Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't think they will either. Even with Remington gone bankrupt, the gun sales have been slow for many months, and don't look to improve, especially for the companies that depended on the AR-15 sales to keep them going.
Dick's can make as much money selling a fancy canoe as it makes on a gun, or a mountain bike, or enough good camping gear to outfit a family. They can sell cameras, range finders, and other electronics that can bring them as much as a gun.
So Dick's has plenty of ways it can go to make up for the loss of the sales of just one type of gun.
But the gun makers don't have alternatives to manufacture. They can branch out into manufacturing other outdoor products, like the corporation that bought Smith & Wesson did, but it takes a very popular and well-known name to do it, and it's only done at great expense in the expertise and re-tooling that's needed for any new product that's a lot different than their traditional product.
Springfield makes good guns, no doubt. But they may be forced by market demand to start producing other models, and it will cost them to do it. There are sure to be lots of unsold guns when they do, and it all affects their bottom line. They will find they need Dick's Sporting Goods more than Dick's needs them.
I don't think they will either. Even with Remington gone bankrupt, the gun sales have been slow for many months, and don't look to improve, especially for the companies that depended on the AR-15 sales to keep them going.
Dick's can make as much money selling a fancy canoe as it makes on a gun, or a mountain bike, or enough good camping gear to outfit a family. They can sell cameras, range finders, and other electronics that can bring them as much as a gun.
So Dick's has plenty of ways it can go to make up for the loss of the sales of just one type of gun.
But the gun makers don't have alternatives to manufacture. They can branch out into manufacturing other outdoor products, like the corporation that bought Smith & Wesson did, but it takes a very popular and well-known name to do it, and it's only done at great expense in the expertise and re-tooling that's needed for any new product that's a lot different than their traditional product.
Springfield makes good guns, no doubt. But they may be forced by market demand to start producing other models, and it will cost them to do it. There are sure to be lots of unsold guns when they do, and it all affects their bottom line. They will find they need Dick's Sporting Goods more than Dick's needs them.
Tell me again how losing .011% of its retail market will harm SA. You don't seem to understand that when a purchaser decides to buy an M1-a rifle he/she is not going settle for a BS rifle "sort of like" an M1-a. If "Dick's" doesn't carry them they will go to one of the other 64,300 dealers,
Springfield armory is famous for its M1a rifle, 1911 style handguns and XD model handguns. They didn't even START making AR-15 type rifles until two years ago.
finally someone noticed this drivel! thank you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1AngryTaxPayer
This post is rife with FUD. The AR-15 is available in about 20 calibers capable of taking any game in N America....for starters.
Dicks has forever lost my business and I don't usually go shopping for gun stuff there anyway. They don't sell anything that I can't find elsewhere without any hassle.
There are many more that will now shop there becuase of this ,it's good business on their part.
Tell me again how losing .011% of its retail market will harm SA. You don't seem to understand that when a purchaser decides to buy an M1-a rifle he/she is not going settle for a BS rifle "sort of like" an M1-a. If "Dick's" doesn't carry them they will go to one of the other 64,300 dealers,
I'm sure a lot of folks at Springfield hope you're right.
Personally, I don't want to see either company go out of business over this.
But for Springfield, it's not the number of dealers that matters the most. It's the number of guns that are sold that matters, and always has, the most of all.
Any Springfield dealer, no matter how large or small, that sells a couple of guns a day is much more important to them than another that sells one or two a month.
With 715 stores, those numbers do add up in a chain so large.
So what? All that says is you're a more dedicated hunter than most and have become proficient with a gun that's a poor choice.
Nothing new about that. There are guys who still hunt elk with muzzle-loaders and bows. They're bad choices when better is easily available.
No one's stopping you from hunting elk with a spear if you want, or a bowie knife, a crossbow, or even a slingshot and a rock if you want. They're all bad choices too.
Me? If I want to load up an elk, I don't want to risk having to chase the big rascal down over a couple of mountains after I shoot him. I want a rifle that fires a big enough bullet to drop him like a rock. Personally, my fave is a .308 shot through a bolt-action rifle. The rifle is heavier, but safer, and the bullet is big and goes fast.
Shooting is the easy part. It's the rest that follows that takes all the work. I'm good, but I'm not Hawkeye, and there's nothing more I hate than having to chase a big bull down one side of a mountain and up the side of another before I can drop him, dress him out and carry the meat home.
Maybe you aren't as particular as I am about the game I eat, but I've found all that adrenalin that shoots through an elk sure doesn't help the flavor of the meat afterwards, but that's me.
Yuk. No thanks. I'll save that teensy little bullet for woodchucks. I don't ever eat them.
And the reason, you don't get to think for me.
What is bad for you, is perfect for me.
And the reason, you don't get to think for me.
What is bad for you, is perfect for me.
I'm not trying to think for you. You aren't trying to think for me.
It's just a simple fact there are some tools that are better for others for a particular use.
If you want to use a tool that's not as good as another, by all means do so. I sure won't try to stop you, nor will anyone else.
This is just deflection anyway. It has nothing to do with the topic. The fact is the AR-15 was never designed to be a hunting firearm. It's simply not the best tool for the purpose. That it can be used for hunting is just the same as using the wrong sized screwdriver for the screw.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
