Is Remington in trouble?

[Hawkmoon]

http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/i...-20171117.html

The Philadelphia Inquirer says "soft demand" has pushed Remington to the brink of defaulting, and has resulted in a further reduction in the company's credit rating. Is demand really that soft post-Obama across the firearms industry, or is some of the problem the fact that Remington just hasn't been making good guns in recent years?

[Doran]

They've had couple product launches that didn't go very well and the constant press drumbeat about the Walker trigger issue hasn't helped. But I believe some of it comes from people attacking the company on the internet only repeating what they've heard elsewhere.

[TexasRedneck]

The internet has done more to damage - and promote - companies than anything else could have done. Some has been good - but much has been "sky is falling" hooey. It seems that folks will believe about anything that's posted without doing any real background research on their own. Take the Remington trigger issue......one of the triggers that was included in the network "expose" HAD had work done to it - yet it was repeatedly reported to have been untouched. A few folks tried pointing that out, but finally gave up in disgust because of all the internet "experts" that just KNEW we were "Remington shills".
I can remember when Randall .45's came out - the net was in its' infancy - and complaints about them feeding JHP ammo first surfaced. Folks quickly pointed out that it was a gun built to milspec and therefore designed to feed on FMJ ammo - case closed, we knew the way to address the issue and folks moved along. Now, I see other .45's explicitly built to milspec - and folks lose their minds because it ain't "feeding right" - yet few (if any) ever point out that the root cause is the non-ball ammo being used.
Or the "experts" that tell everyone to "polish the ramp" on their .45 (my personal favorite) - and to do so with a dremel!! I'm partners in a gun shop, and we get several a month in that we have to ask if they want us to order a new frame, or just put it back together and take it on home.
Google ".45 magazines" for another hoot.....WC is often at/near the top as being the "only mag I'll use". I always offer to take those "junk" OEM/non-WC mags off their hands, explaining that I'll add 'em to my collection once I tweak the feed lips or hold the gun properly. I've got a collection of over 60 1911's, and regularly use those same "junk" mags at the range with nary an issue, including quite a few two-toned ones.....

[cavelamb]

Soft Demand?
WHAT soft demand?

according to the FBI, over 200,000 background check requests associated with the purchase of a firearm were submitted to the agency on Black Friday, marking a new single-day record. The previous record was set on the day after Thanksgiving in 2016. In both 2017 and 2016, enough guns were potentially purchased on Black Friday to arm every active duty Marine! That is also good news!

from the November issue of M1911.ORG newsletter.

I had a Remington R-1, my first 1911.
I wanted so badly to love it.
It was spooky accurate (tight!)
But completely unreliable.

Looking back on it...
The extractor was clocking, causing a lot of jams.
It went back to Remington twice, the second time it was swapped for a new piece.
Which has the same kind of problems.

I traded it off (and got a keeper - Ruger Blackhawk) and bought a Springfield Range Officer 9mm.
That one has had 4000+ rounds through it (Okay, I'm trigger happy) without a single problem.

If Remington goes under, it will be their own fault - not the "soft demand" or internet gossip.

[Hawkmoon]

They've had couple product launches that didn't go very well and the constant press drumbeat about the Walker trigger issue hasn't helped. But I believe some of it comes from people attacking the company on the internet only repeating what they've heard elsewhere.

See post #4 in this thread. I've seen enough issues with incorrectly machined receivers in the early R1s that I would never take a chance on buying one. It's a sad state of affairs, but not all of the problems Remington faces today are attributable to a soft market. If there's any tie-in to a soft market, it's that in a soft market buyers are more discerning, and far less likely to take a chance on buying a pistol with a known reputation for problems when there's no backlog for buying any of the brands that are known for being reliable out of the box. American manufacturers too often forget that it doesn't take long to destroy a good reputation and, once a reputation has been destroyed, it takes a LONG time to rebuild it.

[charlieb8]

Remington is owned by Cerebus Capital Management. They are famous for buying companies, over leveraging them with debt and then draining the companies of assets. Also the election of Trump took the steam out of the folks buying firearms that were afraid of Clinton's election that might restrict sales.

I think S&W has laid off several hundred workers.

[John]

Well, I have no answer to the original question, but in the SHOT Show, Remington had one of the largest booths. They also have several firearms to show (A LOT OF THEM, is the proper term). If they are in financial troubles, it sure was not apparent by their appearance in the Show.

[charlieb8]

You might want to take a look at this article. Cerebus Capital is a notorious compant.

https://www.bizjournals.com/newyork/...ales-slip.html