This all sounds reasonable and logical. But gunnutz is about selling product .Not who has the flashiest web site?? So CA 's site will still be around when every other gunnutz site will be redundant??? Including Gunnutz itself. Why didn't the computer GEEK post your info instead of us customers being jerked around for the last several weeks?? Even CA has admitted that the new site is just not working!!!!
In my opinion, CGN is not about 'selling product' but, about adding value to people, be it through exchange of ideas, opinions, information and/or products.
As for CanAm having "the flashiest web site", I have to disagree. If someone is used to driving around in an '89 Hyndai Stellar (and it's 2015), thinking, 'all these people in their flashy cars' I think is misdirected. In 2015 even a cheap Chevy sedan is flashy compared to a '89 Hyndai Stellar. In 2015, what you call "flashy" is the norm to me. All "modern" sites are flashy compared to even ones from 3 years ago.
I perceive the latest CanAm website as 'professional' and reputable, because it takes a lot more effort (time and money) to produce a site like the latest CanAm one, versus their past one. In the past I have past-up purchasing on certain e-tailer web sites because they looked questionable, and only later-on did they get my business once I have verified their validity - non-gun related. They missed an opportunity to get my currency, instead someone else did.
I think there is some miscommunication. I didn't say other sites will be redundant, I said 'outdated'. CA's site is written/coded and designed with the latest web language (HTML5/CSS3), as of 2015. Hence, as the standard moves forward (with newer versions), websites written/coded & designed in older language/code (i.e HTML4.1/CSS2?) will eventually show compatibility issues with newer browsers especially on the mobile side as more and more people are moving to handheld devices to do online business. And they will be loosing business because of "buggy" site, which will have problems running on Chrome version 65, or whatever else.
Now I do recognize that CanAm did fail to properly vet the site prior to release (probably due to their lack of understanding WRT multi-browser compatibility), which was also a big fail on their web developer's side. The web designer(s) did a great job on the GUI

(in my opinion), I know some people don't like it

, but the web developer(s) are the ones that fell short.
In the end, I still think that this forum is a great tool, that is helping CanAm and the CGN members to communicate in a direct format about the site and any (current) issues. So it can be worked out, and everyone will be happy, win-win.