Single Stack 9's, why no price drops

B

BFaulty

Inactive
I was wondering, with the success of the Shield and its price, why other companies have not followed by dropping their prices to compete. I'm thinking of Walther (PPS), XDs 9mm, now the Glock 43 (I know it's new and the hot thing). I know HK slightly lowered the price for their P2000sk, but I think that was more in reaction to the success of the VP9. Ruger now has the LC9s and LC9s Pro that are good competition for the Shield.

But, I have wanted a PPS for a while, but cannot justify the additional $150 price difference from the Shield. Plus, my LGS has a brand new Sig 320 SC for $500. If I'm going to pay $490 to $520 for a PPS or XDs, why not buy the SIG, or PX Storm SC, although these two are both thicker and heavier than the single stacks.

Maybe it's the "higher" quality of the product, or the importation costs that keep the other companies from dropping their prices to compete with the Shield. Maybe I'm over estimating the success of the Shield. I guess the market is still willing to pay more for the other brands.
 
Not all decisions about choice of pistols are based on price. Glock is still trading on its name and old reputation to folks who think they are great. Some of the other brands offer different triggers, ergonomics, etc. to justify to justify the difference in price.
 
I would say that the answers lie in basic economics and marketing. First, there is the idea of determining "what the market will bear." If they are meeting their sales projections at the current price, then the market will bear that price, therefore there is no reason to lower it.

There is also the psychological aspect to consider. If they keep the price higher, they can project the illusion that their product is superior to the competition, whether it is or not. When people see a low price, the first response is often, "What is wrong with it?" The trick is to price it high enough to imply superiority, but low enough that consumers will think it is worth saving for another month or two to get it.

This is why I have never been a brand name shopper. Look at the pros and cons of a new purchase without taking the name brand into consideration, and examine the product for its own merits rather than as a comparison to something else. Then, once you have found a few that you like and that meet your criteria, compare the finalists to see which one is right for you. This applies to guns, cars, jeans, pretty much anything.
 
If they keep the price higher, they can project the illusion that their product is superior to the competition,
Click to expand...

This has been several years ago, but a friend who managed a local gun shop shared this with me. I've forgotten the brand, but they got a good deal on some imported pistols. By purchasing 12 or more they got an even better price and were able to offer them at under $100. They all sat on the shelves unsold for over a month. They upped the price to $119 and sold all 12 within a few weeks.
 
The shield is probably the smartest buy, high quality, ultra reliable, extremely accurate, and easy on the wallet.

What's not to love (as long as you're willing to admit other companies besides glock make firearms) it's really a simple decision.

I really need to pick up another one just for the safe, maybe the G40 will have to wait a little longer.
 
Bultaco, the Glock 43 has an advantage over other single stack 9mm's by being larger than the competition. Not everyone is looking for a microscopic pocket carry gun. They want something that is slim IWB, and shoots like a larger handgun. The G43 does that. It's not for folks looking to pocket carry.


It also retains the familiar Glock trigger and controls. This is not folks drinking the Koop aid. It is rational, clear thinking about how you carry, and how your body responds to stress in a shooting.
 
2015-03-22-10.46.48-600x444.jpg


Shield v 43
 
I think it is because 9mm is back to being very inexpensive right now and lots of folk understand that and are buying them.
 
A few years back the Walther PPS was a near $700 pistol. At today'g going price of as low as $465 is a very significant decrease.
 
I was wondering, with the success of the Shield and its price, why other companies have not followed by dropping their prices to compete.
Click to expand...

If I remember Economics 101 correctly, I think they call it the law of diminishing returns. The higher you raise the price, the fewer you will sell. The perfect balance is to price the product so that you realize the maximum profit. If selling them cheaperincreases the number sold but the total profit is less, you didn't maximize your profit.
 
There are a myriad of reasons for the different prices, and much of it probably has to do with significant operating and marketing costs. In the case of Glock... their prices have been on the rise for some time and have no prospect of going down. It really doesn't come as a surprise to me considering the ongoing legal issues facing Gaston which likely have a significant impact on the company. I digress...

Anyone with one foot in the gun scene knows that market value is not a bearing instrument for quality of manufacture. There are plenty of cheap guns out there doing the same job or better than more expensive ones. The used market is really the place to be if you have a set price in mind. I don't own any small CCW single stack 9's (I did own a PF9 some time ago - not a good gun) but it is probably the hottest selling platform right now. Years ago it was rare to find that much firepower in such a small package, but today you have many different flavors in different calibers. If you haven't already, I think you should get some trigger time on some small 9mm autos to see if you even like it. The smaller the gun, the lesser the fun.

Also, I would try to find out more about their triggers. Small single stack 9mms are notorious for having awful triggers. The few Glocks I've handled had excellent triggers, so it may be worth the investment. I do not know anything about the Glock 43 trigger. I know that whichever gun had the greatest trigger and the best, most usable sights would be the winner, no matter the cost. There are a few features that MUST be there, and I'd be willing to pay more for those features. If you don't like the gun, even if it was a steal, you will never want to use it.

With all that being said, I hear the Shield is a great gun with a pretty bad trigger, but this can be fixed with a trigger kit. It's probably a wash!
 
The new ruger LC9-S has a very sweet trigger. And they can be had for around $350. If you don't want the safeties, the new Pro version is the same gun without them.
 
I have a LC9s pro and agree that it's a handy little conceal--but lineage-wise it's closer to the 380 LCP as a close-in "point and shoot" weapon than a larger more accurate platform IMO. I haven't tried the 43 yet so I don't know where it fits in terms of accuracy. I get nervous about the prospect of making a stop with a low-capacity 9mm spray gun.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top