More Bad news from Colt

[DPris]

You notice Colt's no longer even listing parts for sale through their website?
Moving Colt parts to Midway & Brownells.

But- Colt HAS expanded the accessory department, so you can still order lots of ballcaps & keychains.

Just continues to look worse every day.
Denis

 

[Aragon]

Just keep in mind guys... that Colt's product line hasn't failed to sell, and the company hasn't failed to make a profit.

Rather.... the corporate investment raiders racked up unnecessary debt and looted far more from that borrowed cash than any company of this size could hope to survive.

I say, get your Colts while the gettins good, as they may not be around for a period of time, and may be different when they come back.

Colt may be making an operating profit (?), but they're still losing money given the massive debt it has to service.

The bright side is that Colt does seem to be building excellent product and plenty of it -- two attributes that would be preserved I suspect no matter what happens to Colt.

 

[Aragon]

Still have to come up with something that'd cause buyers to want it beyond the Colt name (not worth as much as it used to be for the current generation of buyers) and a $299 pricetag.

LOL!! Why? A significantly low price, high product quality and a vaunted name is more than enough.

You'd be placing Colt in direct competition with Taurus & Hi-Point there.
Taurus already has dozens of low-priced autos, lotta plastic already in place.

Actually that's not true. MANY discount Taurus, Hi-Point and others right out of the gate not because of the quality of their current wares, but because they lack the prestige of competing, older marques. Colt would not have this problem.

Diehard older Colt fans of the "GIMME A PYTHON OR GIMME DEATH!!!!" variety would avoid a cheap polygun in droves.
Younger buyers might buy a few, but I don't see 'em soaking up a zillion.
Denis

So? That Python group is fairly limited in size. If Colt offered what's essentially a Glock in product quality for $299.95, I would certainly take 1 or 2.

 

[Sergei Mosin]

If Colt were to enter the polymer striker market, it would have to be something competing with the Glocks and M&Ps and XDs of the world - $500, give or take a bit. Plenty of buyers in that range - plenty of competition, too. Room for another player? Got me. But going significantly downmarket isn't going to work; they'd never sell enough.

 

[scramasax]

Three major things have led to the demise of Colt. The Unions, arrogance, and competition. I will not elaborate beyond these three words because I can't sit at the keyboard long enough. I've worked with or been around Colt employees sine the "70s. This has been a long time coming. Most companies can't feed off the Government tit forever.

BTW I hold no ranker against Colt. Just stating the fact as I have learned from others. I would love seeing them rebuilt into a strong American Company.

Cheers,

ts

Cheers,

 

[DPris]

Not even the Colt name is going to move a $299 pistol in boatloads.

How much quality do you seriously expect to find in a $299 pistol?
Denis

 

[HOOfan_1]

Three major things have led to the demise of Colt. The Unions, arrogance, and competition. I will not elaborate beyond these three words because I can't sit at the keyboard long enough. I've worked with or been around Colt employees sine the "70s. This has been a long time coming. Most companies can't feed off the Government tit forever.

,

When I was doing some reading on Colt losing the M16 contract to FN the other day, I found an article from 1988. Apparently there was a union strike around the time and the Union spokesman said "we'd rather the company go out of business than be operated by scabs".

Seemed like a telling remark to me.

 

[Aragon]

If Colt were to enter the polymer striker market, it would have to be something competing with the Glocks and M&Ps and XDs of the world - $500, give or take a bit. Plenty of buyers in that range - plenty of competition, too. Room for another player? Got me. But going significantly downmarket isn't going to work; they'd never sell enough.

It currently is a $500.00 market...

What if you came in at $299.99?

If Glocks really cost between $50 and $90/unit to produce (depending on the source one chooses), there's still plenty of margin at such a low sales price.

 

[HexHead]

What I'd like to see a Colt do is move to a low tax state, like say Berryville, AR. Hire the best gunsmiths they can and move all their handgun production into the Custom Shop. Compete with the likes of Wilson, Nighthawk and Les Baer instead of Kimber, Springfield and Ruger.

They have the name, just need to produce the best pistols to go with it. A two year backlog on orders at that level would be great.

 

[jerkface11]

If they could make a gun for $50 and sell it for $299 they would still have to sell a million to pay their debts.

 

[Aragon]

Not even the Colt name is going to move a $299 pistol in boatloads.

How much quality do you seriously expect to find in a $299 pistol?
Denis

Is that a serious question? What are the hard manufacturing cost differences between say a G17 and a Hi-Point 916? $10/unit? Possibly $20? Certainly no more than that. Yet the MSRP is $499.00 vs. $189.00. Yes, I think Colt could spend $10-20/unit (at most) more than Hi-Point and demand $110/unit more.

Your notion that a low sales price must equate to low product quality is nonsense.

Even if Colt came in at $359.00/unit it would allow them to grab plenty of market share.

 

[Aragon]

If they could make a gun for $50 and sell it for $299 they would still have to sell a million to pay their debts.

Colt's debt ain't payable as it stands. Neither Ruger nor S&W could service it.

 

[Aragon]

Three major things have led to the demise of Colt. The Unions, arrogance, and competition. I will not elaborate beyond these three words because I can't sit at the keyboard long enough. I've worked with or been around Colt employees sine the "70s. This has been a long time coming. Most companies can't feed off the Government tit forever.

BTW I hold no ranker against Colt. Just stating the fact as I have learned from others. I would love seeing them rebuilt into a strong American Company.

Cheers,

ts

Cheers,

Actually, legal, corporate looting seems to be BAY FAR the biggest problem impacting Colt over the past 20+ years.

 

[DPris]

Degenerating into pointless repetition.
I'm out.
Denis

 

[22-rimfire]

Not even the Colt name is going to move a $299 pistol in boatloads.

The mid range is where I would target. But I would make a good semi-auto 22 pistol (two versions > target and regular) which can't be too difficult from a machining point of view since they make other pistols. They may have non-compete arrangement with the maker of the 1911 Colt pistol??

 

[TRX]

> Colt 2000

The rotating barrel was a Browning patent, and various companies, notably Steyr-Hahn, had produced successful guns with the system.

There was nothing wrong with the design, and it would have been a worthy companion to the 1911.

Looking back over the comments at the time, all you'd have to do is search-and-replace "Colt 2000" and "Remington R51" and you would be hard-pressed to tell the reviews apart.

 

[TheVision]

There was nothing wrong with the design ...

Perhaps Knight's original design was solid, but the redesigned crunch-crunch-click-bang trigger wasn't so endearing.

 

[Elkins45]

How much were Pythons selling for when they were still in regular production? I would pay that for one now (adjusted for inflation) if they added a lock to the crane. I can probably say the same for the Woodsman, except for the part about the crane of course.

 

[wojownik]

Looking back over the comments at the time, all you'd have to do is search-and-replace "Colt 2000" and "Remington R51" and you would be hard-pressed to tell the reviews apart.

Come to think of it, yeah, that seems to be pretty much on the mark ...

 

[Robert]

After 10 pages, a lot of speculation and some rather suspect information I think this one is done.