Heckler & Koch fights for survival

Rebel Rouser said:
I guess this is the current trend with most firearms manufactures now.
Click to expand...

Yes, it is. Most firearms manufacturers have been enjoying strong profits and growth, and are very attractive to rent seeking investment firms that buy these companies at a premium, extract all the accumulated wealth, and load the companies up with debt. Debt that is often from the parent company who had to finance the initial acquisition in the first place. The parent company does not care or understand about the underlying business. Once the underlying business is on the verge of failure the parent company once again can extract what little value is there, and then find creative ways to transfer as much debt from other businesses as possible prior to the inevitable bankruptcy.

Not only is this becoming common in the gun industry, its becoming common in all industries. A decade of quantitative easing in the worlds historically two largest markets, US and Europe, have left financial companies flush with cash. At the same time, crushing regulation and market uncertainty has made it virtually impossible to find something good to actually invest in. Net result being more and more is this acquisition and bankruptcies. A trend that harms employees and consumers, but allows both the previous owners to get paid of huge, while the new owners get paid off down the road when they profit from the bankruptcy. Sadly a pattern that is only possible, and often encouraged, with the help of the government regulators.

macaufoto said:
just reminded me of Remington....
Click to expand...

Almost exactly what happened to Remington actually. But both companies still have good employees, patents, equipment and expertise, and will be a viable company for years to come. They will both emerge from a restructured bankruptcy under new owners, and continue making guns for years to come.

philhut said:
I can see how the writing is on the wall for that company...

- Home based government not very gun friendly (very Pro-UN)
- Announcement last year that they were no longer intending to sell to the reactional/hobbyist market, only commercial and civil and federal contracts
- competitors dealing from more firearm friendly nations
- etc
- etc

Kind of like the Canadian Firearms industry.
Click to expand...

Asides from Colt Canada, I highly doubt any other Canadian Firearm Manufacturer is at any risk of suffering the fate of a Remington, or an HnK.

Due to its national strategic interest, I suspect the Liberals would Nationalize Colt Canada and auction it to a Canadian buyer before they let a foreign entity run the company into the ground. Although recent events might suggest that the time to do so has already come.
 
Cameron SS said:
Yes, it is. Most firearms manufacturers have been enjoying strong profits and growth, and are very attractive to rent seeking investment firms that buy these companies at a premium, extract all the accumulated wealth, and load the companies up with debt. Debt that is often from the parent company who had to finance the initial acquisition in the first place. The parent company does not care or understand about the underlying business. Once the underlying business is on the verge of failure the parent company once again can extract what little value is there, and then find creative ways to transfer as much debt from other businesses as possible prior to the inevitable bankruptcy.

Not only is this becoming common in the gun industry, its becoming common in all industries. A decade of quantitative easing in the worlds historically two largest markets, US and Europe, have left financial companies flush with cash. At the same time, crushing regulation and market uncertainty has made it virtually impossible to find something good to actually invest in. Net result being more and more is this acquisition and bankruptcies. A trend that harms employees and consumers, but allows both the previous owners to get paid of huge, while the new owners get paid off down the road when they profit from the bankruptcy. Sadly a pattern that is only possible, and often encouraged, with the help of the government regulators.
Click to expand...

This is how the rich become richer. You steal as much money from the company that is possible, then declare bankruptcy. Have the lending institutes write the debt off. Start all over again by finding a new company to steal money from.
 
Diamondback Six said:
After how cozy HK's been with the criminal and dictator element (*stares pointedly at their providing build licenses and tech supporrt to Tehran's local-build MP5 line*) while flipping off the law-abiding gun owner for decades... Eff 'em. Go die in a sewage fire, HK. Because You Suck And We HATE You, just like you say about us.
Click to expand...
yup-they did crap on civilian market for years as branding themselves as elite--too bad soo sad---Colt Canada is excellent all the way around-this is why they got the SAS contract...
 
Rebel Rouser said:
This is how the rich become richer. You steal as much money from the company that is possible, then declare bankruptcy. Have the lending institutes write the debt off. Start all over again by finding a new company to steal money from.
Click to expand...

Its only theft if the government says its a crime. IN this the profiteers make sure to maximize their political contributions, the quid pro quo to ensure the wheels stay greased.
 
Refusal to sell their most popular military designs to civilians certainly hasn't helped. The US civilian market is a far more lucrative market than any individual defense entity. Since Obama was first elected, the US civilian market does over 1 million sales of new firearms per year. FN's last M4/M4A1 contract with the US military was for only 120,000 and that's spread over multiple years. Sure, the big military contracts are great, but they're more of a bonus than a bring home the bacon project. Wikipedia says Colt Canada alone has only produced 200,000+ variants of the C7. That's not much..
 
cancer said:
Refusal to sell their most popular military designs to civilians certainly hasn't helped. The US civilian market is a far more lucrative market than any individual defense entity. Since Obama was first elected, the US civilian market does over 1 million sales of new firearms per year. FN's last M4/M4A1 contract with the US military was for only 120,000 and that's spread over multiple years. Sure, the big military contracts are great, but they're more of a bonus than a bring home the bacon project. Wikipedia says Colt Canada alone has only produced 200,000+ variants of the C7. That's not much..
Click to expand...

Colt canada is not as big a company as you think. Their reputation is big around the world and they make great guns. But their production capacity is nothing compared to Hk or Fn Herstal.

Coupled with the restrictive german export laws and Hk not having(hopefully changes when they open their us plant) a manufacturing facility to meet 922r compliance.
 
AlexF said:
HK did not price itself out of the market as much as HK was badly mismanaged and German government does not encourage its arms industry especially firearms exports.
It was so bad that German Leopard II tanks had broomsticks as machine guns!!!
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wo...omsticks-instead-of-guns-during-training.html
In any case, I'm really saddened by the entire thing...
Click to expand...

7E8w8rZ.png
 
cancer said:
Refusal to sell their most popular military designs to civilians certainly hasn't helped. The US civilian market is a far more lucrative market than any individual defense entity. Since Obama was first elected, the US civilian market does over 1 million sales of new firearms per year. FN's last M4/M4A1 contract with the US military was for only 120,000 and that's spread over multiple years. Sure, the big military contracts are great, but they're more of a bonus than a bring home the bacon project. Wikipedia says Colt Canada alone has only produced 200,000+ variants of the C7. That's not much..
Click to expand...

Yes--back in the late 80's I recall a trend of Colt, S&W, and others chose not to sell semis to civilian end users after a highly publicized school shooting. They promptly went bankrupt and into receivership.

HK should transfer operations to the USA, give the executives philosophical enemas (ie teach that it is okay to sell to civvys) and proceed to make more mony....
 
zupermann said:
Yes--back in the late 80's I recall a trend of Colt, S&W, and others chose not to sell semis to civilian end users after a highly publicized school shooting. They promptly went bankrupt and into receivership.

HK should transfer operations to the USA, give the executives philosophical enemas (ie teach that it is okay to sell to civvys) and proceed to make more mony....
Click to expand...

But then how could they tell us that we suck, and they hate us?
 
greentips said:
Not every company, like Colt Canada and Lithgrow, is essentially subsidized by the government...
Click to expand...

at the end of the day, armory need military contracts, plus the cost of R&D, manufacturing.... it is sad to see any company in trouble, especially those who supply toys to us.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom