U.S. gunmaker Remington files for bankruptcy
reuters.com
reuters.com
"This has been in the works for a while and nobody is really concerned about it. They're still selling guns, building guns, and planning for the future. This was more of a they were behind on their financial payments because of their last buyout and such. When the industry took a downturn they were hit with it. So they need to restructure to be able to pay off debts. They're not going out of business, and they won't be likely to go out of business any time soon, their name is still hugely valuable and they still sell some of the most popular guns on the market (and their quality across the board seems to be getting better, especially their Marlin line). Source: Person in the industry (though not at Remington)"
https://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/875z4t/remington_one_...
[edit: changed the quoting for readability on mobile]
use asterisks and put your quote in italics.
Code tends to have short lines and are easy to read with the current formatting (even on mobile). Quotes can have long lines which should be wrapped (especially on mobile).
It would be nice if HN had a format option designed for blockquotes, but in the absence of one using code formatting is the worst possible option, worse than just wrapping the quoted block in quotation marks.
> This is a markdown block > quote, which could be styled > differently than a long italic > block.
If you want to quote something, the best way to do that right now is to write it like
> *This is a quote*
> This is a quote
It's called bankruptcy because it is, in fact, a form of bankruptcy established in the Bankruptcy Code under Congress’ Constitutional power to set uniform rules for bankruptcy. See, e.g., the info about chapter 11 reorganization bankruptcies from the US Courts website:
http://www.uscourts.gov/services-forms/bankruptcy/bankruptcy...
Ch 7 bankruptcy is what most laypeople call 'bankruptcy', which usually applies to individuals (but can apply to corporations). I am aware that Ch 11 is under the US bankruptcy code.
However, bankruptcy in this context (headlines), as used by distressed debt journalists, lawyers, bankers and investors, refers to CH 11 not Ch 7. They'd refer to Ch 7 as 'Ch 7 bankruptcy'. Ch 11 just goes by 'Ch 11' or simply 'bankruptcy'.
"It was still a profitable company, except that its owners had loaded it up with debt in typical private-equity style to divert profits to themselves. In the first nine months of 2016, the company could pay $45 million in interest to its creditors and still walk away with a $19 million profit. In the same period in 2017, Feinberg and the company’s remaining investors faced a $60 million loss"
So this just appears to be another example of a private equity company buying up and saddling a profitable business with unsustainable debt, much like what happened with Toys'R'Us et al. The same pattern we've been seeing for a while.
Lovely.
Add in that a long history of treating their union employees like garbage has led to a lot of internal disconnect between management, engineering, and labor and you have a situation that is not tuned for long term growth.
While I think it's ridiculous to attach the "if any" claim to this sentence, I think the more general claim (the one referencing "many people") is fair.
> or that there are distinctions between firearms companies at all.
This is an absurd claim to make. You really think that people protesting don't know the difference between various firearm brands and manufacturers?
I'm sure they can't all name every brand or manufacturer, but your claim is that most aren't aware that there are distinctions between various firearm companies. That's ludicrous on its face.
I interpreted the text of your comment:
"or that there are distinctions between firearms companies at all."
as saying most in the protests were unaware that there were differences between firearm manufacturers. Not that they would be familiar with what the specific differences were.
I think the vast majority of people know that there are differences between firearm manufacturers. I think you're quite correct in the claim that many activists may not be aware of what those specific differences are.
Pre FG Rem guns often sell for more than new ones simply because of the manufacturing quality differences.
The pro gun community is actually responsible for the Remington issues, as they have been railing on Remington for years now, which really started around the Rem 700 recalls.
In point of fact the "hundreds of thousands" of useful idiots will eventually come to understand the real world - and in the meantime little will change. The millions of NRA members alone trump them, and NRA membership has just had a significant jump.
"When it's a matter of seconds, the police are only minutes away."
However, on the other hand, expectation of future regulation may affect expected future revenue and thus present creditability.
Rust is also a problem when you’re dealing with lots of heat, and corrosive gasses. Good question!
"Hot gasses escaping the chamber were essentially flame cutting the top of my hand"
"Problems keeping the magazine in the gun"
"The slide action was very rough, and the rear sight was loose in the dovetail"
"An Idaho man was accidentally shot while loading his R51 pistol. According to court documents, the man did not press the trigger, nor did he depress the grip safety. Yet, the gun allegedly fired and struck him in the abdomen when he inserted a magazine."
From http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/02/foghorn/gun-review-...
"The left side of the R51’s slide rail contacted my hand when the gun cycles"
"The R51’s trigger had no perceptible reset"
"Disassembling Remington’s carry piece is almost as challenging as changing an M1 Carbine’s extractor... When you re-assemble the R51 you must slip a small tab on the slide stop of the gun underneath this little spring. You must insert it perfectly parallel to the slide. If you tilt the slide stop upwards by as little as a 1/16th of an inch, if it rides above the spring, the gun will malfunction" (Note, they did fix this in the second version of the r51)
"Even when the gun is absolutely 100% assembled correctly, it still fails to fire, fires out of battery, and fails to feed with alarming regularity"
> $950 million debtload... Cerberus Capital Management LP, the private equity firm that controls Remington, will lose ownership in the bankruptcy.
This looks like another case of a leveraged buyout destroying a business.
Edit follows:
Cutting the quality is straight out of the leveraged buyout playbook.
Buy the brand, cash out any public goodwill it has remaining, then sell off the company before the debt payments catch up. In this instance, they couldn't sell the company fast enough, partly because a Remington Bushmaster was used to murder children at Sandy Hook.
If a private equity company buys your favorite brand, buy up some of the warehoused product as quickly as you can, then just forget about it. Otherwise, it's like watching someone slowly succumb to cancer.
Sure, sometimes that isn't the play, and the company actually improves post-buyout, but if you're talking about a nationally recognized brand, the odds are that someone is going to burn the brand to fuel their personal money engine, and then dump the husk of the company on the side of a lonely country road.
The Wikipedia entries on these companies are quite thin, actually, but you can follow the thread, if you care, this way: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E._Remington_and_Sons https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remington_Rand
How?
I also don't know whether the statistics about how many fatal accidents were caused by distracted driving exists (it's kinda hard to ask a person who died in a car accident whether they were texting before or not...) or is reliable. But given the ubiquity of both driving and cellphones, I wouldn't be surprised if there existed some data pointing to the way the parent post suggested. I wouldn't also make any far-reaching conclusions from it as the issues involved are of quite different nature, and the data, as I pointed, is probably very dirty anyway.
https://www.nhtsa.gov/risky-driving/distracted-driving
I’m just trying to point out how silly some point of views are in the current state of national discussions.
From the point of view of a 2A supporter, people are attempting to take away what is a RIGHT, while conveniently forgetting to address what is effectively a modern convenience (it is not a RIGHT to own an iPhone) that is factually more impactful on the presumed end goal.
But it makes for better TV ratings and yet another polarizing dividing issue (which is not, as there are high school kids trying to advocate for guns in schools, whose voices are being drowned out by the media and the kids “on the other side”
Imagine what it would be like if we had a march to take away the right to love the person you love, because some people who love like you do get more frequently sick of some disease.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FN_P90
The only possible use for this is calling lots of people quickly at close range.
I became aware of this model and cartridge when I used Google Maps to see how many gun shops are near Parkland High (3 within walking distance.) One of the shops specializes in these weapons. If the shooter could have afforded it, I would guess he would have bought this.
How many Porsche 911 Turbos or Audi R8s are used as getaway cars for bank robberies?
I don't disagree with your point that arms manufacturers are still producing new models, but that isn't a terribly good illustration of 'new', especially since the arm you linked has been in production for ~30 years.
This is absolutely not true.
The point of the P90 is to be a compact carbine for troops in cramped quarters (think tank crew) with the capability to penetrate soft body armor.
The way it achieves this is with a high speed, low caliber pistol round and full auto operation. Even then, it is only marginally effective. Take away the full auto part (civilian use) and I can't think of a single reason someone would use it, except that it looks "cool".
To reiterate, the purpose of this gun is not to be effective at killing. It is to be as small as possible while still being marginally effective (in the military configuration).
I think the primary use for the military full-auto version is VIP duty, where the scenario would be exactly as you describe: killing lots of threats quickly in close proximity (supposedly with minimal collateral damage due to the design of the bullet).
The primary use for the civilian PS90 is to show your friends how much you hate money by turning a questionable boutique round into noise.
If you want to see something more affordable, that is probably equally as, if not more deadly, look at "AR" pistols (chambered in 5.56x45) instead of the P90. (Or PS90).
Or, the SIG MPX, which while expensive, is also available.
Though, it sounds from your comment, that you and I are on very different terms in opinion.
The 5.7x28mm would be a terrible choice for someone wanting to kill a large number of people. It's reason for existence is a tradeoff between the number of rounds one can effectively carry, armor penetration, and terminal performance. In short, it's designed for use in compact full-auto firearms - PDWs ("Person Defense Weapons"). That class of firearm has not been readily available in the US since 1934, and the P90 has never been available.
"The 5.7×28mm SS190 has a muzzle velocity of roughly 716 m/s (2,350 ft/s, Mach 2) and can penetrate the NATO CRISAT vest or a Level IIIA Kevlar vest at a range of 200m"
it's a pretty interesting gun though, not necessarily because of the bullpup design, but because of the type of round it shoots. the 5.7 round is pretty unique - it's small but ultra high velocity and was designed to penetrate light body armor but is not very good at killing. anyway, it's unlikely someone would use one of these to shoot up a school or whatever.... they are really expensive (and the ammo is also very expensive and rare). as far as a vegas style shooting, the 5.7 round isn't long range because of its small size - it's seriously a tiny bullet. moreover, i'm pretty sure the fn five-seven (basically the complementary pistol) is illegal to carry in most places because of the armor pen - cops don't like them
Yes, why not base legislation on the power of a weapon measured as, say, ft*lbs delivered in 20 seconds. A 50 round drum magazine on a Ruger 10/22 rifle - no problem. But on an AR-15 style rifle - not allowed.
I'm sure someone more knowledgeable can chronicle the use of polymer frames in firearms, which maybe really caught on in the 1990s?
Failure to improve on old designs seems like a good thing to me as a consumer, it's preferable to churn
I don't need to replace my wrenches or my bed or my kitchen knives. Manufacturers stay in business by keeping their operations modest, so they can stay in business with the sales from people changing interests, population growth, and occasional replacements.
* Beds frames can be made cheaply and if they break, you can still put your mattress on the floor (bullets don't work well if just thrown)
* You need to sharpen knives pretty often, which is wearing them out, but it is true that good knives will last a good while. (But when was the last time you heard of a knife lobbying group pushing to prevent laws from limiting the knife industry's ability to sell product)
I don't think either industry depends on such breakage to stay in business.
Trigger pins can wiggle loose. Butt stocks can crack. Springs lose their springiness. Barrels wear down with normal use, and that wear is accelerated to corrosion if they aren't cared for properly. Receivers will crack if used enough.
Sure. That gun in your uncle's safe will probably still shoot fine in 50 years (assuming it was cleaned before it was put away), but competition shooters replace their arms, or major parts in their guns every couple of years or so.
Though, I do have a major soft spot for the 870 as visually it's much nicer.
Oh wait there was never an epidemic: https://medium.com/@bjcampbell/the-gun-homicide-epidemic-isn...