Simms Bought for $192 Million

D

Deleted member 1337

Guest
It's just purely optics and politics at work. Many pension plans/university endowments/hedge funds/politically charged entities are being pressured to divest of any and all companies (i.e. sell their stock) if those companies have anything to do with guns, ammo, and/or anything that gets headlines (oil was a big one until recently....). This type of split is quite common to get around that.

An extreme example would be a company could generate $100 billion in revenue from solving world hunger, but if they also made $2 from selling a single bullet, they are deemed uninvestible by many. Letting some other entity book the revenues from that $2 gets around it. Safe to say Simms won't be bucketed alongside Remington.
It’s ok to not have idiots investing in your bullet company.
 

Mac17

Just Hatched
If they go in the same direction as other companies bought up in recent years I'll be done with Simms.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HOG

Old406Kid

Life of the Party
Forum Supporter
If they go in the same direction as other companies bought up in recent years I'll be done with Simms.
IMO, it looks like they're on the up and up. I don't think they would choose Bozeman just to make it easier for pissed off people to come pounding on their door. 🤣
 

Tinker

Smolt
Forum Supporter
It's a public company that owns a number of brands that you probably know, but they split into two divisions to keep guns/ammo/etc under a separate entity.

View attachment 24857View attachment 24858

Ouch! Those are all hunting/camping products and I wonder if they're more interested in the SIMMS clothing line than the wader side of the business. They seem under-invested in outdoor clothing to compliment their other brands.
 
Last edited:

Tinker

Smolt
Forum Supporter
1. quality has nothing to do with location
I guess you don't read customer complaints about product quality after a company moves manufacturing offshore compared to quality before the move. Even I've seen it in power tools. It's a real issue.
 

dflett68

Steelhead
I guess you don't read customer complaints about product quality after a company moves manufacturing offshore compared to quality before the move. Even I've seen it in power tools. It's a real issue.
No, I don't. I'm simply saying it's a myth to blame poor quality on cheap labor. Simms' commitment to quality will determine the quality of their product regardless of where it is produced. If they want the quality to stay at the same level it has always been, they can get that offshore. If they aren't committed to the same level of quality - it can go down just as fast in Montana as it could in China.
 

_WW_

Geriatric Skagit Swinger
Forum Supporter
No, I don't. I'm simply saying it's a myth to blame poor quality on cheap labor. Simms' commitment to quality will determine the quality of their product regardless of where it is produced. If they want the quality to stay at the same level it has always been, they can get that offshore. If they aren't committed to the same level of quality - it can go down just as fast in Montana as it could in China.
Unfortunately perception often prevails over reality. Hardy discovered this when they moved production out of the country.
 

Tinker

Smolt
Forum Supporter
No, I don't. I'm simply saying it's a myth to blame poor quality on cheap labor. Simms' commitment to quality will determine the quality of their product regardless of where it is produced. If they want the quality to stay at the same level it has always been, they can get that offshore. If they aren't committed to the same level of quality - it can go down just as fast in Montana as it could in China.

It's not a myth and it is by no means just perception. Simms may remain committed to quality but they won't be there to inspect every production lot coming off the line more than any other firm who heads offshore staffs its own quality control team in remote facilities. You sound like the Chinese government economist on CNN a few years ago who kept repeating that U.S. consumers would see better quality goods if everyone moved manufacturing to China. Hasn't happened yet.

Economics sets in. Labors cost go up, firms are under highly competitive contracts, corners get cut. Some are almost imperceptible; some can be quite obvious.
 

HauntedByWaters

Life of the Party
Unfortunately perception often prevails over reality. Hardy discovered this when they moved production out of the country.

Alternate reality: my friend tripped at the river and destroyed a $1K+ English Bougle. So I like my Korean Hardys and the real ones can stay in the safe. They are simple design, it’s not hard to outsource it and get equal use.
 

Long_Rod_Silvers

Elder Millennial
Forum Supporter
Alternate reality: my friend tripped at the river and destroyed a $1K+ English Bougle. So I like my Korean Hardys and the real ones can stay in the safe. They are simple design, it’s not hard to outsource it and get equal use.
I've got a Hardy made in england and one made in korea - I can't notice a difference in quality. Aside from knowing what I paid for them.....
I'm sure someone somewhere could probably point out a thing or two, but they both sound fucking rad when a fish takes line, so I'm happy with both.
 

dflett68

Steelhead
It's not a myth and it is by no means just perception. Simms may remain committed to quality but they won't be there to inspect every production lot coming off the line more than any other firm who heads offshore staffs its own quality control team in remote facilities. You sound like the Chinese government economist on CNN a few years ago who kept repeating that U.S. consumers would see better quality goods if everyone moved manufacturing to China. Hasn't happened yet.

Economics sets in. Labors cost go up, firms are under highly competitive contracts, corners get cut. Some are almost imperceptible; some can be quite obvious.
it's a myth. perception is the playground of mythologies and emotion and is the domain of the marketing department. quality is measurable results.

your suggestion that a person or company can be committed to quality, but tolerate not getting it, makes me wonder what you think commitment means...

lots of notable brands get the quality they demand offshore. meanwhile, i doubt it would be hard to find examples of domestic manufacturers whose quality is substandard but benefit from the perception that location determines quality. the fact is everyone gets the quality they demand, no matter where they produce.

obviously for lots of people, where something is made, and who made it, deeply informs their idea of quality. but that's often rooted in feelings about people and culture, not objective testing of the materials, processes, or products in question.
 

GOTY

Steelhead
obviously for lots of people, where something is made, and who made it, deeply informs their idea of quality. but that's often rooted in feelings about people and culture, not objective testing of the materials, processes, or products in question.
I'm reluctantly replying because it requires careful tip toeing around that race baiting. I'm responding because I think you're missing the point here that others are making.

In fly fishing gear there is often a massive difference in quality based on who made it, far more so than other industries. Obviously, who made it correlates to where it was made. There are a number of local rod and reel makers that produce products of a much higher quality than mass produced products made elsewhere. I'd even include modern Hardy's in the inferior category, both the made in England and made in Korea ones. Plenty of locally made options that are of superior quality for similar price points. Of course, there are also local rod and reel makers who's products are inferior to those. None of that is rooted with feelings about people or culture.
 

Salmo_g

Legend
Forum Supporter
In fly fishing gear there is often a massive difference in quality based on who made it, far more so than other industries.
Really? Maybe I'm slow on the uptake here, but I haven't seen how this follows. i.e., Simms makes good waders in the U.S.; Patagonia makes good waders sourced offshore. Some rods made in the U.S. (Sage, Loomis, Scott) are good, but not inherently better than some sourced offshore (Beulah, Echo, Redington - certain models anyway). I guess I need some clear and cogent examples to understand the massive difference in quality you refer to.
 

dflett68

Steelhead
I'm reluctantly replying because it requires careful tip toeing around that race baiting. I'm responding because I think you're missing the point here that others are making.

In fly fishing gear there is often a massive difference in quality based on who made it, far more so than other industries. Obviously, who made it correlates to where it was made. There are a number of local rod and reel makers that produce products of a much higher quality than mass produced products made elsewhere. I'd even include modern Hardy's in the inferior category, both the made in England and made in Korea ones. Plenty of locally made options that are of superior quality for similar price points. Of course, there are also local rod and reel makers who's products are inferior to those. None of that is rooted with feelings about people or culture.
it's all good. the point seems to be getting lost a little, i'll point back to my original assertions, "it is a myth to blame poor quality on cheap labor." and "quality has nothing to do with location."

i don't disagree that consumers are noticing real differences in quality between offshore and premium domestic gear. the products you speak of aren't inferior because of where they were produced - that's a coincidence that is being misconstrued as a cause. they're designed and intended to be inferior as a matter of market strategy. to me, from a business perspective, the reasons for that are obvious and the race-baiting accusation is a great deal more contentious than i want to get involved with. not my intention at all.

much of what's made for mass IS less than top quality cause mass consumers tolerate it so brands design for it and enjoy the reduced cost of it. but for the manufacturer and the company contracting them - that's a strategy. they aren't asking for top quality but settling for less.

we're all using products every day that we think of as premium in their industry which are produced offshore for brands that are committed to quality, demand quality, and get quality.
 

GOTY

Steelhead
Really? Maybe I'm slow on the uptake here, but I haven't seen how this follows. i.e., Simms makes good waders in the U.S.; Patagonia makes good waders sourced offshore. Some rods made in the U.S. (Sage, Loomis, Scott) are good, but not inherently better than some sourced offshore (Beulah, Echo, Redington - certain models anyway). I guess I need some clear and cogent examples to understand the massive difference in quality you refer to.
A simple example would be a farlex vs one of the current version Hardy's. The difference in quality, durability, tolerances, etc is huge. Took all of 2 small a run steelhead to blow up my "new" perfect. I was on day 1 of a 5 day trip with a free spooling hardy centerpin reel. Replaced the check, problem repeated itself, sold it, bought a farlex, and haven't looked back. Meanwhile folks have fished old Hardy reels for over a hundred years without any issue. The new stuff just isn't the same anymore unfortunately. I want an old one bad!!

Fully agree with you on rods. Meiser makes incredible rods with sourced blanks.
 

GOTY

Steelhead
it's all good. the point seems to be getting lost a little, i'll point back to my original assertions, "it is a myth to blame poor quality on cheap labor." and "quality has nothing to do with location."

i don't disagree that consumers are noticing real differences in quality between offshore and premium domestic gear. the products you speak of aren't inferior because of where they were produced - that's a coincidence that is being misconstrued as a cause. they're designed and intended to be inferior as a matter of market strategy. to me, from a business perspective, the reasons for that are obvious and the race-baiting accusation is a great deal more contentious than i want to get involved with. not my intention at all.

much of what's made for mass IS less than top quality cause mass consumers tolerate it so brands design for it and enjoy the reduced cost of it. but for the manufacturer and the company contracting them - that's a strategy. they aren't asking for top quality but settling for less.

we're all using products every day that we think of as premium in their industry which are produced offshore for brands that are committed to quality, demand quality, and get quality.
Makes sense, I get what you're saying 👍
 

Stonedfish

Known Grizzler-hater of triploids, humpies & ND
Forum Supporter

mcswny

Legend
Forum Supporter
Wait didn’t Vista just buy Simms?
 

SurfnFish

Legend
Forum Supporter
There is off shoring and than there is off shoring...Patagonia having clothing built in Viet Nam factories where they have strict quality and employee standards baked into the contract vs lowest bid gets a fulfillment contract in China.
Friends wife worked at Patagonia for decades in the quality control department...she said it was next to impossible to find manufacturers in the US that could fabricate their clothes in the quantity they required, much less compete on price. How many folks do we know that would like to sew on a prodution line?
 
Top