[Spktyr]

Mmmm... not so sure about that. The problem is that the market started moving away from *buying* their core competencies, so they bought in companies that were making what people wanted to buy. Where they screwed up was that they then ran them like another part of Remington, subject to the same crap that was ruining their main lines, and reduced this expertise they’d bought to some labels slapped on low quality weapons. They somehow managed to convert Bushmaster, which was a leading name in AR-15 pattern rifles at the time of purchase, into a laughingstock that nobody buys, to use one example.

They could have and should have left (again, to use the example) Bushmaster alone to continue in the marketplace. But they didn’t, they started micromanaging and needlessly consolidating their new purchase into what they already had.

[snoringbear]

“They could have and should have left (again, to use the example) Bushmaster alone to continue in the marketplace. But they didn’t, they started micromanaging and needlessly consolidating their new purchase into what they already had.” No argument here. A reality of the gun market is that for the most part their products are multigenerational meaning that with rare exception guns are rarely used to the point of being worn out. And, consequently they’re usually passed on to the next generation. Example, I have guns that I inherited from my father and a shotgun from my grandfather. So, gun manufacturers in order to grow the business must grow their customer base (i.e. women) or introduce new products, preferably both. Your Bushmaster example is a good one. I wasn’t aware that it was bought by Remington. I’m getting on up there in years and now have all the guns my wife will allow me to buy so I don’t keep up with current events in the gun business 😏.