Question: why was Marlin sold in the first place??

[Ray Newman]

Have always wonder why marlin was sold? have asked this on other sites and seems as if no one really knows.

Does anyone here know the actual reason(s) why Marlin was sold off to Remington??

[Blaine]

Have always wonder why marlin was sold? have asked this on other sites and seems as if no one really knows.

Does anyone here know the actual reason(s) why Marlin was sold off to Remington??

Generational disinterest?

[rellisonii]

Remington to Acquire Marlin Firearms

Deal positions Marlin and its various brands for growth
Madison, North Carolina – December 26, 2007 – Remington Arms Company, Inc. ("Remington" or " the Company") the only manufacturer of both firearms and ammunition for Hunting, Law Enforcement/Security, Government & Military applications in the United States, today announced it has entered into a definitive agreement to acquire Marlin Firearms Company, Inc. ("Marlin"). The transaction is expected to close by the end of January 2008.

Marlin, headquartered in North Haven, Connecticut, also owns Harrington and Richardson (H&R), New England Firearms (NEF) and LC Smith brands of rifles and shotguns.

Tommy Millner Remington's CEO, said, "I am pleased to announce that Marlin's well known brands with a long heritage of providing quality rifles and shotguns to hunters and shooters around the world will join the Remington family. The opportunity to combine two historic U.S. based companies with such storied and proud histories, is both challenging and exhilarating."

"We look forward to working with Bob Behn, a well respected member of our industry. He will remain as president of Marlin, charting a course of further growth and operational improvement," Mr. Millner continued.

Closing of the transaction is subject to certain customary conditions, including regulatory approvals. Credit Suisse acted as financial advisor to Remington with respect to this acquisition. Duff & Phelps Securities, LLC, a unit of Duff & Phelps Corporation (NYSE:DUF), initiated the transaction, assisted in the negotiations and acted as exclusive financial advisor to Marlin.

Frank Kenna III, Marlin's Chairman, said, "Marlin has been a family run business since 1924 and through a number of important steps, we have grown it into the company it is today. We knew it was time to find the right partner for Marlin to ensure our brands maintain their leadership positions and move into the next century."

Mr. Kenna III continued, "We believe Remington's commitment to the industry, shooters and hunters alike, combined with their resources from a manufacturing and sales and marketing position, will reinforce the confidence, hard work and dedication that our employees and management have put into our brands."

Marlin manufactures a wide range of long guns, from the historic Model 39 and 336 rifles, which are the oldest shoulder arm designs in the world still being produced, to the XLR Series, which are the most accurate lever action rifles in the world. Its lever action 22 repeater, now the Model 39, became the favorite of many exhibition shooters, including the great Annie Oakley.

E. Scott Blackwell, Remington's President of Global Sales/Marketing and Product Development, said, "The history of our two companies in innovation and meeting the needs of hunters and shooters around the globe, combined with the opportunity to further develop the Remington, Marlin, H&R, NEF and LC Smith brands, is not only beneficial to the Company and our channel partners, but especially to our to the end customer. And it is these customers and our employees that have contributed to the success and longevity of these brands.

[cas]

I assume it was the obvious, they offered them more money than they could turn down.


Why they bought them is another question. I'm still not ruling out my "corporate killer" theory, buying all these gun companies to run them into the ground. That may sound silly to some, but they sure seem to be going out of their way to prove me right. Buy em all, consolidate, if they work fine, if they fail, fine.

Doesn't make a lot of sense to me, some of the things they've done Remington, one of the biggest and at one time most respected names in the arms business is now a bad joke. (granted they did a fine job of ruining the brand name even before the Freedom Group came along) Remington buys Para USA. A brand with soiled reputation in it's own right. You'd be hard pressed to make the public think any less of Para then they already did the last few years. Oh wait, you found a way to do just that! Make them Remington Para's! Oh good grief.

[tman]

I assume it was the obvious, they offered them more money than they could turn down.


Why they bought them is another question. I'm still not ruling out my "corporate killer" theory, buying all these gun companies to run them into the ground. That may sound silly to some, but they sure seem to be going out of their way to prove me right. Buy em all, consolidate, if they work fine, if they fail, fine.

Doesn't make a lot of sense to me, some of the things they've done Remington, one of the biggest and at one time most respected names in the arms business is now a bad joke. (granted they did a fine job of ruining the brand name even before the Freedom Group came along) Remington buys Para USA. A brand with soiled reputation in it's own right. You'd be hard pressed to make the public think any less of Para then they already did the last few years. Oh wait, you found a way to do just that! Make them Remington Para's! Oh good grief.

+1

[Blaine]

I assume it was the obvious, they offered them more money than they could turn down.


Why they bought them is another question. I'm still not ruling out my "corporate killer" theory, buying all these gun companies to run them into the ground. That may sound silly to some, but they sure seem to be going out of their way to prove me right. Buy em all, consolidate, if they work fine, if they fail, fine.

Doesn't make a lot of sense to me, some of the things they've done Remington, one of the biggest and at one time most respected names in the arms business is now a bad joke. (granted they did a fine job of ruining the brand name even before the Freedom Group came along) Remington buys Para USA. A brand with soiled reputation in it's own right. You'd be hard pressed to make the public think any less of Para then they already did the last few years. Oh wait, you found a way to do just that! Make them Remington Para's! Oh good grief.

Several years ago, I bought a Para NRA-ILA 1911. I don't shoot it a bunch, and it seems pretty nice....but, did I buy one with The Stank on it?

[Pete44ru]

.


The McKenna family descendants wanted out, and found what was (for them) a Golden Parachute.


.

[J Miller]

Question: why was Marlin sold in the first place??

Answer: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ That's the bottom line.


Joe

[jeepnik]

Have always wonder why marlin was sold? have asked this on other sites and seems as if no one really knows.

Does anyone here know the actual reason(s) why Marlin was sold off to Remington??

Generational disinterest?

Nailed it. I worked for a family owned refinery. The grandfather started it. His sons built it up to a going concern but when they wanted to retire the kids weren't interested. Lasted about three years after the family sold it.

[Pisgah]

Essentially, Marlin has taken its profits through the decades without re-investing in the business. They had allowed their production equipment to get old and worn, and were at a point where they could pretty much either shut down or sell -- no money to refit.

To some extent, Remington bought a pig in a poke -- they really got little more than the husk of what had been Marlin, without even up-to-date drawings of the guns in an age when just about everyone but Marlin was long-converted to CNC machinery. One reason Remington has had such trouble getting their ducks in a row was that they bought the company, then realized they were starting almost from scratch.

Some may deny it, but Marlin quality had steadily declined in the last years before the takeover, and this was a sign that all was not well -- it was getting harder and harder for them to keep the old quality going with the sorry state of their facility.

[AJMD429]

Several years ago, I bought a Para NRA-ILA 1911. I don't shoot it a bunch, and it seems pretty nice....but, did I buy one with The Stank on it?

I've owned four of them over the years, and the only one that I didn't like was their 'PDA' - it had an awesome double-action trigger unlike anything I've ever shot before or since, but when I took it apart it had too many small parts for a 1911 aficionado to appreciate (1911's, like UZI's, are actually made from recycled tractor parts - few and robust). It worked like my single-actions though - flawlessly. Now my favorite, smoothest, one is an oldie that has the black painted slide, and lots of dings and scratches, but it is utterly reliable.

I think their 'bad period' was in between initially developing and perfecting the double-stack concept, then as the concept became popular, they may have had trouble ramping up the volume without attending to quality. I haven't exactly made a study of the issue, but from the reading I have done it appears that there was about a 8-10 year interval where reliability suffered. I wouldn't hesitate to buy a new-production one, but might want a nice price to consider an 8 year old one.

[buckeyeshooter]

I was working for Valspar Paint when They bought the Cabot Stain Company. Cabot had said for years, they were family run... always would be and were committed to the Independent Paint Dealer. Well..... when we asked Sam Cabot III, Why are you selling. He said, I'm young, I have a 60 foot sailboat and I want to sail around the world. So, he took his millions and went sailing, he will never need to work again.
Then Valspar fired all the sales reps, rolled Cabot into the product line they had and put it into Lowe's. Basically, everything Cabot promised would never happen for 200 years...... Same story different industry.

[FWiedner]

I worked for a multi-generation manufacturing company in a nearby city.

Got to the 3rd generation and the kid just didn't have the sack to run the place.

His gramps and dad paid for a full-boat business education at Notre Dame, and when the kid cam back the best he could do was sit in an office with an executive VP salary playing video games and talking to his girlfriend on the phone all day, with the only advice given toward improving the business being to sell.

Gramps and dad decided to to take the money and do something else rather than see their fortune turned to dust by the clod.

Hurt a lot of people.

[marlinman93]

Frank Kenna Jr. (sole owner of Marlin then) was getting ready to fully retire. His nephews were running the company, and also getting to a point where they were contemplating retiring. The company was doing quite well, and the decision was made for the Kenna family to simply sell, and walk away. They didn't have any trouble selling Marlin, considering it was a thriving business at the time. Remington/Freedom Group, was anxious to expand their empire, and Marlin was a good acquisition for them. But they should have left it where it was, with the work force it had.
I'd bet the same question came up when John Marlin's two sons sold to Rockwell Corporation just prior to WWI. They grew up in their father's successful firearms business, but saw a chance to sell while it was on top. Rockwell did much like Rem./Freedom Group, and ran the company through WWI, and sold to the people who were management after WWI. They in turn ran the company into the ground, and Frank Kenna Sr. bought it out of bankruptcy court.

[marlinman93]

One more thing, for those who are spreading rumors that the company is under new management, or ownership. It's still owned by Remington, and still managed by the same people who had difficulty getting the company up to speed. The difference today is they finally decided to replace old equipment, and learn how to build a lever action Marlin. They blamed old equipment, and not getting many previous employees to move with the company. Actually they got NO employees to move, as they didn't make an attempt to compensate any existing employees, or pay the wages they made at Marlin before the sale.
Old equipment is an excuse, and nothing more. If your old lathe wouldn't turn out a good part, would you still use the part? Or would you fix/replace the lathe, so it made good parts? There is no acceptable excuse for sending less than perfect guns out the door.
Here's a link to an old story from a couple years ago. It tells the story, and is better than most I've read:
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/0 ... -well-see/

[Grandpa Ron]

One thing that nobody has mentioned is what percentage of the black gun market did Marlin have?

Sure, us old duffers like fine wood and metal but where is the rail on the 336 to hang my do-dad from?

We will never know the exact reason why, but it is safe to assume "it seemed like a good idea at the time."

[marlinman93]

One thing that nobody has mentioned is what percentage of the black gun market did Marlin have?

Sure, us old duffers like fine wood and metal but where is the rail on the 336 to hang my do-dad from?

We will never know the exact reason why, but it is safe to assume "it seemed like a good idea at the time."

Well I doubt they had any measureable percentage of the black rifle market, and wonder why they would try? It seems a lucrative market, but also seems a contradiction to make a lever action rifle to compete with the semiauto black rifle market? Especially considering the other companies owned under the same blanket, that already sell the black rifles they'd compete with.

[jeepnik]

I worked for a multi-generation manufacturing company in a nearby city.

Got to the 3rd generation and the kid just didn't have the sack to run the place.

His gramps and dad paid for a full-boat business education at Notre Dame, and when the kid cam back the best he could do was sit in an office with an executive VP salary playing video games and talking to his girlfriend on the phone all day, with the only advice given toward improving the business being to sell.

Gramps and dad decided to to take the money and do something else rather than see their fortune turned to dust by the clod.

Hurt a lot of people.

I've heard this described as "shirt sleeves to shirt sleeves in three generations".

[Grandpa Ron]

The reason I asked about black guns is lever guns seem to appeal to just a limited group of people. The cowboy action boom created a resurgence for sure but in businesses your growth depends on your next product.

Just like a fine side x side, double trigger, straight grip shotgun; they have a very limited appeal. Not what you would build a business on. Also look a the half stock muzzle loading cap lock rifles once quite common new replaced buy in-lines or custom makers.

Hopefully Marlins with establish a niche within its parent company.

[FWiedner]

The reason I asked about black guns is lever guns seem to appeal to just a limited group of people.

As you've pointed out, the answer to this is expanding the market demographic.

For example, Denis mentioned last week that Henry is considering a lever-gun in .223. I see this as an example of a sure way to draw attention to the lever-gun market from the black rifle demographic.

The main problem for new gun owners, and a draw for the cowboy/traditional lever-gun users is that lever-guns manufacturers continue to manufacture arms in obscure calibers. This is not a problem for a shooter who reloads, but for someone who knows of no other cartridges beside .223, .308, or even .30-06, I can see how this would drive a decision to shop elsewhere. Yes, there are design issues, but apparently SOMEONE is attempting to address those old issues.

[DPris]

Pisgah nailed it re Marlin.

And Henry is not "considering" a .223 levergun, it's a done deal.
Denis