Glenn, I think Colt was putting a positive spin on what they are doing, ie. creating collector grade firearms. Firearms that are not intended to hurt people. If the mainstream media, especially the NY Times, publishes a positive use for a firearm besides giving an individual the power to take a life, I think we win. I never considered myself a firearms collector, but I do now to avoid the arsenal tag. It is all about semantics and having the general public, who mainly don't care about guns one way or the other, think of the gun owners in a positive light. One of the toughest arguments for a firearms owner to discuss with an anti-gunner is that guns are made for killing. To a 'fence sitter' that is a tough argument to defeat. I can beat it because I argue gun control issues all the time, but many people just say that guns are used for target shooting. Well, sorry, but a fence sitter will not agree that a recreational activity enjoyed by a minority is more important than manufacturing 'killing machines.' The more positive spin we get the better off we are. I am certainly happy that the Colt reps did not try to explain the business reasons for creating different companies and placing them under a holding company. The Times would have run a very negative gun article involving a foreign national investment banker sheltering money so he can declare bankruptcy, bust a union, and not have to pay any judgements resulting from the lawsuits filed by many cities and the federal govt. I think Colt is making an excellent business decision and I think the spokeman for Colt handled the interview beautifully which allowed positive press for firearms in the NY Times. After all, people who dress up like Annie Oakly and Wild Bill and shoot guns for fun at targets, are not very threatening to the majority who don't care about guns. They might even take the kids out to watch these adults all dressed up like cowboys. Much better than taking them to an IDPA or IPSC match and watching them combat shoot on human shaped targets. This is a good thing. I would have preferred for Colt to stand up and be tough in their public statements, but that would not have played well in the press. As gun owners we must not be looked at as threatening group, as the militia units are viewed by the public, but as doctors, lawyers, and professionals who have a hobby no more threatening to them than coin collecting is.