Smith & Wesson: Reputation Among Gun Supporters Is Main Concern
BY Herschel Smith
5 years, 9 months ago
Alienating firearms backers would “cause the greatest reputational and financial harm” to American Outdoors Brand Corp., the manufacturer disclosed in a federal filing on Friday
“The one overriding factor mitigating the effectiveness of gun control groups to damage the reputations of those in the firearms business is the passion and strength of firearms owners in defending their rights at the ballot box, in the course of legislative debates, and in the marketplace,” Smith & Wesson’s parent company wrote.
The candid remarks encapsulate the difficulty proponents of new gun laws have faced in their quest. While such campaigns often garner intense media attention, the core support among gun owners and the significant political weight the group carries has stymied any significant legislation on the issue.
It also highlights the difficulty firearms producers and retailers face in trying to navigate the intense political landscape on gun control. Dick’s Sporting Goods’ decision in 2018 to ban the sales of AR-15-style rifles helped contribute to a 4.5 percent decline in sales in its hunting business. The backlash among conservatives and others firearms supporters “could affect future results,” the Pittsburgh-based sporting goods retailer disclosed in November.
Friday’s study from American Outdoors Brand Corp. (AOCB) was released following a successful effort by shareholders, including a group of nuns, to force the company to analyze how its products are associated with gun violence and what steps the Springfield, Massachusetts-based firm is taking to make its firearms safer.
In the report, the company disputed the need to direct resources towards developing so-called “smart gun” technology, which includes facial recognition software to only allow an authorized user to fire it. Doing so would “require a significant investment” and the products would come at a cost that could alienate many of its key consumers.
“This pricing difference alone, at best, limits the commercial viability of ‘smart guns’ to a very small niche market. AOBC’s reasonable business judgment is that an investment in such an unknown, niche market is not a sound business decision,” the firm wrote, adding that it will “continue to regularly assess the market.”
Why would they have to make a “federal filing” over a stockholder vote? The article doesn’t say.
As for what the author said in the article, it isn’t clear if Smith & Wesson really, really want to invest in “smart guns” and just can’t because of the financial damage (which would be very real and potentially deadly to the company), or the author is just making up this supposed conundrum for gun manufacturers.
As for Smith & Wesson, I’ll make the same observation I have for Ruger, Savage and all other manufacturers. Hedge against this sort of thing by ensuring that if you do go public in order to raise revenue, your employees own a majority of the stock. Make it an employee-run company.
Most manufacturers won’t have the wisdom to do that.
|
|
On February 11, 2019 at 10:12 pm, John said:
S&W was bankrupted by gun buying customers in the 1990’s; who turned their
backs on the company when it cut a gun registration agreement with Slick Willie.
They couldn’t give one away until they went completely broke and were bought
out for the fire-sale price of 2 million dollars. I think they learned their lesson.
On February 12, 2019 at 12:58 am, Jon said:
The shareholder requested thing is part of their annual report to shareholders, which is required to be filed with the SEC.
On February 12, 2019 at 3:01 pm, RCW said:
Reading this Smith post brings to mind Coonan’s shenanigans six years ago when they decided to go in cahoots with the gun grabbers of Evolve; it appears now that Coonan, Inc., if it’s not in it already, is headed towards bankruptcy.
On February 12, 2019 at 3:43 pm, scott s. said:
Further to Jon, it is reported as SEC Form-8K per Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Section 13 filed 02/08/2019.
On February 13, 2019 at 12:36 pm, George said:
Smith and Wesson should come out with a clear statement that they will not be heading toward smart technology regardless of profit or lack thereof. They should state that their company is consumer driven and there is no demand for such a product.
Then to add insult to the requested stupidity, they should announce that due to overwhelming consumer demand, Smith and Wesson revolvers will no longer be sold with the internal action lock.
I am sure that the last one would have the gun grabbers heads explode as well as increase profits for Smith and Wesson. I for one would immediately purchase a S&W 686 sans the Hillary hole.
On February 13, 2019 at 1:06 pm, moe mensale said:
“S&W was bankrupted by gun buying customers in the 1990’s; who turned their backs on the company when it cut a gun registration agreement with Slick Willie.”
@John,
The S&W agreement with the Clinton administration has nothing to do with gun registration. It dealt with fundamentally changing the way guns are made, distributed and sold.