I would say that the MOA argument does have some validity to it. One big push right now is that everyone seems to want to get involved in "Long Range Shooting". Remington has not pushing theirselves into this long range platform that is all the rage right now. That isn't to say that I couldn't take a standard off the shelf model 700 and turn it in to a long range weapon that will equal anything out there, but rather the fact that it isn't offered "off the shelf" as other companies have done. This makes it "easier" for people. On the flip side, once purchased, they can no longer blame the gun when they cannot put 3 round in a 2inch circle at 200 yards (or 1 inch at 100 yards).
As a trained Marine Corps sniper and marksmenship training instructor, I can say with pretty good certainty that the average joe rifleman cannot shoot sub MOA groups at 100 yards regardless of the rifle he is holding. That isn't in a bench secured vise or a caldwell leadsled. But, by taking the "gun" out of the eqaution, people are more apped to pick something up off the shelf knowing that it already has the potential to do something as opposed to trying to make something do it without realizing that it is the shooter and not the gun in a lot of instances.
Another issue has to do with their bushmaster lineup. The number one purchased rifle in America at the present time is the AR platform. Unfortunately, the Bushmaster name has been associated with garbage or bottom of the barrel. They are competing with larger, bigger and better names. So, when you are not selling even a small percentage of the largest piece of pie taken out of the gun market, you can see where the economics can quickly shift. Sure, you can sell shotguns, you can sell rifles, but, when you cannot sell a small percentage of the largest and most popular weapon being sold today, you are losing money.
Their issue has been that they have not kept up with the times like other companies have. The older generation (myself included) already owns several weapons. Rifles in several different calibers, tons of different shotguns, muzzle loaders, pistols etc... We don't need to purchase the same old things. We are looking for specifics. The new generation of purchaser is where they are going to make a gross sum of their money. Unfortunately, when you are not doing the two things mentioned above, then you are not appealing to the younger generation that is purchasing weapons today.
They have a pistol lineup but, unfortunately, nobody has really heard of it. Looking at it right now, they are not really doing anything WELL. The number one selling pistol is NOT a Remington (or top 20 for that matter). The number one selling platform (AR) is NOT a bushmaster (or 10 for that matter), and the number one selling long range rifle is not a Remington (which isn't to say they don't make quality rifles because they do), you have problems. Heck, even the shotgun line is up for debate and, as a form of entertainement, the younger generation simply isn't getting into the sport of trap and skeet.
What's the answer? Go back to doing what you did well and stick to it. Then make it better. Get rid of the bushmaster lineup or create something new and different. Throw your pistols in the toilet and go back to the drawing board. Make your shotguns rival the better ones on the market, and recapture your rifle lineup. Stop trying to introduce 100 poorly made products and instead, introduce 1 or 2 exceptional ones. When you have too many rifles in your inventory, a person will simply look at all of them, scratch their heads, and go purchase a sub MOA weapon from someone else because they cannot figure out which gun to purchase in the Remington lineup.
I have OCD "Obsessive Crappie Disorder"
Likes: 
Thanks: 
HaHa: 
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by wicklundrh
except what is in RED, it should state in the eyes of MORONS that believes it is the guns fault that these terrible things happening in today society !!!
