Post by Ceorlmann on Oct 18, 2022 16:40:09 GMT -7
This was complete and utter news to me; something I didn't know about until I watched a video on YouTube (Iraqveteran8888) and read through some of the comments. That's what I get for significantly lessening my watch on current events in the firearm manufacturing and company/corporate world. After reading an interview conducted by TFB with CZG's president I have more questions that weren't covered by answers.
www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2021/02/15/cz-buys-colt/
First question and answer: CZ knows very well that Colt is still a very iconic name in the firearms world; especially the older makes and models. Did they need to acquire it for marketing purposes? No, but they make it quite clear why they bought it later on in the interview.
Second Q & A: CZ acknowledges marketing shortcomings for both (namely having a limited primary targeted clientele). With producing CZ products in Colt's manufacturing facilities I'm seeing either the want to push up their product prices by throwing in their marketing of the "Colt" quality, or something else. Another answer later on kinda contradicts the answer here.
Third Q & A: I don't have anything further to add here. Colt's stubbornness to stick to the same firearm platforms and leaving the civilian market as a sideshow at most I'm sure contributed to its filing of Chapter 11 years ago. However if one is already making a top notch product that can't be beaten and is associated with a name why change the product line up?
Fourth Q & A: Either CZ's Prez or the company itself doesn't see what PTR and other former Connecticut manufacturers have done especially since post-2012. There's no way there's enough raw material, employee cohesiveness, and other established team strengths to justify keeping Connecticut's plant there. Moving to a gun-friendly state would be another middle finger to the current communist government in Connecticut, and it would save them a substantial amount of tax money in the long run.
www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2021/02/15/cz-buys-colt/
First question and answer: CZ knows very well that Colt is still a very iconic name in the firearms world; especially the older makes and models. Did they need to acquire it for marketing purposes? No, but they make it quite clear why they bought it later on in the interview.
Second Q & A: CZ acknowledges marketing shortcomings for both (namely having a limited primary targeted clientele). With producing CZ products in Colt's manufacturing facilities I'm seeing either the want to push up their product prices by throwing in their marketing of the "Colt" quality, or something else. Another answer later on kinda contradicts the answer here.
Third Q & A: I don't have anything further to add here. Colt's stubbornness to stick to the same firearm platforms and leaving the civilian market as a sideshow at most I'm sure contributed to its filing of Chapter 11 years ago. However if one is already making a top notch product that can't be beaten and is associated with a name why change the product line up?
Fourth Q & A: Either CZ's Prez or the company itself doesn't see what PTR and other former Connecticut manufacturers have done especially since post-2012. There's no way there's enough raw material, employee cohesiveness, and other established team strengths to justify keeping Connecticut's plant there. Moving to a gun-friendly state would be another middle finger to the current communist government in Connecticut, and it would save them a substantial amount of tax money in the long run.
Fifth Q & A: What a load of smoke and mirrors by CZ's Prez just with the first sentence alone. Benchmark my @$$. Maybe a number of decades ago sure, but Glock has the law enforcement monopoly with no clear competitors. Not to mention more and more M16 and M4 variants currently supplied to our armed forces are either Fabrique Nationale, or H&K. Some Colt's rifles are still out there, yes, but not like they used to be.
Sixth Q & A: CZ Prez took the opportunity to brag about the expanse CZ has in the firearms industry with how many different brand names it owns. Ends with how keeping manufacturing facilities here in the states keeps it in compliance with the Buy American Act. Maybe I'm looking too deep into this speculative rabbit hole, but I don't see a whole lot of benefit here for us consumers...
Seventh Q & A: I have nothing further. I don't know enough to figure out consumer-level pros vs cons here.
Eighth Q & A: Prez isn't so stupid as to try to have Colt manufactured outside the US. Maybe some speculating on his part or at least someone with enough sense to figure if they did that would kill off Colt for anything new, and really drive US-made products through the roof.
Ninth Q & A: I smell smoke here. Prez doesn't ever directly answer how the newer revolver models aren't living up to their original design and line of manufacturing. He's only addressing this number of 70,000. He's not comparing that number to how many did Colt produce vs that 70k, how many got returned, etc. A comparison with at least one thing there would've cleared up at least some of the smoke I smelled there.
Tenth Q & A: Basically the same answers as in previous Qs. Ultimately Prez made it clear he wants CZ to become the leader of the firearms industry, and he actually mentioned that word for word in that interview. I can't blame him for showing ambition, but my very limited look into chaos theory is worried about what if and when things hit the fan with CZ, or is it trying to become like other corporations that aren't exactly liked by the consumer, and are ultimately too big to fail short of an apocalypse that wrecks them like the book version of Jurassic Park's Tyrannosaurus Rex (I recently read Michael Crichton's first book to my son over the course of a couple of months ago)...
And maybe I'm just being overly paranoid and this is the best thing to actually happen to the two companies at this point.
