Does it matter? Remington seeking financing for Bankruptcy

T

TXAZ

New member
There is an interesting issue with Remington looking for financing to go into bankruptcy : Does it matter?
Remington has made some classic firearms including the iconic 700.

So the question is, with all the other manufacturers out there, would it matter to you or the industry if Remington leaves the business?

Remington needs $$$’s to file bankruptcy

My guess is it won’t matter much, as companies ***seeking financing to go bankrupt*** usually don’t emerge as their old self, and are often parted out and sold off.
 
Last edited:
Curious. At the 2017 SHOT Show, Colt had their usual, huge display despite having just weathered yet another financial crisis. Remington also had their usual, huge display.

Fast forward to SHOT 2018. Colt's display was comparatively tiny -- not as small as some of the single-table operations, but a mere shadow of the area they had in 2017. The Remington display for 2018 was the same size and layout as 2017. And they introduced a new VP for handgun sales. I'm not sure what, if anything, that all means, but I'll toss it out to feed the discussion.
 
TXAZ said:
My guess is it won’t matter much, as companies ***seeking financing to go bankrupt*** usually don’t emerge as their old self, and are often parted out and sold off.
Click to expand...
True, but perhaps one of the main reasons for the maneuver is to spin off some of the brands that Remington's parent company has absorbed, such as Marlin and H&R. Quid pro quo; you give us money, we give you Marlin.

This wouldn't hurt the feelings of most Marlin fans. :)
 
My guess is it won’t matter much, as companies ***seeking financing to go bankrupt*** usually don’t emerge as their old self, and are often parted out and sold off.
Click to expand...

Remington is already made up of pieces and parts of old companies. In the end, it doesn't really matter... bankruptcy at the corporate level usually just mean restructuring existing debt, the company remains, maybe having to sell off some of their assets but in reality just continuing on as before.
 
Bankruptcy is a financing tool. Used with cunning and skill by our prez, and many others.
There also different flavors (chapter 7 liquidation, chapter 11 deptor in possession reorganization). Those are for individuals, there are corresponding rules for businesses. Savage went through BK a few years ago, then came back with the Accutrigger and Axis line. I say a financing tool because it is usually used to get rid of hopelessly excessive dept, that usually resulted from mergers, acquisitions, equity fund buy outs, and general stupidity.
I own Remington shotguns. My last shotgun purchased was Italian. Remington could reorganize and operate: that requires new money. That seems to be the case here.
Winchester and Herters also went through BK, and devolved into "brand names" owned by profitable companies. The USSR went through national BK. The evil empire morphed into the evil Russian commonwealth.
No. It does not matter. The Italians can make better shotguns cheaper. The sky is not falling.
 
Last edited:
Aguila Blanca said:
Curious. At the 2017 SHOT Show, Colt had their usual, huge display despite having just weathered yet another financial crisis. Remington also had their usual, huge display.

Fast forward to SHOT 2018. Colt's display was comparatively tiny -- not as small as some of the single-table operations, but a mere shadow of the area they had in 2017. The Remington display for 2018 was the same size and layout as 2017. And they introduced a new VP for handgun sales. I'm not sure what, if anything, that all means, but I'll toss it out to feed the discussion.
Click to expand...



Big Green must’ve still had room on the Credit Card


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
On the other hand, if they 1) amputate the debt, and "management", and 2) get back to making good guns with controlled overhead cost. They COULD resurge like Savage.
 
Could it be an attempt to further separte more of its operation from Ilion, NY?

I have read things are going well in Huntsville, AL or is that just white wash?
 
Lamarw brings up an interesting question. Is bankruptcy a way to easily get out of union contracts that it has with the Ilion employees?
 
Personally, my belief is that Remington, under the umbrella of the Freedom Group and what not has ran itself into the ground.

The 770 and 783 weren't all that great, even in the budget rifle market.

Trying to order a 700 is an exercise in frustration. As is trying to find a 870 that isn't an Express.

The R-51 was an utter failure.
 
I'll be the first to admit that I do not understand big business, financing, investments, bankruptcy, etc. etc. But, how often do we see this? A group of investors (Freedom Group) buys up a huge company that may or may not be in a bit of trouble, buys them cheap. Runs the company into the ground, only worried about the almighty dollar, then breaks it up into smaller pieces and sells it off. The investors still make money after the dust settles. They are happy, and to hell with anyone else.
 
Mike38, that is about right. Often the former companies become mere brand names, thay can be bought sold and traded (Herters, Gander Mountain, Winchester). They just exist for the marketing value in the name when it used to be a good company.
For instance, lets say the Canada rifle company buys Remington's brand name, and starts slapping Remington on their Rifles, the new Reminington Excis. If if is a good rifle, we might stary buying them. To hell with Rem management, bond deals, and steel makers who lost a big chunk of accounts receivable.
 
Mike38, let me help your understanding of large corporations (been with them for 40 years and seen several “breakups” and divestitures from the inside) and restructuring/ financing.

The goal of any investor is to maximize cash flow, value or other financial value to the shareholders. Intentionally running a company into the ground is asking for lawsuits and possibly criminal charges. Restructuring is not.

If the parts of a company are more valuable than the whole, which can be true for companies in trouble, (particularly if there is a bankruptcy, major lawsuit or dischargable debt involved) then selling off the healthy parts and leaving the debt or liabilities in the parent or a spun-off entity can allow the healthier components to succeed. Workers (some, many, most) keep their jobs. Sometimes there are wage concessions involved.

Yes someone get stuck with the debt/ loss. That’s often stockholders or large plaintiffs. Used to be more often it was workers or retirees’ pension accounts.
There are legal firms that are excellent at restructuring and lawfully making the debt or large lawsuits go away. As such, stockholders and investors are usually required to acknowledge/ are given notice that their investment could fail.
Hope that helps.
 
Apparently Remington management has discovered the Colt Secret of how to siphon off money from successive generations of investors and creditors without actually doing anything physical.
 
The goal of any investor is to maximize cash flow, value or other financial value to the shareholders. Intentionally running a company into the ground is asking for lawsuits and possibly criminal charges. Restructuring is not.
Click to expand...

True for most folks; however capital groups like Cerebus typically come in on the cheap, make a buck as fast as possible and then sell off whatever remains. These type of companies did a lot of that, especially back in the 80s.
 
FITASC said:
True for most folks; however capital groups like Cerebus typically come in on the cheap, make a buck as fast as possible and then sell off whatever remains. These type of companies did a lot of that, especially back in the 80s.
Click to expand...
Same for Cerebus, Carl Icahn, and others. They just have a much shorter investment horizon.
 
Mike38 said:
I'll be the first to admit that I do not understand big business, financing, investments, bankruptcy, etc. etc. But, how often do we see this? A group of investors (Freedom Group) buys up a huge company that may or may not be in a bit of trouble, buys them cheap. Runs the company into the ground, only worried about the almighty dollar, then breaks it up into smaller pieces and sells it off. The investors still make money after the dust settles. They are happy, and to hell with anyone else.
Click to expand...



I don’t believe that’s the case at all with Remington, they were an old company that made outdated product. They tried to expand their product line by adding handguns and bought other smaller companies , unfortunately for them the AR market was saturated as is the CC handgun market .

so now what? Downsize, focus on their core? What kind of demand is there for mid quality rifles and shotguns? Ruger and savage seem to be-able to sell cheap rifles that guys want as does Mossberg with shotguns.

Time to fold up the tent or go real small.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
So the question is, with all the other manufacturers out there, would it matter to you or the industry if Remington leaves the business?
Click to expand...
To a degree yes. Anytime a firearms manufacturer goes south that's just one less in "our" corner.
Supposedly when freedom Group bought up Para it was to be a good thing. And just like that Para was no more and the speculation was and is, that it was to help Remington get back into the hand gun market being the R pistol was such a disaster. The 1911 they have out is just way over priced for a production gun, IMO
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top