons than are now available.
“Plain old mismanagement or incompetence is not illegal.”
It doesn’t have to be illegal before we can do anything about it. A bit of arm-twisting can go a long way. Persuasion can work. Look at what President Trump did with Boing.
“So, again, corporate boot camp is not a legal option.”
You give up too easily. Motivate the board to hire the right guy as CEO, let him hire the rest of the officers, and they can put the company through boot camp quite legally.
“Companies whose management consists exclusively or almost exclusively of persons who came up through the ranks at the company and not from a ‘corporate officer clique’ make the same mistakes and run their companies into the ground.”
You have rebutted an argument I didn’t make. I agree that people up from the ranks **can** be the wrong people, and my argument is not predicated on using them. It is based on people with good judgment, like President Trump, choosing people who are up to the task.
“Harley-Davidson is a classic example in progress…their strategy…isn’t working any more…”
I hate to use this example, because I hate two-wheeled vehicles. Still, it is a case in point, so…
Harley could be saved, even now, if someone were willing to put in the money and make the right decisions. Agreed? So why would anybody put in the cash? I mean, if you want one, the Japanese make great bikes. The only reasons I can think of are patriotism and nostalgia. If you can turn a profit while acting patriotically, it seems like something a patriot might do.
To save the company the board and/or major stockholders could probably be persuaded to bring in an effective CEO and make necessary changes. If they couldn’t be persuaded, then the changes could be made to pull it out of bankruptcy,
“Remember, there are ‘suicide forests’ in Japan because their culture requires figurative or sometimes literal suicide upon certain failures.”
Not so much. That cultural artifact was suppressed as an unwelcome element of “militarism” following the war. It hasn’t been completely eradicated, of course, but the last big-time seppuku was back in the 1960s. Those people kill themselves because they are weak and depressed, not because honor requires it. BTW, it’s not like there are ‘suicide forests’ all over the place. I only know of one, and it sees about a hundred suicides per year.
“Your “right men” theory is interesting, but it’s too much like “with the right men in charge, socialism can work.”
It would be if I were proposing it as a system of government. I am not. I am thinking of it only as a one-time emergency measure, to be discontinued as soon as companies are back on their feet. It doesn’t differ that much from what we do now.
“The “right men” are never available in the required quantities”
I’m not sure that’s entirely true. Sounds like an argument the “top management clique” would make.
“and they’re usually busy doing something else, not wanting to be appointed to try to resurrect some failure for little pay.”
Wild Bill Donovan ran the OSS for $1 a year. His staff were also “dollar-a-year men.”
“Hence why the preferred solution is for someone to *buy* the wreckage of a company instead of “work as an appointee of a court.”
I haven’t said anything to oppose that. However, it would be better if such a company were run by the right men, whoever owns it. Then, too, there are times when nobody buys a failing firm, and it goes into bankruptcy.
Suppose, when that happens, that the judge is a leftard who picks George Stephanopoulos to restore Remington to health.
A different outcome, I think, than we’d see if someone like President Trump picked someone suitable.
You seem to think I am proposing draconian, tyrannical measures. I don’t think I am. These decisions and choices are already being made. I’m just saying that we have been choosing poorly, and it is possible to choose more wisely.