# Colt Almost Bankrupt (Again)



## Scorpion8

Live by Big Government, Die by Big Government - Townhall Magazine

In the end, there are really only three things that are responsible for killing Colt: cronyism, support for gun control, and unions. You would think a gun manufacturer would know better than to sleep with government. I guess nobody shared that lesson with Colt's management.


----------



## GCBHM

Sleeping with the government and pricing their guns entirely too high. I'm sorry, I love the Colt 1911 Series 70 pistol, but it is NOT worth the $1000 they charge for it. You can get a Springfield GI model 1911 for half that, and it is just reliable and accurate. Then there is the CQBP that is some $3500...and WHY? B/c they sell it to the "military". I'll take my Glock, thanks.


----------



## desertman

Scorpion:


> In the end, there are really only three things that are responsible for killing Colt: cronyism, support for gun control, and unions.


Fourth, competition. Just about everyone and their brother are making AR 15's and 1911's. Uberti makes a beautiful reproduction of the single action army. With it's many variations the Sig P238 is a much nicer gun than the Colt Mustang. So what's left? I went to their web site and didn't see any Python's or Anaconda's as a matter of fact I didn't see any double action revolvers.


----------



## GCBHM

It is a lot like how Toyota took over the top spot from the big three. The big three kept producing the same old tired junk, charging more and more for it, while the competition kept producing better and better products priced to sell. If Colt isn't careful, they will end up completely out of business once and for all.


----------



## RK3369

You can make a company like Colt work if the government buys their product. What you can't do is produce a high quality expensive firearm at a high cost of production, then sell it to the public at a price lower than what you sell it to the government for. Most of the companies that sell to the general public, with a few exceptions, have a "consumer' line of product that is what would be considered "average" quality, dependable, but certainly not the peak of their offerings. To my knowledge, Colt doesn't have that product offering. They have high quality, high priced guns that they focus on selling to the government. When the government cuts it's orders because of drop in need, absence of wars, etc, that shoots the bottom out of your sales market. I think the problem for Colt may be that they have refused to diversify, or at least that's my perception. I admittedly dont' know their complete product line but have the sense that most of it is higher priced items not necessarily in the "Walmart" range of the consumer marketplace.


----------



## GCBHM

I've read where they are supposed to be working on a "civilian" version of the CQBP to sell to the public for less than the $3500 they sell the real deal to the military for, but I still do not see where this pistol is worth $3500.


----------



## RK3369

GCBHM said:


> I've read where they are supposed to be working on a "civilian" version of the CQBP to sell to the public for less than the $3500 they sell the real deal to the military for, but I still do not see where this pistol is worth $3500.


and you are probably correct, "worth" is a matter of personal perception. But what isn't "personal" is the fact that if they make and sell that model that meets gov't specs for less than $3500 they can't sell it to the gov't for $3,500. That's how Federal procurement works. They have to be able to buy at the lowest price available to meet federal requirements, unless there is a sole source supplier. In firearms, it's kind of hard to argue that there is a "sole source" supplier for firearms in any specific caliber that meet government standards. You can kinda get that with fighter jets and military radar systems, etc, but it's kind of hard to do with firearms. So, you either build high priced, high quality, high cost firearms which you focus on selling to the government, or you add a consumer line which doesn't necessarily meet govt specs, but which usually you compete on price and quality with in the rest of the market. I don't think Colt has taken to the "consumer" market to date. Admittedly I don't know their product line very well, but I can't remember seeing an "inexpensive" colt yet in my buying trips.


----------



## desertman

It seems that Colt has a very limited variety of firearms. I don't see what's so special about the CQBP it's just another 1911 except that it has a rail. Nothing against the 1911, except that there are so many of them out there in just about every variation. Same for the AR 15. In this day and age you would think that Colt would come out with a high capacity DA/SA semi auto or striker fired pistol. I would think that the military would be better served with a high capacity variation of one of those instead of a turn of the century design. With the amount of competition in the market for the 1911 pistol, I don't think any 1911 is worth $3500. If they charge the government $3500 for each pistol and the government pays that, we as taxpayers should be justifiably outraged, especially if the civilian version goes for considerably less. I don't understand what the differences should be if they sold a version of the CQBP to the general public. Would it be less reliable? Made of inferior materials? Or lower manufacturing standards in order to justify the lower cost? If that's the case who would want to buy it? Especially since there are many other high quality 1911's to choose from on the civilian market. Why shouldn't it be the exact same pistol at a competitive price? The military would probably be better off buying .45 Glocks as they have a proven track record for reliability and are extremely easy to maintain all for about $570 each, and that's for the civilian market.


----------



## otisroy

I agree desertman! I'd be curious to read the documented requirements for the CQBP acquisistion. I'd bet that it was written such that anything that wasn't an M1911 and all it's "features" wasn't up for consideration. Cronyism. How they got away with choosing the $3500 Colt model is the real trick.

As someone who had to spec and purchase millions of dollars of Commercial Off the Shelf (COTS) electronics equipment, I had to produce a significant amount of documentation for each purchase to validate that I was getting the best market price for said components. I'd consider a sidearm a COTS purchase unless someone can explain to me how Colt M1911s make enemy combatants more dead under austere conditions than high quality M1911 clones made by other manufacturers for far less. Somebody with some juice must've really wanted these Colts.

The other oddball thing is that does the average Marine carrying the sidearm consider the M1911 to be the best combat pistol versus today's .45 offerings from Sig, S&W, H&K, Glock, Ruger, etc?


----------



## desertman

otisroy:


> Cronyism. How they got away with choosing the $3500 Colt model is the real trick.


Someone's paying somebody off. That's how our government works especially when they have an endless resource of money, ours.



> The other oddball thing is that does the average Marine carrying the sidearm consider the M1911 to be the best combat pistol versus today's .45 offerings from Sig, S&W, H&K, Glock, Ruger, etc?


Probably not, but the bureaucrats know what's best particularly the ones who are getting paid off. As much as I like the 1911 platform, I own four, I rarely carry them as there are much better choices for personal self defense on the market today. If given the choice if I were in uniform I wouldn't carry a 1911, it was great in it's day but firearms technology has come a long way since 1911.


----------



## GCBHM

I think Colt expected the USMC to love the gun so much they would supply all Marines with it, hoping the USA would replace the aging M9 with the Colt CQBP, this pulling Colt's fat out of the fire. However, that hasn't happened. Namely bc the CQBP is not worth $3500! In fact, no pistol is. Colt is in trouble.


----------



## desertman

GCBHM:


> Colt is in trouble.


Indeed they are! As far as I know they made the "Double Eagle" and "New Agent" both DA/SA pistols based on the 1911 platform. I think, but I'm not sure whether they copied that concept from Para Ordnance or not. They also make a polymer frame version of the .380 "Mustang" and made the ill fated "Colt 2000" 9mm. But that's about it as far as innovation is concerned. They've stopped making DA revolvers, but it is rumored that they will make them again. Sure, the "Python" is a really nice revolver, but is it that much better than the S&W 686? Was the "Anaconda" better than the S&W "Model 29" or the Ruger "Redhawk" that would justify their premium price? It's all subjective. I'll bet most people upon firing them could never tell the difference. Colt is kind of like Henry Ford who at one time would not use hydraulic brakes in his cars until 1939. At least Ford is still in business. Although Colt also is, the question is for how long? I also question some of those custom 1911's. Are their prices really justified? At least to me they are not. Yeah, I know they are hand built which is what you are paying for. But for the average shooter and with the endless varieties of quality 1911's on the market are they really that much better? I shoot just as well with all my pistols which all have different trigger weights and feel, all are factory stock. I'm not in competition so I really don't need a trigger pull where if you breath on it it will set it off.


----------



## SouthernBoy

I think that getting in bed with the government is what disturbs me most. Look to Gm and then Ford. Who has done better in the eyes of the public?


----------



## GCBHM

Ford


----------



## rustygun

I would buy a "python", "anaconda", or "king cobra" if the price was not to far off from what S&W offers. Those are very fine looking revolvers.


----------



## RK3369

It sounds as if Colt has made the same mistakes that GM and others made. Unions pushed the costs up, and GM , rather than allowing the unions to strike, gave into the demands figuring they'd just raise the price of the vehicles. Well, eventually, the vehicles turned to junk, were high priced and nobody wanted to buy them when there were many more reliable, less expensive foreign options around. Kinda part of what has happened to Colt. So let it be a good lesson to business in general, you can't always give in to union demands because eventually your product succumbs to poor quality and high price, and somebody else will build a better mousetrap for less money. Boeing has just announced recently that the next generation of 787's, the version 8, will be built solely in SC. Why? Capacity and cost they say, but I'm sure a lot of the reason is to send a message to the union up in the PNW, as there is no union in the SC plants.


----------



## rustygun

Unions are not the whole problem. There seems to be plenty of corporate greed in these big companies. CEO of GM salary 15 million, Boeing was over 20 million.That's dollars per year. That's just the top guy. There are plenty of overpaid stuffed shirts beneath them making sure they get there's. I don't think any one is worth that kinda of salary.


----------



## SouthernBoy

GCBHM said:


> Ford


For what it's worth, I am seriously considering a 2016 Mustang GT. I love the Coyote engine and what Ford is doing with the new Mustang (few concerns but they're minor). I owned an '88 LX 302 (5.0 for those liter lovers) and it was one of the best cars I ever owned. Just once more I would like to have a serious piece of machinery. I owned a real and original American supercar in the mid 60's (there were NOT called musclecars back then) and would like once more before I depart this world to have that kind of performance. Today's machines are so much better in so many ways but the originals did have their special place.


----------



## Kennydale

Can't afford a decent rifle yet, do like the Colt LE series.


----------



## berettatoter

GCBHM said:


> Sleeping with the government and pricing their guns entirely too high. I'm sorry, I love the Colt 1911 Series 70 pistol, but it is NOT worth the $1000 they charge for it. You can get a Springfield GI model 1911 for half that, and it is just reliable and accurate. Then there is the CQBP that is some $3500...and WHY? B/c they sell it to the "military". I'll take my Glock, thanks.


I feel the same way.


----------



## lead

If Colt does go belly up again, I can just imagine what the next gun shows will be like. Even higher prices on everything made by Colt, and sellers singing their favorite song, "They don't make them anymore".


----------



## RK3369

rustygun said:


> Unions are not the whole problem. There seems to be plenty of corporate greed in these big companies. CEO of GM salary 15 million, Boeing was over 20 million.That's dollars per year. That's just the top guy. There are plenty of overpaid stuffed shirts beneath them making sure they get there's. I don't think any one is worth that kinda of salary.


Perhaps, but think about it this way. If it were your business, or you were the CEO, would you decline the $15 mil a year? If you made the company profitable and by your actions increased the value of the stock, wouldnt' you be worth that much money to the stockholders? Because face it, that's the only party the CEO is responsible to, the shareholders. Certainly not the rank and file, who are very well compensated for their efforts. Somebody inside the stockholder system must believe the CEO and all the "stuffed shirts" as you call them, are worth the money they are paid, otherwise they'd be fired.


----------



## AjayTaylor

I for one think that a brand new MKIV/SERIES 70 is worth every penny of $1000. Every time I look at the deep mirror blue on the slide, feel the silky smooth action as I pull the slide back, the cartridge slides up the ramp without the least hint of resistance, just smooth, slick action gettin' ready to do what it was built for. The smooth, quiet feel as the clip is rammed home. I love my Colts, and if they were stolen, I'd take the insurance check and order another Colt. Even the roll marks, all exactly the same depth, with no bunching of metal where the digits Mark the weapon. Colt has made auto pistols into an art form, and I'm talking about the Government Model. I just love 'em.


----------



## buckhorn_cortez

> Then there is the CQBP that is some $3500...and WHY? B/c they sell it to the "military". I'll take my Glock, thanks.


The original MSRP for the civilian version of the Colt M45A1 CQBP was $1995 NOT the $3500 that has been stated in this thread. You can find them right now on Gunbroker for $2400. The premium on the gun is because it comes out of the Colt Custom Shop and they make a maximum of 80 per month for the civilian market. That makes them hard to get and you pay a premium price for a gun that is available from a dealer.

This is no different than the Springfield FBI gun that also commands either a premium price above MSRP; or the willingness of the buyer to wait 18-24 months for delivery of one that has been ordered through a dealer at MSRP.

The Government price on the gun is hard to arrive at as it includes spare parts and logistics. But, if you take the maximum amount of the contract ($22.5M) and divide that by the maximum amount to be delivered (12,000 units) you come up with a price of $1875 - including the spare parts and logistics support.

But, let's not have facts get in the way of your opinion...


----------



## berettatoter

RK3369 said:


> You can make a company like Colt work if the government buys their product. What you can't do is produce a high quality expensive firearm at a high cost of production, then sell it to the public at a price lower than what you sell it to the government for. Most of the companies that sell to the general public, with a few exceptions, have a "consumer' line of product that is what would be considered "average" quality, dependable, but certainly not the peak of their offerings. To my knowledge, Colt doesn't have that product offering. They have high quality, high priced guns that they focus on selling to the government. When the government cuts it's orders because of drop in need, absence of wars, etc, that shoots the bottom out of your sales market. I think the problem for Colt may be that they have refused to diversify, or at least that's my perception. I admittedly dont' know their complete product line but have the sense that most of it is higher priced items not necessarily in the "Walmart" range of the consumer marketplace.


I would agree with you on this. I know I can't afford pretty much all of Colt's guns, unless I went without for quite a long time, then spent all I saved on the one gun. The Mustang is a cool little gun, but damn if the price is not way out there for what it is...a .380 ACP pocket pistol. There is always a market out there for these high-priced little blasters, but you have to be a little better off than most to pay that much for a pocket pistol in a caliber that is not that powerful. JMHO.


----------



## smithnframe

SouthernBoy said:


> For what it's worth, I am seriously considering a 2016 Mustang GT. I love the Coyote engine and what Ford is doing with the new Mustang (few concerns but they're minor). I owned an '88 LX 302 (5.0 for those liter lovers) and it was one of the best cars I ever owned. Just once more I would like to have a serious piece of machinery. I owned a real and original American supercar in the mid 60's (there were NOT called musclecars back then) and would like once more before I depart this world to have that kind of performance. Today's machines are so much better in so many ways but the originals did have their special place.


This is a Colt forum........shouldn't you be looking for a Dodge Colt?


----------



## pic

smithnframe said:


> This is a Colt forum........shouldn't you be looking for a Dodge Colt?


Are you hitting the bottle early today ?
:drinkers:


----------



## dakota1911

Outside of buying several new Colts this year I am just keeping my fingers crossed.


----------



## MickeyD

I think Colt is doing well with the restructuring. Cutting areas not directly associated with production, such as outsourcing parts distribution, and offering better guns at lowered prices are helping tremendously.

If there were stock offerings, I would add them to my portfolio.


----------

