Don't Shoot the Messenger... TC vs CVA-Traditions
10-27-2011, 07:15 PM
#12
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Yucca Valley,Ca
Posts: 2,496
10-27-2011, 07:55 PM
#14
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Yucca Valley,Ca
Posts: 2,496
I did and how long S&W has owned T/C has absolutely nothing to do with anything.. since they are in fact one in the same!!!only difference is they have different names!!owner the same lmao.. S&W has the pistol recognition and T/C has the M/L recognition.again owners the same!!
10-27-2011, 08:29 PM
#16
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Yucca Valley,Ca
Posts: 2,496
I don't think TC has lots of money. Why did they sell to S&W? your words old timer..T/C has as much money as S&W, since there owned by the same corporation.S&W can sink as much money into a T/C lawsuit as they see fit, again since the owned by the same corporation.only difference is the names.. and S&W wouldn't change the T/C name, since it has name recognition.and visa versa.what do you think T/C can only use it's profits to pay for the lawsuit lol? nuff said
10-27-2011, 08:52 PM
#17
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 9,557
Answer this.
Did S&W buy half of TC and consider them partners, or did they buy the whole company and just keep the name to make it easier for customers to understand. Are TC employees being paid by TC or S&W?
Did S&W buy half of TC and consider them partners, or did they buy the whole company and just keep the name to make it easier for customers to understand. Are TC employees being paid by TC or S&W?
10-27-2011, 09:04 PM
#18
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 9,557
It doesn't seem that TC has much say so in what's happening.
S&W is calling the shots.
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2...plant-closing/
S&W is calling the shots.
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2...plant-closing/
10-27-2011, 09:37 PM
#19
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Rivesville, WV
Posts: 3,192
Here is a little information for you guys. S&W bought Thompson Center for $102 million dollars. At the time TC was doing about $70 Million a year in sales. S&W was a good bit larger than TC. Over 3 times as large(in gross sales). At the time of purchase S&W was doing over 210 Million a year in sales.
So the companies were not equal. S&W was a good bit larger than TC.
The reason S&W bought TC had absolutley nothing to do with black powder firearms. Smith bought TC for two major reasons. The first reason was the ability of TC to make rifled barrels. And their facilities to make those rifled barrels. Smith wanted to get into the long gun business. And make their own barrels.
The second reason was investment casting. TC is very good at investment casting, and Smith was better at actual machine tooling of steel. So this gave Smith inroads to investment casting which Ruger had, but Smith did not. Ruger is a very advanced company in investment casting, and Smith wanted that technology.
The two companies had zero synergies, which was another plus. Smith and TC products did not compete with each other. So TC immediately added to the bottom line for Smith. This was also a real plus for doing the deal.
There is no partnership here. Smith is the company. But elected to keep the Thompson trademarks for obvious reasons. All this information is available since Smith is a publicly traded company, and at the time TC was not.
Muzzleloading products have little to nothing to do with the deal between the two companies. However it did open up a new market to Smith because it was a market they were never in before. The main reason was the ability and tooling to make rifled barrels. Thus immediately opening up the long gun market to Smith. Tom.
So the companies were not equal. S&W was a good bit larger than TC.
The reason S&W bought TC had absolutley nothing to do with black powder firearms. Smith bought TC for two major reasons. The first reason was the ability of TC to make rifled barrels. And their facilities to make those rifled barrels. Smith wanted to get into the long gun business. And make their own barrels.
The second reason was investment casting. TC is very good at investment casting, and Smith was better at actual machine tooling of steel. So this gave Smith inroads to investment casting which Ruger had, but Smith did not. Ruger is a very advanced company in investment casting, and Smith wanted that technology.
The two companies had zero synergies, which was another plus. Smith and TC products did not compete with each other. So TC immediately added to the bottom line for Smith. This was also a real plus for doing the deal.
There is no partnership here. Smith is the company. But elected to keep the Thompson trademarks for obvious reasons. All this information is available since Smith is a publicly traded company, and at the time TC was not.
Muzzleloading products have little to nothing to do with the deal between the two companies. However it did open up a new market to Smith because it was a market they were never in before. The main reason was the ability and tooling to make rifled barrels. Thus immediately opening up the long gun market to Smith. Tom.
Last edited by HEAD0001; 10-27-2011 at 09:42 PM.
10-27-2011, 09:50 PM
#20
Typical Buck
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Ohio
Posts: 861
Thanks for that info Tom. So its safe to say that this is clearly not a "hurting for money" issue for Smith & Wesson. Sounds like a company that is protecting there patents but who knows I just buy the stuff lol.