Dennis Olson
New member
Don't they have lawyers?
Um, not any more, they don't....
Um, not any more, they don't....
S&W backpeddles
- Thread starter tc556guy
- Start date
parabellum
New member
Well, I do hope the whole deal falls through. I love my Smiths, and I look forward to adding to my collection. If this thing were to fall apart, that would simply make my month!
Libertarian
New member
If they completely recant publicly with no spinning or hedging AND join the counter suits with lots of money against cities, mayors and HUD, I will give them a chance to prove themselves worthy of being. But only if there return to the fold is without reservation.
I like their revolvers too much to not be willing to let them sincerely try.
I like their revolvers too much to not be willing to let them sincerely try.
Gopher a 45
New member
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by pack_rat:
Could it be?
s&w has awakened to discover money on the
nightstand and a strange aftertaste...[/quote]
Which, apparently, would be fine with slick & weasel, but upon closer inspection in the harsh light of day, it looks like monopoly money there on the nightstand. Ooooops.
Could it be?
s&w has awakened to discover money on the
nightstand and a strange aftertaste...[/quote]
Which, apparently, would be fine with slick & weasel, but upon closer inspection in the harsh light of day, it looks like monopoly money there on the nightstand. Ooooops.
I don't understand why S&W can't just walk away from this deal. After all, they are still being sued by more than a half a dozen communities. It would appear to me that they gave up a lot and got very little in return.
As for the wish to S&W to die, can we really afford to have the largest (somebody has to be buying their guns and only 25% is government sales) American-based handgun maker to go out of business? All we need is for them to be bought by an American firm and a reorganize at the top to wipe them into line again.
[This message has been edited by FUD (edited April 14, 2000).]
As for the wish to S&W to die, can we really afford to have the largest (somebody has to be buying their guns and only 25% is government sales) American-based handgun maker to go out of business? All we need is for them to be bought by an American firm and a reorganize at the top to wipe them into line again.
[This message has been edited by FUD (edited April 14, 2000).]
S&W can't walk away from the deal because it made the deal with EACH of the respective governments and agencies. S&W can sue those cities which pulled out after signing (although I think most pulled out during the negotiations) but it can't back out of its obligations to those who have fulfilled their obligations. HUD hasn't sued S&W so if S&W pulls out, it will be in violation of the contract, not HUD.
It goes like this: A,B, and C enter into a contract by which A gives something to both
B and C and B and C individually give something to A (remember, HUD can't order the cities to do anything: 10th Amendment). C backs out. A has a cause of action against C. B has done NOTHING wrong contractually. Why should B be deprived of the benefit of its bargain simply because C acted in bad faith?
S&W's situation would make a perfect law school exam question. It's such a no brainer that the poor students would waste an hour looking for the hidden issue. Unfortunately, there is none. S&W is toast.
It goes like this: A,B, and C enter into a contract by which A gives something to both
B and C and B and C individually give something to A (remember, HUD can't order the cities to do anything: 10th Amendment). C backs out. A has a cause of action against C. B has done NOTHING wrong contractually. Why should B be deprived of the benefit of its bargain simply because C acted in bad faith?
S&W's situation would make a perfect law school exam question. It's such a no brainer that the poor students would waste an hour looking for the hidden issue. Unfortunately, there is none. S&W is toast.
As to S&W "backpeddling", of whatever it might be that they are doing, I believe that the following comes into play, though I cannot substantiate it.
S & W/Tompkins PLC were pulled up short by the sharpness of the reaction to their political stunt. Obviously, the reaction was and has been adverse, and it must remain exactly that way. Tompkins was desirous of selling S&W, for whatever reason, but they weren't getting any takers, what with the threat of law suits handing over the sale item. It appears that the wreck their gambit may well have made of the company, including the fact that the stunt has not gotten them free of suits, may well have done it, leading to what is now described as "backpeddling" by S&W.
So far as I'm concerned, S&W/Tompkins PLC have made their deal with the devil, and they can rot in hell. I do have sympathy for S&W employees, who may be without employment, should S&W "die". They are not at fault, but in the game of big business, geo and power politics, and political pandering, it's the civilian that gets it in the neck. Same thing here too.
S & W/Tompkins PLC were pulled up short by the sharpness of the reaction to their political stunt. Obviously, the reaction was and has been adverse, and it must remain exactly that way. Tompkins was desirous of selling S&W, for whatever reason, but they weren't getting any takers, what with the threat of law suits handing over the sale item. It appears that the wreck their gambit may well have made of the company, including the fact that the stunt has not gotten them free of suits, may well have done it, leading to what is now described as "backpeddling" by S&W.
So far as I'm concerned, S&W/Tompkins PLC have made their deal with the devil, and they can rot in hell. I do have sympathy for S&W employees, who may be without employment, should S&W "die". They are not at fault, but in the game of big business, geo and power politics, and political pandering, it's the civilian that gets it in the neck. Same thing here too.
i had my name removed from s@w stocking dealer list.i encourage every stocking dealer to do the same.s@w is not supporting us and i will not support them.EVERYONE please contact all the rest of the dealers on the page and encorage them to do the same.maybe with enough boycotts the value of there company will diminish and some american company will get to buy them out and turn them around.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Herodotus:
Can they not just desolve the corporation and let the assests go to the highest bidder? Cannot the stockholders just take that money and go home?[/quote]
Thee are no stockholders except for Tomkins PLC. Sellout&Wussy is wholly owned by them. As to disolving the company, Tomkins would get a nice tax writeoff, but lose money in the end, so that isn't a desireable step at this stage. Maybe once sales have dwindled to nothing and Sellout&Wussy can't even meet its own payroll and expenses they might consider that, but only after a long time looking for a buyer--as things look right now, they'd get more money selling the company either whole or in pieces than they would benefit from the tax write-off.
------------------
"There's not much comfort in the fact that crime is down 6 percent. So instead of 100 criminals targeting you, now there are only 94. Whoop-dee-doo." -- Paxton Quigley
Can they not just desolve the corporation and let the assests go to the highest bidder? Cannot the stockholders just take that money and go home?[/quote]
Thee are no stockholders except for Tomkins PLC. Sellout&Wussy is wholly owned by them. As to disolving the company, Tomkins would get a nice tax writeoff, but lose money in the end, so that isn't a desireable step at this stage. Maybe once sales have dwindled to nothing and Sellout&Wussy can't even meet its own payroll and expenses they might consider that, but only after a long time looking for a buyer--as things look right now, they'd get more money selling the company either whole or in pieces than they would benefit from the tax write-off.
------------------
"There's not much comfort in the fact that crime is down 6 percent. So instead of 100 criminals targeting you, now there are only 94. Whoop-dee-doo." -- Paxton Quigley
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
The only thing particulary useful in the SW line nowadays are their revolvers.
While some of the 3rd generation semis are nice, there are plenty of substitutes.
Why doesn't SW sell the rights for the revolvers to someone else and the machinery and then disappear?
While some of the 3rd generation semis are nice, there are plenty of substitutes.
Why doesn't SW sell the rights for the revolvers to someone else and the machinery and then disappear?
Smith & Wesson made a real error in judgement and I'm not sure if there is anyway out for them at this point. It was a great company once. I can remember as a kid hearing people say "Smith & Wesson" with a kind of bad ass respect, losing a company like that is not a good thing. About the only positive note I can see to all this is that Law Enforcement may get real resentful of the fact that they MUST carry S&W. It might make more LEOs aware of the fact that all this anti gun BS has implications they might have overlooked.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Glenn E. Meyer: ... While some of the 3rd generation semis are nice, there are plenty of substitutes ...[/quote]Who else makes a compact, traditional DA/SA stainless steel/alloy pistol with a manual safety/decocker? Beretta isn't big on stainless steel compacts and Sigs only have a decocker -- not a manual safety.
Share what you know, learn what you don't -- FUD
[This message has been edited by FUD (edited April 17, 2000).]
Share what you know, learn what you don't -- FUD
[This message has been edited by FUD (edited April 17, 2000).]