A Message from Matt Hipwell

Status
Not open for further replies.
Makes one stop and ask themselves I wonder what legal advise this organization obtained before entering into any kind of talks with the Lie berals. Foolish move. Now damage control but that’s too late as they got what they really wanted being the media coverage twist that puts wind in sails. Way to go CSAAA!!!! Board members that react after the fact with resignations fool no one, why didn’t they bail out before this came to light? Because they were complacent and thought they could have it both ways. Not a single dime of mine will be spent at any of these retailers going forward. You sleep with dogs, you wake up with flees. Or in this case painted red.
 
bacardi said:
Thank you for the video Matt.

Putting everything else aside. What retailers can do about the inventory that is now prohibited and cannot sell and they need money to survive? Can we talk about this now? I am drawing blank, but would like to hear suggestions.
Click to expand...

Its a transparently false excuse to clear out the dead inventory so they can liquidate the rest instead of being stuck with the dead goods as a loss after they close the business.

IT IS NOT SO A BUSINESS CAN SURVIVE.

If they need the money from the inventory as a question of survival they are going out of business anyway.

If they are in that kind of a position now what will they do when the inventory money runs out.

The money from the inventory cannot float a business that is in that kind of trouble because it is finite and nothing about the business cash flow or lack therefore will be changed by it.

The small retailers are going to be out of business whatever they do resulting from the diminished and diminishing legal market especially in the face of the coming recession combined

with persistent inflation and high interest rates that do not address that the inflation is resulting from the green taxes on fuel.

They are going to sell out to the big stores that will be the only ones left that can survive or simply liquidate.


If anyone thinks that the money from some frozen inventory is going to save a business that thinks it needs that money to survive, they need to realize that business would not survive

as nothing will change and everything will get worse after that inventory money runs out otherwise that business would not be in that position in the first place.

A one time cash influx does not create a positive cash flow where there is none to start with.
 
They were no good intentions of the CSAAA. They did not give a dam about all the customers who have purchased millions in IOC guns - stranded in their gun safe from them.

They went after their interest first.. get inventory money first. They put themselves in that position. They did not have to enter-in a collaboration deal with the Libs while we are in court over the IOC gun.

They negotiated a collaboration contract over months while the different courts chalenges were taking place. They knew what they were doing. We call that back stabbing. They offered collaboration with the Libs gun grab program against all gun owners interest in return for inventory money. Nice guys.

The CSAAA members who claims they are big supporters of gun owners - knew and willingly entered in a contract and association with the Libs grab program and this for their benefit, not gun owners interest.

When I see Matt Hippwell from Wolverine write is a supporter of gun right and gun owners..he undermined his own father court challenges - the CFFR - Generoux and others and all gun owners who financially supported those chalenges by his actions within the CSAAA. If he was my son - he would have a good kick in the ass.

Like the Titanic’s captain, remembered for the sinking not what he as done before that, Matt and those CSAAA business members will be remembered for their betrayal of their customers - clients and all gun owners.
 
Milanczar said:
Its a transparently false excuse to clear out the dead inventory so they can liquidate the rest instead of being stuck with the dead goods as a loss after they close the business.

IT IS NOT SO A BUSINESS CAN SURVIVE.

If they need the money from the inventory as a question of survival they are going out of business anyway.

If they are in that kind of a position now what will they do when the inventory money runs out.

The money from the inventory cannot float a business that is in that kind of trouble because it is finite and nothing about the business cash flow or lack therefore will be changed by it.

The small retailers are going to be out of business whatever they do resulting from the diminished and diminishing legal market especially in the face of the coming recession combined

with persistent inflation and high interest rates that do not address that the inflation is resulting from the green taxes on fuel.

They are going to sell out to the big stores that will be the only ones left that can survive or simply liquidate.


If anyone thinks that the money from some frozen inventory is going to save a business that thinks it needs that money to survive, they need to realize that business would not survive

as nothing will change and everything will get worse after that inventory money runs out otherwise that business would not be in that position in the first place.
Click to expand...

Spoken like someone who doesn't own a business.
 
I own a business - he is right.

They have that inventory for the last 3 years. They made a ton of money selling at over inflated price - 500 000 handguns last year.
None of them are on the brink of bankruptcy.

They did not have to screw all their clients and customers who supported them and purchased millions of $ of IOC guns from them in the past. They did not had to agreed to collaborate with the Libs - associate their org with the grab program and undermine all gun owners who are in court over the IOC - to get their inventory money.

They were too eager to get inventory money - in return they agree to screw all their customer and gun owners in the process.

If it’s your business model - you won’t stay in business long…
 
Frankly I couldn't care less what you've done in the past. You've just handed the liberals the excuse of "We're working with industry experts and firearms dealers on a buyback program to take these weapons specifically designed to kill the most people in the shortest amount of time off of our streets!" vs "We have noone willing to help us with our program because none of them are willing to help take away the rights of their fellow firearms owners"

Canadian firearms owners and dealers held a united front for years. You just helped the government drive straight through that line, while also conveniently getting $700,000 out of the deal. Congratulations. Traitor.
 
What the Liberals have succeeded in doing is exposing the cracks in the firearms community. From what I have been reading here on this forum lately, this community was never really that solid.
 
Everyone keep kicking Matt on the head and yet no one has any idea on what to do with tons of paperweight that stores are holding.
Individuals have much less paperweight inventory than businesses so most of us are okay. But how about businesses? What are they supposed to do with theirs? Hopefully the next poster has good ideas and not another complaint.
 
bacardi said:
Everyone keep kicking Matt on the head and yet no one has any idea on what to do with tons of paperweight that stores are holding.
Individuals have much less paperweight inventory than businesses so most of us are okay. But how about businesses? What are they supposed to do with theirs? Hopefully the next poster has good ideas and not another complaint.
Click to expand...

C21 amendments was not that long ago, dead paperweight inventory was going to be much larger. Sorry not an excuse, This only emboldened the libs to keep on adding makes, models, all semis, bolts...
 
joshywa1123 said:
Frankly I couldn't care less what you've done in the past. You've just handed the liberals the excuse of "We're working with industry experts and firearms dealers on a buyback program to take these weapons specifically designed to kill the most people in the shortest amount of time off of our streets!" vs "We have noone willing to help us with our program because none of them are willing to help take away the rights of their fellow firearms owners"

Canadian firearms owners and dealers held a united front for years. You just helped the government drive straight through that line, while also conveniently getting $700,000 out of the deal. Congratulations. Traitor.
Click to expand...
Exactly
 
b-wingpilot said:
Weak statement. He is part of the reason for the division. All gun owners were lock-step in solidarity for years, and the letter writing campaign helped to withdraw the amendments to C-21. This.....un-intelligent decision by the board of CSAAA sowed the seeds of division.

BTW, is Wolverine Supplies still a member of the CSAAA?
Click to expand...

there is no such a thing as united or in solidarity for gun owners ... how many contributed to the challenges and how many of the ar15 owners challenged s74? gun owners are not different than stores owning restricted or prohibited guns and i do wish that all that want to hang short and high all those bad people will put the money where there mouths are and supporting really those challenges ...
 
bacardi said:
Everyone keep kicking Matt on the head and yet no one has any idea on what to do with tons of paperweight that stores are holding.
Individuals have much less paperweight inventory than businesses so most of us are okay. But how about businesses? What are they supposed to do with theirs? Hopefully the next poster has good ideas and not another complaint.
Click to expand...
Read Red Deer Shooting Center’s response to all of this. They all have the same option, they can strip inventory and sell parts,a much better solution than accepting 30 pieces of silver to sell us all out. I have no sympathy for any of them, they made a deal behind closed doors, turned on all of us, and damaged our unity immeasurably. They broke ranks period
 
Jay said:
I can see how CSAAA thought they were doing the right thing by their membership.

Unfortunately, every penny of the purported $700K contract was money well spent by the libs for both the speaking points and the ability to parade the CSAAA around as partners in facilitating the first step of their gun buy back.

Folks in the Shooting Sports are upset because they supported the OIC court case, only to find out the CSAAA signed a contract with the very entity they were battling in court.

Despite what I believe to be good intentions on the part of CSAAA, they got played hard core by the libs who are masters of divide and conquer.
Click to expand...

you re the voice of reason Jay. a shame some cannot understand where the devil is really ...
 
EXTREMISTS have the inabilty of wanting a negotiated settlement that doesn't fit their beliefs. Moderates give and take and when dealing with this clownshow in Ottawa they realize that they need some say whether it matches their ideals or not.
 
I don’t understand why someone’s former occupation has anything to do with this situation. To me it seems like it’s mentioned as though it’s supposed to gain everyone’s respect.

What I think is a problem is the method the Liberals used to ban these firearms. They did so with an OIC which was the most undemocratic way to do things. They skirted parliament and avoided any sort of democratic process that has been used in Canada for 100 years.

My questions are this:

1) Why do we acknowledge and obey the undemocratic OIC as law? Because in doing so we grant the government absolute power to change and implement any laws they seem fit.

2) Why do police officers obey orders to enforce these bogus laws?

3) Matt, as a police officer if you were given to order to confiscate our firearms, would you have done it? (Rhetorical question - no need to answer.)

It’s
 
"The people having a reaction I disagree with to a situation that upsets them are EXTREMISTS, only an EXTREMIST wouldn't want to deal with people taking tax-payer money from the government to assist them in confiscating and destroying the things they value!"

Where on earth have I heard this type of rhetoric before..? It sounds familiar, but I'm having trouble placing it.. I'd swear there was a particular group out there with a habit of calling people they disagree with EXTREMISTS.. oh well.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom