Explanation of Remington Woes

N

ndking1126

New member
So we all know Remington has run into some financial problems in the past years. I'm not sure if this has been posted or discussed, but I found it very interesting. I never understood how they hit financial hardship so quickly. It's a long article, but if you'd like to get to the point, start reading about half way through at the paragraph that starts at "Last fall, a former Remington executive, who..."

Basically Cerebus took on a lot of debt and then transferred it to Remington. Not long after transferring the debt to Remington, Cerebus took their cash and ran. Garbage.. I'm sure Remington has their problems to work through (what company doesn't?) but this makes a whole lot more sense then all the sudden they just can't make money selling their weapons anymore. I live less than 10 miles from the Remington plant, so maybe it's a little more personal to me. I was always a Remington fan and would love to see them make a full recovery in finances and quality, but I guess this post is more about the situation they went through than how I feel about their guns currently.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/05/01/magazine/remington-guns-jobs-huntsville.html

Mods, if not allowed or redundant, my apologies. Please delete.
 
M

MTT TL

New member
Basically Cerebus took on a lot of debt and then transferred it to Remington. Not long after transferring the debt to Remington, Cerebus took their cash and ran. Garbage.. I'm sure Remington has their problems to work through (what company doesn't?) but this makes a whole lot more sense then all the sudden they just can't make money selling their weapons anymore.
Click to expand...

That is how Leveraged Buyouts work. When a publicly traded company sits on a big pile of cash share holders will see that as an ineffective use of capitol and clamor for change. A corporate raider will swing by and buyout the shareholders and saddle the company with debt. It is textbook.

Remington may have been a good company at making stuff in 2003 but they were lousy at capital management. In a capitalist society if you are going to trade your company publicly you have to be able to do both.
 
F

fourbore

New member
If the last post is true, my take in business is profits should either be reinvested in making the company better or returned to the share holders.

If it is pension money it should reside a deferred individual employee controlled account such as 401k. Company has no business with the money either.

I dont blame corporate raiders for picking up free money left in a paper bag in the sidewalk. Unfortunate free market, really free, does not prevent stupid or irresponsible.

On another note, I really do miss the old Remington. The whole industry seems to be moving a direction I dont care for. It is a lot worse with Remington. The same for Marlin, which is more than just missed, that one broke my heart.
 
A

Aguila Blanca

Staff
Marlin and Remington are now under common ownership. I have seen the company referred to as "Marlington." The same thing that is now besetting Remington is what ruined Colt -- greedy corporate owners who are more interested in siphoning money out of the company than they are in actually running the company.
 
M

MTT TL

New member
greedy corporate owners who are more interested in siphoning money out of the company than they are in actually running the company.
Click to expand...

That is exactly how capitalism works. Sure there are different investing strategies for short and long term returns but in the final analysis most investors could give a whit about what the company is actually doing so long as they get a solid return on their money.

There are ways Remington could have avoided the whole fiasco but nobody gave it a thought.
 
J

jmr40

New member
The problem goes much deeper. Remington was building defective firearms going back to the 1940's and did a good job of keeping things quiet by paying off people with financial settlements along with non-disclosure clauses. All that money going into payouts as well as paying the lawyers led to no innovation and poor QC going back years.

Remington sat on their butts for years trying to keep selling the same things. They were the last manufacturer to offer interchangeable choke tubes. They still to this day use the God awful reverse stamped checkering everyone else dumped in the 1960's. They didn't innovate very much new in rifles, and the few they did come up with were not supported.

But the the lawsuits couldn't be kept quiet with the advent of the internet. By the early 2000's word was getting around and everything snowballed. More and more lawsuits were piling up and the more money they spent defending themselves the less they had to build quality or innovate.

This is what weakened the company to the point where they had to sell. Cerebus simply finished off the company. They had been circling the drain for a long time and would have gone bankrupt regardless.
 
E

emcon5

New member
jmr40 said:
The problem goes much deeper. Remington was building defective firearms going back to the 1940's and did a good job of keeping things quiet by paying off people with financial settlements along with non-disclosure clauses.
Click to expand...

joker_here_we_go.gif


Let it go. You won. Remington recalled all the good triggers and replaced them with utter garbage, all because some morons were unable to practice the simplest rule of gun safety.

Jeff Cooper said:
Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy.
Click to expand...
 
D

Doyle

New member
Let it go. You won. Remington recalled all the good triggers and replaced them with utter garbage, all because some morons were unable to practice the simplest rule of gun safety.
Click to expand...

I disagree. No matter which way the gun is pointed, the simple act of taking it off safe should NEVER make it fire. A gun that does that is a problem waiting to happen and indicative of negligent design.
 
D

driz

New member
Doyle said:
I disagree. No matter which way the gun is pointed, the simple act of taking it off safe should NEVER make it fire. A gun that does that is a problem waiting to happen and indicative of negligent design.
Click to expand...
Back in the 60s I was using my buddies Remington 22 bolt gun. It’s the one time in all the years I had an AD by simply sliding the safety off. At the time I half blamed it on something I did but knew that my finger wasn’t anywhere near the trigger guard. I never really trusted any safety fully ever since.
 
F

FrankenMauser

New member
I never really trusted any safety fully ever since.
Click to expand...
Safeties should keep the firearm from discharging, but they can't do anything to keep a moron from pointing the firearm at friends or family.
For some reason, the general public - and even many idiots in 'gun culture' - can't understand the difference.
 
T

Tony Z

New member
35 years ago, I too, hadn accidental discharge from my Model 700. Fortunately, I was hunting alone and when unloading, had the rifle pointed towards the ground. I was convinced my finger was not on the trigger and remained baffled for years, until I read of the trigger issues.

I never replaced the trigger, and have remembered that moment like it was an hour ago.
 
N

natman

New member
Sure, you should always treat any gun like it could fire at any moment. That doesn't excuse making a gun that actually does it.
 
J

J.G. Terry

New member
Experience with Remington 700's

Experience with Remington 700's. This safety thing has been talked to death. Personally, I'm glad to see the company regain its footing. This is the age of the circling sharks. A curse on them all. Also, many hater's came out of the woodwork when this lawsuit started.

For many of us who had used Remington bolt action rifles without problems looks at the entire business as bizarre. The only incidents I personally experienced was with Remington rifles with the Bubba Trigger Job. I hope the company continues to make a comeback. I've got four Remington bolt actions that are keepers.
 
Last edited:
D

Doyle

New member
Nothing wrong with the triggers, it was lack of maintanience (cleaning) causing the problems.
Click to expand...

If that were true, you'd be seeing similar problems with undermaintained Savage, Winchester, etc. triggers. Remington screwed up. Even their own engineers admitted it.
 
O

olddav

New member
Doyle,
Savage, Winchester etc.... are a different designs. The designer ID the problem people were having and suggested a fix. All designs can and are overwhelmed by abuse and the lack of proper maintanience. Still say there is nothing wrong with the Walker triggers, but you must maintain and clean them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top