Things Must Be Getting Bad At S&W

G

Good Guy

New member
Things Must Be Getting Bad At S&W

If you can’t make it selling guns, you might as well go into the food condiment business. I wonder what they’ll come up with next? Maybe a nauseating fast food restaurant.

From the November 2000 issue of Guns magazine;

....S&W is now offering a line of gourmet barbeque sauces and condiments which will appeal to gun owners and gourmets alike. For less than $3 your picnic table can be graced by a bottle of Smith & Wesson “.38 Special BBQ Sauce” with a tangy hickory and tomato taste, or, for the more adventurous, “.44 Magnum Hot Sauce” which features aged cayenne peppers. There’s also “Magnum Salsa” which S&W claims will “make a chip’s life much more flavorable.” For more information contact……..

No thanks S&W, I’ll continue to make my own sauces. As for your stuff, CHOKE ON IT!



------------------
Just one of the Good Guys
 
Wunnerful, a pommie Brit outfit tryin to sell Americans their sauce and salsa.

Wonder what chicken outfit is sellin it to em?

Sam...just tried sweet taters with butter n jalapenos...different.
 
Jesus.

Thanks.

I've now got a CRUSHING headache...

I'm going to go take a few hundred Percocet and lie down....

------------------
Beware the man with the S&W .357 Mag.
Chances are he knows how to use it.
 
I remember when Eddie Bauer used to sell high end outdoor gear and lots of rock/mountain climbing gear. Then they fell upon hard times and were purchased by Spiegel. Now all the EB stuff is of lesser quality and virtually none of it is "serious" outdoor gear. I recently saw the 2000 S&W catalogs -- one of guns and one of mugs and buckles and clothing, etc. I wouldn't be surprised if S&W eventually goes the way of EB -- the name will stick to sporting gear but no guns.
 
I hope they burn in HELL!

------------------
Gun control started the Revolutionary War!..."itcta alea est"
 
Hey, any of ya'll ever been to a S&W store??? I found one in an outlet mall in Pigeon Forge,TN (didn't buy anything). It was chock full of all the useless crap they sell in the backs of their catalogs, as well as some guns on display. They didn't seem to have too much activity :)
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by hkg3:
I hope they burn in HELL![/quote]How about trying to SAVE one of America's oldest & largest handgun makers? A quarter of a century ago there was a very popular book, which was later made into an even more popular movie, called "The Exorcist". A demon inhabited a girl. The demon, however, was not the girl. Instead of killing the girl, how about if we exorcise the demon?

Everyone is chanting "S&W must die" but in the end, that's a victory for the anti's. Think about it ... what is the difference if the anti's put S&W out of business or if the shooting public puts them out of business? The final result is the same -- one less supplier of new firearms!

Everyone is saying that an example must be made of them to others but last year Colt pretty much withdrew from the public market. This year, we are attempting to put S&W out of business via our boycotts of their products. Next year, for one reason or another, we'll lose another gun maker. And another.

I fail to see how any of this is good for the shooting public and how it can been seen as anything but another victory for the anti's.

[ Thoughts & ideas in this post were loosely borrowed from comments made by "parabellum". ]
 
FUD, S&W is dead. I'm an attorney for the feds and trust me, there is no way out of this contract unless the feds themselves breach it (not likely to happen) or Bush gets elected. S&W screwed itself and all of us in the hopes of making some money. The preferential treatment is what they were after because at the stage the lawsuits were in, there was no motivation for giving in. None.
 
We need to figure out some way to get another mfgr. to by S&W. Perhaps Glock or Ruger.

Do you think the other mfgrs. realize that if they buy them and reverse their agreement that they will be rewarded to the same magnitude that the current S&W has been punished? I would think this would make a very attractive business opportunity? Particulary if GWB gets elected.

Buy S&W for cheep because they cant sell any guns, tear up a piece of paper, put a few adds in the gun mags, restore the previous good market and sell a few extra units to people like me who will buy just as an attaboy.

I can see the magazine add now.... A big piece of parchment that says "S&W agreement with the Clinton "Justice" Department" in fancy script, torn in half, corners lit on fire, big Red hand stamp across the full page ad that says "Under New Management".

Or perhaps a picture of Bill Ruger with his pants around his ankles standing on the curb in front of the white house wipeing his rear with a piece of parchment. The add copy says "NO DEALS - S&W IS UNDER NEW MANAGEMENT".

That would get me reaching for my checkbook.

Any others out there?
 
SW isn't like Colt. The latter just stopped making some guns and indicated they folded the lines as the law suits were hurting them. They also had some stupid CEO comments in the gun literature and press.

SW tried to screw everbody. The agreement was cohersion of the entire industry if you read it.

The solution is for someone else to buy the plans for their revolver line and go into production. Their semis are not that much of a loss. I know FUD you like Smiths. I liked a 3913 I had also but such is life.

They could have held out with the others.
 
Buzz, I am NOT defending their actions in the least. For the life of me, I still don't understand why they agreed to something like this. The point is, however, that they are currently owned and controlled by a non-American firm who could care less about our right to keep and bear arms. I would like to see control of S&W returned to someone (a company) that has American interests in mind.

With regard to getting out of this contract, you would be far more knowledgable than I in that area but from the couple of laws courses that I took (Legal foundations of business & Contract Law), isn't there give & takes on both sides of any contract?

In exchange for these conditions, doesn't S&W have to get back something in return? And if the other side fails to deliver, then wouldn't that free S&W from it's part?

keeping it simple ... Your son breaks my window. I fix the window and decide to sue you. We AGREE that if your son doesn't come anywhere near my house, I won't sue you. You try that for a few months, but then your son starts coming around again. The AGREEMENT is voided and I go back to suing you for the broken window ... or am I over simplifying things? My six credits in Law obviouly can't even begin to compare to your experience & training.

EnochGale, we FINALLY agree on something ... everytime S&W's CEO opens his mouth, he puts his foot in deeper & deeper. The more he speaks, the less sympathy I have for them. But I also recognize that he is the last person in line who is going to be hurt by out boycotts. First will be the American workers and eventually the American gun-buying public who will no longer be able to purchase a new S&W because they go under. The CEO will get his termination package and either retire or move on to another assignment.

What Bullwinkle said is something that I've suggested months ago. S&W is sold off in bits & pieces because it is no longer making a profit. ONE company buys all of those bits & pieces -- they're not actually buying S&W because the company isn't making any money. Instead, they buy the factory, the equipment, the copyrights, etc.

Since they didn't actually buy S&W themselves, their no agreement for them to be held to. Then, they resume making S&W products -- maybe even calling themselves "Wesson & Smith" so that they can reuse the same logo on the guns.

I think that legally it should not be a problem but then again, I'm not a lawyer.

[This message has been edited by FUD (edited September 21, 2000).]
 
FUD

Yes, there is give and take. S&W agreed to the terms of the agreement in exchange for preferential treatment and the feds (and other entities) not suing them. Although Congress prevented much of the preferential treatment, that alone is not sufficient to void the contract. There is a generally accepted principle that just because Congress passes a law affecting a contract, it doesn't necessarily allow the parties to get out of the contract. Because the feds are not suing S&W, the feds haven't breached the contract.

Have other entities breached the contract? Yes. But the feds cannot force them to go along with it (as they are separate sovereigns under the 10th Amend.) and S&W is charged with knowledge of the limitations of the feds' powers. Does S&W have a cause of action against those parties that signed and then backed out? Yes. But if S&W declares the contract void, they will have breached as far as the feds are concerned. The feds can then sue (and recover) costs, damages, and specific performance.

The idea is this: you hire 10 people to build your house, each person doing a different job. They approached you together but each is an independent actor. No. 1 does exactly what he said he would, except that weather intervened (somewhat comparable to Congress' action). Nos. 2-10 said screw you and walked off the job. Can you sue 2-10? Sure. Can you tell No. 1 that you're not going to pay him? No. He hasn't done anything wrong. He's not responsible for the actions of the others. He is, quite simply, an innocent party as far as the contract is concerned.

S&W has gotten most of what it asked for from the feds. It is thus bound by the contract.

There are ways around this. A new CEO can come in and discover that the feds threatened and coerced S&W (like they tried with Glock). Schutlz has already declared it was voluntary so he can't run this claim. However, even if you threaten to put someone out of business if they don't sign is insufficient to void a contract for coercion. So, S&W has to argue that the contract is illegal as a matter of law as a restraint on trade. Hard for a party to the contract to argue that. Someone on the outside could argue it but S&W would have a hard time running that play.

All in all, S&W is screwed. There are many cases of the feds doing something similar to other firms and getting away with it.
 
Ah, but FUD you're looking at it the wrong way. You have to look at it as: If I am another firearm manufacturer, I now see that S&W betrayed gun owners and GUN OWNERS are boycotting S&W. I would learn from this that I SHOULD NOT ANGER THOSE WHO MADE MY BUSINESS BECAUSE THEY CAN DESTROY IT VIA BOYCOTT. In the end, good will triumph.

Hopefully they'll sell off the firearms company and the name and someone else will buy it cheap to restore the good name of Smith and Wesson.

------------------
The first step is registration, the second step is confiscation, the final step is subjugation.
 
I think ruger, or charlton heston, or some rich mofo with good in mind should buy smith and wesson, (the whole company) for a nice round sum of money, lets say $100. Then, put the contract through the paper shredder and send it back to the feds with a post-it note saying "new owners, contract void." then turn around and sell it back to smith and wesson, for..lets say $101. (for services rendered.) One of us couldn't do this, but any of the large strong gun lobby company, could set up talks with S&W and work somthing out. Smith&Wesson, may not give a damn about american rights, but EVERYBODY cares about money, and this boycott has got to be hurtin' them.
 
buzz, as lawyers we recognize that there is always hope: the plaintiff may die or be arrested for child molestation. So it is in this instance as well. The easiest way would be for Bush to be elected and nullify the agreement for reasons of constitutionality, public policy, etc., or appoint an attorney general who would do so.

Another way would be for the S&W "name" to be acquired by a firearms maker of integrity in a manner excusing them from performance under the agreement.

There is always hope that the pommy brits will pack up their unsold sauce and go back to helping Tony Blair ruin their own country.

The more gunmakers there are, the better. I look forward to proudly buying a Smith and Wesson, someday when things are different.

Regards,

Ledbetter
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by FUD:
Think about it ... what is the difference if the anti's put S&W out of business or if the shooting public puts them out of business? The final result is the same -- one less supplier of new firearms.[/quote]

What it all boils down to is that S&W put themselves out of business. I didn't sign the d@mn agreement, nor did anyone else here on TFL. If everyone were to oblige S&W then we would lose good dealers and great companies like Bushmaster and Springfield Armory. Remember the part of the agreement that prevents S&W dealers from also stocking semiauto AWs (their terminology) and normal capacity (over 10 rounds) magazines, along with a host of other traitorous stipulations.

Who the H#LL is S&W to dictate what guns and accessories my dealer can and cannot stock. By signing the agreeement that is what they have done. If we let them get away with this one, Lord only knows what they'll sign next. I say it's time to call their game.

Yes, S&W must die.


------------------
Just one of the Good Guys
 
We got Bill Ruger to thank for the 10-round limit on magazines -- this affects ALL gun makers, Para-Ordnance, SIG, Beretta, etc.; Why aren't we boycotting his company as well?
 
There is a huge difference between a 10 rd magazine and what S&W did. If you haven't checked, many other manufacturers signed on to that 10rd limmit before it was passed. Colt did a bad thing to but this again was just a business move.

S&W folding will not affect gun manufacturing. Where one market dies another is born. Other companies, Glock, have come around and become major players in guns sales in the US.
Because of S&W's example, the remaining companies and any new ones will be a lot more careful about pissing off their customers.

------------------
"It is easier to get out of jail then it is a morgue"
Live long and defend yourself!
John 3:16
NRA lifer
GOA
GSSF
KABA
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top